Proactive Personality in the Context of Job Complexity Greg A. Chung-Yan and Andrea M. Butler University of Windsor This study examined the moderating influence of proactive personality (i.e., a disposition to initiate change in the environment) on the relationship between job complexity and demands–abilities fit (i.e., the extent to which a person’s ability level matches the job demands), job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. It was found that for workers with a high proactive personality, moderate-to-high job complexity was positively associated with demands–abilities fit and job satisfaction; negatively with turnover intentions. Conversely, for workers with a low proactive personality, moderate-to-high job complexity was negatively associated with demands– abilities fit and job satisfaction; positively with turnover intentions. Many of the relationships were also curvilinear. This research supports the expansion of work design and job enrichment theories to include individual differences and a consideration of nonlinear relationships. Keywords: job complexity, proactive personality, job characteristics, work adaptation Complex work is on the rise, placing greater demands on an increasing number of workers in knowledge societies (Crow, 2006). Complex work is demanding because it has more unantic- ipated challenges than routine work, requiring more flexibility, judgment, and personal initiative on the part of workers. Estab- lished, static procedures are not suited for dealing with the de- mands of rapidly changing work environments. Traditionally, motivational work design theories have looked at the motivational benefits of work that is complex (e.g., Hackman & Lawler, 1971; Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Pearce & Dunham, 1976). However, this research has only recently begun to explore individual differences that might affect whether workers are dif- ferentially influenced by work design characteristics. Integrating current theories of proactive personality with the work design literature, this study focuses on the need for workers to be proac- tive in a complex work environment. Job Complexity Complex jobs refer to jobs that are mentally challenging, re- quiring workers to use a number of complex skills. They are characterized by ambiguity, difficulty, and lack of structure (e.g., Campbell, 1988; Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006; Wood, 1986). Rooted in the job enrichment movement (Pearce & Dunham, 1976), job complexity is generally considered a positive aspect of work and is positively related to well-being and job-related atti- tudes (see Ilgen & Hollenbeck, 1991, for a review). One of the most influential work design theories is the Job Characteristics Model (JCM; Hackman & Oldham, 1980). According to the JCM, jobs with specific core characteristics lead to higher levels of work motivation. These core characteristics are skill variety (the extent to which a job requires the use of different skills), task identity (the extent to which a job involves completing an entire, identifiable piece of work), task significance (the extent to which a job sub- stantially affects the lives or work of other people), autonomy (the extent to which a job allows employees the discretion to schedule their work and determine the procedures used to carry out the work), and job feedback (the extent to which the job itself results in employees obtaining information about the effectiveness of their performance; Hackman & Oldham, 1980). Together, these five core characteristics are often used to describe the complexity of a job. Meta-analytic findings show positive associations between the amount of job complexity and important work-related variables such as internal work motivation, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, job involvement, and job performance (Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007). Although the general associations in regard to the benefits of job complexity have been established, there are differences in how job complexity is conceptualized. Although many JCM studies fre- quently use all five core dimensions as an index of job complexity, they do not necessarily map onto the common definition of job complexity. For example, autonomy and job feedback are concep- tually different than work requiring a complex skill set. Humphrey et al. (2007) expanded the JCM to include job complexity, distinct from the original five core characteristics. They argued that although job complexity promotes job satisfac- tion, it could also have a negative effect by promoting perceptions of work overload. Thus, job complexity can be both engaging and overwhelming. Recently, Morgeson and Humphrey (2006) devel- oped a measure of work design that measured job complexity separately from the five JCM core dimensions. The greater uncertainty of the modern workplace adds to the complexity of work and requires work designs that empower employ- ees to self-manage their work processes (Parker, Wall, & Cordery, 2001). However, although the JCM and other work design theories support providing opportunities in the workplace for proactive cog- This article was published Online First July 25, 2011. Greg A. Chung-Yan and Andrea M. Butler, Department of Psychology, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada. This research was supported by a University of Windsor Humanities and Social Sciences Research Grant. We thank Christin Moeller and Steven F. Cronshaw for their comments on an earlier version of this article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Greg A. Chung-Yan, Department of Psychology, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, N9B3P4. E-mail: gcy@uwindsor.ca Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science © 2011 Canadian Psychological Association 2011, Vol. 43, No. 4, 279 –286 0008-400X/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0024501 279