This study expands our understanding of the antecedents and outcomes of flow in work teams. We focused on how individual personality is related to individual performance via flow in a team environment based on flow theory. This study longitudinally examined the mediating role of flow and team reflexivity on the relationship of proactive personality to performance from 79 ongoing teams. Using multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) with a Bayesian estimator, we found that proactive personality is positively associated with individual performance in a team environment through flow, but not through team reflexivity. We also found that both proactive personality and team reflexivity are positively related to flow. Moreover, flow mediates the relationship between team reflexivity and performance. These findings are discussed in terms of the antecedents from both individual and team levels of flow, and the practical implications for increasing performance.
AndersonJ. C.GerbingD. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
2.
ArmstrongA. C. (2008). The fragility of group flow: The experiences of two small groups in a middle school mathematics classroom. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27(2), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2008.08.001
3.
AsakawaK. (2010). Flow experience, culture, and well-being: How do autotelic Japanese college students feel, behave, and think in their daily lives?Journal of happiness studies, 11(2), 205–223.
4.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. (2021). Advances in Bayesian model fit evaluation for structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 28(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1764360
5.
AubéC.BrunelleE.RousseauV. (2014). Flow experience and team performance: The role of team goal commitment and information exchange. Motivation and Emotion, 38(1), 120–130.
6.
AubéC.FrancoeurC.SponemS.SéguinM. (2021). Ethical leadership and corporate board effectiveness: The role of team reflexivity and environmental dynamism. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 25(4), 288–302.
7.
BakerF. A.MacDonaldR. A. (2013). Flow, identity, achievement, satisfaction and ownership during therapeutic songwriting experiences with university students and retirees. Musicae Scientiae, 17(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864913476287
8.
BakkerA. B. (2005). Flow among music teachers and their students: The crossover of peak experiences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2003.11.001
9.
BakkerA. B. (2008). The work-related flow inventory: Construction and initial validation of the WOLF. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(3), 400–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2007.11.007
10.
BakkerA. B.OerlemansW.DemeroutiE.SlotB. B.AliD. K. (2011). Flow and performance: A study among talented Dutch soccer players. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(4), 442–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2011.02.003
11.
BakkerA. B.TimsM.DerksD. (2012). Proactive personality and job performance: The role of job crafting and work engagement. Human Relations, 65(10), 1359–1378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712453471
12.
BakkerA. B.van WoerkomM. (2017). Flow at work: A self-determination perspective. Occupational Health Science, 1(1-2), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-017-0003-3
13.
BassiM.FaveA. D. (2012). Optimal experience among teachers: New insights into the work paradox. The Journal of Psychology, 146(5), 533–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2012.656156
14.
BassiM.StecaP.MonzaniD.GrecoA.Delle FaveA. (2014). Personality and optimal experience in adolescence: Implications for well-being and development. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(4), 829–843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9451-x
15.
BatemanT. S.CrantJ. M. (1993). The proactive component of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030140202
16.
BeardK. S.HoyW. K.HoyA. W. (2010). Academic optimism of individual teachers: Confirming a new construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(5), 1136–1144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.003
17.
BlieseP. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In KleinK. J.KozlowskiS. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). Jossey-Bass/Wiley.
ByrneC.MacDonaldR.CarltonL. (2003). Assessing creativity in musical compositions: Flow as an assessment tool. British Journal of Music Education, 20(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0265051703005448
20.
CameronK.DuttonJ. (Eds.). (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
21.
CarterS. M.WestM. A. (1998). Reflexivity, effectiveness, and mental health in BBC-TV production teams. Small group research, 29(5), 583–601.
22.
ChenG.KanferR. (2006). Toward a systems theory of motivated behavior in work teams. Research in organizational behavior, 27, 223–267.
23.
ChuL. C.LeeC. L. (2012). Exploring the impact of flow experience on job performance. The Journal of Global Business Management, 8(2), 150–158.
24.
CohenJ.CohenP.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
25.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. Basic Books.
26.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety. Jossey-Bass. (Original work published 1975).
27.
DemeroutiE. (2006). Job characteristics, flow, and performance: The moderating role of conscientiousness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11(3), 266–280. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.11.3.266
28.
DepaoliS.CliftonJ. P. (2015). A Bayesian approach to multilevel structural equation modeling with continuous and dichotomous outcomes. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(3), 327–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.937849
29.
DepaoliS.Van de SchootR. (2017). Improving transparency and replication in Bayesian statistics: The WAMBS-checklist. Psychological Methods, 22(2), 240–261. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000065
30.
DuncanJ.WestR. E. (2018). Conceptualizing group flow: A framework. Educational Research and Reviews, 13(1), 1–11.
31.
GaggioloA.ChiricoA.MazzoniE.MilaniL.RivaG. (2017). Networked flow in musical bands. Psychology of Music, 45(2), 283–297.
32.
GelmanA.RubinD. B. (1992). Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences. Statistical Science, 7(4), 457–472. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177011136
GregurasG. J.DiefendorffJ. M. (2010). Why does proactive personality predict employee life satisfaction and work behaviors? A field investigation of the mediating role of the self-concordance model. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 539–560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01180.x
35.
HanS.HaroldC. M.CheongM. (2019). Examining why employee proactive personality influences empowering leadership: The roles of cognition‐and affect‐based trust. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(2), 352–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12252
36.
HarveyJ. F.LeblancP. M.CroninM. A. (2019). Beyond separate emergence: A systems view of team learning climate. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 01441. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01441
37.
HohnemannC.SchweigS.DiestelS.PeiferC. (2022). How feedback shapes flow experience in cognitive tasks: The role of locus of control and conscientiousness. Personality and Individual Differences, 184, 111166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111166
38.
HoxJ. J.MaasC. J.BrinkhuisM. J. (2010). The effect of estimation method and sample size in multilevel structural equation modeling. Statistica Neerlandica, 64(2), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9574.2009.00445.x
39.
HoxJ. J.van de SchootR.MatthijsseS. (2012). How few countries will do? Comparative survey analysis from a Bayesian perspective. Survey Research Methods, 6(2), 87–93.
40.
HuX.ZhaoR.GaoJ.LiJ.YanP.YanX.LiX.SuJ. (2021). Relationship between proactive personality and job performance of Chinese nurses: The mediating role of competency and work engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 533293. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.533293
41.
JacksonS. A. (1995). Factors influencing the occurrence of flow state in elite athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 7(2), 138–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209508406962
42.
JacksonS. A.FordS. K.KimiecikJ. C.MarshH. W. (1998). Psychological correlates of flow in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20(4), 358–378. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.20.4.358
43.
KimM. J.HallC. M. (2019). A hedonic motivation model in virtual reality tourism: Comparing visitors and non-visitors. International journal of information management, 46, 236–249.
44.
Kim QuyH. T.TranM. D.DinhT. M. (2025). Employees’ belief restoration in a crisis context: The role of servant leadership, workplace spirituality, and proactive personality. Human Resource Development International, 28(1), 56–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2023.2285923
45.
KonradtU.OtteK. P.SchippersM. C.SteenfattC. (2016). Reflexivity in teams: A review and new perspectives. The Journal of Psychology, 150(2), 153–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2015.1050977
46.
KozlowskiS. W. J.KleinK. J. (2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In KleinK. J.KozlowskiS. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3–90). Jossey-Bass.
47.
LandhäußerA.KellerJ. (2012). Flow and its affective, cognitive, and performance-related consequences. In S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research, (pp. 65–85). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2359-14
48.
LavoieR.BaerM.RouseE. D. (2024). Group flow: A theory of group member interactions in the moment and over time. Academy of Management Review, 50(3), 493–518. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2021.0458
49.
LeblancP. M.RousseauV.HarveyJ. F. (2022). Leader humility and team innovation: The role of team reflexivity and team proactive personality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(8), 1396–1409. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2648
50.
LiC. R.LiC. X.LinC. J. (2021). Dynamics of the relationships between team reflexivity and team performance over a series of performance episodes. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 25(2), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000144
51.
LinesR. L.PietschS.CraneM.NtoumanisN.TembyP.GrahamS.GucciardiD. F. (2021). The effectiveness of team reflexivity interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 10(3), 438–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/spy0000251
52.
LiuD.MorgesonF. P.ZhuJ.FanX. (2023). Event-oriented organizational behavior research: A multilevel review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 49(6), 2148–2186. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231162094
53.
LuthansF. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6), 695–706. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.165
54.
LuthansF.Youssef-MorganC. M.AvolioB. J. (2015). Psychological capital and beyond. Oxford University Press.
55.
LyubovnikovaJ.LegoodA.TurnerN.MamakoukaA. (2017). How authentic leadership influences team performance: The mediating role of team reflexivity. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2692-3
56.
MartinA. J.JacksonS. A. (2008). Brief approaches to assessing task absorption and enhanced subjective experience: Examining ‘short’and ‘core’flow in diverse performance domains. Motivation and emotion, 32(3), 141–157.
57.
MurciaJ. A. M.GimenoE. C.CollD. G. C. (2008). Relationships among goal orientations, motivational climate and flow in adolescent athletes: Differences by gender. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 181–191. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1138741600004224
58.
MustafaS. M. S.EliasH.NoahS. M.RoslanS. (2010). A proposed model of motivational influences on academic achievement with flow as the mediator. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.001
59.
MuthénB.AsparouhovT. (2012). Bayesian structural equation modeling: A more flexible representation of substantive theory. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 313–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026802
60.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.).
61.
MyaskovetskyV.ShmueliL. (2023). Transformational leadership vs. proactive personality: Contributing factors to physiotherapists proactive behaviors and burnout during the SARS‐COV‐2 pandemic. Physiotherapy Research International: The Journal for Researchers and Clinicians in Physical Therapy, 28(4), Article e2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.2011
62.
O’NeillS. (1999). Flow theory and the development of musical performance skills. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 141, 129–134.
63.
ParkerS. K.CollinsC. G. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive behaviors. Journal of Management, 36(3), 633–662. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321554
64.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.PodsakoffN. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
65.
PreacherK. J.ZyphurM. J.ZhangZ. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15(3), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020141
66.
RussellW. D. (2001). An examination of flow state occurrence in college athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24(1), 83–107.
67.
SalanovaM.BakkerA. B.LlorensS. (2006). Flow at work: Evidence for an upward spiral of personal and organizational resources. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-005-8854-8
68.
SawyerK. (2017). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. Basic Books.
69.
SchippersM. C.Den HartogD. N.KoopmanP. L. (2007). Reflexivity in teams: A measure and correlates. Applied psychology, 56(2), 189–211.
70.
SchippersM. C.EdmondsonA. C.WestM. A. (2014). Team reflexivity as an antidote to team information-processing failures. Small Group Research, 45(6), 731–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496414553473
71.
SchippersM. C.HogenesR. (2011). Energy management of people in organizations: A review and research agenda. Journal of business and psychology, 26(2), 193–203.
72.
SchippersM. C.WestM. A.DawsonJ. F. (2015). Team reflexivity and innovation: The moderating role of team context. Journal of Management, 41(3), 769–788. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312441210
73.
SchmutzJ. B.LeiZ.EppichW. J.ManserT. (2018). Reflection in the heat of the moment: The role of in‐action team reflexivity in health care emergency teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(6), 749–765. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2299
74.
SchülerJ. (2007). Arousal of flow experience in a learning setting and its effects on exam performance and affect. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 21(3/4), 217–227.
75.
SchülerJ.BrunnerS. (2009). The rewarding effect of flow experience on performance in a marathon race. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10(1), 168–174.
76.
SeibertS. E.CrantJ. M.KraimerM. L. (1999). Proactive personality and career success. The Journal of applied psychology, 84(3), 416–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.3.416
SheldonK. M.RyanR. M.DeciE. L.KasserT. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 30(4), 475–486.
80.
ȘtefanA. D.VîrgăD. (2024). Self-leadership, performance, and life-satisfaction: The mediation role of flow at work in a three-wave study. The Journal of Psychology, 159(4), 245–265.
81.
ThompsonJ. A. (2005). Proactive personality and job performance: A social capital perspective. The Journal of applied psychology, 90(5), 1011–1017. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.1011
82.
TseD. C.NakamuraJ.CsikszentmihalyiM. (2022). Flow experiences across adulthood: Preliminary findings on the continuity hypothesis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 23(6), 2517–2540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-022-00514-5
83.
UllénF.de ManzanoÖ.AlmeidaR.MagnussonP. K.PedersenN. L.NakamuraJ.MadisonG. (2012). Proneness for psychological flow in everyday life: Associations with personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(2), 167–172.
84.
UrbiniF.CaracuzzoE.BakkerA. B.CalleaA. (2025). Does proactive personality foster playful work design? A survey study on implications for flow and task performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-05-2024-4539
van OortmerssenL. A.CaniëlsM. C.StynenD.van RitbergenA. (2022). Boosting team flow through collective efficacy beliefs: A multilevel study in real‐life organizational teams. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(10), 1030–1044. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12910
87.
WellsA. (1988). Self-esteem and optimal experience. In CsikszentmihalyiM.CsikszentmihalyiI. (Eds.), Optimal experience (pp. 327–341). Cambridge University Press.
88.
WestM. A. (1996). Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: A conceptual integration. In WestM. A. (Ed.), Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams: Product development teams. JAI.
89.
WestM. A. (2000). Reflexivity, revolution and innovation in work teams. In JohnsonD. A.BeyerleinS. T. (Eds.), Advances in the interdisciplinary study of work teams: Product development teams (pp. 1–29). JAI Press.
90.
WilliamsH. M.ParkerS. K.TurnerN. (2010). Proactively performing teams: The role of work design, transformational leadership, and team composition. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(2), 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317910x502494
91.
WrigleyW. J.EmmersonS. B. (2013). The experience of the flow state in live music performance. Psychology of Music, 41(3), 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735611425903
92.
WuL.WangD.EvansJ. A. (2019). Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature, 566(7744), 378–382. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0941-9
93.
XieL. (2022). Flow in work teams: The role of emotional regulation, voice, and team mindfulness. Current Psychology, 41(11), 7867–7877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01179-0
94.
XieL.ChangC. N.SinghS. (2021). Emotional intelligence, voice and flow: A team-level study of work teams. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 27(7/8), 524–539. https://doi.org/10.1108/tpm-12-2020-0110
95.
XuM.QinX.DustS. B.DiRenzoM. S. (2019). Supervisor-subordinate proactive personality congruence and psychological safety: A signaling theory approach to employee voice behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 440–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.03.001
96.
YanQ.DonaldsonS. I. (2023). What are the differences between flow and work engagement? A systematic review of positive intervention research. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 18(3), 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2022.2036798
97.
ZhangR.LiA.GongY. (2021). Too much of a good thing: Examining the curvilinear relationship between team‐level proactive personality and team performance. Personnel Psychology, 74(2), 295–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12413
98.
ZitzmannS.LüdtkeO.RobitzschA.MarshH. W. (2016). A Bayesian approach for estimating multilevel latent contextual models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23(5), 661–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2016.1207179
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
