163 Proactive Vitality Management Among Employees with Chronic Liver Disease and the “why” behind taking action. In addition, it is essential that individuals feel responsible in order to take action (Parker et al., 2010). Accordingly, it is important that chronically ill employees not only feel confident and motivated to take control, but actually feel responsible for their own occupational health and performance. Parties that carry a co-responsibility, such as healthcare professionals and employers, may play an influential role in providing advice, guidance, and support to individuals with a chronic health condition (Beatty & Joffe, 2006). For example, they may stimulate awareness on the role of physical and mental energy, and how to effectively manage these valuable resources to retain functional capacity. Moreover, organizations and supervisors may provide additional support and opportunities for chronically ill employees to facilitate their proactive vitality management efforts (see also, Op den Kamp et al., 2018). As there are many different strategies to purposefully manage physical and mental energy that seem to be bearing fruit, self-insight may help to become more aware of the relative value of those different behavioral strategies. There are several ways in which individuals and organizations may aim to develop or train levels of self-insight (Klimoski & Hu, 2011). Moreover, chronically ill employees may aim to cultivate their self-insight while they proactively managing their vitality by first coming up with strategies that may mobilize their physical and mental energy for work, and then monitor, evaluate, and adjust the strategies where needed. Limitations The relatively long time period that spans the current research addresses the call for longitudinal studies on proactive processes (Parker et al., 2010) and provides valuable insights into how processes unfold over time. Moreover, our research involves an ecologically valid study among chronically ill employees, i.e., a disadvantaged, yet understudied population within organizational settings (Beatty, 2012; Kanengoni & Murugan, 2013). However, our research design is not without limitations. First, our design is not experimental in nature and so it does not allow for causal attributions. Future studies may explore the effectiveness of interventions that provide education, coaching and inspiration to chronically ill individuals on proactive vitality management. Second, even though we aimed to support the validity of our measures and measurement model, the measure we used for the outcome variable functional capacity was not thoroughly validated in earlier scientific studies. Third, due to the 6
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw