Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review
Background: Workplace procrastination is associated with a wide range of negative organizational outcomes. Our objectives are to systematically review the factors of workplace procrastination and the instruments used to measure this construct. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched for pa...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Social Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/6/380 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850165047499685888 |
|---|---|
| author | Iraida Musteață Andrei Corneliu Holman |
| author_facet | Iraida Musteață Andrei Corneliu Holman |
| author_sort | Iraida Musteață |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Workplace procrastination is associated with a wide range of negative organizational outcomes. Our objectives are to systematically review the factors of workplace procrastination and the instruments used to measure this construct. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched for papers published between 2000 and 2023 through Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Taylor & Francis, using the search terms “workplace procrastination not academic” and “employee procrastination”. Results: After screening, 33 studies were retained for analysis and were also submitted to quality assessment. The factors were grouped into two main categories, i.e., employee-related and external. Several potential factors have been investigated only in a single study, while contradictory findings have been reported regarding the effect of others, especially in culturally diverse samples. Procrastination was measured using ten different instruments, with variations in their conceptual underpinnings. Conclusions: Future advancements in understanding the factors of workplace procrastination would greatly benefit from studies on employee samples from different countries. Moreover, future research should select their workplace procrastination measures based on careful consideration of the specific facets that it aims to investigate. Our findings also suggest that addressing procrastination at work requires a comprehensive approach involving different interventions at both the organizational and individual level. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-65ceb328479c4b3f85670ca92b4e8088 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2076-0760 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-06-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Social Sciences |
| spelling | doaj-art-65ceb328479c4b3f85670ca92b4e80882025-08-20T02:21:50ZengMDPI AGSocial Sciences2076-07602025-06-0114638010.3390/socsci14060380Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic ReviewIraida Musteață0Andrei Corneliu Holman1Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, 700554 Iasi, RomaniaDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, 700554 Iasi, RomaniaBackground: Workplace procrastination is associated with a wide range of negative organizational outcomes. Our objectives are to systematically review the factors of workplace procrastination and the instruments used to measure this construct. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched for papers published between 2000 and 2023 through Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Taylor & Francis, using the search terms “workplace procrastination not academic” and “employee procrastination”. Results: After screening, 33 studies were retained for analysis and were also submitted to quality assessment. The factors were grouped into two main categories, i.e., employee-related and external. Several potential factors have been investigated only in a single study, while contradictory findings have been reported regarding the effect of others, especially in culturally diverse samples. Procrastination was measured using ten different instruments, with variations in their conceptual underpinnings. Conclusions: Future advancements in understanding the factors of workplace procrastination would greatly benefit from studies on employee samples from different countries. Moreover, future research should select their workplace procrastination measures based on careful consideration of the specific facets that it aims to investigate. Our findings also suggest that addressing procrastination at work requires a comprehensive approach involving different interventions at both the organizational and individual level.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/6/380workplace procrastinationfactors of procrastinationpersonalityjob characteristicsleadershipworkload |
| spellingShingle | Iraida Musteață Andrei Corneliu Holman Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review Social Sciences workplace procrastination factors of procrastination personality job characteristics leadership workload |
| title | Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review |
| title_full | Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review |
| title_fullStr | Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review |
| title_short | Factors of Workplace Procrastination: A Systematic Review |
| title_sort | factors of workplace procrastination a systematic review |
| topic | workplace procrastination factors of procrastination personality job characteristics leadership workload |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/14/6/380 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT iraidamusteata factorsofworkplaceprocrastinationasystematicreview AT andreicorneliuholman factorsofworkplaceprocrastinationasystematicreview |