With the increasing interest in positive organizational scholarship, interest in constructive deviance has grown. A growing literature explores the notion of constructive deviance conceptualized as behaviors that depart from the norms of the reference group such that they benefit the reference group and conform to hypernorms. Despite the role of constructive deviance in increasing innovation and fostering organizational change, there is a lack of empirical research in the area. Our review is organized around series of questions. We begin with “What is constructive deviance?” We discuss the origin and concept of constructive deviance, indicating that constructive deviance is a type of voluntary behavior that is characterized by prosocial intentions, departing from the norms of organization, conforming to hypernorms. We then turn our attention to the measurement of constructive deviance. Western scholars measure construction deviance mainly through the self-report scale. “What leads to constructive deviance and why?” Here, the results of theoretical and empirical research on the antecedents of constructive deviance are summarized, finding that personal characteristics and variables of perception and attitude, as well as organizational context characteristics all have significant effects on constructive deviance. The end result of this review is an integrative model of constructive deviance. Using the three common theories to organize our review (Self-determination theory, Social exchange theory, and economic rationality), we provide an emergent model that integrates extant theoretical and empirical work on the antecedents of constructive deviance. We then ask, “What is the effect of constructive deviance?” In this section, the double results of constructive deviance are explained. On the positive side, effective constructive deviance is beneficial not only to organizations because it increases innovation, enhances competitiveness and fosters organizational change; but also to employees who do constructive deviance because it brings the positive performance evaluation and the advantage to the occupation development. On the negative side, if the employees showed too much construction deviance, the stability and effective operation of the organization would be threatened. Even worse, too much constructive deviance causes confusion and disorderly situation. Finally, we propose the possible future research directions: (1) to explore the construct of constructive deviance. (2) to prepare predictor scale suitable for Chinese, to provide a reliable measurement instrument for advanced study. (3) to explore the multi-level dynamic formation mechanism of constructive deviance, probing into the mediating mechanisms in constructive deviance formation, as well as the interaction mechanisms of personal characteristics and situational factors to constructive deviance, such as the role of intrinsic motivation，responsibility and organizational justice in mediating the relationship between organizational context and constructive deviance of individuals - context interactions impacting on constructive deviance. (4) to explore the boundary condition of constructive deviance, because it’s a double-edged sword to the organization and its employees. Finally, we analyze the contextual characteristics in China which might affect constructive deviance, and propose to carry out the localized research on constructive deviance.