PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2017 | 16 | nr 2 | 267--294
Tytuł artykułu

How Destructive Social Aspects Inhibit Innovation in the Organisation

Treść / Zawartość
Warianty tytułu
W jaki sposób destrukcyjny klimat społeczny ogranicza zachowania innowacyjne w organizacji?
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
Tło badań. Zachowania innowacyjne pracowników stanowią jeden z kluczowych elementów pozwalających wyjaśniać konkurencyjność firm na rynku. W związku z tym badanie i rozumienie mechanizmów wyzwalających aktywność innowacyjną jednostek są ważnym obszarem analizy, dzięki któremu można wypracowywać praktyczne rekomendacje dla osób zarządzających organizacjami.
Cel badań. W artykule, na podstawie teorii równości Adamsa, opisano i wyjaśniono relacje pomiędzy kontrproduktywnymi zachowaniami w organizacji, poczuciem sprawiedliwości organizacyjnej i zachowaniami innowacyjnymi. W proponowanym modelu teoretycznym zachowania kontrproduktywne innych pracowników uznane zostały za inhibitor zachowań innowacyjnych. Poczucie sprawiedliwości pełniło rolę mediatora relacji pomiędzy zmiennymi.
Metodologia. Badania zostały przeprowadzone w latach 2014-2015 na grupie 207 uczestników studiów podyplomowych uczestniczących na zajęciach w Szkole Głównej Handlowej w Warszawie. Do analizy danych wykorzystano model korelacyjny, metodykę SEM (Structural Equation Modelling) w programie AMOS wersja 23, a także SPSS macro PROCESS do oceny efektu mediacji.
Kluczowe wnioski. Badania potwierdziły statystyczne zależności pomiędzy zachowaniami innowacyjnymi a pozostałymi analizowanymi zmiennymi: negatywnie z zachowaniami kontrproduktywnymi innych pracowników i pozytywnie z sprawiedliwością organizacyjną. Na podstawie analiz metodą SEM można powiedzieć, że zachowania kontrproduktywne w sposób pośredni, poprzez mediacje sprawiedliwości organizacyjnej, tłumaczą przejawiane przez pracowników zachowania innowacyjne. Ponadto badania pokazują, że ujmowanie w analizach wskazanych zmiennych może być użyteczne w wyjaśnianiu innowacyjności w miejscu pracy i służyć zarówno działom HR, jak i menedżerom do podnoszenia innowacyjności firm. (abstrakt oryginalny)
EN
Background. The innovative behaviours of employees constitute one of the key elements for explaining companies' market competitiveness. Therefore, studying and understanding the mechanisms which trigger individual innovative activity form an important area of analyses owing to which it is possible to design practical recommendations for managerial personnel of organisations.
Research aims. Drawing on equity theory, this study describes and explains the relationship between counterproductive work behaviours (CWB), organisational justice and innovative workplace behaviours (IWB). In the proposed model explaining the influence of counterproductive work behaviours on creative activity in the workplace, the organisational justice construct was used - as the mediator of the relationship.
Methodology. The study was conducted anonymously in 2014-2015 on a group of 207 employees studying at post-graduate studies at the Warsaw School of Economics. To assess the direct effects and estimation theoretical model, structural equation modelling was used with AMOS version 23. For the assessment of the indirect effects, the SPSS macro PROCESS was used, which allows for testing mediation effect. Correlation analyses weer also used.
Key findings. The research confirmed a significant statistical relationship between innovative work behaviours and all studied variables: counterproductive work behaviours and organisational justice. On the basis of the analysis using the structural equation model it can be stated that the following factors influence innovative behaviours: counterproductive work behaviours have indirect influence on innovative workplace behaviours via organisational justice. The research shows that both organisational justice and counterproductive work behaviours provide a useful perspective which may facilitate understanding of the factors determining the occurrence of innovative activity in an organisation and may support creative behaviours of HRM and managers. (original abstract)
Rocznik
Tom
16
Numer
Strony
267--294
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
  • Warsaw School of Economics, Poland
  • Warsaw School of Economics, Poland
Bibliografia
  • Adams, J.S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In: L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press, 267-299.
  • Agrawal, U.A. (2014). Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work Engagement. Personnel Review, 43(1), 41-73.
  • Amabile, T.M. & Gryskiewicz, S.S. (1988). Creative human resource in the R&D laboratory: How environment and personality affect innovation. In: R.L. Kuhn (ed.), Handbook of creative and innovative managers. New York: McGraw Hill, 501-524.
  • Amabile, T.M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In: B.M. Shaw & L.L. Cummings (eds.), Research in organisational behaviour. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 123-167.
  • Amabile, T.M. (2004). Stimulate creativity by fueling passion. In: E.A. Locke (ed.), The Blackwell handbook of principles of organisational behaviour. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing, 331-341.
  • Anderson, N. & West, M.A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 19, 235-258.
  • Anderson, N., Potočnik, K. & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A State-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333.
  • Axtell, C.M., Holman, D.J., Unsworth, K.L., Wall, T.D., Waterson, P.E. & Harrington, E. (2000). Shop floor innovation: Facilitating the suggestion and implementation of ideas. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 73, 265-285.
  • Bagozzi, R. & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(1), 8-34.
  • Baron, R.M. & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
  • Baucus M.S., Norton, W.I., Baucus, D.A. & Human, A.E. (2008). Fostering creativity and innovation without encouraging unethical behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 97-115.
  • Bennett, R.J. & Robinson, S.L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 349-360.
  • Bies, R.J. (2005). Are procedural justice and interactional justice conceptually distinct? In: J. Greenberg & J.A. Colquitt, Handbook of organisational justice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 85-112.
  • Binnewies, C. & Wornlein, S.C. (2011). What makes a creative day? A diary study on the interplay between affect, job stressors, and job control. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 32, 589-607.
  • Bledow, R., Rosing, K. & Frese, M. (2013). A dynamic perspective on affect and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 432-450.
  • Chen, G., Liu, C. & Tjosvold, D. (2005). Conflict management for effective top management teams and innovation in China. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 277-300.
  • Cohen-Charash, Y. & Spector, P.E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 86, 278-321.
  • Colquitt, J.A., Conlon, D.E., Wesson, M.J., Porter, C.O.L.H. & Ng, K.Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A Meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425-445.
  • Colquitt, J.A., Greenberg, J. & Zapata-Phelan, C.P. (2005). What is organizational justice? A historical overview. In: J. Greenberg & J.A. Colquitt (eds.), Handbook of organisational justice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 3-56.
  • Da Costa, S., Paez, D., Sanchez, F., Garaigordobil, M. & Gondim, S. (2015). Personal factors of creativity: A second order meta-analysis. Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 31, 165-173.
  • Dacey, J.S. & Lennon, K.H. (1998). Understanding Creativity. The Interplay of Biological, Psychological, and Social Factors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • De Jong, J. & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 23-36.
  • Dorenbosch, L., van Engen, M.L. & Verhagen M. (2005). On-the-job innovation: The impact of job design and human resource management through production ownership. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(2), 129-141.
  • Eisenberger, R. & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth? American Psychologist, 51, 1153-1166.
  • Farr, J.L. & Ford, C.M. (1990). Individual innovation. In: M.A. West & J.L. Farr (eds.), Innovation and creativity at work. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 63-80.
  • Hammond, M.M., Neff, N.L., Farr, J.L., Schwall, A.R. & Zhao, X. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 90-105.
  • Harari, M.B., Reaves, A.C. & Viswesvaran, Ch. (2016). Creative and innovative performance: A meta-analysis of relationships with task, citizenship, and counterproductive job performance dimensions. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 25(4), 495-511.
  • Hayes, A.F. (2013). An Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: The Guilford Press.
  • Hu, L.T. & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analyses: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Hülsheger, U.R., Anderson, N. & Salgado, J.F. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1128-1145.
  • Isaken, S.G. & Ekvall, G. (2010). Managing for innovation: the two faces of tension in creative climates. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(2), 73-88.
  • Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness, and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 73(3), 287-302.
  • Janssen, O. (2003). Innovative behaviour and job involvement at the price of conflict and less satisfactory relations with co-workers. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 76, 347-364.
  • Janssen, O. (2004). How fairness perceptions make innovative behaviour more or less stressful. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 25, 201-215.
  • Janssen, O. (2005). The joint impact of perceived influence and supervisor supportiveness on employee innovative behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 78(4), 573-579.
  • Jensen, M.B. & Beckmann, S. (2009). Determinants of innovation and creativity in corporate branding: findings from Denmark. Journal of Brand Management, 16(7), 468-479.
  • Kanter, R.M. (1984). The Change Masters. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  • Kaptein, M. (2010). The ethics of organizations: A longitudinal study of the U.S. working population. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 601-618.
  • Keashly, L. & Harvey, S. (1998). Emotional abuse in the workplace. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 1, 85-117.
  • Khazanchi, S. & Masterson, S.S. (2011). Who and what is fair matters: A multi-foci social exchange model of creativity. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 32, 86-106.
  • Kleysen, R.F. & Street, Ch.T. (2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovative behaviour. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 284-296.
  • Ko, H-T. & Lu, H.-P. (2010). Measuring innovation competencies for integrated services in the communications industry. Journal of Service Management, 21(2), 162-190.
  • May, D.R., Gilson, R.L. & Harter, L.M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 77(1), 11-37.
  • Montani, F., Odoardi, C., Battistelli, A. (2014). Individual and contextual determinants of innovative work behaviour: Proactive goal generation matters. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 87(4), 645-670.
  • Ng, T.W. & Feldman, D.C. (2012). A comparison of self-ratings and non-self-report measures of employee creativity. Human Relations, 65(3), 1021-1047.
  • Niehoff, B.P. & Moorman, R.H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of mentoring and organisational citizenship behaviour. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.
  • Nisula A.-M. & Kianto, A. (2016). The antecedents of individual innovative behavior in temporary group innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25(4), 431-444.
  • Park H., Yeon Son S., Lee S. & Yun S. (2009). Organisational justice and knowledge sharing. International Journal of Business Research, 9(4), 180-184.
  • Pelled, L.H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615-631.
  • Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioural research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.
  • Prahalad, C.K. & Krishnan, M.S. (2010). Nowa era innowacji. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
  • Ramamoorthy, N., Flood, P.C., Slattery, T. & Sardessai, R. (2005). Determinants of innovative work behaviour: Development and test of an integrated model. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(2), 142-150.
  • Robinson, S.L. & Bennett, R.J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviours: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2), 555-572.
  • Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J. & Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 441-457.
  • Ruppel, C.P. & Harrington, S.J. (2000). The relationship of communication, ethical work climate, and trust to commitment and innovation. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 313-328.
  • Scott, S.G. & Bruce, R.A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behaviour: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
  • Shih, H.-A. & Susanto, E. (2011). Is innovative behaviour really good for the firm? Innovative work behaviour, conflict with coworkers and turnover intention: moderating roles of perceived distributive fairness. International Journal of Conflict Management, 22(2), 111-130.
  • Simmons, A. (2011). The influence of openness to experience and organizational justice on creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 23(1), 9-23.
  • Somech, A. & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2013). Translating team creativity to innovation implementation: the role of team composition and climate for innovation. Journal of Management, 39(3), 684-708.
  • Spector, P.E. (2006). Method variance in organisational research: truth or urban legend? Organisational Research Methods, 9(2), 221-232.
  • Spector, P.E., Fox, S., Penney, L.M., Bruursema, K., Goh, A. & Kessler, S. (2006). The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviours created equal? Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 68, 446-460.
  • Tuominen, T. & Toivonen, M. (2011). Studding innovation and change activities in KIBS through the lens of innovation behaviour. International Journal of Innovation Management, 15(2), 393-422.
  • Turek, D. (2012). Kontrproduktywne zachowania pracowników w organizacji. Przejawy, uwarunkowania, ograniczanie. Warszawa: Difin.
  • Vardi, Y. & Weitz, E. (2004). Misbehaviour in Organizations. New Jersey: Lawrence Elbaum Associates.
  • Wang, P. & Rode, J.C. (2010). Transformational leadership and follower creativity: The moderating effects of identification with leader and organizational climate. Human Relations, 63(8), 1105-1028.
  • West, M.A. & Farr, J.L. (1989). Innovation at work: Psychological perspectives. Social Behaviour, 4, 15-30.
  • Wojtczuk-Turek, A. & Turek, D. (2016). The significance of perceived social-organization climate for creating employees' innovativeness: The mediating role of person-organization fit. Management Research Review, 39(2), 167-195.
  • Wojtczuk-Turek, A. (2012). Zachowania innowacyjne w pracy. Warszawa: Difin.
  • Wojtczuk-Turek, A. (2016). Wspieranie produktywności pracowników wiedzy. Warszawa: PWN.
  • Yidong, T. & Xinxin, L. (2013). How ethical leadership influence employees' innovative work behaviour: A perspective of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 116, 441-455.
  • Young, L.D. (2012). How to promote innovative behaviour at work? The role of justice and support within organizations. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 46(3), 220-243.
  • Yuan, F. & Woodman, R.W. (2010). Innovative behaviour in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(2), 323-342.
  • Zhang, Y., Lepine, J., Buckman, B.R. & Wei, F. (2014). It's not fair... or is it? The role of justice and leadership in explaining work stressor-job performance relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 57(3), 675-697.
  • Zhou, J. & Shalley, C. (2003). Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. In: J.J. Martocchio & G.R. Ferris (eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science, 165-217.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171500424

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.