Leveraging employee creativity through high performance work systems:a multilevel perspective

Research has looked at single rather than a configuration of human resource management (HRM) practices to influence creativity so it is not yet clear how these practices synergistically facilitate creativity and organisational performance. I address this significant but unanswered question in a three-part study. In Study 1, I develop a high performance work system (HPWS) for creativity scale. I use Study 2 sample to test the validity of the new scale. In Study 3, I test a multilevel model of the intervening processes through which branch HPWS for creativity influences creativity and branch performance. Specifically, at the branch level, I draw on social context theory and hypothesise that branch HPWS for creativity relates to climate for creativity which, in turn, leads to creativity, and ultimately, to profit. Furthermore, I hypothesise environmental dynamism as a boundary condition of the creativity-profit relationship. At the individual level, I hypothesise a cross-level effect of branch HPWS for creativity on employee-perceived HPWS. I draw on self-determination theory and argue that perceived HPWS for creativity relate to need satisfaction and the psychological pathways of intrinsic motivation and creative process engagement to predict creativity. I also hypothesise climate for creativity as a cross-level moderator of the intrinsic motivation-creativity and creative process engagement-creativity relationships. Results of hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) indicate that ten out of the fifteen hypotheses were supported. The findings of this study respond to calls for HPWS to be designed around a strategic focus by developing and providing initial validity evidence of an HPWS for creativity scale. The results reveal the underlying mechanisms through which HPWS for creativity simultaneously influences individual and branch creativity leading to profit. Lastly, results indicate environmental dynamism to be an important boundary condition of the creativity-profit relationship and climate for creativity as a cross-level moderator of the creative process engagement-creativity.

Do managerial strategies influence service behaviours? Insights from a qualitative study

Based on a review of the extant literature, a conceptual framework for analyzing the associations between managerial strategies (internal communications, empowerment, supportive leadership and professional development), employee job attitudes (organizational commitment and job satisfaction) and prosocial service behaviours (PSBs) is developed. The authors explore the relevance of the proposed conceptual model and testable propositions regarding the associations between managerial strategies, employee attitudes and PSBs by conducting in-depth interviews of FLEs in a travel service organization. Based on the findings of the in-depth interviews, the relationships between managerial strategies, job attitudes and PSBs in the conceptual framework are largely supported.

Towards a multilevel model of the high performance work systems–workplace safety relationship

Human Resource (HR) systems and practices generally referred to as High Performance Work Practices (HPWPs), (Huselid, 1995) (sometimes termed High Commitment Work Practices or High Involvement Work Practices) have attracted much research attention in past decades. Although many conceptualizations of the construct have been proposed, there is general agreement that HPWPs encompass a bundle or set of HR practices including sophisticated staffing, intensive training and development, incentive-based compensation, performance management, initiatives aimed at increasing employee participation and involvement, job safety and security, and work design (e.g. Pfeffer, 1998). It is argued that these practices either directly and indirectly influence the extent to which employees’ knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics are utilized in the organization. Research spanning nearly 20 years has provided considerable empirical evidence for relationships between HPWPs and various measures of performance including increased productivity, improved customer service, and reduced turnover (e.g. Guthrie, 2001; Belt & Giles, 2009). With the exception of a few papers (e.g., Laursen &Foss, 2003), this literature appears to lack focus on how HPWPs influence or foster more innovative-related attitudes and behaviours, extra role behaviors, and performance. This situation exists despite the vast evidence demonstrating the importance of innovation, proactivity, and creativity in its various forms to individual, group, and organizational performance outcomes. Several pertinent issues arise when considering HPWPs and their relationship to innovation and performance outcomes. At a broad level is the issue of which HPWPs are related to which innovation-related variables. Another issue not well identified in research relates to employees’ perceptions of HPWPs: does an employee actually perceive the HPWP –outcomes relationship? No matter how well HPWPs are designed, if they are not perceived and experienced by employees to be effective or worthwhile then their likely success in achieving positive outcomes is limited. At another level, research needs to consider the mechanisms through which HPWPs influence –innovation and performance. The research question here relates to what possible mediating variables are important to the success or failure of HPWPs in impacting innovative behaviours and attitudes and what are the potential process considerations? These questions call for theory refinement and the development of more comprehensive models of the HPWP-innovation/performance relationship that include intermediate linkages and boundary conditions (Ferris, Hochwarter, Buckley, Harrell-Cook, & Frink, 1999). While there are many calls for this type of research to be made a high priority, to date, researchers have made few inroads into answering these questions. This symposium brings together researchers from Australia, Europe, Asia and Africa to examine these various questions relating to the HPWP-innovation-performance relationship. Each paper discusses a HPWP and potential variables that can facilitate or hinder the effects of these practices on innovation- and performance- related outcomes. The first paper by Johnston and Becker explores the HPWPs in relation to work design in a disaster response organization that shifts quickly from business as usual to rapid response. The researchers examine how the enactment of the organizational response is devolved to groups and individuals. Moreover, they assess motivational characteristics that exist in dual work designs (normal operations and periods of disaster activation) and the implications for innovation. The second paper by Jørgensen reports the results of an investigation into training and development practices and innovative work behaviors (IWBs) in Danish organizations. Research on how to design and implement training and development initiatives to support IWBs and innovation in general is surprisingly scant and often vague. This research investigates the mechanisms by which training and development initiatives influence employee behaviors associated with innovation, and provides insights into how training and development can be used effectively by firms to attract and retain valuable human capital in knowledge-intensive firms. The next two papers in this symposium consider the role of employee perceptions of HPWPs and their relationships to innovation-related variables and performance. First, Bish and Newton examine perceptions of the characteristics and awareness of occupational health and safety (OHS) practices and their relationship to individual level adaptability and proactivity in an Australian public service organization. The authors explore the role of perceived supportive and visionary leadership and its impact on the OHS policy-adaptability/proactivity relationship. The study highlights the positive main effects of awareness and characteristics of OHS polices, and supportive and visionary leadership on individual adaptability and proactivity. It also highlights the important moderating effects of leadership in the OHS policy-adaptability/proactivity relationship. Okhawere and Davis present a conceptual model developed for a Nigerian study in the safety-critical oil and gas industry that takes a multi-level approach to the HPWP-safety relationship. Adopting a social exchange perspective, they propose that at the organizational level, organizational climate for safety mediates the relationship between enacted HPWS’s and organizational safety performance (prescribed and extra role performance). At the individual level, the experience of HPWP impacts on individual behaviors and attitudes in organizations, here operationalized as safety knowledge, skills and motivation, and these influence individual safety performance. However these latter relationships are moderated by organizational climate for safety. A positive organizational climate for safety strengthens the relationship between individual safety behaviors and attitudes and individual-level safety performance, therefore suggesting a cross-level boundary condition. The model includes both safety performance (behaviors) and organizational level safety outcomes, operationalized as accidents, injuries, and fatalities. The final paper of this symposium by Zhang and Liu explores leader development and relationship between transformational leadership and employee creativity and innovation in China. The authors further develop a model that incorporates the effects of extrinsic motivation (pay for performance: PFP) and employee collectivism in the leader-employee creativity relationship. The papers’ contributions include the incorporation of a PFP effect on creativity as moderator, rather than predictor in most studies; the exploration of the PFP effect from both fairness and strength perspectives; the advancement of knowledge on the impact of collectivism on the leader- employee creativity link. Last, this is the first study to examine three-way interactional effects among leader-member exchange (LMX), PFP and collectivism, thus, enriches our understanding of promoting employee creativity. In conclusion, this symposium draws upon the findings of four empirical studies and one conceptual study to provide an insight into understanding how different variables facilitate or potentially hinder the influence various HPWPs on innovation and performance. We will propose a number of questions for further consideration and discussion. The symposium will address the Conference Theme of ‘Capitalism in Question' by highlighting how HPWPs can promote financial health and performance of organizations while maintaining a high level of regard and respect for employees and organizational stakeholders. Furthermore, the focus on different countries and cultures explores the overall research question in relation to different modes or stages of development of capitalism.

Corporate identity at the stakeholder group level:a conceptual model of front-line employee corporate identity

There is a paucity of literature regarding the construction and operation of corporate identity at the stakeholder group level. This article examines corporate identity from the perspective of an individual stakeholder group, namely, front-line employees. A stakeholder group that is central to the development of an organization’s corporate identity as it spans an organization’s boundaries, frequently interacts with both internal and external stakeholders, and influences a firm’s financial performance by building customer loyalty and satisfaction. The article reviews the corporate identity, branding, services and social identity literatures to address how corporate identity manifests within the front-line employee stakeholder group, identifying what components comprise front-line employee corporate identity and assessing what contribution front-line employees make to constructing a strong and enduring corporate identity for an organization. In reviewing the literature the article develops propositions that, in conjunction with a conceptual model, constitute the generation of theory that is recommended for empirical testing.

Help in finding the right balance:leadership, work-family balance and employee outcomes

Although much research has examined employees’ experience of the work-family interface, its conceptualization has been rather problematic, ranging from work and family as mutually constraining through to mutually enriching and, more recently, to work-family balance (WFB). Building on Greenhaus and Allen’s (2011) conceptualization of WFB as comprising satisfaction and effectiveness components, I proposed and tested a model of he antecedents and outcomes of WFB. Based on work-family border theory, I hypothesised that family-supportive supervisor behaviours (FSSB) facilitate WFB and hat the relationship is stronger when the organisation also offers formal support (availability of family-friendly practices (FFPs); enhancement effect). Furthermore, I integrated the leadership and work-family interface literatures by proposing authentic eadership as an antecedent of FSSB. Based on role accumulation theories, I proposed life satisfaction and health as outcomes of WFB satisfaction and WFB effectiveness and job performance as an outcome of only WFB effectiveness. I tested my hypotheses with individual-level data in Study 1 (two waves of data; employees from Germany and the UK) and nested data (individuals nested in teams; two waves of data; employee and supervisor ratings; Germany and the UK) in Study 2. The obtained findings largely supported the hypothesized model and showed that both authentic leadership (Study 1) and team authentic leadership (Study 2) predicted FSSB which, in turn, increased WFB satisfaction and WFB effectiveness. Contrary to my prediction, both studies revealed that FSSB and (team) availability of FFPs compensated for each other, only impacting WFB satisfaction/effectiveness if the other form of family support was not available. Furthermore, both components were positively related to life satisfaction and health, while WFB effectiveness was only related to self-rated performance (Study 1) and not supervisor-rated performance (Study 2). Lastly, the serial moderated mediation model hat tested the conditional indirect effect of (team) authentic leadership on the outcomes received mixed support.

Measuring employee innovation:a review of existing scales and the development of the innovative behavior and innovation support inventories across cultures

Purpose - The paper develops a model of employee innovative behavior conceptualizing it as distinct from innovation outputs and as a multi-faceted behavior rather than a simple count of ‘innovative acts’ by employees. It understands individual employee innovative behaviors as a micro-foundation of firm intrapreneurship that is embedded in and influenced by contextual factors such as managerial, organizational and cultural support for innovation. Building from a review of existing employee innovative behavior scales and theoretical considerations we develop and validate the Innovative Behavior Inventory (IBI) and the Innovation Support Inventory (ISI). Design/methodology/approach – Two pilot studies, a third validation study in the Czech Republic and a fourth cross-cultural validation study using population representative samples from Switzerland, Germany, Italy and the Czech Republic (N=2812 employees and 450 entrepreneurs) were conducted. Findings - Both inventories were reliable and showed factorial, criterion, convergent and discriminant validity as well as cross-cultural equivalence. Employee innovative behavior was supported as comprising of idea generation, idea search, idea communication, implementation starting activities, involving others and overcoming obstacles. Managerial support was the most proximal contextual influence on innovative behavior and mediated the effect of organizational support and national culture. Originality/value - The paper advances our understanding of employee innovative behavior as a multi-faceted phenomenon and the contextual factors influencing it. Where past research typically focuses on convenience samples within a particular country, we offer first robust evidence that our model of employee innovative behavior generalizes across cultures and types of samples. Our model and the IBI and ISI inventories enable researchers to build a deeper understanding of the important micro-foundation underpinning intrapreneurial behavior in organizations and allow practitioners to identify their organizations’ strengths and weaknesses related to intrapreneurship.