When Are Individuals Innovative?
Three-Way Interaction Among Openness to Experience, Innovative Climate, and Job Complexity
Abstract
Abstract. This study aims to explain: (a) what types of individuals are likely to exhibit innovative behavior and (b) when they are more likely to do so. For this purpose, the study uses trait activation theory (Tett & Burnett, 2003; Tett & Guterman, 2000) as a theoretical framework and simultaneously examines the characteristics of the individual performing the job (openness to experience), the context within which the job is performed (innovative climate), and the nature of the job (job complexity). An analysis of survey data collected in China suggests that innovative climate and job complexity have a joint moderating effect on the relationship between openness to experience and innovative behavior. Based on the results, implications for research and practice are discussed.
References
1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
(2005). Affect and creativity at work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 367–403. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.3.367
(2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations. Journal of Management, 40, 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
(2000). Shopfloor innovation: Facilitating the suggestion and implementation of ideas. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317900167029
(2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115
(2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.10.2.170
(2003). Dual processes at work in a call centre: An application of the job demands – resources model. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12, 393–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320344000165
(2005). The crossover of burnout and work engagement among working couples. Human Relations, 58, 661–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726705055967
(2007). Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.274
(1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
(2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00160
(2000). Coping and physical health during caregiving: The roles of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.1.131
(2010). What do people want from their jobs? The big five, core self‐evaluations and work motivation. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18, 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00486.x
(2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29, 87–111.
(2000). Reporting analyses of covariance structures. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 461–483. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0703_6
(2001). The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 1273–1289. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00217-8
(1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO personality inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 887–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90177-D
(2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499
(1985). A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 305–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90002-0
(2003). Employee creativity in Taiwan: An application of role identity theory. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 618–630. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040653
(1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5
(2008). Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 613–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.023
(2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.513
(2002). Understanding when bad moods foster creativity and good ones don’t: The role of context and clarity of feelings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 687–697. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.687
(1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
(1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
(1989). Prosocial behavior, job complexity, and suggestion contribution under gainsharing plans. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 25, 231–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886389253002
(2009). A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 280–293. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.37308035
(2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317900167038
(2004). How fairness perceptions make innovative behavior more or less stressful. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.238
(2000). Personality and job satisfaction: The mediating role of job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 237–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.237
(2013). Hierarchical representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: Integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 875–925. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033901
(1996). Creativity and the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1996.0013
(2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
(2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x
(2011). Too much of a good thing: Curvilinear relationships between personality traits and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021016
(2000). Adaptability to changing task contexts: Effects of general cognitive ability, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. Personnel Psychology, 53, 563–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00214.x
(2010). A study on the influence of organizational climate on knowledge-sharing behavior in IT enterprises. Journal of Computers, 5, 508–515. https://doi.org/10.4304/jcp.5.4.508-515
(1985). A meta-analysis of the relation of job characteristics to job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.70.2.280
(2002). There’s no place like home? The contributions of work and nonwork creativity support to employees’ creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 757–767. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069309
(1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1258–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1258
(2004). Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and efficiency compete or complement each other? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 175–199. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.237
(2010). Multirater assessment of creative contributions to team projects in organizations. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 150–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320902815312
(1987). What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(87)90043-1
(2010). The impact of job embeddedness on innovation-related behaviors. Human Resource Management, 49, 1067–1087. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20390
(2012). A comparison of self-ratings and non-self-report measures of employee creativity. Human Relations, 65, 1021–1047. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712446015
(2013). Age and innovation-related behavior: The joint moderating effects of supervisor undermining and proactive personality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 583–606. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1802
(2010). Psychological contract breaches, organizational commitment, and innovation-related behaviors: A latent growth modeling approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 744–751. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018804
(1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 607–634. https://doi.org/10.2307/256657
(2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: Links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 379–408. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.312
(1968). Performance and satisfaction as a function of individual-environment fit. Psychological Bulletin, 69, 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025271
(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
(2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 612–624. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.4.612
(2010). The joint effects of personality and job scope on in-role performance, citizenship behaviors, and creativity. Human Relations, 63, 981–1005. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709349863
(1990).
(Climate and culture: An evolution of constructs . In B. SchneiderEd., Organizational climate and culture (pp. 5–39). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.2002). The role of personality in new product development team performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 19, 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0923-4748(01)00045-5
(2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698–714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698
(1997). The five factor model of personality and job performance in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.30
(1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580–607. https://doi.org/10.2307/256701
(2000). The measurement and prediction of managerial creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_14
(2009). Interactive effects of growth need strength, work context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 489–505. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.41330806
(2004). The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30, 933–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007
(2009). Openness to experience, plasticity, and creativity: Exploring lower-order, high-order, and interactive effects. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 1087–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.015
(2009). Do big five personality factors affect individual creativity? The moderating role of extrinsic motivation. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 37, 941–956. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2009.37.7.941
(2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500
(2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 397–423. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2292
(2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1137–1148. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069429
(2004). The Pygmalion process and employee creativity. Journal of Management, 30, 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2002.12.001
(2010). Not all job demands are equal: Differentiating job hindrances and job challenges in the job demands-resources model. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 735–759. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320903223839
(2000). Person-organization fit: The match between newcomers’ and recruiters’ preferences for organizational cultures. Personnel Psychology, 53, 113–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00196.x
(1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
(2001). Individual differences in creativity: Personality, story writing, and hobbies. European Journal of Personality, 15, 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.409
(2007). The role of personal resources in the job demands-resources model. International Journal of Stress Management, 14, 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.14.2.121
(2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 323–342. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.49388995
(2008). Reliability and concurrent validation of the IPIP big-five factor markers in China: Consistencies in factor structure between Internet-obtained heterosexual and homosexual samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 649–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.07.009
(2001). Enhancing creative performance: Effects of expected developmental assessment strategies and creative personality. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 35, 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2001.tb01044.x
(