european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals
european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals european journal of social sciences issn: 1450-2267 - EuroJournals
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 3 (2007) Determinant of Innovative Behavior in the Workplace: A Case Study of a Malaysian Public Sector Organisation Indra Devi Subramaniam Faculty of Management, Multimedia University, Malaysia Abstract The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between selected predictor variables and innovative behavior in the workplace. The predictor variables are leadermember relationship, leader role expectation, demographic variables and problem-solving style. The study was also carried out to determine whether there was a direct relationship between these predictor variables and innovative behavior or whether the psychological climate for innovation mediated between the predictor variables and innovative behavior. The respondents for this study were 79 teacher educators. A questionnaire was used to collect data. The findings of the study showed that only leader-member exchange correlated significantly with support for innovation. Leader-member exchange, leader role expectation and intuitive problem solving style correlated significantly with individual's perception of adequacy of resource supply for innovation. Leader-member exchange is the only variable that correlated significantly with psychological climate for innovation. There was significant relationship between psychological climate and innovative behavior. Leader-member exchange, leader-role expectation, systematic problem-solving style and intuitive problem-solving style correlated significantly with innovative behavior. Among the conclusion that can be made from this study is that psychological climate for innovation is influenced by leader-member exchange. Support for innovation without resource supply will not result in innovative behavior. Keywords: Psychological climate for innovation, leader member exchange, leader role expectation, problem-solving style Introduction Teachers are faced with unprecedented challenges in the new millennium. They have been charged with building the human capital of the nation equipped with skills for the k-economy. This they are expected to do by encouraging in their students acquisition of knowledge and key skills for the new information society and emphasizing creativity and imagination. Teachers can only achieve this by providing a challenging and rewarding experience for all students. This cannot be achieved without innovation in teaching and learning. Innovation requires creation of new knowledge. This knowledge creation process involves tapping the tacit and often subjective insights, intuitions and hunches of individual teachers and testing them through the research process. Ideally based on the findings of the research, a prototype of a product can be made. The product in this case can be a new teaching method. This then represents an innovation in the teaching learning process and can be implemented in the classroom. However in reality this is seldom the case. In most cases the teacher researchers do not go beyond stating the findings of the research and statements of how the new knowledge can improve practice. What is then impeding these teachers from implementing these innovation in their classroom? 96
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 3 (2007) Figure 1: Determining Individual Innovative Behavior: A Hypothetical Model (Adapted from Scott and Bruce, 1994) Model of Individual Innovative Behavior According to Van de Van (1986), one of the central problems in the management of innovation is the management of attention. This is because individuals gradually adapt to their environments in such a way that their awareness of need deteriorates and their action thresholds reach a level at which only crisis can stimulate action (Scott and Bruce, 1994). However several theorist (Amabile, 1988; Isaken, 1987 and Kanter, 1988) have suggested that organizational climate may channel and direct both attention and activities towards innovation. The purpose of this study is to determine the factors that facilitate innovative behavior in the work place. The study will also look at the path model for innovative behavior and the best predictors of innovative behavior in the work place. In the model tested in this study (Figure 1), individual innovative behavior is viewed as the outcome of three interacting systems - individual attributes, leadership and climate for innovation. In this model leadership style (leader-member exchange and leader role expectation) and individual attributes (demographic variables and problem¬ solving style [systematic problem -solving style and intuitive problem-solving style]) affect individual innovative behavior directly and indirectly through the individual's perception of a climate for innovation (support for innovation and resource supply). Based on the hypothetical model, the following hypothesis has been developed to be tested in this study: 97
- Page 45 and 46: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 47 and 48: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 49 and 50: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 51 and 52: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 53 and 54: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 55 and 56: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 57 and 58: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 59 and 60: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 61 and 62: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 63 and 64: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 65 and 66: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 67 and 68: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 69 and 70: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 71 and 72: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 73 and 74: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 75 and 76: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 77 and 78: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 79 and 80: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 81 and 82: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 83 and 84: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 85 and 86: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 87 and 88: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 89 and 90: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 91 and 92: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 93 and 94: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 95: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 99 and 100: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 101 and 102: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 103 and 104: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 105 and 106: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 107 and 108: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 109 and 110: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 111 and 112: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 113 and 114: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 115 and 116: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 117 and 118: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 119 and 120: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 121 and 122: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 123 and 124: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 125 and 126: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 127 and 128: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 129 and 130: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 131 and 132: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 133 and 134: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 135 and 136: 3. Result and Discussion 1. Profile
- Page 137 and 138: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 139 and 140: Table 2: The Channels of the respon
- Page 141 and 142: European Journal of Social Sciences
- Page 143: European Journal of Social Sciences
European Journal <strong>of</strong> Social Sciences – Volume 5, Number 3 (2007)<br />
Figure 1: Determining Individual Innovative Behavior: A Hypothetical Model (Adapted from Scott and<br />
Bruce, 1994)<br />
Model <strong>of</strong> Individual Innovative Behavior<br />
According to Van de Van (1986), one <strong>of</strong> the central problems in the management <strong>of</strong> innovation is the<br />
management <strong>of</strong> attention. This is because individuals gradually adapt to their environments in such a<br />
way that their awareness <strong>of</strong> need deteriorates and their action thresholds reach a level at which only<br />
crisis can stimulate action (Scott and Bruce, 1994). However several theorist (Amabile, 1988; Isaken,<br />
1987 and Kanter, 1988) have suggested that organizational climate may channel and direct both<br />
attention and activities towards innovation.<br />
The purpose <strong>of</strong> this study is to determine the factors that facilitate innovative behavior in the<br />
work place. The study will also look at the path model for innovative behavior and the best predictors<br />
<strong>of</strong> innovative behavior in the work place.<br />
In the model tested in this study (Figure 1), individual innovative behavior is viewed as the<br />
outcome <strong>of</strong> three interacting systems - individual attributes, leadership and climate for innovation. In<br />
this model leadership style (leader-member exchange and leader role expectation) and individual<br />
attributes (demographic variables and problem¬ solving style [systematic problem -solving style and<br />
intuitive problem-solving style]) affect individual innovative behavior directly and indirectly through<br />
the individual's perception <strong>of</strong> a climate for innovation (support for innovation and resource supply).<br />
Based on the hypothetical model, the following hypothesis has been developed to be tested in this<br />
study:<br />
97