Uniwersyteckie Czasopisma NaukoweOpenness to experience and innovative work behavior: workplace politics harms the innovativeness of those low on openness
Słowa kluczowe:
openness to experience, perceptions of organizational politics, innovative work behavior, trait activationAbstrakt
Background
Work innovation is essential to both employee and organizational success in today’s highly competitive work environment. Although scholars have found personality (e.g., openness to experience) to relate to innovative work behavior, only some research has examined how context might influence personality’s effects, and very few studies have examined work environments (e.g., workplace politics) that could be detrimental to innovative behavior.
Participants and procedur
Taking a trait activation approach, across two time points, we examined how openness affects the perceptions of organizational politics (POP)–innovative work behavior relationship using a sample of employees and supervisors working in a variety of finance sectors.
Results
The results revealed that innovative work behaviors, as rated by managers both concurrently and six months later, decrease crease for employees low on openness under conditions of elevated POP, but are not reduced for those high on openness under high POP. Thus, the (only) employees whose innovative behavior was negatively affected were those who were otherwise least prone to engage in work innovation (i.e., those low on openness), indicating the harmful effect of workplace politics on this valuable work behavior.
Conclusions
These findings suggest that scholars should develop a more nuanced understanding of openness’s long-established relationship with innovation at work, paying particular attention to the context of their openness studies.
Downloads
Bibliografia
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Chao, G. T., & Bauer, T. N. (2017). Taking stock of two relational aspects of organizational life: Tracing the history and shaping the future of socialization and mentoring research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 324–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000086
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, 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 389–444). Allyn & Bacon.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5
Diefendorff, J., Lee, F., & Hynes, D. (2021). Longitudinal designs for organizational research. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.211
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
Feist, G. J. (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
Ferris, G. R., & Hochwarter, W. A. (2011). Organizational politics. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol. 3. Maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization (pp. 435–459). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12171-012
Ferris, G. R., Ellen III, B. P., McAllister, C. P., & Maher, L. P. (2019). Reorganizing organizational politics research: a review of the literature and identification of future research directions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015221
Gjermunds, N., Brechan, I., Johnsen, S. Å. K., & Watten, R. G. (2020). Personality traits in musicians. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 8, 100–107. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2020.97314
Hammond, M. M., Neff, N. L., Farr, J. L., Schwall, A. R., & Zhao, X. Y. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: a meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts, 5, 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018556.
Hauser, O. P., Linos, E., & Rogers, T. (2017). Innovation with field experiments: Studying organizational behaviors in actual organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37, 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2017.10.004
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regressionbased approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
HBR Ascend Staff (2019). The changing perspectives of young professionals on work and the workplace. Retrieved from https://hbrascend.org/tO.P.ics/thechanging-perspectives-work-and the-workplaceyouth-skills-survey/
Hochwarter, W. A., Rosen, C. C., Jordan, S. L., Ferris, G. R., Ejaz, A., & Maher, L. P. (2020). Perceptions of organizational politics research: Past, present, and future. Journal of Management, 46, 879–907. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319898506
Hochwarter, W., Ferris, G., Laird, M., Treadway, D., & Gallagher, V. (2010). Nonlinear politics perceptions-work outcomes relationships: a three-study, five-sample investigation. Journal of Management, 36, 740–763. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308324065
Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869–879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.869
Janssen, O. (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
Javed, B., Khan, A. K., Arjoon, S., Mashkoor, M., & Haque, A. U. (2020). Openness to experience, ethical leadership, and innovative work behavior. Journal of Creative Behavior, 54, 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.360
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). Guilford Press.
Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386–408. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.20208687
Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further validation of the perceptions of politics scale (POPS): a multiple sample investigation. Journal of Management, 23, 627–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(97)90019-2
Kane-Frieder, R. E., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2014). Terms of engagement: Political boundaries of work engagement-work outcomes relation ships. Human Relations, 67, 357–382. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713495068
Maher, L. P., Russell, Z. A., Jordan, S. L., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2021). Research methods in organizational politics: Issues, challenges, and opportunities. In E. F. Stone-Romero & P. J. Rosopa (Eds.), Research methods in human resource management (pp. 135–172). Information Age Publishing.
Miller, B. K., Rutherford, M. A., & Kolodinsky, R. W. (2008). Perceptions of organizational politics: a meta-analysis of outcomes. Journal of Business Psychology, 22, 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9061-5
Ng, T. W., & Feldman, D. C. (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
Ng, T. W., Feldman, D. C., & Lam, S. S. (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
Park, H. H., Zhou, Y., & Choi, M. (2018). When are individuals innovative? Three-way interaction among openness to experience, innovative climate, and job complexity. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 17, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000190
Parker, C. P., Dipboye, R. L., & Jackson, S. L. (1995). Perceptions of organizational politics: an investigation of antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management, 21, 891–912. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-2063(95)90046-2
Perry, R., & Sibley, C. G. (2013). Seize and freeze: Openness to experience shapes judgments of societal threat. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 677–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.06.006.
Piedmont, R. L., Sherman, M. F., & Sherman, N. C. (2012). Maladaptively high and low openness: The case for experiential permeability. Journal of Personality, 80, 1641–1668. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00777.x
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (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
Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: a review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.12.004
Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2008). Personality and prejudice: a meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 248–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308319226
Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2013). Personality geneses of authoritarianism: The form and function of openness to experience. In F. Funke, T. Petzel, J. C. Cohrs, & J. Duckitt (Eds.), Perspectives on authoritarianism (pp. 169-199). VS-Verlag.
Taggar, S. (2002). Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: a multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 315–330. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069349
Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality traitbased interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500
Woodman, R. W., & Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1990). An interactionist model of creative behavior. Journal of Creative Behavior, 24, 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1990.tb00525.x
Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (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
Zare, M., & Flinchbaugh, C. (2019). Voice, creativity, and big five personality traits: a meta-analysis. Human Performance, 32, 30–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2018.1550782
Zhang, W., Xu, F., & Sun, B. (2020). Are open individuals more creative? The interaction effects of leadership factors on creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 163, 110078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110078
