Is innovative behavior really good for the firm?

Hsi‐An Shih · Ely Susanto

113 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Conflict Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior Team Dynamics and Performance Conflict Management and Negotiation

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate the negative impacts of innovative work behavior (IWB) on conflict with coworkers and turnover intention. It also aims to test the moderating effect of perceived distributive fairness on these relationships. Design/methodology/approach A total of 460 employees who were working in production and marketing teams at manufacturing and pharmaceutical companies in Indonesia were asked to complete the questionnaire. The final sample consisted of 135 sets of paired data of supervisor and subordinate. The multiple hierarchical regressions were used to test the developed hypotheses. Findings Findings of this study indicated that innovative work behavior had a positive and significant relationship with conflict with coworkers and turnover intention respectively. Moreover, the findings also found that perceived distributive fairness negatively moderated the relationship between IWB and both conflict with coworkers and turnover intention. Research limitations/implications The study involved relatively a small sample selected from employees who were working in production and marketing teams in manufacturing and pharmaceutical companies in Indonesia. Future research should consider extending the sample to other industries and locations to test the arguments as well as exploring other contextual variables to buffer the negative impacts of IWB on conflict with coworkers and turnover intention Originality/value Scholars and practitioners alike agree that IWB helps organizations to gain and sustain competitive advantage. However, IWB may also create problems for organizations and employees that previous studies have left unexplored. This study examines such negative impacts, along with how to alleviate them.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 113 citations exist upstream.

References

2003Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.2017Exchange and Power in Social Life 1960The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement 1965Inequity In Social Exchange 1986Perceived organizational support.1994DETERMINANTS OF INNOVATIVE BEHAVIOR: A PATH MODEL OF INDIVIDUAL INNOVATION IN THE WORKPLACE.2001Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.1953Field Theory in Social Science

Cited by

2013Innovative employee behaviour 2020How to promote managers’ innovative behavior at work: Individual factors and perceptions 2019Employee-level open innovation in emerging markets: linking internal, external, and managerial resources 2015Who cares about imagination, creativity, and innovation, and why? A review.2021High-performance work practices do much, but H.E.R.O does more: an empirical investigation of employees' innovative behavior from the hospitality industry

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.