Five innovation energy mechanisms need strategic and operational HRM involvement—An abductive case study at Saxion University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands
Abstract
This paper provides insight into innovation energy, its five working mechanisms, and innovative work behaviour (IWB). Although human energy is often mentioned as an important factor in theories about motivation, it is still an unexplored theme in literature. The management of organisations often focuses on the innovation content and neglects the process aspects. Strategic and operational HRM involvement is needed to realising the essential conditions for the innovation energy of innovative employees. An abductive case study on innovation energy took place in five educational departments of one academy at Saxion University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands. We interviewed 21 innovating lecturers and their five team leaders individually and organised five focus groups with a total of 17 team members. Innovation energy converts individual innovation properties (creativity, psychological empowerment, and optimism) into IWB. Organisations must pay attention to these properties and four other working mechanisms (autonomy, teamwork, leadership, and external contacts) that influence this conversion process. HRM professionals should be involved with innovation processes to realise the right conditions for innovation energy, together with line management. The construct of innovation energy with five working mechanisms gives more insight into the IWB process from the perspective of the engaged employee with IWB. This research contributes to the body of knowledge on IWB, (human) innovation energy, and engagement in relation to HRM.
References
1. Crossan MM, Apaydin M. A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies 2010; 47(6): 1154–1191. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00880.x
2. Chasan E. Global sustainable investments rise 34 percent to $30.7 trillion. Available online: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-01/global-sustainable-investments-rise-34-percent-to-30-7-trillion (accessed on 7 July 2023).
3. Guterres A. World Investment Report 2020. United Nations Publications.
4. Schröder T. Herman Wijffels: We are approaching a new era for which we do not yet have a name (Dutch). Available online: https://www.stichting-jas.nl/2020/04/herman-wijffels-we-naderen-een-nieuw.html (accessed on 7 July 2023).
5. Mumford MD. Managing creative people: Strategies and tactics for innovation. Human Resource Management Review 2000; 10(3): 313–351. doi: 10.1016/S1053-4822(99)00043-1
6. Bass BJ, Avolio BM, Jung DI. Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 1999; 72(4): 441–462. doi: 10.1348/096317999166789
7. van de Ven AH. Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science 1986; 32(5): 590–670.
8. Vermeulen P. The Anchored Organizations (Dutch). Boom Lemma Uitgevers; 2011.
9. van Hootegem G. The Unbearable Slowness of Management (Dutch). Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Departement Sociologie; 1999.
10. Bos-Nehles A, Renkema M, Janssen M. HRM and innovative work behaviour: A systematic literature review. Personnel Review 2017; 46(7): 1228–1253. doi: 10.1108/PR-09-2016-0257
11. de Jong J, den Hartog D. Innovative work behavior. Creativity and Innovation Management 2010; 19(1): 23–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x
12. de Spiegelaere S, van Guyes G, van Hootegem G. The concept of Innovative Work Behavior: Definition and orientation (Dutch). Gedrag en Organisatie 2014; 27(2): 139–156. doi: 10.5553/GenO/092150772014027001002
13. van den Brand W, Stynen D, Wognum I, Nikolova ID. Promoting innovative work behavior through transformational leadership: The mediating role of psychological safety and team learning (Dutch). Gedrag & Organisatie 2021; 34(2): 148–179. doi: 10.5117/go2021.2.001.bran
14. Li CH, Wu JJ. The structural relationships between optimism and innovative behaviour: Understanding potential antecedents and mediating effects. Creativity Research Journal 2011; 23(2): 119–128. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2011.571184
15. Amabile TM. A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior 1988; 10: 123–167.
16. Spreitzer G. Taking stock: A review of more than twenty years of research on empowerment at work. In: Cooper C, Barling J (editors). Organizational Behavior. Sage Publication; 2008. pp. 54–72.
17. van Essen HJ, de Leede J, Bondarouk T. Innovation energy: The stimulus converting employees’ innovation properties into innovative work behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management 2022; 31(2): doi: 10.1111/caim.12490
18. Schippers MC, Hogenes R. Energy management of people in organizations: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business and Psychology 2011; 26(2): 193–203. doi: 10.1007/s10869-011-9217-6
19. Ulrich D. A New Mandate for Human Resources. Harvard Business Review; 1998. pp. 124–135.
20. Kim W, Han SJ, Park J. Is the role of work engagement essential to employee performance or ‘nice to have’? Sustainability 2019; 11(4): 1050. doi: 10.3390/su11041050
21. de Jong JPJ, den Hartog DN. Determinants of innovative behavior: A study among SME knowledge workers (Dutch). Gedrag & Organisatie 2005; 18(5): 235–259. doi: 10.5117/2005.018.005.001
22. Dorenbosch L, van Engen ML, Verhagen M. On-the-job innovation: The impact of job design and human resource management through production ownership. Creativity and Innovation Management 2005; 14(2): 129–141. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-8691.2005.00333.x
23. Scott SG, Bruce RA. Determinants of innovative behaviour: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal 1994; 37(3): 580–607. doi: 10.5465/256701
24. Janssen O, Schoonebeek G, van Looy B. Cognitions of empowerment as the link between delegative leadership andinnovative behavior of employees (Dutch). Gedrag & Organisatie 1997; 4: 175–194
25. Burke KL, Joyner AB, Czech DR, Wilson M. An investigation of concurrent validity between two optimism/pessimism questionnaires: The life orientation test-revised and the optimism and pessimism scale. Current Psychology 2000; 19(2): 129–136. doi: 10.1007/s12144-000-1009-5
26. Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology 1975; 60(2): 159–170. doi: 10.1037/h0076546
27. Widmann A, Messmann G, Mulder RH. The impact of team learning behaviors on team innovative behaviour: A systematic review. Human Resource Development Review 2016; 15(4): 429–458. doi: 10.1177/1534484316673713
28. Schyns B, van Veldhoven MJPM, Wood S. Organizational climate, relative psychological climate, and job satisfaction: The example of supportive leadership climate. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 2009; 30(7): 649–663. doi: 10.1108/01437730910991664
29. Rafferty AE, Griffin MA. Refining individualized consideration: Distinguishing developmental leadership and supportive leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 2006; 79: 37–61. doi: 10.1348/096317905X36731
30. Cross R, Baker W, Parker A. What creates energy in organizations. MIT Sloan Management Review 2003; 44(4): 51–56
31. Quinn RW, Spreitzer GM, Lam CH. Building a sustainable model of human energy in organizations: Exploring the critical role of resources. The Academy of Management 2012; 6(1): 1–60. doi: 10.5465/19416520.2012.676762
32. Schiuma G, Mason S, Kennerley M. Assessing energy within organizations. Measuring Business Excellence 2007; 11(3): 69–78. doi: 10.1108/13683040710820764
33. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB, Salanova M. The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement 2006; 66(4): 701–716. doi: 10.1177/0013164405282471
34. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In: Bakker AB, Leiter MP (editors). Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research. Psychology Press; 2010. pp. 10–21.
35. Boeije H. Analyzing in Qualitative Research (Dutch). Bom Lemma; 2014.
36. Saetre AS, Van de Ven A. Generating theory by abduction. Academy of Management Review 2021; 46(4): 684–701. doi: 10.5465/amr.2019.0233
37. Dubois A, Gadde LE. Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research 2002; 55(7): 553–560. doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00195-8
38. Dubois A, Gadde LE. “Systematic combining”—A decade later. Journal of Business Research 2014; 67(6): 1277–1284. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.036
39. Agarwal UA. Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement. Personnel Review 2014; 43(1): 41–73. doi: 10.1108/PR-02-2012-0019
40. Lee Y. Multidisciplinary team research as an innovation engine in knowledge-based transition economies and implication for Asian countries—From the perspective of the science of team science. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia 2013; 12(1): 49–63. doi: 10.17477/jcea.2013.12.1.049
41. de Jong. Individual innovation, the connection between leadership and employees innovative work behaviour. Zoetermeer: EIM; 2007.
42. Hsu M, Hou S, Fan H. Creative self-efficacy and innovative. Journal of Creative Behavior 2011; 45(4): 258–272. doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2011.tb01430.x
43. de Leede J. Innovating from the Bottom up: On the Contribution of Task Forces to Process and Product Innovation (Dutch). University of Twente; 1997.
44. Bondarouk TV. Action-oriented group learning in the implementation of information technologies: Results from three case studies. European Journal of Information Systems 2006; 15(1): 42–53. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000608
45. Stone AG, Russell RF, Patterson K. Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 2004; 25(4): 349–361. doi: 10.1108/01437730410538671
46. Ngan PT. Organisational innovativeness: Motivation in an employee’s innovative work behaviour. Scientific Bulletin-Economic Sciences 2015; 14: 86–97.
47. Soomro BA, Shah N. Determining the impact of entrepreneurial orientation and organizational culture, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and employee’s performance. South Asian Journal of Business 2019; 8(3): 266–282. doi: 10.1108/SAJBS-12-2018-0142
48. Renkema M, Meijerink J, Bondarouk T. Routes for employee-driven innovation: How HRM supports the emergence of innovation in a formalized context. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 2022; 33(17): 3526–3559. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2021.1913625
Copyright (c) 2023 Henk Jan van Essen, Jan de Leede
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
