Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why and when innovation performance is available: the role of fell responsibility for constructive change and creative self-efficacy

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Combining Gen Z and millennial employee groups, the current study aims to explore the mechanism of felt responsibility for constructive change, taking charge and innovation performance based on the theory of planned behavior and proactive motivation model, and analyzes the moderating effect of creative self-efficacy in it. The results reveal a positive association between felt responsibility for constructive change and taking charge, as well as between taking charge and innovation performance, with taking charge acting as a complete mediator. Moreover, the level of creative self-efficacy influences the relationship between felt responsibility for constructive change, taking charge, and innovation performance. Specifically, employees with high levels of creative self-efficacy demonstrate an accelerated transition from felt responsibility for constructive change to taking charge, thus enhancing innovation performance. Conversely, employees with low levels of creative self-efficacy experience a hindered transformation process from felt responsibility for constructive change to taking charge. These findings contribute to our understanding of the role of responsibility awareness in fostering innovation performance, and provide theoretical and practical enlightenment for managers to effectively cultivate employees’ consciousness of responsibility for constructive change, promote active engagement in taking charge and improve innovation performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

We have made arranged with the companies that participated in our study to keep our data private but will provide it upon reasonable request. Therefore, the datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Code Availability

Not applicable to this article.

References

  • Afsaneh, B., & Alexander, N., and Nathan E (2022). Entrepreneurial leadership of CEOs and employees’ innovative behavior in high-technology new ventures. Journal of Small Business Management, 60(4), 805–827. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2020.1737094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (2012). The theory of planned behavior. In P. A. M. Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 438–459). London, UK: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n22.

  • Ajzen, I. (2018). The theory of planned behavior: A bibliography. Retrieved from http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/tpbrefs.html.

  • Ajzen, I., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2019). Reasoned action in the service of goal pursuit. Psychological Review, 126(5), 774–786. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aleksić, D., Rangus, K., Slavec Gomezel, A. Microfoundations of SME open innovation: the role of help, knowledge sharing and hiding. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(6), 178–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-10-2020-0411

  • Amabile, T. M., Barsade, S. G., Mueller, J. S., & Staw, B. M. (2005). Affect and Creativity at Work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 367–403. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.3.367.

  • Amabile, T., Conti, R., Coon, H. M., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154–1184. https://doi.org/10.5465/256995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N., Potocnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and Creativity in Organizations. Journal of Management, 40, 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arain, G. A., Hameed, I., & Crawshaw, J. R. (2019). Servant leadership and follower voice: The roles of follower felt responsibility for constructive change and avoidance-approach motivation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28, 555–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1609946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asad, N., Hashmi, H. B., Nasir, M., Khalid, A., & Ahmad, A. (2021). Transformational Leadership Relationship with Employee Creativity: The moderating effect of knowledge sharing and mediating Effect of Creative Self-Efficacy. International Journal of Innovation Creativity and Change. https://doi.org/10.53333/ijicc2013/15913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badri, S. K. Z., Yung, C. T. M., Mohd Yunus, W., W. M. A., & Seman, N. A. A. (2023). The perceived effects of spirituality, work-life integration and mediating role of work passion to millennial or gen Y employees’ mental health. Management Research Review.

  • Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 13(2).

  • Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (2000). Select on conscientiousness and emotional stability. Blackwell.

  • Battistelli, A., Odoardi, C., Cangialosi, N., Di Napoli, G., & Piccione, L. (2022). The role of image expectations in linking organizational climate and innovative work behaviour. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(6), 204–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-01-2021-0044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Z., Huo, Y., Lan, J., Chen, Z., & Lam, W. (2019). When do Frontline Hospitality Employees take charge? Prosocial Motivation, taking charge, and Job Performance: The moderating role of Job Autonomy. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 60(3), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965518797081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2007). The influence of leaders’ and other referents’ normative expectations on individual involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, J. J. T., May, D. R., Schwoerer, C. E., & Deeg, M. (2022). Called” to speak out: Employee Career calling and Voice Behavior. Journal of Career Development, 0(0), https://doi.org/10.1177/08948453211064943.

  • Choi, J. N. (2004). Individual and Contextual Predictors of Creative Performance: The Mediating Role of Psychological Processes. Creativity Research Journal, 16(2), 187–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2004.9651452

  • Chung, J. W., Huei, T. T., & Ming, T. T. (2014). Linking transformational leadership and employee creativity in the hospitality industry: The influences of creative role identity, creative self-efficacy, and job complexity. Tourism Management, 40, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarence, M., & Jena, L. K. (2023). The role of Personal and Contextual Resources on the Relationship between Soul at Work and Discerning Millennial Employees. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 23220937221144364.

  • Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in Work Organizations: The state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diliello, T. C., Houghton, J. D., & Dawley, D. (2011). Narrowing the creativity gap: The moderating effects of perceived support for creativity. The Journal of psychology, 145(3), 151–172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Du, Y., Hu, H., & Wang, Z. (2021). Entrepreneurs’ Felt responsibility for constructive change and entrepreneurial performance: A Moderated Mediation Model of Technology Action and Market Orientation. Frontiers in Psychology, 5949.

  • Dudley, N. M., Orvis, K. A., Lebiecki, J. E., & Cortina, J. M. (2006). A meta-analytic investigation of conscientiousness in the prediction of job performance: Examining the intercorrelations and the incremental validity of narrow traits. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 40–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, J. B., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K. (2006). Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behaviour: Exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Organizational Behavvior, 27(8), 1089–1120. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, J. B. Jr., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K. (2012). Bridge building within the province of proactivity. Journal of organizational behaviour, 33(8), 1053–1070. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1780. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002

  • Fuller, B., Marler, L. E., Hester, K., & Otondo, R. F. (2015). Leader reactions to follower proactive behavior: Giving credit when credit is due. Human Relations, 68(6), 879–898. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726714548235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galperin, & Bella, L. (2012). Exploring the Nomological Network of Workplace Deviance: Developing and validating a measure of constructive deviance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(12), 2988–3025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Globocnik, D. (2019). Taking or avoiding risk through secret innovation activities—The relationships among employees’ risk propensity, bootlegging, and management support. International Journal of Innovation Management, 23(3), https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919619500221.

  • Gong, Y., Huang, J. C., & Farh, J. L. (2009). Employee Learning Orientation, Transformational Leadership, & Employee Creativity: The Mediating Role of Employee Creative Self-Efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43670890

  • Graham, J. W. (1986). Principled organizational dissent: A theoretical essay. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 8, 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, S., Harold, C. M., & Cheong, M. (2019). Examining why employee proactive personality influences empowering leadership: The roles of cognition-and affect-based trust. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92, 352–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In new challenges to international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, O., & Yperen, N. W. V. (2004). Employees’ goal orientations, the Quality of Leader-Member Exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 368–384. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaussi, K. S., Randel, A. E., & Dionne, S. D. (2007). I am, I think I can, and I do: The role of personal identity, self-efficacy, and cross-application of experiences in creativity at work. Creativity Research Journal, 19, 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T. Y., & Liu, Z. (2017). Taking charge and employee outcomes: the moderating effect of emotional competence. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(5), 775–793. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1109537

  • Lam, C. F., Johnson, H. H., Song, L. J., Wu, W., Lee, C., & Chen, Z. (2022). More depleted, speak up more? A daily examination of the benefit and cost of depletion for voice behavior and voice endorsement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(6), 983–1000. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, N., Barrick, M. R., Zimmerman, R. D., & Chiaburu, D. S. (2014). Retaining the productive employee: The role of personality. Academy of Management Annals, 8, 347–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, R., Zhang, Z. Y., & Tian, X. M. (2016). Can self-sacrificial leadership promote subordinate taking charge? The mediating role of organizational identification and the moderating role of risk aversion. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(5), 758–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., Li, Y. P., Hou, X. F. (2021). Utilitarian orientation, long-term orientation, and performance: evidence from Chinese millennial-generation employees. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 43(9), 1463–1476.

  • Liu, D., Chen, Y., & Li, N. (2021). Tackling the negative impact of COVID-19 on work engagement and taking charge: A multi-study investigation of frontline health workers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000866.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J. N., Hou, Y. Z., Wang, J., Fu, P., & Xia, C. Z. (2022). How does leaders’ information-sharing behavior affect subordinates’ taking charge behavior in public sector? A moderated mediation effect. Frontiers in Psychology, 13.

  • Maden-Eyiusta, C. (2021). Role conflict, role ambiguity, and proactive behaviors: does flexible role orientation moderate the mediating impact of engagement? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 32, 2829–2855.

  • Mallory, D. B., Rupp, D. E., Pandey, N., & Tay, L. (2020). The Effect of Employee Proactive Personality and Felt responsibility on individual corporate social responsibility behaviors. The CSR Context Matters.

  • Man Tang, P., Koopman, J., McClean, S. T., Zhang, J. H., Li, C. H., De Cremer, D., & Ng, C. T. S (2022). When conscientious employees meet intelligent machines: An integrative approach inspired by complementarity theory and role theory. Academy of Management Journal, 65(3), 1019–1054. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2020.1516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2017). Sources of Entrepreneurial Courage and Imagination: Three Perspectives. Three Contexts Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41, 667–675. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.1228

  • Morrison, E. W., & Phelps, C. C. (1999). Taking charge at work: Extrarole efforts to Initiate Workplace Change. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.5465/257011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neeraj, K. J., & l, Rajib, L. D. (2015). Transformational leadership, innovation climate, creative self-efficacy and employee creativity: A multilevel study. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.07.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngo, M., Mustafa, M. J., & Butt, M. M. (2022). When and why employees take charge in the Workplace: The roles of learning goal orientation, role-breadth self-efficacy and co-worker support. Review of Managerial Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00568-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington Books.

  • Parker, S. K., & Collins, C. G. (2008). Taking Stock: Integrating and Differentiating Multiple Proactive Behaviours. Journal of Management, 36(3), 633–662. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321554

  • Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M., & Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the Antecedents of proactive Behaviour at Work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 636–652.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. (2010). Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. Journal of Management, 36(4), 827–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310363732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Politi, C., Roumeliotis, S., Tripepi, G., & Spoto, B. (2023). Sample size calculation in Genetic Association Studies: A practical Approach. Life (Basel Switzerland), 13(1), 235. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13010235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shaheen, M., & Pradhan, S. (2019). Sampling in qualitative research. Qualitative techniques for workplace data analysis (pp. 25–51). IGI Global.

  • Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2007). When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. Journal of applied psychology, 92(6), 1709–1721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, S. J., Kim, T. Y., Lee, J. Y., & Bian, L. (2012). Cognitive Team Diversity and Individual Team Member Creativity: A Cross-Level Interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 55(1), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stouten, J., Rousseau, D. M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajudeen, F. P., Nadarajah, D., Jaafar, N. I., & Sulaiman, A. (2022). The impact of digitalisation vision and information technology on organisations’ innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(2), 607–629. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-10-2020-0423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative Self-Efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137–1148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2004). The pygmalion process and Employee Creativity. Journal of Management, 30(3), 413–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2010). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over Time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 277–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, H. Y. (2023). Do you feel like being proactive day? How daily cyberloafing Influences Creativity and Proactive Behavior: The moderating roles of Work Environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 138, 107470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, W., & Yu, L. (2022). How does personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology promote knowledge workers’ innovative work behavior? Information & Management, 59(6), 103688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, Z., Yang, F., & Peng, J. (2021). How does authentic leadership influence employee voice? From the perspective of the theory of planned behavior. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01464-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, A. J., Loi, R., & Chow, C. W. (2023). Does taking charge help or harm employees’ promotability and visibility? An investigation from supervisors’ status perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(1), 53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ylitalo, J. (2009). Controlling for Common Method Variance with partial least squares path modeling: A Monte Carlo Study. Computer Science.

  • Yuan, Y., Yang, L., Cheng, X., & Wei, J. (2021). What is bullying hiding? Exploring antecedents and potential dimension of knowledge hiding. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(5), 1146–1169. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2020-0256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, M. J., Zhang, Y., & Law, K. S. (2022a). Paradoxical leadership and innovation in work teams: The multilevel mediating role of ambidexterity and leader vision as a boundary condition. Academy of Management Journal, 65(5), 1652–1679. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.1265.

  • Zhang, Y., Wang, F., Cui, G., et al. (2022b). When and why proactive employees get promoted: A trait activation perspective. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04142-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, J., Oldham, G. R., Chuang, A., & Hsu, R. S. (2022). Enhancing employee creativity: Effects of choice, rewards and personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(3), 503–513. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000900.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (20BGL136).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, No.5 Zhongguancun South Street, 100081, Beijing, China

    Yunyun Yuan, Pingqing Liu, Claire Marie Cecila Andrianandraina & Yuanyuan Liu

  2. School of Business, Fuyang Normal University, 236037, Fuyang, China

    Bin Liu

Authors
  1. Yunyun Yuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bin Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pingqing Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Claire Marie Cecila Andrianandraina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yuanyuan Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the conception and design of the study. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Bin Liu, Yunayuan Liu, and Claire Marie Cecila Andrianandraina. The initial draft of the manuscript was written by Yunyun Yuan and Pingqing Liu. During the revision process, Yunyun Yuan, Bin Liu, and Pingqing Liu made significant contributions, and all authors provided feedback on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pingqing Liu.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Statement

Our research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Our research has been known to all members participating in the research, and information about the subject’s consent to participate is provided in the system.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yuan, Y., Liu, B., Liu, P. et al. Why and when innovation performance is available: the role of fell responsibility for constructive change and creative self-efficacy. Curr Psychol 43, 10132–10147 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05073-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05073-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation