Framing Workplace Innovation Through an Organisational Psychology Perspective: A Review of Current WPI Studies

  • Arianna Costantini
  • Riccardo Sartori
  • Andrea Ceschi
Part of the Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being book series (AHSW)


In this chapter, we discuss the potential advantages of taking a work and organisational psychology (WOP) perspective on Workplace Innovation (WPI). WPI represents a construct that can be applied at different organisational levels and be considered from multiple inter-related perspectives. Accordingly, this contribution takes a systemic perspective on WPI. Such an approach suggests that multiple disciplines have something to contribute to our understanding of WPI and this chapter aims to show how research in WPI can benefit from a WOP perspective. Accordingly, a main goal of this chapter is to recognize how organisational and work-related dynamics influence the effectiveness of WPI practices, an issue that will be examined by means of recent WPI studies analysed from a WOP perspective. In doing so, we seek to encourage perspectives on WPI and research in WOP to be merged, in order to promote a deeper investigation of the predictors and consequences of WPI, as well as a greater understanding of factors influencing the effectiveness of WPI practices.


Workplace innovation Human resource management Quality of working life Organisational performance Job autonomy Job flexibility Participation in organisational life Job redesign 



The authors thank editor Diana Rus who provided insight and comments that greatly improved the manuscript.

The authors and publisher gratefully acknowledge the following permission to use the material in this book: Arianna Costantini, Riccardo Sartori & Andrea Ceschi, Reviewing psychological facets of workplace innovation In: European Work and Organizational Psychology in Practice. Special issue on Workplace Innovation, 2017, Volume 1, 6–18.


  1. Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A. L. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high-performance work systems pay off. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bakker, A., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43, 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13, 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., de Boer, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2003a). Job demands and job resources as predictors of absence duration and frequency. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 62, 341–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Euwema, M. C. (2005). Job resources buffer the impact of job demands on burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 170–180.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., Taris, T. W., Schaufeli, W. B., & Schreurs, P. J. (2003b). A multigroup analysis of the job demands-resources model in four home care organizations. International Journal of Stress Management, 10, 16–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beauregard, T. A., & Henry, L. C. (2009). Making the link between work-life balance practices and organizational performance. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bond, F. W., & Flaxman, P. E. (2006). The ability of psychological flexibility and job control to predict learning, job performance, and mental health. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 26, 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2007). High-performance work systems and organisational performance: Bridging theory and practice. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45, 261–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2016). Strategy and human resource management (4th ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Busck, O., Knudsen, H., & Lind, J. (2010). The transformation of employee participation: Consequences for the work environment. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31, 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Choi, J. N., & Chang, J. Y. (2009). Innovation implementation in the public sector: An integration of institutional and collective dynamics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 245–253.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, L. E., & Cherns, A. (1975). The quality of working life. Problems, prospects, and the state of the art. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. de Jonge, J., & Kompier, M. A. (1997). A critical examination of the demand-control-support model from a work psychological perspective. International Journal of Stress Management, 4, 235–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 802–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Demerouti, E. (2015). Design your own job through job crafting. European Psychologist, 19, 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2006). Employee well-being and job performance: Where we stand and where we should go. In J. Houdmont & S. McIntyre (Eds.), Occupational health psychology: European perspectives on research, education and practice (Vol. 1, pp. 83–111). Maia: ISMAI Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499–512.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dhondt, S., Pot, F., & Kraan, K. (2014). The importance of organizational level decision latitude for well-being and organizational commitment. Team Performance Management, 20, 307–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dhondt, S., & Van Hootegem, G. (2015). Reshaping workplaces: Workplace innovation as designed by scientists and practitioners. European Journal of Workplace Innovation, 1, 17–24.Google Scholar
  22. Eeckelaert, L., Dhondt, S., Oeij, P., Pot, F., Nicolescu, G., Webster, J., et al. (2012). Review of workplace innovation and its relation with occupational safety and health. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  23. Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. Human Resource Management Review, 21, 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hagen, I. M., & Trygstad, S. C. (2009). Local flexicurity: Resolving the conflict between direct and representative participation. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 15, 557–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holman, D., Frenkel, S., Sørensen, O., & Wood, S. (2009). Work design variation and outcomes in call centers: Strategic choice and institutional explanations. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 62, 510–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holman, D., Totterdell, P., Axtell, C., Stride, C., Port, R., Svensson, R., et al. (2012). Job design and the employee innovation process: The mediating role of learning strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332–1356.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1992). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  30. Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klein, K. J., Conn, A. B., & Sorra, J. S. (2001). Implementing computerized technology: An organizational analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 811–824.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Knudsen, H., Busck, O., & Lind, J. (2011). Work environment quality: The role of workplace participation and democracy. Work, Employment and Society, 25, 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martel, J.-P., & Dupuis, G. (2006). Quality of work life: Theoretical and methodological problems, and presentation of a new model and measuring instrument. Social Indicators Research, 77, 333–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oeij, P., & Vaas, F. (2016). Effect of workplace innovation on organisational performance and sickness absence. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 12, 101–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Oeij, P., de Vroome, E., Bolland, A., Gründemann, R., & van Teeffelen, L. (2014). Investing in workplace innovation pays off for SMEs: A regional innovation initiative from The Netherlands. International Journal of Social Quality, 4, 86–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oeij, P., Žiauberyté-Jakštiené, R., Dhondt, S., Corral, A., Totterdill, P., & Preenen, P. (2015). Workplace innovation in European companies. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  38. Oeij, P. R., Dhondt, S., Kraan, K., Vergeer, R., & Pot, F. (2012). Workplace innovation and its relations with organisational performance and employee commitment. LLinE, Lifelong Learning in Europe, 4, 2012.Google Scholar
  39. Oldham, G. R., Hackman, J. R., & Pearce, J. L. (1976). Conditions under which employees respond positively to enriched work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parker, S. K. (2003). Longitudinal effects of lean production on employee outcomes and the mediating role of work characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 620–634.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Jackson, P. R. (1997). “That’s not my job”: Developing flexible employee work orientations. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 899–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pot, F. D., & Koningsveld, E. A. (2009). Quality of working life and organizational performance-two sides of the same coin? Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health, 35, 421–428.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Preenen, P. T., Oeij, P. R., Dhondt, S., Kraan, K. O., & Jansen, E. (2016). Why job autonomy matters for young companies’ performance: Company maturity as a moderator between job autonomy and company performance. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 12, 74–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Preenen, P. T., Vergeer, R., Kraan, K., & Dhondt, S. (2015). Labour productivity and innovation performance: The importance of internal labour flexibility practices. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 1–23.Google Scholar
  45. Purvis, R. L., Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W. (2001). The assimilation of knowledge platforms in organizations: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 12, 117–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ramos, J., Anderson, N., Peiró, J. M., & Zijlstra, F. (2016). Studying innovation in organizations: A dialectic perspective—Introduction to the special issue. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25, 477–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Russell, D. M., & Hoag, A. M. (2004). People and information technology in the supply chain: Social and organizational influences on adoption. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 34, 102–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1217–1227.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schnall, P., Landsbergis, P., & Baker, D. (1994). Job strain and cardiovascular disease. Annual Review of Public Health, 15, 381–411.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Singh, J. (2000). Performance productivity and quality of frontline employees in service organizations. Journal of Marketing, 64, 15–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Takeuchi, R., Chen, G., & Lepak, D. P. (2009). Through the looking glass of a social system: Cross-level effects of high-performance work systems on employees’ attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 62, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Taris, T. W., Kompier, M. A., De Lange, A. H., Schaufeli, W. B., & Schreurs, P. J. (2003). Learning new behaviour patterns: A longitudinal test of Karasek’s active learning hypothesis among Dutch teachers. Work & Stress, 17, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999). The job demand-control (-support) model and psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work and Stress, 13, 87–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Walters, D., & Nichols, T. (2007). Worker representation and workplace health and safety. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. (2007). How job and personal resources influence work engagement and financial turnover: A diary study in a Greek fast–food company. International Journal of Stress Management, 14, 121–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhou, H., Dekker, R., & Kleinknecht, A. (2011). Flexible labor and innovation performance: Evidence from longitudinal firm-level data. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20, 941–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arianna Costantini
    • 1
  • Riccardo Sartori
    • 1
  • Andrea Ceschi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Human SciencesVerona UniversityVeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations