Building on person-environment t theory and social exchange theory, the relationship between job demands and innovative work behaviour was assumed to be moderated by fairness perceptions of the ratio between eVort spent and reward received at work. This interaction of job demands with perceptions of eVort-reward fairness was tested among 170 non-management employees from a Dutch industrial organization in the food sector. Results demonstrated a positive relationship between job demands and innovative work behaviour when employees perceived eVort-reward fairness rather than under-reward unfairness.

As hypothesized, data from 170 employees of a Dutch firm showed that the quality of leader-member exchange mediated positive relationships between a mastery orientation and leader-rated in-role job performance, leader-rated innovative job performance, and job satisfaction. In contrast, a performance orientation was negatively related or unrelated to those outcomes. These findings suggest that employees with stronger mastery orientations are more effective on the job because they tend to establish higher-quality exchanges with their supervisors.

As hypothesized, data from 170 employees of a Dutch firm showed that the quality of leader-member exchange mediated positive relationships between a mastery orientation and leader-rated in-role job performance, leader-rated innovative job performance, and job satisfaction. In contrast, a performance orientation was negatively related or unrelated to those outcomes. These findings suggest that employees with stronger mastery orientations are more effective on the job because they tend to establish higher-quality exchanges with their supervisors.

SummaryThis introduction essay proposes a challenging program for researchers eager to explore factors and process mechanisms contributing to the benefits and costs individuals and groups incur from pursuing innovative approaches. With respect to individual innovation, such moderating factors might be found in the characteristics of the innovative idea, the innovator, coworkers, supervisors, the broader organizational context, and in national culture. Examples of factors that are likely to shape the beneficial and detrimental outcomes of group innovation include knowledge, skills and ability of group members, group tenure, diversity among group members, group processes (clarifying group objectives, participation, constructive management of competing perspectives), and external demands on groups. This Special Issue contains a state-of-the-science paper, three articles dealing with the benefits and costs of individual innovation, and three articles addressing the bright and dark sides of group innovation.

No abstract