Innovation Onset: A Moderated Mediation Model of High-Involvement Work Practices and Employees’ Innovative Work Behavior

Abstract

Purpose Based on the componential theory of creativity, this study examined the link between high-involvement work practices and employees’ innovative behavior by further investigating the moderating and mediating role of leadership humility and employees’ personal initiative. Methodology To test the hypothesized model, the data were gathered from 255-line staff and 119 supervisors working in the textile industry in Pakistan via the time lag technique. The proposed hypotheses were analyzed through partial least squares structural equation modeling using Smart-PLS software. Findings The results indicated that high-involvement work practices were significantly related to employees’ innovative work behaviors. Additionally, the moderation findings revealed that a higher level of leadership humility strengthens the relationship between high-involvement work practices and employees’ personal initiative. Furthermore, employees’ personal initiative mediates the relationship between high-involvement work practices and their innovative work behavior. The findings of the moderated mediation model indicated that a higher level of leadership humility leads to higher innovative behavior of employees in the presence of high-involvement work practices via employees’ personal initiative. Practical Implications This study’s findings are helpful for the management of organizations to understand the factors that enhance innovative work behaviors in high-involvement work practices. Moreover, managers should establish humble behaviors in their leadership style to influence employees’ personal initiative, which indirectly influences their innovative work behavior. Originality/Value The present study highlights the importance of leadership humility and employees’ personal initiative in the relationship between high-involvement work practices and innovative work behaviors of employees in the textile industry of Pakistan.

How do work–life balance programmes influence nurses' psychological well‐being? The role of servant leadership and learning goal orientation

“…Previous work has highlighted the role of leadership in influencing employee altitudinal and behavioural outcomes (Li et al, 2022). In Ma and colleagues' recent review study (2023), they eloquently argued that a positive leadership style and supervisor–employee guanxi may contribute to positive employee outcomes (e.g.…”

How high-involvement work practices, leadership and job crafting influence nurses’ innovative work behavior

“…Evidence from this study reveals that JC significantly mediates the relationship between HIWPs and IWBs of nurses. Though some previous studies (Li et al ., 2022; Wang et al ., 2022) reported that HIWPs boost IWB and productivity, our study contributes to the extant literature by showing that JC mediates the relationship between HIWPs and IWB. The plausible explanation for this empirical outcome is that the perceptions of nurses about their work environment are critical to their ability to innovate (Laschinger and Leiter, 2006).…”

“…Employees engage in JC as a form of self-determination to meet their basic psychological needs, which enables them to engage in their jobs with a view to becoming more creative and innovative. Since some studies have shown that HIWPs significantly contribute to IWB (Li et al ., 2022; Wang et al ., 2022), it is fundamental to ascertain whether JC is one of the channels or mechanisms through which HIWPs influence IWB.…”

Factors Affecting Employee’s Retention: Integration of Situational Leadership With Social Exchange Theory

“…The working environment concerns the availability of a conducive workplace ( Edgar and Geare, 2005 ) and is defined as the degree to which employees consider the workplace physically safe. Employees can share their views on their surroundings with their mutual consideration with organisations by assessing the environment ( Lewin et al, 1939 ; Li et al, 2022 ). Some examples of work environment indicators include supervisor support ( Stirpe and Zárraga-Oberty, 2017 ), physical working conditions ( Richards et al, 1994 ), social worker support ( Haggins, 2011 ), and helping behaviours during decision-making ( Subramaniam and Mia, 2001 ).…”