The relationship between personal values, organizational formalization and employee work outcomes of compliance and innovation

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the interaction between personal values and the organizational context in influencing work behaviors. Specifically, it examines the relationships between two dimensions of personal values based on Schwartz’s value theory – self-direction and conformity; and two work behaviors – innovation and compliance. Design/methodology/approach Survey data were collected from 187 employees in Australia. Multiple regression method was used to test the hypotheses. Findings The results showed that organizational formalization moderated the relationship between self-direction values and innovative behaviors. As hypothesized, the positive effect of self-direction values on innovative behavior was strongest in less formalized organizations. the authors also found that conformity values predicted compliance behaviors, but no evidence of moderation by organizational formalization. Practical implications It is important for organizations seeking particular work behaviors to ensure they are hiring employees with corresponding values and structuring the degree of formalization in the organization accordingly. Originality/value This research contributes to the interactionist perspective, demonstrating that formalization interacts with employee values to influence work behaviors. Further, the authors extend previous studies on self-direction values and creative behaviors by understanding how personal values impact innovative behavior.

Person–Job Fit and Innovation Behavior: Roles of Job Involvement and Career Commitment

“…Innovation behavior was measured using a 6-item questionnaire developed and validated by Scott and Bruce (1994). A sample item is “I search out new technologies, processes, techniques, and product ideas.” Scott and Bruce’s (1994) innovation measure was found to be correlated with objective measures of innovation behavior (Eva et al, 2017). It has also been used for both self-reported and manager-reported innovation (Tu and Lu, 2013).…”

Ambidextrous Relationships and Social Capability as Employee Well-Being: The Secret Sauce for Research and Development and Sustainable Innovation Performance

“…Authors such as Gratton and Ghoshal [8], Byrne et al [56], and Eva et al [57] argue that close informal networks among employees are direct sources of innovation and R&D. In this way, through mutual trust, engagement, internal values, cooperation, or the exchange of knowledge, important results can be obtained in terms of innovation and R&D [58]. Specifically, authors such as Gratton and Ghoshal [8] argue that aspects such as relaxed meetings, consensus, and cooperation are factors that positively influence product innovation.…”

Top-down, bottom-up or outside-in? An examination of triadic mechanisms on firm innovation in Chinese firms

“…Centralization reduces opportunities to express ideas and explore alternative solutions (Keum and See 2017;March and Simon 1958) and suppresses individuals' learning orientation (Hirst et al 2011). Similarly, formalization creates a coercive mechanism that suffocates the openness with which employees can freely contribute new ideas and engage in new behaviours (Adler and Borys 1996;Eva et al 2017;Pierce and Delbecq 1977).…”