Keep the fire burning: Reciprocal gains of basic need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation and innovative work behaviour

Abstract

Drawing on insights from self-determination theory, we explored the dynamic relationship between intrinsic motivation and innovative work behaviour (IWB) over time. Specifically, we investigated how basic need satisfaction influences IWB through its effect on intrinsic motivation and how IWB in turn affects basic need satisfaction as measured the next day (i.e., a reciprocal relationship). The current study used a longitudinal design comprising a 6-day period and relied on multi-source data from 76 students in industrial product design and electronic engineering who participated in an innovation boot camp. In general, results provided support for the mediating role of intrinsic motivation in the relationship between basic need satisfaction and IWB, as well as the reciprocal relationship between basic need satisfaction and IWB.

The influence of future time perspective on work engagement and job performance: the role of job crafting

“…Although these few studies focus on the role of (1) the work environment and (2) personality in eliciting job crafting behaviour, to the best of our knowledge, no empirical studies to date have focused on individual motivational constructs as antecedents of job crafting. This is surprising because motivation is seen as a strong predictor of proactive behaviours (e.g., Devloo, Anseel, De Beuckelaer, & Salanova, 2015) and motivational orientations play an important role in eliciting job crafting behaviour to align the job to these motivational orientations (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). In addition, whereas personality is a stable individual characteristic, motivational individual characteristics are more malleable, providing opportunities for organizations to influence their employees' job crafting behaviours.…”

Perceptions of HR practices and innovative work behavior: the moderating effect of an innovative climate

“…Although some authors see IWB as more related to incremental and process innovations (e.g. Devloo et al, 2015) and we know that incremental and process innovations are more common in other formalized and centralized organizations such as the public sector (e.g. Hartley, 2005), future research could investigate the tendency towards incremental or radical, and process or product, innovative behaviors more closely.…”

“…IWB can be defined as individual actions directed at generating, processing, and implementing new ideas, including new product ideas, technologies, procedures, and work processes, with the goal of increasing the organisation's effectiveness and success (Kleysen & Street, 2001;Yuan & Woodman, 2010). This rather comprehensive behavioural construct consists not only of the generation of ideas but also their transformation into concrete innovations (Devloo, Anseel, De Beuckelaer, & Salanova, 2015). IWB is seen as an extra-role, or discretionary, behavior that goes beyond prescribed role expectations in that it is not explicitly expected of employees (Janssen, 2000).…”

Inovatyvus elgesys darbe: kai kurios psichometrinės klausimyno charakteristikos ir sąsajos su darbuotojų psichologiniu įgalinimu bei vidine darbo motyvacija

“…Taip pat buvo siekiama išsiaiškinti, ar darbuotojų vidinė motyvacija ir psichologinis įgalinimas siejasi su inovatyviu elgesiu darbe. Atskleista, kad vidinė motyvacija yra susijusi su inovatyviu elgesiu, o tai atitinka užsienio autorių tyrimų rezultatus (pvz., Devloo et al, 2015). Vidinės motyvacijos ir IED sąsają iš dalies galima paaiškinti Amabile (1988) komponentų modeliu, pagal kurį kūrybiškam elgesiui (t. y. naujų ir naudingų idėjų kūrimui) reikia trijų veiksnių sąveikos: įgūdžių toje srityje, kurioje norima kurti, kūrybinių įgūdžių ir vidinės užduoties motyvacijos.…”

“…Kita vertus, apie vidinės motyvacijos reikšmę inovatyviam elgesiui (ne tik idėjų kūrimui, bet ir jų įgyvendinimui) žinoma mažiau. Tyrimai patvirtina, kad darbuotojai, pasižymintys stipria vidine motyvacija, iš tiesų dažniau elgiasi inovatyviai (pvz., Devloo, Anseel, Beuckelaer, & Salanova, 2015), tačiau nepakanka tyrimų, kuriuose ši sąsaja būtų nagrinėjama atsižvelgiant į inovatyvaus elgesio dimensijas.…”