Price Organization Pays!! Innovative Work Behaviors and Perceived Organizational Support

Price Organization Pays!! Innovative Work Behaviors and Perceived Organizational Support

Sahiba Sharma1, Research Scholar, SRM University,

Delhi-NCR, Haryana, India1

Dr. Richa Dahiya2

Associate Professor and Research Guide, SRM University,

Delhi-NCR, Haryana, India2

Abstract: Employee innovative work behaviour (IWB), a competitive advantage to the organization is embraced by the organization? Its unanswered. There are certain factors such as conflict with coworkers which resist the innovative behavior of employees. Besides the price for initiating an innovative behavior the individual has to pay, there is an organizational support which they seek. Therefore, this paper hypothesized the relation between innovative work behavior and perceived organizational support, and conceptualizes the price which organization has to pay as outcome of this relationship. This conceptual paper will present a model which can be further measured, tested and validated. The importance of the study lies in the fact that employee IWB is an assets to the organization as it can enhance organizational performance and organizational effectiveness. The present study bridges the gap in the available literature by conceptualizing this relationship and encouraging further research.

Keywords: Innovative Work Behaviour, Perceived Organizational Support, Intention To Quit, Conflict With Coworkers, Innovation

1. INTRODUCTION

   One of the organizational drivers in dealing with the rapid market changes is the employee innovative work behavior (IWB), a behavioural perspective. IWB is defined as an employee behaviour that aims at creating, introducing, and applying new ideas intentionally within a work role or in an organization that are beneficial to improve organizational performance (Janssen, 2000; Yuan & Woodman, 2010). For an organization to survive, continuously innovating the products and services lays the importance for innovative work behavior else it will result in decline of the organization. In contrast, there is a negative effect associated with IWB as discussed by Shih & Susanto (2011) in their study i.e. conflict. Conflict between the innovative employees and their co workers arise due to uncertainty and insecurity. In their study they have discussed how innovative ideas generate conflict with the coworkers and based on an empirical study have found that innovative work behavior is positively related to the conflict with coworkers. Conflict at workplace leads to unhealthy relations among the employees and develops a disparaging attitude or environment towards the individual employee. It has also seemed that the coworkers may intensify unfair practices at workplace against the

   individual, which lowers the motivation of an innovative employee and stimulates behavioral changes. In spite of the challenges faced by the employee at individual level, is the innovative work behavior of the employees is embraced by the organization? It is still unanswered. Psychological trauma which an individual has to deal at workplace ultimately leads to the employees intention to quit the organization. Moreover, the negative effect of innovative work behavior amplifies in the relationship focused society where employees seek their superiors and organizations for support, encouragement, fairness and nurturance, for instance: India.

   One of the most significant organizational concepts in organizational behavior literature is perceived organizational support (POS) that has the adeptness to retain employees in the organization, since organizational support is identified as a key factor in increasing employees job satisfaction and the organizational commitment (Colakoglu et al, 2010), which is assumed to moderates the negative effect of IWB. More specifically, perceived organizational support is considered to be the resemblance of strength of psychological contract between the employee and the organization (Guzzo, Noonan and Elron, 1994).

   Increasing turnover and the cost associated with employee turnover is an added contest which organization has to deal. Thereby, it highlights the importance of retaining innovative employees in the organization. According to organizational support theory, if the employees perceive more support from the organization, they are likely to develop more positive attitudes towards it (Eiesnberger et al, 1986) and hence organization can retain their innovative employees and not have to compromise with the consequence of innovative employee turnover i.e. low innovation. However, in case of those employees who intend to quit but in existence of specific conditions remain silent about their prevailing conflicts or bullying experience in the workplace, the costs to the organization is even higher (Milliken et al., 2003).

   In light of this argument, the authors have conceptualized a new relation supported by the review using the social theory (IWB), organizational support theory (perceived organizational support) and reasoned action theory (intention to quit).

   The paper is structured as: firstly the objectives and the importance of the study have been discussed followed by literature review on innovative work behavior, perceived organizational support and intention to quit. Secondly, based on the literature review a conceptual model has been proposed and later, conclusion, managerial implications, limitations and future research directions has been discussed.

2. OBJECTIVE AND IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY

   The primary objective of the study is to find the relation between innovative work behaviour and perceived organizational support, and to find the price which organization has to pay as outcome of this relationship i.e. employees intention to quit the organization. The importance of the study lies in the fact that employee IWB is an assets to the organization as it can enhance organizational performance and organizational effectiveness.

3. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS FORMATION

   Innovative Work Behavior

   Innovative work behavior has been derived from the latin word: innovare, which means making something new (Tidd, Bessant and Pavitt 2001). Studies on innovative work behavior are in nascent stage and have no universally accepted innovation definition. According to Kanter (1988), innovation involves introduction and adoption of novel and useful ideas along with idea implementation. IWB includes employee behavior that directly and indirectly kindles the introduction and development of innovations at the workplace. According to Schumpeter (1934), innovation is defined as the creation and implementation of new combination and this new combination is not associated with only new products but also with services and policies. Innovation does not only create added value to the firm itself but also to other stakeholders and the community. Zimmerer and Scarborough (2005) describes innovation as the ability to apply creative solutions to the problems and opportunities to improve and enrich people's lives (cited in Awang, Sapie, Hussain & Ishak, 2011).

   De Spiegelaere (2015) has discussed that IWB is a different concept and is sometime confused with employee creativity for two main reasons. Firstly, creativity focuses on the idea generation phase, but IWB comprises entire employee behavior related to the different innovation process phases. Secondly, traditionally creativity refers to creating something absolutely new whereas IWB focuses on something new, for the relevant unit of adoption. Employees taking initiative to copy the successful work habits from other departments are presenting innovative ehavior but it is not at all workplace creativity. Innovative work behavior is associated with different phases of the innovation process (Janssen, 2000; Scott & Bruce, 1994). Thus, innovation literature reveals that it is a multistage process. The concept of innovative work behaviour twitches with the idea generation followed by idea

   championing and idea application (Veenendaal & Bondarouk, 2015). In the first stage, innovation is initiated by recognizing and defining problem, finding a solution to solve the problem. The solution may be grounded on a new concept or on a new arrangement of existing concepts (Kanter, 1988). In second stage, for the support of his ideas, the innovator seeks for support as they may feel uncertain about his ideas and need support to sell idea. Innovation drives alongside changes and resistance to change. Finally, implementation stage which necessities an approach of perseverance. Also, the employees need different kind of attitude and for the different phases to create innovative solutions (Puccio, Treffinger & Talbot, 1995).

   Perceived Organizational Support

   Organizational support theory believes that to cater socio- emotional needs and valuing employee contribution at workplace increases employee organizational commitment and called this belief as Perceived Organizational Support. In other words, the extent to which the organization values employee contribution and cares about their well-being is a belief which experience employees are considered to develop (Eisenberger et al., 2002). It is more of a psychological contract between employee and employer, thereby strengthening the relationship. According to Shore and Tetrick (1994) psychological contracts provide employees a sense of control and security with employers in contrast it also offer employers a way to manage and direct employee behavior without much surveillance. Social cues that inform employees of their contractual obligations are based on the employees observations about how their co-workers and supervisors behave and are treated by the organization i.e. refers to the relational contracts. Favorable reward opportunities, justice, supportive supervision and organization actions that are perceived as sincere by the employee have shown positive relation with perceived organizational support (Rhoades et al., 2001; Gilbert & Ivancevich, 2000; Hutchison, 1997). High POS is believed to influence trust (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Fairness at workplace is another aspect which is considered as increasing the perception of organizational support. Employees with high perceived organizational support feel gratitude and favorably respond to the organization in the form of positive job attitudes, organizational behaviors and support organizational goals, thereby increasing organizational commitment (Loi, Hang-Yue & Foley, 2006).

   Intention to Quit

   Price organization pays, the metaphor used in this study is measured in terms of turnover cost associated with actual turnover. Actual turnover and the cost associated with it is comparatively difficult to study. However, studies have shown that intention to quit is predictor or proxy for actual turnover (Cho & Lewis, 2012). In other words, intention to quit or turnover intention is a convenient way of studying actual turnover. According to the reasoned action theory, intention is a psychological precursor to the actual behavioral act (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). The immediate determinant of the action is the individual intention to

   perform or not to perform a behavioral act. Therefore, in the right conditions the individual may likely leave the present organization. Turnover intention of an individuals are perceived probability of their staying or leaving the current organization. In this study, authors are specifically concerning the voluntary turnover of the employees and not involuntary. According to Barsade & Gibson (2007) turnover intention refers to the employees having thoughts of voluntarily quitting the job or has taken steps towards this intention. Individuals intention to quit is depicted through their job search behaviours such as looking for employment opportunities outside the organization,

   submitting resume or curriculum vitae and attending

   H2: Innovative work behavior leads to employee intention to quit the organization and is mediated by perceived organizational support.

   Figure 1: Proposed model (A) Negative relation between Innovative work behavior (IWB) and perceived organizational support (POS) (B) POS Mediates the relation between IWB and Intention to quit

   Innovative Work Behaviour

   Innovativ e Work

   interviews, contacting employment agencies or consultancies (Spector, 1997). Organizations as a human resource management practice invest in employees in terms of orientation, training and development, and initiating steps to retain them within the organization. As a result of this, if an employee intends to quit there is this cost which organization has to bear. Therefore, managers must at all costs try to minimize employees turnover as it has cost implications for the organization. If higher is the turnover, then intention to quit may adversely affect the organization in turn, can lead to a drop in innovation. In addition, it is associated with the direct costs associated with replacement, recruitment and selection, along with the indirect costs resulting from low morale, pressure on other employees (Griffin and Moorhead, 2011).

4. HYPOTHESIS FORMATION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

   Based on the review of previous research it was found that if the working environment is not constructive and supportive, high performance or innovative employee can

   Behaviour

   H1: (-)

   (+

   Percieved Organizational Support

   Intention to quit

   (-)

   Intention to quit

   H2:

   Perceived Organizational Support

   certainly leave the organization. In addition to this, innovative employees have high tendency to quit the organization as they have more jobs available outside the organization (Shih & Susanto, 2011; Martin et al., 1981), which in result establishes a positive relation between innovative work behavior and the employee intention to quit the organization. Earlier studies have found that perceived organizational support is a predictor of intention to quit (Robson & Robson, 2016; Das et al, 2013; Campbell et al, 2013; Dawley et al, 2010). Intention to quit is largely influenced by job dissatisfaction, lack of commitment to the organization and feelings of stress. But there is also lack of perceived organizational support which can initiate innovative employee intent to quit. In this paper, we have conceptualized this relationship. However, there is no study that has identified the relationship between these three variables: innovative work behavior and perceived organizational support and Intention to quit. Therefore, we propose the hypothesis:

   H1: Innovative work behavior is negatively related to perceived organizational support (but not vice versa) and leads to employee intention to quit the organization.

   (A) (B)

5. CONCLUSION

   We propose that there is negative relation between innovative work behavior and perceived organizational support (not vice versa) and thus results in intention to quit which if results in actual turnover, the organization has to bear turnover cost i.e. high innovative work behavior and low perceived organizational support will result in high employee intention to quit. The relation has not been established between these three variables earlier however, it can be of high importance to human resource managers for reducing the turnover cost. Therefore, authors concludes that in order to be an innovative organization, they must cater, implement and manage the organization culture or inner environment that embrace the innovative behavioural traits of the employees which can add competitive advantage to the organization (Alpkan et al., 2010)./p>

6. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS

   If validated, the proposed model will be useful for the organizations to keep an eye on their turnover cost via managing, enhancing and supporting employees innovative work behavior in the organization. Furthermore, human resource managers can make strategies concerning innovative behavior of the employees and making effective.

7. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

DIRECTIONS

A literature review on Innovative work behaviors and perceived organizational support and intention to quit provides the basis for the research model and hypotheses, which requires further validation by researchers. Further empirical studies will have significant practical importance in many fields of human research management field.

REFERENCES

1. Alpkan, L., Bulut, C., Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G. and Kilic, K. (2010), Organizational support for intrapreneurship and its interaction with human capital to enhance innovative performance, Management Decision, Vol. 48 Nos 5-6, pp. 732-755.

2. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

3. Awang, A. H., Sapie, N. M., Hussain, M. Y., & Ishak, S. (2011). Organizational Learning and Work Environment: A Formation of Innovative Work Behavior at Small Medium Enterprises ( SMEs ), 3039.

4. Barsade, S. G., & Gibson, D. E. (2007, February). Why does affect matter in Boyatzis, E. R., Goleman, D., & Rhee, K. (1999). Clustering Competence in Emotional Intelligence: Insights From the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI).

5. Campbell, N. S., Perry, S. J., Maertz, C. P., Allen, D. G., & Griffeth, R. W. (2013). All you need is … resources: The effects of justice and support on burnout and turnover. Human Relations, 66(6), 759782.

   https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712462614

6. Cho, Y. J., & Lewis, G. B. (2012). Turnover Intention and Turnover Behavior: Implications for Retaining Federal Employees. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(1), 423. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X11408701)

7. Colakoglu, U., Culha, O., & Atay, H. (2010). The Effects of Perceived Organizational Support on