84 2017, XX, 3
Ekonomika a managemen
DOI: 10.15240/ ul/001/2017-3-006
In oduc ion
Nowadays i is mo e and mo e equen ly
emphasized ha o ganiza ion’s abili y o
inno a e is an explana o y ac o in de e mining
i s compe i i eness. I e e s o he ac
ha con empo a y o ganiza ions ac unde
pe manen p essu e o economic, echnological,
poli ical and social changes. Taking in o
accoun such an uns able en i onmen , he
issue ha becomes signi i can is enhancing
o ganiza ional capaci y o espond o ex e nal
changes wi h some no el p oduc s, p ocesses,
ideas e c. (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Bessan ,
Lamming, Noke, & Philips, 2005; Bessan &
Tidd, 2007; Ellonen, Blomq is , & Puumalainen,
2008; Pie zak & Łapińska, 2015).
An inno a ion is a e y wide and mul i-
dimensional concep . The p esen -day app oach
sugges s ha an inno a ion is e e y esul o
human ac i i ies con ibu ing o he imp o emen
o human li e quali y; e e y ac i i y which
enables one o ac be e , mo e e i cien ly, mo e
e ec i ely. Such esul s may include new o
imp o ed p oduc s and echnologies, new ways
o se ice p o ision, new s anda ds o p oduc s
and se ices o ac i i ies which dis inguish one
o ganiza ion om he o he (Damanpou , 1996;
Bessan & Tidd, 2007; Ba egheh, Rowley, &
Samb ook, 2009).
Wi h he inc easing popula i y o he
issues conce ning he necessi y o being
inno a i e o s eng hen and de elop all kinds
o mode n o ganiza ions, he condi ions ha
p omo e he eme gence and implemen a ion
o inno a ions ha e also become he subjec o
e l ec ion. Nowadays we ha e al eady known
ha inno a ions do no eme ge by leaps, in
a spon aneous way. The e is a conside able
ag eemen among esea che s on he ac
ha inno a ions eme ge wi hin o ganiza ions
as a consequence o building inside hem he
‘heal hy’ o ganiza ional cul u e and he clima e
ha p omo es c ea i e hinking and ac ing
(Bu ke & Li win, 1992; Ek all, 1996; Na anjo-
Valencia, Jimenez-Jimenez & Sanz-Valle,
2011; Wol , Kaudela-Baum, & Meissne , 2012;
Mi o ić, G ubić-Nešić, Milisa lje ić, Melo ić, &
Babinko á, 2014).
Such clima e suppo i e o inno a ions is
a speci i c combina ion o elemen s connec ed
wi h manne s o communica ion wi hin he
o ganiza ion, posi i e in e pe sonal exchange,
o ganiza ional in eg a ion, he employee sense
o sa e y, co-pa icipa ion and co-ope a ion
o he wo ke s, suppo o c ea i e ideas,
openness and us exis en in he o ganiza ion,
he o ganiza ion’s dynamism and a i ude o
di e si y (Isaksen, Laue , Ek al, & B i z, 2001;
Loewe & Dominiquini, 2006; Isaksen, & Ek all,
2010). Among a o emen ioned ac o s, in he
ligh o g owing esea ch mo emen owa ds
posi i e p ocesses in o ganiza ions (Posi i e
O ganiza ional Schola ship; Came on, Du on,
& Quinn, 2003) we ocus ou a en ion on
posi i e ela ionships a wo k. Addi ionally,
oge he wi h heo ies p o ing he impo ance o
he deba e dimension in inno a ion clima e we
include in ou analysis he elemen s o in e nal
communica ion in he o ganiza ion.
The aim o ou pape is o p esen he ole o
posi i e ela ionships a wo k and communica ion
ace s in s imula ion inno a ions eme gence in an
o ganiza ion. As ou assump ion is ha posi i e
ela ionships a wo k a e highly associa ed wi h
openness and us among employees, in he
empi ical pa o he pape we ocus on ela ions
be ween posi i e employee ela ionships,
in o mal mee ings, open in e nal communica ion
and indi idual commi men o inno a ion. As
he ou come o he esea ch conduc ed in 200
companies we de elop a model o ela ionships
be ween a o emen ioned a iables. Con ibu ing
o he exis ing heo y on he inno a ion clima e
ou i ndings p o ide also use ul manage ial
INNOVATIONS AMONG PEOPLE. HOW
POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS AT WORK CAN
TRIGGER INNOVATION CREATION
Aldona Glińska-Neweś, Aga a Sudolska, A kadiusz Ka wacki,
Joanna Gó ka
EM_3_2017.indd 84EM_3_2017.indd 84 7.9.2017 10:34:187.9.2017 10:34:18
85
3, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
implica ions conce ned wi h enhancing
employees ac i i ies and commi men o c ea ing
inno a ions.
1. Theo e ical Backg ound
1.1 Inno a ions and Inno a ion Clima e
in O ganiza ions
Inno a ion is always coupled wi h change due
o he ac ha o ganiza ions use inno a ions in
o de o espond he changes in hei in e nal
and ex e nal en i onmen o o ake p e-emp i e
ac ion ocused on in l uencing he en i onmen .
So we can say ha inno a ion is any change in
di e en a eas o he o ganiza ion ac i i y, ha
in oduces p og ess compa ed o he exis ing
s a e, de eloped in o ou side he o ganiza ion
as a esponse o some signaled needs o
sa is ying he needs ha ha e p e iously
had been un e ealed (Damanpou , 1996;
B own & Ulijn, 2004). Inno a ion may include
a wide ange o change ypes, depending
on o ganiza ional esou ces, capabili ies,
s a egies o equi emen s. The p esen day
app oach in ol es a a ie y o inno a ions,
s a ing om p oduc and p ocess inno a ions,
passing h ough o ganiza ional and ma ke
inno a ions and ending wi h social inno a ions
(Damanpou , 1996; Bessan & Tidd, 2007;
Plessis, 2007).
As highligh ed by Ba egheh, Rowley
and Samb ook (2009) who ha e conduc ed
a comp ehensi e analysis o se e al inno a ion
de i ni ions (ex ac ed om a numbe o di e en
disciplines), inno a ion is a mul i-s age p ocess
in which o ganiza ions ans o m hei ideas in o
new o imp o ed p oduc s, p ocesses in o de o
ad ance, compe e and di e en ia e hemsel es
success ully in he ma ke (Ba egheh e al.,
2009). Addi ionally, i has been ecognized ha
c ea ing inno a ion is a con inuous p ocess
occu ing among people, consis ing o he
wo ke pa icipa ion and he in e ac ion among
hem (Ag ell & Gus a son, 1996; Van O enbeek
& Koopman, 1996; D ach-Zaha y & Somech,
2001, Szczepańska-Woszczyna, 2014).
Inno a ion is also desc ibed as in en ional
in oduc ion and applica ion wi hin a g oup o
o ganiza ion o ideas, p ocesses, p oduc s o
p ocedu es, new o he ele an uni o adop ion,
designed o signi i can ly bene i he indi idual,
he g oup, he o ganiza ion o he socie y (Wes
& Fa , 1990; De D eu, 2006). Such app oach
sugges s ha an inno a ion only has o be
some hing new o he ele an uni o adop ion,
and inno a ion in one eam o o ganiza ion
may be common p ac ice in o he eams o
o ganiza ions (De D eu, 2006). This means ha
inno a ion is no a domain o a selec ed g oup
o ou s andingly c ea i e and alen ed people;
ins ead e e y employee may con ibu e o he
inno a ion by imp o ing speci i c elemen s o he
e e yday wo k. This leads us o he necessi y
o ocus on all employees’ engagemen and
willingness o imp o e hei ways o pe o ming
and p ocedu es and p oduc s being ou comes
o hei wo k in o de o achie e o ganiza ional
p og ess and de elopmen . The e o e, i is o
signi i can impo ance o c ea e he clima e ha
suppo s all employees’ inno a i eness.
The e e ence li e a u e p esen s a a ie y
o models and app oaches o explo e he ole
o he o ganiza ional clima e. As highligh ed
by se e al au ho s, o ganiza ional clima e
has been ecognized as a key de e minan o
en e p ise’s capabili y o c ea ing inno a ions
(see Bu ke & Li win, 1992; Woodman, Sawye ,
& G i i n, 1993; Ek all, 1996; Na anjo-Valencia
e al., 2011; Wol , Kaudela-Baum & Meissne ,
2012). The o ganiza ional clima e is unde s ood
as an o ganiza ional eali y, a p ope y o he
o ganiza ion con aining ecu ing pa e ns o
beha io , a i udes and eeling ha cha ac e ize
he li e in an o ganiza ion (Isaksen e al.,
2001; Isaksen & Ek all, 2010). The clima e o
c ea i i y and change p omo es he c ea ion,
conside a ion and use o new p oduc s,
se ices and ways o wo king. I suppo s he
de elopmen , assimila ion and u iliza ion o
new and di e en app oaches and concep s
(Isaksen e al., 2001). The e a e a numbe o
a iables which a e conside ed as he c ucial
componen s o he o ganiza ional clima e
a o able o inno a ions (Loewe & Dominiquini,
2006; Hun e , Bedell, & Mum o d, 2007;
Isaksen & Ek all, 2010; Mi o ić, G ubić-Nešić,
Milisa lje ić, Melo ić & Babinko á, 2014).
In spi e o he ac ha he e a e di e en
ypologies o he main dimensions o he
o ganiza ional clima e suppo ing inno a ions,
we e e o hose p oposed by Isaksen e al.
(2001) who ocus on he ollowing aspec s:
employees challenge and in ol emen ,
eedom, us /openness o employees, ime
used o elabo a ing new ideas, play ulness
and humo , p esence o con l ic , idea suppo ,
employees deba ing and isk- aking which
means ole ance o unce ain y and ambigui y
in he wo kplace.
EM_3_2017.indd 85EM_3_2017.indd 85 7.9.2017 10:34:187.9.2017 10:34:18
86 2017, XX, 3
Ekonomika a managemen
Ha ing o bea in mind ha o ganiza ional
clima e a ou able o inno a ions is a mul i-
dimensional issue, we ocus on he us /
openness dimension and we ela e i o
communica ion be ween employees and hei
in e pe sonal ela ionships as p e equisi es o
enhancing o ganiza ion employee ac i i ies
conce ned wi h inno a ions. Rela ionships a
wo k and communica ion ace s ha e been
p o ed as c ucial o c ea ing a con ex in
which inno a ions can be no only ini ia ed bu
also main ained in he o ganiza ion (Hun e e
al., 2007; Mum o d, Hun e , Eubanks, Bedell
& Mu phy, 2007; Isaksen & Ek all, 2010),
howe e s udies conce ning ela ions linking
all hese a iables a e s ill limi ed. Mo eo e ,
we a e inspi ed by he posi i e heo y in
managemen emphasizing he impo ance
o posi i e ela ionships a wo k which will be
explained in he pa ag aph 1.3.
1.2 In e nal Communica ion
Con ibu ion o Openness/T us
Dimension o Inno a ion Clima e
As highligh ed by se e al au ho s, e ec i e
in e nal communica ion has a posi i e impac on
gene a ing inno a ions wi hin an o ganiza ion
as i acili a es dispe sion o ideas as well as
inc eases hei amoun and di e si y. This in
u n esul s in c oss- e iliza ion o se e al
ideas. Mo eo e i has been ecognized ha i
c ea es an in e nal en i onmen a o able o he
su i al o hese new ideas in he o ganiza ion
(Aiken & Hage, 1971; Ross, 1974; Damanpou ,
1991; Leende s, Van Engelen & K a ze , 2003;
De D eu, 2006; Holá, 2012). In e es ingly,
he associa ion o he a iables conce ning
in e nal communica ion wi hin o ganiza ion is
no linea and, o ins ance, e-mail in o ma ion
exchange has an U-shape ela ionship wi h
eam c ea i i y. Fo his eason a ious ace s
o o ganiza ional communica ion s ill ha e o
be explo ed and analysed wi hin he cons uc
o clima e suppo ing inno a i eness. In ou
app oach we ocus on wo a iables, i.e. in e nal
communica ion including sha ing bo h he good
and bad in o ma ion, and an oppo uni y o
employee in o mal mee ings du ing wo king-
hou s. Such selec ion o con ol a iables is
mo i a ed by he ac , ha hey a e ela ed o
bo h posi i e ela ionships and inno a i eness.
Employee openness e e s o he issue
o mu ual us and emo ional sa e y in
in e pe sonal ela ionships. While he e is
a high deg ee o us be ween people in he
o ganiza ion, hey can be genuinely open and
ank wi h one ano he , sha ing bo h good and
bad in o ma ion (Isaksen e al., 2001). On he
o he hand, in e pe sonal us conce ns he
p edic abili y o people’s beha io (Se a, Fulle
& Maye , 2005; Ha din, 2006), i s ems om
a communica ion sys em. While employees
a e communica ing equen ly and openly, i
s imula es he eme gence o us be ween
hem, because due o mu ual unde s anding i
makes i easie o p edic each o he ’s beha io .
In such in e nal en i onmen employees coun
on each o he o any kind o suppo , hey
a e willing o sha e knowledge and expe ise
wi h o he s. The high le el o us wi hin an
o ganiza ion has many bene i cial e ec s, such
as: he inc ease o o ganiza ional l exibili y,
inc ease o speed o ope a ions, c ea ing
posi i e employee a i udes, enabling ans e
o knowledge and expe ise, enabling c ea i i y
and inno a ion, employee loyal y and inc ease
in hei mo i a ion (Shaw, 1997; Di ks & Fe in,
2001; Colqui , Sco , & LePine, 2007). Besides,
us con eys op imism o he u u e, people’s
posi i e a i ude as well as hei goodwill
(Lewicki & Bunke , 1996; McKnigh & Che any,
2001; Pi son, 2008), wha is necessa y o c ea e
willingness and eadiness o inno a ions.
Wi h he ega d o he impo ance o
communica ion in shaping o ganiza ional
clima e suppo ing inno a ions, i is ex emely
impo an o poin ou he deba e dimension.
Acco ding o Isaksen e al. (2001), his a iable
conce ns an occu ence o encoun e s and
disag eemen s be ween iewpoin s, ideas and
expe iences o employees. In an o ganiza ion
ocusing on deba ing di e en oices a e hea d
and people a e keen on pu ing o wa d hei
ideas o conside a ion and e iew. In ac , in
a clima e suppo i e o inno a ions e e yone has
a igh o exp ess hei own opinion. Mo eo e ,
employees discuss opposing opinions and hus
sha e a di e si y o pe spec i es. Fo c ea ing
such s imula ing en i onmen i is necessa y
o gi e he employees a sense o secu i y
and in oduce anspa en incen i e sys em
app ecia ing hei ini ia i e and ewa ding hei
pa icipa ion in he inno a ion p ocess (see
Ande son & Wes , 1998; Leiponen, 2005;
Loewe & Dominiquini, 2006; Hun e e al.,
2007; Isaksen e al., 2001, Isaksen & Ek al,
2010; Szczepańska–Woszczyna, 2014).
EM_3_2017.indd 86EM_3_2017.indd 86 7.9.2017 10:34:187.9.2017 10:34:18
87
3, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
Ano he signi i can issue conce ning he
c ea ion o he p o-inno a i e o ganiza ional
clima e is encou aging employees o seek and
disco e uncon en ional and non-s anda d
ways o pe o ming hei asks and achie ing
goals (Szczepańska–Woszczyna, 2014). One
o he s imula o s o employee inno a i e
hinking is o allow in o mal mee ings wi hin an
o ganiza ion. They le indi iduals sha e hei
knowledge in a suppo i e wo k en i onmen
and a e accompanied wi h posi i e socio-
emo ional in e ac ions and signals o ela ional
commi men (Go se & Emmi , 2009). I is
qui e equen ha du ing in o mal mee ings
employees deal wi h job- ela ed issues. In such
mee ings hey sea ch o knowledge o opinions
o hei colleagues o con i m o ein o ce
hei own ideas conce ning he decision hey
ha e o make (Mang um, 2002). This, in u n,
s eng hens hei in e pe sonal ela ionships
and emo ional sa e y which con ibu es o us /
openness dimension con ained in he c ea i e
clima e cons uc (Isaksen & Ek all, 2010).
Mo eo e , om he inno a ion pe spec i e
an o ganiza ion may bene i om in o mal
mee ings, as hey allow employees o sha e he
ideas ha may no be ully de eloped ye . When
employees eel ee o mee and alk in he
wo kplace, e y o en hey spend ime oge he
on sol ing pa icula p oblems conce ned wi h
hei asks. This, in ac , s imula es hem o
sea ch o se e al inno a i e solu ions and may
esul in some no el y wi hin o ganiza ion.
Conce ning ha in ou app oach we
ope a ionalize us /openness dimension wi h
bo h in e nal communica ion and employee
in e pe sonal ela ionships, we need o e e
also o ask and ela ionship con l ic s as
o ganiza ional beha io ace s in l uencing he
eam inno a i eness. Al hough a me a-analysis
o he published and unpublished wo ks (De
D eu & Weinga , 2003) shows a mode a ely
nega i e co ela ion be ween ask con l ic and
o e all eam e ec i eness, ask con l ic may be
bene i cial o eam membe abili y o lea n, o
de elop and implemen new insigh s o sol e
complex p oblems, such as inno a ions (De
D eu, 2006). Some le el o con l ic may igge
eam c ea i i y h ough exposu e o mino i y
opinions and inc ease o indi idual cou age
o esis g oup con o mi y, which exempli i es
openness/ us dimension (Neme h & Chies,
1988). Simul aneously, nega i e e ec s o
ask con l ic on gene al eam pe o mance
may be educed by mode a o s, such as eam
clima e, no ms ega ding con l ic , and us (De
Chu ch & Ma ks, 2001). The mode a ing ole
o hese elemen s, pa icula ly in he p ocess
o inno a ion c ea ion, was con i med by Zhou
and Geo ge (2001) who ound ha help and
suppo om wo k-g oup colleagues in l uenced
he c ea i i y o employees dissa is i ed wi h hei
jobs who ac i ely esponded o his si ua ion
(i.e. he g oup suppo u ned dissa is ac ion in o
c ea i i y h ough a oice exp ession).These
i ndings lead ou a en ion o he ela ionships
a wo k as an eceden s o inno a ion c ea ion.
Addi ionally, hei ole in he p ocess is
in e es ing and s ill unclea . As, acco ding o
De D eu (2006), ask and ela ionship con l ic s
a e mode a ely co ela ed, while ela ionship
con l ic is no signi i can ly ela ed o inno a ions,
we decided o adop a pe spec i e opposi e o
con l ic -inno a ion link, i.e. he pe spec i e o
posi i e ela ionships a wo k.
1.3 Posi i e Rela ionships a Wo k and
Thei Role in Inno a ion C ea ion
Va ious ela ionships, bonds and connec ions
a e he building blocks o e e y o ganiza ion and
o ganiza ions a ange he ela ionships be ween
he indi iduals (Aydin & Ceylan, 2009). In mode n
o ganiza ions he jobs, oles, and asks a e e en
mo e socially embedded han be o e, due o
he g owing in e dependence and in e ac ions
wi h cowo ke s and se ice ecipien s. This
leads schola s o he de elopmen o ela ional
pe spec i e (G an & Pa ke , 2009) sugges ing
ha he eal wo k o he human o ganiza ion
occu s wi hin he space o in e ac ion be ween i s
membe s (B adbu y & Lich ens ein, 2000). Thus,
he heo is mus accoun o he ela ionships
among, a he han he indi idual p ope ies o ,
o ganiza ional membe s.
Among he speci i ed ela ionship ca ego ies
he posi i e ela ionships a wo k (PRW) a e
ecei ing a g owing a en ion in business
s udies (see Du on & Ragins, 2007; Tu ne
de To mes Eby & Allen, 2012) and appea o
be he impo an esea ch subjec unde he
umb ella concep o he Posi i e O ganiza ional
Schola ship (Came on, Du on, & Quinn, 2003;
Came on & Sp ei ze , 2012). As he esea ch
issue hese ela ionships may e e o dyads,
bo h as he supe iso y ela ionships (Bono
& Yoon, 2012) and he cowo ke exchanges
(Halbesleben, 2012), and o eams (Chen &
Sha ma, 2012).
EM_3_2017.indd 87EM_3_2017.indd 87 7.9.2017 10:34:197.9.2017 10:34:19
88 2017, XX, 3
Ekonomika a managemen
As posi i e ela ionships a wo k (PRW)
a e conce ned by di e en disciplines (e.g.
psychology, sociology, managemen ) and on
di e en le els (indi idual, eam, o ganiza ion)
he e is no single ‘bes ’ de i ni ion e l ec ing
absolu e consensus (Ragins & Du on, 2007,
p. 8). They may be de i ned in e ms o s a es
and p ocesses accompanied ela ionships,
hei quali y o ou comes. Respec i ely, Robe s
dis inguishes posi i e ela ionships as hese in
which he e is a ue sense o ela edness and
mu uali y (Robe s, 2007, p. 31); S ephens,
Heaphy and Du on (2012, p. 386) ocusing on
high-quali y connec ions (sho - e m, dyadic
in e ac ions) p opose o ely on subjec i e
expe ience o i ali y and ali eness, posi i e
ega d, mu uali y and posi i e physiological
esponses; acco ding o Kahn (1990) posi i e
ela ionships suppo he employee abili y o
engage in wo k.
I seems ha he la e pe spec i e, i.e.
analyzing posi i e ela ionships a wo k h ough
hei ou comes, is pa icula ly impo an
in managemen s udies. Being absolu ely
con inced abou he signi i cance o posi i e
ela ionships a wo k o o ganiza ional
pe o mance we a e awa e o he doub s ha
a ise among o he schola s and business
p ac i ione s. Many manage s pe cei e his
kind o ela ionships as a h ea and a sou ce
o dis ac ion (Be man, Wes , & Rich e , 2002).
Thus, esea ch aimed a explo ing posi i e
ou comes o posi i e ela ionships a wo k may
help o educe his skep icism.
Posi i e ela ionships a wo k a e conside ed
as an eceden s o many posi i e esul s o bo h
indi iduals and o ganiza ions, while he o me
e ec may be conside ed as s imula ing o he
la e . In he i s g oup (i.e. indi idual e ec s),
he cogni i e, physiological and beha io al
p ocesses imp o ing indi idual unc ioning ha e
been iden i i ed (S ephens e al., 2012, p. 387;
Sökmen, Bi miş, & Üne , 2015). They include,
e.g. he inc ease o p ocessing speed and
wo king memo y pe o mance, salu a y e ec s
on indi idual ca dio ascula , neu oendoc ine
and immune sys ems, o enhancemen and
en ichmen o sel -iden i y. A a eam le el,
posi i e ela ionships a wo k c ea e a eeling
o psychological sa e y and us , con ibu ing o
g ea e lea ning om ailu es (Ca meli, B uelle ,
& Du on, 2009) and he en ep eneu ial
beha iou (Abey a hne & Jayawa dena, 2014).
Employees c ea ing posi i e connec ions wi h
cowo ke s a e mo e inclined o in es hei
ene gy in helping o he s (Chiabu u & Ha ison,
2008). Tha may explain why, when asked why
hey con inued hei wo k, e en i hey did no
ha e o, employees o en esponded ha i was
due o he ela ionships hey had de eloped
wi h o he s (Halbesleben, 2012, p. 107).
Rela ionships a wo k gi e a meaning o
wha employees do in he o ganiza ion (Makin,
Coope , & Cox, 1996), hus hey may shape
a ious o ganiza ional p ocesses, including he
decision-making and communica ion l ow (K am
& Isabella, 1985; Rawlins, 1992). Rega ding ou
esea ch p ojec and his p esen a ion aim we
a e pa icula ly conce ned abou he in l uence
ha posi i e ela ionships a wo k ha e on
employee inno a i eness. The e is al eady
e idence sugges ing posi i e ela ionships
a wo k impac knowledge managemen
e ec i eness, comp ising o lea ning and
expe imen a ion enhancemen (Da idson &
James, 2007) and knowledge sha ing inc ease
(Iba a, 1993). Th ough hei impac on an
indi idual iden i y posi i e ela ionships a wo k
make people mo e open o con inued g ow h
and de elopmen and p o ide a secu e base
o lea ning and expe imen ing; people lea n
mo e om one ano he , disco e hei sou ces
o s eng hs, compe ence and added alue a
wo k, and can expe imen wi h new skills o
asks (Robe s, 2007). Subsequen ly, he e a e
s udies p o ing ha posi i e social ela ionships
in eams enhance indi idual c ea i i y (Munoz-
Doyague & Nie o, 2012). PRW acili a e also
he cons uc i e exchange o c i ical eedback
and people a e mo e likely o conside ailu es,
c i icism and nega i e eedback as oppo uni ies
o lea n and imp o e. Combining hese wi h he
posi i e e ec ha PRW ha e on he ene gy ha
people eel (Quinn, 2007), he o e all impac
o posi i e ela ionships a wo k on inno a ion
p ocess in o ganiza ions seems e y likely.
1.4 Hypo heses
Rega ding all he a o emen ioned posi i e
e ec s ha PRW ha e on wo king en i onmen ,
as well as hei associa ions wi h mechanisms
ela ed o inno a ions, we hypo hesize ha
posi i e ela ionships in he o ganiza ion
suppo indi idual commi men o inno a ion
c ea ion p ocess, and p opose:
Hypo hesis 1: Posi i e ela ionships a wo k
s imula e he inno a ion c ea ion by employees
ega dless o hei job desc ip ion.
EM_3_2017.indd 88EM_3_2017.indd 88 7.9.2017 10:34:197.9.2017 10:34:19

89
3, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
A he same ime, in he esea ch
s eam doub ing PRW s imula ing ole in he
o ganiza ion, he e a e wo ks demons a ing
possible nega i e e ec o social ela ionships
on indi idual c ea i e wo k (Shalley, 1995; Pe y-
Smi h & Shalley, 2003). Acco ding o hem,
indi iduals in ol ed in posi i e ela ionships wi h
co-wo ke s may be dis ac ed and unwilling o
explo e a wide ange o en i onmen al s imuli.
Mo eo e , s ong posi i e ies a e de eloped
be ween simila indi iduals, while weak ies
may connec people wi h di e en poin o iew,
in e es s and pe spec i es, igge ing c ea i i y.
Weak connec ions p o ide also an access o
a la ge g oup o people and a g ea e quan i y
o in o ma ion.
Conside ing his inconsis ency o s udies
explo ing PRW links o indi idual c ea i i y and
inno a i eness we hypo hesize a cu ilinea
ela ionship be ween employee posi i e
ela ionships and inno a ion c ea ion:
Hypo hesis 2: A low and high le el o
ela ionship posi i i y indi idual ac i i y in
inno a ion c ea ion is lowe han a mode a e
le els o ela ionship posi i i y.
Rega ding ha openness/ us dimension
o inno a ion clima e e e s o bo h posi i e
ela ionships and in e nal communica ion and
he bo h a e conside ed as an eceden s o
o ganiza ional inno a i eness, we p opose o
conce n PRW as p e equisi es o he p ocess in
he ollowing hypo heses:
Hypo hesis 3: Posi i e ela ionships a
wo k s imula e in e nal communica ion ace s
suppo ing employee inno a i eness.
2. Me hod
2.1 P ocedu es and Pa icipan s
The s udy was conduc ed by means o a su ey
using he echnique o ques ionnai e-based
Compu e Assis ed Telephone In e iew (CATI)
on he sample o 200 Polish companies.
In each company we ob ained in o ma ion
om a pe son in ol ed in leading a eam
c ea ing inno a ions in an o ganiza ion. The
esponden s o he s udy we e HR depa men
manage s (35.5%), ma ke ing depa men
manage s (16.5%), specialis s (14%), and
o he pe sons in manage ial posi ions (13.5%),
company di ec o s (4.5%), depu y di ec o s
o membe s o he boa d (6.5%), o p ojec
specialis s (7.5%). The companies ha e
been selec ed om wo ankings including
he mos dynamically de eloping en e p ises
in Cen al Eu ope: ‘Gazelles o Business’ by
Bonnie Business (Poland) and he ‘Deloi e
Technology Fas 50 in Cen al Eu ope’. We
assumed ha en e p ises lis ed in hese
p es igious ankings achie ed hei high
indica o s o de elopmen , in e alia, h ough
inno a ion c ea ion. The in es iga ed sample
o 200 en e p ises consis ed o o ganiza ions
om he sec o o comme ce (98 en i ies),
indus y (76 en i ies), se ices (57 en i ies),
cons uc ion (29), IT (6), anspo a ion
(6), ag icul u e (9), ene gy and publishing
(3 each). The in es iga ed en i ies mos
equen ly ope a e on he na ional ma ke
(as was decla ed by 46.5% o he en i ies),
on he UE ma ke (32.5%), and on he global
one (13.5%). Only 15 o he en e p ises
ope a e solely on he local ma ke (7.5% o
he sample).
The in e iews we e conduc ed in Oc obe
2014. The esea ch assis an s i s phoned
selec ed companies asking o a con ac wi h
a pe son in ol ed in leading a eam c ea ing
inno a ions. While making appoin men s wi h
in e iewees he esea ch assis an s sen hem
he ques ionnai e o allow o sel -p epa a ion.
The in e iews we e conduc ed on he phone.
The in e iewe s ead ou he ques ions and
no ed down he answe s using a special
compu e sc ip , in his case, he LimeSu ey.
2.2 Measu es
In he s udy we used he ques ionnai e consis ing
o i ems speci i cally designed o his s udy.
The eliabili y o scales has been con i med
wi h C onbach alpha coe i cien . The i ems
we e g ouped in wo se s: 1. he o ganiza ion
o he inno a i eness p ocess ( a iables
inspi ed by Szczepanska-Woszczyna, 2014;
α = .79) including ‘inno a ions a e p oposed by
indi idual employees ega dless o hei posi ion’
which in he u he analysis is ea ed as
a mani es a ion o he indi idual commi men o
inno a ions; 2. he dimensions o he inno a ion
clima e ela ed o employee ela ionships and
in e nal communica ion ( a iables inspi ed
by Isaksen & Ek all 2010; α = .81), including
i ems ‘in e pe sonal ela ionships a e gene ally
posi i e’ (in he analysis we use he abb e ia ion
‘posi i e ela ionships’), ‘all he in o ma ion
is communica ed, bo h he good and bad’
(‘openness’ as he abb e ia ion), ‘du ing
wo king-hou s employees ha e oppo uni y o
in o mal mee ings’ ( he abb e ia ion is o he
EM_3_2017.indd 89EM_3_2017.indd 89 7.9.2017 10:34:197.9.2017 10:34:19
90 2017, XX, 3
Ekonomika a managemen
‘ ime o in o mal mee ings’). In each case, he
esponden s e alua ed s a emen s in he o m
o a i ma i e sen ences wi h a scale anging
om 0-100% wi h 10% in e als (0% meaning
‘I o ally disag ee’, and 100% – ‘I o ally ag ee’).
3. Resul s
The desc ip i e s a is ics a e gi en in Tab. 1. As
shown, co ela ions a e a he low bu posi i e
and s a is ically signi i can , wi h one excep ion,
i.e. he co ela ion be ween openness and ime
o in o mal mee ings. Indi idual commi men
o inno a ions, measu ed in ou case wi h he
indi idual ac i i y in p oposing inno a ions,
is associa ed wi h posi i e ela ionships in an
o ganiza ion and wi h a iables ela ed o he
communica ion. The co ela ion coe i cien s
con i m also ha he e a e links be ween
posi i e ela ionships and bo h he openness
in communica ion and he ime o in o mal
mee ings du ing wo king-hou s, howe e , he
co ela ion be ween openness and in o mal
mee ings is e y low and non-signi i can p o ing
he independence o hese a iables.
To es o he cu ilinea e ec p oposed in
Hypo hesis 2 we used a hie a chical eg ession
analysis. The i em: ‘inno a ions a e p oposed
by indi idual employees ega dless o hei
posi ion’ was he dependen a iable. In he i s
s ep (Model 1), openness and ime o in o mal
Va iable M SD 1 2 3 4
1. Indi idual commi men o inno a ions 6.16 2.46
2. Posi i e ela ionships 8.48 1.18 .35**
3. Openness 6.73 1.81 .27** .39**
4. Time o in o mal mee ings 6.64 2.24 .17*.29** .04
Sou ce: own
No e: N = 193; *p < .05; **p < .01
Indi idual commi men o inno a ions
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
BSEBSEBSE
In e cep 2.604 .806 -.502 1.217 1.980 4.652
S ep 1 (con ol a iables)
Openness .356** .093 .225*.099 .224*.099
Time o in o mal mee ings .174*.076 .097 .077 .108 .080
S ep 2 (linea e ec )
Posi i e ela ionships .531** .159 -.121 1.191
S ep 3 (quad a ic e ec )
Posi i e ela ionships .041 .074
R2.097 .147 .149
F 10.290** 10.950** 8.260**
ΔR2.050 .001
ΔF 11.160** .310
Sou ce: own
No e: *p<.05; **p<.01
Tab. 1: Means, s anda d de ia ions and co ela ions o he s udy a iables
Tab. 2: Reg ession o indi idual commi men o inno a ions on posi i e ela ionships
EM_3_2017.indd 90EM_3_2017.indd 90 7.9.2017 10:34:197.9.2017 10:34:19
91
3, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
mee ings we e inse ed as con ol a iables.
A linea e m o posi i e ela ionships was
en e ed in he second s ep (Model 2) and in
he hi d s ep (Model 3) he squa ed e m o
posi i e ela ionships was en e ed. The esul s
a e p esen ed in Tab. 2.
The con ol a iables in Model 1 explain
a signi i can po ion o he a iance, i.e. a iables
ela ed o he in e nal communica ion p edic
he indi idual commi men o inno a ions.
The addi ion o he linea e m o posi i e
ela ionships in Model 2 gi es a s a is ically
signi i can e ec , which means ha posi i e
ela ionships se e as he be e p edic o o
he indi idual commi men o inno a ion han
communica ion ace s analyzed in ou su ey.
This suppo s he no ion ha PRW should be
ega ded as he p e equisi e o he whole p ocess
(hypo hesized in H3). Howe e , he signi i cance
o B-coe i cien s shows ha PRW e ec akes
o e pa icula ly he impac o he ime o
in o mal mee ings on he employee commi men
o inno a ion, and i is less ele an in he case o
open communica ion. In Model 3 he B-coe i cien
o posi i e ela ionships is nega i e and o he
squa ed e m i is posi i e, bu he coe i cien s a e
non-signi i can in bo h cases.
These esul s suppo Hypo hesis 1 s a ing
ha posi i e ela ionships a wo k s imula e he
inno a ion c ea ion by employees ega dless o
hei job desc ip ion. A he same ime, he e a e
no signi i can e ec s suppo ing Hypo hesis 2
s a ing ha a low and high le el o ela ionship
posi i i y indi idual ac i i y in inno a ion c ea ion
is lowe han a mode a e le els o ela ionship
posi i i y. Mo eo e , ega dless he signi i cance
o he esul s, he cu ilinea ela ion be ween
he indi idual commi men o inno a ions and
posi i e ela ionships has a di e en shape han
we hypo hesized. Fig. 1 gi es he p edic ed
e ec s on he basis o hie a chical eg ession
and shows bo h he linea (signi i can ) and
cu ilinea (non-signi i can ) ela ionships o he
analyzed a iables.
In ou app oach we in es iga e i he causal
e ec o posi i e ela ionships on indi idual
commi men o inno a ions is media ed by
communica ion ace s including communica ing
bo h he good and he bad hings and
employees oppo uni ies o spend ime on
in o mal mee ings. The esul s p esen ed in
Tab. 2 e ealed ha PRW a e mo e ele an
in explaining he p ocess. Consequen ly, o
e i y Hypo hesis 3 and o g asp pa icula
Fig. 1: Linea (signi i can ) and cu ilinea (non-signi i can ) ela ion be ween indi idual
commi men o inno a ions and employee posi i e ela ionships
Sou ce: own
EM_3_2017.indd 91EM_3_2017.indd 91 7.9.2017 10:34:197.9.2017 10:34:19
92 2017, XX, 3
Ekonomika a managemen
links among all analyzed a iables we used he
linea eg ession analysis. Fig. 2 summa izes
he model o hese ela ionships in a pa h
diag am.
Excep o one link, i.e. be ween ime o
in o mal mee ings and openness, all a iables
a e in s a is ically signi i can ela ionships.
Thus, he esul s show ha posi i e employee
ela ionships in l uence he indi idual
commi men o inno a ions, as i was p o ed
h ough he hie a chical eg ession analysis.
Wha is mo e, posi i e ela ionships de e mine
in e nal communica ion in e ms o bo h i s
openness and p ac icing in o mal mee ings in
an o ganiza ion which suppo s Hypo hesis 3.
I is a e y impo an conclusion as in e nal
communica ion has been app o ed as
a ac o o o ganiza ional inno a i eness. Ou
esea ch demons a es ha posi i e employee
ela ionships may pe o m a key ole in he
whole p ocess.
4. Discussion
The p ocess o inno a ion c ea ion wi hin an
o ganiza ion is based on he sea ch o he new
in o ma ion and knowledge o come up wi h
no el solu ions, p ocesses, p oduc s o ideas.
This sea ch is a human capabili y acili a ed
no only by o ganiza ional sys ems, incen i es
and p ocesses, bu mos o all by o ganiza ional
clima e, including in e nal communica ion and
in e pe sonal ela ionships wi hin o ganiza ion.
Ou s udy con ibu es o he esea ch s eam
e ealing mechanisms and causal ela ions
among inno a ion clima e dimensions.
In he p oposed model we show ha
posi i e ela ionships a wo k (PRW) should
be conside ed among p e equisi es o
inno a ion c ea ion in an o ganiza ion. They
a e di ec ly linked o he indi idual commi men
o inno a ions as well as in l uence in e nal
communica ion ace s suppo ing o ganiza ional
inno a i eness. Such a di ec ion o dependency
in ou model has been assumed on he basis o
PRW esea ch s eam and app o ed wi h ou
s udy esul s. A he same ime we a e awa e
ha ela ionships among analyzed phenomena
may be mu ual, hus he p oblem has o be
discussed in his pa ag aph.
Posi i e ela ionships a wo k a e among
he main issues in es iga ed wi hin he
umb ella concep o Posi i e O ganiza ional
Schola ship (POS) (Came on, Du on, & Quinn,
2003; Came on & Sp eize , 2012). Seeking
Fig. 2: Posi i e employee ela ionships, in o mal mee ings, in e nal communica ion
and indi idual commi men o inno a ion - model o ela ionships
Sou ce: own
EM_3_2017.indd 92EM_3_2017.indd 92 7.9.2017 10:34:197.9.2017 10:34:19
99
3, XX, 2017
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
eams. In M. A. Wes (Ed.), Handbook o wo k
g oup psychology (pp. 159-187). London: Wiley.
Wes , M. A., & Fa , J. L. (1990). Inno a ion
a wo k. In M. A. Wes , & J. L. Fa (Eds.),
Inno a ion and c ea i i y a wo k (pp. 3-13).
Chiches e : Wiley.
Wes phal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. (2013).
A Beha io al Theo y o Co po a e Go e nance:
Explica ing he Mechanisms o Socially Si ua ed
and Socially Cons i u ed Agency. The Academy
o Managemen Annals, 7(1), 607-661.
doi:10.1080/19416520.2013.783669.
Wol , P., Kaudela-Baum, S., & Meissne ,
J. O. (2012). Explo ing inno a ing cul u es in
small and medium-sized en e p ises: Findings
om Cen al Swi ze land. In e na ional
Small Business Jou nal, 30(3), 242-274.
doi:10.1177/0266242610386666.
Woodman, R., Sawye , J. E., & G i i n, R.
W. (1993). Towa ds a heo y o o ganiza ional
c ea i i y. Academy o Managemen Re iew,
18(2), 293-321.
Zhou, J., & Geo ge, J. M. (2001).
When job dissa is ac ion leads o c ea i i y:
encou aging he exp ession o oice. Academy
o Managemen Jou nal, 44(4), 682-697.
doi:10.2307/3069410.
p o . d hab. Aldona Glińska-Neweś
Nicolaus Cope nicus Uni e si y
Facul y o Economic Sciences
and Managemen
Depa men o Business Excellence
[email p o ec ed]
p o . d hab. Aga a Sudolska
Nicolaus Cope nicus Uni e si y
Facul y o Economic Sciences
and Managemen
Depa men o En e p ise Managemen
[email p o ec ed]
p o . d hab. A kadiusz Ka wacki
Nicolaus Cope nicus Uni e si y
Facul y o Humani ies
Ins i u e o Sociology
[email p o ec ed]
p o . d hab. Joanna Gó ka
Nicolaus Cope nicus Uni e si y
Facul y o Economic Sciences
and Managemen
Depa men o Econome ics and S a is ics
[email p o ec ed]
EM_3_2017.indd 99EM_3_2017.indd 99 7.9.2017 10:34:217.9.2017 10:34:21

100 2017, XX, 3
Ekonomika a managemen
Abs ac
INNOVATIONS AMONG PEOPLE. HOW POSITIVE RELATIONSHIPS AT WORK
CAN TRIGGER INNOVATION CREATION
Aldona Glińska-Neweś, Aga a Sudolska, A kadiusz Ka wacki, Joanna Gó ka
Inno a ions a e he essence o he success ul o ganiza ion. The p ocess o hei c ea ion is s ongly
based on indi idual and eam commi men o c ea e imp o emen s in e e y o ganiza ional a ea. This
commi men is igge ed by inno a ion clima e including employee posi i e ela ionships (PRW) and
suppo ing in e nal communica ion ace s. The aim o he pape is o de i ne causal ela ions among
he a o emen ioned a iables. We hypo hesize ha posi i e ela ionships a wo k a e a p e equisi e
o he inno a ion c ea ion p ocess, i.e. hey s imula e employee commi men o inno a ion c ea ion
ega dless o he employee posi ion in an o ganiza ion as well as in l uence in e nal communica ion
ace s ha suppo inno a i eness. No ably, among in e nal communica ion elemen s we analyze
open communica ion o bo h good and bad in o ma ion and employee in o mal mee ings. The
analyses a e based on he quan i a i e su ey conduc ed on he sample o 200 Polish companies
ep esen ing a ious sec o s and selec ed om ankings o he mos dynamically de eloping
o ganiza ions in Cen al Eu ope. In each company we ob ained in o ma ion om a pe son in ol ed
in leading a eam c ea ing inno a ions, i.e. ep esen ing di e en unc ional depa men s. In he
cou se o da a analyses we used he hie a chical eg ession and he linea eg ession analysis.
The esul s suppo he hypo heses o PRW key ole in he inno a i eness p ocess, and he e ec
appea ed o be linea . Speci i cally, posi i e ela ionships a wo k s imula e bo h employee indi idual
commi men o inno a ions and in e nal communica ion suppo ing inno a i eness. These i ndings
con ibu e o he esea ch s eam connec ed wi h he Posi i e O ganiza ional Schola ship umb ella
concep . P ac ical implica ions o he su ey poin o he need o posi i e ela ionships a wo k
s imula ion in o ganiza ions.
Key Wo ds: Inno a ion, inno a ion c ea ion, posi i e ela ionships a wo k, in e nal
communica ion.
JEL Classi i ca ion: O31, J29, D23.
DOI: 10.15240/ ul/001/2017-3-006
EM_3_2017.indd 100EM_3_2017.indd 100 7.9.2017 10:34:217.9.2017 10:34:21