Innovations among people. How positive relationships at work can trigger innovation creation
Abstract
Innovations are the essence of the successful organization. The process of their creation is strongly based on individual and team commitment to create improvements in every organizational area. This commitment is triggered by innovation climate including employee positive relationships (PRW) and supporting internal communication facets. The aim of the paper is to define causal relations among the aforementioned variables. We hypothesize that positive relationships at work are a prerequisite of the innovation creation process, i.e. they stimulate employee commitment to innovation creation regardless of the employee position in an organization as well as influence internal communication facets that support innovativeness. Notably, among internal communication elements we analyze open communication of both good and bad information and employee informal meetings. The analyses are based on the quantitative survey conducted on the sample of 200 Polish companies representing various sectors and selected from rankings of the most dynamically developing organizations in Central Europe. In each company we obtained information from a person involved in leading a team creating innovations, i.e. representing different functional departments. In the course of data analyses we used the hierarchical regression and the linear regression analysis. The results support the hypotheses of PRW key role in the innovativeness process, and the effect appeared to be linear. Specifically, positive relationships at work stimulate both employee individual commitment to innovations and internal communication supporting innovativeness. These findings contribute to the research stream connected with the Positive Organizational Scholarship umbrella concept. Practical implications of the survey point to the need of positive relationships at work stimulation in organizations.
Full text
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