Socially responsible human resource management and employee innovation performance: the roles of person-organization fit, work engagement and individualism orientation

Zhao, Xinkuan; Chutipattana, Nirachon; Mohd-Shamsudin, Faridahwati Article Socially responsible human resource management and employee innovation performance: the roles of person-organization fit, work engagement and individualism orientation Cogent Business & Management Provided in Cooperation with: Taylor & Francis Group Suggested Citation: Zhao, Xinkuan; Chutipattana, Nirachon; Mohd-Shamsudin, Faridahwati (2024) : Socially responsible human resource management and employee innovation performance: the roles of person-organization fit, work engagement and individualism orientation, Cogent Business & Management, ISSN 2331-1975, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2424483 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/326677 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Cogent Business & Management ISSN: 2331-1975 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oabm20 Socially responsible human resource management and employee innovation performance: the roles of person-organization fit, work engagement and individualism orientation Xinkuan Zhao, Nirachon Chutipattana & Faridahwati Mohd-Shamsudin To cite this article: Xinkuan Zhao, Nirachon Chutipattana & Faridahwati MohdShamsudin (2024) Socially responsible human resource management and employee innovation performance: the roles of person-organization fit, work engagement and individualism orientation, Cogent Business & Management, 11:1, 2424483, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2024.2424483 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2424483 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group Published online: 12 Nov 2024. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1648 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oabm20 ManageMent | ReseaRch aRticle Cogent Business & ManageMent 2024, VoL. 11, no. 1, 2424483 Socially responsible human resource management and employee innovation performance: the roles of person-organization fit, work engagement and individualism orientation Xinkuan Zhaoa,b , nirachon chutipattanac,d and Faridahwati Mohd-shamsudine aCollege of graduate studies, Walailak university, nakhon si thammarat, thailand; bZhuhai City Polytechnic, Zhuhai, China; cDepartment of Community Public Health, school of Public Health, Walailak university, nakhon si thammarat, thailand; dexcellent Centre for Dengue and Community Public Health (e.C. for DaCH), school of Public Health, Walailak university, nakhon si thammarat, thailand; eCollege of Business administration, university of sharjah, sharjah, united arab emirates ABSTRACT employee innovation performance (eiP) enhances competitiveness among high-tech enterprises, and socially responsible human resource management (sRhRM) is garnering increasing attention. integrating corporate social responsibility, sRhRM shapes employees’ attitudes and behaviors. this study builds upon the person-environment fit theory to propose and validate a moderated serial mediation model, aiming to unveil the intricate influence mechanism of sRhRM on eiP. the research scrutinizes the relationship through cross-sectional data derived from a questionnaire survey involving 440 employees in high-tech enterprises in china. the findings reveal that, directly as well as indirectly, sRhRM affects employees innovation performance. indirect influence occurs through individual mediation due to person-organization fit (P-O fit) and work engagement (We) or through their sequential mediation. concurrently, the study highlights that individualism orientation (iO) influences both the relationship between P-O fit and We and the serial mediation process involving sRhRM and eiP. With a strong iO, the positive association between P-O fit and We, as well as the serial mediation path between sRhRM and eiP, becomes more pronounced. the study adds knowledge concerning sRhRM’s relation to innovation because it highlights significance for P-O fit as well as We in influencing employee innovation within the realm of sRhRM, while also underscoring the distinctive role played by individual cultural values. 1. Introduction as china’s economy transitions into a new phase of high-quality development amidst the gradual deceleration of rapid economic growth, there is an increasing focus on implementing an innovation-driven strategy to facilitate economic structural transformation. a key starting point in this endeavor is supporting enterprises to strengthen their innovation capacity, which catalyzes market vitality, bolsters developmental momentum and nurtures high-quality development (liu etal., 2020; salike etal., 2022). innovation’s significance for high-tech enterprises to gain competitive advantages is widely recognized in china, where these enterprises are considered the primary drivers of technological advancement (Kim et al., 2015). however, evidence suggests that the progress toward innovation in china is still lagging behind many developed countries despite the various government support in this area (li et al., 2020). On World intellectual Property Organization’s (WiPO) global innovation index 2023 (WiPO, 2023), china ranks 12th, behind major developed economies including the Us, UK, France and germany. the research problem highlighted is the apparent gap between chinese enterprises’ significant research and development © 2024 the author(s). Published by informa uK Limited, trading as taylor & Francis group CONTACT nirachon Chutipattana [email protected].th Department of Community Public Health, school of Public Health, Walailak university, nakhon si thammarat 80161, thailand this article has been corrected with minor changes. these changes do not impact the academic content of the article. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2424483 this is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. the terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. ARTICLE HISTORY Received 2 July 2024 Revised 24 October 2024 accepted 28 October 2024 KEYWORDS sRhRM; employee innovation performance; person-organization fit; work engagement; individualism orientation SUBJECTS human Resource Management; innovation Management; corporate social Responsibility & Business ethics; corporate social Responsibility; Management & Organization 2 X. ZhaO etal. (R&D) investments and their actual innovation performance, despite seventeen chinese companies being among the top R&D investors. industrial R&D investment scoreboard, only five chinese companies are recognized on clarivate’s top 100 global innovators (clarivate, 2024) list, suggesting a discrepancy between investment in innovation and recognized innovative outcomes. the evidence implies an underlying issue with employee innovation performance (eiP), a core component in developing firms’ innovation capabilities to transform their business models (alMulhim, 2021; li & hsu, 2016; liu etal., 2017). eiP also plays a pivotal role in providing sustained competitive advantages to organizations (turró et al., 2014). as employees are the crucial agents who innovate by generating and implementing ideas generation (Kesting & Ulhøi, 2010; smith et al., 2012), examining drivers of eiP is essential for business competitiveness and sustainability. Previous research has established a connection between different types of hRM practices and employee innovation (Bos-nehles & Veenendaal, 2019; chand & ambardar, 2020; Dong & Zhong, 2021; le & le, 2023). however, in today’s business landscape, where organizations are increasingly pressured to be socially and ethically responsible, implementing sustainability-integrated practices is becoming the industry norm (Rezaee, 2017). With the integration of corporate social responsibility (csR) principles into standard hR practices (Omidi & Dal Zotto, 2022), socially responsible human resource management (sRhRM) practices, such as equitable treatment, ethical behavior and community engagement, can enhance employees’ sense of belonging and purpose within the organization, thus encouraging their engagement in innovative behaviors. While the benefits of socially responsible practices on organizational outcomes are well-documented (Martinuzzi & Krumay, 2013; Valmohammadi, 2014), limited research specifically links sRhRM to eiP. Most studies have focused on general csR practices rather than the specific role of hRM in fostering innovation (Zhou etal., 2020). Focusing on the postulated linkage between sRhRM and eiP, our research is guided by theory concerning person-environment fit (P-e fit; Kristof-Brown et al., 2005), which postulates that individual performance is a function of alignment and congruence between individual disposition and the (work/organization) environment. For sRhRM contexts, the theory suggests that when an organization presents sRhRM in alignment with the values and expectations of its employees, it creates a supportive environment that fosters employee well-being, engagement and motivation (edwards & shipp, 2007). the black-box narrative in the hRM literature describes management actions as indirectly affecting employees’ outcomes; it emphasizes the need to examine the relevant mechanisms underlying the link (latorre etal., 2016; takeuchi & takeuchi, 2013). Following this narrative and P-e fit theory, we introduce two serial mediators in our model: person-organization fit (P-O fit) and work engagement (We). Where hRM practices enhance employee work outcomes, employee-organization compatibility and employees’ positive psychological states play crucial roles (aboramadan, 2022; Bernt, 2016; Mostafa & gould-Williams, 2014; Wang et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2021). therefore, we chose P-O fit and employee engagement, shown to be related to individual-level innovation (afsar etal., 2015; cheng etal., 2020; sari etal., 2021) as two mediators. Furthermore, since the link between sRhRM and eiP is not straightforward but complex, we follow MacKinnon et al. (2012), who suggested that in complex relationships where changes in one mediator may influence another, researchers should explore sequential mediation relationships to understand the nomological pathways between all variables better. We postulate that the effect of sRhRM on eiP will manifest where workers feel they hold values that are congruent with their workplace’s due to implemented sRhRM policies or practices, enhancing their We. engaged employees are likely to demonstrate innovative work performance as a result. studies have shown that We varies across cultural orientations (aman et al., 2023). Workers strongly oriented toward individualism show greater likelihood to engage in work which allows them to express their individuality, pursue personal goals and achieve personal success. their We is often driven by personal achievement and autonomy (hu et al., 2014). however, those low on individualism (preferring collectivism) orientation may find higher We in collaborative environments where they can work toward group goals and feel a sense of belonging and community (eby & Dobbins, 1997). Despite china being a predominantly collectivist society, cultural orientations in this country are not monolithic, as individuals may exhibit varying degrees of both collectivism and individualism, as shown by the literature (cai etal., 2014; Kwon, 2012; Wong, 2001; Xiao & tsui, 2007). evidence suggests a significant influence of individualism orientation (iO) on innovation (chaston, 2009; saldanha et al., 2021; tajeddini & trueman, 2012). cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 3 Our study aims to replicate and validate this finding further in a predominantly collectivist society, such as china, since past studies have been conducted primarily on individualistic societies. hence, we speculate that iO is likely to influence the connection between P-O fit and We, as employees will engage more at work when they embrace an iO, driving them to be innovative. given these gaps, we aimed for three objectives: (a) examining sRhRM’s impact concerning eiP, (b) investigating serial psychological processes concerning P-O fit as well as employee engagement and (c) assessing iO in moderating impacts due to P-O fit and employee engagement. Our study enriches the literature on eiP in various ways. Firstly, we address the often overlooked impact of hRM practices in a socially responsible way on employee behavior, particularly eiP. Yassin and Beckmann (2024) emphasize the need to explore new innovation-related employee behavioral outcomes by considering csR-integrated practices. secondly, following the theory of P-e fit, we enrich the literature on eiP by proposing a serial model that elucidates the psychological processes and mechanisms from sRhRM practices to individual innovation. earlier research predominantly assessed factors with influences on employee innovation, based either on organizational environment or on individual level (Pratoom & savatsomboon, 2012; sarooghi et al., 2015; Zennouche et al., 2014). Full focus has yet to be given on predictive value in the alignment between these two factors on employee innovation. For this reason, we aimed at enhancing our understanding concerning eiP, integrating sRhRM, P-O fit and We into a framework. 2. Review of literature and hypothesis development 2.1. EIP and SRHRM sRhRM is a concept strongly grounded in csR (Bombiak & Marciniuk-Kluska, 2019), a crucial approach for organizations to reach long-term goals and achieve sustainable development (carroll, 1998; Porter & Kramer, 2002). Orlitzky and swanson (2006) first introduced sRhRM as a solution to translating csR into business operations. carrying a sense of socially responsible management (shao et al., 2019), sRhRM is considered a significant aspect when it comes to csR practices aimed at engaging or satisfying the needs of employees and their families. since employees are considered to be the main stakeholders (abdelmotaleb & saha, 2020; shen & Benson, 2016), the sRhRM practices are carried out to create value for them, which goes into more than economic or legal transactions (Barrena-Martinez et al., 2018). the practices include providing employees with a safe work environment, offering salaries that exceed legal minimums, supporting their work/life balance (shen & Benson, 2016; shen & Zhu, 2011) while treating them fairly and benevolently. sRhRM also pays close attention to equality and fairness in the workplace, providing employees with organizational support and justice (shen & Zhu, 2011). this includes offering equal development opportunities, providing timely feedback on job performance and emphasizing democratic workplaces where employees participate in decision-making through shared power (shen & Benson, 2016; shen & Zhu, 2011). in addition, sRhRM has a broader focus aimed at developing well-rounded individuals in their professional roles but also responsible and engaged members of society. this significantly differs from traditional hRM practices that focus on accomplishing professional roles. Due to its role in supporting the sustainability goals of organizations, studies investigating sRhRM as it impacts work outcomes (abdelmotaleb & saha, 2020; Kundu & gahlawat, 2015; shao etal., 2019; shen & Benson, 2016; shen & Zhu, 2011) have burgeoned. We add to this corpus of data through considering eiP, as another potential work outcome. employees’ innovation is understood in terms of their engagement in generating, implementing and promoting new ideas to benefit the workplace (Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004). in hRM studies, hRM practices are understood as influencing employees’ work dispositions because they foster support as well as a conducive workplace, promoting employees’ engagement and positive behavior (emmanuel, 2021; Ma Prieto & Perez-santana, 2014; snape & Redman, 2010). Using the same logic, we anticipate sRhRM practices to drive employees’ innovative behavior. embedded with the idea of social responsibility, hRM is frequently seen as the ‘guardian of ethics’ in the workplace (sanjaya etal., 2018; shao et al., 2019). the sRhRM practices can, therefore, cultivate a conducive work culture, driving employees to engage in innovative behavior. For instance, through sRhRM practices, a diverse and 4 X. ZhaO etal. inclusive workplace where equal opportunities for all employees are upheld. in such a workplace, the diversity of viewpoints, experiences, and ideas is encouraged and promoted, so each employee can show creativity and be innovative on the job as they feel their contribution is valued and recognized. studies have shown that such a work culture fosters employees’ positive work outcomes (Pless & Maak, 2004). Based on these arguments, we hypothesize: H1. sRhRM positively impacts eiP. 2.2. SRHRM, P-O fit and EIP Kristof (1996) described P-O fit in terms of a person–organization match, a construct which has witnessed surging curiosity because it plays a central role in various strategic hRM practices and its impact on employees’ positive attitudes toward work and behavioral outcomes (amarneh & Muthuveloo, 2020; Farooqui & nagendra, 2014; Kakar etal., 2019). specifically, prior research has assigned positive influence to P-O fit when it comes to employees’ innovation performance, innovative work behavior and employee creativity (afsar & Badir, 2016; saraç et al., 2014; Wu & Wu, 2017). consistent with P-e fit, which postulates an alignment of personal dispositions with the work environment driving individual performance (chen & Mathieu, 2008; Yu, 2013), employees who regard ethical conduct and social responsibility are likely to perceive that their beliefs align with their organizations’ because sRhRM practices support their values and perspectives (shen & Benson, 2016). For instance, through socially responsible hiring, organizations hire employees with strong work ethics and value social responsibility. employees with such values are likely to feel that they are in the ‘correct’ place of work, belong to and identify with the organization, driving workers’ innovation. essentially, employees perceive the sRhRM practices as a key organizational support that reinforces their work values, enabling them to perform innovatively to support organizational goals. evidence suggests that employees will perform in a work environment that supports and is in harmony with their work values (abdelmotaleb & saha, 2020; Rawshdeh et al., 2019; Wojtczuk-turek, 2015). accordingly, we hypothesize: H2. P-O fit mediates positive relationship of sRhRM toward eiP. 2.3. SRHRM, WE and EIP schaufeli etal. (2006) defined We in terms of positivity and fulfillment in relation to work. Vigor, absorption and dedication reflecting employees’ feeling connected, their willingness to invest themselves when it comes to the tasks and goals at work. employees with engagement exhibit increased motivation and focus as well as commitment to their tasks and their organization’s overall goals. in recent years, We has gained considerable attention as a mediator between positive outcomes in the workplace and various antecedents of hRM (guan & Frenkel, 2018). the popularity of We can be attributed to its high correlation with important employees, team and organizational outcomes (sonnentag, 2017). since sRhRM focuses on creating value for employees by providing practices beyond the economic and legal domains (Barrena-Martinez et al., 2018), employees will probably show engagement in their work. through such practices where the workers experience fair treatment, given equal opportunities, respected and recognized, they will be motivated and encouraged about making individual efforts, and spending time, in accomplishing their job performance. studies found engagement among workers leads to discretionary effort investments and increased intrinsic motivation as they actively seek innovative solutions to work-related challenges (gichohi, 2014; Reijseger et al., 2017; shuck et al., 2011). they are also more likely to help colleagues and surpass their initial goals, contributing to various positive individual-level performance outcomes (Bakker, 2010; Demerouti etal., 2015; gupta etal., 2017). thus, we posit that: H3. We has a mediating effect on positive relations of sRhRM with eiP. cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 5 2.4. SRHRM, P-O fit, EIP and WE thus far, our article has argued how and why sRhRM affects eiP using separate mediations. consistent with the black-box narrative that effects on work outcomes due to organizational approaches such as sRhRM are complex and indirect and that changes in one mediator may influence another (MacKinnon etal., 2012), there are grounds to suspect the presence of a serial mediation effect involving P-O fit and We. the existing literature indicates the following possibility: P-O fit indirectly mediates eiP by influencing We, because people perceiving they fit well in the workplace show greater disposition to be engaged and display innovative behavior (afsar etal., 2018; Bhattarai & Budhathoki, 2023). additionally, We directly mediates eiP, as engaged employees have a greater tendency to show higher levels of innovation performance (cheng et al., 2020). serial mediation is possible with the theoretical guidance due to P-e fit; the theory suggests an alignment between personal fit in a work environment can drive individual performance (edwards & shipp, 2007). hence, we speculate that employees engage in innovative performance because the sRhRM practices enhance their fit perception, enhancing their We and, subsequently, driving them to demonstrate innovative job performance. accordingly: H4. P-O fit and We serially mediate a positive relation of sRhRM to eiP. 2.5. IO as moderator culture orientation, crucial to work-related coping with stress in the fit between person and environment (lazarus & Folkman, 1984), has a role in relating workers’ P-e fit with employee engagement. individualism/ collectivism orientation, also known as the individualism-collectivism cultural dimension, refers to an individual’s or a society’s inclination toward either individualistic or collectivist values and behaviors (hofstede, 1991). the continuum from individualism to collectivism implies that embracing individualistic tendencies entails a rejection of collectivism (charles, 2010; Duan et al., 2008; Freeman & Bordia, 2001). nevertheless, we reject this singular, bipolar construct and accept the idea that a cultural orientation is not monolithic, as individuals may exhibit varying degrees of both collectivism and individualism in a collectivist society (cai etal., 2014; Kwon, 2012; Wong, 2021; Xiao & tsui, 2007). consistently, we approach iO in an individual-targeted analysis, implying variation in personal orientation. employees with a strong iO emphasize personal goals, autonomy and self-reliance, prioritizing individual needs and desires over group interests (hofstede, 2011; Pian et al., 2019). iO can significantly influence work values and attitudes (Kim, 2020). individuals with high iO, viewing themselves as independent of collectives, are primarily motivated by their own preferences and needs. evidence suggests a significant influence of iO on innovation (chaston, 2009; tajeddini & trueman, 2012). We posit that employees with a stronger iO will likely engage more in their work to deliver innovative performance because sRhRM practices allow them to be self-reliant and achieve personal goals, autonomy and needs. specifically, raised iO raises individual employees’ perceptions of fit, driving them toward more engagement and innovation. this is because sRhRM practices that emphasize personal development, ethical behavior and individual recognition resonate more with employees with high iO, enhancing perceived organizational alignment. conversely, workers with low iO might prioritize group goals and interdependence, and they may perceive a lower fit with sRhRM practices centered on individual achievements and autonomy. this perceived misfit can reduce their We and, consequently, their innovative performance. hence: H5. iO moderates positive linkage of P-O fit with We where greater iO intensifies positive relation. integrating (1) the concept that the relationship between P-O fit and We is moderated by iO (h5) and (2) the sequential mediation effects of P-O fit and We in the sRhRM-eiP relationship (h4) suggests that iO influences the entire serial mediation process. this approach provides a more detailed examination of iO’s role throughout the sequence. accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed: iO moderates the 6 X. ZhaO etal. effect of sRhRM on eiP through the sequential mediation of P-O fit and We, with the positive indirect effect being more pronounced at higher levels of the moderator. H6. iO moderates the serial effect of sRhRM on eiP via P-O fit and We, such that the indirect positive effect is stronger at higher iO levels. Figure 1 illustrates postulated links between the variables. 3. Method 3.1. Participants and procedure through online surveys we collected data on workers at high-tech enterprises around Zhuhai, guangdong, china. Zhuhai was chosen because it is one of the first four special economic zones established in china. it has 2075 high-tech enterprises, primarily in smart home appliances. Using personal and professional networks, one of the researchers got approval from 10 companies to conduct the study after being told about our research goals through discussions on the study’s actual implementation. Due to the companies’ preference for electronic means, online surveys were used. the website of www.wjx.cn, china’s largest professional questionnaire survey platform, was employed to design the online questionnaire. the survey was accessible on both computers and mobile phones through linked URl as well as a QR code. given access to the employees’ contact information, the URl link or QR code was distributed via email or Wechat, with the latter being a widely used method in china. the survey included an introduction interface where participants could learn about the purpose, potential use of the data, and voluntary and anonymity statements. Participants were required to click a button on the introduction interface to indicate their agreement and willingness for continued participation. thus, each participant gave informed consent in writing. however, we also told them they could withdraw anytime during the survey without any consequences. all these protocols are necessary to minimize the methodological bias associated with surveys (groves et al., 2009). to further mitigate any bias, the online questionnaire was presented using block form where one block of items represents a variable. the participants would move to the next block after they had completed all items within the block. they would be notified if they missed any items which prevented them from moving to the next block. the online surveys were conducted in chinese. however, the back-translation procedure was carried out as a check that the translated chinese version was equivalent to the english original (Brislin, 1970). the study was approved by the ethics committee of Walailak University (approval no. WUec-23-292-01), ensuring adherence to the guidelines outlined in the Declaration of helsinki. some 440 responses, all valid, were collected. the participants’ profile is as follows: a majority (57.73%) of participants were men. those who were 25 years old and under accounted for 19.95%, 26–35 accounted for 37.27%, 36–45 accounted for 31.82% and over 45 accounted for 12.95%. the participants were highly educated: the majority had a bachelor’s or equivalent degree (65.45%), 13.86% had a master’s degree or equivalent, 3.64% held doctorates; the rest held secondary school certificates. in terms of position, Figure 1. the proposed model. cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 7 44.77% were technicians and professionals, 8.41% were in sales, 21.14% were managers, and the remaining were in other positions. 3.2. Measures We adopted established instruments for measurement of key constructs. the items, measured on a five-point likert scale, showed strongly disagree at 1 and strongly disagree at 5. appendix shows the list of items used. 3.2.1. SRHRM Following shen and Benson (2016), six items measured this construct. two sample items were ‘my company provides adequate csR training to promote csR as a core organizational value’ and ‘my company relates employee social performance in performance appraisals.’ cronbach’s α was 0.90. the scale was utilized and validated in the chinese context by shao et al. (2019). 3.2.2. EIP Following Janssen and Van Yperen (2004), nine items were used for assessing eiP. the items related to generating, promoting and realizing ideas across a workplace. For example, one item held that ‘creating new ideas for difficult issues (idea generation).’ cronbach’s α was 0.98. We validated the scale by referring to Wisse et al. (2015). 3.2.3. P-O fit Following Memon et al. (2018), we adapted six items for measurement of P-O fit. One item, for example, was ‘i really fit this organization.’ cronbach’s α was 0.93. the scale was validated by Memon et al. (2018). 3.2.4. WE Using the Utrecht Work engagement scale, we measured We (schaufeli etal., 2006). this well-established and widely used scale was sourced from the literature of the concept’s founders. lu etal. (2014) showed the construct had validity in chinese contexts. an example from this instrument was, ‘at my work, i feel bursting with energy.’ cronbach’s α was 0.93. 3.2.5. IO seven items measuring iO were adopted from Van hooft and De Jong (2009). this tool was chosen because it is a measure validated by the literature and has been validated in a chinese context (Kim, 2020; Yu, 2014). an example item was ‘i am unique, different from others in many respects.’ in Kim’s (2020) study, cronbach’s α coefficient of this scale was0.779. 3.2.6. Control variables control measures were also included for age, gender, education degree, job position, duration of employment and enterprise ownership. this consideration is essential because individual characteristics such as gender, age, education and duration of employment can significantly impact innovation intentions and perceptions of hRM practices. Moreover, variations in enterprise ownership can foster distinct organizational cultures, thereby influencing employees’ understanding of innovation in different ways. 4. Results 4.1. Analysis We used sPss 26 to calculate how reliable measurements (such as cronbach’s α) were, as well as to perform descriptive statistical analysis like means or standard deviation (sD), common method bias 14 X. ZhaO etal. Funding no external funding. About the authors Xinkuan Zhao is a Ph.D. candidate in management at Walailak University. his research focuses on hRM practices, with particular interests in socially responsible hRM, employee engagement and innovation performance. Nirachon Chutipattana is an associate professor at Walailak University’s school of Public health in thailand and a lecturer at the graduate school of Management. With extensive experience in academia and public health, she holds degrees in nursing, health education, behavioral sciences and human resource management. her research focuses on hRM and behavioral sciences. Faridahwati Mohd-Shamsudin is an associate professor of management at the college of Business administration, University of sharjah, United arab emirates. she holds a Ph.D. in behavior in organizations from lancaster University. her research interests include organizational misbehavior, human resource management practices and negative leadership, with extensive publications in these areas. ORCID Xinkuan Zhao http://orcid.org/0009-0007-2512-0788 nirachon chutipattana http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3295-5808 Faridahwati Mohd-shamsudin http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2854-6681 Data availability statement the data that support the findings of this study are available from the first author, Xinkuan Zhao, upon reasonable request. References abdelmotaleb, M., & saha, s. K. (2020). socially responsible human resources management, perceived organizational morality, and employee well-being. Public Organization Review, 20(2), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11115-019-00447-3 aboramadan, M. (2022). the effect of green hRM on employee green behaviors in higher education: the mediating mechanism of green work engagement. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 30(1), 7–23. https://doi. org/10.1108/iJOa-05-2020-2190 afsar, B., Badir, Y., & Khan, M. M. (2015). Person–job fit, person–organization fit and innovative work behavior: the mediating role of innovation trust. the Journal of high technology Management Research, 26(2), 105–116. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2015.09.001 afsar, B., & Badir, Y. F. (2016). Person–organization fit, perceived organizational support, and organizational citizenship behavior: the role of job embeddedness. Journal of human Resources in hospitality & tourism, 15(3), 252–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2016.1147936 afsar, B., cheema, s., & Bin saeed, B. (2018). Do nurses display innovative work behavior when their values match with hospitals’ values? European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(1), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1108/ eJiM-01-2017-0007 aiken, l. s., & West, s. g. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. sage Publications. alMulhim, a. F. (2021). the role of internal and external sources of knowledge on frugal innovation: moderating role of innovation capabilities. International Journal of Innovation Science, 13(3), 341–363. https://doi.org/10.1108/ iJis-09-2020-0130 aman, a., Rafiq, M., & Dastane, O. (2023). a cross-cultural comparison of work engagement in the relationships between trust climate–job performance and turnover intention: Focusing china and Pakistan. heliyon, 9(9), e19534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19534 amarneh, s., & Muthuveloo, R. (2020). human resource management practices and person-organization fit towards nurses’ job satisfaction. Management Science Letters, 10(14), 3198–3206. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.6.019 ariyani, n., & hidayati, s. (2018). influence of transformational leadership and work engagement on innovative behavior. etiKOnOMi, 17(2), 275–284. https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v17i2.7427 Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327 cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 15 Bakker, a. B. (2010). engagement and “job crafting”: engaged employees create their own great place to work. in handbook of employee engagement. edward elgar Publishing. Bakker, a. B., Petrou, P., Op den Kamp, e. M., & tims, M. (2020). Proactive vitality management, work engagement, and creativity: the role of goal orientation. applied Psychology, 69(2), 351–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12173 Barrena-Martinez, J., lópez-Fernández, M., & Romero-Fernandez, P. M. (2018). Drivers and barriers in socially responsible human resource management. sustainability, 10(5), 1532. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051532 Bernt, P. e. h. (2016). Work engagement as a mediator in the relationship between HRM-practices and employee performance [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. University of Oslo. Bhattarai, g., & Budhathoki, B. P. (2023). impact of person-environment fit on innovative work behaviour: Mediating role of work engagement. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 21(1), 396–407. https://doi.org/10.21511/ ppm.21(1).2023.34 Bombiak, e., & Marciniuk-Kluska, a. (2019). socially responsible human resource management as a concept of fostering sustainable organization-building: experiences of young polish companies. sustainability, 11(4), 1044. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su11041044 Boon, c., Den hartog, D. n., Boselie, P., & Paauwe, J. (2011). the relationship between perceptions of hR practices and employee outcomes: examining the role of person–organization and person–job fit. the international Journal of human Resource Management, 22(1), 138–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2011.538978 Bos-nehles, a. c., & Veenendaal, a. a. (2019). Perceptions of hR practices and innovative work behavior: the moderating effect of an innovative climate. the international Journal of human Resource Management, 30(18), 2661– 2683. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1380680 Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of cross-cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301 Browne, M. W., & cudeck, R. (1993). alternative ways of assessing model fit. sage Publications. cai, h., Morris, M. W., & Wu, s. (2014). Financial need, social isolation, and preference for family-based collectivism in china. Journal of cross-cultural Psychology, 45(7), 1053–1069. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114537550 carroll, a. B. (1998). the four faces of corporate citizenship. Business and society Review, 100–101(1), 1–7. https://doi. org/10.1111/0045-3609.00008 chand, M., & ambardar, a. (2020). the impact of hRM practices on organisational innovation performance: the mediating effects of employees’ creativity and perceived organizational support. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Systems, 13 (1), 68–80. charles, W. e. (2010). The conflict between individualism and collectivism in a democracy: Three lectures. University of Virginia, Barbour-Page Foundation, Biblio life Press. chaston, i. (2009). entrepreneurship in small firms. sage. chaudhary, R., & akhouri, a. (2019). csR perceptions and employee creativity: examining serial mediation effects of meaningfulness and work engagement. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1108/ sRJ-01-2018-0018 chen, g., & Mathieu, J. e. (2008). goal orientation dispositions and performance trajectories: the roles of supplementary and complementary situational inducements. Organizational Behavior and human Decision Processes, 106(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.11.001 cheng, t., Zhang, P., Wen, Y., & Wang, l. (2020). social media use and employee innovative performance: Work engagement as a mediator. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 48(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2224/ sbp.8698 clarivate. (2024, March 15). Top 100 Global Innovators 2024. https://clarivate.com/top-100-innovators/ cohen, J., cohen, P., West, s. g., & aiken, l. s. (2003). applied multiple regression and correlation for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). lawrence erlbaum associates. cua, K. O., McKone, K. e., & schroeder, R. g. (2001). Relationships between implementation of tQM, Jit, and tPM and manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management, 19(6), 675–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-6963(01)00066-3 Demerouti, e., Bakker, a. B., & gevers, J. M. (2015). Job crafting and extra-role behavior: the role of work engagement and flourishing. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 91, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.09.001 Dong, W., & Zhong, l. (2021). Responsible leadership fuels innovative behavior: the mediating roles of socially responsible human resource management and organizational pride. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 787833. https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.787833 Duan, c., Wei, M., & Wang, l. (2008). the role of individualism-collectivism in empathy: an exploratory study. Asian Journal of Counselling, 15(1), 57–81. eby, l. t., & Dobbins, g. h. (1997). collectivistic orientation in teams: an individual and group‐level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(3), 275–295. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1379(199705)18:3<275::aiD-JOB796>3.0.cO;2-c edwards, J. R., & shipp, a. J. (2007). the relationship between person-environment fit and outcomes: an integrative theoretical framework. in c. Ostroff & t. a. Judge (eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 209–258). Jossey-Bass. emmanuel, O. O. (2021). the dynamics of work environment and its impact on organizational objectives. Annals of Human Resource Management Research, 1(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.35912/ahrmr.v1i2.826 Farooqui, M. s., & nagendra, a. (2014). the impact of person-organization fit on job satisfaction and performance of the employees. Procedia economics and Finance, 11, 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(14)00182-8 16 X. ZhaO etal. Fornell, c., & larcker, D. F. (1981). evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 Freeman, M. a., & Bordia, P. (2001). assessing alternative models of individualism and collectivism: a confirmatory factor analysis. European Journal of Personality, 15(2), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.398 Fuller, c. M., simmering, M. J., atinc, g., atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008 gadi, P. D., & Kee, D. M. h. (2020). Workplace bullying, human resource management practices, and turnover intention: the mediating effect of work engagement: evidence of nigeria. American Journal of Business, 36(1), 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1108/aJB-08-2020-0135 gichohi, P. M. (2014). the role of employee engagement in revitalizing creativity and innovation at the workplace: a survey of selected libraries in Meru county-Kenya. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1171, 1–33. groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Jr., couper, M. P., lepkowski, J. M., singer, e., & tourangeau, R. (2009). survey methodology (Vol. 561). John Wiley & sons. guan, X., & Frenkel, s. (2018). how hR practice, work engagement and job crafting influence employee performance. Chinese Management Studies, 12(3), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1108/cMs-11-2017-0328 gupta, M., shaheen, M., & Reddy, P. K. (2017). impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship behavior: Mediation by work engagement. Journal of Management Development, 36(7), 973–983. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JMD-06-2016-0084 hair, J. F., anderson, R. e., tatham, R. l., & Black, W. c. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Prentice hall. hair, J. F., Ringle, c. M., & sarstedt, M. (2011). Pls-seM: indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MtP1069-6679190202 hayes, a. F. (2018). introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach (2nd ed.). guilford Press. hofstede, g. (1991). cultures and organizations: software of the mind. administrative science Quarterly, 38(1), 132. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393257 hofstede, g. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: the hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and culture, 2(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014 holmes-smith, P., coote, l., & cunningham, e. (2006). Structural equation modelling: From the fundamentals to advanced topics. sReaMs. hu, Q., schaufeli, W., taris, t., hessen, D., hakanen, J. J., salanova, M., & shimazu, a. (2014). east is east and West is West and never the twain shall meet: Work engagement and workaholism across eastern and Western cultures. Journal of Behavioral and social sciences, 1(1), 6–24. hulland, J., Baumgartner, h., & smith, K. M. (2018). Marketing survey research best practices: evidence and recommendations from a review of JaMs articles. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(1), 92–108. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11747-017-0532-y Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, n. W. (2004). employees’ goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 368–384. https:// doi.org/10.2307/20159587 Kakar, a. s., saufi, R. a., & Mansor, n. n. a. (2019). Person-organization fit and job opportunities matter in hRM practices-turnover intention relationship: a moderated mediation model. amazonia investiga, 8(20), 155–165. Kesting, P., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2010). employee-driven innovation: extending the license to foster innovation. Management Decision, 48(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011014463 Kim, J., Kim, s., & Park, h. (2015). Factors affecting product innovation performance according to dynamics of environment: evidence from Korean high-tech enterprises in manufacturing sector. International Journal of Technology Management, 67(2/3/4), 269. https://doi.org/10.1504/iJtM.2015.068219 Kim, s. s. (2020). the effect of social contexts and formation of individualism–collectivism orientation on knowledge sharing intention: the case of workers in Korea. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(2), 196–215. https://doi. org/10.1108/JKM-06-2019-0284 Klimovskikh, n., sekerin, V., Makushkin, s., Kuzmicheva, a., leontev, M., & Kochetkov, e. (2023). impact of human resource management on improving the innovation potential of an enterprise to achieve the principles of sustainable development. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11(1), e0274. https://doi.org/10.37497/sdgs.v11i1.274 Kristof, a. l. (1996). Person‐organization fit: an integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x Kristof-Brown, a., & guay, R. P. (2011). Person–environment fit. in s. Zedeck (ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1–50). american Psychological association. Kristof-Brown, a. l., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, e. c. (2005). consequences of individuals’ fit at work: a meta-analysis of person-job, person-organisation, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x Kundu, s. c., & gahlawat, n. (2015). socially responsible hR practices and employees’ intention to quit: the mediating role of job satisfaction. human Resource Development international, 18(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2015.1056500 Kwon, J. W. (2012). Does china have more than one culture? Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(1), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-010-9191-y cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 17 latorre, F., guest, D., Ramos, J., & gracia, F. J. (2016). high commitment hR practices, the employment relationship and job performance: a test of a mediation model. european Management Journal, 34(4), 328–337. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.emj.2016.05.005 lazarus, R. s., & Folkman, s. (1984). stress, appraisal, and coping. springer Publishing company. le, t. t., & le, P. B. (2023). high-involvement hRM practices stimulate incremental and radical innovation: the roles of knowledge sharing and market turbulence. Journal of Open innovation: technology, Market, and complexity, 9(1), 100006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.02.003 lee, B. Y., Kim, t. Y., Kim, s., liu, Z., & Wang, Y. (2023). socially responsible human resource management and employee performance: the roles of perceived external prestige and employee human resource attributions. Human Resource Management Journal, 33(4), 828–845. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12481 li, M., & hsu, c. h. (2016). a review of employee innovative behavior in services. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(12), 2820–2841. https://doi.org/10.1108/iJchM-04-2015-0214 li, Y., Ji, Q., & Zhang, D. (2020). technological catching up and innovation policies in china: What is behind this largely successful story? technological Forecasting and social change, 153, 119918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119918 liu, D., gong, Y., Zhou, J., & huang, J. (2017). human resource systems, employee creativity, and firm innovation: the moderating role of firm ownership. Academy of Management Journal, 60(3), 1164–1188. https://doi.org/10.5465/ amj.2015.0230 liu, h., Xing, F., li, B., & Yakshtas, K. (2020). Does the high-tech enterprise certification policy promote innovation in china? Science and Public Policy, 47(5), 678–688. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa050 lu, c. Q., Wang, h. J., lu, J. J., Du, D. Y., & Bakker, a. B. (2014). Does work engagement increase person–job fit? the role of job crafting and job insecurity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 84(2), 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jvb.2013.12.004 Ma Prieto, i., & Perez-santana, M. P. (2014). Managing innovative work behavior: the role of human resource practices. Personnel Review, 43(2), 184–208. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2012-0199 MacKinnon, D. P., coxe, s., & Baraldi, a. n. (2012). guidelines for the investigation of mediating variables in business research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-011-9248-z Maden, c. (2015). linking high involvement human resource practices to employee proactivity: the role of work engagement and learning goal orientation. Personnel Review, 44(5), 720–738. https://doi.org/10.1108/ PR-01-2014-0030 Manuti, a., lo Presti, a., & giancaspro, M. l. (2021). the association of hRM practices with organizational citizenship behaviors: the mediating role of work engagement, perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange. BPA-Applied Psychology Bulletin (Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata) , 292, 13–25. Marsh, h. W., & hocevar, D. (1985). application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: First-and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97(3), 562–582. https://doi. org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.3.562 Martinuzzi, a., & Krumay, B. (2013). the good, the bad, and the successful—how corporate social responsibility leads to competitive advantage and organizational transformation. Journal of change Management, 13(4), 424–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2013.851953 Memon, M. a., salleh, R., nordin, s. M., cheah, J.-h., ting, h., & chuah, F. (2018). Person-organization fit and turnover intention: the mediating role of work engagement. Journal of Management Development, 37(3), 285–298. https:// doi.org/10.1108/JMD-07-2017-0232 Mostafa, a. M. s., & gould-Williams, J. s. (2014). testing the mediation effect of person–organization fit on the relationship between high performance hR practices and employee outcomes in the egyptian public sector. the international Journal of human Resource Management, 25(2), 276–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.826917 nunnally, J. c., & Bernstein, i. h. (1994). Psychometric theory. Mcgraw-hill. Omidi, a., & Dal Zotto, c. (2022). socially responsible human resource management: a systematic literature review and research agenda. sustainability, 14(4), 2116. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042116 Orlitzky, M., & swanson, D. l. (2006). socially responsible human resource management: charting new territory. in J. R. Deckop (ed.), Human resource management ethics (pp. 3–25). information age Publishing. Ouyang, Z., sang, J., li, P., & Peng, J. (2015). Organizational justice and job insecurity as mediators of the effect of emotional intelligence on job satisfaction: a study from china. Personality and individual Differences, 76, 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.004 Peng, J. c., & chen, s. W. (2023). learning climate and innovative creative performance: exploring the multi-level mediating mechanism of team psychological capital and work engagement. Current Psychology, 42(15), 13114– 13132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02617-3 Pian, Q. Y., Jin, h., & li, h. (2019). linking knowledge sharing to innovative behavior: the moderating role of collectivism. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(8), 1652–1672. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2018-0753 Pless, n., & Maak, t. (2004). Building an inclusive diversity culture: Principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business ethics, 54(2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-9465-8 Porter, M. e., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). the competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–68, 133. 18 X. ZhaO etal. Pratoom, K., & savatsomboon, g. (2012). explaining factors affecting individual innovation: the case of producer group members in thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29(4), 1063–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10490-010-9246-0 Rawshdeh, Z. a., Makhbul, Z. K. M., & alam, s. s. (2019). the mediating role of person-organization fit in the relationship between socially responsible-hRM practices and employee engagement. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(5), 434–441. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2019.7548 Reijseger, g., Peeters, M. c., taris, t. W., & schaufeli, W. B. (2017). From motivation to activation: Why engaged workers are better performers. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(2), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10869-016-9435-z Rezaee, Z. (2017). Business sustainability: Performance, compliance, accountability and integrated reporting. Routledge. saldanha, t. J., John-Mariadoss, B., Wu, M. X., & Mithas, s. (2021). how information and communication technology shapes the influence of culture on innovation: a country-level analysis. Journal of Management information systems, 38(1), 108–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2021.1870386 salike, n., huang, Y., Yin, Z., & Zeng, D. Z. (2022). Making of an innovative economy: a study of diversity of chinese enterprise innovation. China Finance Review International, 12(3), 496–518. https://doi.org/10.1108/cFRi-10-2020-0135 sanjaya, n., Do, B.-R., salim, U., & Moko, W. (2018). influence socially responsible human resource management, technostress creators and employee satisfaction to use fintech (study on financial institutions in indonesia). Asia Pacific Management and Business Application, 007(02), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.apmba.2018.007.02.2 saraç, M., efil, i., & eryilmaz, M. (2014). a study of the relationship between person-organization fit and employee creativity. Management Research Review, 37(5), 479–501. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-01-2013-0025 sari, D. K., christian, F., & Yudiarso, a. (2021, april). Work engagement and innovative work behavior: Meta-analysis study. in Proceedings of the International Conference on Psychological Studies (ICPSYCHE 2020) (Vol. 530, no. 53, pp. 359–366). atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210423.053 sarooghi, h., libaers, D., & Burkemper, a. (2015). examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: a meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 714–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.12.003 schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, a. B., & salanova, M. (2006). the measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: a cross-national study. educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi. org/10.1177/0013164405282471 shao, D., Zhou, e., & gao, P. (2019). influence of perceived socially responsible human resource management on task performance and social performance. sustainability, 11(11), 3195. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113195 shen, J., & Benson, J. (2016). When csR is a social norm. Journal of Management, 42(6), 1723–1746. https://doi. org/10.1177/0149206314522300 shen, J., & Zhu, J. (2011). effects of socially responsible human resource management on employee organizational commitment. the international Journal of human Resource Management, 22(15), 3020–3035. https://doi.org/10.10 80/09585192.2011.599951 shuck, B., Reio, t. g., Jr,., & Rocco, t. s. (2011). employee engagement: an examination of antecedent and outcome variables. human Resource Development international, 14(4), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2011.601587 smith, P., Ulhøi, J. P., & Kesting, P. (2012). Mapping key antecedents of employee-driven innovations. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 12(3), 224. https://doi.org/10.1504/iJhRDM.2012.048629 snape, e., & Redman, t. (2010). hRM practices, organizational citizenship behaviour, and performance: a multi‐level analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1219–1247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00911.x sonnentag, s. (2017). a task-level perspective on work engagement: a new approach that helps to differentiate the concepts of engagement and burnout. Burnout Research, 5, 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2017.04.001 su, R., Murdock, c., & Rounds, J. (2015). Person-environment fit. in P. J. hartung, M. l. savickas, & W. B. Walsh (eds.), APA handbook of career intervention (pp. 81–98). american Psychological association. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 14438-005 sun, J., & Wang, X. (2010). Value differences between generations in china: a study in shanghai. Journal of Youth studies, 13(1), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260903173462 suwanti, s., Udin, U., & Widodo, W. (2018). Person-organization fit, person-job fit, and innovative work behavior: the role of organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Vi(issue 3), 146–159. https://doi.org/10.35808/ijeba/178 tajeddini, K., & trueman, M. (2012). Managing swiss hospitality: how cultural antecedents of innovation and customer-oriented value systems can influence performance in the hotel industry. international Journal of hospitality Management, 31(4), 1119–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.01.009 takeuchi, n., & takeuchi, t. (2013). committed to the organization or the job? effects of perceived hRM practices on employees’ behavioral outcomes in the Japanese healthcare industry. the international Journal of human Resource Management, 24(11), 2089–2106. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.767059 tehseen, s., Ramayah, t., & sajilan, s. (2017). testing and controlling for common method variance: a review of available methods. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 142–168. https://doi.org/10.20547/jms.2014.1704202 turró, a., Urbano, D., & Peris-Ortiz, M. (2014). culture and innovation: the moderating effect of cultural values on corporate entrepreneurship. technological Forecasting and social change, 88, 360–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2013.10.004 cOgent BUsiness & ManageMent 19 Valmohammadi, c. (2014). impact of corporate social responsibility practices on organizational performance: an isO 26000 perspective. Social Responsibility Journal, 10(3), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.1108/sRJ-02-2013-0021 Van hooft, e. a., & De Jong, M. (2009). Predicting job seeking for temporary employment using the theory of planned behaviour: the moderating role of individualism and collectivism. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(2), 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317908X325322 Wang, J., Zhang, Z., & Jia, M. (2023). Doing good or looking good: how socially responsible human resource management practices influence employees’ csR-specific performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 38(3), 225– 244. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-08-2022-0423 Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., alwin, D. F., & summers, g. F. (1977). assessing reliability and stability in panel models. sociological Methodology, 8, 84–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/270754 Wisse, B., Barelds, D. P., & Rietzschel, e. F. (2015). how innovative is your employee? the role of employee and supervisor Dark triad personality traits in supervisor perceptions of employee innovative behavior. Personality and individual Differences, 82, 158–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.020 Wojtczuk-turek, a. (2015). the importance of hRM in creating employee innovativeness—the mediating role of person-organization/job fit and job characteristics. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie, 933(9), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.15678/ZnUeK.2014.0933.0902 Wong, Y. t. e. (2001). the chinese at work: collectivism or individualism? (hKiBs Working Paper series 040-001). lingnan University. http://commons.ln.edu.hk/hkibswp/31 World intellectual Property Organization (WiPO). (2023). global innovation index 2023: innovation in the face of uncertainty. WiPO. https://doi.org/10.34667/tind.48220 Wu, g., & Wu, c. (2017, January). Person-organization fit relationship with innovative performance of employees: a literature review. in 2017 International Conference on Education, Culture and Social Development (ICECSD 2017) (pp. 185–189). atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icecsd-17.2017.41 Xiao, Z., & tsui, a. s. (2007). When brokers may not work: the cultural contingency of social capital in chinese high-tech firms. administrative science Quarterly, 52(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.1.1 Xu, W.-Q., lin, l.-h., Ding, K.-R., Ke, Y.-F., huang, J.-h., hou, c.-l., Jia, F.-J., & Wang, s.-B. (2021). the role of depression and anxiety in the relationship between poor sleep quality and subjective cognitive decline in chinese elderly: exploring parallel, serial, and moderated mediation. Journal of Affective Disorders, 294, 464–471. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.07.063 Yassin, Y., & Beckmann, M. (2024). csR and employee outcomes: a systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly. advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-023-00389-7 Yu, K. Y. t. (2013). a motivational model of person-environment fit: Psychological motives as drivers of change. in a. l. Kristof-Brown & J. Billsberry (eds.), Organizational Fit: Key issues and new directions (pp. 21–49). Wiley Blackwell. Yu, K. Y. (2014). Person–organization fit effects on organizational attraction: a test of an expectations-based model. Organizational Behavior and human Decision Processes, 124(1), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.12.005 Zennouche, M., Zhang, J., & Wang, B. W. (2014). Factors influencing innovation at individual, group and organizational levels: a content analysis. International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management, 7(1), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1504/iJiscM.2014.065052 Zhang, Z., & Zheng, l. (2021). consumer community cognition, brand loyalty, and behaviour intentions within online publishing communities: an empirical study of epubit in china. learned Publishing, 34(2), 116–127. https://doi. org/10.1002/leap.1327 Zhao, h., Zhou, Q., he, P., & Jiang, c. (2021). how and when does socially responsible hRM affect employees’ organizational citizenship behaviors toward the environment? Journal of Business Ethics, 169(2), 371–385. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10551-019-04285-7 Zhou, h., Wang, Q., & Zhao, X. (2020). corporate social responsibility and innovation: a comparative study. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(5), 863–882. https://doi.org/10.1108/iMDs-09-2019-0493 Appendix Scale items EIP eiP1: i often create new ideas for improvements. eiP2: i often Mobilize support for innovative ideas. eiP3: i often search out new working methods, techniques or instruments. eiP4: i often acquire approval for innovative ideas. eiP5: i often transform innovative ideas into useful applications. eiP6: i often generate original solutions to problems. eiP7: i often introduce innovative ideas in a systematic way. eiP8: i often Make important organizational members enthusiastic for innovative ideas. eiP9: i often thoroughly evaluate the application of innovate ideas. 20 X. ZhaO etal. SRHRM sRhRM1: My company considers candidates’ general attitudes toward csR in selection. sRhRM2: My company uses training to promote csR as an espoused organizational value. sRhRM3: My company provides csR training to develop employees’ skills in stakeholder engagement and communication. sRhRM4: My company considers employee social performance in promotions. sRhRM5: My company considers employee social performance in performance appraisals. sRhRM6: My company relates employee social performance to rewards and compensation. WE We1: When i get up in the morning, i feel like going to work. We2: at my work, i feel bursting with energy. We3: at my job i feel strong and vigorous. We4: My job inspires me. We5: i am enthusiastic about my job. We6: i am proud of the work that i do. We7: i get carried away when i am working. We8: i am immersed in my work. We9: i feel happy when i am working intensely. P-O fit P-O fit1: i really fit this organization. P-O fit2: i feel that my personal values are a good fit with this organization. P-O fit3: My organization meets my major needs well. P-O fit4: My values match those of current employees in this organization. P-O fit5: i have affections and affinity for this organization. P-O fit6: this organization has the same values as i do with regard to concern for others. IO iO1: i tend to do my own thing, and others in my family do the same. iO2: it is important to me that i perform better than others on a task. iO3: i am unique, different from others in many respects. iO4: i value my privacy very much. iO5: i would rather work alone than do a group task. iO6: i like to live my life independent of others. iO7: if i have a difficult personal problem, i rather decide by myself than consult with others.