Innovative Behavior in the Workplace: The Role of Performance and Image Outcome Expectations
Abstract
Why do employees engage in innovative behavior at their workplaces? We examine how employees' innovative behavior is explained by expectations for such behavior to affect job performance (expected positive performance outcomes) and image inside their organizations (expected image risks and expected image gains). We found significant effects of all three outcome expectations on innovative behavior. These outcome expectations, as intermediate psychological processes, were shaped by contextual and individual difference factors, including perceived organization support for innovation, supervisor relationship quality, job requirement for innovativeness, employee reputation as innovative, and individual dissatisfaction with the status quo.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The interactionist perspective has been one of the most frequently used conceptual frameworks in emphasizing the interactions between contextual and individual factors that might enhance or inhibit creativity at work.
“This has been one of the most frequently used conceptual frameworks in emphasizing the interactions between the contextual and individual factors that might enhance or inhibit creativity at work (Shalley, Gilson, & Blum, 2009; Yuan & Woodman, 2010; Zhou & Shalley, 2010).”
From Innovation and Creativity in Organizations: A State-of-the-Science Review, Prospective Commentary, and Guiding Framework (2014) · cites this paper as Yuan & Woodman, 2010
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194 · see citing works
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941 · see citing works
A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.83 · Cited by 9,406 · see citing works
The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the Self
Steele, C. M. (1988) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60229-4 · Cited by 3,697 · see citing works
Measuring the perceived support for innovation in organizations.
Siegel, S. M., & Kaemmerer, W. F. (1978) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.63.5.553 · Cited by 426 · see citing works
Suppressor Variables in Path Models: Definitions and Interpretations
MAASSEN, G. H., & BAKKER, A. B. (2001) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124101030002004 · Cited by 407 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314527128 · Cited by 3,103 · see citing works
Ready or not, AI comes—an interview study of organizational AI readiness factors
Jöhnk, J., Weißert, M., & Wyrtki, K. (2021) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-020-00676-7 · Cited by 637 · see citing works
Yoshida, D. T., Sendjaya, S., Hirst, G., & Cooper, B. (2014) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.013 · Cited by 442 · see citing works
Mani, V., Gunasekaran, A., & Delgado, C. (2018) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.10.025 · Cited by 408 · see citing works
Organizational climate and creative performance in the public sector
Mutonyi, B. R., Slåtten, T., & Lien, G. (2020) · European Business Review · doi:10.1108/ebr-02-2019-0021 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Lee, L.-Y., & Kartika, N. (2014) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2014.02.030 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
The role of transformational leadership in innovation performance of Malaysian SMEs
Tajasom, A., Hung, D. K. M., Nikbin, D., & Hyun, S. S. (2015) · Asian Journal of Technology Innovation · doi:10.1080/19761597.2015.1074513 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
A taxonomic foundation for evidence-based research on employee performance management
Posthuma, R. A., Charles Campion, M., & Campion, M. A. (2018) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2018.1438411 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
- Authors
- Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Kansas (US)
- ORCID
- Yuan, Feirong
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2010-04
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 323-342
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2159589190
- Cited by
- 1,557
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 89 · 2025: 108 · 2024: 140 · 2023: 143 · 2022: 169 · 2021: 176 · 2020: 146 · 2019: 130 · 2018: 103 · 2017: 70 · 2016: 80 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 33
- FWCI
- 56.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academy of Management Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employee Performance and Leadership
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Keywords
- innovative behavior, outcome expectations, organizational support for innovation, workplace innovation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
