Thirteenth International Conference on Design Principles & Practices

Abstract

Theorists tend to describe innovative work behaviour (IWB) in different ways, with most agreeing that it is a sequential process comprised of phases such as exploration, generativity, investigation, championing, and application. When outlining measures to assess the prevalence of IWB among employees, theorists consequently design instruments which reflect these phases. In this study, the generally accepted, but presumed, structure of IWB is tested employing exploratory as well as confirmatory factor analyses, using a sample of more than 3000 employees. Five different factorial structures are presented and tested: a single factor model, a five-factor orthogonal model, a five-factor correlated model, a five-factor higher order, as well as a bi-factor model. The analyses were performed in SPSS and the lavaan package in R. The results reveal a dissonance between the theorised structure and what occurs in practice. Firstly, and with the wisdom of hindsight, exploration and generativity occur more often than investigation, championing, and application. The phases of IWB are also correlated, and not orthogonal and sequential as originally theorised. The results suggest rethinking the theorising about IWB and have significant consequences for promoting IWB, including the importance of investing in the products of the creative process in order to facilitate the process itself. Making employees knowledgeable on how to manage the investigation, championing and application phases will therefore generate the inputs (exploration and generativity) which are required to maintain and accelerate an effective IWB system. An alternative data informed theory is presented in this paper.