| Literature DB >> 35911039 |
Hazem Ali1, Min Li2, Xunmin Qiu2.
Abstract
Given the ever-changing business environment, organizations are forced to consider innovation as an essential prerequisite to enhance their efficiency, productivity, and sustainability. In this regard, organizations pay increased attention to enhancing employees' engagement (EE) and stimulating their innovative work behaviors (IWBs). Research emphasizes the importance of employees' IWBs in achieving competitive advantages and organizational sustainability. In this research, we address the question of whether employee engagement leads to stimulating IWBs of the Chinese millennial workforce in service industries. In addition, we explore the potential mediating effect of work-life balance (WLB) and the moderating influence of psychological empowerment (PE) on the relationship between EE and IWBs. Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect data from 372 Chinese senior employees working in the IT, trade, real estate, financial, and telecommunication industries. Our empirical findings showed that highly engaged employees are most likely to exhibit IWBs and maintain a WLB. In addition, the relationship between EE and IWB was partially mediated by WLB. Moreover, the interaction between EE and PE was found to strengthen employees' IWBs. Our study contributes to understanding the importance of EE as an essential prerequisite for millennials' IWBs and provides new insights for service organizations to encourage employees' IWBs. This study contributes to the human resource management field by offering valuable implications vis-à-vis how service organizations operating in a turbulent business environment stimulate the IWBs of their millennial workforce.Entities:
Keywords: Chinese millennials; employee engagement; innovative work behavior; psychological empowerment; work-life balance
Year: 2022 PMID: 35911039 PMCID: PMC9337214 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.942580
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Research model.
| Employee engagement (Schaufeli et al., | EE1 | I feel bursting with energy at work. | |
| EE2 | I feel strong and vigorous at work. | ||
| EE3 | When I get up in the morning, I want to go to work. | ||
| EE4 | I am enthusiastic about my work. | ||
| EE5 | My work inspires me. | ||
| EE6 | I am proud of my work. | ||
| EE7 | When I work hard, I feel happy. | ||
| EE8 | I am immersed in my work. | ||
| EE9 | I get carried away when I am working. | ||
| Work-life balance | WLB1 | There is enough time for recreation activities | |
| WLB2 | I do not need to work overtime as I use to finish work within working hours | ||
| WLB3 | I have enough time for my family and friends | ||
| WLB4 | I value the social benefits that the company offers me | ||
| Psychological empowerment | Meaning | PE1 | The work I do is very important to me |
| PE2 | My job activities are personally meaningful to me | ||
| PE3 | The work I do is meaningful to me | ||
| Competence | PE4 | I am confident about my ability to do my job | |
| PE5 | I am self-assured about my capabilities to perform my work activities | ||
| PE6 | I have mastered the skills necessary for my job | ||
| Impact | PE7 | My impact on what happens in my department is large | |
| PE8 | I have a great deal of control over what happens in my department | ||
| PE9 | I have significant influences over what happens in my department | ||
| Self Determination | PE10 | I can decide on my own how to go about doing my work | |
| PE11 | I have considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do my job | ||
| PE12 | I can decide for myself how to organize my work | ||
| Innovative work behavior (Ma Prieto and Pérez-Santana, | IWB1 | I show innovative and creative behaviors | |
| IWB2 | I am able to take the risk of being innovative and creative | ||
| IWB3 | I am able to search for new working methods, techniques or instruments | ||
| IWB4 | I am able to anticipate problems and opportunities | ||
Descriptive information (N = 372).
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 227 | 61 |
| Female | 145 | 39 | |
| Age | <30 | 55 | 14.8 |
| 30–35 | 112 | 30.1 | |
| 36–40 | 119 | 32 | |
| More than 40 years | 86 | 23.1 | |
| Industry | IT | 66 | 17.8 |
| Trade | 49 | 13.2 | |
| Real-estate | 83 | 22.3 | |
| Financial | 79 | 21.2 | |
| Telecommunication | 95 | 25.5 | |
| Education | Diploma | 27 | 7.2 |
| Graduate | 264 | 71 | |
| Post-Graduate | 82 | 22 | |
| Organizational tenure | 0–2 | 26 | 7 |
| 2–4 | 96 | 26 | |
| 4–6 | 133 | 36 | |
| 6–8 | 60 | 16 | |
| 8–10 | 41 | 11 | |
| More than 10 years | 16 | 4 |
Measurement model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EE | EE1 | 0.831 | 0.928 | 0.940 | 0.636 | 1.694 |
| EE2 | 0.738 | |||||
| EE3 | 0.788 | |||||
| EE4 | 0.773 | |||||
| EE5 | 0.802 | |||||
| EE6 | 0.800 | |||||
| EE7 | 0.838 | |||||
| EE8 | 0.797 | |||||
| EE9 | 0.808 | |||||
| WLB | WLB1 | 0.815 | 0.810 | 0.875 | 0.637 | 1.859 |
| WLB2 | 0.857 | |||||
| WLB3 | 0.755 | |||||
| WLB4 | 0.760 | |||||
| PE | PE1 | 0.889 | 0.953 | 0.959 | 0.660 | 2.714 |
| PE2 | 0.932 | |||||
| PE3 | 0.905 | |||||
| PE4 | 0.869 | |||||
| PE5 | 0.836 | |||||
| PE6 | 0.858 | |||||
| PE7 | 0.949 | |||||
| PE8 | 0.944 | |||||
| PE9 | 0.928 | |||||
| PE10 | 0.936 | |||||
| PE11 | 0.942 | |||||
| PE12 | 0.911 | |||||
| IWB | IWB1 | 0.841 | 0.828 | 0.886 | 0.661 | 2.823 |
| IWB2 | 0.810 | |||||
| IWB3 | 0.732 | |||||
| IWB4 | 0.861 |
Latent variable correlation and square root of AVE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | |||||||
| Age | −0.139 | ||||||
| Tenure | −0.085 | −0.026 | |||||
| EE | −0.134 | −0.031 | −0.026 |
| |||
| WLB | −0.083 | 0.105 | 0.069 | 0.453 |
| ||
| PE | 0.018 | 0.043 | 0.038 | 0.572 | 0.572 |
| |
| IWB | −0.174 | 0.106 | −0.019 | 0.211 | 0.179 | 0.475 |
|
N = 372. EE, Employee Engagement; WLB, Work-Life Balance; PE, Psychological Empowerment; IWB, Innovative Work Behavior. Values on the diagonal (bold) are square root of the AVE while the off-diagonals are correlations.
Figure 2Results of structural equation modeling.
Model strength.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| WLB | 372.00 | 238.371 | 0.362 | 0.731 | 0.728 |
| IWB | 372.00 | 271.662 | 0.269 | 0.795 | 0.786 |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
| |||
| EE | 0.593 | 0.133 | 0.034 (Small) | ||
| WLB | 0.028 | 0.109 (Small) | |||
| EE → WLB → IWB | 0.129 | 0.095 (Small) | |||
| EE* PE → IWB | 0.097 | 0.086 (Small) | |||
N = 372. Goodness of fit: SRMR = 0.078; EE → PE. Moderation effect size is small. EE, Employee Engagement; WLB, Work-Life Balance; PE, Psychological Empowerment; IWB, Innovative Work Behavior.
Path coefficient and hypotheses testing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| H2 | EE → WLB | 0.855 | 0.063 | 26.292 | 0.000 | Supported | |
| H3 | WLB → IWB | 0.215 | 0.049 | 2.157 | 0.029 | Supported | |
| Indirect effect | Mediating (H4) | WE → WLB → IWB | 0.184 | 0.056 | 4.316 | 0.001 | Supported |
| Moderation (H5) | WE*PE → IWB | 0.140 | 0.071 | 3.284 | 0.002 | Supported | |
N = 372. EE, Employee Engagement; WLB, Work-Life Balance; PE, Psychological Empowerment; IWB, Innovative Work Behavior. *t > 1.96 (p < 0.05).
Figure 3Visualization of moderation effect.