A multifaceted framework toward implementation behavior and innovation outcome: Interactive effects of innovation characteristics and individual, social, and organizational factors

Abstract

Recently, technological advancement and growth in cross–border trade have accelerated future uncertainties, and thus contemporary organizations have set managing innovation–related activities as one of their top priorities. To this end, a large body of research has examined the nature of innovation, but many studies on innovation remained limited. In contrast to the previous research stream grounded on a bifurcated user behavior model of either acceptance or rejection, this study first attempted to develop a multifaceted framework of individual need and implementation behavior toward innovation. Specifically, I began with McClellands Need Theory and hypothesized three relationships between each need (i.e., need for achievement, affiliation, and power) and a corresponding behavior toward innovation (i.e., compliance, cooperation, and championing). Afterwards, drawing on the person–situation– behavior (P–S–B) triad long–established in the personality psychology literature, I postulated that an innovation property (i.e., performance expectancy), social factors (i.e., social expectation), and an organizational factor (i.e., participatory practice) would moderate each relationship. Finally, I supposed that three forms of implementation behavior would lead to innovation outcome, an individuals gains from using the innovation. To test my multifaceted framework of individual implementation behavior toward innovation, I collected survey data of 302 individuals from 11 organizations in Korea. The results showed that, as expected, n affiliation was positively related to cooperation and n power was negatively related to championing, but that unexpectedly, n achievement was negatively associated with compliance. In addition, each implementation behavior led to innovation outcome. Although only one of the interaction hypotheses was supported, the post hoc analysis identified three cross–interactions: the interaction effect of social expectation on the n achievement–championing relationship

the interaction effect of performance expectancy on the n affiliation–cooperation relationship

and the interaction effect of social expectation on the n affiliation– championing relationship. The present study provided theoretically meaningful contributions. First, this new model of individual–level implementation process offered a more balanced view by integrating an innovation property, a social factor, an organizational factor, and individual factors into one framework. In particular, the application of Trait Activation Theory to the innovation literature evoked the effect of social expectation as the strongest situation directing employee need to the utmost implementation behavior. Second, this research firstly elucidated the multiple forms of implementation behavior, namely, compliance, cooperation, and championing. Finally, this study conceptually singled out and empirically tested three different paths from employee need to implementation behavior. Furthermore, the present research firstly examined the form of implementation behavior that leads to the highest innovation outcome, to my knowledge. This research also suggested several practical implications. The compliant behavior of employees on innovation requirements was a crucial predictor of innovation outcome. However, if management would like to improve organizational effectiveness, it should also derive the cooperation and championing behaviors of employees in using innovation. Management should especially highlight the finding that, given a strong social expectation, those with n affiliation can also conduct championing. In other words, to achieve a higher level of innovation outcome, managers should not only leave employees with n affiliation to perform cooperation, but they should also encourage employees to conduct championing toward innovation by helping them shape strong social expectation. In summary, a multifaceted perspective of the individual–level process of innovation implementation can provide contemporary organizations with effective ways to gain expected and extended benefits from using innovation. With this new framework, organizations can obtain a higher level of organizational effectiveness and ultimately accomplish the goal of future survival.