TO SUPPORT OR NOT TO SUPPORT CREATIVE IDEAS VOICED BY SUBORDINATES? The role of leaders’ impression management considerations and performance goals:
A moderated-mediation analysis
Master Thesis, MSc Human Resource Management University of Groningen, faculty of Economics and Business
February 4, 2018
Marijn van Aalst Student number: s2362619 Weeshuisgang 4-9 9712EV Groningen tel: +31(0)6-81924936 e-mail: m.c.l.van.aalst@student.rug.nl Supervisor:
Prof. Dr. O. Janssen, University of Groningen
2
Abstract
Creativity is highly valued within organizations because it is linked to achieving competitive advantage. Until now, little research has focused on the role of leaders in supporting creative ideas voiced by subordinates. This is remarkable, because leaders control the resources to withhold or provide support to these creative ideas. The present study investigates the effect of creative ideas voiced by subordinates (incremental vs radical) on leaders’ support for these ideas, using an impression management perspective, and by differentiating between leader performance goals. The first set of hypotheses state that subordinate incremental creative ideas result in higher leader expectations of image gains, and subsequently, in more leader support. The second set of hypotheses suggest that radical creative ideas result in higher expectations of image threats, and subsequently, in lower support for these radical creative ideas. In addition, the third hypothesis is that leader performance-approach goals moderate the effect of type of creative idea and expected image gains, such that the positive effect of incremental creative ideas on expected image gains is more pronounced for leader high, rather than low, on performance-approach goals. The fourth hypothesis suggests that the negative effect of radical creative ideas on image threats is more pronounced for leaders high, rather than low, on performance-avoidance goals leaders. To conclude, a moderated-mediation model is tested using PROCESS macro module model 9, developed by A.F. Hayes (2013). Data is gathered through scenario-based questionnaires, using the snowball method, thereby focusing on leaders that have at least five subordinates.
3
Introduction
Over the last decades, creativity has become a hot topic within psychology and it is highly valued within organizations. When one enters the search term ‘creativity’ in the search database “Web of Science”, one gets over 24,000 links to articles about creativity and its antecedents. Creativity has been defined as coming up with novel and useful ideas to solve existing problems (Amabile, 1996). Creativity has been linked to organizational success and many organizations focus on optimizing their policies and practices with regard to creative behavior of their subordinates. Some authors state that increased creativity directly leads to organizational success (Amabile, Schatzel, Moneta, & Kramer, 2004; Kanter, 1983; Kanter, 1988).
4
creative courses of action, but they also control the resources and support needed for successful support for and further development of the creative input by subordinates (Janssen, 2005; Mumford, Scott, Gaddis, & Strange, 2002; Graen & Cashman, 1975).
5
and routines they have established. Accordingly, one can assume that a leader evaluates incremental creative ideas more positively than radical creative ideas. Therefore, the first contribution to the existing body of literature of this present study is differentiating between incremental creative ideas and radical creative ideas voiced by subordinates, and examining how these different types of creative ideas are related to leader support.
6
practices without attacking the status quo, are likely to be perceived as less threatening by leaders (Gilson & Madjar, 2011; Madjar et al., 2011). Furthermore, incremental creative ideas fit within the existing practices in the organization where leaders, as gatekeepers, feel psychological ownership for (Detert & Burris, 2007). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that leaders see more potential image gains in incremental creative ideas. Radical creative ideas, however, propose major changes to the established practices in the organization and attack the established status quo that leaders feel responsible for (Gilson & Madjar, 2011; Madjar et al., 2011; Detert & Burris, 2007). Consequently, leaders are assumed to perceive radical creative ideas as more threatening and see more potential image threats in radical creative ideas voiced by subordinates. This present study aims to add valuable insights in the mediating role of leader impression management considerations while evaluating, and subsequently, supporting different types of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates.
7
8
In sum, this present study seeks to contribute to the extant body of literature by theorizing and testing how leaders’ receptiveness to creative ideas voiced by subordinates is affected by type of creative idea, thereby differentiating between incremental and radical creative ideas. Secondly, the difference in leader support for incremental and radical creative ideas voiced by subordinates is explained through the mediating role of leader impression management considerations. The third and final contribution is showing that leader performance goals moderate the relationship between type of creative idea voiced by subordinates and leader impression management considerations, such that leader performance-approach goals might enhance the image gains that leaders expect if they would support subordinates’ incremental creative ideas, while leader performance-avoidance goals might enhance the image threats that leaders expect if they would support subordinates’ radical creative ideas.
Theoretical background and hypotheses
9
Moreover, as radical ideas substantially differ from the existing practices within the organization, they leave leaders uncertain about their expected performance (Darnon et al., 2007; Madjar et al., 2011).
Incremental creative ideas, image gains, and leader support
10
H1a: Subordinate incremental creative idea lead to higher leader expectations of image gains than subordinate radical creative ideas.
H1b: Leader expectations of image gains are positively related to leader support
H1c: Leader expectations of image gains mediate the relationship between type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) and leader support.
Radical creative ideas, image threats, and leader support
11
Leaders have to resolve these conflicts in order for the organization to be successful. Subsequently, the leaders may oppose these radical creative ideas because they feel threatened and uncertain about their expected performance due to the expected potential image threats that can harm their own image in the organization. As a consequence, the leaders are more focused on expected potential image threats while evaluating, and subsequently supporting, radical creative ideas voiced by subordinates. Based on this argumentation, it is hypothesized that:
H2a: Subordinate radical creative ideas lead to higher leader expectations of image threats than subordinate incremental creative ideas.
H2b: Leader expectations of image threats are negatively related to leader support.
H2c: Leader expectations of image threats mediate the relationship between type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) and leader support.
The moderating role of leader performance goals
12
intrapersonal mastery-approach and –avoidance goals and the interpersonal performance-approach and –avoidance goals. In this study, our research focus is on the interpersonal performance goals (approach vs avoidance) to examine whether they have different effects with respect to leaders’ support for creative ideas voiced by their subordinates.
13
H3: Leader performance-approach goals moderate the negative effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates on leader expectations of image gains (radical ideas induce lower leader expectations of image gains than incremental ideas), such that this effect is more pronounced for leaders who are high, rather than low, on performance-approach goals.
14
H4: Leader performance-avoidance goals moderate the positive effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates on leader expectations of image threats (radical ideas induce higher leader expectations of image threats than incremental ideas), such that this effects is more pronounced for leaders who are high, rather than low, on performance-avoidance goals.
Moderated-mediation model of type of creative idea, leader impression management, and leader performance goals
To conclude, it is expected that leaders with stronger performance-approach goals evaluate incremental creative ideas more positively than radical creative ideas, because incremental creative ideas fit within the status quo they feel psychological ownership for, thereby expecting to achieve more image gains when supporting incremental than when supporting radical creative ideas that do not fit within the existing framework of practices and procedures. In contrast, leaders that pursue performance-avoidance goals evaluate radical creative ideas more negatively compared to incremental creative ideas, because they see more image threats in these radical creative ideas than in incremental creative ideas. Furthermore, this effect is expected to be more pronounced for leaders who score high, rather than low, on performance-avoidance goals.
Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
15
H6: Leader performance-avoidance goals moderate the indirect negative effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates and leader support for creative ideas through leader expectations of image threats such that this indirect effect is more pronounced for leaders who are high, rather than low, on performance-avoidance goals.
Following these hypotheses, the conceptual model is displayed below in figure 1.
16
Method
Procedure An online scenario-based questionnaire was used to gather the data needed for analyzing the proposed moderated-mediation model. Several organizations and managers were contacted to participate in this study and social media channels such as LinkedIn and Facebook were used to distribute the questionnaire. In addition, the personal network of the researcher was used to collect participants.
Sample One-hundred-and-ten managers filled out the scenario-based questionnaire. Fifteen participants failed to complete the questionnaire which led to a final sample of 95 participants: 45 leaders were in the incremental creative idea condition (47.4%) and 50 leaders were in the radical creative idea condition (52.6%). Fifty participants were male (52.6%) and 45 were female (47.4%). The distribution of education level was 26 participants with a high school degree (27.4%), four with a MBO degree (4.2%), 19 with a HBO degree (20.0%), 9 with a post-HBO degree (9.5%), 11 with an undergraduate bachelor’s degree (11.6%), 18 with a master’s degree (18.9%), and 8 with a PhD degree or higher (8.4%). Thirty-seven participants worked less than a year in their current supervisory position (38.9%), 31 participants 1-3 years (32.6%), 10 participants 3-5 years (10.5%), 6 participants 5-10 years (6.3%), and 11 have been in their current supervisory position for over 10 years (11.6%).
17
leadership tasks. First, the leaders had to fill in questions about their personal goals as a leader through which we measured their performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals. Second, all leaders had to respond to two emails they received from their subordinates. The first email contained an absence notice from a subordinate who was absent more often, which was getting out of hand. In the second email, the leaders had to respond to a training allowance request by another subordinate. After having activated their leadership roles by these emails, the leaders had to evaluate either an incremental creative idea voiced by a subordinate or a radical creative idea.
Measures
Variables
18
A manipulation check was performed for these different creative ideas (incremental vs radical). Both creative ideas were evaluated using four questions tapping the radicalness/incrementality of the ideas, such as the extent to which the creative idea was different from the current state of affairs in the organization and the extent to which the idea was different from the normal course of events in the organization.
Performance approach goal (α = .86) was measured using the three-item subscale of the achievement goal questionnaire by Elliot, Murayama, and Pekrun (2011). The three items were adapted to fit the context of the research: (1) My goal as a manager is to outperform others, (2) In my work as a manager my aim is to outperform my subordinates, (3) In my work as a manager it is my goal to outperform others. Response categories ranged from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).
Performance avoidance goal (α = .77) was measured using the three-item subscale of the achievement goal questionnaire by Elliot, Murayama, and Pekrun (2011). The three items were adapted to fit the context of the research: (1) My goal as a manager is to avoid performing worse than others, (2) In my work as a manager I strive to avoid being outperformed by my subordinates, (3) In my work as a manager my goal is to avoid being outperformed by other managers in similar positions. Response categories ranged from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).
19
in the organization, (4) Supporting Lars’ idea will improve my supervisor’s evaluation of me. Response categories ranged from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).
Expected image threats (α = .87) was measured using Ashford and colleagues’ (1998) image risks scale combined with Sijbom and colleagues’ (2015) image risks scale. The six items were adapted to fit the context of the research: (1) My subordinates will think worse of me when I support Lars’ idea, (2) My fellow managers will think I am a bit crazy if I actively support Lars’ idea, (3) My supervisors will think worse of me if I support Lars’ idea, (4) I consider the creative input of Lars as negative feedback on my position as a manager, (5) The creative input by Lars undermines my position as a manager, (6) I have the feeling that Lars is trying to pull the rug out from under me. Response categories ranged from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).
20
Control Variables
In this study, gender, level of education, and tenure were controlled for as these demographic variables may influence leaders’ evaluations of creative ideas voiced by subordinates (Baer, 2012; Mumford & Gustafson, 1988).
Gender was measured using one item: What is your gender? Response categories were 1 (male), 2 (female).
Level of education was measured using one item: What is the highest educational level you attained? Response categories were: 1 (High School), 2 (MBO), 3 (HBO), 4 (post-HBO), 5 (bachelor degree), 6 (master degree), 7 (PhD or higher).
Tenure was measured using one item: How long have you been working in your current
supervisory position? Response categories were: 1 (less than a year), 2 (1-3 years), 3 (3-5 years), 4 (5-10 years), 5 (more than 10 years).
21
bootstrapping (using 5000 samples) was used to analyze the multiple moderated-mediation model and to estimate the total indirect effect and specific indirect effects.
Results
Manipulation check. A one factor MANOVA was used to check if our manipulation of the creative ideas was successful, the results are shown in Table 1 below. The manipulation check was successful, F (4, 90) = 7.98, p < 0.001. Compared to incremental creative ideas, radical creative ideas were evaluated as significantly more different from the current state of affairs, requiring significantly more major changes within the organization, more different from the normal course of events in the organization, and less in line with the current state of affairs in the organization. Hence, it can be concluded that our manipulation of creative ideas was successful, and therefore the full sample was used for further analyses.
All results can be found in tables in the appendix. Table 2 includes the means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s Alphas, and the correlations between all separate variables of the model. In Table 3, the results of PROCESS mediation model 4, used to test the first hypotheses, are shown. Table 4 shows PROCESS mediation model 4 (Hayes, 2013) used to test the second hypotheses of the model. The results of PROCESS model 9 (Hayes, 2013), used to test the moderation, mediation, and moderated-mediation hypotheses, are displayed in table 5 in the appendix.
Hypotheses testing
22
in more expected image gains compared to subordinate radical creative ideas (B = -.17, SE = .07, p = .02). Therefore, the first hypothesis is supported by the data. Incremental creative ideas voiced by subordinates result in higher expectations of image gains than subordinate radical creative ideas.
Hypothesis 1b suggested that leader expectations of image gains are positively related to leader support for creative ideas voiced by subordinates. Using a linear regression procedure, as shown in table 3, results do confirm that leader expectations of image gains are positively related to leader support for creative ideas voiced by subordinates (B = .67, SE = .09, p < .01). Hypothesis 1b is supported by the data.
Hypothesis 1c stated that leader expectations of image gains mediate the relationship between type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) and leader support. Using Hayes’ (2013) PROCESS model 4, this hypothesis can be confirmed. The effect of image gains on leader support is highly significant (B = .67, SE = .09, p < .01), as shown in table 3. Moreover, the effect of type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) on leader support is non-significant (B=-.01, SE = .07, p = .84). Therefore, the mediation hypothesis 1c is supported by the data.
23
Hypothesis 2b suggested that leader expectations of image threats are negatively related to leader support. Using a regression analysis, as shown in table 4, this hypothesis can be supported. Leader expectations of image threats are negatively related to leader support (B = -.47, SE = .09, p < .01).
Hypothesis 2c proposed that the relationship between type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) and leader support is mediated through image threats. Using PROCESS model 4 (Hayes, 2013), we cannot confirm this hypothesis. Although the effect of image threats is highly significant (B = -.47, SE = .09, p < .01), the effect of type of creative idea was non-significant and did not change while adding image threats to the model. Therefore, this mediation hypothesis cannot be supported by the data.
Hypothesis 3 stated that leader performance-approach goals moderate the positive effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates on leader expectations of image gains (incremental ideas induce higher leader expectations of image gains than radical ideas), such that this effect is more pronounced for leaders who are high, rather than low, on performance-approach goals. The results of the PROCESS model 9 (Hayes, 2013) regression analysis are shown in table 5. The moderation effect of performance approach goals on the relationship between type of creative idea and leader expectations of image gains is non-significant (B = .04, SE = .09, p = .65). Therefore, hypothesis 3 cannot be supported by the data.
24
than low, on performance-avoidance goals. Table 5 shows a non-significant effect of type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) on image threats moderated by leader performance-avoidance goals (B = .03, SE = .09, p = .72). Hypothesis 4 cannot be confirmed.
For the last hypotheses, the PROCESS macro model 9 (Hayes, 2013) was used to analyze the proposed moderated-mediation model. Hypothesis 5 stated that leader performance-approach goals moderate the indirect positive effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates on leader support for creative ideas through leader expectations of image gains such that this indirect effect is more pronounced for leaders who are high, rather than low, on performance-approach goals. Closer examination of the conditional indirect effects shows that the effect of type of creative idea on leader support is significant for leaders who are low on performance-approach goals (performance-approach goals = -1SD; 95% CI: [-.296 to -.013]), and for average performance-approach goal leaders (performance-approach goals = M; 95% CI: [-.237 to -.030]), but was not significant for leaders who are high on performance-approach goals (performance-performance-approach goals = +1SD; 95% CI: [-.276 to .035]). Contrary to hypothesis 5, the conditional indirect effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates on leader support for creative ideas through leader expectations of image gains is more pronounced for leaders who are low, rather than high, on performance-approach goals. Therefore, hypothesis 5 cannot be supported by the data.
25
hypothesis 6 cannot be supported by the data. All confidence intervals of the conditional indirect effects of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) on leader support for creative ideas through leader expectations of image threats contain zero. For leaders low on performance-avoidance goals the effect is non-significant (performance-performance-avoidance goals = -1SD, 95% CI: [-.125 to .117]), for average performance-avoidance goal leaders the conditional indirect effect was also insignificant (performance-avoidance goals = M, 95% CI: [-.087 to .047]), and for high performance-avoidance goal leaders the indirect effect was also not significant (performance-avoidance goals = +1SD, 95% CI: [-.126 to .075]). To conclude, the proposed moderated-mediation hypotheses cannot be confirmed by the data. All confidence intervals contain zero and there is no moderated-mediation in the model.
Discussion
The present study aimed to contribute to the extant body of literature by theorizing and testing how leaders’ receptiveness to creative ideas voiced by subordinates is affected by differentiating between incremental and radical creative ideas. Secondly, this study used an impression management framework to explain the differences in leader support for the different types of creative ideas voiced by subordinates (incremental vs radical). The third and final contribution of this study was extending the performance goal framework literature by examining the moderating influence of leader performance goals (approach vs avoidance) on the relationship between type of creative idea and leader impression management considerations.
26
These findings are in line with the theory presented in this paper. Incremental creative ideas fit within the established framework of thoughts and routines in the organization (Gilson & Madjar, 2011; Madjar et al., 2011). They only propose slight changes to, and therefore do not change, the existing status quo that leaders feel psychological ownership for. Incremental creative ideas result in higher leader expectations of image gains, and subsequently, in more leader support for these ideas.
27
The third hypothesis suggested that leader performance goals moderate the positive effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) voiced by subordinates on leader expectations of image gains (incremental ideas induce higher leader expectations of image gains than radical ideas), such that this effect is more pronounced for leaders scoring high, rather than low, on performance-approach goals. The data provides no support for the moderating influence of leader performance-approach goals on the relationship between type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) and leader expectations of image gains. Previous research indicated uncertainty as an important factor for performance-approach goal leaders (Darnon et al., 2007). Although incremental creative ideas fit within the established framework of thoughts and routines in the organization and result in higher leader expectations of image gains, changes still have to be made to implement these ideas in the organization. Subsequently, both high and low performance-approach goal leaders might feel left uncertain about their future performance while evaluating, and subsequently supporting, these incremental creative ideas. This uncertainty results in lower leader expectations of image gains while evaluating incremental creative ideas voiced by subordinates. Therefore, the effect of incremental creative ideas on leader expectations of image gains might not be more pronounced for leaders high on performance-approach goals compared to leaders low on performance-approach goals.
28
insignificant effect of type of creative idea on leader expectations of image threats, the line of reasoning cannot be argued for.
Further analyses were unable to support both moderated-mediation hypotheses 5 and 6 of this present study. Although the negative effect of type of creative ideas (incremental vs radical) on leader support is mediated through image gains, no support is found for the mediating role of image threats. Furthermore, the data could not support the proposed moderation effects of leader performance goals on the relationship between type of creative idea (incremental vs radical) and leader support through leader impression management considerations. The main moderation effects turned out non-significant. However, the conditional indirect effect of type of creative idea on leader support through image gains was more pronounced for leaders low and average, rather than high, on performance-approach goals. This suggests that the effect of type of creative idea on image gains is less pronounced for leaders high on performance-approach goals. The data could not support the proposed moderation effect of leader performance-avoidance goals on the relationship between type of creative idea and leader support through image threats. Therefore, both moderated-mediation hypotheses could not be supported by the data.
Implications for theory and practice
29
et al., 2011), result in higher leader expectations of image gains, and subsequently, in more leader support compared to radical creative ideas. Radical creative ideas, on the other hand, propose major changes to, or even change, the established status quo that leaders feel responsible and a sense of psychological ownership for (Gilson & Madjar, 2011; Madjar et al., 2011). Therefore, radical creative ideas result in lower leader expectations of image gains because the leaders feel threatened.
Second, this study has provided strong support for the assumption that leaders’ impression management has an important role in leader support to creative ideas voiced by subordinates. Leaders who expect image gains are more likely to support creative ideas voiced by subordinates. In contrast, leaders expecting image threats are less likely to support creative ideas voiced by subordinates. These results are not surprising, given that earlier research already acknowledged the important role of leader impression management on leader support (Sijbom et al., 2015; Yuan & Woodman, 2010; Ashford, 1989).
30
Translating these results to practical implications means that organizations could consider the pivotal role of leaders while stimulating creativity in their organization. Leaders function as gatekeepers that control the resources in the organization (Janssen, 2005; Mumford et al., 2002; Graen & Cashman, 1975). Leaders expecting image gains are more likely to support creative ideas voiced by subordinates compared to leaders expecting image threats. Organizations that highly value creativity, therefore, should aim at creating a supportive environment in the organization where leaders’ supporting creative ideas leads to a higher status, position, or reputation in the organization.
Limitations and future research
31
With respect to leaders’ goal orientations, it would be interesting if future research would focus on the mastery-approach and mastery-avoidance goals of leaders to further examine the effects of creative ideas voiced by subordinates on leaders support moderated by the two-by-two framework (mastery vs performance x approach vs avoidance). It would be advisable to do this in an experimental setting in future research, due to the constraints of a scenario-based questionnaire mentioned earlier.
Conclusion
32
APPENDIX A
TABLE 1: MANOVA. MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, MULTIVARIATE F, AND UNIVARIATE F VALUES OF MEASURES FOR THE MANIPULATION CHECK OF THE INDEPENDENT VARIABLE CREATIVE IDEA VOICED BY A SUBORDINATE.
a Radical creative ideas should be less in line with the current state of affairs, therefore the negative mean difference
is correct here * p < 0.05 *** p < 0.001 Creative Idea Incremental (n = 45) Radical (n = 50) Multivariate F (4, 90)
Evaluation Criteria Univariate
F (1, 93)
M SD M SD
33
TABLE 2: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS, CRONBACH’S ALPHAS (in parentheses along the diagonal), CORRELATION TABLE
Type of creative idea is contrast coded (-1 = incremental, 1 = radical), tenure is coded (1 = less than a year, 2 = 1-3 years, 3 = 3-5 years, 4 = 5-10 years, 5 = more than 10 years), level of education is coded (1 = high school, 2 = MBO, 3 = HBO, 4 = post HBO, 5 = bachelor degree, 6 = master degree, 7 = PhD or higher), gender is dummy coded (1 = male, 2 = female).
* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01
M SD 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1. Type of creative idea .05 1.00 -
2. Perf. approach goals 3.14 .93 -.03 (.86)
3. Perf. avoidance goals 3.29 .90 -.06 .48** (.77)
TABLE 3: MEDIATION MODEL HYPOTHESIS 1a, 1b, 1c AND 2a, 2b, 2c Predictor Mediator variable Image gains B SE t p Hypothesis 1a Constant 3.68 .30 12.17 .00
Type of creative idea (-1 incremental, 1 radical)
-.17 .07 -2.37 .02
Gender (1 male, 2 female) -.13 .15 -.90 .37
Education level -.03 .04 -.78 .44 Tenure -.04 .06 -.66 .51 Predictor Mediator variable Image threats B SE t p Hypothesis 2a Constant 1.79 .28 6.45 .00
Type of creative idea (-1 incremental, 1 radical)
.02 .07 .34 .73
Gender (1 male, 2 female) .07 .14 .54 .59
Education level .03 .03 1.00 .32 Tenure -.02 .05 -.29 .77 Predictor Dependent variable Leader support B SE t p Hypothesis 1b, 1c, 2b, 2c Constant 2.46 .48 5.09 .00 Image gains .67 .09 7.29 .00 Image threats -.47 .09 -4.76 .00
Type of creative idea (-1 incremental, 1 radical)
-.01 .06 -.21 .84
Gender (1 male, 2 female) -.02 .13 -.16 .88
Education level .04 .03 1.13 .26
Tenure .01 .05 .27 .79
35
TABLE 5: RESULTS OF MODERATED MEDIATION ANALYSES
Predictor Mediator variable: image gains
B SE t p
Hypothesis 3
Constant 3.76 .33 11.32 .00
Type of creative idea (-1 incremental, 1 radical)
-.17 .07 -2.35 .02
Performance approach goals -.05 .10 -.48 .63
Type of creative idea x performance approach goals .04 .09 .46 .65
Performance avoidance goals .03 .10 .26 .79
Type of creative idea x performance avoidance goals .02 .10 .17 .86
Gender -.16 .16 -1.02 .31
Education level -.03 .04 -.85 .40
Tenure -.05 .06 -.78 .44
Predictor Mediator variable: image threats
B SE t p
Hypothesis 4
Constant 1.73 .30 5.66 .00
Type of creative idea (-1 incremental, 1 radical)
.03 .07 .44 .66
Performance approach goals .05 .09 .56 .57
Type of creative idea x performance approach goals .01 .08 .13 .90
Performance avoidance goals .06 .09 .72 .47
Type of creative idea x performance avoidance goals .03 .09 .35 .72
Gender .09 .14 .68 .50
Education level .05 .04 1.27 .21
Tenure -.02 .06 -.34 .73
Indirect relationship between type of creative idea and leader support through leader expectations of
image gains / image threats
Effect SE 95% CI*
Hypothesis 5
Performance approach goals
Low (M – 1SD) -.14 .07 -.296 to -.013
Mean -.11 .05 -.237 to -.030
High (M + 1SD) -.09 .08 -.276 to .035
Hypothesis 6
Performance avoidance goals
Low (M – 1SD) -.00 .06 -.125 to .117
Mean -.01 .03 -.087 to .047
High (M + 1SD) -.03 .05 -.126 to .075
36
Appendix B
Performance goals measure AGQ-R (Achievement Goal Questionnaire Revised) (Elliot & Murayama, 2008).
Performance-approach goal items
(1) My aim is to perform well relative to other students. (original Item 3: My goal in this class is to get a better grade than most of the other students.)
(2) I am striving to do well compared to other students. (original Item 2: It is important for me to do well compared to others in this class.)
(3) My goal is to perform better than the other students. (original Item 1: It is important for me to do better than other students.)
Performance-avoidance goal items
(4) My aim is to avoid doing worse than other students. (original Item 10: I just want to avoid doing poorly in this class.)
(5) I am striving to avoid performing worse than others. (original Item 12: My fear of performing poorly in this class is often what motivates me.)
(6) My goal is to avoid performing poorly compared to others. (original Item 11: My goal in this class is to avoid performing poorly.)
Note. Original AGQ items are from “A 2 2 achievement goal framework,” by A. J. Elliot and H. A. McGregor, 2001, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519. Copyright 2001 by the American Psychological Association.
Expected Image Gains scale adapted from Yuan and Woodman (2010) and Ashford and colleagues (1998), four items:
(1) If I were to do something innovative, my image in the organization would be enhanced. (2) Searching out new technologies or techniques for the organization will make me look good. (3) Participating in the implementation of new ideas will improve my images in the organization. (4) Suggesting new ways to achieve goals will improve my supervisor’s evaluation of me.
Expected Image Threats scale developed by Sijbom and colleagues (2015), consists of six items (adapted from Sijbom et al., 2015, p. 467).
37
(2) To what extent is the creative idea voiced by the employee an attack on my own ideas as a leader?
(3) I consider the creative input of the subordinate to be negative feedback on my position as a leader.
(4) To what extent does the creative input undermine my position as a leader? (5) I have the feeling that my subordinate is trying to pull the rug out from under me (6) I have the feeling that my subordinate is opposing me.
Leader support scale was assessed using Sijbom and colleagues’ three item scale (originally adapted from Chen et al. (2010)). These items were adapted to fit within this present study. (1) How likely is it that you would let your subordinate know that you would like to discuss this creative input together with the subordinate?
(2) How likely is it that you would let your subordinate know that you seriously would like to discuss the creative input in the next project meeting?
(3) How likely is it that you would let your subordinate know that you would like to pass this creative input through to your own superiors?
Gender What is your gender? Male (1), Female (2)
Educational attainment what is the highest educational level you attained? (1) “High School”
(2) “Intermediate vocational education” (MBO) (3) “Higher vocational education” (HBO) (4) “University Bachelor Degree”
(5) “University Master Degree”
38
References
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to “The social psychology of creativity.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 5–32.
Arkin, R. M. (1981). Self-presentation styles. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Impression management theory and social psychological research: 311–333. New York: Academic Press.
Ashford, S. J. (1986). Feedback seeking in individual adaptation: A resource perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 465–487.
Ashford, S. J. (1989). Self-assessments in organizations: A literature review and integrative model. Research in Organizational Behavior, 11: 133–174.
Ashford, S. J., Blatt, R., & VandeWalle, D. (2003). Reflections on the looking glass: A review of research on feedback-seeking behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 29, 773–799.
Ashford, S. J., & Northcraft, G. B. (1992). Conveying more (or less) than we realize: The role of impression-management in feedback-seeking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53: 310–334.
Ashford, S. J., Rothbard, N. P., Piderit, S. K., & Dutton, J. E. (1998). Out on a limb: The role of context and impression management in selling gender-equity issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 23–57.
Baer, M. (2012). Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 1102–1119.
39
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497 529.
Burris, E. R. (2012). The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 851–875.
Damanpour, F. (1988). Innovation type, radicalness, and the adoption process. Communication Research, 15(5), 545-567.
Darnon, C., Harackiewicz, J. M., Butera, F., Mugny, G., & Quiamzade, A. (2007). Performance Approach and Performance-Avoidance goals: When Uncertainty Makes a Difference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(6), 813–827.
Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and subordinate voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50, 869–884. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007. 26279183
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and Avoidance Motivation and Achievement Goals. Educational Psychologist, 34(3): 169–189.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A Hierarchical Model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218–232. Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 x 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3): 501–519.
Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, Illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 613–628. Ford, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). Factors influencing creativity in the domain of managerial
40
Graen, G. B., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143–166). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
Gilson, L. L., & Madjar, N. (2011). Radical and Incremental Creativity: Antecedents and Processes. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 21–28.
Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.
Hulsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F. (2009). Team-Level Predictors of Innovation at Work: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Spanning Three Decades of Research. Journal of applied psychology, 94(5), 1128–1145.
Isaakyan, S., Sherf, E. N., Tangirala, S., & Guenter, H. (in press). Keeping It Between Us: Public vs. Private Context, Image Threat, and Managerial Responses to Subordinate Voice. In press.
Janssen, O. (2005). The joint impact of perceived influence and supervisor supportiveness on employee innovative behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 573–579.
Janssen, O., Van de Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and group innovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25: 129–145.
Kanter, R. M. (1983). The change masters. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social
conditions for innovation in organizations. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (10th ed., pp. 169–211). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
41
avoidance goal orientations: Theoretical, methodological, and instructional implications. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 281-301.
Lucas, J. W., & Baxter, A. R. (2012). Power, influence, and diversity in organizations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 639(1), 49–70.
Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., & Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in Teams: A Functional Approach to Understanding Leadership Structures and Processes. Journal of
Management, 36(1): 5-39.
Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27–43.
Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 705–750. Nijstad, B. A., De Dreu., C. K. W., Rietzschel, E. F., & Baas, M. (2010). Towards a dual
pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21, 34–77. doi:10.1080/10463281003765323 Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Subordinate creativity: Personal and contextual factors
at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 607–634. doi:10.2307/256657 Saeed, T., Almas, S., Anis-ul-Haq, M., & Niazi, G. S. K. (2014). Leadership styles:
relationship with conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 25(3) , 214-225.
Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. (2004). The effects of personal and contextual
characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30: 933–958. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007
42
Evidence from Korea. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 703-714. Sijbom, R. B. L., Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2015). Leaders’ receptivity to
subordinates’ creative input: The role of achievement goals and composition of creative input. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(3), 462–478. Sijbom, R. B. L., Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2015). How to get radical creative ideas
into a leader’s mind? Leader’s achievement goals and subordinates’ voice of creative ideas. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(2) 279–296. Sommet, N., Pillaud, V., Meuleman, B., & Butera, F. (2017). The Socialization of Performance
Goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Elsevier: 1-87.
Spisaka, B. R., Grabo, A. E., Arvey, R. D., van Vugt M. (2014). The age of exploration and exploitation: Younger-looking leaders endorsed for change and older-looking leaders endorsed for stability. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 805–816.
West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 355–387.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Towards a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 293–321.
Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of
