An empirical study on impact of HRM on

employee innovative work behaviour and

affective commitment

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of human resources management on the
relationship between employee innovative work behaviour, affective commitment on overall
performance of organization. The objective of all organizations is to improve their performance,
and employees are the main performer, so author investigates the organizational performance of
150 employees of selected organizations in Udaipur city. The population in this study has
included all companies in Udaipur city. We are conducting the exploratory factor analysis. In
analyzing the data the descriptive statistics was used. Software used for data analysis was SPSS
version 20. Research findings confirmed a positive relationship between affective commitment
and human resource management as well as innovative work behavior; however affective
commitment did not mediate the relationship between human resource management and
innovative work behavior.

INTRODUCTION
Organizations have to be aware of human resource need to know about HRM more realistically
and organizations have to keep their human resource up-to-date.
As the environments and organizational processes become more complex, rapidly changing and
challenging, the key priority of every organization is to maximize the innovative potentials
(Park et al., 2013). Unique ideas increase differentiation and improvement of organizational
processes, products and services.
Innovative work behavior is considered to be one of the most important factors in addressing
emerging issues and sustaining competitive advantage. Consistent with this, there is a growing
body of management literature on the determinants and key influences of innovative work
behavior (Scott & Bruce, 1994; Tan & Nasurdin, 2011; Fernandez & Pitts, 2011; Xerri &
Brunetto, 2013; Abstein & Spieth, 2014).

There has been an increasing evidence

regarding the role of innovation in the
success of the organisations (Martins &
Terblanche, 2003; Patterson et al., 2009).
Innovation is viewed as the main determinant of
organisational success and competitiveness
Source: HR Daily Advisor (google)
(Calantone et al., 2002; Neely & Hii, 1998; Palangkaraya et al., 2010; Salaman &
Storey, 2002; Thornhill, 2006). Recently organisations are paying attention to their
human resources to produce innovative behaviors and consequently innovations (Carmeli
et al., 2006; Patterson et al., 2009; Scott and Bruce, 1994) because innovations derive
from the ideas that come from the individuals in the workplace (Neely & Hii, 1998;
Patterson et al., 2009). Firms depend on their employees with creative ideas and effort
(Bharadwaj & Menon, 2000; Sousa & Coelho, 2011). Individual innovation behaviour in the
workplace is considered to be the main pillars of high-performing organizations (Carmeli et
al., 2006).

Literature review

 Human resource management

Armstrong (1994) says that the aims of performance management and human resource
management are similar, namely, to achieve sustained improved performance of
organisations and employees to ensure that people develop and achieve their fullest
capacity and potential for their own benefit and that of their organisation. Furthermore,
performance management empowers people in a way that latent potential can be realized,
and to strengthen or change positively the organization’s culture.
Performance management is a system used by organisation to achieve its objectives of utilizing
human capital optimally. Performance is a relative concept defined in terms of some referent
employing a complex set of time based measurement of generating future results (Corvellec,
1995).

Pukienė, (2016) Innovative work behavior has a huge impact on organization’s innovativeness
and due to this reason; factors influencing employees to generate, promote and implement novel
ideas must be distinguished. Consequently, human resource management becomes important as
it has the influence on employees’ attitudes and behaviors at work. Human resource management
is considered to be the principal mean, which helps company managers influence the behavior,
knowledge, competences and skills of employees to perform assignments at work, which in turn
makes the achievement of organizational goals more possible (Chen & Huang, 2009; Prieto &
Perez-Santana, 2014).

 Organizational performance

OP is used generally as dependent variable in academic literature today, and yet, at the same
time, it consider as one of the most influential and essential constructs that encountered
so much attention by number of researchers (Shook, 2005).That is the reason scholars and
practitioners give much consideration regarding find determinants of OP and the mechanisms
that through which a few variables can influence, negatively or positively the performance in an
organization (Jing & Avery, 2011).

 Employee innovative behaviour

Getz and Robinson (2003) demonstrate that eighty percent of the ideas in an
organization are initiated by employees. However, employees are rarely formally prescribed
to innovate. In other words, innovative behaviors do formally rarely belong to the work
of most employees. Therefore, employees are rarely directly or explicitly rewarded for
innovative behaviors (George & Brief, 1992; Katz, 1964).
There is a growing body of literature on the concept of
innovative work behavior. Innovative behavior of
employees is considered to be a self-initiated activity,
which seeks to improve existing conditions or create the
new ones (Abstein & Spieth, 2014).

Individual innovation can be identified as a purely

discretionary behavior which is in scientific literature
regarded as extra role behavior (Katz, & Kahn, 1978).
Nevertheless, stimulating individual innovation can benefit an employee. An employee
may gain intrinsic rewards for his or her behavior, like recognition or the possibility to
expand their skills. This may result in feelings of enhanced personal control and morale
and therefore a greater commitment to self and ones job (Schuler & Jackson, 1987).

In literature several concepts are available which show a close resemblance with
innovative work behavior. A brief discussion about how the most used concepts differ from
individual innovation will prevent confusion and enhances the understanding of IWB. In the
first place, individual innovation differs from the concept of employee creativity; the
production of ideas for new products, services, processes and work procedures (Amabile,
1988). Although creativity can been seen as a crucial element of individual innovation in
the first phase of the innovation process, IWB include also the implementation of ideas.
Furthermore, employee’s innovative behavior is unlike employee creativity intended to somehow
benefit the organization; it is expected to result in innovative output (DeJong & Den Hartog,
2010).

According to the definition, innovative work behavior is considered to be a multistage process

and has to do with the generation, adoption and implementation of novel ideas (Kanter, 1998;
Scott & Bruce, 1994; Xerri & Brunetto, 2013).

De Jong (2007), defined as ‘individuals’ behaviors directed towards the initiation and
intentional introduction (within a work role, group or organization) of new and useful
ideas, processes, products or procedures.’
IWB is generally framed in the context of how individuals could facilitate the achievement of
initiation and intentional introduction of new and useful ideas, processes, products or procedures
(Farr and Ford, 1990).

General purpose of the study

In the light of above outline, the goal of this study is to test the impact of HRM on employee
innovative work behaviour and affective commitment
Specific purpose

The sub goals included are as follow:

a) To examine the influence of Human resource management on organizational performance.

b) The impact of employee innovative behavior on organizational performance.

c) The purpose is to introduce the relationship of above these independent variables first time
with dependent Variable as organizational performance.

d) To examine the impact of HRM on employee innovative work behaviour and affective
commitment.

Empirical justification for the relationship

The fact that innovative work behavior, human resource management and affective commitment
are interrelated was noticed when conceptualizing the notions. Human resource management
could be the key factor that influences innovative work behavior of employees, and affective
commitment could be the desired consequence of human resource management strategies. Thus,
this section aims to develop theoretical grounding for innovative work behavior, human resource
management and affective commitment relationship and based on this grounding hypotheses will
be raised.

Research methodology

Research methodology part aims to provide an explanation and justification of the selected
methodological approach and its appropriateness for the purpose of this thesis. A conceptual
model for empirical research, together with the definitions of the constructs and variables will be
specified. In addition, the chosen measurement, data collection, sampling and analysis methods
will be presented.

Quantitative research method was chosen to be the most suitable for this study, as the main goal
of this research is to test the relationship between innovative work behavior, human resource
management and affective commitment.

Based on existing literature and previous research findings, the following hypotheses were
formed:

Hypothesis

H1: There is a positive relationship between employees’ perceptions of human resource

management and their innovative work behavior.

H2: There is a positive relationship between employees’ perceptions of human resource

management and their affective commitment.

H3: There is a positive relationship between employees’ affective commitment and their
innovative work behavior.

Sampling

As research is focused on innovative work behavior and human resource management,

organizations selected to participate in the survey had to be practicing highly developed human
resource management and demonstrate strong innovation orientation. With the purpose to
carefully choose suitable companies for the research, firstly, human resource managers of the
companies were contacted and examples of research instrument, together with research aim,
objectives and raised hypotheses were presented.

There was no preference for any particular industry, as it is supposed that human resource
management systems and innovative work behavior are not industry-specific. 15 companies were
approached and only 5 of them accepted to participate in the research.

Descriptions of the organizations that participated in the survey are presented in the Table below.

Table 1. Characteristics of respondents

Industry type Number of respondents Percentage over sample

Mining industry (HZL) 57 38

Consulting service 13 8.66
Technical 9 6
banking 44 29.34
Cement co. 27 18
Total respondents 150 100
Author compilation

From the above Table 1, representing respondent characteristics it can be concluded that five
different organizations form different industries were researched. All the surveyed companies
requested to stay anonymous, as they are securing and protecting their internal information.

Data collection methods

Data collecting through questionnaire method and online collection method was chosen for
collecting data from different organizations. This collection method is comfortable for data
gathering, because of the speed and networking of the Internet.

This article aims to empirically evaluate employee innovative work behavior, human resource
management, performance of employee and affective commitment relationship. In this section
empirical research findings, based on collection and analysis of the primary data will be reported
and summarized.

SPSS software was used for statistical analysis of research results. Respondents from five
different organizations participated in this study.

Descriptive statistics

Table 2. frequency table of gender class of respondents

Gender
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Male 88 58.6 58.6 58.6
 Female 62 41.3 41.3 100.0
Total 150 100.0 100.0

Graph 1. Frequency graph of gender class of respondents

Gender
Frequency Percent

150

100.0
88
58.6 62
41.3

Male Female Total

As the above table and graph shows, In total 150 respondents participated in the study, out of
which 88 (58.6 percent) were men, and 62 (41.3 percent) were women.

Table 3. Frequency table of age of respondents

Age
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid under 25 25 16.7 16.7 16.7
26-40 112 74.8 74.8 90.8
above 40 12 8.0 8.0 100.0
Total 150 100.0 100.0
Graph 2. Frequency graph of age of respondents
 Age
Frequency Percent

150

112
100.0
74.8

25
16.7 12 8.0

under 25 26-40 above 40 Total

Above table and graph stated that, In terms of age, majority of respondents fell into 26-40 year
interval 112 ( 74.8 percent), 25 (16.7 percent) respondents were aged up to 25 and only 12 (8
percent) respondents were over 40 years old.

Table 4. Frequency table of position of respondents

position
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid employee 121 80.7 80.7 80.7
manager 29 19.3 19.3 19.3
Total 150 100.0 100.0

Graph 3. Frequency graph of position of respondents

 Position
Frequency Percent

150
121
100.0
80.7

29 19.3

employee manager Total

As the above table and graph presents, working position of respondents, majority of respondents
were in employee which is obvious 121 (80.7 percent) rather than manager 29 (19.3 percent)
position.

Reliability analysis

Before performing statistical analysis, Cronbach’s alpha test was used to ensure internal
reliability of the questionnaire. Results are presented in Table 5 below.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.897 150

Cronbach’s alpha test results are higher than 0,7 – meaning that chosen scales are appropriate to
use in the study.

Hypothesis testing

In order to test previously raised hypotheses, two-tailed Spearman’s correlation test and ANOVA
method were performed. Spearman’s correlation test was selected to measure the strength and
direction of the relationship between constructs and variables. This test is suitable as all the
variables were measure on ordinal scale and raised hypotheses assumed positive relationship
between the constructs.
When testing the H1, that assumed positive relationship between employees’ perceptions on
human resource management and their innovative work behavior constructs, Spearman’s
correlation test results in the below Table showed moderate positive correlation (rho = 0,457),
meaning that there is a substantial positive relationship between employees’ perceptions on
human resource management and their innovative work behavior.

Spearman’s correlation test results for HRM and IWB

Spearman’s correlation test results for HRM, IWB and affective commitment

Table:- 6

Affective commitment HRM IWB

Affective Rho= 1.00 rho = 0,599 rho = 0,399
commitment
p = 0,000** p = 0,000** p = 0,000**

HRM rho = 0,599 rho = 1.00 rho = 0,457

p = 0,000** p = 0,000** p = 0,000**

IWB rho = 0,399 rho = 0,457 rho = 1.00

p = 0,000** p = 0,000** p = 0,000**

The results of ANOVA method (see Figure 9 below) show that the respondents with high levels
of perceptions on human resource management are more committed to the organization than the
respondents with low levels of perceptions on human resource management. Those differences
are statistically significant, as p < 0,05 for F criteria. Therefore, H2 can be confirmed and the
conclusion can be drawn, that there is statistical evidence for positive relationship between
employees’ perceptions on human resource management and affective commitment.

ANOVA method for all three components of human resource management construct, showed,
that respondents with high levels of perceptions of ability-enhancing HRM, motivation-
enhancing HRM and opportunity-enhancing HRM exert innovative work behavior more, than the
respondents with low levels of perception. Those differences are statistically significant, because
p < 0,005. Results are provided in Appendix 9.

When analyzing the relationships between human resource management and the components of
innovative work behavior, a conclusion can be brought that all relationships are statistically
significant, as p < 0,01. Results of Spearman’s correlation test in the Table 12 (see Appendix 8
for SPSS output) showed that HRM had the strongest correlation with idea promotion, as rho =
0,475, meaning that there is a substantial relationship between HRM and idea promotion. HRM
had lower correlations with idea realization and idea generation, as rho = 0,369 and rho = 0,295
respectively, meaning that there is a definite but small relationships between HRM and those two
components of IWB.

The results of ANOVA method for all three components of innovative work behavior construct,
showed, that respondents with high levels of perceptions on HRM are more determined to
generate, promote and realize innovative ideas, than the respondents with low levels of
perception on HRM. Those differences are statistically significant, because p < 0,005. Results
are provided in Appendix 10.

To summarize, H1 on the relationship between employees’ perceptions on human resource

management and their innovative work behavior is confirmed. From the results of Spearman’s
correlation test, it can be seen that there is a positive relationship between employees’
perceptions on human resource management and innovative work behavior.

When testing H2, that anticipated a positive relationship between employees’ perceptions on
human resource management and their affective commitment, Spearman’s correlation test results
in Table 13 below (see Appendix 11 for SPSS output) showed moderate positive correlation (rho
= 0,599), meaning that there is a substantial positive relationship between employees’
perceptions on human resource management and affective commitment.

When testing the H3, that assumed positive relationship between employees’ affective
commitment and their innovative work behavior, Spearman’s correlation test results in showed
low positive correlation, as rho = 0,499, meaning that there is a definite but small positive
relationship between affective commitment and innovative work behavior.
ANOVA method showed that respondents, who are more affectively committed to the
organization they work in, behave more innovatively, than those respondents who are less
affectively committed.

IWB, HRM and Affective commitment according to gender and position

In order to compare how demographic variables, such as gender, position and age affect
innovative work behavior, human resource management and affective commitment constructs,
Mann-Whitney U test – a non-parametric test that is used to compare two populations from the
same sample (Gravetter & Wallnau, 2009) - was used. The test results according to respondents’
gender are provided in the Table 15 below.

Table:- 7 Results of Mann-Whitney U test according to respondents’ gender

Construct Male mean rank Female mean Z Sig.

rank

IWB 51,90 50,25 -0,283 0,777

HRM 46,48 54,78 -1,419 0,156
Affective 48,24 53,31 -0,868 0,385
commitment

From the Mann-Whitney U test results according to gender, it could be concluded that in this
research there are no significant differences between men and women as the significance level is
higher than 0,05 for all the constructs and variables.

Table:- 8 Results of Mann-Whitney U test according to respondents’ position

Construct Male mean rank Female mean Z Sig.

rank

IWB 47,55 65,89 -2,462 0,014*

HRM 48,54 61,63 -1,756 0,790
Affective 47,45 66,34 -2,538 0,011*
commitment
The result for overall IWB also showed significant results (Z = -2,462, when p < 0,05), meaning
that managers behave more innovatively than employees. In addition to that, when comparing the
differences between employees’ and managers’ affective commitment, the results occurred to be
significant, as Z = -2,538, when p < 0,05).

It could be concluded that managers are more affectively committed to their organizations, when
employees. However, Mann-Whitney U test results appeared to be insignificant for idea
realization, ability-enhancing HRM, motivation-enhancing HRM, opportunity-enhancing HRM
and the overall HRM construct, meaning that there are no differences between employees and
managers for these variables and construct.

Mann-Whitney U test was not performed according to respondents’ age, as 75,2% of respondents
were aged between 25-40 years, therefore, the test would not show any significant results.

Major findings from empirical research

H1 can be confirmed and the conclusion can be drawn, that there is a statistical evidence for
positive relationship between employees’ perceptions on human resource management and their
innovative work behavior constructs.

When analyzing correlations between components of human resource management construct and
innovative work behavior, it can be concluded that motivation-enhancing HRM has the strongest
relationship with innovative work behavior.

H2 can be confirmed and the conclusion can be drawn, that there is statistical evidence for
positive relationship between employees’ perceptions on human resource management and
affective commitment.

H3 can be confirmed and conclusion can be made that affective commitment and innovative
work behavior have a positive relationship.

By comparing how gender, position and age affect IWB, HRM and affective commitment it was
found that managers behave more innovatively than employees and managers are more
affectively committed than employees.

Discussion and conclusions

The aim of this article is to investigate the human resource management and affective
commitment role in fostering innovative work behavior among business companies practicing a
highly developed human resource management. From the results of the empirical research it
could be concluded that, there is a substantial positive relationship between employees’
perceptions on human resource management and their innovative work behavior.

However, empirical data did not provide the evidence that affective commitment plays mediating
role between the IWB and HRM constructs.

The findings of empirical research proved the relationship between innovative work behavior,
human resource management and affective commitment and show that managers rather than
relying on one or several individual practices have to leverage multiple dimensions and systems,
which would encourage innovative work behavior.

By comparing how gender, position and age affect innovative work behavior, human resource
management and affective commitment, it was found that in companies practicing highly
developed HRM, managers behave more innovatively than employees.

Limitations and suggestions for further research

Sample was limited, due to the reason, that surveyed companies had to be practicing highly
developed human resource management and be innovation oriented, meaning that the
respondents had to be engaged in innovative work behavior in the company.

So Further research could benefit from a larger sample of companies practicing highly developed
HRM and innovation oriented that would bring more statistical power and also select more
comapnies.

In this research primary data was analyzed, meaning that it could be very subjective, especially
in measuring innovative work behavior. Thus, in further research data on IWB could be
compared to secondary data representing innovative outputs of the company.

References:-
 Abstein, A., Heidenreich, S., & Spieth, P. (2014). Innovative work behaviour: the impact
of comprehensive HR system perceptions and the role of work–life Conflict. Industry and
Innovation, 21(2), 91-116.
 Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research
in organizational behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
 Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong's handbook of performance management: an evidence-
based guide to delivering high performance. Kogan Page Publishers.
 Bharadwaj, S., & Menon, A. (2000), Making Innovation Happen in Organizations:
Individual Crativity Mechanisms, Organizational Creativity Mechanisms or Both?.
Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17, 424-434.
 Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. (2002), Learning orientation, firm
innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31,
515-524.
 Carmeli, A., Meitar, R., & Weisberg, J. (2006). Self-leadership skills and innovative
behavior at work. International Journal of Manpower, 27(1), 75-90. DOI
10.1108/01437720610652853
 Chen, C. J., & Huang, J. W. (2009). Strategic human resource practices and innovation
performance—The mediating role of knowledge management capacity. Journal of
business research, 62(1), 104-114.
 Combs, J. G., Russell Crook, T., & Shook, C. L. (2005). The dimensionality of
organizational performance and its implications for strategic management research. In
Research methodology in strategy and management (pp. 259-286). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited.
 Corvellec, H. (1995). Translating Management Accounting Terms-The Case
of’Performance’. Advances in International Accounting, 8, 129-147.
 De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). How leaders influence employees'
innovative behaviour. European Journal of innovation management, 10(1), 41-64.
 De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity
and Innovation Management, 19(1), 23-36.
 Farr, J. L., & Ford, C. M. 1990. Individual innovation. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr
(Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
 Feng Jing, F., Avery, G. C., & Bergsteiner, H. (2011). Organizational climate and
performance in retail pharmacies. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
32(3), 224-242.
 Fernandez, S., & Pitts, D. W. (2011). Understanding employee motivation to innovate:
Evidence from front line employees in United States federal agencies. Australian Journal
of Public Administration, 70(2), 202-222.
 George, J. M., & Brief, A. P. (1992). Feeling good-doing good: a conceptual analysis of
the mood at work-organizational spontaneity relationship. Psychological bulletin, 112(2),
310.
 Getz, I., & Robinson, A. G. (2003). Innovate or die: Is that a fact?. Creativity and
innovation management, 12(3), 130-136.
 Kanter, R. M. (1998). When a thousand flowers bloom: structural, collective and social
conditions for innovation in organizations. Organizational Behavior. 10. 169-211.
 Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Systems Research
and Behavioral Science, 9(2), 131-146.
 Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). Organizations and the system concept. Classics of
organization theory, 161-172.
 Ma Prieto, I., & Pilar Perez-Santana, M. (2014). Managing innovative work behavior: the
role of human resource practices. Personnel Review, 43(2), 184-208.
 Martins, E. C., & Terblanche, F. (2003). Building organisational culture that stimulates
creativity and innovation. European journal of innovation management, 6(1), 64-74.
 Neely, A., & Hii, J. (1998). Innovation and Business Performance: A Literature Review.
Cambridge: The Judge Institute of Management Studies, Retrieved from:
http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/696/521/1221/litreview_innov1.pdf.
 Palangkaraya, A., Stierwald, A., Webster, E., & Jensen, P. (2010). Examining the
Characteristics of Innovative Firms in Australia. A Report for the Australian Government
Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Intellectual Property
Research Institute of Australia report, The University of Melbourne
 Park, T. Y., & Shaw, J. D. (2013). Turnover rates and organizational performance: A
meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 98(2), 268.
 Patterson, F., Kerrin, M., & Gatto-Roissard, G. (2009). Characteristics and Behaviours of
Innovative People in Organisations. Literature Review prepared for the NESTA Policy &
Research Unit, London: NESTA, 1-63.
 Pukienė, A. (2016). Innovative work behavior-the role of human resource management
and affective commitment (Doctoral dissertation, ISM University of Management and
Economics).
 Salaman, J.G., & Storey, J. (2002). Managers' theories about the process of innovation.
Journal of Management Studies, 39(2), 147-165.
 Schuler, R. S., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human
resource management practices. The Academy of Management Executive (1987-1989),
207-219.
 Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model
of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of management journal, 37(3), 580-
607.
 Sousa, C.M. (2011). From Personal Values to Creativity: Evidence from Frontline
Service Employees. Highly Commended Award Winner.P. & Coelho, F. European
Journal of Marketing, 45(7/8), 1029-1050.
 Tan, C. L., & Nasurdin, A. M. (2011). Human resource management practices and
organizational innovation: assessing the mediating role of knowledge management
effectiveness. Electronic journal of knowledge management, 9(2), 155-167.
 Thornhill, S. (2006). Knowledge, innovation and firm performance in high-and low-
technology regimes. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(5), 687-703
 Xerri, M. J., & Brunetto, Y. (2013). Fostering innovative behaviour: The importance of
employee commitment and organisational citizenship behaviour. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(16), 3163-3177.