IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Innovative Work Behaviour: Measurement and Validation

Listed author(s):
  • Jeroen de Jong
  • Deanne Den Hartog
Registered author(s):

    Although both scientists and practitioners emphasize the importance of innovative work behavior (IWB) of individual employees for organizational success, the measurement of employees' IWB is still in evolution. Here, we present two multi-source studies that aimed to develop and validate a measure of IWB. Four related dimensions of IWB are distinguished: opportunity exploration, idea generation, championing and application. We derived a tenitem measure of these IWB dimensions from a pilot survey among matched dyads of 81 professionals in a research institute and their supervisors. Next, a survey among a matching sample of 703 knowledge workers and their supervisors from 94 different firms was done. We used confirmatory factor analyses to examine convergent and discriminant validity, and hierarchical multilevel regression to test hypothesized relationships of IWB with participative leadership, external work contacts and innovative output (proposed as an initial nomological network). Results demonstrate strong convergent validity of the IWB measure as all four dimensions contribute to an overall measure of IWB. Support for discriminant validity is weaker as correlations between some dimensions are relatively high. Finally, IWB is positively related with participative leadership, external work contacts and innovative output, providing first evidence for nomological validity.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by EIM Business and Policy Research in its series Scales Research Reports with number H200820.

    in new window

    Length: 27 pages
    Date of creation: 25 Nov 2008
    Handle: RePEc:eim:papers:h200820
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Bredewater 26, 2715 CA Zoetermeer

    Phone: (+31)79-322 20 00
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. JS Armstrong & Terry Overton, 2005. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," General Economics and Teaching 0502044, EconWPA.
    2. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    3. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    4. Shane, Scott A., 1994. "Are champions different from non-champions?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 397-421, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eim:papers:h200820. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster EIM)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.