CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW, AND THEORETICAL AND
2.2 Innovation
2.2.2 Innovation Research at Different Levels of Studies
2.2.1.4 Administrative Process Innovation
In 1978 Daft and Light explained the objective of the administrative process innovation as follows: “Administrative process innovations are practiced to motivate and reward organizational members.” Birkinshaw et al. (2008) agreed with Daft and Light. Damanpour and Evan (1984) also said that “these innovations are indirectly related to the organization’s elementary work activities and mostly affect its management systems, administrative process innovation is related to bring changes in the organizational structure and processes and administrative systems” (Damanpour &
Evan, 1984). In this process, gained knowledge is used in the execution of the work of management that will help an organization function properly by using its resources efficiently. It should be mentioned that the current study deals with process innovation in the service delivery of the district and Upazila administration of the country.
Table 2.1 Summary of Individual Level Innovation Studies
Name of Scholar Year of Study Focused Area and Findings
Amabile 1983 Componential model of
innovation/creativity.
Woodman Schoenfeld 1989,1990 Interactionist model of creative behavior.
Gardner 1993 Individual’s creativity within the
society.
Raja and Johns 2010 The role of personality in
innovation personality traits to moderators or mediators.
Gardner 1993 Individual’s creativity within
society.
Hackman and Oldham 1980 Job scope low, openness was found to be positively related to creativity.
George and Zhou 2001
Shalley 2009 Identify an optimistic prime
influence of growth need strength Farmer and Tierney 2002 Creative self-efficacy as a degree to
make employees innovative Farmer and Tierney 2011 Identify a positive association
within creativity and creative self- efficacy.
Rank et al. 2009 Found that when employees get
more supervisory environment with transformational leadership, it revealed better employee creative performance.
2.2.2.2 Team Level Innovation Studies
There has been significant advancement in the team level studies of innovation. A meta-analysis was done by Hulsheger et al. (2009) and Rosing et al.
(2011) on innovation studies, which were mentionable in this area. Anderson, Potocnik, and Zhou (2014) have shown that team level studies can be categorized into three: a) team structure and composition; b) team climate and processes; and c) leadership style. A positive team environment and innovativeness have a clear positive correlation for the team vision (Hulsheger, Anderson, & Salgado, 2009).
Currently, the affiliation between leadership and innovation has acknowledged more and more care than before. The important areas of team level innovation studies have been formatted in the table below.
Table 2.2 Summary of Team Level Innovation Studies Name of
Scholar
Year of Study
Main Focus and Findings
Kraus and Colleagues
2007 A positive correlation between exhortative consultative leadership which provides advice and guidance and implementation success.
Oldham and Cummings
1996 A strong positive association between non- controlling leadership and distinct innovation but without suggestions or patents.
Somech 2006 Both participative leadership which helps to share taking decisions by supervisors and the employees and directive leadership, which provides an outline to take actions and decisions that are positively correlated with team innovation.
Rosing Frees and Bouch
2011 For the opening up phase of innovation, transformational leadership plays a vital role.
Burns 1978 Notable transformational leadership from transactional leadership.
Name of Scholar
Year of Study
Main Focus and Findings
Judge and Piccolo
2004 Distinguished transformational leadership from transactional leadership.
2.2.2.3 Organizational Level Innovation Studies
Amabile (1990) and Witt and Boerkem (1989) mentioned that “It is found that organizational innovation flourishes when opportunities for exploration and autonomy and when originality is supported and valued.” Between leadership style and organizational innovation, socio-cultural context plays a complex role. The sociocultural structure is a fact for leadership and it has a great impact on leadership issues. When innovation is taken in an organizational context, it covers the following:
the application of new ideas for reformation, reducing service costs, enhancing communication, introducing new technologies for production processes, new designs for organizations and structure, and plans or programs for personnel (Robbins, 1996).
The efficiency and efficacy of innovation have been studied and measured from many points of view and understandings (Alegre, Lapiedra, & Chiva, 2006). Innovation efficiency denotes the determination to gain the level of achievement. Innovation efficacy denotes the level of success of the innovation.
Table 2.3 Summary of Organizational Level Innovation Studies
Name of Scholar Year of Study Main Focus and Findings Cohen & Levinthal;
Damapour; Farr &
Ford; Tushman &
Nelson
1990; 1991;
1990; 1990
Resources in terms of money and time are available and then project creativity level will be higher.
Sanchez Martinez &
Shipton
2009, 2011;
2006
Organizations that provide the following will be enjoy a higher level of innovation.
These are: a) the employee’s participation practices, and training; b) using a
Name of Scholar Year of Study Main Focus and Findings performance oriented paying system; c) flexibility of work time; d) emphasizing job variety; e) demonstrate more human resource suppleness.
Anderson, Potocnik, and Zhou
2014 Identified some attributes which have an impact on organizational innovation: they are knowledge and networks,
organizational size, culture and climate, organizational structure and strategy, innovation diffusion and corporate entrepreneurship, etc.
Choi & Chang 2009 Focused on the management attributes of innovation and found that management support and higher management positive feelings about creativity are conducive to organizational innovation.
Schneider and Damanpour
2006 Focused on management attributes.
2.2.2.4 Multiple Level Innovation Studies
The individual level, the team level, and the organizational level can be also studied simultaneously at multiple levels and across levels. Among the studies, Shin (2012) and Rode and Wang (2010) studied leadership at the individual level, team level, and organizational level. In this multiple-level study, the researcher will be able to go deeply into the analysis of the complex system of innovation and also be able to disclose the interconnections and mechanism among the levels and the environment. Anderson, Potocnik, and Zhou (2014) stated the following in this connection: “this approach presents the particular promise to uncover and elucidate processes underlying innovation the given complex nature of innovation”. For the current study team level innovation was the study area, as the unit of analysis was the team.