##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The goal of this study was to figure out what kind of link there was between Meaningfulness, a psychological empowerment characteristic, and employee innovative behaviour. The study was done in the telecommunications industry, which is a big business in Nigeria's south-south area. It used a lot of questionnaires to get the information it needed. Using metrics like idea generation, idea development, and idea implementation, the researchers were able to measure how creative each employee was. They were chosen from a pool of 310 people in the telecommunications industry. The data was looked at both descriptively and inferentially. We used the Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient (rho) in the descriptive analysis, while regression analysis and the Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient (rho) were used in the inferential analysis. Based on what the research said, meaningfulness had a mild positive relationship on idea formation and development. However, it also had a high and significant effect on how the concept was put into practice. Thus, the data showed, among other things, that meaningfulness is important when it comes to certain tasks, and it also plays a big role in the collective action that positions businesses in their industry.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–376.
     Google Scholar
  2. Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to "The Social Psychology of Creativity". Boulder Co; Westview Press.
     Google Scholar
  3. Amabile, T. M. (1988). A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations. In B.M. Staw & L.L. Cummins (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 123-167). Greenwich, CT: JAL Press.
     Google Scholar
  4. Amabile, T. M.., Hadley, C. N., Kramer, S. J. (2002). Creativity under the Gun. Harvard Business Review, 80:52-61.
     Google Scholar
  5. Amabile, T.M., &Gitome, J. (2000). Children Artistic Creativity: Effects of Choice in Task Materials. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 209-215.
     Google Scholar
  6. Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational Leadership and Organizational Commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 951-968.
     Google Scholar
  7. Bowen, D.E., & Lawler, E.E. (1992). The Empowerment of Service Workers: What, Why, How and When. Sloan Management Review, 33, 31-39.
     Google Scholar
  8. Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2003). Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press.
     Google Scholar
  9. Chen, G., &Klimoski, R. J. 2003. The Impact of Expectations on Newcomer PERFORMANCE in teams as Mediated by Work Characteristics, Social Exchanges, and Empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 591-607.
     Google Scholar
  10. Conger, J. A., &Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory and Practice. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471-482.
     Google Scholar
  11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2006). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. NY: HarperCollins.
     Google Scholar
  12. Dana, S. D. (2001) Statistics and Data Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, New York: McGraw Hill Book Co.
     Google Scholar
  13. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior, New York: Plenum.
     Google Scholar
  14. George, J. M. (2007). Creativity in Organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 1: 439-477.
     Google Scholar
  15. Grant, A. M. (2008). Does Intrinsic Motivation Fuel the Pro Social Fire? Motivational Synergy in Predicting Persistence, Performance and Productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 48-58.
     Google Scholar
  16. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work Redesign, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
     Google Scholar
  17. Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1990). Motivation through the design of Work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
     Google Scholar
  18. Haran, Z. (2004). A Review of the Relationship between a Person Organization Fit, Journal of Vocational behavior.
     Google Scholar
  19. Kahn, W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.
     Google Scholar
  20. Kanter, R.M. (1983). The Change Masters. New York: Simon and Schuster. Kellough, J.E. &Nigro, L.C. (2003). Pay for Performance in Georgia State Government: Employee Perspectives on Georgia Gain After 5 years. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 22, 146-166.
     Google Scholar
  21. Kirkman, B.L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond Self-Management: Antecedents and Consequences of Team Empowerment. Academy of Management Journal. 42: 58-74.
     Google Scholar
  22. Kizilos, S., & Manson, O.E. (2004). Social and Psychological Resources and Adaptation, Review of General Psychology, 6(1), 307-324.
     Google Scholar
  23. Krejcie, R.V. and Morgan, D.W. (1970) Determining Sample Size for Research Activities Educational and Psychological Measurement.
     Google Scholar
  24. Lee, C.R., & Koh J.T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology. 85, 132-142.
     Google Scholar
  25. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrow, R. T. (2000). An Examination of the Mediating role of Psychological Empowerment on the Relations between the Job, Interpersonal Relationships, and Work Outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 407-416.
     Google Scholar
  26. Ling, Li., & Lu, Changqin. (2007). Actuality of the Psychological Empowerment Research. Advances in Psychological Science, No.15.
     Google Scholar
  27. Mattews, R.A., Diaz, W.M. & Cole, S.G. (2003). The Organizational Empowerment Scale. Personnel Review, 32(3), 297-318.
     Google Scholar
  28. May, D.R., Gilson, R.L., & Harter, L.M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational, 24(8) 65-78.
     Google Scholar
  29. Mumford, M.D., & Gustafson, S.B. (1988). Creativity Syndrome: Integration, Application and Innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 27-43.
     Google Scholar
  30. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
     Google Scholar
  31. Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 607–634.
     Google Scholar
  32. Pratt, M. G., &Ashforth, B. E. (2003). Fostering meaningfulness in working and at work. In K.S. Cameron, J. E.
     Google Scholar
  33. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (309-327), San Francisco: Berrett- Koehler Publishers Inc.
     Google Scholar
  34. Quinn, R. E., &Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). The Road to Empowerment: Seven Questions every Leader should Consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26(2), 37-49.
     Google Scholar
  35. Rapparport, V.A. (1997). Psychological Empowerment: A Review of the Construct, Psychological Review, 8(11);514-532.
     Google Scholar
  36. Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting Creativity to Work: Effects of Leader Behaviour on Subordinate Creativity. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 55, 120- 151.
     Google Scholar
  37. Robert, L.E. (2006). Empowerment: trust vs. control. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 33(1), 69-72.
     Google Scholar
  38. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th Ed.). New York: Free Press.
     Google Scholar
  39. Ryan, R.M., &Deci, E.L. (2001). On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudemonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
     Google Scholar
  40. Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of Innovative Behaviour: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580-607.
     Google Scholar
  41. Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What Leaders need to know: A Review of Social and Contextual Factors that can Foster or Hinder Creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33-53.
     Google Scholar
  42. Shalley, C.E. (1995). Effects of coactions, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creating and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 483-503.
     Google Scholar
  43. Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A Dimensional Analysis of the Relationship between Psychological Empowerment and Effectiveness, Satisfaction, and Strain. Journal of Management, 23(5), 679-704.
     Google Scholar
  44. Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.
     Google Scholar
  45. Tamunosiki-Amadi, J.O. & Dede T.L. (2015). Self-determination and Employee Innovative Behaviour. European Journal of Business and Management, 35(7), 97-105
     Google Scholar
  46. Tamunosiki-Amadi, J.O., and Ogoun Bunatari (2018). Competence and Employee Innovative Behaviour. International Journal of Business and Management, 13(7), 210-221.
     Google Scholar
  47. Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A., (2000). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment. Academy of Management Review, J5(4), 666-681.
     Google Scholar
  48. Unsworth, K. L. (2001). Unpacking Creativity. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 286 297.
     Google Scholar
  49. Velthouse, B.A. (2000). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An Interpretive Model of Intrinsic Task Motivation, Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681.
     Google Scholar
  50. West, M. A. and J. L. Farr (1989). Innovation at Work: Psychological Perspective. Social Behavior, 4, 15-30.
     Google Scholar
  51. Wong, K. (2006). Industry-specific and general environmental factors impacting on hotel employment. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 16 (4/5), 287-293.
     Google Scholar
  52. Wrzesniewski, A. (2003). Finding positive meaning in work. In K.S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (296-308). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.
     Google Scholar
  53. Zhou, J. (1998). Feedback valence, feedback style, task autonomy, and achievement orientation:
     Google Scholar
  54. Interactive effects on creative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 261-276.
     Google Scholar