The prosocial-motivated process of meaningful innovation: evidence from Chinese start-ups in digital industry

References

• Amabile, T. M. 1988. “A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations.” Research in Organizational Behavior 10 (1): 123–167.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. 1996. Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. London: Hachette UK.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. 2012. “Componential Theory of Creativity.” Harvard Business School 12 (96): 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Amabile, T. M. 1983. “The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45 (2): 357. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. R., and M. A. West. 1998. “Measuring Climate for Work Group Innovation: Development and Validation of the Team Climate Inventory.” Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior 19 (3): 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199805)19:3<235:AID-JOB837>3.0.CO;2-C
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batson, C. D. 1987. “Prosocial Motivation: Is It Ever Truly Altruistic?” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 65–122. Vol. 20. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60412-8.
   Google Scholar
• Besley, T., and M. Ghatak. 2018. “Prosocial Motivation and Incentives.” Annual Review of Economics 10 (1): 411–438. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-063016-103739.
   Google Scholar
• Brislin, R. W. 1980. “Cross-Cultural Research Methods.” In Environment and Culture, 47–82. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0451-5_3.
   Google Scholar
• Brislin, R. W. 1983. “Cross-Cultural Research in Psychology.” Annual Review of Psychology 34 (1): 363–400. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.34.020183.002051.
   Google Scholar
• CAICT. 2022. The Report on the Development of China's Digital Economy (in Chinese). Beijing: CAICT Online Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Cajaiba-Santana, G. 2014. “Social Innovation: Moving the Field Forward. A Conceptual Framework.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 82:42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campion, M. A., G. J. Medsker, and A. Catherine Higgs. 1993. “Relations Between Work Group Characteristics and Effectiveness: Implications for Designing Effective Work Groups.” Personnel Psychology 46 (4): 823–847. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb01571.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaiken, S., and Y. Trope. 1999. Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, H., S. Zang, J. Chen, W. He, and H. C. Chieh. 2020. “Looking for Meaningful Disruptive Innovation: Counterattack from Pinduoduo.” Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 30 (1): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2020.1820352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, J., and G. Qu. 2018. “Meaningful Innovation: A New Paradigm Leading Renaissance of Philosophy and Humanistic Spirit in New Era.” Technology Economics (In Chinese) 37 (7): 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, J., G. Qu, and L. Wang. 2019. “Meaningful Innovation: Origin, Connotation and Enlightenment.” Studies in Science of Science (In Chinese) 37 (11): 261–270.
   Google Scholar
• Chu, E. 2023. “China’s Digital Economy: Full Steam Ahead.” HKTDC Research. Accessed Feburary 02, 2023. https://research.hktdc.com/en/article/MTI4OTE5MTYwMg.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, P., and L. Daniel. 2010. “Understanding Social Innovation: A Provisional Framework.” International Journal of Technology Management 51 (1): 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2010.033125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K. 2002. “Team Innovation and Team Effectiveness: The Importance of Minority Dissent and Reflexivity.” European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology 11 (3): 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320244000175.
   Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K. 2006. “Rational Self-Interest and Other Orientation in Organizational Behavior: A Critical Appraisal and Extension of Meglino and Korsgaard (2004).” The Journal of Applied Psychology 91 (6): 1245–1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K., B. A. Nijstad, M. Baas, and M. N. Bechtoldt. 2008. “The Creating Force of Minority Dissent: A Motivated Information Processing Perspective.” Social Influence 3 (4): 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510802341157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K., B. A. Nijstad, and D. van Knippenberg. 2008. “Motivated Information Processing in Group Judgment and Decision Making.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 12 (1): 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868307304092.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Dreu, C. K., and M. A. West. 2001. “Minority Dissent and Team Innovation: The Importance of Participation in Decision Making.” Journal of Applied Psychology 86 (6): 1191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., J. P. Connell, and R. M. Ryan. 1989. “Self-Determination in a Work Organization.” Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (4): 580. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., and R. Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7.
   Google Scholar
• den Ouden, E. 2012. “Meaningful Innovation.” In Innovation Design, edited by E. den Ouden, 61–96. London: Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2268-5_4.
   Google Scholar
• EU-Commission. 2016. This is European Social Innovation. Vol. 9. Belgium: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Gosling, S. D., P. J. Rentfrow, and W. B. Swann Jr. 2003. “A Very Brief Measure of the Big-Five Personality Domains.” Journal of Research in Personality 37 (6): 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, A. M. 2008a. “Does Intrinsic Motivation Fuel the Prosocial Fire? Motivational Synergy in Predicting Persistence, Performance, and Productivity.” Journal of Applied Psychology 93 (1): 48. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, A. M. 2008b. “The Significance of Task Significance: Job Performance Effects, Relational Mechanisms, and Boundary Conditions.” Journal of Applied Psychology 93 (1): 108. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, A. M., and J. W. Berry. 2011. “The Necessity of Others is the Mother of Invention: Intrinsic and Prosocial Motivations, Perspective Taking, and Creativity.” Academy of Management Journal 54 (1): 73–96. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.59215085.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graziano, W. G., M. M. Habashi, B. E. Sheese, and R. M. Tobin. 2007. “Agreeableness, Empathy, and Helping: A person× Situation Perspective.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93 (4): 583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haines, J. K. 2016. “Meaningful Innovation: Ethnographic Potential in the Startup and Venture Capital Spheres.” Paper presented at the Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, Minneapolis, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. 2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression- Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hinsz, V. B., R. Scott Tindale, and D. A. Vollrath. 1997. “The Emerging Conceptualization of Groups as Information Processors.” Psychological Bulletin 121 (1): 43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen, O., E. Van de Vliert, and C. Veenstra. 1999. “How Task and Person Conflict Shape the Role of Positive Interdependence in Management Teams.” Journal of Management 25 (2): 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarmai, K., and H. Vogel-Pöschl. 2020. “Meaningful Collaboration for Responsible Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (1): 138–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1633227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsuno, Y. 2018. “Meaningful Innovation in Corporate Activities from the Viewpoint of Financial Data.” Paper presented at the 2018 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Portland, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Mei, L., and J. Chen. 2015. “Responsible Innovation: Origin Attribution Interpretation and Theoretical Framework.” Management World (In Chinese) 263 (8): 39–57.
   Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F. 2016. “Social Innovation: Institutionally Embedded, Territorially (Re) Produced.” In Social Innovation and Territorial Development, edited by D. MacCallum, F. Moulaert, and J. Hillier, 27–40. London: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Moulaert, F., D. MacCallum, and J. Hillier. 2013. “Social innovation: intuition, precept, concept.” In The International Handbook on Social Innovation: Collective Action, Social Learning and Transdisciplinary Research, edited by F. Moulaert. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849809993.00011.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G. 2006. “The Process of Social Innovation.” Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization 1 (2): 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1162/itgg.2006.1.2.145.
   Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G., S. Tucker, R. Ali, and B. Sanders. 2007. “Social Innovation: What It Is, Why It Matters and How It Can Be Accelerated.” Working Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Mumford, M. D. 2002. “Social Innovation: ten Cases from Benjamin Franklin.” Creativity Research Journal 14 (2): 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1402_11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I. 1994. “A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation.” Organization Science 5 (1): 14–37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., and N. Konno. 1998. “The Concept of “Ba”: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation.” California Management Review 40 (3): 40–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., and H. Takeuchi. 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford university press.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., and R. Toyama. 2003. “The Knowledge-Creating Theory Revisited: Knowledge Creation as a Synthesizing Process.” Knowledge Management Research & Practice 1 (1): 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500001.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., and R. Toyama. 2015. “The Knowledge-Creating Theory Revisited: Knowledge Creation as a Synthesizing Process.” In The Essentials of Knowledge Management, 95–110. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137552105_4.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., R. Toyama, and N. Konno. 2000. “SECI, Ba and Leadership: A Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation.” Long Range Planning 33 (1): 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(99)00115-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., R. Toyama, and A. Nagata. 2000. “A Firm as a Knowledge-Creating Entity: A New Perspective on the Theory of the Firm.” Industrial and Corporate Change 9 (1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/9.1.1.
   Google Scholar
• Osburg, T. 2013. “Social Innovation to Drive Corporate Sustainability.” In Social Innovation, 13–22. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36540-9_2.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, R., P. Macnaghten, and J. Stilgoe. 2012. “Responsible Research and Innovation: From Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society.” Science & Public Policy 39 (6): 751–760. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penner, L. A., J. F. Dovidio, J. A. Piliavin, and D. A. Schroeder. 2005. “Prosocial Behavior: Multilevel Perspectives.” Annual Review of Psychology 56 (1): 365–392. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, J.-Y. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff. 2003. “Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies.” Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (5): 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher, K. J., and A. F. Hayes. 2008. “Contemporary Approaches to Assessing Mediation in Communication Research.” In The Sage Sourcebook of Advanced Data Analysis Methods for Communication Research, edited by A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater, and L. B. Snyder, 13–54. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Qu, G., J. Chen, and L. Wang. 2020. “Meaningful Innovation: A Coupling Framework Based on the Complex System Perspective.” Studies in Science of Science (In Chinese) 38 (11): 187–196.
   Google Scholar
• Qu, G., J. Chen, and L. Wang. 2021. “Innovation Meaning Asset: Origin, Strategic Value, and Enterprise Practice.” Studies in Science of Science (In Chinese) 39 (6): 162–170.
   Google Scholar
• Qu, G., Y. Jie, J. Chen, and L. Wang. 2022. “Meaningful Innovation: Conceptual Dimensions, Measurement, and Innovation Performance.” Management Review (In Chinese). https://doi.org/10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.20220426.001.
   Google Scholar
• Qu, G., L. Wang, and J. Chen. 2021. “Meaningful Innovation: Decision-Making Framework, Cognitive Basis, and Catch-Up Path.” Science of Science and Management of S&T (In Chinese) 42 (7): 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Roper, S., P. Vahter, and J. H. Love. 2013. “Externalities of Openness in Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1544–1554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., and E. L. Deci. 2000. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 25 (1): 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salancik, G. R., and J. Pfeffer. 1978. “A Social Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task Design.” Administrative Science Quarterly 23 (2): 224–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392563.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J., R. Owen, and P. Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tierney, P., S. M. Farmer, and G. B. Graen. 1999. “An Examination of Leadership and Employee Creativity: The Relevance of Traits and Relationships.” Personnel Psychology 52 (3): 591–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verganti, R. 2016. Overcrowded: Designing Meaningful Products in a World Awash with Ideas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262035361.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Von Schomberg, R. 2013. “A Vision of Responsible Research and Innovation.” In Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society, edited by R. Owen, J. Bessant, and M. Heintz, 51–74. London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, S. 2016. “Design for Meaningful Innovation.” In The Routledge Companion to Design Studies, edited by P. Sparke and F. Fisher, 395–408. Abindgon, Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Walther, J. B. 2008. “Social Information Processing Theory.” In Engaging Theories in Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives, edited by D. O. Braithwaite and P. Schrodt, 391. Los Angeles: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329529.n29.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, L., G. Qu, and J. Chen. 2022. “Towards a Meaningful Innovation Paradigm: Conceptual Framework and Practice of Leading World-Class Enterprise.” Chinese Management Studies 16 (4): 942–964. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-12-2020-0536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, M. 2000. “State of the Art: Creativity and Innovation at Work.” The Psychologist 13 (9): 460–464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, H. P. 2011. “The Dynamics of Social Innovation.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (Supplement 4): 21285–21291. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1100973108.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar