The Use of Autonomous Teams for Individual Vitality and Team Innovation: A 2-1-2 Multilevel Mediation Model in the Public Context

References

• Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. S. (1998). Interdependence and controversy in group decision making: Antecedents to effective self-managing teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2748
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. R., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. R., & West, M. A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational 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
• Atwater, L., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Leader-member exchange, feelings of energy, and involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.07.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauwens, R., Decramer, A., & Audenaert, M. (2021). Challenged by great expectations? Examining cross-level moderations and curvilinearity in the public sector job demands-resources model. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 41(2), 319–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekkers, V., Edelenbos, J., & Steijn, B., (2013). Innovation in the public sector: Linking capacity and leadership. Pelgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (1st ed., pp. 349–381). Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Borst, R. T. (2018). Work-related well-being of (semi-)public sector employees bringing in the job demands-resources model of work engagement [Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen]. Radboud Repository.
   Google Scholar
• Borst, R. T., Kruyen, P. M., & Lako, C. J. (2019). Exploring the job demands-resources model of work engagement in government: Bringing in a psychological perspective. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(3), 372–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17729870
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borst, R. T., Kruyen, P. M., Lako, C. J., & de Vries, M. S. (2020). The attitudinal, behavioral, and performance outcomes of work engagement: A comparative meta-analysis across the public, semipublic, and private Sector. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 40(4), 613–640. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X19840399
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Campion, M. A., Papper, E. M., & Medsker, G. J. (1996). Relations between work team characteristics and effectiveness: A replication and extension. Personnel Psychology, 49(2), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01806.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dackert, I. (2016). Creativity in teams: The impact of team members’ affective well-being and diversity. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 04(09), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2016.49003
   Google Scholar
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Team innovation and team effectiveness: The importance of minority dissent and reflexivity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11(3), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320244000175
   Google Scholar
• Dijkhoff, T. (2014). The Dutch Social Support Act in the shadow of the decentralization dream. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 36(3), 276–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2014.933590
   Google Scholar
• George, B., & Pandey, S. K. (2017). We know the yin-but where is the yang? Toward a balanced approach on common source bias in public administration scholarship. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(2), 245–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17698189
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoegl, M., & Parboteeah, P. (2006). Autonomy and teamwork in innovative projects. Human Resource Management, 45(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobsen, M. L. F., & Thrane, C. (2016). Public innovation and organizational structure: Searching (in vain) for the optimal design. In J. Torfing & P. Traintafillou (Eds.), Enhancing public innovation by transforming public governance, or vice versa? (pp. 217–236). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang, Y., & Chen, C. C. (2018). Integrating knowledge activities for team innovation: Effects of transformational leadership. Journal of Management, 44(5), 1819–1847. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316628641
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jongbloed, J. (2018). Higher education for happiness? Investigating the impact of education on the hedonic and eudaimonic well-being of Europeans. European Educational Research Journal, 17(5), 733–754. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904118770818
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jønsson, T., & Jeppesen, H. J. (2013). Under the influence of the team? An investigation of the relationships between team autonomy, individual autonomy and social influence within teams. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(1), 78–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.672448
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalliola, S. (2003). Self-designed teams in improving public sector performance and quality of working life. Public Performance & Management Review, 27(2), 110–122.
   Google Scholar
• Kark, R., & Carmeli, A. (2009). Alive and creating: The mediating role of vitality and aliveness in the relationship between psychological safety and creative work involvement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(6), 785–804. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.571
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaur, S., & Kaur, G. (2022). Human resource practices, employee competencies and firm performance: A 2-1-2 multilevel mediational analysis. Personnel Review, 51(3), 1100–1119. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2020-0609
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kooij, D. T. A. M., de Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., Kanfer, R., & Dikkers, J. S. E. (2011). Age and work-related motives: Results of a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 197–225. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.665
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krull, J. L., & Mackinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(2), 249–277. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3602_06
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahat, L., & Ofek, D. (2022). Emotional well-being among public employees: A comparative perspective. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 42(1), 31–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M. Y., & Edmondson, A. C. (2017). Self-managing organizations: Exploring the limits of less-hierarchical organizing. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37, 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luu, T. T., Rowley, C., Dinh, C. K., Qian, D., & Le, H. Q. (2019). Team creativity in public healthcare organizations: The roles of charismatic leadership, team job crafting, and collective public service motivation. Public Performance & Management Review, 42(6), 1448–1480. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2019.1595067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magpili, N. C., & Pazos, P. (2018). Self-managing team performance: A systematic review of multilevel input factors. Small Group Research, 49(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496417710500
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxwell, S. E., & Cole, D. A. (2007). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 23–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxwell, S. E., Cole, D. A., & Mitchell, M. A. (2011). Bias in cross-sectional analyses of longitudinal mediation: Partial and complete mediation under an autoregressive model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(5), 816–841.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijer, A. J. (2014). From hero-innovators to distributed heroism: An in-depth analysis of the role of individuals in public sector innovation. Public Management Review, 16(2), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.806575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijer, A. J., & Thaens, M. (2021). The dark side of public innovation. Public Performance & Management Review, 44(1), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1782954
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, R. J., & Boyle, B. (2019). Inspirational leadership, positive mood, and team innovation: A moderated mediation investigation into the pivotal role of professional salience. Human Resource Management, 58(3), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21951
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 677–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogbonnaya, C., & Valizade, D. (2018). High performance work practices, employee outcomes and organizational performance: A 2-1-2 multilevel mediation analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(2), 239–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1146320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P., & Brown, K. (2012). Managing change and innovation in public service organizations. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Padgett, R. N., & Morgan, G. B. (2021). Multilevel CFA with ordered categorical data: A simulation study comparing fit indices across robust estimation methods. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 28(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2020.1759426
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potipiroon, W., & Faerman, S. (2020). Tired from working hard? Examining the effect of prganizational ctizenship behavior on emotional exhaustion and the buffering roles of public service motivation and perceived supervisor support. Public Performance & Management Review, 43(6), 1260–1291. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2020.1742168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2011). Alternative methods for assessing mediation in multilevel data: The advantages of multilevel SEM. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(2), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2011.557329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rangus, K., & Slavec, A. (2017). The interplay of decentralization, employee involvement and absorptive capacity on firms’ innovation and business performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 120, 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.12.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. E., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). University of Rochester Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Work and organizations: Promoting wellness and productivity. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development and wellness (pp. 532–560). The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., Nix, G. A., & Manly, J. B. (1999). Revitalization through self-regulation: The effects of autonomous and controlled motivation on happiness and vitality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 266–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65(3), 529–565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2003). Voorlopige handleiding Utrechtse bevlogenheidschaal (UBES)[Preliminary manual Utrecht Engagement Scale (UBES)]. Utrecht University.
   Google Scholar
• Silva, B. C., Bosancianu, C. M., & Littvay, L. (2019). Multilevel structural equation modeling. SAGE Publications Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Tummers, L., Kruyen, P. M., Vijverberg, D. M., & Voesenek, T. J. (2015). Connecting HRM and change management: The importance of proactivity and vitality. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(4), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tummers, L., Steijn, B., Nevicka, B., & Heerema, M. (2018). The effects of leadership and job autonomy on vitality: Survey and experimental evidence. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(3), 355–377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uhl-Bien, M., & Graen, G. B. (1998). Individual self-management: Analysis of professionals’ self-managing activities in functional and cross-functional work teams. Academy of Management, 41(3), 340–350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Voet, J., & Steijn, B. (2021). Team innovation through collaboration: How visionary leadership spurs innovation via team cohesion. Public Management Review, 23(9), 1275–1294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Mierlo, H., Rutte, C. G., Vermunt, J. K., Kompier, M. A. J., & Doorewaard, J. A. C. M. (2006). Individual autonomy in work teams: The role of team autonomy, self-efficacy, and social support. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(3), 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320500412249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Mierlo, H., Rutte, C. G., Vermunt, J. K., Kompier, M. A. J., & Doorewaard, J. A. C. M. (2007). A multi-level mediation model of the relationships between team autonomy, individual task design and psychological well-being. The British Psychological Society, 80, 647–664.
   Google Scholar
• Vermeeren, B. (2014). Variability in HRM implementation among line managers and its effect on performance: A 2-1-2 mediational multilevel approach. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(22), 3039–3059. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.934891
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, R., Sawhney, M., & Chen, J. (2019). Public service innovation: A typology. Public Management Review, 22(11), 1674–1698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter, F., & van der Vegt, G. S. (2013). Harnessing members’ positive mood for team-directed learning behaviour and team innovation: The moderating role of perceived team feedback. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(2), 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.660748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(3), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00521.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, M. A. (2003). Innovation implementation in work teams. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 245–276). Oxford Scholarship Online.
   Google Scholar
• Witter, R. A., Okun, M. A., Stock, W. A., & Haring, M. J. (1984). Education and subjective well-being: A meta-analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6(2), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737006002165
   Google Scholar
• Woehr, D. J., Loignon, A. C., Schmidt, P. B., Loughry, M. L., & Ohland, M. W. (2015). Justifying aggregation with consensus-based constructs: A review and examination of cutoff values for common aggregation indices. Organizational Research Methods, 18(4), 704–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115582090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynen, J., Verhoest, K., & Rübecksen, K. (2014). Decentralization in public sector organizations. Do organizational autonomy and result control lead to decentralization toward lower hierarchical levels? Public Performance & Management Review, 37(3), 496–520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeh, S.-T., & Walter, Z. (2016). Determinants of service innovation in academic libraries through the lens of disruptive innovation. College & Research Libraries, 77(6), 795–804. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.77.6.795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zijl, A. L., Vermeeren, B., Koster, F., & Steijn, B. (2019). Towards sustainable local welfare systems: The effects of functional heterogeneity and team autonomy on team processes in Dutch neighbourhood teams. Health & Social Care in the Community, 27(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12604
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar