the effects of employees’ perception of high involvement
Post on 12-May-2022
7 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
The effects of employees’ perception of high involvement work
practices and country on intrapreneurial behavior
Author: Nathalie Pingel
SNR: 2033268
Institute Tilburg University
Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Master Human Resource Studies
Supervisor Dr. W. M. M. Altink-van den Berg
Dr. B. Kroon
Project period March 2019 - January 2020
Project theme Intrapreneurship
2
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Abstract
In a fast changing market, organizations need to generate new ideas quickly to maintain
competitive advantage. In order to do so, the focus has shifted on the employee to show
intrapreneurial behavior. One way to foster this behavior is by implementing HR practices
signaling the desired behavior. However, using a bundle of HR practices to foster intrapreneurial
behavior has remained a relatively underdeveloped topic in literature. Therefore this paper strived
to investigate the relation between high involvement work practices (HIWPs) and intrapreneurial
behavior. In addition, the differences of the effects of HIWPs and IB between two countries
Germany and the Netherlands were investigated. This paper draws on the social exchange theory,
expectancy theory and the institutional and sociocultural theory to test the model. This paper
found that HIWPs indeed predict the intrapreneurial behavior of employees and that this effect
differs by country. Not all individual practices were found to have an impact on intrapreneurial
behavior and results showed that it is better to focus on practices that do have an impact rather
than implementing a bundle of practices.
Keywords: Intrapreneurship, Intrapreneurial behavior, Innovation, Human capital, HR
practices, High involvement work practices, Country
3
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
1. Introduction
Due to the fast-changing world, the competitive environment and the need to adapt
processes quickly, firms have been looking for ways to maintain competitive advantage (Blanka,
2018). Human capital is often seen as the potential and available source for added value and long-
term investment (Wunderer, 2001). Owning human capital that is equipped with information and
knowledge and has the opportunity to participate in decision making can lead to the creation of
competitive advantage and innovation. Particular interest has therefore turned towards fostering
innovative behavior under the umbrella term of intrapreneurship. It stands for actions initiated by
employees undertaking new and profitable business activities within their organization such as
generating new products or processes (Bosma et al., 2010; Parker, 2011). Intrapreneurial
behavior (IB) is supposed to positively influence renewal, innovation, risk taking and
organizational growth which are all key components for organizational success and performance
in today’s world (Veenker et al., 2008; Edú Valsania et al., 2016).
It has been said that the lack of IB within German organizations is the reason for Germany
staying behind and losing its advantage in the global market (Prange, 2016). In order to enhance
IB and therefore to generate new ideas within an organization, a supportive environment needs to
be created. Previous research has examined factors that may affect the tendency of individuals to
engage in intrapreneurial activities. These include human resources (HR) practices and situational
factors such as the contextual environment (Stull & Singh, 2005). In regards to this, an increasing
interest has turned towards the contribution of HR practices to encourage and foster the desired
behaviors to enhance organizational performance and innovation (Hayton et al., 2002). However,
up to now, studies have mainly focused on isolated HR practices as antecedents to IB rather than
a set of HR practices, for instance the High Involvement Work Practices (HIWPs) (Ma Prieto &
Pilar Pérez-Santana, 2014). HIWPs refer to a bundle of practices seeking to increase
4
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
organizational performance by motivating employees, enhancing their skills, empowering
employees in decision making and sharing information (Rana, 2015). However, research has
shown that HR practices might be perceived differently and need to be adapted to the
environment. Therefore, this study includes Germany and the Netherlands to assess the
universality of the HIWPs and their influence on IB and how the variable country might affect
HIWPs and IB in the first place. Both countries have been chosen as the Netherlands have shown
a higher score of IB than Germany while showing similar patterns in social and economic
characteristics (Hemerijck, et al., 2000; Bosma et al., 2016).
In order to gain deeper insights on how to encourage IB within employees to support
organizations in the competitive market, this research aims to answer the following research
questions. What is the effect of high involvement work practices on intrapreneurial behavior of
employees? And to what extent does the country affect the work practices or intrapreneurial
behavior? Can a difference between Germany and the Netherlands be portrayed?
From a theoretical perspective, the contribution of this research is to firstly, gain deeper
insights on the direct relationship between (combined) HIWPs and IB; and secondly, to see
whether contextual factors such as the country can have an effect on those variables. For this
purpose we look at the social exchange theory to address the link between HR practices and IB.
2. Theoretical background
The overarching theory behind this research is based on HIWPs. HIWPs have been found
to positively influence behaviors such as employee engagement and enhanced performance
(Konrad, 2006). Lawler and colleagues (1986) found four principles that ensure the efficiency of
HIWPs: the power to make decisions, trainings to enhance knowledge and skills, shared
information across the unit and appropriate rewards. Positive outcomes such as enhanced
5
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
performance can be explained with the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) which states that
employees who perceive a supportive environment will act proactively and innovatively to
further benefit the organization (Podsakoff & MacKenzie, 1997). Furthermore it can be argued
that, HIWPs and IB are influenced by the country that the organization and employees are
situated in. This can be explained by the institutional and sociocultural theory (see 2.3).
2.1 Intrapreneurial behavior
Intrapreneurship can be defined as actions initiated by employees to undertake new and
profitable business activities within organizations such as the development of new products or
services (Bosma et al., 2010). In previous research, different kinds of definitions of
intrapreneurship have been recognized. The common underlying theme of all forms of
intrapreneurship is innovation and its use to generate competitive advantage (Heinonen &
Korvela, 2003). Several studies have shown that intrapreneurial behavior (IB) is positively
associated with organizational performance and growth. Even though intrapreneurship seems to
be beneficial for the organization, ―the decision to opt for intrapreneurship remains an individual
and personal decision as this is unlikely to be a part of a standard job description‖ (Rigtering &
Weitzel, 2013, p. 8). Therefore, organizations need an environment that encourages and
facilitates IB. Previous research has examined factors that affect the tendency of individuals to
engage in intrapreneurial activities. These include resources such as human resources practices
and situational factors including the contextual environment (Stull & Singh, 2005).
In this study, the definition of intrapreneurship follows the definition commonly used in
literature and is defined as the multidimensional overarching concept consisting of three
behavioral dimensions performed by individuals: risk-taking, innovation and proactiveness
(Miller, 1983; Stull & Singh, 2005; Edú Valsania et al., 2016). Firstly, risk-taking is defined as
6
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
behaviors and actions which break established orders and process without knowing what the
outcome will look like (Covin & Slevin, 1991; Preenen et al., 2014). Secondly, innovation refers
to the employees experimenting and developing new concepts, services or processes (Edú
Valsania et al., 2016). Lastly, proactiveness reflects the process of acting in anticipation of future
challenges, needs or changes that may lead to new opportunities (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). The
current research has not yet defined whether all sub dimensions need to be present in order to
show IB. Therefore, for our study we adhere to the definition by Miller (1983) that IB combines
all three sub dimensions, this means that only the sum score of all three individual dimensions is
of interest. This indicates that two dimensions may show high scores while the third shows a low
score, this behavior is still considered IB.
2.2 HIWPs and IB
In recent years a growing interest towards HR practices as an antecedent to
intrapreneurship has evolved as it has been argued that intrapreneurship can occur when HR
practices are coordinated accordingly (Özdemirci & Behram, 2014). Following previous research
based on the theory of the resource-based view of the firm (RBV) (Barney, 1991), human capital
is an important asset and factor in creating and sustaining competitive advantage by showing
innovative behavior (Ma Prieto & Pilar Pérez-Santana, 2014). The RBV considers internal
resources which are valuable, rare, costly to imitate and non-substitutable to be the reason for
competitive advantage. Therefore, human capital is often seen as a potential source for added
value and long-term investment (Wunderer, 2001). Consequently, human resource practices are
the primary means by which organizations can influence and shape the skills, attitudes, and
behavior of individuals to achieve organizational goals (Chen & Huang, 2009). The RBV
indicates that organizations should invest in their employees; however, employees also need to
7
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
acknowledge the effort of their employer. This link is grounded in the social exchange theory
first proposed by Blau (1964). It states that employees perceive HR practices as signals of their
organization showing which behaviors are valued and employees will act according to that.
Moreover, Jackson et al. (1989) introduced a framework that links the organizations competitive
strategy with the HR strategy. It refers to the rationale that different employee role behaviors can
be achieved by a different set of HR practices (Camps & Luna-Arocas, 2009). Therefore, in order
to create an environment that encourages IB, research proposed to introduce a specialized human
resource management (HRM) system to aid and stimulate the stated characteristics (Twomey &
Harris, 2000; Özdemirci & Behram, 2014; Morris & Jones, 1993).
In line with this, researchers such as Schuler (1986) argue that intrapreneurship can be
impelled by creating a consistent set of particular HRM practices. Furthermore, authors such as
Hayton (2003) argue that IB is also an indicator of the effectiveness of a firm’s HRM practices
(Castrogiovanni et al., 2011). To foster innovative behavior and enhance performance within the
organization it is essential to understand that employees perform well when they are able to do so
(training possibilities and shared information), they have the motivation to do so (incentive
systems) and have been provided with the opportunities (employee participation) (Ma Prieto &
Pilar Pérez-Santana, 2014). These principles are grounded in the theory of the HIWPs established
by Lawler (1986) and parallel the rationale of the AMO framework initially proposed by Bailey
(1993). The AMO theory suggests that organizational interests are realized best by practices that
aim at employees’ ability, motivation and opportunity. In regards to this, the abilities are reflected
in the trainings and shared information, the motivation is reflected by compensation and
opportunity is reflected by employee participation and general work.
HIWPs are conceptualized as a set of interconnected and synergistic HR practices which
select, develop, retain and motivate the human capital to encourage collective behaviors towards
8
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
achieving organizational goals (Camps & Luna-Arocas, 2009; Ma Prieto & Pilar Pérez-Santana,
2014). These consist of: compensation practices, trainings, employee participation in decisions
and shared information across the organization. The individual variables are seen as mutually
reinforcing as these HIWPs empower workers to make decisions, enhance the information and
knowledge to do so and lastly reward them (Boxal & Macky, 2009). Guthrie (2001) argues that
especially organizations that are looking to improve their performance and productivity should
opt for HIWPs. Focusing on HIWPs instead of individual practices and using the synergies of
combining practices could be a turning point for the performance of organizations and lead to
more positive results (Ma Prieto & Pilar Pérez-Santana, 2014).
The current state of research shows that HIWPs are mostly associated with employee
engagement and enhanced performance, but have not been tested to influence IB. Only individual
practices such as compensation and training have been shown to positively influence IB (Kuratko
et al., 1990; Schuler, 1986; Castrogiovann et al., 2011). The central idea behind our research is
based on the social exchange theory so that employees, who perceive that they are fairly
compensated, get offered training programs, are able to participate in the organization and receive
sufficient information will repay the organization with showing IB. Furthermore, employees
show more IB when they are content with all practices. However, employees may perceive HR
practices differently to what was intended, because individuals have been found to apply different
schemas in processing information related to HR (Wright & Nishii, 2013; Bos-Nehles &
Veenendaal, 2019). In this study, HIWPs are defined as proposed by Lawler consisting of
compensation, training, employee participation and information sharing.
H1 = The more positively perceived all HIWPs (compensation, training, information
sharing, employee participation) are, the more employees will show intrapreneurial behavior.
9
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
In this research, we also consider the impact of individual HR practices to see if they have
a greater impact on IB than the bundle of HIWPs. The individual practices are described in the
following.
2.2.1 Compensation and IB
The influence of compensation practices on employee behavior has received the most
attention in research to date. Compensation is defined as providing monetary value to workers in
exchange for work performance. The compensation package is designed by each organization to
fit their strategy and the needs of their employees. For organizations, providing performance
oriented incentive compensation is the primary source to enhance employee motivation and
attract new employees (Delaney & Huselid, 1996). Chen and Huang (2009) showed that
recognizing individual and team accomplishments with compensation systems encourages
innovation and based on the social exchange theory, individuals may put more effort into their
behavior and activities if the compensation rewards the contribution adequately. The individual
perception of fair compensation therefore might lead to a sense of obligation to provide the
individual knowledge and show the desired behavior (Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal, 2019).
Moreover, researchers such as Hayton (2005) have pointed out that in order to encourage risk
taking, pay levels should be higher than average (Balkin et al., 2000). Following this approach,
more studies have shown that a compensation system can have an impact on innovative behavior
(Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal, 2019; Bysted & Jespersen, 2014). However, the research is mixed as
some researchers were able to find a negative effect of compensation (Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal,
2019). On the other hand, a study conducted in 1992 showed that employees ranked good wages
as the most important factor as a job reward (Wiley, 1997).
10
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
In sum, compensation can either lead to increased IB or discourage IB by rewarding other
behaviors or not rewarding on appropriate levels (Madu & Urban, 2014). Nevertheless, here we
hypothesize that contentment with compensation can positively influence IB.
H2 = The more satisfied employees are with their compensation; the more employees will
show intrapreneurial behavior.
2.2.2 Training and IB
In order to promote IB within employees, organizations can guide their human capital
towards this behavior. This can be accomplished by constructing training practices to further
evolve the individuals’ competences and show possibilities to be innovative within the
organization (Kuratko et al., 1990; Castrogiovanni et al., 2011). Training is defined as official
and ongoing education activities within organizations designed to enhance employees’
performance (BusinessDictionary, 2019).
Following the social exchange theory, employees which are offered and experiencing
trainings can perceive them as an organization’s commitment towards their employees.
Accordingly, they subconsciously feel the need to reciprocate this behavior even though they
might not get formally rewarded (Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal, 2019). Furthermore, providing
training opportunities for employees will signal that the organization considers the employees to
be valuable and is willing to further invest in their development (Tremblay et al., 2010).
Moreover, in a fast changing world, training opportunities can be crucial for employees to adapt
to changing job demands and new technology and being able to respond to new challenges in
order to have the ability to stay innovative. Furthermore, these programs may include and further
promote characteristics that are vital for IB such as acceptance of change and the willingness to
take risks (Morris & Jones, 1993).
11
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
However, evidence of the actual influence of training practices on innovative behavior has
been mixed as some researchers were unable to find a significant effect (Bos-Nehles &
Veenendaal, 2019. Nevertheless, based on social exchange arguments employees who perceive
training opportunities can be expected to understand this as an investment in themselves and the
need to show the desired behavior to bring value to the organization (Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal,
2019).
H3 = The more satisfied employees are with their training; the more employees will show
intrapreneurial behavior.
2.2.3 Employee participation and IB
Employee participation is defined as a process in which decision making and influencing
is shared among all members of an organization who are hierarchically unequal through
participative management techniques (Locke & Schweiger, 1979). It is argued that employees are
more likely to contribute to the organizations success, if they have the opportunity to participate
in decision making. This assumption is based on the expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964). This
theory states that an individual's motivation to increase his or her efforts depends on the outcome
and rewards of the selected behavior. Empowerment through employee participation is an
enabling process for employees to set higher performance goals (Conger & Kanungo, 1988).
Outcomes of employee participation therefore may include higher job satisfaction, higher
productivity levels and employee engagement (Bhatti & Qureshi, 2007).
Coch and French (1948) first studied employee participation in the workplace and
developed a model based on the idea that there is a direct link between employee involvement
and positive outcomes such as for example job satisfaction or productivity. Following this
approach, a study conducted by Rigtering and Weitzel (2013) suggests that high levels of
12
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
participation gives employees control over their job as well as autonomy in the job which is
essential to perform IB. They were also able to find positive effects of employee participation on
innovative behavior. Bhatti and Qureshi (2007) argue that the most effective way to improve
organizational outcomes is to strive for shared goals between the employees and managers. This
can be achieved by encouraging workers to input suggestions for developing the vision and
mission of the organization, policies and practices which will result in improved communication
and satisfaction. The relation between IB and employee participation has yet to find a lot of
interest in literature, however, from the theoretical background and few findings it can be
hypothesized that participation opportunities can lead to IB.
H4 = The more satisfied employees are with their participation opportunities; the more
employees will show intrapreneurial behavior.
2.2.4 Information sharing and IB
Information sharing is defined as the process of adapting and formatting all types of
knowledge to make it accessible and comprehensible to all members of the organization (Haase
et al., 2014). Information in general is created by individuals and sharing is the progress of
transforming individual knowledge into organizational knowledge (Akhavan et al., 2015). The
sharing of organizational information and therefore open and transparent communication within
organizations has been found to be beneficial for innovation (Qin et al., 2012). In this research,
the focus is on information about and within the organization. The information is shared between
the top management and employees to ensure that employees are motivated to contribute
effectively to the organizations success (Konrad, 2006).
According to the organizational knowledge-creation theory, employees who are exposed to
new information through colleagues or the organization are more likely to reflect on their own
13
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
practices while enhancing creativity to find new ways to work (Li & Sandino, 2018).
Furthermore, information sharing quality and quantity enables the transfer of knowledge and
information from individuals to the collective resulting in many benefits such as higher
competency overall by providing relevant data and active participation (Bontis et al., 2011;
Konrad, 2006; Franke & Shah, 2003; Chan, 2014). When managers share information more
transparently, employees are able to see the link between their actions and the performance of the
organization and can contribute to the organizations success more effectively (Konrad, 2006).
Even though there is only little research on the relation of IB and information sharing, several
studies were able to find a positive effect of information sharing on innovative behavior
(Akhavan et al., 2015; Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal, 2017; Yu et al., 2013). It can be expected that
high satisfaction with information sharing leads to higher levels of IB, because sharing is
supposed to stimulate support and may therefore lead to the willingness of employees to
contribute to the organizational goals.
H5 = The more satisfied employees are with the level of information sharing in their
organization; the more employees will show intrapreneurial behavior.
2.3 Country and IB
The tendency of certain countries to put forth entrepreneurs has been the start for
researchers to view countries as a determinant of intrapreneurship. A study by Shane et al. (1991)
showed that factors leading to new venture creations were determined by an interaction of gender
as well as nationality. Vygotsky, a soviet psychologist, has played an important role in
determining the variables that influence human behavior and actions. According to his
sociocultural theory the larger sociocultural context is viewed as a determinant of
entrepreneurship (Amit et al., 1993).
14
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Up to now, researchers have mainly ignored the influence of situational and contextual
factors such as the country on employee behavior. However, related research confirms an effect
of national culture on innovation and entrepreneurship (Sun, 2009; Waarts & Van Everdingen,
2005). This is grounded in the idea that national culture influences the organizational culture
which in turn influences the behavior of employees (Stephan & Uhlaner, 2010). A study by
Shane (1993) focused on cultural influences on national rates of innovation showed that nations
differ in their rates of innovation because of the cultural values of their citizens. For instance,
innovation rates are closely associated with uncertainty acceptance, lack of power distance and
lack of individualism. In these dimensions, Germany and the Netherlands show similar scores in
Power Distance (Germany: 35 out of 100 points; Netherlands: 38/100), but slight differences in
Individualism (Germany: 67/100; Netherlands: 80/100) and uncertainty avoidance (Germany:
65/100; Netherlands 53/100). Therefore, if organizations or countries wish to increase the
innovation rate, they need to change the attitudes of their employees or citizens. Furthermore,
Mueller and Thomas (2001) found that various cultures motivate individuals in different ways to
show certain behaviors which can be considered to influence IB. As mentioned before, Bosma et
al. (2016) have found that the IB is higher in the Netherlands compared to Germany (N: 5.4
percent, G: 3.5 percent). Even though there might be other factors playing a role in fostering IB,
the environment certainly has been found to play an important role.
H6 = Dutch employees show more intrapreneurial behavior than German employees.
2.4 Country and HIWPs
The relationship between country and HIWPs is based on the institutional theory.
According to the institutional theory, organizations are influenced by the societies in which they
operate in (Shane, 1993). The main idea of the institutional theory is that countries differ in their
15
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
institutional characteristics and the individual organizational practices reflect this environment.
The institutional environment is composed of various types of institutions and can be
characterized by three pillars: regulatory reflecting laws and rules, cognitive reflecting society’s
shared social knowledge and normative reflecting the values and norms. The practices employed
by organizations are shaped by the institutional environment to fit the individual needs and
structures of the organization (Kostova, 1999).
In the light of globalization, HRM has evolved from a support function to a strategic
partner and is increasingly viewed as an essential component of the organization's overall
strategy. Some researchers even say that the HR department is the glue to keep the organization
together (Pudelko & Harzing, 2007). When looking closer at the individual HRM practices,
Newman and Nollen (1996) found that HRM and practices differ by national culture. Moreover,
Lockwood (2007) found that different countries focus on different HR practices that are
considered important. This is due to cultural idiosyncrasy, governmental regulations and policies,
cultural values or different managerial practices (Salk & Brannen, 2000; Boxall & Steeneveld,
1999; Ahmad & Schroeder; 2003).
In recent years a lot of research has looked at different HRM models in different countries
(Pudelko & Harzing, 2007; Brewster et al., 2007; Lazarova et al., 2008). For example, the
CRANET survey collects data from a wide range of countries on HRM. The data set from 2005
looks at the HR operating costs, which are 64% in the Netherlands and 41% in Germany of the
total operating costs. It also looks at the amount of money spent on training showing that German
organizations spent 2.26% of the annual payroll costs on training and development while Dutch
organizations spent 3.09%. When comparing the two countries based on the HR costs, it becomes
clear that Dutch organizations spend more money on their employees than German organization
16
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
do. It can be hypothesized that less investments in HR practices will show in less satisfaction of
HR practices and that more investments will lead to more satisfaction.
Stated research shows differences between countries in the role of the HR Department and
the implemented practices which will show in the satisfaction of the HR practices by employees
and the conducted IB.
H7 = German employees are less satisfied with their HIWPs than Dutch employees.
H8= The difference between the Netherlands and Germany in intrapreneurial behavior is
partially related to higher levels of satisfaction of HIWPs in the Netherlands as compared to in
Germany.
Fig. 1: Conceptual model
17
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
3. Methodology
In this section the methodological framework of the research is described by providing
information about the research design, research sample, instruments procedure and the analysis.
3.1 Research design
The collected data used in this research was part of a bigger explanatory investigation on
intrapreneurship. For the collection of data, a survey was used that measures various constructs.
This study was conducted as a quantitative study using and testing the research model as the
foundation.
3.2 Sampling method and survey
The target group of the study was employees over 18 year’s old working in an
organization for 12+ hours a week in Germany and the Netherlands; this excludes entrepreneurs
and freelancers. The intended number of respondents was 138. This number was based on a
confidence interval of 95 percent, a margin error of 5 percent and a medium effect size of 0.15
recommended by literature (Dattalo, 2008; Cunningham & McCrum-Gardner, 2007). The sample
size was calculated by the software G*Power, which is a statistical power analysis tool created by
researchers at Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf and often mentioned in literature, using the a
priori analysis to compute the necessary sample size (Cunningham & McCrum-Gardner, 2007).
The survey was available in English, German and Dutch and based on either validated
translated scales or a back translation with an official translator to ensure full comprehension and
understanding. Back-translation is a three-step process in which the original survey was
translated from English to the target languages German and Dutch and then back translated by a
different translator. Both English versions were then compared. To ensure a high standard of
18
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
translation, researchers need to be aware of cultural differences which might change the essential
meaning of words and phrases (Maxwell, 1996). To minimize this problem several outsiders and
an official translator looked over the German and Dutch translations and made comments or
adaptations to ensure understandability and flow of the sentences.
For time and cost efficiency reasons, we used availability sampling, also known as
convenience sampling, to reach the intended number of participants (Skowronek & Duerr, 2009).
Availability sampling is a non-probabilistic sampling method in which participants are chosen
because of their accessibility to the researcher (Dattalo, 2008; Skowronek & Duerr, 2009).
However, this method runs the risk of being biased due to the possibility that people willing to
participate may differ from a representative sample of the population (Kitchenham & Pfleeger,
2002; Fricker, 2008). Accordingly, drawing strong inferences must be considered carefully.
3.3 Procedure
To carry out the research, five students from Tilburg University collected data by using an
online survey on Qualtrics. A web-based survey was chosen as it performs faster at a lower cost
than traditional approaches such as personal interviews (Heiervang & Goodman, 2011). The
survey consisted of 87 items. The questionnaire was distributed on social and business networks
by a link which redirected the participants to the survey on Qualtrics. On the website participants
first read a letter of consent with information regarding instructions, estimated time,
confidentiality and anonymity. The latter was guaranteed since the questionnaire did not collect
any identifying or personal information of the participant. For further questions or interest in the
research, participants could reach out by sending an email or visiting our website.
In order to address the research questions and to test the hypotheses, the collected data
was analyzed with IBM’s Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 24. First, the
19
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
dataset was checked for values out of range or missing. In the last case, the missing values were
coded as ―99‖. After that, variables that were coded the wrong way will be recoded. Then, data
was checked for homoscedasticity and multicollinearity. After this the preliminary analysis was
conducted.
Before any measurement instruments can be used for research, their reliability and
validity must be ensured (Koo & Li, 2015). Reliability or internal consistency is measured by
running the Cronbach's alpha test in SPSS. A scale is considered acceptable when Cronbach’s
alpha of the scale exceeded the number of .70.
All scales were examined separately in a factor analysis. A principal component analysis
(PCA) was used to identify clusters of items of our survey as well as to measure construct
validity. Prior to the PCA, we determined the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) which should be close
to 1.0 and excel .6 indicating that the correlation matrix was adequate for conducting factor
analysis (Remijn et al., 2014). A PCA was conducted for IB to ensure that a one factor solution
was adequate.
Then, means and standard deviation were computed and the correlations matrix presented
in order to examine multicollinearity. Multicollinearity can be ruled out if it is under the
threshold of .90.
After the preliminary analysis, the hypotheses were tested. To test the effects of
antecedents on IB, a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted. For this, all individual
HR practices were entered block wise. We chose to do a block wise regression first to check the
effects of all antecedents rather than having variables excluded in a stepwise regression. In a
second step, a new linear regression analysis with HIWPs was conducted. This had to be done in
a second step, because HIWPs consists of the four HR practices and therefore would measure the
same thing. Both regression analyses were run three times: once for the whole sample, the once
20
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
for the Germany sample and once for the Dutch sample. Hypotheses 1 to 5 were supported if a
direct, significant and positive effect was found. After this, we further looked into the effect of
country on the individual constructs. In order to test hypotheses 6a and 6b, a linear regression and
an independent samples t-test was conducted to check the effect of country on IB. Hypotheses 6a
and 6b were supported if a direct and significant effect was found and Dutch employees showed
higher IB. For hypotheses 7a and 7b a linear regression analysis with country as an independent
variable and the individual HR practices as well as HIWPs as dependent variables were entered
and an independent samples t-test is conducted. Hypotheses 7a and 7b were supported if a direct
and significant effect was found and Dutch employees showed higher satisfaction with their
HIWPs. In order to test hypothesis 8, a partial correlation analysis was conducted to test the
strength of the relationship between HIWPs and IB while controlling for country. The hypothesis
was supported, if a significant effect was found with and without controlling for country.
3.4 Measures
Intrapreneurial behavior was measured using a 15-item scale developed by Stull and
Singh (2005). This scale has been used and validated in previous studies (Wakkee et al., 2008;
Moriano et al., 2009). It uses the definition of intrapreneurship defined as the multidimensional
overarching concept consisting of three behavioral dimensions: risk-taking, innovation and
proactiveness (Miller, 1983). Each dimension was measured with five items on a five-point-
Likert scale (1=‖disagree strongly‖ to 5=‖agree strongly‖). A sample item was ―I generate useful
ideas‖. The KMO measure verified the sampling adequacy for the analysis, KMO = .83 and all
KMO values for individual items were > .63, which is above the acceptable limit of .6. The
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity (χ2 (105) = 1383.99, p < .05), was significant, indicating that
variables correlated highly enough to provide a reasonable basis for factor analysis. An initial
21
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
analysis was run to obtain eigenvalues for each component in the data (see Appendix B). Four
components had eigenvalues over Kaiser’s criterion of 1 and the combination explained 58.29
percent of the variance. Creating one factor accounted for 30.64 percent of the variance
indicating that the scale cannot be considered as one-dimensional as the explained variance was
lower than .40 (van Veldhoven, & Broersen, 2003). Considering the scree plot and the results of
the component matrix, a one factor solution was suitable for further research. Following the
approach proposed by literature, a one factor solution labeled ―Intrapreneurial Behavior‖ was
created as a sum score of the 15 individual items. However, two items did not load on the one
factor solution, but since more than 10 items loaded higher than .40 and the sample size exceeds
300, the interpretability was ensured (Klopp, 2012) (see Appendix B). A high score stood for
high IB.
Furthermore, the scale has been found to have high internal consistency as Cronbach's
alpha was .80 which is comparable with previous research showing a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.76
(Stull & Singh, 2005).
HIWPs were defined as a set of interconnected and synergistic HR practices consisting of
compensation practices, trainings, employee participation and shared information across the
organization. To measure HIWPs parts of a scale developed by Boselie et al. (2001) measuring
the four individual constructs were used. This scale has been used by other researchers and was
found to have a high reliability (Veenendaal & Bondarouk, 2015; Pons et al., 2016).
Each of the items was measured in terms of the perception of the extent to which a certain
HR practice took place within the organization. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from
1=‖disagree strongly‖ to 5 = ―strongly agree‖ was used. The KMO measure verified the sampling
adequacy for the analysis, KMO = .68, and all KMO values for individual items were < .69
22
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
except Compensation which was .49. The Bartlett's Test (χ2 (105) = 156.56, p < .05), was
significant. Creating one factor accounts for 47.65 percent of the variance. Following the
approach proposed by literature, a one factor solution labeled ―HIWPs‖ was created as a sum
score of the 16 individual items with Cronbach’s alpha being .61 even though one item
(compensation) did not load on this factor. A high score stood for high satisfaction with the HR
practices.
Compensation is represented by three items with a sample item being ―I am not getting
underpaid for my work‖. KMO measure of sampling adequacy was .683, and Bartlett’s Test was
significant (χ2 (3) = 205.58, p < .05). One component had an eigenvalue over 1 (1.96) explaining
65.59 percent of the variance. Cronbach’s alpha was .73 which is similar to previous research
showing high internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of .72 (Boselie et al., 2001).
Training and development is represented by three items with a sample item being ―I get
enough opportunities to attend skill trainings for improvement of current function‖. KMO
measure of sampling adequacy was .63, and Bartlett’s Test was significant (χ2 (3) = 429.37, p <
.05). One component had an eigenvalue over 1 (2.22) explaining 74.28 percent of the variance.
Cronbach’s alpha was .82 which was higher than in previous research showing a Cronbach’s
alpha of .71 (Boselie et al., 2001).
Employee participation is measured by four items with a sample item being ―Management
is willing to do something with my recommendations‖. KMO measure of sampling adequacy was
.80, and Bartlett’s Test was significant (χ2 (6) = 426.32, p < .05). One component had an
eigenvalue over 1 (2.59) explaining 64.93 percent of the variance. Cronbach’s alpha was .81
23
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
which was higher than in previous research showing a Cronbach’s alpha of .71 (Boselie et al.,
2001).
Information sharing is measured by six items with a sample item being ―I am well informed
on the future plans of the company‖ KMO measure of sampling adequacy was .797, and
Bartlett’s Test was significant (χ2 (15) = 600.628, p < .05). One component had an eigenvalue
over 1 (3.091) explaining 51.520 percent of the variance. Cronbach’s alpha was .80 which was
higher than in previous research showing a Cronbach’s alpha of .71 (Boselie et al., 2001).
We included two control variables that may influence the relationships we examine. Firstly,
we included age, because previous research has found that there is a possibility of an effect on
innovative behavior (Schaffer, Kearney, Voelpel & Koester, 2012). Secondly, we included
gender which was measured dichotomously (1=male; 2=female) as it has been found to influence
innovative behavior within the workplace (Singh & Sarkar, 2012).
3.5 Sample
The sample consisted of 562 participants of which 318 respondents belonged to the target
group (i.e. are either Dutch or German) and have filled out all of the relevant questions which
was above the calculated and intended number of 138 respondents (see 3.2).
Looking at the country of residence, 46 percent (149) of the respondents lived in Germany
and 53.1 percent (169) lived in the Netherlands. The final sample size consisted of 57.2 percent
(182) women and 42.8 percent (136) man. The mean age was 32.2 years with 18 years being the
youngest and 67 years the oldest. More than 50 percent of the respondents were younger than 27.
Respondents have worked on average 5.3 years for their current employer with 0 years being the
24
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
shortest and 42 years the longest. Respondents were asked to fill in ―0‖ in case they work less
than a year for their employer. More than 50 percent of the sample has worked only 2.5 years or
less for their current employer. When looking at the educational level, 74.5 percent (237) of the
respondents have completed either a university of applied sciences or university, 14.5 percent
(46) have completed an apprenticeship, 4.1 percent (13) have completed lower or middle
secondary education and 6.9 percent (22) have completed the general university entrance
certificate. To test if both groups (German and Dutch sample) were similar, we conducted an
independent samples t-test. Looking at the results, Levene’s test is indicating that the variances of
both groups were similar for tenure (.73) and educational background (.85), but variances were
not similar for age (.01) and gender (.01). The detailed descriptives for both groups can be found
in appendix B.
4. Analysis
4.1. Descriptives
The means, standard deviations, and correlations for the variables addressed in this study
are presented in Table 1. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to analyze the correlations
between the individual HR practices, HIWPs and IB. In order to analyze the correlations between
all constructs and Country the Eta correlation was used, because it is able to calculate correlations
with nominal scaled variables. Multicollinearity can be ruled out since the variance inflation
factor for all variables was lower than 10 and the tolerance was higher than .10. Furthermore,
maximum correlation between the independent variables was .47 which is well under the
threshold of .90. The high correlations for HIWPs were seen as unproblematic since they were
caused by the inclusion of the four HR practices and therefore expected to correlate highly.
25
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Table 1. Means (M), standard deviations (SD) and correlations
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1.compensation 3.20 .84 1
2. training 3.21 .93 .21* 1
3.employee participation 3.48 .78 .20* .32* 1
4.information sharing 3.43 .75 .19* .34* .47* 1
5.HIWPS 3.33 .56 .59* .71* .71* .70* 1
6.IB 3.38 .48 .10 .10 .24* .26* .25* 1
7.Country 1.53 .49 .10 .14* .14* .09* .17* .17* 1
8.Age 32.18 11.71 .04 .10 -.01 .04 .06 -.01 -.01 1
9.Gender 1.57 .49 -.01 .00 -.03 .02 -.00 -.09 .08 -.15* 1
Note. Country coded 1=Germany, 2=the Netherlands. *correlation is significant at the .05 level
Table 1 represents the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the variables.
Results revealed that significant correlations were found between compensation and training (r =
.21, p <.05), employee participation and compensation (r = .20, p <.05), employee participation
and training (r=.32, p<.05), information sharing and compensation (r = .19, p <.05), information
sharing and training (r = .34, p <.05), information sharing and employee participation (r = .47, p
<.05). Furthermore, significant correlations were found between HIWPs and the individual HR
practices: HIWPs and compensation (r = .59, p <.05), training (r = .71, p <.05), employee
participation (r = .71, p <.05), information sharing (r = .70, p <.05). Moreover, we found several
significant correlations between IB and employee participation (r = .24, p <.05), IB and
information sharing (r = .26, p <.05), and IB and HIWPs (r = .25, p <.05). We failed to find a
significant correlation between IB and compensation (r = .10, p >.05), and IB and training (r
=.10, p >.05). Moreover, several significant correlations with country were found: Country and
training (r = .14, p <.05), and employee participation (r =.14, p <.05), and employee participation
26
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
(r =.09, p <.05), and information sharing (r = .17, p <.05), and HIWPs (r = .17, p <.05). No
statistically significant correlation was found between Country and compensation (r = .10, p
>.05). Furthermore, no statistically significant correlations were found between the control
variables Age and Gender and the other variables. Only Age and Gender were found to have a
significant correlation (r = -.15, p <.05),
As the scales for HIWPs range from 1 to 5, having a mean above 3 indicates that the
employees were above average satisfied with their HR practices. Moreover, the standard
deviations were similar between the practices indicating similar diversification. Furthermore,
employees also showed above average IB.
4.2 Hypothesis testing
Effects of antecedents on IB
Multiple regression analysis was conducted to test hypotheses 1 to 5. Firstly, the
individual HR practices were entered together block wise as independent variables while IB as
the dependent variable was held constant. In a second step, a new regression analysis with
HIWPs as an independent variable was entered. Then, we changed the sample size from all
(N=318) to only German employees (Model 2, N=149) or only Dutch employees (Model 3,
N=169) to see any differences between the three models (see Table 2).
27
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Table 2. Regression analysis: individual HR practices predicting IB
Model 1 Model 2 (German
employees)
Model 3 (Dutch
employees)
B β R2 B β R
2 B β R
2
Constant
compensation .35 .04 .07 .82 -.02 .10 -.22 .11 .06
training -.17 -.02 -1.26* .05 .49 -.18
employee participation 1.45* .15 .71* .20 2.07* .09
information sharing 1.76* .18 2.38* .09 1.02 .29
Note. n=318 n=149 n=169
*indicates the confidence interval of p<.05
Table 3. Regression analysis: HIWPs predicting IB
Model 1 Model 2 (German
employees)
Model 3 (Dutch
employees)
B β R2 B β R
2 B β R
2
Constant
HIWPs .21* .27 .07 .16* .24 .05 .22 .26 .06
Note. n=318 n=149 n=169
*indicates the confidence interval of p<.05
The results showed that the bundle of HIWPs had a highly significant and positive direct
effect on IB (F(1,316) = 25.66, p <.05). Hypothesis 1 is therefore supported. However, only a
small percentage of the variation in IB was explained by HIWPS (R2=.07). Furthermore, HIWPs,
had a significant and direct effect on IB for both German employees (F(1,147) = 9.13, p <.05)
and for Dutch employees (F(1,167) = 12.284, p <.05). A summary of the hypotheses results can
be found in Table 5.
28
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
When looking at the individual HR practices, following results were found. The results
suggest that the data fits the models well. In model 1 (F(4.31)= 7.56, p < 0.05, R² = .07) seven
percent of the variance in IB was explained by the four individual HR practices. In model 2
(F(4.14)= 5.27, p <0.05, R² = .10) 10 percent and in model 3 (F(4.16)= 3.68, p <0.05, R² = .06)
six percent. This indicates that more variance in IB is explained with this model in Germany than
in the Netherlands.
The results showed that compensation had no significant direct effect on IB (β = .04, p >
.05). Therefore, hypothesis 2 was rejected. We also failed to find a significant effect of
compensation on IB for only German (β = -.02, p > .05) or Dutch employees (β = .26, p > .05).
Moreover, it was found that training had no significant direct effect on IB (β = -.02, p >
.05). Therefore, hypothesis 3 was rejected. We also failed to find a significant effect of training
satisfaction on IB for only Dutch employees (β = -.18, p > .05) However, we found a significant
and direct negative effect of training satisfaction on IB in the German sample (β = .05, p < .05).
This indicates that the more satisfied German employees are with their training opportunities, the
fewer employees will show IB.
Furthermore, the results showed that employee participation had a significant positive and
direct effect on IB (β = .15, p < .05). Hypothesis 4 was supported. Results also showed a
significant and positive effect for German employees (β = .20, p < .05) as well as Dutch (β = .09,
p < .05).
Lastly, it was found that information sharing had a significant positive and direct effect on
IB (β = .18, p < .05). Hypothesis 5 was supported. Results also showed a significant and positive
effect for German employees (β = .09, p < .05) but no significant effect was found for Dutch
employees (β = .29, p > .05).
29
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Moreover, the control variables age (B=-.00, p>.05) and gender (B=-.06, p>0.5) were
both found to not have a significant on IB nor on HIWPs and were therefore excluded from the
tables.
Effects of country
For the second analysis, we looked further into the effect of the country (independent
variable) on the individual HR practices, as well as on HIWPs and IB (dependent variable). The
results can be seen in Table 4.
In order to test hypothesis 6, we conducted two different analyses. Firstly, we computed a
simple linear regression. The results showed that country had a significant effect on IB (β = .17, p
< .05) (see Table 4). Secondly, we conducted an independent samples t-test. The mean level of IB
of German employees (M = 3.29; SD = .41) was lower than the mean level of IB of Dutch
employees (M = 3.46; SD = .52) and the standard deviation indicated a bigger variance in the
Dutch sample. Levene’s test indicated unequal variance (p < .01), so the degrees of freedom were
adjusted from 316 to 311. The difference was significant (t(311)= -3.13, p < 0.05). Therefore,
hypothesis 6 is supported.
Furthermore, an independent samples t-test was conducted to look at the effects of
Germany and the Netherlands on the HR practices. Looking at the results, Levene’s test (p = .75)
is indicating that the variances of both groups were similar. The mean level of satisfaction with
HIWPs of German employees (M = 3.22; SD = .55) was lower than the mean level of satisfaction
with HIWPs of Dutch employees (M = 3.43; SD = .55). The difference was significant (t(316)= -
3.33, p<.05). Hypothesis 7 can therefore also be supported.
When looking further at the individual HR practices we saw similar results (see Table 5).
The mean levels of satisfaction with HR practices were significantly different and lower in the
30
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
German sample compared to the Dutch sample indicating that Dutch employees are more
satisfied with their HR practices.
Table 4. Independent samples t-test results
German sample Dutch sample
M SD M SD df t sig
HIWPs 3.22 .55 3.43 .55 310 -3.33 <.05
compensation 3.10 .85 3.29 .83 316 -1.67 >.05
training 3.06 .92 3.34 .91 310 -2.64 <.05
employee participation 3.35 .79 3.59 .79 308 -2.71 <.05
information sharing 3.36 .76 3.50 .73 316 -1.67 >.05
Spurious relation between HIWPs and IB because of country
In order to test hypothesis 8, we conducted a partial correlation analysis by looking at the
strength of the relationship between HIWPs and IB while controlling for the effect of country.
The results showed that the bundle of HIWPs have a highly significant and direct, but lower
effect on IB when controlled for country (B=.25, p<.05). Without controlling for country the
effect is still highly significant and direct, but slightly higher (B=.27, p<.05). This indicates that
country has only a very small influence on the relation between HIWPs and IB. However, also
hypothesis 8 is supported.
31
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Table 5. Hypotheses summary
Hypothesis IV DV p<.05 B M
1 The more satisfied employees are with their HIWPS, the
more employees will show IB.
HIWPs IB supported .21
2 The more satisfied employees are with their compensation,
the more employees will show IB.
compensation IB not supported
3 The more satisfied employees are with their training, the
more employees will show IB.
training IB not supported
4 The more satisfied employees are with their employee
participation, the more employees will show IB.
employee
participation
IB supported 1.77
5 The more satisfied employees are with their information
sharing, the more employees will show IB.
information
sharing
IB supported 1.45
6 Dutch employees show more IB than German employees. Country supported GER=3.29
NED=3.46
7 German employees are less satisfied with their HIWPs. Country HIWPs supported GER=3.22
NED=3.43
8 The difference between the IB in the Netherlands and
Germany is partially related to higher levels of their
satisfaction with HIWPs.
Country HIWPs/
IB
supported .02
32
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
5. Discussion
5.1 Main findings
The purpose of this paper was to investigate the relationship between HIWPS and
intrapreneurial behavior while considering potential effects of countries. This study aimed to
answer the following research questions: What is the effect of high involvement work practices
on intrapreneurial behavior of employees? To what extent does the country affect the work
practices or intrapreneurial behavior? And can a difference between Germany and the
Netherlands be portrayed? To answer these questions a sample of 318 employees in Germany
(149) and the Netherlands (169) was used to investigate the hypotheses.
The results indicated that the bundle of HIWPs has a positive and direct effect on IB.
Unfortunately, not all individual HIWPs were found to have an effect on IB. For satisfaction
with compensation and training opportunities, we failed to find a significant effect on IB.
However, when employees were satisfied with their participation in the organization as well as
with their information sharing, their IB was higher. Though, when conducting additional
analysis, we found that the effect of only including information sharing and employee
participation is stronger (β=1.61, p<.05, adj. R²= .08) than when including all of the HIWPs
(β=.21, p<.05, adj. R²= .07). For Germany, we found a negative effect of satisfaction with
training on the IB. Yet, we did not find a significant effect of HIWPs on IB in the Dutch sample.
In this study we also wanted to acknowledge the influence of contextual factors such as
the effect of country on the satisfaction with HIWPs and IB. We have found that the country
affects not only the IB of employees, but also the satisfaction with their HIWPs. A direct effect
of country on IB and HIWPs was found, however, this effect only explained a very small
variance of the variable.
33
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
The satisfaction with HIWPs and the IB of employees was higher in the Netherlands than
in Germany. The variable country moderated the effect between HIWPs and IB slightly, but not
in full effect.
5.2 Discussion and implications
The reported findings suggest that employees who are more satisfied with the HIWPs of
their organization are more likely to show IB, but this effect differs by country. For instance, we
were able to find a significant effect of HIWPs on IB in the German sample, but not for the
Dutch sample. This is in line with previous research showing that HR practices need to be
adapted to the local context and may have different effects in different countries (Kostova,
1999). However, even though the satisfaction with the HIWPs and the IB was higher in the
Netherlands, we failed to find a significant effect of the HR practices on IB. Therefore, the
higher IB must be influenced by other factors. One of the factors might be the national culture.
As previously mentioned, Shane (1993) found that innovation rates of countries are closely
related to Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (1980), especially uncertainty acceptance, lack of
power distance and lack of individualism. In these dimensions, Germany and the Netherlands
show similar scores in power, but differences in individualism and uncertainty avoidance.
Furthermore, Mueller and Thomas (2001) found that various cultures motivate individuals in
different ways to show certain behaviors which can be considered to influence IB. Following
this, the institutional theory can support in understanding this effect. Its main idea is that
countries differ in their institutional characteristics which can be characterized by three pillars:
regulatory reflecting laws and rules, cognitive reflecting society’s shared social knowledge and
normative reflecting the values and norms. One could therefore argue that the normative pillar in
34
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
the Netherlands is different to the one in Germany and therefore guides behaviors towards
certain patterns (Lammers & Garcia, 2017). This could lead to a higher IB in the Netherlands
without the need to implement HR practices as the behavior is already present within the
population. This is in line with the results of our study as the Dutch sample has shown higher IB
than the German sample, this might be due to the national culture valuing behaviors closely
related to IB. This indicates that the bundle of HIWPs chosen in this study does not have a
universal effect in every country or organization.
Furthermore, the findings suggest that not all individual HR practices have the same
effect on IB of employees. For instance, we found that training had an effect on IB in the
German sample and opposite to what was expected. Results indicated that the higher the
satisfaction with training, the lower the IB of the employee. However, no statistically significant
results were found for the Dutch sample. These results contradict our assumption and the
findings of previous studies that training has a positive effect on the innovative behavior of
employees (e.g. Shipton et al., 2006). It could be argued that the offered trainings did not match
the employees’ or organizational needs. Following the social exchange theory, it could also be
argued that the signals sent by the organization were misinterpreted or that the training in general
was not useful to the employees (Bos-Nehles & Veenendaal, 2019). Furthermore, the job
demands-resources theory could be used to explain the effect. Researchers have shown that job
demands such as challenges can motivate employees to show innovative behavior (eg Bos-
Nehles & Veenendaal, 2019). The participants may have the job resources as for instance
through trainings, but lack the job demands to show IB. Moreover, Neal et al. (2005) found that
the organizational climate may also play a role in the relation between training and innovative
behavior. They showed that training may only have an effect in a non-innovative climate since
35
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
employees have the possibility to show IB in these environments. This could indicate that the
climate in the Netherlands is different to the one in Germany which could explain the different
effects of training.
Furthermore, compensation did not significantly influence the IB of employees in any of
our samples either. This could be explained with the fact that the average age of our sample size
is 32 with 50 percent being under 27 while the cross section of the working population is 44
years old (Destatis, 2019) and the changing demands accompanied by the younger generation.
Recent studies suggest that new generations such as generation y (age-group 1980 to 1994) and
generation z (age-group 1995 to 2010) are shifting their demands (Saxena & Jain, 2012). For
example, the focus shifted from traditional benefits such as compensation to other less
materialistic benefits such as a challenging work and a flexible and independent workspace with
a good team spirit (Mörstedt, 2015). While this could explain why we were unable to find a
significant effect of compensation on IB, it could also explain why we found a positive and
significant effect of employee participation on IB in all samples and a positive and significant
effect on information sharing on IB in the whole sample and for the German sample.
This implicates that organizations need to adjust their HR practices to the requirements of
the new working force to foster IB within the organization (Schmidt et al., 2011). The results
also indicated that not all HR practices had a significant effect on IB, but the bundle (HIWPs) did
have a significant effect. Only information sharing and employee participation were found to
have a significant and positive impact on IB. In order to test whether the effect is higher when
only including the significant practices compared to the whole bundle, we performed an
additional analysis. For this a new factor consisting of information sharing and employee
participation was created and a linear regression was performed. Results showed that, the effect
36
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
of only including information sharing and employee participation is stronger (β = .29, p < .05)
than when including all of the HIWPs (β = .27, p < .05). This suggests that it is better to focus on
fewer individual practices that have an impact rather than a bundle of practices where the effect
of individual practices might be eliminated.
Furthermore, the importance of the effect of shared information on IB has also been
highlighted in previous studies surround the field of knowledge sharing. The underlying idea
behind the knowledge sharing theory is that the knowledge of individuals must be transferred
voluntarily to the group as well as the organization in order to prepare the ground for innovative
actions and be applied (Camelo-Ordaz et al., 2011). Authors such as Ipe (2003) argue that if
knowledge sharing is not performed effectively, innovations processes can suffer. While this
theory would explain why we were able to find a statistically significant effect of information
sharing on IB in the German sample, it fails to give an understanding why no effect was found in
the Dutch sample. This is especially interesting, because the levels of satisfaction with
information sharing were higher in the Netherlands than in Germany. However, it is important to
mention that the focus of the questions in this survey were mainly regarding information
surrounding organizational aspects rather than individual or organizational knowledge.
Therefore, this could be an interesting aspect to research further as it has also been rarely studied
in conjunction with HR practices and frameworks.
The results indicated that organizations need to consider a variety of aspects when
wanting to foster IB. Currently, employees seem to be more attracted by having the opportunity
to actively participate in their environment. Furthermore, especially German organizations need
to critically reflect on their training practices to ensure that the trainings are necessary and
effective to avoid triggering opposite effects. In sum, there is no best practice solution to follow,
37
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
rather organizations need to critically reflect on their organizational structure and goals and
select practices that are corresponding to this.
5.3 Limitations and suggestions for future research
This study has several limitations that need to be considered to accurately interpret the
results which might have an influence on the outcomes. First, in this research we used
convenience sampling and self-reported data which has a high chance of involving a bias
towards social desirability (Etikan et al., 2016). Therefore, the results might not portray the
accurate level of IB within the organization and cannot be seen as representative and need to be
interpreted with caution. In order to control for this behavior, it would be interesting to consider
taking into account other measures and data sets from additional sources such as performance
ratings, project work or supervisor and colleague assessments to verify the individual's level of
IB.
As mentioned before, the average age within our sample is 12 years lower than the cross
section of the working population. In our sample, we were unable to find an effect of age on IB;
however, the results could differ with an older sample size. In recent studies, which investigated
the relationship between age and IB, the results were mixed and indicated that the relation is
more complex than expected. For instance, a study by Schaffer et al. (2012) found that the
relation between age and IB is impacted by skills, motivation and contextual factors.
In order to deepen the knowledge of antecedents of IB to support organizations in
competing on a global market, future research can support this in the following ways. Firstly, it
would be interesting to further look into the effects of how HR practices can stimulate IB. This
can be performed by conducting longitudinal studies. This would enable researchers to find
38
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
effects of newly implemented HR practices on IB and see whether the implemented practices
lead to the intended outcomes. While performing this, it would be interesting to focus more on a
variety of HR practices that are adapted to the needs of younger generations. As previously
mentioned, one of their goals is to give meaning to their work and work innovatively. The
organization therefore needs to trigger this behavior within the employees by acknowledging
fitting HR practices. Examples of this could be to create an open and supportive workplace, a
transparent and fair performance management feedback system or knowledge sharing systems.
Furthermore, the results indicated that German employees are less satisfied with their HIWPs
than Dutch employees. It would therefore be interesting to compare the practices in both
countries and see whether there are actual differences in levels of practices or which other factors
also contribute to the satisfaction with HIWPs of employees. Research shows that the average
income is higher in the Netherlands (43.404€/year) than in Germany (39.949€/year) which could
explain the differences in satisfaction with compensation (Mean Germany= 3.1, Mean
Netherlands= 3.29), however there is less research about the levels of information sharing and
employee participation (Laenderdaten, 2018).
The theoretical model used in this research was significant, however it explained only a
small variance of IB showing that the model needs to be extended by other variables. For
example, this includes the size of the organization and its composition, the satisfaction with the
job or the motivation. In an additional analysis we found that educational level has a significant
and positive effect on IB. This can be grounded in the assumption that employees with a higher
educational background are better able to carry out innovative tasks as they are provided with the
relevant knowledge (Romero & Martínez-Román, 2012). However, this would be needed to
39
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
research further. It would also be beneficial to understand what aspects or practices are needed to
support employees of a lower educational background to show IB.
5.4 Practical implications
The results of this study can be used by practitioners to understand how to foster IB of
employees within the organization in order to sustain competitive advantage. As many
organizations struggle to keep updated with the outcomes of HR practices, this study can provide
interesting insights for practitioners to help organizations succeed in supporting and guiding their
human capital to show desired behavior. This study indicates that individual HR practices may
have an effect on IB of employees within organizations. Furthermore, the effects vary by country
(here: Germany and the Netherlands). Therefore, the results suggest that organizations need to
consider a variety of aspects when wanting to foster IB. Currently, employees seem to be more
attracted by having the opportunity to actively participate in their environment. There is no one-
size-fits-all solution to follow, rather organizations need to critically reflect on their
organizational structure, contextual factors, their employees and goals and select practices that
are corresponding to this direction. As the results have shown, the IB in the Netherlands is higher
compared to Germany; however there was no significant effect of HIWPs on IB in the Dutch
sample. This shows that German organizations should consider investing more in their HIWPs as
a way to encourage IB while Dutch organizations need to consider other aspects such as
individual and organizational characteristics, leadership behaviors or political and socioeconomic
parameters (Standing et al., 2016; Su & Baird, 2018; Birudavolu & Nag, 2019). It is best to
include only practices of importance and significance to the employee such as information
sharing and employee participation than incorporating a big variety that is not contributing to the
40
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
organization's goals as this would lower the effect of the practices on IB. Therefore, it is
important to reassess the introduced practices by for instance performing a trend barometer or a
survey within the organization
.
41
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
6. References
Ahmad, S., & Schroeder, R. G. (2003). The impact of human resource management practices
on operational performance: recognizing country and industry differences. Journal
of operations Management, 21(1), 19-43.
Akhavan, P., Hosseini, S. M., Abbasi, M., & Manteghi, M. (2015). Knowledge-sharing
determinants, behaviors, and innovative work behaviors: An integrated theoretical view
and empirical examination. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(5), 562-591.
Amit, R., Glosten, L., & Muller, E. (1993). Challenges to theory development in
entrepreneurship research. Journal of Management Studies, 30(5), 815-834.
Bailey, T. (1993). Discretionary effort and the organization of work: employment
participation and work reform since Hawthorne, Teachers College and Conservation of
Human Resources, Columbia University, NY
Balkin, D. B., Markman, G. D., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2000). Is CEO pay in high-
technology firms related to innovation? Academy of management journal, 43(6),
1118-1129.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
management, 17(1), 99-120.
42
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Bhatti, K. K., & Qureshi, T. M. (2007). Impact of employee participation on job
satisfaction, employee commitment and employee productivity. International review of
business research papers, 3(2), 54-68.
Birudavolu, S., & Nag, B. (2019). Regional Factors Influencing Innovation. In Business
Innovation and ICT Strategies (pp. 211-238). Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.
Blanka, C. (2018). An individual-level perspective on intrapreneurship: A review and ways
forward. Review of Managerial Science, 1-43.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life.
Bontis, N., Richards, D., & Serenko, A. (2011). Improving service delivery: Investigating the
role of information sharing, job characteristics, and employee satisfaction. The learning
organization, 18(3), 239-250.
Bos-Nehles, A. C., & Veenendaal, A. A. (2019). Perceptions of HR practices and innovative
work behavior: the moderating effect of an innovative climate. The International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 30(18), 2661-2683.
Bosma, N. S., Stam, F. C., & Wennekers, A. R. M. (2010). Intrapreneurship: An
international study.
43
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Bosma, N. S., Abdul, A., Michael, D., Eltogby, M., Gratzke, P., Hart, M. & O’Neill, M.
(2016). Europe’s Hidden Entrepreneurs: Entrepreneurial Employee Activity and
Competitiveness in Europe. World Economic Forum.
Boselie, P., Hesselink, M., Paauwe, J., & van der Wiele, T. (2001). Employee Perception on
Commitment Oriented Work Systems.
Boxall, P., & Steeneveld, M. (1999). Human resource strategy and competitive advantage: A
longitudinal study of engineering consultancies. Journal of Management studies,
36(4), 443-463.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2009). Research and theory on high‐performance work systems:
progressing the high‐involvement stream. Human resource management journal, 19(1), 3-
23.
Brewster, C., Sparrow, P., & Harris, H. (2007). Towards a new model of globalizing HRM.
In Human Resources Abstracts (Vol. 42, No. 1, p. 949).
Business dictionary (2019). Training and Development.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/training-and-development.html
44
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Bysted, R., & Jespersen, K. R. (2014). Exploring managerial mechanisms that influence
innovative work behaviour: Comparing private and public employees. Public
Management Review, 16(2), 217-241.
Camelo-Ordaz, C., Garcia-Cruz, J., Sousa-Ginel, E., & Valle-Cabrera, R. (2011). The influence
of human resource management on knowledge sharing and innovation in Spain: the
mediating role of affective commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 22(07), 1442-1463.
Camps, J., & Luna-Arocas, R. (2009). High involvement work practices and firm
performance. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(5), 1056-
1077.
Castrogiovanni, G. J., Urbano, D., & Loras, J. (2011). Linking corporate
entrepreneurship and human resource management in SMEs. International
Journal of Manpower, 32(1), 34-47.
Chan, S. C. (2014). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice: Does information sharing
matter?. Human Relations, 67(6), 667-693.
Chen, C. J., & Huang, J. W. (2009). Strategic human resource practices and innovation
performance—The mediating role of knowledge management capacity. Journal of
business research, 62(1), 104-114.
45
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Coch, L. & French, J. R. P., Jr. Overcoming restistance to change. Human Relations, 1948, 1,
512-532
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and
practice. Academy of management review, 13(3), 471-482.
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm
behavior. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 16(1), 7-26.
Cunningham JB, McCrum-Gardner E. (2007) Power, effect and sample size using GPower:
practical issues for researchers and members of research ethics committees. Evidence
Based Midwifery 5(4): 132-6
Dattalo, P. (2008). Determining sample size: Balancing power, precision, and practicality.
Oxford University Press.
Delaney, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. (1996). The impact of human resource management
practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of
Management journal, 39(4), 949-969.
Destatis.de (2019). Erwerbstätige im Durchschnitt 44 Jahre alt.
https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2018/11/PD18_448_122.html
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and
46
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
Franke, N., & Shah, S. (2003). How communities support innovative activities: an exploration
of assistance and sharing among end-users. Research policy, 32(1), 157-178.
Fricker, R. D. (2008). Sampling methods for web and e-mail surveys. The SAGE handbook
of online research methods, 195-216.
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence
from New Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 180-190.
Haase, H., Franco, M., & Félix, M. (2015). Organisational learning and intrapreneurship:
evidence of interrelated concepts. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 36(8), 906-926.
Hayton, J. C., George, G., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). National culture and entrepreneurship:
A review of behavioral research. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 26(4), 33-
52.
Hayton, J. C. (2003). Strategic human capital management in SMEs: An empirical study
of entrepreneurial performance. Human Resource Management: Published in
Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of
Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources
47
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Management, 42(4), 375-391.
Hayton, J. C. (2005). Promoting corporate entrepreneurship through human resource
management practices: A review of empirical research. Human resource
management review, 15(1), 21-41.
Heiervang, E., & Goodman, R. (2011). Advantages and limitations of web-based surveys:
evidence from a child mental health survey. Social psychiatry and psychiatric
epidemiology, 46(1), 69-76.
Heinonen, J., & Korvela, K. (2003). How about measuring intrapreneurship. Small
Business Institute, Turku School of Economics and Business Administration.
Hemerijck, A., Manow, P., & Van Kersbergen, K. (2000). Welfare without work? Divergent
experiences of reform in Germany and the Netherlands. In Survival of the European
welfare state (pp. 106-127). Routledge.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management &
Organization, 10(4), 15-41.
Ipe, M. (2003). Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework. Human resource
development review, 2(4), 337-359.
48
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Rivero, J. C. (1989). Organizational characteristics as
predictors of personnel practices. Personnel psychology, 42(4), 727-786.
Kitchenham, B., & Pfleeger, S. L. (2002). Principles of survey research: part 5: populations
and samples. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 27(5), 17-20.
Klopp, E. (2012). Explorative Faktorenanalyse. Retrieved from https://eric-
klopp.de/texte/explorative-faktorenanalyse.php
Konrad, A. M. (2006). Engaging employees through high-involvement work practices. Ivey
Business Journal, 70(4), 1-6.
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass
correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of chiropractic
medicine, 15(2), 155-163.
Kostova, T. (1999). Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual
perspective. Academy of management review, 24(2), 308-324.
Kuratko, D. F., Montagno, R. V., & Hornsby, J. S. (1990). Developing an intrapreneurial
assessment instrument for an effective corporate entrepreneurial
environment. Strategic management journal, 49-58.
Laenderdaten.info (2018). Durchschnittliches Einkommen weltweit.
49
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
https://www.laenderdaten.info/durchschnittseinkommen.php
Lammers, J. C., & Garcia, M. A. (2017). Institutional theory approaches. The international
encyclopedia of organizational communication, 1-10.
Lawler III, E. E. (1986). High-Involvement Management. Participative Strategies for
Improving Organizational Performance. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome
Street, San Francisco, CA 94104.
Lazarova, M., Morley, M., & Tyson, S. (2008). International comparative studies in HRM
and performance–the Cranet data: Introduction. The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 19(11), 1995-2003.
Li, S. X., & Sandino, T. (2018). Effects of an information sharing system on employee
creativity, engagement, and performance. Journal of Accounting Research, 56(2), 713-
747.
Lockwood, N. R. (2007). Leveraging employee engagement for competitive advantage.
Society for Human Resource Management Research Quarterly, 1(1), 1-12.
Locke, E. A., & Schweiger, D. M. (1979). Participation in decision-making: One more look.
Research in organizational behavior, 1(10), 265-339.
50
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct
and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
Madu, U. O., & Urban, B. (2014). An empirical study of desired versus actual
compensation practices in determining intrapreneurial behaviour. SA Journal of
Human Resource Management, 12(1), 1-10.
Maxwell, B. (1996). Translation and cultural adaptation of the survey instruments. Third
international mathematics and science study (TIMSS) technical report, 1, 159-169.
Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management
science, 29(7), 770-791.
Moriano, J. A., Topa, G., Valero, E., & Lévy-Mangin, J. P. (2009). Identificación
organizacional y Conducta ―Intraemprendedora‖. Anales de Psicología, 25, 277–
287.
Morris, M. H., & Jones, F. F. (1993). Human resource management practices and corporate
entrepreneurship: An empirical assessment from the USA. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 4(4), 873-896.
Mörstedt, A. B. (2015). Erwartungen der Generation Z an die Unternehmen. PFH Private
Hochschule Göttingen.
51
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: A nine
country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of business
venturing, 16(1), 51-75.
Neal, A., West, M. A., & Patterson, M. G. (2005). Do organizational climate and competitive
strategy moderate the relationship between human resource management and
productivity?. Journal of management, 31(4), 492-512.
Newman, K. L., & Nollen, S. D. (1996). Culture and congruence: The fit between
management practices and national culture. Journal of international business
studies, 27(4), 753-779.
Özdemirci, A., & Behram, N. K. (2014). Linking human resources practices to corporate
entrepreneurship: The mediating role of perceived organizational
support. Business Management and Strategy, 5(1), 56.
Parker, S. C. (2011). Intrapreneurship or entrepreneurship?. Journal of Business
Venturing, 26(1), 19-34.
Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1997). Impact of organizational citizenship
behavior on organizational performance: A review and suggestions for future
research. Human performance, 10(2), 133-151.
52
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Pons, F. J., Ramos, J., & Ramos, A. (2016). Antecedent variables of innovation behaviors in
organizations: Differences between men and women. Revue Européenne de
Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 66(3), 117-126.
Prange, S. (2016, December 20). Darum verliert Deutschland den Anschluss.
WirtschaftsWoche. https://www.wiwo.de/politik/europa/unternehmertum-darum-verliert-
deutschland-den-anschluss/15002662.html
Ma Prieto, I., & Pilar Perez-Santana, M. (2014). Managing innovative work behavior: the role
of human resource practices. Personnel Review, 43(2), 184-208.
Preenen, P., van Vianen, A., & de Pater, I. (2014). Challenging tasks: The role of employees'
and supervisors' goal orientations. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 23(1), 48-61.
Pudelko, M., & Harzing, A. W. (2007). Country‐of‐origin, localization, or dominance
effect? An empirical investigation of HRM practices in foreign
subsidiaries. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the
School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance
with the Society of Human Resources Management, 46(4), 535-559.
53
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Qin, J., Smyrnios, K. X., & Deng, L. (2012). An extended intervening process model:
Diversity, group processes, and performance. Human Resource Development Review,
11(3), 269-298.
Rana, S. (2015). High-involvement work practices and employee engagement. Human
Resource Development International, 18(3), 308-316.
Remijn, L., Speyer, R., Groen, B. E., van Limbeek, J., & Nijhuis-van der Sanden, M. W.
(2014). Validity and reliability of the Mastication Observation and Evaluation (MOE)
instrument. Research in developmental disabilities, 35(7), 1551-1561.
Rigtering, J. P. C., & Weitzel, U. (2013). Work context and employee behaviour as
antecedents for intrapreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management
Journal, 9(3), 337-360.
Romero, I., & Martínez-Román, J. A. (2012). Self-employment and innovation. Exploring
the determinants of innovative behavior in small businesses. Research Policy, 41(1), 178-
189.
Salk, J. E., & Brannen, M. Y. (2000). National culture, networks, and individual influence in
a multinational management team. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 191-202.
54
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Saxena, P., & Jain, R. (2012). Managing career aspirations of generation Y at work
place. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software
Engineering, 2(7).
Schaffer, S., Kearney, E., Voelpel, S. C., & Koester, R. (2012). Managing demographic
change and diversity in organizations: how feedback from coworkers moderates the
relationship between age and innovative work behavior. In Managing Diversity in
Organizations (pp. 45-68).
Schuler, R. S. (1986). Fostering and facilitating entrepreneurship in organizations:
Implications for organization structure and human resource management
practices. Human resource management, 25(4), 607-629.
Schmidt, C. E., Möller, J., Schmidt, K., Gerbershagen, M. U., Wappler, F., Limmroth, V.,
Padosch, S.A.,& Bauer, M. (2011). Generation Y. Der Anaesthesist, 60(6), 517.
Shane, S., Kolvereid, L., & Westhead, P. (1991). An exploratory examination of the
reasons leading to new firm formation across country and gender. Journal of
business venturing, 6(6), 431-446.
Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of business
venturing, 8(1), 59-73.
55
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Shipton, H., West, M. A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., & Patterson, M. (2006). HRM as a predictor
of innovation. Human resource management journal, 16(1), 3-27.
Singh, M., & Sarkar, A. (2012). The relationship between psychological empowerment and
innovative behavior. Journal of Personnel Psychology.
Skowronek, D., & Duerr, L. (2009). The convenience of nonprobability: Survey strategies for
small academic libraries. College & Research Libraries News, 70(7), 412-415.
Su, S., & Baird, K. (2018). The role of leaders in generating management innovation. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(19), 2758-2779.
Sun, H. (2009). A meta-analysis on the influence of national culture on innovation capability.
International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 10(3-4), 353-360.
Standing, C., Jackson, D., Larsen, A. C., Suseno, Y., Fulford, R., & Gengatharen, D. (2016).
Enhancing individual innovation in organisations: a review of the literature. International
Journal of Innovation and Learning, 19(1), 44-62.
Stephan, U., & Uhlaner, L. M. (2010). Performance-based vs socially supportive culture: A
cross-national study of descriptive norms and entrepreneurship. Journal of
International Business Studies, 41(8), 1347-1364.
56
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Stull, M., & Singh, J. (2005). Intrapreneurship in nonprofit organizations examining the
factors that facilitate entrepreneurial behaviour among employees.
Tremblay, M., Cloutier, J., Simard, G., Chênevert, D., & Vandenberghe, C. (2010). The role
of HRM practices, procedural justice, organizational support and trust in organizational
commitment and in-role and extra-role performance. The international journal of human
resource management, 21(3), 405-433.
Twomey, D. F., & Harris, D. L. (2000). From strategy to corporate outcomes: Aligning
human resource management systems with entrepreneurial intent. International Journal
of Commerce and Management, 10(3/4), 43-55.
Edú Valsania, S. E., Moriano, J. A., & Molero, F. (2016). Authentic leadership and
intrapreneurial behavior: cross-level analysis of the mediator effect of
organizational identification and empowerment. International Entrepreneurship
and Management Journal, 12(1), 131-152.
Van Veldhoven, M. J. P. M., & Broersen, S. (2003). Measurement quality and validity of the
―need for recovery scale‖. Occupational and environmental medicine, 60(suppl 1), i3-i9.
Veenendaal, A., & Bondarouk, T. (2015). Perceptions of HRM and their effect on dimensions
of innovative work behaviour: Evidence from a manufacturing firm. Management
revue, 138-160.
57
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Veenker, S., Sijde, P. V. D., During, W., & Nijhof, A. (2008). Organisational conditions for
corporate entrepreneurship in Dutch organisations. The Journal of
Entrepreneurship, 17(1), 49-58.
Waarts, E., & Van Everdingen, Y. (2005). The Influence of National Culture on the Adoption
Status of Innovations:: An Empirical Study of Firms Across Europe. European
Management Journal, 23(6), 601-610.
Wakkee, I., Elfring, T., & Monaghan, S. (2008). Creating entrepreneurial employees in
traditional service sectors. The role of coaching and self-efficacy. International
Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6, 1–21. doi: 10.1007/s11365-008-0078-z.
Wiley, C. (1997). What motivates employees according to over 40 years of motivation
surveys. International journal of manpower, 18(3), 263-280.
Wright, P., & Nishii, L. (2013). Strategic HRM and organizational behavior: Integrating
multiple levels of analysis. In J. Paauwe, D. Guest, & P. Wright (Eds.), HRM and
performance: Achievements and challenges (pp. 97–110). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Wunderer, R. (2001). Employees as ―co-intrapreneurs‖– a transformation
concept. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(5), 193-211
Yu, C., Yu, T. F., & Yu, C. C. (2013). Knowledge sharing, organizational climate, and
58
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
innovative behavior: A cross-level analysis of effects. Social Behavior and Personality:
an international journal, 41(1), 143-156.
59
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Appendix A
Scales
Compensation
1. I am not getting underpaid for my work.
2. In comparison to my colleagues I get well paid.
3. As far as I know our salary is as high or even better than the salaries of comparable
organizations.
Training
4. I am well prepared for my work because of the training I got from my business unit.
5. I get enough opportunities to attend skills training for improvement of my current
function.
6. I get enough opportunities to attend skills training for improvement of my
opportunities to a better function.
Employee Participation
7. There is a lot of effort done to get to know the opinions and ideas of employees in my
business unit.
8. Management is willing to do something with my recommendations.
9. Employees are encouraged to bring forward new solutions for problems.
10. I am satisfied with my participation with decision making related to my function.
60
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Information Sharing
11. I am well informed on the vision and mission of the company.
12. I am well informed on the future plans of the company.
13. I am well informed on the business results of the company.
14. I am well informed on the full service package of the company.
15. I am well informed on the activities of other establishments and units of the company.
16. I am well informed on the service standards of the company.
Risk-taking
17. I approach new projects or activities in a cautious manner.
18. I do things that have a chance of not working out.
19. I avoid taking calculated risks.
20. I engage in activities that have a chance of not working out will take calculated risks
despite the possibility of failure.
21. I will take calculated risks despite the possibility of failure.
Proactiveness
22. I keep ahead of changes instead of responding to them.
23. I actively fix or improve things I don't like.
24. I act in anticipation of future problems, needs or changes.
25. I take the initiative to start projects.
26. I tend to implement changes before they are needed.
61
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Innovativeness
27. I generate useful ideas.
28. I develop new processes, services, or products.
29. I approach business tasks in innovative ways.
30. I find new ways to do things.
31. I often do things in unique ways.
62
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Appendix B
Descriptives of sample
Category Country M SD Min Max
Gender (1=male; 2=female) all 1.57 .49 1 2
Germany 1.53 .50 1 2
Netherlands 1.61 .48 1 2
Age all 32.18 11.71 18 67
Germany 32.34 10.83 21 67
Netherlands 32.03 12.46 18 66
Educational Background (1=lower
secondary; 2=higher secondary;
3=apprenticeship; 4=University of
applied sciences; 5=University)
all 4.06 1.12 1 5
Germany 4.34 1.08 1 5
Netherlands 3.81 1.09 1 5
Tenure all 5.29 8.13 0 42
Germany 5.50 8.42 0 42
Netherlands 5.09 7.85 0 40
63
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
Factor and reliability analysis
Item Factor
loading
Loadings
on HIWPs
Cronbach’s
alpha
Compensation .73
I am not getting underpaid for my work. .82 /
In comparison to my colleagues I get well paid. .81 .35
As far as I know our salary is as high or even better than the
salaries of comparable organizations.
.78 .36
Training
I am well prepared for my work because of the training I
got from my business unit.
.92 .47 .82
I get enough opportunities to attend skills training for
improvement of my current function.
.87 .60
I get enough opportunities to attend skills training for
improvement of my opportunities to a better function.
.773 .56
Employee Participation .81
There is a lot of effort done to get to know the opinions and
ideas of employees in my business unit.
.83 .66
Management is willing to do something with my
recommendations.
.81 .65
Employees are encouraged to bring forward new solutions
for problems.
.80 .60
I am satisfied with my participation with decision making
related to my function.
.76 .58
Information Sharing .80
I am well informed on the vision and mission of the
company.
.78 .61
I am well informed on the future plans of the company. .74 .67
I am well informed on the business results of the company. .73 .53
I am well informed on the full service package of the
company.
.70 .62
I am well informed on the activities of other establishments
and units of the company.
.69 .56
I am well informed on the service standards of the
company.
.64 .61
Intrapreneurial Behavior .80
I approach new projects or activities in a cautious manner. /
I do things that have a chance of not working out. .39
I avoid taking calculated risks. .30
I engage in activities that have a chance of not working out. .41
I will take calculated risks despite the possibility of failure. .50
64
THE EFFECT OF HIWPS ON INTRAPRENEURIAL BEHAVIOR
I keep ahead of changes instead of responding to them. /
I actively fix or improve things I don't like. .61
I act in anticipation of future problems, needs or changes. .52
I take the initiative to start projects. .72
I tend to implement changes before they are needed. .57
I generate useful ideas. .69
I develop new processes, services, or products. .70
I approach business tasks in innovative ways. .73
I find new ways to do things. .72
I often do things in unique ways. .57
.
top related