Prior research has linked the innovative behavior of public sector employees to desirable outcomes such as improved efficiency and higher public service quality. However, questions regarding the drivers of innovative behavior among employees have received limited attention. This study employs psychological empowerment theory to examine the underlying processes by which entrepreneurial leadership and public service motivation (PSM) shape innovative behavior among civil servants.
Based on the literature on public sector innovation, entrepreneurial leadership, PSM, and psychological empowerment we generated the following hypotheses:
H1: Entrepreneurial leadership is positively related to psychological empowerment.
H2: PSM is positively related to psychological empowerment.
H3: Psychological empowerment mediates the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership and innovative behavior.
H4: Psychological empowerment mediates the relationship between PSM and innovative behavior.
Data were obtained from Chinese civil servants working in government bureaus in Shanghai and two adjacent provinces, Zhejiang and Jiangsu, using a survey methodology. At time 1, questionnaires were distributed to the employees working directly under the head of each department. Employees were required to provide their own PSM and demographics and rate the entrepreneurial leadership behavior of the department head. At time 2, two weeks later, employees who had responded to the first wave of the survey were required to rate their psychological empowerment. Finally, at time 3, four weeks later, department heads were asked to rate the innovative behavior of their subordinates. In total, 281 employees and their 59 department heads fully completed our surveys, representing a response rate of 82 per cent.
Before hypothesis testing was undertaken, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the construct validity of the variables used in the study. Our hypothesized seven-factor model (i.e., items measuring entrepreneurial leadership, PSM, meaning, competence, self-determination, impact and innovative behavior) yielded a better fit to the data than alternative models (χ2 = 726.67, IFI = .94, CFI = .94, RMSEA = .06, SRMR = .05). The data consisted of employees nested within departments. Hence, multilevel modeling using robust maximum likelihood estimation in Mplus 7.4 was applied to test the hypotheses. Entrepreneurial leadership was found to positively influence subordinates’ innovative behavior by enhancing two dimensions of psychological empowerment: meaning and impact. Additionally, PSM was found to influence subordinates’ innovative behavior by enhancing the dimensions of meaning and competence. When controlling for the mediator (psychological empowerment), the direct effects of entrepreneurial leadership and PSM on innovative behavior were not statistically significant (β = .03, p > .05 and β = .08, p > .05, respectively), supporting an inference of full mediation. Overall, our mediation model explained a very large part (35%) of the total variance in innovative behavior.
The main theoretical contribution of this research results from our identification of the psychological mechanisms linking entrepreneurial leadership and PSM to subordinates’ innovative behavior. Our findings suggest that to facilitate innovative behavior amongst employees, public organizations should consider introducing training that encourages leaders to serve as entrepreneurial role models and nurture PSM.
