explores Personality traits as a determinant of Innovative behaviour in the
workplace. The relationship between Personality traits and Innovative behaviour
in the workplace were examined.
sample of 200 participants was drawn for the study. The data was gathered with
the aid of a standardized structured questionnaire, comprising of an innovative
scale and a big five personality scale.
The results were
correlated using Pearson product moment correlation. The results gathered
stated that not all personality traits were positively correlated with
innovative behaviour in the workplace. Extraversion, Agreeableness, and
Openness to experience showed significant b relationships, while Neuroticism
and Conscientiousness, did not show significant relationships.
The result of this
research discussed the relationship between Personality traits and innovative
behaviour in the workplace, and also the policy implications.
Title page i
Table of content ii
List of Tables iv
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background to
the Study 2
Classification of Five Factor Model of Personality Traits 6
Openness to Experience 7
Statement of Problem 9
Objectives of Study 9
1.5 Significance Of Study 10
1.6 Scope Of The Study 10
1.7 Operational Definition Of Variables Of The Study 10
Theoretical Framework 16
Five-Factor Theory 16
Theory Of Planned Behaviour 17
Social Cognitive Theory 18
1.10 Research Questions 19
1.11 Research Hypotheses 20
2.1 Research Setting 21
2.2 Population of Study 21
CHAPTER THREE: RESULTS
CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION
Objective Stated 30
Summary of Findings 30
Discussion Relating to Past Work 31
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND
5.1 Conclusion 34
Implication of Findings 35
5.3 Recommendations 35
Contribution to Body of Knowledge
Limitation of Study 36
3.1: The Mean and Standard
Deviation of Scores of Participants Dependent Measures by Innovative behaviour and
3.2: Summary of Pearson’s ‘r’
correlation between Innovative behaviour
Table 3.3: Summary of Pearson’s ‘r’ correlation between Innovative behaviour and Agreeableness.
3.4: Summary of Pearson’s ‘r’
correlation between Innovative behaviour and Conscientiousness.
3.5: Summary of Pearson’s ‘r’
correlation between Innovative behaviour and Neuroticism.
3.6 Summary of Pearson’s ‘r’
correlation between innovative behaviour and Openness to experience.
research work done on the characteristics and behaviours associated with
innovative people in organisations is immense, both in magnitude and diversity.
This has resulted into a lack of cohesive theoretical understanding of how
individual creativity and innovative behaviours operate in organisations. Hence,
the study of what motivates or enables individual innovative behaviour is crucial.
recent years, a severe global financial crisis has led to economic downturn in
most countries across the world. Consequently, it has become a great challenge
for many organisations to remain profitable and to survive in their markets.
Particularly, during times of operating in the shadow of a paralyzed
international financial system, the crucial importance of organisations and
their employees to stay innovative cannot be overemphasized.
by itself, cannot be described as a single process, rather, it can be described
as a multifaceted process. From this perspective, individual innovation begins
with problem recognition and the generation of ideas or solutions, either novel
or adopted. Another key stage in this process, involves the innovative
individual seeking sponsorship for ideas and attempting to build a coalition of
supporters for it. The final stage of the innovative process involves
completing the idea by producing a prototype or model of the innovation, which
can now be felt, experienced, diffused, mass-produced, and turned into
productive use or institutionalized.
1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE
an article, The Economist, Frymire 2006 argues that “the biggest challenge
today is not finding or hiring cheap workers, but rather hiring individuals
with the brainpower (both natural and trained) and especially the ability to
think creatively.” The ability to continuously innovate and improve products,
services and work processes is nowadays crucial for organisations (De Jong
& Den Hartog, 2007). In the current economic climate, there is evidence to
back the increasing importance of innovation. According to reports on the
official Nesta webpage (http://www.nesta.org.uk/economic-downturn),
“During economic downturns innovation is the single most important condition
for transforming the crisis into an opportunity.” Innovation is critical for
organisational long-term prosperity, particularly in dynamic markets (Balkin et
al, 2000). In view of today’s economic climate, increasing global competition,
and rapidly changing organisations, an organisation’s ability to innovate is
regarded as a key factor for success (Shipton et al, 2006).
employees need to be willing and able to innovate if a continuous flow of
innovation is to be realised (Janssen, 2000). Innovation and creativity has
been used as synonyms by many scholars, while some were able to distinguish the
two concepts. Mumford & Gustafson, (1988) said Creativity has to do with the
production of novel and useful ideas and innovation has to do with the
production or adoption of useful Ideas and idea implementation (Kanter, 1988;
Van de Ven, 1986). Though creativity is often described as doing something for
the first time anywhere or creating new knowledge, while innovation covers the
adaptation of products or processes from outside an organisation, in practice
idea generation is only one stage of the multistage process of innovation. Thus
Scott & Bruce, (1994) viewed innovation as a multistage process, with
different activities and different individual behaviours necessary at each
is very important to clearly define innovation and to distinguish it from
related concepts such as creativity, entrepreneurship, adaptability, originality,
productivity and novelty. In the past, several research papers did not give a
clear differentiation between the constructs creativity and innovation, which
has led to a misunderstanding as regards the antecedents and outcome of
creativity and innovative behaviour in the organisation. In a bid to clear the
air of doubt, Patterson (2004) argues that creativity and innovation are
overlapping constructs, but the main distinction is with regard to novelty.
Creativity is exclusively concerned with generating new and entirely original
ideas. Innovation is a broader concept as it also encompasses the application
of new ideas to produce something new and useful, usually in the context of
groups, organisations, societies.
is often referred to as a process, because implementing new ideas necessarily
involves influencing others, whereas, creativity could be achieved in
isolation. Employee innovation goes beyond individual creativity as it also
concerns the extent to which employees implement and sustain innovations.
the Organisational psychology literature, West and Farr (1990) emphasised the
positive nature of innovation “…the intentional introduction and application
within a role, group or organisation of ideas, processes, products, or
procedures, new to the relevant unit of adoption, designed to significantly
benefit the individual, group, the organisation or wider society.” In 2003, the
UK department of Trade and Industry adopted a more concise definition of
innovation as “the successful exploitation of new ideas.”
theory has repeatedly stressed that innovation is broader than only creativity
and also includes the implementation of ideas (King & Anderson, 2002).
Thus, innovation does not only include idea generation, but also behaviours
needed to implement ideas and achieve improvements that will enhance personal
and or business performance. Recently, organisations are paying attention to
their human resources to produce innovative behaviours and consequently
innovations (Carmeli et al., 2006), because innovations are derived from the
ideas that come from the individuals in the workplace. Firms depend on their employees with creative
ideas and efforts (Soussa, 2011). Individual innovation behaviour in the
workplace is considered to be the main pillars of high-performing organisations
(Carmeli et al., 2006). Finding out motivators and enablers of individual
innovation behaviour would be a great contribution towards understanding
individual innovation behaviour and organisational innovation and success (Wu
et al., 2011).
have worked on several factors that predict innovative behaviour, for example
Climate (Abbey & Dickson, 1983), this represents signals individuals
receive concerning organisational expectations for behaviour and potential
outcomes of behaviour. A conducive psychological climate in an organisation
that promotes innovative behaviour among employees (Scott & Bruce, 1994),
Leadership was also found to be a predictor of innovative behaviour (Waldman
& Bass, 1991, cited in Scott & Bruce 1994), the leadership style
adopted by the manager goes a long way to how innovative the subordinates will
be. Seer, (1989) in his study found that work-group can also be a predictor of
innovative behaviour; group cohesion and communication were some of the
variables that signalled work-group as a factor that promotes innovative
behaviour. Problem-solving style of an individual was also found to be a
determinant of innovative behaviour; this is the cognitive ability of individuals
in an organization to solve issues that has to do with innovation (Kirton,
innovative behaviour is expected of employees, and a major factor that predicts
employer’s delivery and performance in their personality, therefore it will be
important to know whether certain personalities in an individual can predict
innovative behaviour in the work place.
has been known to play a crucial role in understanding human behaviour. The Five
Factor Model (FFM) of personality has been an important mechanism to understand
the structure of personality (Patterson et al., 2009). Five personality
dimensions namely, Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness
and Conscientiousness, help to explain most of the meaningful variance in
personality psychology with a clear measurement framework and are responsible
for the resurgence of interest to personality in the field of work and
five factors have been identified across a number of cultures and radically
different languages, providing further support for the existence of the five
factor model and its universal application (McCrae & Costa, 1997). Apart
from the American/English languages, the factor structure of the five factor
model has been replicated in German, Dutch, Italian, Hungarian, Spanish,
Chinese, Japanese, Belgian, Israeli, Estonian, Finnish, Croatian, and Czech
(McCrae & Costa, 1997).
traits have been known to be related to workplace behaviours, attitudes, and
performance (Bakker et al.,2002) Personality has been studied by many
researchers to be the predictor of so many work factors, for instance
Hlatywayo, Mhlanga &Zingwe (2013) found that neuroticism was positively and
weakly correlated to job satisfaction, Hence low neuroticism is positively
related to job satisfaction, and less likely to be distracted easily, which has
less behavioural risks.
focus of this work is on innovation. Innovation drives and sustains the success
of organizational motives; it helps to continually make an organization
relevant even in a competitive environment.
Self-esteem and self-efficacy were also found to be related to job
satisfaction (Cleare 2013). Other phenomena in work place where personality has
been studied as a predictor includes job performance (Alharbi& Wan
Khairuzzaman 2012) and organisational commitment (Hoffmann, Ineson&
1.2.1. CLASSIFICATION OF
FIVE FACTOR MODEL OF PERSONALITY TRAITS
BIG FIVE personality traits are self-regulating personality factors that
described five major personality dimensions that include Extraversion,
Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Openness to experience
outgoing, companionable, chatty, and determined persons are called Extraverts
(Barrick et al., 2001). Extraverts have a tendency a tendency to be
spontaneous, communicative, energetic, positive, and enthusiastic (Goldberg,
1992). If compared with other five personality traits, extraverts are
completely associated with emotional commitment (Erdheim, Wang &Zickar,
are capable of practicing affirmative emotions (Costa & McCrae, 1992) which
in turn leads to job gratification (Connolly &Viswesvaran, 2000).
Extraverted individuals are emotionally firm and that is why they possess
contented personality and this blissful personality is the key feature of
contented life job satisfaction (Judge et al, 2002). Extraverts are also
effective analysts of job performance for professions like administration,
social relation and sales (Barrick et al., 2001).
signifies variances of individual suffering and is defined asemotionally secure
and uneven (McCrae & John, 1992). Neurotics possess traits including,
annoyed, stressed, sulky, unsociable, nervous, embarrassed, uncertain,
doubtful, unconfident, fearful, and dejected (Judge & Bono, 2000).
compared to other individuals, Neurotics experience more adverse feelings in
life (Magnus et al., 1993). That is the reason they are found to be negatively
related to job satisfaction (Judge et al., 2002). Meta-analysis by Meyer et
al., (2002) showed that persistence commitment is negatively interrelated with
complete performance and Neuroticism also negatively interrelated with
professional performance (Tett& Burnett, 2003).
contains personality traits like diligent, attentive, vigilant, comprehensive,
responsible,, systemized and determined (Barrick et al., 2001). High
conscientiousness personalities are logical, reliable and risk averter
(Goldberg, 1990). These persons are responsible, reliable, determined, cautious
and thorough, who focus on success which is also very significant
characteristic for performing work tasks (Barrick et al., 2001).
is the reason Conscientiousness persons are best related with job satisfaction
and job performance in all traits (Judge et al., 2002). Conscientious people
form long-standing work exchange relations and search for atmosphere where they
have better chances for achievement and success. (Raja et al., 2004). Erdheim
et al., also confirmed a positive link between effective commitment and
defines the features such as self-sacrifice, helpful, nurturance, gentle, and
emotional support at one end of the dimension, and enmity, indifference to
others and self-interest on the other end. (Digman, 1990). Agreeable consists
of traits such as polite, flexible, naïve, helpful, supportive, merciful, kind,
openminded and tend to be generous, calm, trusting, truthful and sincere (Judge
& Bono, 2000).
to Judge et al., (2002), between agreeableness and job performance, the
correlation is very weak and also, the relationship between agreeableness and
job satisfaction is also very weak. This facet of the big five model is related
with normative commitments significantly (Erdehim et al., 2006).
126.96.36.199 Openness to
to Experience is correlated to technical innovativeness, deviating approach,
and political moderation (Judge et al., 2002). The social propensity generally
related with openness to experience comprise of being creative, cultivated,
curious, open-minded, intellectual having a need for diversity, aesthetic and
sensitivity (Goldberg, 1990). Persons who are extraordinary in openness to
experience have the propensity to better suite other dimensions (Costa &
to experience represents the influence of openness directed towards affective
responses such as subjective well-being (Judge et al., 2002). This may have
accounted for the special reason why the openness to experience dimension is
shown to have a weak relationship with job satisfaction (Judge et al., 2002).
Other studies carried out by Judge & Bono (2002), found a positive
relationship between the openness to experience dimension and job performance
for “training proficiency criterion”, which seems to suggest that these
individuals are innovative, caring and insightful.
to Raja et al., (2004), openness to experience is quite ambiguous and
debatable, and further research is required on this particular dimension
compared to other big five personality traits. When done successfully, it can
increase the impact of the openness to experience dimension to organisational
performance (Raja et al., 2004).
1.3 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
business today, firms must innovate on a continuous basis to stay competitive
and to survive in the long run. Employees can innovate either because it is
part of their job description or by expressing voluntary innovative behaviour
(Dörner, 2012). Therefore, since innovation is expected from employees either
as part of their job description or they do it voluntarily, it is important to
know if the personality of these individuals will serve as a major factor that
will trigger the ability to innovate new ideas, that will sustain the
organization and keep the business running especially in a competitive
environment. The personality traits to be considered during this study are
Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. Very
little published research literature has been done in Nigeria on the
relationship between innovative behaviour and its relationship with personality
traits in the workplace. This study aims to fill the gap in knowledge by
seeking to find out the relationship that exists between innovative behaviour
and personality traits in the workplace.
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
general objective of this study is to observe the relationship between
personality traits and innovative behaviour in the workplace:
To determine the relationship between extraversion and innovative behaviour.
To investigate the correlation between agreeableness and innovative behaviour.
To predict innovative behaviour from conscientiousness.
To determine the relationship between neuroticism and innovative behaviour.
To understand the relationship between openness and innovative behaviour.
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY
study is expected to contribute to scientific knowledge and also provide
practical ways of enhancing innovative behaviour using employees’ personality
traits. This work is also expected to direct the organisation during
recruitment process, so that they will be able to select individuals that
possess the right personality traits that will promote innovation in the
organisation. Lastly the significance of this study to the targeted population
is to help them identify personality traits inherent in then that support
innovation and be able to increase the exhibition of such traits.
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
work examined prime factors that determine innovative behaviour in the
workplace, which explored workers of all six APTECH offices in Lagos state.
1.7 OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF VARAIABLES OF THE
can be defined as any behaviour exhibited by the employee of an organisation
that does not only include idea generation, but also behaviours needed to
implement ideas and achieve improvements that will enhance, successful business
performances in an organisation.
can be defined as the combination of characteristics or qualities that form an
individual’s distinctive character. It is an employee’s individual differences
in characteristic pattern of thinking, feeling and behaving. And this is the
individual’s score obtained from the BIG
FIVE personality scale.
can be defined as an employee’s distinguishing quality or characteristics,
typically peculiar to one person.
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE
can be explained using the six facets of the trait, these are Fantasy (the
tendency towards a vivid imagination and fantasy life), Aesthetics (the
tendency to appreciate art, music, and poetry), Feelings (being receptive to
inner emotional states and valuing emotional experience), Actions (the
inclination to try new activities, visit
new places, and try need food), Ideas (the tendency to be intellectually
curious and open to new ideas) and Values (the readiness to re-examine
traditional social, religious, and political values) and also the scores
obtained from the individual’s openness to experience subscale of personality,
is measured by the BIG FIVE personality scale.
is defined as the employee’s trait of being thorough, careful or vigilant, it
implies executing a task efficiently. It includes how efficient and organized
an employee is, and the score obtained by the individuals on conscientiousness
subscale of personality, is measured by the BIG FIVE personality scale.
can be defined as traits that manifest in outgoing, talkative, energetic
behaviours in an employee, and also the score is obtained from the individual,
on the extraversion subscale of personality, as measured by the BIG FIVE
refers to those traits that manifest in an employee’sbehaviour that is
perceived as kind, sympathetic, cooperative, warm and considerate. The score
obtained by the individual on the agreeableness subscale of personality, is
measured by the BIG FIVE personality scale.
can be defined as traits characterized by anxiety, fear, mood-swings, worry,
envy, frustration, jealousy, and loneliness. The score obtained by the
individual on neuroticism subscale of personality, is measured by the BIG FIVE
1.8 LITERATURE REVIEW
personality traits that this study sets out to test has been correlated with
other dependent variables in several researches, in a study carried out by
Hlatywayo, Mhlanga &Zingwe (2013), where they investigated if neuroticism
was a determinant of job satisfaction among bank employees. They used 126
members of staff of a bank comprising of male and female, permanent and
contract staff. Using SAS 9.1, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, ANOVA and
Waller-Duncan K-ratio T test and T test. They found that employees with low
level of neuroticism experience higher level of job satisfaction. Hlatywayo et
al concluded that the banking environment requires employees with low levels of
neuroticism due to the nature of services they offer. The submission of this
study cannot be generalized, since the study does not consider other traits in
the employees that may be responsible for their satisfaction on the job. For
instance gender and age could be additional variables that make an individual
with low neuroticism to have higher job satisfaction. Because Hodson (1989) in
her analysis of gender difference in the determination of job satisfaction
found that minor difference occur in men and women job satisfaction especially
in a job that is peculiar to a particular gender. At least some women do not
like complex work as men. Women also express slightly greater job
dissatisfaction than men they have children under six years of age (Hodson
the review of research conducted by Anderson et al. (2004), the main
organisational, team, job and individual level factors, were found to influence
employee innovativeness. These factors play a central role in influencing both
individual innovativeness and that they are borne through interaction among
employees. All these factors need to be considered when encouraging and
supporting innovativeness in contemporary organisations. It has to be
acknowledged that person, job and team-related factors such as personality
characteristics, autonomy, goals and relationships with colleagues and line
managers may play a more direct role in influencing the initiation phase of the
innovation process characterised by creativity, than organisational level
factors such as the structure or culture of the organisation.
et al., (2009) argued that although individuals are the source of innovations,
innovations rarely occur in isolation. In order to innovate, employees often
need to relate and interact with other individuals - inside or outside the
organisation-hence the importance of communication, articulation, and social
networking skills. They further looked at the previous empirical studies and
noted that there are inconsistent results regarding whether extraversion or
intraversion affect innovation. They concluded that introversion is related to
real life artistic endeavour, while extraversion is good predictor of creativity
and innovation (Patterson, 2002).
intelligence and curiosity are the traits associated with openness to
experience (Bakker et al., 2002). Referring to Watson & Hubbard (1996),
Bakker et al., (2002) noted that people with high on openness to experience reflect
a more flexible, imaginative, and intellectually curious approach in situations
characterized with stress. Blickle (1996) found that openness to experience is
related academic performance. Based on the previous studies, Patterson et al.,
(2009) asserted that openness to experience is the most salient personality
dimension to predict the propensity for innovation (Batey&Furnham, 2006)
and noted that there is a great deal of empirical studies with evidence of
positive relationship between openness to experience and innovation. Patterson
et al., (2009) further noted that some studies reflected that this relationship
might be moderated by the contextual factors (Burke & Witt, 2004).
innovative behaviour, Subramaniam (2012) in a study to determine the relationship
between selected predictor variables and innovative behaviour in the workplace.
The predictor variables are leader member relationship, leader role
expectation, demographic variables and problem-solving style. Using
questionnaire to collect data from 79 teacher educators, He found that only
leader-member exchange correlated significantly with support for innovation.
Leader-member exchange, leader role expectation and intuitive problem solving
style correlated significantly with individual's perception of adequacy of
resource supply for innovation. Leader member exchange is the only variable
that correlated significantly with psychological climate for innovation. He
also found a significant relationship between psychological climate and innovative
behaviour. Leader-member exchange, leader-role expectation, systematic
problem-solving style and intuitive problem-solving style correlated
significantly with innovative behaviour. He concluded that psychological
climate for innovation is influenced by leader-member exchange and that support
for innovation without resource supply will not result in innovative behaviour.
a study carried out by De Spiegelaere (2011), to determine the relationship
between job design and innovative work behaviour. The study was conducted using
952 employees from 17 different companies from various sectors. The surveys
were distributed to all employees that would participate in the upcoming
project of organisational innovation. The response rate was 53%, yet, 59 surveys
were left out of consideration due to missing data. Of the total of 893 useable
surveys, 47.89% were completed by male respondents. 60.48% of the respondents
had a degree of at most higher secondary education. The average age of the
respondents was 39 years old (median 40years and modus 31years). Further,
41.70% of the respondents were employed as blue-collar workers and 50.05% as
white-collar employees. The rest were employed as agency workers or as members
of the senior management. 70.22% of the respondents were engaged as full-time
findings from this study show that the relation between the job design and
innovative work behaviour differs significantly for blue-and white-collar
employees. Job resources, such as organizing tasks, have a more positive
relation with innovative work behaviour for white-collar workers in comparison
with blue-collar workers. This finding can be linked to previous literatures
which identified routine tasks both as potential obstacle and a driver for
the significant predictors, leader-member exchange explained about 37 per cent
of the variation in innovative behaviour, while leader role expectation
explained 13 per cent of variation in innovative behaviour. These two variables
explained about 50 per cent of the total variation in individual innovative
behaviour in the workplace.
another study,Oukes (2013), found a positive relationship between innovative
stimulating leadership and innovative work behaviour among workers, this
implies that when supervisors display innovative stimulating behaviour to a
large extent, employees will be more motivated.
above analysis is important to understand the fact that personality can
stimulate certain behaviour in employees, and also to understand situations
that can determine innovative behaviour.
this study, Personality is expected to predict innovative behaviour, it is
presumed that employees with high level of certain traits should exhibit
innovative behaviour and when some traits are low in an employee, they should
exhibit innovative behaviour.
trait has been defined by many scholars is different ways, Schultz &
Schultz (2005) explained personality as many attributes of an individual, a
totality or collection of various characteristics that goes beyond superficial
physical qualities. The word encompasses a host of subjective social and
emotional qualities as well, ones that we may not be able to see directly, that
a person may try to hide from us, or that we may try to hide from others. And
when we talk about personality we talk about what makes a person different from
other people, perhaps unique (Akinfala, 2005). Having established what
personality entails, reviews of relevant theories of personality to this study
are discussed below
1.9.1 FIVE-FACTOR THEORY
Five-factor model delineates five broad traits- extraversion, neuroticism,
agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience (Moss, 2008).
Costa & McCrae (1992 cited in Moss 2008) identified six facets that
correspond to each trait. For example Individual who exhibit Extraversion are
gregarious, assertive, warm, positive, and active and as well seek excitement.
The six facets that underpin Neuroticism include exhibition of anxiety, depression
and hostility as well as feel self-conscious, act of impulsively and experience
a sense of vulnerability, unable to accommodate aversive events. Agreeableness
can be inferred through traits such as trust in other individuals,
Straightforward and honest communication, altruistic and cooperative behaviour,
compliance rather than defiance, modesty and humility, as well as tender,
sympathetic attitudes. Openness to experience is the final trait, which relates
the extent to which individuals are open to fantasies, aesthetics, feelings as
well as novel actions, ideas and values, open individuals prefer novel intense,
diverse and complex experiences, while closed individuals prefer familiar tasks
and standardized routines (McCrae, 1996 cited in Moss 2008).
relevance of this theory to the present study is that, individuals in an
organisation possesses these traits and on several occasions, these traits has
been the determinants of employee performance of task and duties, therefore it
will be important to know whether individuals possessing any of these traits
will exhibit innovative behaviour.
1.9.2 THEORY OF PLANNED
theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is one of the most widely cited and applied
behaviour theories. It is one of a closely inter-related family of theories
which adopt a cognitive approach to explaining behaviour which centres on
individuals’ attitudes and beliefs. The TPB evolved from the theory of reasoned
action (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975 cited in Morris, Marzano, Dandy, & O’Brien
2012) which posited intention to act as the best Predictor of behaviour.
Intention is itself an outcome of the combination of attitudes towards
behaviour. That is the positive or negative evaluation of the behaviour and its
expected outcomes, and subjective norms, which are the social pressures exerted
on an individual resulting from their perceptions of what others think they
should do and their inclination to comply with these. The TPB added a third set
of factors as affecting intention (and behaviour); perceived behavioural
control. This is the perceived ease or difficulty with which the individual
will be able to perform or carry out the behaviour, and is very similar to
notions of self-efficacy.
Marzano, Dandy, & O’Brien (2012) explained that TPB is suited to predicting
behaviour and retrospective analysis of behaviour and has been particularly
widely used in relation to health and other sphere of Life. Evidence suggests
that the TPB can predict 20-30% of the variance in behaviour brought about via
interventions, and a greater proportion of intention (Morris, Marzano, Dandy,
& O’Brien 2012).
the assertions of this theory that, individuals tends to plan the outcomes of
their action within their cognition before going into it. In view of the present
study, it will be important to know, if individuals that possess any of the
personality of study, with a positive perception of the outcomes of innovative
behaviour, will exhibit innovative behaviour.
1.9.3 SOCIAL COGNITIVE
cognitive theory, refers to a psychological model of behaviour that emerged
primarily from the works of Albert Bandura (1977 ; 1986). The theory was
initially developed with an emphasis on the acquisition of social
behaviour. Social cognitive theory
continues to emphasize that learning occurs in a social context and that much
of what is learned, is gained through observation. This theory has been applied
in various aspects of human functioning such as, career choice, organisational
behaviour, mental and physical health. According to Zimmerman (1998), social
cognitive theory has also been applied extensively by those interested in
understanding classroom motivation, learning and achievement.
(1977; 1986) social cognitive theory provides a framework for understanding,
predicting, and changing human behaviour. According to social cognitive theory,
people hold two expectations concerning behaviour. The first relates to the
expectations concerning one’s ability to perform a particular behaviour, i.e.,
self-efficacy. The second encompasses the expected outcomes of the particular
is one of the most focal concepts in contemporary psychology research. It is defined as people’s judgment of their
capabilities to accomplish a certain level of performance (Bandura 1986). Thus,
self-efficacy does not reflect the skills one has but the judgment of what one
can do with whatever skills one possesses (Bandura 1986). Gist and Mitchell
(1992) stressed that self-efficacy is task-specific. It is a conditional state
that is proximal to behaviour (Chen et al. 2000 cited in Dörner, 2012).), i.e.,
it directly influences behaviour.
expectations refer to the beliefs of the consequences of one’s actions
(Bandura,1986). Dörner, (2012) posited that most intentional human behaviour is
regulated by forethought. This means that individuals anticipate the likely
outcomes of their behaviour. Outcome expectations play an important role in
human behaviour. People are more likely to engage in specific behaviour when
they believe that the behaviour leads to a positive, valued consequence. On the
contrary, people try to avoid prospective actions if they believe that the
particular action results in outcomes that are not favourable (Dörner, 2012). Also, Social cognitive theory suggests that
enactive attainment, vicarious experiences, verbal persuasion, and
physiological and psychological state contribute a variety of personal and
contextual factors that can influence work-related self-efficacy (Bandura,
the work place is a social environment, the theory has its relevance in this
study based on the fact that individuals that possess certain personality
believe in their self-efficacies, for example someone who is an extravert might
want to showcase his innovative dexterities if he believes he has the
competence. The outcome expectation of this theory is related to the already
explained Theory of Planned Behaviour. Therefore this study will want to
compare the suggestions of the Social Cognitive Theory to the outcome of this
1.10 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
(1) Will there be a significant
relationship between extraversion personality trait and innovation?
(2) Will there be a significant
relationship between agreeableness personality trait and innovation?
(3) Will there be a significant
relationship between conscientiousness personality trait and innovation?
(4) Will there be a significant
relationship between neuroticism personality trait and innovation?
(5) Will there be a relationship
between openness personality trait and innovation?
1.11 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
(1) There will be a significant
relationship between extraversion personality trait and innovation.
(2) There be a significant
relationship between agreeableness personality trait and innovation (3) There
will be a significant relationship between conscientiousness personality trait
(4) There will be a significant
relationship between neuroticism personality trait and innovation.
(5) There will be a significant
relationship between openness personality trait and innovation.