ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างความพร้อมต่อการเปลี่ยนแปลง ความผูกพันต่อองค์การ กรอบความคิดแบบเติบโต กับพฤติกรรมเชิงสร้างสรรค์นวัตกรรมใน การทำงาน: กรณีศึกษาบุคลากรสำนักงานปลัดกระทรวงศึกษาธิการ

Sorasich Phisutkritdakan; Rangsima Homsettee

Authors

Sorasich Phisutkritdakan Master of Science Program in Psychology, Faculty of Education, Ramkhamhaeng University
Rangsima Homsettee Master of Science Program in Psychology, Faculty of Education, Ramkhamhaeng University

Keywords:

innovative work behavior, readiness for change, organizational commitment, growth mindset

Abstract

The objectives of this research were to: 1) examine the levels of innovative work behavior, readiness for change, organizational engagement, and growth mindset; 2) compare innovative work behavior based on personal factors, namely gender, generation, educational level, and years of service; 3) analyze the relationships between readiness for change, organizational commitment, and growth mindset with innovative work behavior; and 4) investigate the prediction power of readiness for change, organizational commitment, and growth mindset in forecasting innovative working behavior. The sample consisted of 214 personnel working in the headquarters of the Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education, Bangkok. The research instrument was a five-part questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient analysis. The findings revealed that: 1) innovative work behavior differed significantly in accordance with generation and years of service. The differences in gender and educational level yielded no statistically significant variations in innovative work behavior. 2) Readiness for change and growth mindset were positively and strongly correlated with innovative work behavior. Conversely, organizational commitment was negatively and weakly correlated with innovative work behavior, with both relationships being statistically significant at the .01 level. 3) Readiness for change, organizational commitment, and growth mindset jointly predicted 74.3 percent of the variance in the innovative work behavior of the personnel, at the statistically significant level of .01. Growth mindset was the strongest predictor of innovative work behavior followed in descending order by readiness for change and organizational commitment, with the standardized regression coefficient of .520, .360, and .188, respectively.

References

วิฑูรย์ โชตนะพันธ์. (2563). ความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างความผูกพันของพนักงาน พฤติกรรมการเป็นสมาชิกที่ดีขององค์กร และผลการปฏิบัติงานส่วนบุคคล กรณีศึกษาการประปานครหลวง. การค้นคว้าอิสระบริหารธุรกิจมหาบัณฑิต สาขาวิชาการจัดการธุรกิจสากล มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์. https://ethesisarchive.library.tu.ac.th/thesis/2020/TU_2020_6202010051_13087_13278.pdf.

Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to the social psychology of creativity. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429501234.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.

Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2013). Employee empowerment, employee attitudes, and performance: Testing a causal model. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 490–506. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12049.

Holt, D. T., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Harris, S. G. (2007). Readiness for organizational change: The systematic development of a scale. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(2), 232–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886306295295.

Janssen, O. (2004). How fairness perceptions make innovative behavior more or less stressful. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.238.

Lee, G., & Kim, C. (2024). Antecedents of innovative behavior in public organizations: The role of public service motivation, organizational commitment, and perceived innovative culture. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1378217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1378217.

Liu, Q., & Tong, Y. (2022). Employee growth mindset and innovative behavior: The roles of employee strengths use and strengths-based leadership. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 814154. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.814154.

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). The relationships of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 677–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x.

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248.

Sengupta, S., Bajaj, B., Singh, A., Sharma, S., Patel, P., & Prikshat, V. (2023). Innovative work behavior driving Indian startups go global: The role of authentic leadership and readiness for change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 36(1), 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-05-2022-0156.

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4, Article 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67.

Xu, Y., Liao, C., Huang, L., Li, Z., Xiao, H., & Pan, Y. (2024). The positive side of stress: Investigating the impact of challenge stressors on innovative behavior in higher education. Acta Psychologica, 246, 104255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104255.

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory analysis (2nd ed). Harper & Row.

Yu, T., He, L., Ying, H., Liu, J., Wu, Y., Wang, Y., & Pan, X. (2024). Growth mindset and job crafting: A trait activation perspective with the moderating role of job autonomy. Behavioral Sciences, 14(12), 1221. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14121221.