+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com
  

Critically evaluate the article’s strengths, weaknesses, and contribution to the study field using the outline below as a guide write 3 pages in APA format with following sections:

Executive Summary

Literature review

Data Analysis

Results and conclusion

3091

https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318779127

Journal of Management
Vol. 45 No. 8, November 2019 3091 –3113

DOI: 10.1177/0149206318779127
© The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions

Learning off the Job: Examining Part-time
Entrepreneurs as Innovative Employees

David R. Marshall
University of Dayton

Walter D. Davis
Clay Dibrell

Anthony P. Ammeter
University of Mississippi

In this paper, we explain and examine how engaging in part-time entrepreneurship (creating
and managing side businesses while remaining employed for wages in existing organizations)
uniquely positions individuals to exhibit innovative behavior in employee roles. To study this
phenomenon, we integrate the literatures on entrepreneurial learning, knowledge and learning
transfer, and employee innovation. We hypothesize that part-time entrepreneurship provides an
opportunity for individuals to acquire knowledge and skills conducive to enacting innovative
behaviors as employees. Multilevel regression analysis of a sample of 1,221 employee responses
across 137 organizational units provides evidence to support our positive transferal hypothesis.
Further, we find that individual differences in goal orientations and work-unit climates for
innovation strengthen these relationships.

Keywords: employee innovation; part-time entrepreneurship; learning

To thrive in competitive markets, firms innovate by exploring new ideas and exploiting
existing knowledge and resources (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991). Recent perspec-
tives assert that firm innovation is dependent, at least in part, on innovative behaviors exhib-
ited by employees (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004; Mom, Van den Bosch, & Volberda, 2007;
Raisch & Birkinshaw, 2008). However, the contexts and mechanisms through which employ-
ees learn knowledge, skills, and abilities leading to innovative behavior at work are less clear
(Gibson & Birkinshaw; O’Reilly & Tushman, 2013). Beyond developing new skills within

Corresponding author: David R. Marshall, University of Dayton, 300 College Park Dr., Dayton, OH 45469, USA.

E-mail: [email protected]

779127 JOMXXX10.1177/0149206318779127Journal of ManagementMarshall et al. / Learning off the Job
research-article2018

3092 Journal of Management / November 2019

one’s employee role, studies suggest abilities can also be developed outside primary work
roles (e.g., Eriksson & Ortega, 2006). In this study, we advance the intriguing possibility that
employees engaged in entrepreneurial venturing activities outside of (in addition to) wage-
employment roles are uniquely positioned to develop, refine, and transfer innovative capa-
bilities from entrepreneurial to employee roles.

We introduce part-time entrepreneurship as a context and entrepreneurial learning as a
mechanism through which employee innovation is enhanced. Entrepreneurship, as a process
of creating ventures to pursue value-added opportunities (Bygrave & Hofer, 1991), offers
participants a unique learning context. Indeed, entrepreneurial learning theory describes the
development of knowledge and unique skills through entrepreneurial experiences (Wang &
Chugh, 2014). In particular, individuals learn to exploit existing knowledge to incrementally
improve products and services and explore new knowledge to generate new ideas (Politis,
2005). Thus, part-time entrepreneurs are primed for developing innovative capabilities.

Part-time (hybrid) entrepreneurship refers to simultaneous participation in wage-employment
and entrepreneurship wherein wage-employees engage in entrepreneurial activities outside
of primary work roles (Folta, Delmar, & Wennberg, 2010). While traditional management
practice frowns on employees holding multiple jobs (Jamal & Crawford, 1981), creating and
managing a new business while holding a primary employment position may be a particu-
larly special case of multiple job holding given that an individual takes on a new entrepre-
neurial role rather than simply an additional employee role (Stevenson & Sahlman, 1987). In
this case, part-time entrepreneurs are founders and owners in unique learning contexts (Dyer,
1994) that may facilitate the development and transfer of innovative capabilities.

Theories of interrole learning transfer explain that positive interrole exchanges occur
because individuals view knowledge and skills generated in one role as particularly valuable
to performance in another (Baldwin & Ford, 1988; Greenhaus & Powell, 2006; Noe &
Schmitt, 1986). Therefore, we hypothesize that the extent to which an individual is engaged
in part-time entrepreneurship is associated with greater exhibition of innovative behavior in
primary employee roles (see Figure 1). However, individual motivation to transfer learning
is influenced by learning and achievement preferences such as one’s goal orientation
(Chadwick & Raver, 2015; Chiaburu & Marinova, 2005) and contextual factors such as
work-group climate (Mathieu, Tannenbaum, & Salas, 1992; Wallace, Butts, Johnson, Stevens,
& Smith, 2016). Accordingly, we examine moderating effects of individual goal orientations
and work-unit climate for innovation on relationships between part-time entrepreneurship
and innovative behavior in employee roles.

By introducing part-time entrepreneurship as a context and entrepreneurial learning as a
mechanism through which employee innovation can be developed and transferred to
employee roles, we contribute to a growing body of literature focused on understanding the
ways in which employees can develop and improve innovative skill sets (Liu, Gong, Zhou,
& Huang, 2017; Sung & Choi, 2014). Our integration of employee innovation research,
entrepreneurial learning theory, and learning transfer research extends our understanding of
drivers of employee innovation (Anderson, Potocnik, & Zhou, 2014; Wallace et al., 2016).
While there may be costs associated with simultaneous employee-entrepreneurial role par-
ticipation (Hobfoll, 1989), our model suggests that managers who recognize the value of
part-time entrepreneurship might seek ways to facilitate the transfer of learned knowledge
and skills. Therefore, we shed light on the part-time entrepreneur as an important member of
organizational life who is distinctly situated to contribute to organizational innovation.

Marshall et al. / Learning off the Job 3093

Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

Moving beyond research treating employee and entrepreneurial roles as mutually exclu-
sive (e.g., career-choice studies; Douglas & Shepherd, 2002), both scholars and practitioners
acknowledge the existence of wage-employment and entrepreneurship career overlap. For
example, Entrepreneur magazine regularly publishes articles highlighting the benefits of par-
ticipating in part-time entrepreneurship (Goodman, 2005; Zwilling, 2014). Likewise,
research in labor economics reports that as many as 44% of entrepreneurs mix their time
between organizational and self-employment contexts (Folta et al., 2010; Parker, 1997).
Accordingly, there is an emerging call for research that focuses on “everyday” forms of
entrepreneurship (Welter, Baker, Audretsch, & Gartner, 2017) and the part-time entrepre-
neurs who perform these roles.

Much of the scant research on part-time entrepreneurship assumes that simultaneous
entrepreneurial and employee role engagement is a transitional stage toward eventual full-
time entrepreneurial entry. Yet other studies indicate that full-time entrepreneurial entry may
take place only after achieving high levels of self-employment to wage-employment income
(Folta et al., 2010) or when an individual is willing and able to commit sufficient time to new
venturing (Burmeister-Lamp, Lévesque, & Schade, 2012). Recently, scholars proposed that
in many cases, part-time entrepreneurs never fully transition, opting instead to remain in a
state of career hybridity (Thorgren, Sirén, Nordström, & Wincent, 2016). Regardless of
whether part-time entrepreneurship is transitional or permanent, it offers participants the
“potential to learn” that might not otherwise exist (Folta et al., 2010: 265). Part-time entre-
preneurship as a “learning-by-doing” context (Petrova, 2012: 489) can result in increased
entrepreneurial skills and abilities (Petrova, 2010; Raffiee & Feng, 2014). Thus, individuals
engaged in entrepreneurship, even in part-time capacities, participate in important entrepre-
neurial learning.

Figure 1
Innovative Behavioral Transfer From Entrepreneurial to Employee Roles

3094 Journal of Management / November 2019

Entrepreneurial Learning

Entrepreneurial learning theory emerged at the intersection of organizational learning and
entrepreneurship research (Harrison & Leitch, 2005) and from an individual perspective,
explains the process by which entrepreneurial experiences transform into entrepreneurial
knowledge (Wang & Chugh, 2014). Entrepreneurial experiences encompass the participation
in or observation of the creation or maintenance of a new venture (Cope, 2005; Cope &
Watts, 2000). To explain how individuals learn through entrepreneurial experiences, scholars
draw from research and theory related to exploratory and exploitative approaches to learning
(March, 1991). Exploitative learning involves the use of existing knowledge structures to
guide the acquisition of additional information that can be used to improve entrepreneurial
practices. This type of learning often involves limiting variations in practice (e.g., correcting
mistakes) to improve the efficiency of operations. Exploratory learning involves experimen-
tation with new variations in practices that may result in desirable results. Oftentimes, the
efficacy of such exploratory learning is unknown until after the results of these variations are
observed. Individuals engaged in entrepreneurship develop new knowledge as they acquire
information that complements existing knowledge structures (exploitative) and experiment
with new practices to develop fundamentally different knowledge structures (exploratory)
(Bingham & Davis, 2012).

Given that individuals participating in entrepreneurship are engaged in exploratory and
exploitative learning, scholars suggest the key outcome of entrepreneurial learning is entre-
preneurial knowledge and the ability to recognize and act on opportunities for innovation
(Corbett, 2005; Politis, 2005). Alvarez and Busenitz (2001: 762) conceptualize entrepreneur-
ial knowledge as “the ability to take conceptual, abstract information of where and how to
obtain undervalued resources, explicit and tacit, and how to deploy and exploit these
resources.” Thus, entrepreneurial knowledge increases an individual’s capacity to exhibit
innovative behaviors.

Transfer of Innovative Learning From Entrepreneurial to Employee Roles

Transfer of learning occurs when knowledge obtained in one setting results in exhibition
of related behaviors in another setting (Baldwin & Ford, 1988; Noe, 1986). Successful trans-
fer of learning between roles typically transpires through an instrumental path allocation
process in which valuable resources generated in one role become instrumental to enhancing
performance in another (Greenhaus & Powell, 2006). For example, learning transfer from
training sessions to real working situations is most effective when employees learn knowl-
edge and skills that are relevant to behaviors needed to accomplish role tasks (Axtell, Maitlis,
& Yearta, 1997). In our model, part-time entrepreneurs gain learning experiences through
entrepreneurial participation that provides increased capabilities to innovate in employee
roles.

As previously reviewed, part-time entrepreneurship offers a useful and low-risk context
through which an individual can increase entrepreneurial knowledge and innovative capa-
bilities (Raffiee & Feng, 2014). Engaging in entrepreneurship requires the development of
experience and knowledge necessary for the exploration and exploitation of opportunities
(Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). Therefore, learning to be more entrepreneurially minded
may have important developmental benefits in terms of increasing innovative behavioral

Marshall et al. / Learning off the Job 3095

capabilities. Indeed, learning experiences in entrepreneurship are primarily transformed into
useful knowledge via innovative decision making modes (Politis, 2005). Consequently,
based on our review of entrepreneurial learning theory, we contend that entrepreneurial
learning is a useful mechanism through which part-time entrepreneurs generate and refine
abilities to exhibit innovative behaviors.

Innovation is defined as the “intentional introduction and application within a role, group,
or organization of ideas, processes, products or procedures, new to the relevant unit of adop-
tion, designed to significantly benefit the individual, the group, organization or wider society”
(West & Farr, 1990: 9). Innovative behavior is increasingly seen as important to the enactment
of employee roles (Scott & Bruce, 1994). As individuals acquire entrepreneurial knowledge
through their part-time entrepreneurship experiences, they are likely to exhibit innovative
behavior in their roles as employees as they see opportunities to improve performance.

Individual innovative behavior can be both exploratory and exploitative in nature.
Exploratory behaviors include the introduction of new ideas, solutions, services, or products
associated with one’s work role, while exploitative behaviors include reliance on existing
knowledge to make incremental improvements to work procedures (Lee & Meyer-Doyle,
2017). While at the firm level it is difficult to engage in both exploratory and exploitative
activities (March, 1991), research suggests individuals may be more adept in enacting both
(Rogan & Mors, 2014; Taylor & Greve, 2006; Zacher, Robinson, & Rosing, 2016), which are
valuable to performance of employee role tasks (Lee & Meyer-Doyle). We argue that indi-
viduals simultaneously engaged in entrepreneurial activities while maintaining employee
roles may be more adept than other employees at demonstrating exploratory innovative
behaviors in the workplace by looking for new ways to improve organizational processes,
expand or go beyond management demands, and looking for new technologies to improve
how work is accomplished. Likewise, these individuals may be more capable of undertaking
exploitative innovative behaviors by making existing processes more efficient and finding
synergies among resources to accomplish work more effectively.

Hypothesis 1: The extent to which an individual engages in part-time entrepreneurship is positively
associated with his or her innovative behavior in employee roles.

Individual Differences and Contextual Moderators

Employee behavior is often viewed as a function of ability, motivation, and opportunity
(Gardner, Wright, & Moynihan, 2011). Therefore, the extent to which capabilities developed
in entrepreneurial roles are transferred and exhibited in primary employee roles depends on
both individual and contextual factors affecting motivation and perceived opportunities to
act. Learning through experience is not an automatic process, and not all individuals are
motivated to learn (Colquitt & Simmering, 1998). Individuals must have the desire to trans-
form and integrate experiences into new and existing knowledge structures and identify
opportunities to do so.

We contend that the relationship between part-time entrepreneurship and innovative
behavior is moderated by goal orientation (motivation) and work-unit climate for innovation
(opportunity). Goal orientation is often studied as one of the most fundamental individual
traits guiding motivation in both learning and achievement settings (Button, Mathieu, &

3096 Journal of Management / November 2019

Zajac, 1996; Kanfer, Frese, & Johnson, 2017). Scholars are increasingly focusing on achieve-
ment goal theory (Dweck & Leggett, 1988) for an understanding of the individual’s role in
organizational learning processes, and individual differences in goal orientation are often
seen as a primary determinant of learning and learning transfer (Chadwick & Raver, 2015).
Other researchers argue that organizational climates arising from supportive policies, rules,
and leaders are critical in providing the opportunity for engaging in innovative behavior
(Scott & Bruce, 1994; West & Richter, 2008).

Goal orientation. Goal orientation refers to relatively stable dispositions toward
developing personal capabilities and demonstrating task competence. Goal orientation
arises out of one’s view of whether ability is fixed (perhaps innate) or can be improved
through learning, task practice, and experimentation with new approaches to task accom-
plishment (Button et al., 1996). Three dimensions of goal orientation include: learning
orientation, performance-proving orientation, and performance-avoiding orientation.
Individuals higher in learning orientation view ability and task mastery as something
that can be improved through learning and experimentation and therefore tend to seek
out challenging experiences that provide opportunities to learn (Ames & Archer, 1988)
and acquire new knowledge useful for developing new capabilities (VandeWalle, Brown,
Cron, & Slocum, 1999). Furthermore, increased learning orientation can lead to the elab-
oration of task strategies, which is the purposeful cognitive experimentation with task
schemas, leading to the development of procedural knowledge (Steele-Johnson, Beaure-
gard, Hoover, & Schmidt, 2000).

Given their desires for learning and the subsequent development of knowledge, we con-
tend that part-time entrepreneurs with higher learning goal orientations will experience
greater learning through entrepreneurial experiences than lower learning-oriented individu-
als. Hence, part-timers with higher learning orientations have greater capacities for exhibit-
ing innovative behaviors in employee roles. Furthermore, we expect higher learning
orientations to provide increased motivation for part-timers to transfer their knowledge and
skills to the exhibition of innovative behaviors at work as higher learners tend to be less
deterred by the risky and/or uncertain performance situations associated with innovative
activities (Hirst, Van Knippenberg, & Zhou, 2009). Indeed, people with higher learning ori-
entations often engage in more risky innovative learning (Chadwick & Raver, 2015) and are
more inclined to transfer knowledge into actual behavioral settings despite high risks of
failure (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002).

Hypothesis 2: Learning goal orientation moderates the association between engagement in part-time
entrepreneurship and innovative behavior in employee roles such that the association will be
more positive for persons with higher learning goal orientations.

Individuals with higher performance-proving orientations tend to seek out opportunities
to improve performance by rehearsing existing task strategies rather than experimenting with
new approaches (Steele-Johnson et al., 2000) and are inclined to engage in learning experi-
ences that enable them to refine existing capabilities (Chadwick & Raver, 2015). Therefore,
part-timers with higher proving orientations likely develop greater innovative capabilities
than those with lower proving orientations and are uniquely equipped to draw on their newly
developed entrepreneurial knowledge and skills in enacting innovative behaviors in employee
roles. Further, persons with higher performance-proving orientations are more motivated to

Marshall et al. / Learning off the Job 3097

demonstrate their competence and gain favorable judgements from others than lower prov-
ing-oriented people (VandeWalle, Cron, & Slocum, 2001). Thus, we expect that part-timers
with higher proving orientations experience increased motivation to transfer entrepreneurial
learning to the enhancement of their performance in employee roles through greater innova-
tive behaviors, thereby garnering favor with organizational leaders and coworkers.

Hypothesis 3: Performance-proving goal orientation moderates the association between engage-
ment in part-time entrepreneurship and innovative behavior in employee roles such that the
association will be more positive for persons with higher performance-proving goal
orientations.

An individual with higher performance-avoiding goal orientation views ability as rela-
tively fixed, such that experimentation with new approaches to task accomplishment is
unnecessary and perhaps even risky (Hirst et al., 2009). As such, higher avoidance goal-
oriented individuals tend to evade opportunities to engage in learning (Chadwick & Raver,
2015). Accordingly, we posit that higher avoiding goal orientations make it harder for part-
time entrepreneurs to develop innovative behavioral skill sets such as those acquired by high
learners and provers. We further contend that part-time entrepreneurs with higher avoiding
goal orientations than others lack the potential to make unique innovative contributions in
employee roles. Additionally, performance-avoiding goal orientation is characterized by a
strong desire to avoid negative performance perceptions (VandeWalle, 1997). Because the
outcomes of innovative behaviors are often uncertain and can result in failure, part-time
entrepreneurs who are also higher in avoidance orientation may be less motivated to transfer
entrepreneurial learning to the exhibition of innovative behavior in employment roles. These
individuals may fail to recognize the important information embedded in learning experi-
ences and are less likely to utilize this information in new situations.

Hypothesis 4: Performance-avoiding goal orientation moderates the association between engage-
ment in part-time entrepreneurship and innovative behavior in employee roles such that the
association will be more positive for persons with lower performance-avoiding goal
orientations.

Work-unit climate for innovation. Climate refers to the shared perceptions of the types
of behaviors that are encouraged in a work-unit through meanings attributed to policies,
practices, and norms (Schneider, 1990). Climate is typically studied as an attribute of a group
or an organization rather than at the individual level (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013).
When group policies and norms reward and encourage innovative behavior, group members
are more likely to share perceptions of opportunities to engage in innovative behavior (Scott
& Bruce, 1994; West & Richter, 2008). Specifically, a climate for innovation consists of
a shared vision of innovative outcomes, perceived safety to participate in the innovative
process, high collective standards of task performance, and shared perceptions of support
for innovation in the form of needed resources (Anderson & West, 1998; Somech & Drach-
Zahavy, 2013).

When employees in a work-unit share similar perceptions that innovative behavior is
highly encouraged, rewarded, and supported, it is more likely that part-time entrepreneurs
will be motivated to transfer their entrepreneurial knowledge and skills toward innovation in

3098 Journal of Management / November 2019

employee roles. Perhaps most importantly, when a work-unit provides the psychological
safety to promote and champion innovative ideas, part-timers will feel free of the risk and
uncertainty that often accompany innovation (Choi, 2007). Additionally, innovative group
climates can help part-time entrepreneurs recognize how their entrepreneurial skills might be
applicable in their work tasks by conveying clear messages about what innovative behaviors
look like within the unit (Sung & Choi, 2014). However, a group climate lacking in support
of innovation may suggest to part-timers that learned entrepreneurial knowledge does not
pertain to employee roles or is not valued, and therefore, part-time entrepreneurs may be less
inclined to transfer entrepreneurial learning to innovative behavior at work.

Hypothesis 5: Work-unit climate for innovation moderates the association between engagement in
part-time entrepreneurship and innovative behavior in employee roles such that the association
will be more positive under conditions of higher innovative climate.

Methodology

Design and Sample

We tested our hypotheses on a sample of employees of a large logistics and security com-
pany working in eight locations throughout the United States. This firm is useful for testing
hypotheses regarding part-time entrepreneurship and employee innovative behavior for sev-
eral reasons. First, this company emphasizes team-based approaches to organizing and dis-
tributing workload, thereby facilitating the testing of group-climate effects. Specifically, the
sample consists of 137 unique teams distinguished by office codes assigned by the personnel
department. Each office, or work-unit, is composed of at least two employees of varying
functional areas (43 occupational codes; e.g., finance, HR, maintenance, R&D, supply chain,
business development, etc.). Second, to avoid biased results, the sample firm provides
employee participants of varying degrees of innovative capabilities (as opposed to employ-
ees of high-tech innovation firms of Silicon Valley) to accurately capture the effects of part-
time entrepreneurial engagement on innovative behavior within primary employing roles. As
part of its vision, the firm aims to provide innovative and cost-effective capabilities to cus-
tomers. Thus, while the company emphasizes the importance of innovation, its reputation is
not one of high-tech or necessarily high innovation and provides a valid context in which to
test our hypotheses.

The survey instrument was distributed via the organization’s internal survey system to
roughly 5,500 workers. Useable responses totaled 1,221, a response rate of 22.2%. The sam-
ple has the following characteristics: 71% male, average age of 37 years, average tenure of
11 years, 53% holding a college or advanced degree, and 69% considered white-collar or
non–maintenance personnel.

Construct Measurement and Validity

Engagement in part-time entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is a broad concept with
many varied conceptualizations and definitions, making its measurement difficult (Gart-
ner, 1990). Recently, scholars have warned against narrowly defining entrepreneurial
activity in scholarly research to avoid restricting empirical evaluation (Welter et al., 2017).

Marshall et al. / Learning off the Job 3099

Consistent with this logic but also to distinguish between part-time entrepreneurship, other
forms of secondary wage-employment work, and other activities that fail to generate eco-
nomic value (e.g., clubs, societies, and/or other hobby-based groups), we adopt a view of
entrepreneurship shared by many scholars that value-creating opportunities are realized
through the creation, implementation, and management of new business entities (Alvarez
& Busenitz, 2001). Thus, part-time entrepreneurship reflects engagement in the creation
and/or management of an entrepreneurial venture while maintaining a role as an employee
in an existing firm.

To avoid restricting the range of possible entrepreneurial ventures undertaken in our sample,
we allowed respondents to determine the extent to which they were actually involved in entre-
preneurial venture creation and management. That is to say, we did not provide a formal defini-
tion of entrepreneurship to respondents. Rather, through three items, individuals identified the
extent to which they were currently engaged in entrepreneurial activities (related to starting
and/or managing their own entrepreneurial ventures) outside of primary employment roles. A
7-point Likert-type scale was used for scoring each item. These activities included “founding
an entrepreneurial business,” “running a part-time business,” and “creating a for-profit or non-
profit entrepreneurial venture.” We scattered distractor items related to one’s involvement in
other various activities outside of work but unrelated to entrepreneurial pursuits throughout the
scale to aide in the distinction of part-time entrepreneurship and other types of activities such
as “involvement in civic organizations or clubs.” To better distinguish entrepreneurial activities
from other profit-generating activities not typically considered as entrepreneurial, such as con-
sulting or driving for Uber, we included an “involvement in self-employment” activities item
(full scales reported in the Appendix). Distractor/distinguisher items were not used in the final
analytical model. Rather, these items helped to discriminate between entrepreneurship and non-
entrepreneurship activities. Alpha reliability for the measure is 0.97.

Innovative behavior (in employee roles). We relied primarily on Jansen, Van Den Bosch,
and Volberda’s (2006) questionnaire to generate a list of potential items to adapt to the individ-
ual level given that few studies have dealt explicitly with exploratory and exploitative behavior
at the individual level. The Jansen et al. survey was designed to assess unit-level innovative
behaviors based on managerial responses. Where appropriate for our research sample and set-
ting, we maintained similar verbiage of the items while replacing each unit-level referent such
as we and our with I and replaced statements of unit-level services with more appropriate indi-
vidual-level tasks or other established items of innovative behavior (Scott & Bruce, 1994). We
reviewed and revised items to ensure the measures accounted for multiple stages of innovative
behavior (i.e., idea generation, coalition building, and implementation; Scott & Bruce, 1994).
To enhance construct validity, we then pretested items through interviews with six senior-level
managers and four members of the personnel department (responsible for maintaining posi-
tion descriptions of each employee) of our sampled firm. Each interviewee was asked to indi-
cate item phrasing that was relevant to the types of work processes performed by the typical
employee of the firm and suggest changes to improve overall understandability of each item
for their employees.

We followed the approach of other scholars in relying on self-reported assessments of
innovative behavior (Dorenbosch, Van Engen, & Verhagen, 2005; Jansen et al., 2006)
because peer judgements may not adequately capture the full range of innovative behaviors

3100 Journal of Management / November 2019

of an employee given that much of the innovation process takes place in one’s mind (Janssen,
2000). Likewise, peers and/or supervisors may not recognize incremental innovations
employees make in individual work tasks and processes as these changes may be “subtle” in
nature (Janssen 2000: 292). Meta-analyses empirically demonstrate that “others-rated” p