The prospective innovator in public university by scrutinizing particular personality traits

• Autorzy: Abbas E. W. , Hadi S. , Rajiani I.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17512/pjms.2018.18.1.01

Warianty tytułu

PL

Szczegółowe badanie cech personalnych jako innowator dla uniwersytetów publicznych

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The administrative process innovation was adopted with enthusiasm by the Western advanced industrialized countries and was taken for granted as a superior approach that should be practiced. However, public organizations in Indonesia are structured and run differently making public sector employees may have different views toward new ways of doing the job. This article aims to reveal who innovates in the organization by analyzing typical personality traits. The hypotheses are tested through a sample of 200 employees of public universities located in South Kalimantan, Indonesia, and structural equation modeling is used. Applying Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), the five-factor personality in this research is labeled as adjustment (neuroticism), sociability (extraversion), likeability (agreeableness), prudence (conscientiousness), and school success (openness to experience). The results are discussed regarding the implications for what one can learn from individual-level studies of personality and innovation. Suggestions are offered to those universities interested in encouraging service quality in the public sector via innovation.

PL

Innowacje w procesie administracyjnym zostały przyjęte z entuzjazmem przez zachodnie zaawansowane kraje uprzemysłowione i uznano je za oczywiste, jako nadrzędne podejście, które powinno być praktykowane. Jednak organizacje publiczne w Indonezji są zorganizowane i działają w różny sposób, sprawiając, że pracownicy sektora publicznego mogą mieć różne poglądy na nowe sposoby wykonywania pracy. Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu ujawnienie, kto wprowadza innowacje w organizacji, analizując typowe cechy osobowości. Hipotezy są testowane na próbie 200 pracowników uniwersytetów publicznych zlokalizowanych w południowym Kalimantan w Indonezji i wykorzystuje się modelowanie równań strukturalnych. Stosując Inwentarz Osobowości Hogana (HPI), pięcioczynnikowa osobowość określana jest, jako dostosowanie (neurotyczność), towarzyskość (ekstrawersja), sympatia (ugodowość), roztropność (sumienność) i sukces szkolny (otwartość na doświadczenie). Omówiono wyniki dotyczące konsekwencji, jakie można wyciągnąć z badań osobowości i innowacji na poziomie indywidualnym. Propozycje oferowane są uniwersytetom zainteresowanym promowaniem jakości usług w sektorze publicznym za pomocą innowacji.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

five-factor personality; innovation; public sector; Indonesia

PL

pięcioczynnikowa osobowość; innowacja; sektor publiczny; Indonezja

• Wydawca: Czestochowa University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Management Studies
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: Vol. 18, No. 1
• Strony: 9--19
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 40 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Abbas E. W.

• University of Lambung Mangkurat Banjarmasin, Indonesia

autor

Hadi S.

• University of Lambung Mangkurat Banjarmasin, Indonesia

autor

Rajiani I.

• STIA Dan Manajemen Kepelabuhan Barunawati Surabaya, Indonesia

Bibliografia

• 1. Ab Rahman Z.N., Ismail N., Rajiani I., 2018, Challenges for managing non-technological innovation: a case from Malaysian public sector, “Polish Journal of Management Studies”, 17.
• 2. Ahmad B., 2018, Service Innovation in Local Government: Analysis of Business Information Services in South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia, “Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences”, 9(3).
• 3. Bagozzi R.P., Yi Y., Nassen K.D., 1998, Representation of measurement error in marketing variables: Review of approaches and extension to three-facet designs, “Journal of Econometrics”, 89(1-2).
• 4. Chin W.W., 2010, Bootstrap cross-validation indices for PLS path model assessment, [In:] Handbook of partial least squares, (pp. 83-97), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• 5. Carter L., Bélanger F., 2005, The utilization of e-government services: citizen trust, innovation and acceptance factors, “Information Systems Journal, 15(1).
• 6. Common R., 2017, Public management and policy transfer in South-East Asia, [In:] Policy transfer in global perspective, (pp. 143-161), Routledge.
• 7. Cristea L.A., 2017, The Share and Evolution of Indirect Taxes in the State’s Revenues-Case of Romania, “Annals of the University of Petroșani - Economics”, 17(1).
• 8. Darono A., Irawati D., 2015, Service innovation in the complex environment of tax administration: the Indonesian public sector perspective, “Interantional Journal of Innovation and Regional Development”, 6(1).
• 9. Damanpour F., Aravind D., 2012, Managerial innovation: Conceptions, processes and antecedents, “Management and Organization Review”, 8(2).
• 10. De Vries H., Bekkers V., Tummers L., 2016, Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda, “Public Administration”, 94(1).
• 11. George J.M., Zhou J., 2001, When openness to experience and conscientiousnessare related to creative behavior: An interactional approach, “Journal of Applied Psychology”, 86.
• 12. Goodhue D.L., Lewis W., Thompson R., 2012, Does PLS have advantages for small sample size or non-normal data? “Mis Quarterly”.
• 13. Hair J.F., Sarstedt M., Ringle C.M., Mena J.A., 2012, An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research, “Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science”, 40(3).
• 14. Hofstede G., McCrae R.R., 2004, Personality and culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture, “Cross-Cultural Research, 38(1).
• 15. Hogan R., 2005, In defense of personality measurement: New wine for old whiners, “Human Performance”, 18(4).
• 16. Holland J., 2007, Tools for institutional, political, and social analysis of policy reform: a sourcebook for development practitioners, The World Bank.
• 17. Homburg V., 2018, ICT, E-Government and E-Governance: Bits & Bytes for Public Administration, [In:] The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe, (pp. 347-361), Palgrave Macmillan, London.
• 18. Judge T.A., Zapata C.P., 2015, The person-situation debate revisited: Effect of situation strength and trait activation on the validity of the Big Five personality traits in predicting job performance, “Academy of Management Journal”, 58(4).
• 19. Kim S., Kim H.J., Lee H., 2009, An institutional analysis of an e-government system for anti-corruption: The case of OPEN, “Government Information Quarterly”, 26(1).
• 20. Lichtarski J., Trenkner M., 2018, On the Co-existence of Innovation and Creativity in the Lean Management Environment, “Forum Scientiae Oeconomia”, 6(3).
• 21. Man M., Răvaș B., 2017, Implications of Lean Manufacturing on Management Accounting in Romanian Organisations, “Annals of the University of Petroșani - Economics” 17(1).
• 22. Matzler K., Renzl B., Mooradian T., von Krogh G., Mueller J., 2011, Personality traits, affective commitment, documentation of knowledge, and knowledge sharing, “The International Journal of Human Resource Management”, 22(02).
• 23. McCrae R.R., 2015, A more nuanced view of reliability: Specificity in the trait hierarchy, “Personality and Social Psychology Review”, 19(2).
• 24. McCrae R.R., Sutin A.R., 2018, A five-factor theory perspective on causal analysis, “European Journal of Personality”.
• 25. Mol M.J., 2018, Reflections on “the sources of management innovation”, “Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science”, 28(3).
• 26. Mol M.J., Birkinshaw J., 2014, The role of external involvement in the creation of management innovations, “Organization Studies”, 35(9).
• 27. Mõttus R., Kandler C., Bleidorn W., Riemann R., McCrae R.R., 2017, Personality traits below facets: The consensual validity, longitudinal stability, heritability, and utility of personality nuances, “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 112(3).
• 28. Mulgan G., 2014, Design in public and social innovation: what works and what could work better, Retrieved, 23(07), 2015.
• 29. Nieves J., Segarra-Ciprés M., 2015, Management innovation in the hotel industry, “Tourism Management”, 46.
• 30. Oliver P., Jupp V., 2006, Purposive Sampling, “The SAGE dictionary of social research methods”, 245-246.
• 31. Oshio A., Taku K., Hirano M., Saeed G., 2018, Resilience and Big Five personality traits: A meta-analysis, “Personality and Individual Differences”, 127.
• 32. Paterson H., Reniers R., Völlm B., 2009, Personality types and mental health experiences of those who volunteer for helplines, “British Journal of Guidance & Counselling”, 37(4).
• 33. Pollitt C., Bouckaert G., 2017, Public management reform: a comparative analysis-into the age of austerity, Oxford University Press.
• 34. Sleep C.E., Lamkin J., Lynam D.R., Campbell W.K., Miller J.D., 2018, Personality disorder traits: Testing insight regarding presence of traits, impairment, and desire for change, “Personality Disorders”.
• 35. Stee G.D., Rinne T., Fairweather J., 2012, Personality, nations, and innovation: Relationships between personality traits and national innovation scores, “Cross-Cultural Research”, 46(1).
• 36. Sutin A.R., Stephan Y., Luchetti M., Artese A., Oshio A., Terracciano A., 2016, The five-factor model of personality and physical inactivity: A meta-analysis of 16 samples, “Journal of Research in Personality”, 63.
• 37. Turner S., Allen P., Bartlett W., Pérotin V., 2011, Innovation and the English National Health Service: a qualitative study of the independent sector treatment centre programme, “Social Science & Medicine”, 73(4).
• 38. Ulewicz R., Kucęba R. 2016, Identification of problems of implementation of Lean concept in the SME sector. “Engineering Management in Production and Services”, 8(1)
• 39. Urbancova H., 2013, Competitive advantage achievement through innovation and knowledge, “Journal of Competitiveness”, 5(1).
• 40. Van Witteloostuijn A., Esteve M., Boyne G., 2016, Public sector motivation ad fonts: Personality traits as antecedents of the motivation to serve the public interest, “Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory”, 27(1).

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2018).