The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business

Korea Distribution Science Association (한국유통과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Role of Innovative Work Behavior in Management of Public Transportation in Indonesia

  • Received : 2022.11.30
  • Accepted : 2023.03.15
  • Published : 2023.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study examines the low performance of state civil servants related (ASN) to the management of public transportation at the Directorate of Road Transport (DRT), Ministry of Transportation, Indonesia. This study surveyed 103 ASNs, using a quantitative approach using the Amos SEM software. The results showed that Knowledge Sharing (KS) and Work Engagement (WE) directly influenced Innovative Work Behavior (IWB) as well as Job Performance (JP). Meanwhile, IWB had a significant, direct effect on JP and acts as a full mediator in the effect of KS and WE on JP. The descriptive data obtained also showed that respondents' statements based on gender have differences related to the IWB variable, where on average, women were better than men. However, for other variables (JP, KS, and WE), the data showed that, on average, the statements of male respondents were better than women. This study recommends that the DRT pay attention to IWB as a key factor mediating KS and WE towards increasing JP by maintaining the best indicators and improving the weakest indicators. Furthermore, this study recommends that future research refine these results by adding the variables of gender and educational level of the respondents.

Keywords

1. Introduction

Transportation is a significant element of human life, as almost all human activities cannot be separated from using transportation facilities. In Indonesia, transportation arrangements are generally regulated by the Ministry of Transportation (Widyaparaga et al., 2017). As a public organization, innovation is required to improve performance in serving the community’s wishes (Anuntarumporn & Sorhsaruht, 2022). One of the important indicators in evaluating the successful performance of regulatory authorities in public transportation is the Urban Transport Connectivity Ratio (Sdoukopoulos et al., 2019). In Indonesia, the Urban Transport Connectivity Ratio in 2020 only reached the target of 63%, and in 2021 reached 65% (Irsal et al., 2022). Therefore, it can be concluded that the performance of the Directorate of Road Transport of Indonesia in 2020 and 2021 failed to achieve the target.

Low organizational performance is an indication of low employee performance. According to Chitale et al. (2019), the main key to attaining organizational performance is the achievement of Job Performance (JP). Furthermore, Austin (2013) observed that the performance of employees in that organization determines the performance of an organization. Hutajulu et al. (2021) stated that JP is the achievement of targets by employees based on job quality, quantity, and time. Therefore, the Directorate of Road Transport of Indonesia in 2020 and 2021 illustrates the low performance of employees in the organization, as determined by job quality, quantity, and time.

A previous study examined the relationship between Knowledge Sharing (KS) and JP, where KS affected JP through Innovative Work Behavior (IWB) (Kim & Park, 2017). Meanwhile, Elidemir et al. (2020) observed that Work Engagement (WE) affects JP through the mediation of IWB. In contrast, Wang and Chen (2020) discovered that JP is directly influenced by WE, which was also supported by another study (Guan & Frenkel, 2018; Kooij et al., 2017; Yongxing et al., 2017) that the better employee WE in an organization, the better the JP. This was also different from the observations of other experts, which stated that KS is a factor that directly affects JP (Imamoglu et al., 2019; Rese et al., 2020; Tran, 2021).

Differences in opinion have been observed regarding the factors that affect JP. Consequently, this study uses a relatively new model to ascertain if IWB is a mediator of KS and WE on JP. The results will constitute practical recommendations for organizations to improve the performance of the Directorate of Road Transport of Indonesia. It will also enhance further studies to be developed as theoretical literature related to factors that affect JP in transportation management authority organizations.

2. Literature Review

The Resource-based View (RBV) is a theoretical concept that is believed to provide answers in terms of creating a competitive advantage for an organization (McGahan, 2021). As competition increases, problems become socially complex, and the knowledge base and capabilities are heterogeneous among companies, the RBV theory becomes increasingly connected to the Knowledge-Based View (KBV) theory proposed by Grant (1996). The KBV theory states that knowledge is the most strategically significant organizational resource. The nature of these knowledge-based resources, intangible and dynamic, renders it possible to develop the basis of enterprise knowledge-based performance creation mechanisms, specifically through path dependence and causal ambiguity (Nguyen & Nguyen, 2022).

According to McGahan (2021), the global centrality of knowledge enhanced the development of a knowledge-based view (KBV) of the firm. Therefore, KBV is a social constructionist approach to knowledge, and the multilevel nature of the process enables a more comprehensive, useful theory of knowledge-based global strategy. Furthermore, improving the performance of knowledge-based organizations can be achieved when IWB is optimum and KS (KS) between colleagues occurs correctly. Therefore, the important factors adopted from the KBV theory to improve employee performance (JP) are KS (KS) as an independent variable and IWB as a mediating variable. Another study added WE as an affecting variable (Guan & Frenkel, 2018; Kooij et al., 2017; Yongxing et al., 2017).

To build concepts in a model based on similarities and differences from previous theories and opinions of experts, the equation concept of the effect between variables into hypotheses was formed during the analysis.

2.1. Knowledge Sharing Affects Job Performance

According to Swanson et al. (2020), KS affects JP in an organization. The higher the level of KS, the higher the JP (Imamoglu et al., 2019; Rese et al., 2020; Tran, 2021). Previous research showed that KS has a positive and significant effect on JP. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 1.

H1: states that KS has a positive and significant effect on JP.

2.2. Work Engagement Affects Job Performance

According to Wang and Chen (2020), employee JP is affected by WE in an organization. This is supported by Guan and Frenkel (2018), Kooij et al. (2017), and Yongxing et al. (2017), who stated that the higher the level of WE, the higher the employee performance. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 2.

H2: states that WE has a positive and significant effect on JP.

2.3. Knowledge Sharing Affects Innovative Work Behaviour

According to Abukhait et al. (2019), KS creates IWB in a team or organization. Akram et al. (2018), Asurakkody and Kim (2020), and Kmieciak (2021) empirically proved that KS positively and significantly influences IWB. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 3.

H3: states that KS has a positive and significant effect on IWB.

2.4. Work Engagement Affects Innovative Work Behaviour

Jason (2021) stated that WE has a strong effect on creating Innovative Work Behaviour in an organization. Another study by Kang and Lee (2017), Kwon and Kim (2020), and Montani et al. (2020) showed that WE have a positive and significant effect on IWB. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 4.

H4: states that WE has a positive and significant effect on IWB.

2.5. Innovative Work Behaviour Affects Job Performance

Hughes et al. (2018) concluded that the main factor that affects JP is the level of IWB. This is in line with Tran (2021), Wang et al. (2021), and Xerri and Reid (2018), which empirically showed that IWB has a positive, significant effect on JP. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 5.

H5: States that IWB has a positive and significant effect on JP

2.6. Innovative Work Behavior as a Mediating Effect of Knowledge Sharing on Job Performance

The relationship between KS on JP was analyzed by Kim and Park (2017), where IWB mediated the effect of KS on JP. Furthermore, Lam et al. (2021) observed that KS has a positive and significant effect on JP with the mediation of IWB. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 6.

H6: States that KS has a positive and significant effect on JP through the mediation of IWB.

2.7. Innovative Work Behavior as Mediation on the Effect of Work Engagement on Job Performance

The results of a study by Kim and Koo (2017), supported by Schmitt et al. (2016), observed that WE has a positive and significant effect on JP mediated by IWB. Based on the results of these empirical studies, hypothesis 7.

H7: States that WE has a positive and significant effect on JP through IWB.

3. Research Methods

3.1. Study Model

Based on the effective relationship between the variables described above, the study model was developed as shown in Figure 1 below:

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_f0001.png 이미지

Figure 1: Study Hypothesis Model

3.2. Study Method

The Amos Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to prove this model by analyzing data from 103 State Civil Apparatus as respondents. Furthermore, 5-point Likert scale with statement items was adopted from the previous study, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Study Instruments

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_t0001.png 이미지

4. Results

4.1. Model Feasibility Test Results

Model feasibility testing was conducted with SEM analysis of the test stage to meet the model fit criteria. The initial model built in this study is shown in Table 2:

Table 2: Initial Conditions of the Study Model

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_t0002.png 이미지

Based on Table 2, the P (Probability) value of 0.00 failed to meet the model fit criteria of ≥0.05. Therefore, the model is declared not fit due to unfulfilled criteria. To meet these criteria, modification indices are performed to gradually eliminate the highest error items.

After the error items are gradually eliminated until the value of p = 0.086 > 0.05, the model was declared fit for full model analysis. Therefore, this study model leaves 15 indicators, namely KS with items KS1, KS2, K4, and KS6, WE with items WE3, WE5, WE6, and WE8, IWB with items IWB1, IWB3, IWB5, and IWB7, JP with items JP3, JP5, and JP7.

The full model construct obtained after going through the modification indices process is shown in Figure 2 below:

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_f0002.png 이미지

Figure 2: SEM Full Model

Figure 2 above is an SEM with a full model that has met the criteria as a fit model after going through the modification indices process, as shown in Table 3 below.

Table 3: Results of the Modification Indices Process

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_t0004.png 이미지

Table 3 above shows that all model fit criteria were eventually met, and some improved. Therefore, the full model of this study is now ready for analysis in the next stage.

4.2. Factor Loading

The analysis determined the highest factor loading of statement items as the best reflection of the instrument for measuring each variable. It also showed the lowest factor loading of statement items recommended for improvement. The factor loading values for each variable are shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Factor Loading Instruments

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_t0005.png 이미지

Based on Table 4 above, the JP variable had the highest factor loading value of 0.842 on indicator JP7: My staff completes work according to schedule. Meanwhile, the lowest factor loading value was 0.757 in indicator JP5: My staff performs work according to the established budget. This result shows that JP7 is the best reflection as an implication of the JP variable, while JP5 is the lowest and requires improved attention.

The IWB variable had the highest factor loading value of 0.812, found in indicator IWB3: “I develop innovative ideas by providing new ideas.” In contrast, the lowest factor loading value was in IWB5 with a value of 0.756: I encourage implementing new innovative ideas. Therefore, IWB3 is the best reflection as an implication of the IWB variable, while IWB5 is the lowest indicator that requires improved attention.

The variable of KS had the highest factor loading value of 0.863, observed in the KS2 indicator: I am willing to share my new ideas with colleagues. In contrast, the indicator with the lowest factor loading value of 0.749 was KS4: I spent a lot of time understanding the experiences shared by colleagues. Therefore, KS2 is the best reflection as an implication of the KS variable, while KS4 is the lowest indicator needing improvement.

The variable of WE had the highest factor loading value of 0.840, found in the WE5 indicator: “Work is an inspiration for me. Simultaneously, the indicator with the lowest factor loading value of 0.741 was WE3: I have the spirit to work every day. This result shows that WE5 is the best reflection as an implication of the WE variable, while WE3 is the lowest indicator needing improvement.

4.3. Hypothesis Testing Results

The hypotheses were tested after the model achieved the Goodness of Fit calculated using the Amos SEM software. Table 5 shows the results of the direct effect hypothesis test.

Table 5: The Direct Effect Hypothesis Test Results

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_t0006.png 이미지

To test hypothesis 6 (H6), namely the mediating role of IWB on the effect of KS on JP, this study used the Sobel Test Calculator, as shown in Figure 3.

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_f0003.png 이미지

Figure 3: Sobel Mediation Test on Hypothesis 6 (H6)

The data input in the Sobel test calculator shown in Figure 3 referred to the coefficient values (A and B) and the Standard Error values (SEA and SEB) obtained from the Unstandardized Estimates of the Goodness of Fit Model. After the data input, the Sobel test calculator showed that the CR for H6 (the effect of KS on JP through IWB) is 4.522, greater than 1.96. Therefore, hypothesis H6 was accepted, meaning that IWB plays a fully mediating role in the effect of KS on JP

The testing of hypothesis 7 (H7) as the mediating role of IWB in the effect of WE on JP applied the Sobel test with the Calculator, as shown in Figure 4.

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_f0004.png 이미지

Figure 4: Sobel Mediation Test on Hypothesis 7 (H7)

The data input in the Sobel test calculator shown in Figure 4 refers to the coefficient values (A and B) and the Standard Error values (SEA and SEB) obtained from the Unstandardized Estimates of the Goodness of Fit Model. After the data input, the calculation showed that the CR for H7 (the effect of WE on JP through IWB) is 6.659, greater than 1.96. Therefore, hypothesis H7 was accepted, meaning that IWB plays a fully mediating role in the effect of WE on JP

Based on the direct and indirect effect hypothesis tests described above, which refer to Hair et al. (2014), the test decisions can be accepted with the criteria CR> 1.96. The conclusion of the overall hypothesis test is shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Hypothesis Test Results

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_t0007.png 이미지

5. Discussion

The theoretical benefits contribute to the knowledge of the model of JP improvement associated with IWB. This study showed that IWB plays an important role in mediating the effect of KS and WE, which cannot directly affect JP’s improvement. Therefore, KS and WE cannot stand alone as exogenous variables affecting the endogenous but require full mediation by IWB.

5.1. Knowledge Sharing Has No Significant Effect on Job Performance

This study empirically proves that KS has no significant effect on JP among Civil Servants at the Road Transportation Directorate of the Ministry of Transportation. This contradicts Swanson et al. (2020) that KS can impact JP in an organization. Similarly, the results differ from other research, which emphasizes that the higher the level of KS, the higher the JP (Imamoglu et al., 2019; Rese et al., 2020; Tran, 2021).

Based on the factor loading, the indicator “I am willing to share my new ideas with my colleagues” is the best reflection in explaining KS, and the indicator “I spend a lot of time understanding the experiences shared by my colleagues” is the weakest. Therefore, efforts are needed to improve it, to enhance the effect of KS on JP.

5.2. Work Engagement Has No Significant Effect on Job Performance

According to Wang and Chen (2020), employee JP is affected by WE within an organization. This is supported by Guan and Frenkel (2018), Kooij et al. (2017), and Yongxing et al. (2017), that the higher the level of WE, the higher the employee's performance. However, this view is at odds with the empirical results of this study, where engagement had no significant effect on the JP of Civil Servant employees in the Road Transportation Directorate of the Ministry of Transportation.

According to the factor loading, the indicator “My job is an inspiration for me” is the best reflection in explaining the WE variable, while the indicator “I have the enthusiasm to work every day” is the weakest. Therefore, efforts are needed to enhance the effect of WE on JP.

5.3. Innovative Work Behavior Has Significant Effect on Job Performance

Abukhait et al. (2019) stated that the main factor affecting JP is the level of IWB. Similarly, Akram et al. (2018), Asurakkody and Kim (2020), and Kmieciak (2021) empirically proved that Innovative Work Behaviour has a positive and significant effect on JP.

Empirically, these experts' opinions align with the results of this study that Innovative Work Behaviour has a positive, significant impact on the JP of Civil Servants at the Directorate of Road Transport in the Ministry of Transportation.

Based on the factor loading, the indicator “I develop innovative ideas by providing new suggestions” is the best reflection in explaining the Innovative Work Behaviour variable, while the indicator “I encourage the implementation of new innovative ideas” is the weakest. Therefore, efforts are needed to enhance the effect of IWB on JP.

5.4. Knowledge Sharing has a Significant Effect on Innovative Work Behavior

This empirical study showed that KS positively and significantly affects IWB among Civil Servants in the Road Transportation Directorate of the Ministry of Transportation. This is consistent with Jason (2021), KS creates IWB within a team or organization. Furthermore, Kang and Lee (2017), Kwon and Kim (2020), and Montani et al. (2020) empirically proved that KS has a positive and significant effect on IWB.

Based on factor loading, the indicator “I am willing to share my new ideas with my coworkers” is the best reflection in explaining the knowledge-sharing variable, while the indicator “I spend a lot of time understanding the experiences shared by my coworkers” is the weakest. Therefore, further efforts will be required to enhance the effect of KS on JP if needed.

5.5. Work Engagement Has a Significant Effect on Innovative Work Behavior

This study empirically showed that WE has a positive, significant effect on IWB among Civil Servants in the Road Transportation Directorate of the Ministry of Transportation. This is in line with Hughes et al. (2018) that WE significantly influence IWB in an organization. Other studies (Tran, 2021; Wang et al., 2021; Xerri & Reid, 2018) supported this by proving that WE has a positive and significant effect on IWB.

Based on the factor loading, the indicator “Work is an inspiration for me” is the best reflection in explaining the WE variable, while the indicator “I have the enthusiasm to work every day” is the weakest. Therefore, efforts are needed to enhance the effect of WE on JP.

5.6. Innovative Work Behavior Mediates the Effect of Knowledge Sharing on Job Performance

The relationship between KS on JP and the mediation of IWB was examined by Kim and Park (2017). IWB played a mediative role in KS, which positively affected JP. This is in line with Lam et al. (2021) that KS has a positive and significant effect on JP through the mediation of IWB. These observations are consistent with the results of this study. Empirically, these results showed that KS has a significant effect on JP mediated by IWB in State Civil Servants at the Directorate of Road Transport, Ministry of Transportation of Indonesia. IWB was fully mediative, as, without IWB, KS has no significant effect on JP.

Based on the factor loading, the indicator “I develop innovative ideas by providing new ideas” is the best reflection in explaining the IWB variable, while the indicator “I encourage the implementation of new innovative ideas” is the weakest. Therefore, efforts are needed to improve it, which shows that IWB has a superior mediative effect of KS on JP.

5.7. Innovative Work Behavior Mediates the Effect of Work Engagement on Job Performance

The results of Kim and Koo (2017) were supported by other research. Schmitt et al. (2016) concluded that WE positively and significantly affect JP through IWB. Empirically, these opinions are consistent with the results of this study. These results showed that WE significantly affect JP mediated by IWB in State Civil Servants at the Directorate of Road Transport, Ministry of Transportation, Indonesia. Furthermore, IWB is fully mediative, as, without IWB, WE has no significant effect on JP.

These results also highlight the novelty of the model used in this study, as shown in Figure 5.

OTGHEU_2023_v10n2_235_f0005.png 이미지

Figure 5: Novelty Studies

6. Conclusion and Suggestions for Future Studies

These results will constitute literature and significant information in the development of science, especially in terms of human resource management and the development of JP theories in similar organizations. Furthermore, this study is expected to be used as a reference for subsequent studies on the effect of gender variables and employee education levels associated with JP.

If subsequent studies wish to apply the same variable, it is necessary to improve quality by perfecting the results of this and previous studies. This will ensure more varied results through qualitative study methods to determine the cause of KS and WE variables lacking a direct effect on JP. Moreover, this will add broad insights for future, in-depth theory development in this field.

References

  1. Abukhait, R. M., Bani-Melhem, S., & Zeffane, R. (2019). Empowerment, KS and innovative behaviors: Exploring gender differences. International Journal of Innovation Management, 23(1), 1950006. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919619500063
  2. Akram, T., Shen, L., Haider, M., & Hussain, S. (2018). Exploring the impact of KS on the IWB of employees: A study in China. International Business Research, 11, 186. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v11n3p186
  3. Anuntarumporn, N, & Sorhsaruht, P. (2022). The impact of innovation capability of firms on competitive advantage: An empirical study of the ICT industry in Thailand. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 9(2), 121-131. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2022.vol9.no2.0121
  4. Asurakkody, T. A., & Kim, S. H. (2020). Effects of KS behavior on IWB among nursing students: Mediating role of self-leadership. International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences, 12, 100190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijans.2020.100190
  5. Austin, R. D. (2013). Measuring and managing performance in organizations. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
  6. Caniels, M. C. J., & Veld, M. (2019). Employee ambidexterity, high-performance work systems, and innovative work behavior: How much balance do we need? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(4), 565-585. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1216881
  7. Chitale, A. K., Mohanty, R. P., & Dubey, N. R. (2019). Organizational behavior. Pune: Public Health Institute Learning Pvt, Ltd.
  8. Elidemir, S. N., Ozturen, A., & Bayighomog, S. W. (2020). Innovative behaviors, employee creativity, and sustainable competitive advantage: A moderated mediation. Sustainability, 12(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12083295
  9. Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171110
  10. Guan, X., & Frenkel, S. (2018). How HR practice, WE, and job crafting influence employee performance. Chinese Management Studies, 12(3), 591-607. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-11-2017-0328
  11. Hair, J. F., Gabriel, M., & Patel, V. (2014). AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM): Guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool. Brazilian Journal of Marketing, 13(2), 145.
  12. Hughes, M., Rigtering, J. P. C., Covin, J. G., Bouncken, R. B., & Kraus, S. (2018). Innovative behavior, trust, and perceived workplace performance. British Journal of Management, 29(4), 750-768. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12305
  13. Hutajulu, R. S., Susita, D., & Eliyana, A. (2021). The effect of digitalization and virtual leadership on organizational innovation during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis: A case study in Indonesia, 8(10), 57-64. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no10.0057
  14. Imamoglu, S. Z., Ince, H., Turkcan, H., & Atakay, B. (2019). The effect of organizational justice and organizational commitment on KS and firm performance. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 899-906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.129
  15. Irsal, R. M., Hasibuan, H. S., & Azwar, S. A. (2022). Spatial modeling for residential optimization in Dukuh atas transit-oriented development (TOD) area, Jakarta, Indonesia. Sustainability, 15(1), 530. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010530
  16. Jason, G. (2021). Regulatory focus and IWB: The role of WE. Current Psychology, 40(6), 2791-2803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00220-1
  17. Kang, M., & Lee, M. J. (2017). Absorptive capacity, KS, and innovative behavior of R&D employees. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 29(2), 219-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2016.1211265
  18. Kim, M. S., & Koo, D. W. (2017). Linking LMX, engagement, innovative behavior, and JP in hotel employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(12), 3044-3062. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2016-0319
  19. Kim, W., & Park, J. (2017). Examining structural relationships between WE, organizational, procedural justice, KS, and IWB for sustainable organizations. Sustainability, 9(2), 205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020205
  20. Kmieciak, R. (2021). Trust, KS, and IWB: Empirical evidence from Poland. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(5), 1832-1859. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-04-2020-0134
  21. Kooij, D. T. A. M., Tims, M., & Akkermans, J. (2017). The influence of future time perspective on WE and JP: The role of job crafting. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(1), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1209489
  22. Kwon, K., & Kim, T. (2020). An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model. Human Resource Management Review, 30(2), 100704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100704
  23. Lam, L., Nguyen, P., Le, N., & Tran, K. (2021). The relation among organizational culture, knowledge management, and innovation capability: Its implication for open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010066
  24. McGahan, A. M. (2021). Integrating insights from the resource-based view of the firm into the new stakeholder theory. Journal of Management, 47(7), 1734-1756. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320987282
  25. Montani, F., Vandenberghe, C., Khedhaouria, A., & Courcy, F. (2020). Examining the inverted U-shaped relationship between workload and IWB: The role of WE and mindfulness. Human Relations, 73(1), 59-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718819055
  26. Na-Nan, K., Chaiprasit, K., & Pukkeeree, P. (2018). Factor analysis-validated comprehensive employee JP scale. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 35(10), 2436-2449. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-06-2017-0117
  27. Nguyen, K., & Nguyen, H. H. (2022). The impact of knowledge management on business performance: A case study of door manufacturers in Vietnam. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 9(6), 267-276. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2022.vol9.no6.0267
  28. Rese, A., Kopplin, C. S., & Nielebock, C. (2020). Factors influencing members' KS and creative performance in coworking spaces. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(9), 2327-2354. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2020-0243
  29. Schmitt, A., Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2016). Transformational leadership and proactive work behavior: A moderated mediation model including WE and job strain. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(3), 588-610. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12143
  30. Sdoukopoulos, A., Pitsiava-Latinopoulou, M., Basbas, S., & Papaioannou, P. (2019). Measuring progress towards transport sustainability through indicators: Analysis and metrics of the main indicator initiatives. Transportation Research Part D, 67, 316-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.11.020.
  31. Swanson, E., Kim, S., Lee, S.-M., Yang, J.-J., & Lee, Y.-K. (2020). The effect of leader competencies on KS and JP: Social capital theory. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 42, 88-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.11.004
  32. Tran, T. K. P. (2021). The effect of KS and innovativeness on organizational performance: An empirical study in Vietnam. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 8(8), 503-511. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no8.0503
  33. Wang, C. H., & Chen, H. T. (2020). Relationships among workplace incivility, WE, and JP. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 3(4), 415-429. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-09-2019-0105
  34. Wang, Z., Ren, S., Chadee, D., Liu, M., & Cai, S. (2021). Team reflexivity and innovative employee behavior: The mediating role of KS and moderating role of leadership. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(6), 1619-1639. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2020-0683
  35. Widyaparaga, A. D., Sopha, B. M., Budiman, A., Muthohar, I., Setiawan, I. C., Lindasista, A., Soemardjito, J., & Oka, K. (2017). Scenarios analysis of energy mix for the road transportation sector in Indonesia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 70, 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.206
  36. Willmer, M., Westerberg Jacobson, J., & Lindberg, M. (2019). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the 9-item Utrecht WE scale in a multi-occupational female sample: A cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 271. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02771
  37. Xerri, M. J., & Reid, S. R. M. (2018). Human resources and innovative behavior: Improving nursing performance. International Journal of Innovation Management, 22(2), 1850019. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919618500196
  38. Yongxing, G., Hongfei, D., Baoguo, X., & Lei, M. (2017). WE and JP: The moderating role of perceived organizational support. Annals of Psychology, 33(3), 708-713.
  39. Zhao, Y., Wang, X., Chen, C., & Shi, K. (2020). A moderated mediation model of workplace ostracism and task performance: Roles of KS and task interdependence. Chinese Management Studies, 25(3), 51-67. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-10-2018-0716