American Journal of Economic and

Management Business

p-ISSN: XXXX-XXXX

e-ISSN: 2835-5199

Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2024

Self-Efficacy Studies and Innovative Behaviors: The Role of

Organizational Support at the Manokwari District Social Office

Marinus Lambi, Budiman

STIE Mah-Esia Manokwari, Indonesia

Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract

This research aims to analyze the influence of self-efficacy on innovative behavior and

the moderating role of organizational support on self-efficacy and innovative behavior.

This research uses explanatory research. The respondents of this research were lecturers

at private universities in Surabaya, totaling 52 respondents. Data was collected using a

questionnaire. Sampling used purposive sampling technique. Data analysis uses Partial

Least Square (PLS) software. The research results show that self-efficacy has a positive

and significant effect on lecturers' innovative behavior. Organizational support directly

has a positive and insignificant effect on innovative behavior. However, organizational

support strengthens self-efficacy towards innovative behavior of private university

lecturers in Surabaya. The research results follow social exchange theory. This research

implies that the faculty support given to lecturers will make them increase their self-

efficacy and strengthen their innovative behavior to produce their best performance.

Keywords: Self-efficacy, Innovative behavior, Organizational support.

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0

International

INTRODUCTION

Self-efficacy is an individual's confidence or confidence about his ability to be

entrepreneurial, perform a task, achieve a goal, produce something, and implement

actions to achieve a certain goal or achievement. According to Bandura, (2011), in Dewi

& Herlina, (2021) self-efficacy is an individual's belief in his ability to succeed in doing

something. The high self-efficacy possessed by an individual makes him like challenges

or feel himself challenged to achieve new things for him. Together with high endurance

in the face of various conditions, self-efficacy drives the individual to achieve his goals.

Individuals with high self-efficacy tend to overcome challenges without problems.

Women will not hesitate because they believe in her abilities and effort, every woman has

individual characteristics, not the same as each other.

King in Sulistyowati & Lestari, (2016) said that self-efficacy is a person's belief

that someone can master a situation and produce various positive results. Meanwhile,

according to Friedman and Schustack in Jaenudin, (2015) self-efficacy is the expectation

of beliefs (expectations) about how far individuals can perform one behavior in a

particular situation. While according to Woolfilk in Miola et al.,(2021) Self-efficacy

American Journal of Economic and Management Business

Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2024

refers to an individual's knowledge of his own ability to complete a specific task without

the need to compare with the abilities of others. According to De Jong & Den Hartog,

(2008) innovative work behavior is individual behavior that aims to achieve initiation and

intentional introduction to new ideas, processes, products and procedures including their

implementation.

Innovative work behavior begins with innovation that comes from planning and that

effectively introduces a process of change in the organization. Innovation is increasingly

recognized as a resource for businesses to achieve sustainable competitive advantage in

the face of a rapidly changing business environment. Innovations that are specifically

displayed by individuals within an organization or company are called innovative work

behaviors (Tjosvold et al., 2004). High innovation will increase the company's ability to

create quality products. Innovation is useful as a tool to improve one's performance and

efficiency, as long as the worker considers that innovative work behavior carried out will

have a positive impact on his performance (Cingöz & Akdoğan, 2011).

Schulz, (2005) defines self-efficacy as a feeling of adequacy, efficiency, and ability

to cope with life. Bandura (1997), defines that self-efficacy is an assessment of a person's

ability to devise actions needed to complete specific tasks at hand. Efficacy itself has a

very important role in everyday life, a person will be able to use his potential optimally

if self-efficacy supports it (Rustika, 2012). The role of the ability to think in the

development of creative self-efficacy is quite large, because people with high intelligence

will be better able to remember and analyze events that have been experienced so that the

conclusions made are more appropriate.

The theory of innovative work behavior developed by De Jong & Den Hartog,

(2008) has four dimensions, namely (1) Opportunity exploration which refers to the

exploration of opportunities with the aim of improving a process, product or service in

finding other alternatives to overcome problems, (2) Idea generation which refers to the

emergence of an idea or idea of innovation in individuals triggered by a problem, (3)

Championing which refers to the behavior of individuals to seek support from colleagues

in the surrounding environment so that new ideas or ideas can become implemented

innovations, and (4) Application which refers to the innovation process that involves the

application of ideas or ideas by producing new products, processes, or procedures that

can ultimately be applied in work roles, groups or the entire organization. In the next

study, De Jong and Hartog (2010) revealed that the higher the innovative work behavior

raised by employees, the more innovation produced by an organization.

Based on the theory of self-effficacy from Bandura, (2011) self-efficacy is a

person's assessment of his ability to structure actions needed in completing specific tasks

at hand. The concept of creative self-efficacy has been derived from the idea of beliefs

about self-capacity in terms of knowledge (intelligence), skills and abilities required for

creative performance (Jaiswal & Dhar, 2015). People who have high self-efficacy will

choose a challenging task to show their ability to face difficulties or obstacles in the job

or task, people who tend to have self-efficacy tend to believe in their abilities so as to

drive the motivation and creativity needed to achieve success from the task given Rego

et al., (2010). Innovative work behavior is related to the implementation of new ideas

which are certainly related to success and risk of failure. Therefore, individuals who have

strong beliefs are needed to create successful innovations. Farmer & Tierney, (2017)

proposed the concept of high Creative Self Efficacy (CSE), able to increase self-

confidence and motivation to behave innovatively. Individuals who engage in work

creatively will eventually have an impact on job innovation.

Marionus Lambi, Budiman

There are several factors influencing innovative work behavior, namely,

organizational commitment and psychological capital (Li & Zheng, 2014), team climate

inventory, learning orientation, organizational support, and transformational leadership

Chatchawan et al., (2017), happiness at work, organizational climate, affective

commitment, and transformational leadership Bawuro et al., (2018) ethical leadership

Yidong & Xinxin, (2013), learning organization, knowledge sharing, and organizational

commitment Fauzia et al., (2017) and individual characteristics (Voo et al., 2019).

Knowledge sharing, intellectual stimulation and intrinsic motivation (Saripin & Kassim,

2019). However, according to (Li & Zheng, 2014), there is still very limited research on

individual factors that influence innovation work behavior.

Variables that have not been studied much are intelligence and creative self-

efficacy, both of which are important in improving innovative work behavior and are still

debated by researchers. In research Kuncel et al., (2004) intelligence correlates with

creative performance, psychometrically one of the factors that influence innovative work

behavior is intelligence. People who have high intelligence are easy to accept lessons,

people who are able to solve problems well and quickly and are able to make new

innovations in their lives. But according to (Sternberg, 2005) the correlation of creativity

with intelligence does not apply at higher levels of intelligence. There is thus no reason

to expect a link between intelligence and creativity (De Dreu et al., 2012)

Innovative employee behavior can develop well if there is organizational support.

Organizational support is employee trust in the organization in contributing and caring

for employee welfare (Celep & Yilmazturk, 2012). The agency needs to provide support

to employees behaving innovatively to produce innovation and establish good

relationships between leaders and employees. Employees who receive organizational

support feel the need to reciprocate the organization's treatment with innovative attitudes

and behaviors, and contribute to organizational goals. Positive organizational support can

influence innovative behavior by providing intrinsic motivation to employees and making

employees feel fully supported by the organization, so that employees do not hesitate to

display innovative behaviors that can benefit the organization (Shanker et al., 2017).

Innovative behavior can be influenced by individual internal factors, namely self-

efficacy (Putri et al., 2021). Self-efficacy is a belief in one's own ability to organize and

carry out actions to achieve certain results (Indriani & Sritresna, 2022). Employees who

have good self-efficacy will be more confident in the knowledge and skills they have in

completing their work, have the ability to handle problems, and be able to achieve

performance even though various problems occur in their work. This is in line with the

opinion of Noerchoidah et al., (2022) that self-efficacy is a reflection of the confident

spirit to realize organizational goals.

Previous research related to innovative behavior is more prevalent in the corporate

sector, but in government organizations is still limited (Roffeei et al., 2017). Innovative

research on employees is important because there are differences in innovative behavior

between employees and employees. In the company area, employees produce innovative

behaviors, such as developing new products, expanding market share, and increasing

business activities (Zhang et al., 2021). However, this is different from the innovative

behavior produced by employees, therefore, the difference is interesting to be studied

further on the innovative behavior of employees in government organizations. Some

factors that can influence innovative behavior are self-efficacy (Berliana & Arsanti, 2018)

(Hsiao et al., 2011) and organizational support (Choi et al., 2021).

American Journal of Economic and Management Business

Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2024

This study is to bridge these differences in examining the factors that influence

employee innovative behavior. Employees who behave innovatively are thought to be

able to improve their performance and make a major contribution to the organization.

This research focused on self-efficacy of innovative behavior with the moderation role of

organizational support. The basic theory used to explain self-efficacy, organizational

support, and innovative behavior is social exchange theory from Blau, (2017) which

explains the existence of reciprocal relationships in exchange with others will produce a

reward at a later time. Self-Efficacy and Innovative Behavior: The role of Organizational

Support is carried out on employees because they are required to have creative thinking

in coming up with new ideas that are implemented in innovative behavior to provide

learning according to work needs which in turn can improve lecturer performance which

will support organizational performance.

In this connection, this study is intended to analyze the direct influence of self-

efficacy on innovative behavior and analyze the role of moderation of organizational

support on self-efficacy and innovative behavior of employees of the Manokwari

Kabuopaten Social Service.To realize writing in this study and so that research has a clear

direction in interpreting facts and data in writing, the formulation of the problem to be

studied is: (1) Does self-efficacy affect innovative behavior? (2) Does self-efficacy affect

innovative behavior, organizational support moderation at the Manokwari District Social

Office.

RESEARCH METHODS

This study is an explanatoryresearch, that examines the effect of self-efficacy, and

organizational support on the innovative behavior of employees in the Manokwari

District Social Office. This research data was obtained from questionnaires given to

respondents. The population and sample of this study were 52. Respondents. All

statement item measurements use the five-point Likert scale. Processing of research data

using Partial Least Square (PLS).

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Validity Test Results

Validity test to explain the degree of accuracy of research measuring instruments in

measuring what is measured. Assessing validity can be done by looking at the average

variance extracted (AVE) value for each latent variable and the outer loading of the

indicator for each specified latent variable. The expected loading factor value >0.7, but

the loading factor value between 0.6-0.7 is still acceptable and considered sufficient for

explanatory research. Another method to measure validity is with the AVE>0.5 value of

each variable (Ghozali & Latan, 2015). Figure 2 shows the qualified validity

measurement results for all indicators.

Figure 1. Smart PLS Results

Source: Data processed (2023)

Marionus Lambi, Budiman

Based on Figure 1, all indicators reflecting each construct of the self-efficacy

variable (X) are 5 indicators, namely (ED1) of 0.854, (ED2) of 0.891, (ED3) of 0.933,

(ED4) of 0.804, and (ED5) of 0.946. Organizational support (Z) as many as 6 indicators,

namely (DO1) of 0.899, (DO2) of 0.883, (DO3) of 0.723, (DO4) of 0.894, (DO5) of

0.913, and (DO6) of 0.741. Innovative behavior (PI) has 9 indicators, namely (PI1) of

0.647, (PI2) of 0.654, (PI3) of 0.828, (PI4) of 0.847, (PI5) of 0.853, (PI6) of 0.937, (PI7)

of 0.889, (PI8) of 0.877, (PI9) of 0.828. Thus, all indicators have a loading factor value

of >0.6 so they are declared valid. Table 2 explains that the average variance extracted

(AVE) value on self-efficacy, organizational support, and innovative behavior >0.5 so

that it can be declared valid.

Table 1 Hasil Cronbach’s Alpha Average Variance Extracted, Composite

Reliability

Variable

Cronbach’s Alpha

Average Variance

Extracted (AVE)

Composite

Reliability

(CR)

Self-efficacy (X)

0.943

0.782

0.955

Organization support (Z)

0.932

0.790

0.949

Innovative Behavior (Y)

0.939

0.678

0.949

Source: Data processed (2023)

Reliability Test Results

Reliability test results are used to prove consistency, accuracy, and accuracy in

measuring variables. Reliability testing is done through Cronbach's Alpha or Composite

Reliability value >0.7, meaning the variable has good reliability. Table 1 found that self-

efficacy, organizational support, and innovative behavior have Cronbach's alpha value

>0.5 and Composite Reliability (CR) >0.7, so all variables are reliable.

Structural Model

Structural tests are used to determine whether or not the relationship between

variables in the research model is strong and to test hypotheses (Hair et al., 1998). The

results of bootstrapping to find out the accepted or rejected research hypothesis can be

seen in Table 2.

Table 2 Results of Direct Influence and Moderation

Variabel

Original Sample (O)

T Statistics

(|O/STDEV|)

Values

Square

Description

Direct influence:

Self-efficacy (X)

innovative behavior (Y)

0.890

12.319

0.000

Positive and significant

Organization support

(Z) behavior

innovative (Y)

0.002

0.043

0.966

Positive and insignificant

Effects of moderation:

ED*DO Interaction

Innovative behavior (Y)

0.712

6.211

0.000

0.725

Positive and significant

Source: Data processed, 2022

Table 2 explains the effect of self-efficacy on innovative behavior. The results

showed the original sample value of 0.890, the statistical t value of 12.319>1.96 and the

American Journal of Economic and Management Business

Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2024

P value (0.000)<0.05, this means that self-efficacy has a positive and significant effect on

innovative behavior so that H1 is accepted. Further, hypothesis 2 (H2) of organizational

support moderates the influence of self-efficacy and innovative behavior. The results of

the analysis showed that the original sample value of 0.712, the statistical t value of

6.211>1.96 and the P value (0.000) <0.05, means that organizational support moderating

the influence of self-efficacy and innovative behavior H2 is accepted. However,

organizational support has no effect on innovative behavior. The results of the analysis

showed the original sample value of 0.002, the statistical t value of 0.043<1.96 and the

P value (0.966) >0.05. That R Square for innovative employee behavior is 0.725. It can

be explained that innovative behavior is influenced by self-efficacy and organizational

support by 72.5% while 27.5% is explained by other variables outside the variables of

this study. Based on the presentation of these findings, R square is included in the

moderate category.

The Effect of Self-Efficacy on Innovative Behavior

Empirical results prove that self-efficacy has a positive and significant effect on

innovative behavior. This means that employees have high self-efficacy, which has an

impact on the innovative behavior of employees for the better at the Manokwari Regency

Social Office. Indicators of self-efficacy on confidence in one's own abilities in the tri

dharma task received the largest answers from respondents. This indicates that the self-

efficacy possessed by employees is very necessary in carrying out job duties according to

their duties. Confidence in one's own abilities in duties can help employees to carry out

their obligations and responsibilities. Therefore, self-efficacy can influence innovative

employee behavior, the desire to achieve is able to motivate employees to generate new

ideas and implement them in their offices.

The results of this study are corroborated by Bandura, (2011) that the higher a

person's self-efficacy will be able to produce their best performance. The results of the

frequency distribution of respondents found that the self-efficacy of lecturers was

included in the high category value and innovative behavior also received high attention

from lecturers. This shows that there is a harmony between employees who claim high

self-efficacy and high innovative employee behavior. Self-efficacy arising from the

competencies, knowledge, skills and capabilities possessed by lecturers is important for

carrying out innovative behavior through generating creative ideas, seeking support for

ideas and implementing constructive ideas for the improvement of lecturer and university

performance. This shows that the innovative behavior produced by lecturers is very

dependent on employee self-efficacy so that the more innovative employees are, the better

performance will result. Employee behavior is shown by being serious about giving

advice to their organization, providing new ideas, providing support for colleagues, and

implementing new methods to overcome work problems. Innovative behavior is needed

in supporting the success of the Manokwari District Social Office. Therefore, better

innovative employee behavior will be able to provide quality learning in an effort to meet

organizational needs.

The results of this study are in line with Hsiao et al., (2011) which states that teacher

self-efficacy is good performance such as innovative work behavior. This is in line with

the findings of Berliana & Arsanti,(2018) that teacher efficacy is required to behave

Marionus Lambi, Budiman

innovatively because their students need different treatment. Therefore, teacher self-

efficacy is very necessary to achieve the best performance. This is reinforced by the

opinion of Sofiyan et al., (2022) that every educator with high self-efficacy knows his

ability to create innovation power so that he can carry out work easily. Every educator

must have self-efficacy in the face of uncertainty and failure in the innovation process.

Organizational Support Moderates Self-Efficacy and Innovative Behaviors

The results proved that organizational support positively strengthened the existence

of self-efficacy and innovative behavior of Manokwari District Social Service employees.

High support from the organization can encourage employee self-efficacy by producing

innovative behaviors to produce the best performance. The results of respondents'

answers stated that organizational support received the highest rating, namely on leaders

who pay attention to employees. This means that leaders care about their employees in

carrying out their duties and responsibilities. Such organizational support can strengthen

employees' self-efficacy and innovative behavior. Inoivative behavior arises because it is

based on the self-efficacy of employees to produce creative ideas. :P Employees with

high self-efficacy will be more likely to contribute to the organization and be positive to

encourage innovative behavior.

This research shows that organizational support acts as moderation that is able to

moderate the relationship between efficacy and innovative behavior of lecturers at PTS

in Surabaya. This means that the existence of organizational support can strengthen in

supporting the self-efficacy of lecturers and implement innovative behavior in the faculty.

Lecturers who feel they get support from faculty tend to reciprocate that support in the

form of innovative behavior. Lecturers' perception of organizational support is getting

better when lecturers experience various tangible results during exchanges with faculty

in their daily work. When exchanges between lecturers and faculty produce positive

results, lecturers will show a tendency to provide creative ideas, explore opportunities,

solve problems and apply in work.

The results of this study are in line with social exchange theory related to the mutual

exchange of resources between employees and leaders (Blau, 2017). When lecturers get

support from organizations, lecturers will replace the treatment with self-efficacy and

manifest in innovative behaviors in the workplace. Furthermore, the results of the study

found that organizational support directly did not have a significant effect on innovative

behavior. This means that organizational support has not been able to fully directly

improve the innovative behavior of private university lecturers in Surabaya. Innovative

behavior of lecturers is very necessary in generating creative ideas related to ways to find

methods to solve problems and to produce the best performance is not only influenced by

organizational support but there are other factors as determinants of lecturer creative

performance. The formation of innovative behavior must begin with creativity that arises

in the lecturers themselves. When lecturers believe they have self-efficacy, they will be

able to produce innovative behavior.

The results of this study are not in line with Yulianti et al., (2018) research

conducted at State Universities in Surabaya that university support has a significant effect

on innovative behavior. The difference in the findings of this study can be due to the

creative culture of organizations built in different private universities.

American Journal of Economic and Management Business

Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2024

CONCLUSION

The empirical results of the study concluded that self-efficacy has a positive and

significant effect on innovative behavior. This explains that better self-efficacy can

improve the innovative behavior of Manokwari District Social Service employees.

Furthermore, organizational support has been shown to moderate self-efficacy against

innovative behavior. This finding explains that organizational support is able to

strengthen the existence of self-efficacy for innovative behavior of Manokwari District

Social Service employees. From the research findings, managerial implications that can

be done by university leaders to always provide facility and moral support to lecturers so

that there are no obstacles in doing creativity. Leaders need to motivate Manokwari

District Social Office employees to increase their self-efficacy in strengthening their

innovative behavior so as to increase the intensity in providing new ideas, providing

support to colleagues for their creative ideas, and actively implementing these new ideas.

The study had some limitations. First, this study was conducted by cross section. Further

research should be carried out longitudinally. Second, the research sample is only PTS

lecturers in Surabaya. Future studies should use samples over a wider area. Third, current

research methods in quantitative Further research to obtain information on innovative

employee behavior in more depth using mixed methods..

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (2011). A social cognitive perspective on positive psychology. International

Journal of Social Psychology, 26(1), 7–20.

Bawuro, F. A., Danjuma, I., & Wajiga, H. (2018). Factors influencing innovative

behaviour of teachers in secondary schools in the north east of Nigeria. Traektoriâ

Nauki= Path of Science, 4(3), 1007–1017.

Berliana, V., & Arsanti, T. A. (2018). Analisis pengaruh self-efficacy, kapabilitas, dan

perilaku kerja inovatif terhadap kinerja. Jurnal Maksipreneur: Manajemen,

Koperasi, Dan Entrepreneurship, 7(2), 149–161.

Blau, P. (2017). Exchange and power in social life. Routledge.

Celep, C., & Yilmazturk, O. E. (2012). The relationship among organizational trust,

multidimensional organizational commitment and perceived organizational support

in educational organizations. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5763–

5776.

Chatchawan, R., Trichandhara, K., & Rinthaisong, I. (2017). Factors affecting innovative

work behavior of employees in local administrative organizations in the South of

Thailand. International Journal of Social Sciences and Management, 4(3), 154–157.

Choi, W.-S., Kang, S.-W., & Choi, S. B. (2021). Innovative behavior in the workplace:

An empirical study of moderated mediation model of self-efficacy, perceived

organizational support, and leader–member exchange. Behavioral Sciences, 11(12),

182.

Cingöz, A., & Akdoğan, A. A. (2011). An empirical examination of performance and

image outcome expectation as determinants of innovative behavior in the

workplace. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 847–853.

De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad, B. A., Baas, M., Wolsink, I., & Roskes, M. (2012). Working

memory benefits creative insight, musical improvisation, and original ideation

through maintained task-focused attention. Personality and Social Psychology

Marionus Lambi, Budiman

Bulletin, 38(5), 656–669.

De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2008). Innovative work behavior: Measurement and

validation. EIM Business and Policy Research, 8(1), 1–27.

Dewi, R., & Herlina, T. (2021). Pengaruh Kreativitas Dan K Emampuan Kewirausahaan

Terhadap Keberhasilan Usaha Pada Umkm Kuliner Di Baturaja Timur Kabupaten

Oku. Jurnal Manajemen Bisnis Unbara, 2(1), 75–93.

Farmer, S. M., & Tierney, P. (2017). Considering creative self-efficacy: Its current state

and ideas for future inquiry. In The creative self (pp. 23–47). Elsevier.

Fauzia, S., Budiningsih, I., Djaelani, A., & Ahmad, M. (2017). Dominant factors affecting

the behavior of innovative employees. Polish Journal of Management Studies,

16(1), 32–40.

Ghozali, I., & Latan, H. (2015). Partial least squares konsep, teknik dan aplikasi

menggunakan program smartpls 3.0 untuk penelitian empiris. Semarang: Badan

Penerbit UNDIP.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998).

Multivariate data analysis. Uppersaddle River. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th Ed)

Upper Saddle River, 5(3), 207–219.

Hsiao, H.-C., Chang, J.-C., Tu, Y.-L., & Chen, S.-C. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy

on innovative work behavior for teachers. International Journal of Social Science

and Humanity, 1(1), 31.

Indriani, R., & Sritresna, T. (2022). Kemampuan Koneksi Matematis ditinjau dari Self

Efficacy Siswa SMP pada Materi Pola Bilangan. Plusminus: Jurnal Pendidikan

Matematika, 2(1), 121–130.

Jaenudin, U. (2015). Dinamika Kepribadian (Psikodinamik). CV. Pustaka Setia.

Jaiswal, N. K., & Dhar, R. L. (2015). Transformational leadership, innovation climate,

creative self-efficacy and employee creativity: A multilevel study. International

Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, 30–41.

Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career

potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all?

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 148.

Li, X., & Zheng, Y. (2014). The influential factors of employees’ innovative behavior

and the management advices. Journal of Service Science and Management, 7(06),

446.

Miola, L., Muffato, V., Meneghetti, C., & Pazzaglia, F. (2021). Spatial learning in a

virtual environment: The role of self-efficacy feedback and individual visuospatial

factors. Brain Sciences, 11(9), 1185.

Noerchoidah, N., Mochklas, M., Indriyani, R., & Arianto, A. (2022). The Mediating

Effect of Knowledge Sharing on Interpersonal Trust and Job Satisfaction of

Creative Industry in East Jawa. Matrik: Jurnal Manajemen, Strategi Bisnis Dan

Kewirausahaan, 16(1), 87–98.

Putri, D. E., Rahardjo, W., Qomariyah, N., Rini, Q. K., & Pranandari, K. (2021). Social

problem-solving in freshmen: The role of emotional stability, secure attachment,

communication skill, and self-esteem. Humaniora, 12(2), 141–149.

Rego, A., Ribeiro, N., & Cunha, M. P. (2010). Perceptions of organizational virtuousness

and happiness as predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of

Business Ethics, 93, 215–235.

Roffeei, S. H. M., Kamarulzaman, Y., & Yusop, F. D. (2017). Inculcating innovative

behaviour among students: Determinants of innovation culture in Malaysian higher

American Journal of Economic and Management Business

Vol. 3 No. 3 March 2024

education. MOJEM: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management, 5(4),

1–17.

Rustika, I. M. (2012). Efikasi diri: tinjauan teori Albert Bandura. Buletin Psikologi, 20(1–

2), 18–25.

Saripin, M. S. Bin, & Kassim, E. S. (2019). Factors of innovative behavior in Malaysia.

Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 18(6), 1–5.

Schulz, W. H. (2005). Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Student Expectations: Results from

PISA 2003. Online Submission.

Shanker, R., Bhanugopan, R., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., & Farrell, M. (2017).

Organizational climate for innovation and organizational performance: The

mediating effect of innovative work behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 100,

67–77.

Sofiyan, S., Agustina, T., Siahaan, R., Simatupang, S., & Sudirman, A. (2022). Testing

the relationship between employee engagement and employee performance: The

urgency of self efficacy and organizational justice as predictors. KnE Social

Sciences, 425–440.

Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Creativity or creativities? International Journal of Human-

Computer Studies, 63(4–5), 370–382.

Sulistyowati, E., & Lestari, N. S. (2016). Faktor-faktor penentu keberhasilan usaha kecil

dan menengah (UKM) Di Kota Yogyakarta. Jurnal Maksipreneur: Manajemen,

Koperasi, Dan Entrepreneurship, 6(1), 24–36.

Tjosvold, D., Tang, M. M. L., & West, M. (2004). Reflexivity for team innovation in

China: The contribution of goal interdependence. Group & Organization

Management, 29(5), 540–559.

Voo, I., Soehod, K., Ashari, H., Suleiman, E., Zaidin, N., Noor, R., & Doulatabadi, M.

(2019). Individual Characteristics Influencing Employee Innovative Behavior with

Reward as Moderator in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Proceedings of the

International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management,

5(7), 3439–3450.

Yidong, T., & Xinxin, L. (2013). How ethical leadership influence employees’ innovative

work behavior: A perspective of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Business Ethics,

116, 441–455.

Yulianti, P., Atomzeal, M. O., & Arina, N. A. (2018). Burnout, self-efficacy and work

satisfaction among special education teacher. KnE Social Sciences.

Marionus Lambi, Budiman (2024)

First publication right:

AJEMB – American Journal of Economic and Management Business