1. Method Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II, Instytut Psychologii, al. Racławickie 14, 20-950 Lublin I Ogólnopolska Konferencja Innowacyjnych Projektów Badawczych, 29 czerwca 2016 Measures: Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ-21; Schwartz et al., 2001; Cieciuch & Zaleski, 2011); Innovative Behavior Questionnaire (Scott, Bruce, 1994; Purc, Łaguna, 2016); Autonomy scale from Work Design Questonnaire (Morgeson, Humphrey, 2006). Factor structure af all measures was verified with CFA using AMOS. Participants: 263 Polish private sector employees, 53.7% women, aged 19-74 (M = 33,88; SD = 10,62); Data analysis: Hierarchical linear regression analysis; Mediation analysis with bias-corrected bootstrapping method (with 5000 repetitions) using Hayes’ PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013). Nowadays, innovation is known as a determinant of business growth and success (Strzałecki, Lizurej, 2011) and is often considered as essential for every modern, ambitious organization. It can increase competitive advantage and probability of firm’s survival in a long-term perspective (Lukes, 2013). Employees as people who play crucial role in organization’s functioning, are usually ‘executors’ of innovative ideas. New, innovative approach to investigate this area uses personal values theory (Schwartz, 1994, Schwartz et al., 2012). Personal values are defined as rather stable, cognitive representations of goals and motivations, which are significant for people (Schwartz, 1994). According to Schwartz (1994) there are 10 basic personal values which can be structured into two bipolar dimensions: Openness to Change versus Conservation and Self-Enhancement versus Self- Transcendence. All values form a circular motivational continuum (Figure 1). Innovative behavior starts with the recognition of a problem and involves generating ideas of problem solutions; the next step is looking for support in order to be able to implement this new solution; the process is finished when the idea has been realized (Scott, Bruce, 1994). Construct similar to creativity, but extended with the last phase – implementation of the idea. The aim of the study was to investigate the relationships between employee’s personal values and his/her innovative behaviour. Hypoyhesized mediator of these relationships can be autonomy (perceived by employees). To date, in research values occured to be ralated to creativity, but not to innovative behavior. To answer research question, regression and mediaton analyses were conducted. In regression analysis it appeared, that Self-enhancement values are positively related to employees’ Innovative Behavior (β =.25***), when Conservation values showed negative relationships (β = -.22***). Autonomy is also positively related to dependent variable (β =.46***). Mediation analysis showed, that Autonomy is significant mediator in relationships between a) Self- enhancement, b) Self-transcendence, c) Conservation and Innovative Behavior (see below). Results of the study bring new insight to innovation research. Employees, who prefer Self-enhancement (Power and Achievement) tend to be more innovative. On the other hand, employees, for whom very important are Conservation values (Security, Conformity, Tradition), appeared to behave less innovatively. In addition, when taking mediating role of perceived autonomy into consideration, Self-enhancement values foster innovative behavior, and Self-transcendence and Conservation values does not. It is suprising that Openess to change values (Self direction, Stimulation, Hedonism) don’t predict innovative behavior, but these variables occured to be significantly, positively related in simple Pearson correlation analysis (r =.13*). These conclusions can be interesting for scholars involved in innovation research and also for human resource management practitioners and business owners, who want to survive on the market by implementing innovative solutions. Introduction Results Conclusions Why employees behave innovatively? Values’ approach to innovation research Ewelina Purc (ewelina.purc@gmail.com) Figure 1. Theoretical model of relations among ten motivational types of values. Adapted from: http://www.fdsd.org Indirect effect =.10; Bootstrapped standard error SEB =.03, 95% confidence interval CI [0.18, 0. 44] (does not include zero what confirms the mediation effect) Autonomy Conservation Innovative behavior Autonomy Self- enhancement Innovative behavior Autonomy Self- transcendence Innovative behavior Indirect effect = -.13 Bootstrapped standard error SEB =.04, 95% confidence interval CI [-0.21, -0.05] (does not include zero what confirms the mediation effect) Indirect effect = -.08; Bootstrapped standard error SEB =.04, 95% confidence interval CI [-0.17, -0.01] (does not include zero what confirms the mediation effect) References Cieciuch, J., Zaleski, Z., 2011, Polska adaptacja Portretowego Kwestionariusza Wartości Shaloma Schwartza, „Czasopismo Psychologiczne” 17(2): 251-262. Lukes, M. (2013). Entrepreneurs as innovators: A multi-country study on entrepreneurs’ innovative behaviour. Prague Economic Papers, 22, 72-84. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1321-1339. Schwartz, S. H., Cieciuch, J., Vecchione, M., Davidov, E., Fischer, R., Beierlein, C., Ramos, A., Verkasalo, M., Lönnqvist, J-E., Demirirutku, K., & Dirilen-Gumus, O. (2012). Refining the theory of basic human values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4), 663-688. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., 2001, Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement, “Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology” 32(5): 519-542. Schwartz, S. H., 1994, Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? “Journal of Social Issues” 50: 19-45. Scott, S. G., Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607. Strzałecki, A. & Lizurej, A. (red.) (2011). Innowacyjna przedsiębiorczość: Teorie, badania, zastosowania praktyczne. Perspektywa psychologiczna. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Academica The study was funded from the grant received from The National Science Centre no. DEC-2013/10/M/HS6/0047 http://www.kul.pl/spp-lab