Comparing the role of personal and organisational support on the innovative behaviour of frontline healthcare workers in Australia and the United States

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Australian Journal of Public Administration

ISSN

03136647

Volume

79

Issue

3

First Page

279

Last Page

297

Publisher

Wiley

School

School of Business and Law

RAS ID

31545

Funders

Wesley Mission, Queensland

Comments

Brunetto, Y., Xerri, M., & Farr‐Wharton, B. (2020). Comparing the role of personal and organisational support on the innovative behaviour of frontline healthcare workers in Australia and the United States. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 79(3), 279-297. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12414

Abstract

© 2020 Institute of Public Administration Australia This paper empirically uses a street-level bureaucrat (SLB) lens to compare the impact of personal and organisational support on the innovative behaviour of frontline healthcare workers in Australia and the United States. Survey data came from the 260 U.S. and 220 Australian respondents. The structural equation model shows that organisational (i.e. manager–subordinate relationships) and personal supports (i.e. psychological capital [PsyCap]) significantly influence the innovative behaviour of frontline SLBs in health care. Further, the mediation results show that reciprocal social exchanges provide the foundations for facilitating the growth of healthcare workers’ PsyCap, which then gives them the resilience to be innovative in the workplace. The U.S. respondents perceived stronger organisational support and consequently had a better platform for building PsyCap – providing better work conditions for facilitating innovative behaviour to bourgeon. The paper adds to SLB theory concerning the influence of two variables on SLBs' innovative behaviour, in addition to a meaningful comparison of the U.S. and Australian healthcare workers. If governments and organisations want innovative workers, then the policies must be based on empirical evidence that shows the impact on all stakeholders, including SLBs, because otherwise, irrespective of policy directives, the outcome is low levels of employee wellbeing (which likely results in limited innovative activity).

DOI

10.1111/1467-8500.12414

Access Rights

subscription content

Link to Full Text

Share

 
COinS