| What factors influence innovative workplace behavior in a United States government bureaucratic organization with a primacy mission in research and development? A mixed methods approach was used to develop a customized survey that measured 33 independent variables and their relationship to six outcomes of innovative work behavior, job satisfaction, employee morale, work involvement, readiness for change, work stress, and work involvement. This dissertation describes the quantitative methodology for analyzing the results of the customized climate survey. The focus of this research is on the independent variables that predict the outcome of innovative work behavior in a U.S. government research and development bureaucracy. The survey was administered to 4,785 civilian and military members of the United States Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). Demographic information collected during the survey included employee status (civilian/military), supervisory role (supervisor/non-supervisor), job grouping (scientist/engineer, management professional, clerical/administrative, technician, other), category in which employee spends greater than 50% of their time (program manager/associate program manager; support scientist and engineer; bench-level scientist and engineer/in-house researcher; plans and programs engineer; technical advisor; functional; other), management level (division chief and above; below division chief), tenure with AFRL, technology directorate, and division within technology directorate. The AFRL 2.0 survey response rate was 84%, an indication of the importance of the action research methodology for engagement with the client system. The results indicate that across AFRL the factors of ownership and organization basic assumptions supporting innovation drove innovative work behavior. Factors that impeded innovative work behavior for individuals in this environment were performance feedback, work environment satisfaction, and work group cohesion and engagement. Models for factors influencing innovative work behavior were also developed and validated for bench-level/in-house scientists and engineers, program management scientists and engineers, and functional employees. The study concludes with a discussion on ways to continue the action research cycle using the scientist-practitioner model to build a climate and culture of innovation in the workplace, and with recommendations for research and development and functional management. |
