1.

3 Problem Statement

(RQ1)The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dato’ Seri Mohd Najib bin Tun Razak, in his
speech in Premier Leadership Discourse of the Administrative and Diplomatic Service
Association 2014, has stressed the importance of creativity and innovation among PTD
officers as key drivers for Malaysia to remain competitive (Prihatin,2015). In quest to be a
developed nation by the year 2020, PTD officers must be forward thinking, stay abreast with
the latest development, strive for continuous improvement and nurture a culture of creativity
and innovation. Moreover, according to Chief Secretary to the Government of Malaysia, Tan
Sri Ali bin Hamsa, in his speech in PTD Alumni International Conference 2014, PTD officers
are expected to be creative and innovative in order to come out with more ideas and new
programmes to suit the transformation era in public service (Ali Hamsa, 2014). Since PTD
officers are the policy makers and change agent of the Government (Ali Hamsa, 2015), they
must nurture innovative work behaviour to continuously improve the service delivery.
Referring to the public service scenario, there are not less than 9,000 complaints received by
Public Complaint Bureau annually over dissatisfaction of government service delivery (Biro
Pengaduan Awam, 2014). This indicates that many aspects in public sector performance
need to be improved by public servants especially by PTD officers since they hold strategic
posts in government and lead the government’s departments and agencies. Hence, apart from
leadership qualities, innovative work behaviour need to be nurtured among PTD officers to
explore, generate and apply new ideas in performing tasks. Innovative work behaviour will
increase performance (Leong, 2014; Imai, 2012) and productivity (Leong, 2014) in public
service, thus will result in customers’ satisfaction (Koch, Mulgan, and Albury, 2009) with the
public service. Therefore, it is vital to examine the determinants of innovative work
behaviour among PTD officers. In this study, leaders member exchange is proposed as the
predictor of innovative work behaviour among PTD officers.

Notwithstanding with the importance of innovative work behaviour, its antecedents

are very subjective and not well understood (Agarwal and Bhargava, 2014). It is an
organizational behaviour resulted from various factors. Some crucial factors of innovative
work behaviour such as trust and leader-member exchange is still under researched (Taştan
and Davoudi, 2015). To date, despite agreement on the importance of the relationships
employees have with their supervisor, little has been done to study the linkage between
leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour (Taştan and Davoudi, 2015;
Sanders, 2010). In the case of PTD officers in Malaysia, it is important to study how far
leader-member exchange affects innovative work behaviour since PTD officers is a multi-
hierarchal scheme which relationship between leaders and subordinates is given emphasize.
For example, PTD officers are requested to regard their leaders as coach and mentor (Ali
Hamsa, 2014), a practice that constructs professional respect which is one dimension of
leader-member exchange. Furthermore, it was found out in Yusof, Masrek, and Noordin
(2012) that understanding, encouraging and appreciative supervisors, positively influence
productivity among PTD officers. As stated earlier, productivity positively link to innovative
work behaviour (Leong, 2014). These supervisors’ characteristics relate to affect, a
dimension of leader-member exchange which defined as mutual affection based on
interpersonal attraction. Therefore, it is crucial to further investigate the effect of leader-
member exchange on innovative work behaviour among PTD officers to promote innovation
in public sector.

Studies that have been conducted on the relationship between leader-member

exchange and innovative work behaviour mostly confirmed the positive effect of leader-
member exchange on innovative work behaviour (Altunoglu and Gurel, 2015; Frank, 2015;
Kheng and Mahmood, 2013; Sanders et al, 2010). These researches has shown that leader-
member exchange is an important antecedent of innovative work behaviour (Xerri, M., 2013,
Agarwal et al 2012; Sanders et al 2012, Sanders, 2010). High level of quality of leader-
member exchange between supervisors and employees will encourage employees to be more
innovative in performing their job. Supportive practices demonstrated by supervisors
increase the chances that innovative behaviour will be successful. Employees are likely to be
more confident that their innovative behaviour will result in performance (Yuan and
Woodman, 2010). However there is a conflicting finding in some studies that concluded that
the influence of leader-member exchange was not significant on employees’ innovative work
behaviour (Taştan and Davoudi, 2015). In the study by Taştan and Davoudi (2015), it was
found that the leader-member exchange quality did not affect the innovative work behaviour
of employees in companies of various sectors in Turkey. Similarly, in study by Lee (2008), it
was concluded that quality of leader-member exchange did not affect the innovative
behaviour of research and development professionals in Singapore. It was stated that the
research and development professionals are tend to work independently and confidence with
their ability and professionalisme. Hence, high quality leader-member exchange does not
help innovativeness. Besides that, in Bernerth et al., 2007; Liden et al., 2006; Van Dyne et
al., 2002, it was concluded that there is no relationship between leader-member exchange and
performance. This can also indicate the trend of relationship between leader-member
exchange and innovative work behaviour since innovative work behaviour is related with
performance (Leong, 2014). Therefore, this current study aims to test the inconsistent
relationship between leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour in the public
sector of Malaysia, specifically among PTD officers. Even though the relationship between
leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour has been tested in previous studies
in the context of many countries such as Turkey (Tastan et al, 2015, Altunoglu et al 2015),
Holland and German (Sanders et al 2010); India (Agarwal et al, 2012; 2013) and the
Netherlands (de Jong, 2007), but the locality and cultural difference between Malaysia and
these countries may not generalise the previous findings. Besides that, this study also fill the
literature gap on the need to further explore innovative work behaviour in the context of
public sector since little attention has been paid to innovative work behaviour in public sector
as compared to private sector (Bysted et al , 2014).

(RQ2)Most researches conducted on leader-member exchange shows that leader-

member exchange has a positive impact on work engagement. According to Kimberley et al,
2015, resourceful work environment enjoyed by employees in high-quality leader-member
exchange leads to work engagement. When supervisors fulfil the psychological contracts of
their employees by taking care of personal and professional needs and treating them with
respect, the subordinates feel oblige to reciprocate in equally positive manners (Saks, 2006).
Employees feel obligated to reciprocate by approaching their work with greater vigour,
dedication, and absorption, which are the dimensions of work engagement. Bhatnagar (2007)
concluded that leaders of high-quality exchange relationships represent resources that
facilitate accomplishment of work goals, stimulate personal development, and thus, increase
work engagement among employees. However, Zhou and Bao (2005) found that: leader-
member exchange had no direct and obvious effect on the employee’s affective commitment
for the organization. The linkage is only significance with the presence of perceived work
satisfaction as mediator. Here, employees’ effective commitment can relate to employees’
engagement since engaged employees possess a high degree of cognitive and affective
commitment (Daniels 2011), Meanwhile, in Jing-zhou and Wen-xia, 2011, it was posited that
not all dimensions of leader-member exchange has significant impact on commitment. It was
concluded that contribution, one dimension of leader-member exchange did not influence the
organizational affective commitment of employees in four organizations in China. Three
other dimensions of leader-member exchange namely affect, loyalty and professional respect
are found to have impact on affective commitment since the dimensions are more social
related, unlike contribution which is more work related. (Jing-zhou and Wen-xia, 2011).
Therefore, this current study intends to investigate the effect of the four dimensions of leader-
member exchange, namely affect, contribution, loyalty and professional respect, on work
engagement in the setting of public sector in Malaysia.

(RQ3)Besides being affected by leader-member exchange, innovative work behaviour

can also be predicted by work engagement. Various studies have been conducted to examine
the effect of work engagement on innovative work behaviour. To date, most studies that have
been conducted on the relationship between work engagement and innovative work
behaviour show positive relation between the two variables. For example, Bakker et al.
(2007) found positive correlations between innovativeness and the three dimensions of work
engagement namely vigour; dedication and absorption. Engaged employees increase their
personal initiative, which results in enhancing innovativeness (Hakanen et al., 2008). They
work at their level best and attempt proactive approach to problem solving. People experience
positive emotions when they are engaged in their work (Bakker and Demerouti, 2008) and
this facilitates people to explore, assimilate new information and experiences, and apply them
(Fredrickson, 2001). However, some researchers, for instance Parker and Griffin (2011)
pointed out that engagement and positive form of behaviour such as innovative work
behaviour must be considered as separate construct which direct linkage between them
cannot be assumed. For example, an employee might demonstrate innovation, not because
they feel engaged, but to prove their competency and to stay in an organization (Parker and
Griffin, 2011). Conversely, an employee might fail to show innovation, not because they are
unengaged, but because some restrains in the environment (Parker and Griffin, 2011). Thus,
since there are contradictory findings on the effect of work engagement on innovative work
behaviour, this research intends to investigate the relationship between the two variables in
the context of Malaysian public sector. Furthermore, recent studies stated that the connection
between work engagement and innovative work behaviour is still under researched despite its
logical connection (Park et al., 2014; Agarwal, 2014).

(RQ4)As discussed earlier, there is inconsistent findings on the relationship between

leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour. This inconsistent relationship
suggested that there might be an intervening variable between leader-member exchange and
innovative work behaviour. Several factors has been tested to mediate the relationship
between leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour such as employability (M.
Stoffers et al, 2014) and satisfaction with HR practices (Sanders et al, 2010). Recent study
by Agarwal et al (2013) concluded that work engagement is a mechanism that links leader-
member exchange and innovative work behaviour. It was found out that leader-member
exchange does not influence innovative work behaviour directly, but through increased work
engagement. Therefore, this study proposes work engagement as the mechanism in the
relationship between leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour among PTD
officers in Malaysian public sector. This proposal is also supported by empirical evidence
that have been deliberated earlier that proved positive relationship between leader-member
exchange and work engagement, and work engagement and innovative work behaviour.
Thus, the mediating role of work engagement in the linkage between leader-member
exchange and innovative work behaviour will be examined in this study.

(RQ5)Even though many studies have proved that there is a positive relationship
between work engagement with innovative work behaviour, some researchers suggested that
there are other factors that can moderate the relationship. Parker and Griffin (2011)
suggested that there is a need to analyse the moderating effect of organisational factors to
identify the conditions under which work engagement is most likely to result in positive
behaviours. Further investigation need to be carried out on the boundary conditions that may
influence the manifestation of engagement on employee behaviour. According to Alfes et al
(2013), research on how moderating variables might affect the relationship between
engagement and individual behaviours is still scarce. Even though an engaged employee is
enthusiastic and personally invested in the job, this does not necessarily imply that engaged
employees will uniformly behave in ways to benefit the organisation. Given the need to
study more on the possible variables that can moderate relationship between work
engagement and behaviour, this current study proposes job standardization as the moderating
variable on the relationship between work engagement and innovative work behaviour.

Job standardization is proposed as the moderating variable since it suits the context of
this study that is public sector. In public organizations, job standardization is significant
since public organizations is characterized by a wealth of procedures and regulations that
give a low level of flexibility to the employees (Boyne 2002; Klein et al. 2010). Referring to
the Malaysian public sector, there are many procedures and guidelines enacted to ensure tasks
has been performed accordingly, meet its objectives and expected outcomes. Among others
are Service Circulars, Treasury Directives, Treasury Circulars and General Administrative
Development Directives (‘Pekeliling Kemajuan Perkhidmatan Awam’) and Director
General’s Directive. Besides that, every ministries and departments have their own Manual
Working Procedure, namely ‘Manual Prosedur Kerja’ and every personnel has their own job
guidelines known as ‘Fail Meja’. Furthermore, some of the working procedures in ministries
and departments have been made certified by International Organisation for Standardization
(ISO) to ensure the quality of outputs. These procedures and guidelines which fall under the
definition of job standardization can influence the innovation process by employees in
organisations.

Besides that, empirical evidence has shown that job standardization can affect
individual’s innovative behaviour either positively or negatively. Those with the view that
job standardization positively affect innovative work behaviour, pointed out that clear
working procedures can assist innovation process (eg: Wright, Sturdy, and Wylie, 2012;
Yoshio Kondo, 2000.1996). On the other hand, some researchers posited that job
standardization hinders innovation because of rigidity and inflexibility (eg: (Luoh et al, 2014;
Sengupta and Dev, 2011; Cardinal, 2001). Since job standardization is proven to have strong
relation with innovative work behaviour either in both positive or negative relation, there is a
possibility that job standardization influences the effect of work engagement on innovative
work behaviour. Given the objective of job standardization in public sector, namely to
enhance the quality of public service delivery and to meet public’s expectation (Prime
Minister’s Department, 1991), it is presumed that job standardization positively moderate the
relationship between work engagement and innovative work behaviour among PTD officers.
A higher degree of job standardization will induce engaged PTD officers to become more
innovative.

In conclusion, this study is significant to investigate the effect of leader-member

exchange on PTD officers’ innovative work behaviour Work engagement plays the role of
mediator that provide mechanism through which leader-member exchange affect PTD
officers’ innovative work behaviour. Additionally, this study seeks to identify the role of job
standardization as the potential moderator in the relationship between work engagement and
innovative work behaviour.
1.4 Research Questions

1. What is the effect of leader-member exchange on innovative work behaviour among

PTD officers?

2. What is the effect of leader-member exchange on work engagement among PTD

officers?

3. What is the effect of work engagement on innovative work behaviour among PTD
officers?

4. Does work engagement mediate the relationship between leader-member exchange

and innovative work behaviour among PTD officers?

5. Does job standardization moderate the relationship between work engagement and
innovative work behaviour among PTD officers?

1.5 Research Aim and Objectives

The aim of this research is to examine the effect of leader-member exchange on work
engagement among PTD Officers which in turn affects their innovative work behaviour.
Thus, work engagement acts as the mediator in the relationship between leader-member
exchange and innovative work behaviour. This research also highlight the role of job
standardization in moderating the relationship between work engagement and job
standardization. The researcher aims to answer the following objectives:

1. To determine the effect of leader-member exchange on innovative work behaviour

among PTD officers.

2. To examine the effect of leader-member exchange on work engagement of PTD

officers.
3. To identify the effect of work engagement on innovative work behaviour of PTD
officers.

4. To determine the mediating effect of work engagement on the relationship between

leader-member exchange and innovative work behaviour of PTD officers.

5. To determine the moderating effect of job standardization on the relationship between

work engagement and innovative work behaviour of PTD officers.