Email this article 
Determinants of GenZ' innovative work behavior in East Java: the mediating role of job performance
(1) Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Hayam Wuruk Perbanas, Surabaya
(2) 2Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Brawijaya, Malang
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Innovative work behavior (IWB) is a critical component of organizational competitiveness in the post-pandemic digital transformation era, which is marked by rapid technological change and high uncertainty. This study's objective is to examine the relationship between IWB and work stress, work engagement, and leader-member exchange (LMX), using job performance as a mediator. The Structural Equation Modeling (SEM-PLS) method was employed in this study's quantitative methodology. 145 Generation Z workers in East Java provided information via a Likert-scale survey. Three key conclusions are revealed by the data. First, work engagement significantly and favorably affects IWB and job performance. Second, while it has no influence on job performance, LMX significantly and favorably affects IWB. Third, although it has no direct impact on IWB, work stress has a detrimental and substantial impact on job performance. Additionally, the mediation study demonstrates that employee innovation is largely driven by work success. These results have three useful ramifications for businesses: Integrating mindfulness-based stress management programs; adaptive workloads into performance appraisal systems; and Training leaders to build high-quality LMX that focuses on emotional support and providing innovative autonomy.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123–167. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-4-14-6
Aman Ullah, A., Aziz, A., Ariza-Montes, A., & Han, H. (2025). Workplace telepressure and innovative work performance: A moderation mediation study through work-family conflicts and job burnout. European Journal of Innovation Management, 28(3), 1164–1180. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-12-2023-1090
Anand, P., Mishra, S., & Mohanty, K. (2025). How do the Gen Z engage at work? A research review and conceptual model. Parikalpana: KIIT Journal of Management, 21(1), 154–169. https://doi.org/10.23862/kiit-parikalpana/2025/v21/i1/250107
Augustine, F., Mulyadi, H., & Sari, R. P. (2025). The influence of job stress and toxic workplace environment on turnover intention with employee engagement as mediating variable on gen Z employees at startup company. In International Journal of Social Science and Business (Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 245–258).
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. In Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (Vol. 22, Issue 3, pp. 273–285). https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. John Wiley and Sons.
BPS East Java. (2026). Statistical Yearbook of East Java Province 2026.
Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 389–444). Allyn & Bacon.
Campbell, J. P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology - Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 1). Consulting Psychologists Press.
Chin, W. W., & Marcoulides, G. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to SEM chapter. In Advances in Hospitality and Leisure (Vol. 8, Issue 2).
Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.x
Divya Prabha, S., & Priyadarsini, K. (2024). Impact of autonomy, organizational support and leader relations on job crafting A comparative study of millennials and generation Z. Revista Clinica Psicologica, 33(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.53555/03276716.2024.03
Dodanwala, T. C., & Santoso, D. S. (2021). Innovative work behavior scale: Development and validation of psychometric properties in higher education in the GCC countries. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(1), 119–133.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-Analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6), 827–844. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.827
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2017). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Edition) by Joseph F. Hair, William C. Black, Barry J. Babin, Rolph E. Anderson (z-lib.org).pdf (p. 761).
Hart, G. (2025). Leader-member exchange, responsible artificial intelligence, and self-determination theory: An integrative review of leadership, autonomy, and motivation in AI-augmented workplaces. Scientific Bulletin Nicolae Balcescu Land Forces Academy, 30(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.2478/bsaft-2025-0015
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2-20.
Hill, J., Kim, M., Oja, B. D., Kim, H. S., & Lee, H. W. (2024). Innovation is the key: Identifying factors to increase career satisfaction and psychological well-being in millennial and generation Z sport employees. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 14(3), 296–315. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-02-2023-0011
Hofstede, G. (2020). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Sage Publications.
Hughes, D. J., Lee, A., Tian, A. W., Newman, A., & Legood, A. (2018). Leadership, creativity, and innovation: A critical review and practical recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(5), 549–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.03.001
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
Gallup. (2024). State of the Global Workplace Report.
Kaltiainen, J., & Hakanen, J. (2022). Fostering Task and Adaptive Performance Through Employee Well-Being: The Role of Servant Leadership. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 25(1), 28–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/2340944420981599
Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. Basic Books.
Karimah, A. U., & Al Karim, C. H. (2025). Turnover intention among Gen Z employees: The influence of work stress and openness to experience personality. Journal of Educational, Health and Community Psychology, 14(3), 1451–1465. https://doi.org/10.12928/jehcp.vi.31532
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
Lai, F. Y., Tang, H. C., Lu, S. C., Lee, Y. C., & Lin, C. C. (2020). Transformational leadership and job performance: The mediating role of work engagement. SAGE Open, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019899085
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company.
Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639802400105
Liu, P., Yuan, Y., Yang, L., Liu, B., & Xu, S. (2024). Innovation comes with responsibility: A dual moderation model of taking charge and innovative job performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 27(8), 2966–2993. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-08-2022-0420
Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader-member exchange (LMX) and performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12100
Martin, R., Ono, M., Legood, A., Dello Russo, S., & Thomas, G. (2023). Leader member exchange (LMX) quality and follower well-being: A daily diary study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 28(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000344
McKinsey Indonesia Digital. (2026). Digital Indonesia Report 2026.
McKinsey Southeast Asia. (2025). Southeast Asia Economic Report 2025.
Montani, F., & Staglianò, R. (2022). Innovation in times of pandemic: The moderating effect of knowledge sharing on the relationship between COVID-19-induced job stress and employee innovation. R&D Management, 52(2), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12489
Nguyen, T. P. L. (2023). Factors affecting innovative behavior of Vietnamese enterprises employees. International Journal of Innovation Science, 15(1), 186–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-12-2021-0214
Nguyen, M. T., & Petchsawang, P. (2024). Encouraging employees' innovative behavior via the mediating effect of work engagement and the moderating effect of their proactive personality: The case of Generation Z in Vietnam. Cogent Business & Management, 11 (1), 2301162. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2301162
Ragu-Nathan, T. S., Tarafdar, M., Ragu-Nathan, B. S., & Tu, Q. (2008). The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: Conceptual development and empirical validation. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 417-433.
Reviana, K. C., Wulani, F., & Pradana, D. W. (2026). Innovative behavior: The role of self-efficacy and work engagement of Gen Z employees. Telaah Bisnis, 26(2), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.35917/tb.v26i2.626
Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.66
Schaufeli, W. B. (2017). Applying the Job Demands-Resources model: A “how to” guide to measuring and tackling work engagement and burnout. Organizational Dynamics, 46(2), 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2017.04.008
Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W. (2014). A critical review of the Job Demands-Resources Model: Implications for improving work and health- Bridging occupational, organizational and public health: A transdisciplinary approach. Springer, 43–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5640-3_4
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2021). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES): Test manual. Utrecht University.
Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (7th ed.). Wiley.
SHRM Global Report. (2025). Global Workplace Trends and Employee Well-being.
Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2022). Recovery from work: Advancing the field toward the future. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 9(1), 33–60. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-091316
Supriyono, S. (2024). Paternalistic leadership and organizational commitment: The mediating role of job satisfaction in Indonesian SMEs. Journal of Management Applications, 22 (1), 88--102.
Susetio, A. T., Aditya, E., & Meilani, Y. F. C. P. (2025). Work engagement and its related constructs among generation Z: A systematic literature review integrating JD-R, SET, and SDT perspectives. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 32(4), 864–880.
Tate, U., Whatley, A., & Clugston, M. (1997). Sources and Outcomes of Job Tension: A Three-Nation Study. In International journal of management (Vol. 14, Issue 3, pp. 350–358).
Tarafdar, M., Cooper, C. L., & Stich, J. F. (2019). The technostress trifecta - techno eustress, techno distress and design: Theoretical directions and an agenda for research. Information Systems Journal, 29(1), 6-42.
Tjoa, Y., & Arief, M. (2022). Determinants of innovative work behavior: The role of job satisfaction as mediation and environmental dynamism as moderating variable. 5th European International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.46254/EU5.20220445
Widiyawati, V. T., & Zamralita, Z. (2025). The role of workplace ostracism on employee performance mediated by work stress among employees. International Journal of Applied Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(2), 123–135.
Yoon, S., Kim, S. L., & Yun, S. (2024). Supervisor knowledge sharing and creative behavior: The roles of employees’ self-efficacy and work family conflict. Journal of Management & Organization, 30(6), 1920–1935. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2022.85
Zhang, J., Zhou, M., & Ni, Y. (2023). Challenge-avoidance stress and employee innovation: The moderating role of job autonomy and leader-member exchange. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 36(2), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-07-2021-0204
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24123/mabis.v25i3.1178
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 0 timesPDF - 0 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Shinta Setia, Nanda Dwi Maharani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ISSN: 1412-3789. e-ISSN: 2477-1783.
 |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |
| Â | Â | Â |
Â
Â
Â