Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Influence of Leaders’ Stewardship Behavior on Innovation Success: The Mediating Effect of Radical Innovation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As stated by previous researchers, in an increasingly competitive environment, organizations need to develop successful innovations to compete and survive in the long term. Furthermore, sustainability and social issues are gaining increasing importance, to the extent that they are now a matter of high concern for firms and for society. Therefore, organizations cannot improve their results at any price and must be responsible for the consequences of their activities, including innovation. In these conditions, a growing demand for new leadership styles and behaviors arises to face this complex context. Stewardship is a leadership behavior that shows great concern for the impact of the organization’s activity on society. A quantitative study has been conducted with the purpose of providing empirical evidence of the relationship between leaders’ stewardship behavior and innovation success, using radical innovation as an explanatory variable. To confirm the hypotheses, structural equations were used on a dataset from a sample of 300 questionnaires from Spanish companies. The study empirically validates the proposed conceptual model. Results show how radical innovation fully mediates the relationship between leaders’ stewardship behavior and innovation success.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alegre, J., Chiva, R., & Lapiedra, R. (2005). A literature-based innovation output analysis: Implications for innovation capacity. International Journal of Innovation Management, 9(04), 385–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avlonitis, G. J., Papastathopoulou, P. G., & Gounaris, S. P. (2001). An empirically-based typology of product innovativeness for new financial services: Success and failure scenarios. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(5), 324–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 72(4), 441–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azapagic, A. (2003). Systems approach to corporate sustainability: A general management framework. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 81(5), 303–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2007). Does market orientation facilitate balanced innovation programs? An organizational learning perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(4), 316–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbuto, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group and Organization Management, 31(3), 300–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becchetti, L., Ciciretti, R., Hasan, I., & Kobeissi, N. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder’s value. Journal of Business Research, 65(11), 1628–1635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8(3), 274–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birasnav, M. (2014). Knowledge management and organizational performance in the service industry: The role of transformational leadership beyond the effects of transactional leadership. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1622–1629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bocquet, R., Le Bas, C., Mothe, C., & Poussing, N. (2017). CSR, innovation, and firm performance in sluggish growth contexts: A firm-level empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 146(1), 241–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bos-Brouwers, H. E. J. (2010). Corporate sustainability and innovation in SMEs: Evidence of themes and activities in practice. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(7), 417–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brentani, U. (2001). Innovative versus incremental new business services: Different keys for achieving success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(3), 169–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broberg, T., & Krull, P. (2010). Where creativity and innovation go to school. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2010(39), 57–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabello-Medina, C., Carmona-Lavado, A., Pérez-Luño, A., & Cuevas-Rodríguez, G. (2011). Do best and worst innovation performance companies differ in terms of intellectual capital, knowledge and radicalness. African Journal of Business Management, 5(28), 11450–11466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., Hayes, L. A., Bernal, P., & Karri, R. (2008). Ethical stewardship–implications for leadership and trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1–2), 153–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarty, S., & Wang, L. (2012). The long-term sustenance of sustainability practices in MNCs: A dynamic capabilities perspective of the role of R&D and internationalization. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(2), 205–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandy, R. K., & Tellis, G. J. (1998). Organizing for radical product innovation: The overlooked role of willingness to cannibalize. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(4), 474–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandy, R. K., & Tellis, G. J. (2000). The incumbent’s curse? Incumbency, size, and radical product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 64(3), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. H. (2011). The influence of corporate environmental ethics on competitive advantage: The mediation role of green innovation. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(3), 361–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S. J., Van Witteloostuijn, A., & Eden, L. (2010). From the editors: Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 178–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, B., & Winn, M. I. (2007). Market imperfections, opportunity and sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(1), 29–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1987). New products: What separates winners from losers? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 4(3), 169–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1995). Performance typologies of new product projects. Industrial Marketing Management, 24(5), 439–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cozijnsen, A. J., Vrakking, W. J., & van IJzerloo, M. (2000). Success and failure of 50 innovation projects in Dutch companies. European Journal of Innovation Management, 3(3), 150–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M. M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1154–1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dangelico, R. M., & Pujari, D. (2010). Mainstreaming green product innovation: Why and how companies integrate environmental sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3), 471–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datta, A., & Jessup, L. M. (2013). Looking beyond the focal industry and existing technologies for radical innovations. Technovation, 33(10), 355–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J. E. (1986). The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis. Management Science, 32(11), 1422–1433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibrell, C., Craig, J. B., Kim, J., & Johnson, A. J. (2015). Establishing how natural environmental competency, organizational social consciousness, and innovativeness relate. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(3), 591–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Innovation Scoreboard. (2017). http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/innovation/facts-figures/scoreboards_es. Accessed August 10, 2017.

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatignon, H., Tushman, M. L., Smith, W., & Anderson, P. (2002). A structural approach to assessing innovation: Construct development of innovation locus, type, and characteristics. Management Science, 48(9), 1103–1122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J. M. (1997). Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 77–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gini, A., & Green, R. M. (2014). Three critical characteristics of leadership: Character, stewardship, experience. Business and Society Review, 119(4), 435–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 73–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinot, J., Chiva, R., & Mallén, F. (2016). Linking altruism and organizational learning capability: A study from excellent human resources management organizations in Spain. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(2), 349–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halila, F., & Rundquist, J. (2011). The development and market success of eco-innovations: A comparative study of eco-innovations and “other” innovations in Sweden. European Journal of Innovation Management, 14(3), 278–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Available at: http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf. Accessed November 7, 2017.

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York City: Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, M. (2008). Promoting stewardship behavior in organizations: A leadership model. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(1), 121–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, M. (2012). Toward an understanding of the psychology of stewardship. Academy of Management Review, 37(2), 172–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, A. S., Escartín, J., Schuh, S. C., & van Dick, R. (2016). Who leads more and why? A mediation model from gender to leadership role occupancy. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 473–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, A., Gassmann, O., & Eisert, U. (2007). An empirical study of the antecedents for radical product innovations and capabilities for transformation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 24(1), 92–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heuer, M. (2010). Defining stewardship: Towards an organisational culture of sustainability. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 40, 31–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huergo, E., & Jaumandreu, J. (2004). How does probability of innovation change with firm age? Small Business Economics, 22(3–4), 193–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jepsen, L. B., Dell’Era, C., & Verganti, R. (2014). The contributions of interpreters to the development of radical innovations of meanings: the role of ‘Pioneering Projects’ in the sustainable buildings industry. R&D Management, 44(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 64(4), 408–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karns, G. L. (2011). Stewardship: a new vision for the purpose of business. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 11(4), 337–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klaus, L., & Fernando, M. (2016). Enacting spiritual leadership in business through ego-transcendence. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 37(1), 71–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koberg, C. S., Detienne, D. R., & Heppard, K. A. (2003). An empirical test of environmental, organizational, and process factors affecting incremental and radical innovation. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14(1), 21–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2011). Stewardship behavior and creativity. Management Revue, 22(3), 274–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maak, T., Pless, N. M., & Voegtlin, C. (2016). Business statesman or shareholder advocate? CEO responsible leadership styles and the micro-foundations of political CSR. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3), 463–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Coxe, S., & Baraldi, A. N. (2012). Guidelines for the investigation of mediating variables in business research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maletič, M., Maletič, D., Dahlgaard, J. J., Dahlgaard-Park, S. M., & Gomišček, B. (2016). Effect of sustainability-oriented innovation practices on the overall organisational performance: An empirical examination. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 27(9–10), 1171–1190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcon, A., de Medeiros, J. F., & Ribeiro, J. L. D. (2017). Innovation and environmentally sustainable economy: Identifying the best practices developed by multinationals in Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 160, 83–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, G. D., Russo, M., Lumpkin, G. T., Jennings, P., & Mair, J. (2016). Entrepreneurship as a platform for pursuing multiple goals: A special issue on sustainability, ethics, and entrepreneurship. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), 673–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marvel, M. R., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2007). Technology entrepreneurs’ human capital and its effects on innovation radicalness. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(6), 807–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, C. M., & O’Connor, G. C. (2002). Managing radical innovation: An overview of emergent strategy issues. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(6), 424–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nga, J. K. H., & Shamuganathan, G. (2010). The influence of personality traits and demographic factors on social entrepreneurship start up intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 259–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunn, S. G., & Avella, J. T. (2015). Does Moral Leadership Conflict With Organizational Innovation? Journal of Leadership Studies, 9(3), 85–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, L., O’Dwyer, M., McNally, R. C., & Murphy, S. (2014). Identity, collaboration and radical innovation: The role of dual organisation identification. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(8), 1335–1342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osburg, T. (2013). Social innovation to drive corporate sustainability. In Osburg, T., & R. Schmidpeter (Eds.), Social innovation. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance (pp. 13–22). Berlin: Springer.

  • Osburg, T., & Schmidpeter, R. (Eds.). (2013). Social innovation. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plambeck, E. L. (2013). OM Forum—operations management challenges for some “cleantech” firms. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, 15(4), 527–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pless, N. M., & Maak, T. (2010). Desarrollando líderes globales responsables. Universia Business Review, 3(27), 56–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Rego, A., e Cunha, M. P., & Polónia, D. (2017). Corporate sustainability: A view from the top. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(1), 133–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, S. E., Roberts, D., & Moore, K. (2015). Technology vision for radical innovation and its impact on early success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(4), 593–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 956–974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, B., & Aarikka-Stenroos, L. (2014). What makes it so difficult? A systematic review on barriers to radical innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(8), 1293–1305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2011). Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(4), 222–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidpeter, R. (2013). Social innovation: A new concept for a sustainable future?. In Social innovation (pp. 1–9). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shevchenko, A., Lévesque, M., & Pagell, M. (2016). Why firms delay reaching true sustainability. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), 911–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shu, C., Zhou, K. Z., Xiao, Y., & Gao, S. (2016). How green management influences product innovation in China: The role of institutional benefits. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(3), 471–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. F., Mohr, J. J., & Sengupta, S. (2014). Radical product innovation capability: Literature review, synthesis, and illustrative research propositions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 552–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorescu, A. B., Chandy, R. K., & Prabhu, J. C. (2003). Sources and financial consequences of radical innovation: Insights from pharmaceuticals. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), 82–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Story, V. M., Daniels, K., Zolkiewski, J., & Dainty, A. R. (2014). The barriers and consequences of radical innovations: Introduction to the issue. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(8), 1271–1277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szekely, F., & Strebel, H. (2013). Incremental, radical and game-changing: Strategic innovation for sustainability. Corporate Governance, 13(5), 467–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tippins, M. J., & Sohi, R. S. (2003). IT competency and firm performance: Is organizational learning a missing link? Strategic Management Journal, 24(8), 745–761.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsen, C. H., Phang, G., Hasan, H., & Buncha, M. R. (2006). Going green: a study of consumers’willingness to pay for green products in kota kinabalu. International Journal of Business and Society, 7(2), 40–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voegtlin, C., & Scherer, A. G. (2017). Responsible innovation and the innovation of responsibility: Governing sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2), 227–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waite, A. M. (2013). Leadership’s influence on innovation and sustainability: A review of the literature and implications for HRD. European Journal of Training and Development, 38(1/2), 15–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, K. P., Chou, C., & Chiu, Y. J. (2014). How unlearning affects radical innovation: The dynamics of social capital and slack resources. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 87, 152–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yidong, T., & Xinxin, L. (2013). How ethical leadership influence employees’ innovative work behavior: A perspective of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(2), 441–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). London: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(4), 66–85.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the University Jaume I (P11B2008-13) and the Spanish Innovation Ministry (ECO2011-26780).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Administración de Empresas y Marketing, Universitat Jaume I, Av. Sos Baynat s/n, 12071, Castellón de la Plana, Spain

    Emilio Domínguez-Escrig, Francisco Fermín Mallén-Broch, Rafael Lapiedra-Alcamí & Ricardo Chiva-Gómez

Authors
  1. Emilio Domínguez-Escrig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francisco Fermín Mallén-Broch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rafael Lapiedra-Alcamí
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ricardo Chiva-Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emilio Domínguez-Escrig.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Emilio Domínguez Escrig, Francisco Fermín Mallén Broch, Rafael Lapiedra Alcamí, and Ricardo Chiva Gómez declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Domínguez-Escrig, E., Mallén-Broch, F., Lapiedra-Alcamí, R. et al. The Influence of Leaders’ Stewardship Behavior on Innovation Success: The Mediating Effect of Radical Innovation. J Bus Ethics 159, 849–862 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3833-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3833-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation