Factors Affecting Employees Innovation Behavior Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperative

Abstract

This research consists purposes were 1. to examine the work motivation of employees that influences the innovative behavior of employees of the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) 2. to investigate the creative organizational culture that affects the innovative behavior of BAAC employees and 3. to study transformational leadership that influences the innovative behavior of BAAC employees. This research employed a quantitative design. The research instrument was a questionnaire. The sample consisted of 393 BAAC employees, determined using Taro Yamane’s (1973) formula with a margin of error of 0.05, and selected through convenience sampling. The collected questionnaire data were analyzed using descriptive statistics percentage, mean and standard deviation and multiple regression analysis with a significance level of 0.05. Research Findings 1) Work Motivation Work motivation had a significant influence on employees’ innovative behavior. The model explained 48.5% of the variance (R² = 0.501, Adjusted R² = 0.485, F = 31.809, p < 0.01). Positive predictors were Challenging work characteristics (Beta = 0.331, Sig. = 0.000) Recognition (Beta = 0.176, Sig. = 0.019) Job position (Beta = 0.358, Sig. = 0.000) A negative effect was found for career advancement (Beta = –0.227, Sig. = 0.006). Bank management policy approached significance (Beta = 0.146, Sig. = 0.066) 2) Creative Organizational Culture Creative organizational culture had a significant influence on employees’ innovative behavior. The model explained 43.7% of the variance (R² = 0.442, Adjusted R² = 0.437, F = 76.947, p < 0.01). Significant positive predictors were Achievement orientation (Beta = 0.389, Sig. = 0.000) Self-actualization orientation (Beta = 0.300, Sig. = 0.000) The dimensions of humanistic-encouraging and affiliative culture showed no significant effects and 3) Transformational Leadership Transformational leadership had a significant influence on employees’ innovative behavior. The model explained 37.8% of the variance (R² = 0.385, Adjusted R² = 0.378, F = 60.681, p < 0.01). The strongest predictor was intellectual stimulation (Beta = 0.504, Sig. = 0.000), while other components showed no significant effects.