SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY, 2016, 44(5), 815–826

© 2016 Scientific Journal Publishers Limited. All Rights Reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2016.44.5.815

CREATIVE SELF-EFFICACY MEDIATES THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE SHARING AND EMPLOYEE
INNOVATION

BEI HU AND YIDAN ZHAO

Huazhong University of Science and Technology

We empirically explored how creative self-efficacy acts as a mediator in the relationship

between knowledge sharing and employee innovation and examined the moderating effects
of job satisfaction on this relationship. Matched supervisor–subordinate pairs (N = 274)
completed a survey. First, subordinates completed measures of their knowledge sharing,
creative self-efficacy, and innovation. Then, the supervisors of these employees assessed
their subordinates’ responses in terms of innovation. Results showed that knowledge sharing
and creative self-efficacy were positively related to employee innovation and that creative
self-efficacy mediated the effects of both knowledge sharing and innovation. Finally,
job satisfaction enhanced the relationship between creative self-efficacy and employee
innovation. We have extended the existing research on individual innovation and we suggest
several managerial implications in line with this.

Keywords: knowledge sharing, creative self-efficacy, employee innovation, job satisfaction,

supervisors, subordinates.

Innovation is essential for enterprises to survive and develop amid the

uncertainty and competitiveness of knowledge-based economies (Yuan &
Woodman, 2010), and employees are the main means for implementing
the behaviors that sustain organizational innovation (Amabile, Conti, Coon,
Lazenby, & Herron, 1996; Zhang & Bartol, 2010). Employee innovation is a
complex combination of generating, promoting, and realizing ideas (Scott &

Bei Hu and Yidan Zhao, School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology.
This study was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China (71232001).
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Yidan Zhao, School of Management,
Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 1037 Luoyu Road, Wuhan 430074, People’s
Republic of China. Email: 18702944214@163.com

815
816 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION

Bruce, 1994), involving identifying problems, seeking support for implementing

solutions to identified problems, and making products or providing services.
In resource-based theories it is asserted that organizations maintain their
competitive advantage by acquiring valuable strategic resources that are difficult
to replicate. Knowledge sources are fundamental building blocks in facilitating
employee innovation in organizations. Employees’ education and experience are
such organizational resources for innovation (van den Hooff & de Ridder, 2004);
however, employees’ knowledge is difficult to transform, making knowledge
sharing crucial in organizations. Knowledge sharing is a process through which
employees exchange knowledge and experiences to derive new ideas and create
knowledge (Van Wijk, Jansen, & Lyles, 2008; Wang & Noe, 2010). This type of
sharing establishes favorable conditions for employee innovation by enhancing
the employees’ capacity to come up with creative ideas.
Bandura (1977) originally defined self-efficacy as personal confidence in
completing a goal. Creative self-efficacy is a personal characteristic that
specifically concerns the ability to innovate, and refers to an internal, sustaining
force that propels individuals to persevere to produce innovative outcomes. It
supports innovation because having creative self-efficacy motivates employees
to persevere by using appropriate coping strategies in challenging situations
(Choi, 2004). Creative self-efficacy reflects the individual’s confidence in his
or her ability to perform a specific task in the innovation process. Further,
knowledge shapes self-efficacy assessment and, therefore, innovation (Amabile,
1983; Gist & Mitchell, 1992; Tierney & Farmer, 2002).
Alongside their personal characteristics, employees’ understanding of the work
environment is an important factor affecting innovation. Job satisfaction has been
the topic of a considerable body of scientific research, but there is still no general
agreement regarding what it actually is. Hoppock (1935) defined job satisfaction
as employees’ feelings about their jobs, which is a combination of psychological
and environmental circumstances. Spector (1997) defined job satisfaction as how
individuals feel about their job and its various aspects. In this study, we define
job satisfaction as people’s evaluation of their work content, namely the degree
to which they like or dislike their job, and the extent to which expectations match
the rewards. Receiving more rewards than anticipated in one’s job can increase
satisfaction with it. Generally, how people feel about their job is considered to
be linked to their work behaviors and job performance, including productivity
and self-motivation, with high job satisfaction resulting in increased dedication
toward achieving organizational goals (Judge & Bono, 2001). Employee
innovation is a kind of performance that may be affected by job satisfaction, but
there has been little research conducted in which this premise has been explored.
Research into the antecedent variables of employee innovation, such as the
studies conducted by Cohendet and Simon (2007) and Van Wijk et al. (2008),
 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION 817
has mainly been focused on individual (e.g., demographic variables, creative
personality) and environmental (e.g., organizational innovation atmosphere, job
control, colleague trust) variables. Although knowledge is crucial for proposing
and adapting a novel idea and knowledge sharing is a method for knowledge
acquisition, there have been few studies on the effect of knowledge sharing on
employee innovation (Lu & Liang, 2012). Knowledge sharing provides related
skills and expertise that can enhance people’s self-concept in regard to being
innovative. Although knowledge sharing has been confirmed to lead to increased
innovation, few researchers have evaluated its role in the cognitive processes
of employee innovation (Seidler-de Alwis & Hartmann, 2008; Subramaniam &
Youndt, 2005). In the present study, we examined the underlying mechanism
of how creative self-efficacy mediates the relationship between knowledge
sharing and employee innovation. Considering that employees’ performance
will be influenced by environmental variables, we also explored whether or not
job satisfaction moderates the relationship between creative self-efficacy and
employee innovation.

Literature Review

Knowledge Sharing and Employee Innovation

Innovation involves organizational, team, and individual behaviors. Further,
knowledge sharing builds organizations’ competitive advantage through
employees obtaining, organizing, reusing, and transferring experience-based
information. Some researchers have demonstrated that knowledge sharing
enhances innovation and reduces unnecessary effort (e.g., Amabile, 1988; Hu,
Horng, & Sun, 2009), and Hu et al. concluded that individual-level innovation is
the foundation of organizational innovation.
Numerous scholars have explored the personal endowments (e.g., personality
traits and intrinsic motivation) and environmental factors (e.g., supervisor
encouragement and organizational climate) underlying employee innovation
(e.g., Anderson, Potočnik, & Zhou, 2014; Choi, 2012). Amabile (1988) proposed
a componential model of individual creativity in which domain-relevant skills
of factual knowledge, technical skills, and special talents were identified as
necessary for innovative success. Immersion in a domain over time helps the
individual propose a new idea and implement it; thus, knowledge plays a key role
in employee innovation and helps to create and sustain competitive advantage.
Knowledge acquisition involves mutual exchanges among coworkers, including
communication of tacit knowledge that cannot be transmitted through formal
channels, and the flow of ideas inspires innovative thinking. Knowledge sharing
helps to cultivate more effective problem-solving processes; conversely, the
capacity to exploit experience and expertise is hindered if knowledge cannot be
818 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION

shared. Following these findings, we formed the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: Knowledge sharing will enhance employee innovation.

Knowledge Sharing and Creative Self-Efficacy

Creative self-efficacy lies within the domain of innovation because it is based
on employees’ confidence in solving problems in innovative ways. Because
innovation is highly risky and volatile (Yuan & Woodman, 2010), employees
face many difficulties in the innovation process and need positive psychological
capital to cope with uncertainties and failures. Creative self-efficacy, thus,
provides the motivation to persevere and overcome difficulties.
There are many potential personal and contextual antecedents to creative
self-efficacy, including job autonomy, leadership, creative role identity, and
employee learning orientation (Shin & Zhou, 2007; Tierney & Farmer, 2011).
Gist and Mitchell (1992) linked employees’ personal knowledge to self-efficacy,
which depends on the individual’s personality and work environment. Among the
two types of knowledge (Nonaka, 1994), explicit knowledge can be formalized,
documented, and codified, so that it can easily be communicated or transferred
between individuals; however, implicit knowledge cannot be expressed clearly
because it is deeply entrenched in the individual’s mind and difficult to transform.
Tierney and Farmer (2002) identified job-related knowledge as one of the
antecedents of creative self-efficacy. Further, Hänninen (2007) found that
knowledgeable employees express greater confidence (i.e., creative self-efficacy)
than do their coworkers in regard to completing challenging goals. Yang
and Cheng (2009) also affirmed a positive relationship between information
technology knowledge and creative self-efficacy. Thus, we suggest that as
employees acquire knowledge through sharing, they will become more confident
in performing innovative behavior. In this way, employees will enhance
their creative self-efficacy by sharing knowledge with others, obtaining new
knowledge themselves, and examining and updating their existing knowledge.
Although it is widely accepted that creative self-efficacy is based on individuals’
innovative knowledge and skills, there have been few empirical examinations of
how knowledge sharing influences creative self-efficacy. Therefore, we formed
the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2: Knowledge sharing will enhance creative self-efficacy.

Influence of Creative Self-Efficacy on Knowledge Sharing and Employee

Innovation
From a cognitive psychology perspective, an individual cognitive process
plays an important role in shaping individual behavior (Bandura, 1977; Hsu,
Hou, & Fan, 2011). Further, personal endowments and environmental factors
influence employee innovation (Choi, 2004; Tierney & Farmer, 2002; Zhou
 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION 819
& George, 2001). Employees with creative self-efficacy are curious, risk
takers, and creative thinkers, and these qualities motivate them to engage in
innovation (Gong, Huang, & Farh, 2009). In line with this, employee innovation
involves making a personal effort to introduce concepts and methods into one’s
organization to produce a new and different result (Zhou & George, 2001).
Tierney and Farmer (2011) found that innovation also improves in the presence
of creative self-efficacy, which, in turn, affects innovative behaviors (Hirst, Van
Knippenberg, & Zhou, 2009; Mathisen, 2011), because employees with high
creative self-efficacy embrace challenges and select unconventional strategies.
Scholars have also demonstrated that creative self-efficacy has a mediation
function, indirectly influencing individual innovation (Gong et al., 2009),
and also the organizational variables of learning orientation, transformational
leadership, climate for innovation, and innovative behaviors (Shin & Zhou,
2007). Supervisors influence employee innovation by encouraging creative
self-efficacy (Tierney & Farmer, 2004), thereby promoting the necessary
intrinsic motivation to engage in innovative activities by enhancing perceptions
of self-competence (Gong et al., 2009). Thus, creative self-efficacy is a potent
antecedent to employee innovation, mediating the effect of knowledge sharing on
innovation. Therefore, we proposed the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 3: Creative self-efficacy will stimulate employee innovation.
Hypothesis 4: Creative self-efficacy will act as a mediator in the relationship
between knowledge sharing and employee innovation.

Influence of Job Satisfaction on Knowledge Sharing and Employee

Innovation
Individual characteristics are important factors affecting employee innovation.
Similarly, employees’ cognition of the working environment will either promote
or hinder their creativity (Egan, 2005). Job satisfaction is a subjective response to
the working environment, and in social exchange theory it is posited that satisfied
employees give back to their organizations. Thus, job satisfaction can influence
employee behaviors such as turnover, organizational citizenship behavior, and
loyalty (Ziegler, Hagen, & Diehl, 2012). As a positive factor in the workplace,
job satisfaction can help to reduce the pressure of performing innovative behavior
and may be perceived as a potential supply of resources (Ziegler et al., 2012).
Christen, Iyer, and Soberman (2006) found that employees’ job satisfaction
positively affected their innovation performance by engendering positive
assessments and encouraging employees to set and achieve high, challenging
goals. Thus, those with a high level of job satisfaction are more willing to come
up with new and useful ideas (Wang, 2011). In sum, the level of a person’s job
satisfaction will affect the strength of the relationship between his or her creative
self-efficacy and innovation. When people are satisfied with their job, they
820 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION

will become positive, enthusiastic, open, confident, achievement-oriented, and

energetic, and will have cognitive flexibility. Thus, employees with high creative
self-efficacy will be motivated to adopt new ideas. To explore the effects of job
satisfaction on creative self-efficacy and employee innovation, we formed the
following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 5: Job satisfaction will moderate the relationship between creative
self-efficacy and employee innovation such that it will be more positive among
employees who are satisfied with their job than it will among those who are not.

Method

Participants
We collated data from 320 survey forms that we had distributed to employees
and their supervisors working for five companies, in businesses ranging from high
technology to service industries, in four cities in China. Supervisor–subordinate
dyads completed the survey, so as to reduce the risk of common method variance.
After excluding invalid responses, 274 paired samples remained (valid rate
of response = 86%), comprising 274 subordinates and 81 direct supervisors.
Respondents’ average age was 40.2 years (SD = 0.704); 41.53% were men and
58.47% were women. Regarding the level of education, 0.42% were high school
graduates, 9.32% were junior college graduates, 79.24% held undergraduate
degrees, 10.60% held a master’s degree, and 0.42% held a doctorate.

Procedure
Responses were collected online, via email, or on site. The subordinates
self-reported their knowledge sharing, creative self-efficacy, and job satisfaction,
then their direct supervisors assessed their subordinates’ responses in terms of
innovation.

Measures
Knowledge sharing was measured using the six-item instrument developed
by Chennamaneni (2007), which has a Cronbach’s alpha of .928. To measure
creative self-efficacy, we applied English-to-Chinese back-translation to the
eight-item scale developed by Carmeli and Schaubroeck (2007), which has a
Cronbach’s alpha of .897. To measure employee innovation, we used the six-item
scale developed by Scott and Bruce (1994), which has a Cronbach’s alpha of
.871. Finally, we used Hackman and Oldham’s (1975) five-item scale, which has
a Cronbach’s alpha of .878, to measure job satisfaction. Responses to all items
were rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally
agree).
In Table 1, the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the variables
included in our study are displayed. Knowledge sharing was positively related to
 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION 821
supervisor-rated employee innovation and creative self-efficacy, and creativity
self-efficacy was positively related to employee innovation. Further, both creative
self-efficacy and employee innovation were positively related to job satisfaction.

Table 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Among Study Variables

M SD 1 2 3 4

1. KS 1.8051 0.57829 1 .754** .649** .573**

2. CSE 1.9650 0.61462 .754** 1 .730** .604**
3. EI 1.8545 0.56181 .649** .730** 1 .717**
4. JS 1.9466 0.71103 .573** .604** .717** 1

Note. ** p < .01. KS = knowledge sharing, CSE = creative self-efficacy, EI = employee innovation,
JS = job satisfaction.

Data Analysis
We used SPSS version 19.0 to analyze the data. Hierarchical regression
analysis was used to test the effect of control variables on the outcome variable,
the effect of the independent variable on the outcome variable, the mediating
effect of creative self-efficacy, and the moderating effect of job satisfaction. To
check the mediating effect, we first analyzed the direct effect of the independent
variable on the outcome variable. Then, we used hierarchical regression analysis
to test the effect of the independent variable on the mediating variable, and
the effect of the mediating variable on the outcome variable. Furthermore,
we brought the mediating variable into the model to test whether creative
self-efficacy was a partial or full mediator. To test for the moderating effect
of job satisfaction, we performed a moderated hierarchical multiple regression
analysis. Because we had tested for the direct effect of creative self-efficacy on
the outcome variable, job satisfaction was then brought into the model to test
for the effect of the moderating variable on the outcome variable. Finally, we
examined the interaction of the moderating variable and creative self-efficacy to
establish whether or not job satisfaction had a moderating effect.

Results

Influence of Creative Self-Efficacy on Knowledge Sharing and Employee

Innovation
We employed hierarchical regression to establish how each variable affected
employee innovation. As shown in Table 2, control variables exhibited no
significant effect on employee innovation in Model 3. However, in Model
4, knowledge sharing was significantly related to employee innovation, thus
supporting Hypothesis 1.
822 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION

To test Hypothesis 2, we added creative self-efficacy into the model. In Model

1, the control variables showed no significant effect on creative self-efficacy.
However, in Model 2, there was a significant link between knowledge sharing
and creative self-efficacy, thus supporting Hypothesis 2.
After controlling for demographic variables, in Model 5 the result showed that
creative self-efficacy significantly and positively affected employee innovation,
thus supporting Hypothesis 3. Finally, creative self-efficacy partially mediated
the relationship between knowledge sharing and innovation; thus, Hypothesis 4
was supported.

Table 2. Results of Hierarchical Regression Analyses of Employee Innovation

Variable Creative self-efficacy Employee innovation

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Model 7

Gender .006 .023 .018 .033 .020 .000 .004

Age -.39 -.087 -.022 -.063 -.16 -.035 -.031
Level of
education -.90 -.073 -.89 -.74 -.34 -.18 -.015
KS .759*** .653*** .238** .127 .127*
CSE .546** .382*** .373***
JS .413*** .358***
JS × CSE .137**
R2 .010 .582 .009 .433 .557 .660 .675
Adj. R2 -.003 .575 -.004 .423 .548 .651 .665
R2 .010 .573 .009 .424*** .125*** .102*** .015***
F 0.749 80.510*** 0.673 44.060*** 57.950*** 73.952*** 67.516***

Note. KS = knowledge sharing, CSE = creative self-efficacy, JS = job satisfaction. * p < .05,
** p < .01, *** p < .001.

Influence of Job Satisfaction on Knowledge Sharing and Employee

Innovation
As illustrated in Table 2, we used knowledge sharing as the control variable
to explore the influence of job satisfaction on employee innovation. Creative
self-efficacy exerted a significant positive effect on employee innovation. Job
satisfaction enhanced innovation in Model 6. In Model 7, we brought in the
interaction of job satisfaction and creative self-efficacy and the results indicated
that job satisfaction acted as a moderator on the relationship between creative
self-efficacy and innovation. Consequently, satisfied employees had greater
creative self-efficacy and displayed greater innovation.

Discussion

Our purpose in this study was to explore the relationship between knowledge
 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION 823
sharing and employees’ innovation, and to elucidate creative self-efficacy as a
mediator in this relationship. We also examined the moderating effect of job
satisfaction on the relationship between creative self-efficacy and employee
innovation.
The results showed that knowledge sharing stimulated employees’ innovation,
and demonstrated the application of knowledge management and innovation
theories as regards the importance of knowledge sharing. If a person wants
to come up with novel and useful ideas, he or she needs to receive referred
knowledge or expertise (Ma, Cheng, Ribbens, & Zhou, 2013). The process of
knowledge exchange is crucial for solving problems creatively, because it can
expand individuals’ cognitive capacities (Yuan & Woodman, 2010).
Next, we established that creative self-efficacy enhanced innovation. Shin
and Zhou (2007) examined how individuals’ concept of themselves might
translate into innovation, and Tierney and Farmer (2011) extended the concept
of self-efficacy to propose creative self-efficacy. Employees with high creative
self-efficacy are proactive in originating ideas and adapting unconventional
methods. Hsu et al. (2011) also found that an employee will be more innovative
when he or she has developed a higher level of creative self-efficacy.
Although knowledge sharing can stimulate employee innovation, a mediator
must account for the relationship. Here, we have shown that creative self-efficacy
is a vital driver of innovation performance because there is a positive relationship
between creative self-efficacy and employee innovation (Tierney & Farmer,
2002, 2004). Thus, continual collection and integration of new knowledge will
lead to innovativeness.
Further, researchers have found that individual, as well as environmental,
factors affect employee innovation; thus, taking a single perspective to
understanding employee innovation in the workplace is insufficient. In research
on innovation, it may be beneficial to explore the interaction of individual and
environmental factors (Robinson-Morral, Reiter-Palmon, & Kaufman, 2013).
In this study, we linked job satisfaction to creative self-efficacy and employee
innovation. According to situation theory, employees’ perception of their external
environment will affect their behavior (Ryu & Jang, 2007). In our study, we found
that job satisfaction moderated the relationship between creative self-efficacy
and employee innovation, such that the positive relationship was stronger among
satisfied employees.
In terms of managerial implications, many companies seek to facilitate
knowledge sharing. As creative self-efficacy involves malleability, managers
can boost creative self-efficacy through providing training courses (Gist &
Mitchell, 1992). To obtain the benefits of job satisfaction, managers can
create a harmonious workplace, giving employees control over their work and
encouraging their enthusiasm to innovate.
824 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION

A limitation in our study is that the sample consisted of only 274 supervisor–
subordinate dyads; thus, the hypotheses should be tested again by conducting
a study with a larger, more general sample. Second, we collected data for
a limited time period, so that it was difficult to reflect the dynamic process
of how knowledge sharing influenced employee innovation; thus, future
researchers should consider undertaking longitudinal studies. Third, we found
that creative self-efficacy mediated the relationship between knowledge sharing
and employee innovation to some extent. However, because our results showed
that the coefficient reduced, there may be other mediator variables involved in
this relationship. In future studies, more variables could be introduced into the
model to examine the relationship between knowledge sharing and employee
innovation.

References

Amabile, T. M. (1983). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in

Organizational Behavior, 10, 123–167.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–376. http://doi.org/czk2qw
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work
environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154–1184. http://doi.org/
d6zp45
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-
the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management,
40, 1297–1333. http://doi.org/32w
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological
Review, 84, 191–215. http://doi.org/cgp
Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. (2007). The influence of leaders’ and other referents’ normative
expectations on individual involvement in creative work. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 35–48.
http://doi.org/ctqwgf
Chennamaneni, A. (2007). Determinants of knowledge sharing behaviors: Developing and testing
an integrated theoretical model (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas,
Arlington, TX, USA. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10106/305
Choi, J. N. (2004). Individual and contextual predictors of creative performance: The mediating role
of psychological processes. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 187–199. http://doi.org/dnrzx4
Choi, J. N. (2012). Context and creativity: The theory of planned behavior as an alternative
mechanism. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 40, 681–692. http://
doi.org/8ct
Christen, M., Iyer, G., & Soberman, D. (2006). Job satisfaction, job performance, and effort:
A reexamination using agency theory. Journal of Marketing, 70, 137–150. http://doi.org/fh64bj
Cohendet, P., & Simon, L. (2007). Playing across the playground: Paradoxes of knowledge creation
in the videogame firm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 587–605. http://doi.org/bgrr8h
Egan, T. M. (2005). Factors influencing individual creativity in the workplace: An examination of
quantitative empirical research. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7, 160–181. http://
doi.org/bh6682
Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and
malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17, 183–211. http://doi.org/fccd2w
 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION 825
Gong, Y., Huang, J.-C., & Farh, J.-L. (2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational
leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy.
Academy of Management Journal, 52, 765–778. http://doi.org/d6n3xd
Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 60, 159–170. http://doi.org/chz
Hänninen, S. (2007). Innovation commercialisation process from the four knowledge bases’
perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Helsinki University, Finland. Retrieved from
http://lib.tkk.fi/Diss/2007/isbn9789512286478/
Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., & Zhou, J. (2009). A cross-level perspective on employee creativity:
Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management
Journal, 52, 280–293. http://doi.org/cvksf2
Hoppock, R. (1935). Job satisfaction. Oxford, UK: Harper.
Hsu, L. A. M., Hou, S. T., & Fan, H.-L. (2011). Creative self-efficacy and innovative behavior in a
service setting: Optimism as a moderator. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 45, 258–272. http://
doi.org/fz2smm
Hu, M.-L. M., Horng, J.-S., & Sun, Y.-H. C. (2009). Hospitality teams: Knowledge sharing and
service innovation performance. Tourism Management, 30, 41–50. http://doi.org/c7t
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem,
generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job
performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80–92. http://doi.org/dgbhn5
Lu, L., & Liang, L. X. (2012). The mediating effect of knowledge sharing in the relationship
between interpersonal interactions and innovation [In Chinese]. Nankai Management Journal,
12, 118–123.
Ma, Y., Cheng, W., Ribbens, B. A., & Zhou, J. (2013). Linking ethical leadership to employee
creativity: Knowledge sharing and self-efficacy as mediators. Social Behavior and Personality:
An international journal, 41, 1409–1420. http://doi.org/sk5
Mathisen, G. E. (2011). Organizational antecedents of creative self-efficacy. Creativity and
Innovation Management, 20, 185–195. http://doi.org/dfh62t
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5,
14–37. http://doi.org/fgqr7p
Robinson-Morral, E. J., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Kaufman, J. C. (2013). The interactive effects of self-
perceptions and job requirements on creative problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior,
47, 200–214. http://doi.org/8cv
Ryu, K., & Jang, S. S. (2007). The effect of environmental perceptions on behavioral intentions
through emotions: The case of upscale restaurants. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,
31, 56–72. http://doi.org/d9xqqg
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual
innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 580–607. http://doi.org/
ds22dt
Seidler-de Alwis, R., & Hartmann, E. (2008). The use of tacit knowledge within innovative companies:
Knowledge management in innovative enterprises. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12,
133–147. http://doi.org/cdbqw9
Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2007). When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in
research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92, 1709–1721. http://doi.org/b728sm
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes and consequences. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of
innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 450–463. http://doi.org/bptb2b
826 SELF-EFFICACY, KNOWLEDGE SHARING, AND INNOVATION

Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship
to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1137–1148. http://doi.org/
brmbbn
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2004). The Pygmalion process and employee creativity. Journal of
Management, 30, 414–432. http://doi.org/bstddp
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance
over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2, 277–293. http://doi.org/frgz3w
van den Hooff, B., & de Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of
organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 8, 117–130. http://doi.org/dmcv5w
Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J. P., & Lyles, M. A. (2008). Inter- and intra-organizational knowledge
transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of
Management Studies, 45, 830–853. http://doi.org/dtbmn2
Wang, B.-C. (2011). An empirical study on the relationships of organization innovation climate,
employee job satisfaction, and employee innovation performance [In Chinese]. Enterprise
Vitality, 1, 59–62. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1MtoHwH
Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research.
Human Resource Management Review, 20, 115–131. http://doi.org/bp2rvg
Yang, H.-L., & Cheng, H.-H. (2009). Creative self-efficacy and its factors: An empirical study of
information system analysts and programmers. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 429–438.
http://doi.org/bg3jhj
Yuan, F., & Woodman, R. W. (2010). Innovative behavior in the workplace: The role of performance
and image outcome expectations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 23–342. http://doi.org/
dqrbzd
Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The
influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement.
Academy of Management Journal, 53, 107–128. http://doi.org/bkq4fb
Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the
expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 682–696. http://doi.org/ddqznp
Ziegler, R., Hagen, B., & Diehl, M. (2012). Relationship between job satisfaction and job
performance: Job ambivalence as a moderator. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42,
2019–2040. http://doi.org/8cw