J Korean Acad Nurs Adm.  2013 Jun;19(3):404-413.

Change Commitment and Learning Orientation as Factors Affecting the Innovativeness of Clinical Nurses

• Kang KH
• Ko YK

Abstract

PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to identify the effects of change commitment and learning orientation on the innovativeness of clinical nurse.
METHODS
The participants in this study were 268 nurses, working in hospitals in Seoul, Gyeonggi and Gangwon Provinces, and Daejeon City. Data were collected from June to August, 2012. A structured questionnaire was used for data collect and data was analyzed using the SPSS/WIN program.
RESULTS
The most significant predictors of innovativeness were education, normative commitment, continuance commitment and learning commitment. Continuance commitment negatively correlated with innovativeness.
CONCLUSION
These findings suggest that nurses' commitment to change and learning commitment were strongly linked to innovativeness. Management-level workers in these hospitals should have the skills and strategies to promote commitment to change include developing positive expectations about change positive outcomes.

Keyword

Change commitment; Learning orientation; Innovativeness; Nurse

MeSH Terms

Learning
Orientation
Surveys and Questionnaires

Reference

1. Ahn KY. The relationship between learning orientation and incremental innovation, and the moderating effect of tenure. J Korean Saf Manag Serv. 2010. 12(3):249–255. http://earticle.net/article.aspx?sn=155489.

2. Cain M, Mittman R. Diffusion of innovation in health care, Health reports. 2002. 05. Oakland: California Healthcare Foundation.

3. Cho SH, Yun SC. The effect of organizational learning capability on innovation performance in SME: Moderating effect of middle manager leadership. J Vocat Edu Res. 2009. 28(2):71–87.

4. Cho YH, Choi WJ, Shin JG. The effect of change commitment on innovativeness: The role of learning organization as a moderator. Korean J Hum Resour Dev. 2011. 13(4):63–88.

5. Choi SY. Empirical study on the effect of learning orientation on the corporate performance: Focus on the mediator of innovation capability, market based capability, SCA and the moderating effect of knowledge management type, organizational age. 2004. Chuncheon, Korea: Kangwon University;Unpublished doctoral dissertation.

6. Cunningham GB. The relationship among commitment to change, coping with change, and turnover intentions. Eur J Work Organ Psychol. 2006. 15(1):29–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13594320500418766.

7. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using GPower 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009. 41:1149–1160. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.

8. Gilley A, McMillan HS, Gilley JW. Organizational change and characteristics of leadership effectiveness. J Leadersh Organ Stud. 2009. 6:38–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1548051809334191.

9. Herscovitch L, Meyer JP. Commitment to organizati onal change: Extension of a three-component model. J Appl Psychol. 2002. 87:474–487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.474.

10. Hong S. The impact of CEO transformation-leadership on organizational innovativeness: The moderating roles of organizational structure. Korean J Hum Res Dev. 2010. 13(1):99–129.

11. Ji SK, Seol HS. Antecedents and outcomes of affective commitment to organizational innovation. J Organ Manage. 2004. 28(3):111–134.

12. Kim MY. Determinants of commitment to organizational change: The effects of efficacy, change's characteristics & social supports. 2009. Seoul, Korea: Ewha Womans University;Unpublished master's thesis.

13. Lee JH, Lee DH, Park TK. Innovativeness and learning orientation: Their antecedents and impact on business performance. Korean Small Bus Rev. 2006. 28(2):75–108.

14. Lee JH, Lee JM, Chung IH. Relationships between activities of learning organizations and transfer of learning to the jobs and innovativeness: Focused on the moderating effects of self-regulated learning. Manag Educ Rev. 2009. 57:183–207.

15. Lim JC, Yun JK. The effects of supervisors' transformational and transactional leadership on subordinates' innovativeness: The role of self-efficacy as a mediator. Korean J Manage. 1999. 7(1):1–42.

16. Park HJ, Yoo TY. The influences of leadership behavior and readiness for organizational change on commitment to organizational change(COC) and the effect COC on adaptive performance and behavioral support for organizational change. Korean J Ind Organ Psychol. 2009. 22(1):131–153.

17. Portoghese I, Galletta M, Battistelli A, Saiani L, Penna MP, Allegrini E. Change-related expectations and commitment to change of nurses: The role of leadership and communication. J Nurs Manag. 2012. 20:582–591. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2011.01322.x.

18. Scott SG, Bruce RA. Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Acad Manage J. 1994. 37:580–607. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25670110.2307/256701.

19. Song KS, Ryu TM, Kim YH. The study on the characteristics of organization innovation process. J Hum Resour Manag Res. 2006. 3(1):103–122.

20. Sinkula JM, Baker WE, Noordewier T. A framework for market-based organizational learning: Linking values knowledge and behavior. J Acad Market Sci. 1997. 25:305–318.

21. Watkins KE, Marsick VJ. In action: Creating the learning organization. 1996. ASTD: Alexandria, VA.

22. Woodman RW, Sawyer JE, Griffin RW. Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Acad Manage Rev. 1993. 18:293–321.

23. Yoh EA. The impact of human resource innovativeness, learning orientation, and their interaction on innovation effect and business performance. Korean Small Bus Rev. 2009. 31(2):19–35.