IMPACTS OF COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY ON THE INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR OF MIDDLE MANAGERS IN THE TECHNOLOGY AND FINTECH SECTOR IN VIETNAM
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examines the impacts of cognitive flexibility (CF) and organizational psychological safety (OPS) on the innovative work behavior (IWB) of middle managers in Vietnam. Drawing on social cognitive theory and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities, the model was empirically validated using data from 219 middle managers in high-innovation-pressure industries. PLS-SEM results indicate that both CF and OPS positively affect personal dynamic capabilities (PDC), with CF exerting a dominant effect (approximately 2.5 times stronger). Crucially, PDC serves as a dual full mediator, confirming that cognitive flexibility and a safe environment cannot directly drive IWB without micro-level action capabilities (sensing, seizing, and transforming). The study offers insights for recruitment, training, and an empowerment culture to maximize innovative behavior within organizations.
Keywords
Cognitive flexibility, organizational psychological safety, personal dynamic capabilities, innovative work behavior, middle managers, PLS-SEM.
Article Details
References
[2] Edmondson, A. (1999), Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2):350-383.
[3] Fernandes, C. I., Hughes, M., Ferreira, J., Veiga, P. M. (2023), Exploring the microfoundations of innovation: what they are, where they come from and where they are going?, European Business Review, 35(3):356-396.
[4] Hair Jr, J., Hair Jr, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Gudergan, S. P. (2023), Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling, saGe publications.
[5] Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015), Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities, Strategic management journal, 36(6):831-850.
[6] 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.
[7] Ionescu, D. A. (2025), The Role of Middle Managers in Digital Transformation, FAIMA Business & Management Journal, 13(3).
[8] Janssen, O. (2000), Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative work behaviour, Journal of Occupational and organizational psychology, 73(3):287-302.
[9] Jin, H., & Peng, Y. (2024), The impact of team psychological safety on employee innovative performance a study with communication behavior as a mediator variable, PloS one, 19(10).
[10] Kock, N. (2015), Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach, International Journal of e-Collaboration (ijec), 11(4):1-10.
[11] Kowalski, M., Bernardes, R. C., Gomes, L., & Borini, F. M. (2025), Microfoundations of dynamic capabilities for digital transformation, European Journal of Innovation Management, 28(8):3717-3746.
[12] Martin, M. M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995), A new measure of cognitive flexibility, Psychological reports, 76(2):623-626.
[13] Mustafa, M. J., Hughes, M., & Ramos, H. M. (2023), Middle-managers’ innovative behavior: the roles of psychological empowerment and personal initiative, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 34(18):3464-3490.
[14] Pham, T. P., Van Nguyen, T., Van Nguyen, P., & Ahmed, Z. U. (2024), The pathways to innovative work behavior and job performance: Exploring the role of public service motivation, transformational leadership, and person-organization fit in Vietnam's public sector, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10(3):100315.
[15] Teece, D. J. (2007), Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance, Strategic management journal, 28(13):1319-1350.
[16] Vallabh, P., Dhir, S., & Budhwar, P. (2024), Does psychological safety matter for innovative behaviour in hybrid workforce? The role of proactive personality, inclusive leadership and affective climate, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 32(4):621-645.