PENGARUH PEMBERDAYAAN PSIKOLOGI TERHADAP PERILAKU INOVATIF

Irma Suryani; Halimatussakdiah Halimatussakdiah; Nidia Sofa

doi:10.32722/epi.v17i1.3312

About Journal

Focus and Scope

The proposed articles can come from the fields of languages, social sciences, cultures, and education.

Peer Review Process

Peer-reviewers assist the editors in making decisions to accept or reject articles that enter Epigram, peer-reviewed (a sustainable partner) to conduct a blind review and evaluation of papers that are reasonable in authors expertise. The reviewers do not know the author's name and the name of the author's institution as blind-review. It aims to avoid conflicts of interest and to assure the quality of the paper.

Each paper is reviewed at least by a reviewer using track change in the article. All comments and suggestions from the reviewers are written using track change. It is to facilitate the editor and writer teams in communicating the results of the review. Thus, Epigram does not require any other form to deliver the results of the report from the reviewers to the editorial team.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its contents on the principle to make research freely available to the public in order to support a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Publication Ethic

Publication Ethics Statement

CODE OF ETHICS FOR SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS

Foreword

The ethics of scientific publications in Epigram is used to guide that all the writings published in the journal have followed ethical principles in academic publications to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts. This paper presents several articles related to the field of language, social science, culture, and education on ethics in this journal publication (authors, editors, truthful partners, publishers, and readers).

Guidelines on Ethics in Journal Publications

Epigram publishes articles from the results of scientific research in the field of language, social science, culture, education and has not been edited or in the process of submission in other publications.

The proposed articles can come from the fields of languages, social sciences, cultures, and education.

Epigram is a peer-reviewed journal in the publication of an article in building a coherent and recognized network of knowledge about languages, social sciences, cultures, and education. The papers sent to Epigram must be able to point the quality of the writing of the author. Therefore, it is essential to arrange standards in ethical behavior for all colleague engaged in the publication: authors, editors, partners, publishers, and journal sponsors.

AUTHOR'S ASSIGNMENT

Standard Article

Articles are original reports of research results and present accurate articles from research conducted by the objectives. The data presented in the paper must be accurate based on research results. Published articles must be adequate and detailed so that they can use as references or references for other researchers. The team editor will not accept presented data, not by ethical behavior in Epigram.

Plagiarism and Originality

The author has to ensure the article written is the original work of the author himself. If the author enters the results of the research or references from others, the author must admit the name of the author of the article. Plagiarism is an action of imitating and copying all items relating to what is written by another writer and claimed by another author without including the original author. This deed of plagiarism is unethical behavior in the publication and not able accepted in Epigram. Entering the same article to more than one journal is unethical behavior and is not acceptable.

The Authors and Co-authors of the Article

The author and co-authors of the article are who has engaged significantly to the concept of writing, those who have contributed to significant contributions registered as co-authors. The author must assure the conformity of the articles with the co-authors before submitting for Epigram.

Errors in Published Articles

When the author discovers a fundamental mistake or inaccuracy in the research that will be published by the Epigram, the author's obligation to immediately notify the journal editor or editorial board to retract the article and correct it.

EDITORIAL BOARD OF ASSIGNMENTS

Publication Decision and Justice in Publication

The editorial team of Epigram is responsible for deciding which articles publish in Epigram. Sustainable reviewers work closely with the editorial team in determining which they are eligible to be published in Epigram. Editors and sustainable partners evaluate the articles for content regardless of gender, relatives, ethnic origin, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political philosophy of the writer.

Confidentiality of the Process Publication

The Editors and staff editors prevent the leak of author confidentiality and the writing before the article published in Epigram. The editorial team and editorial staff did not give the names and institutions of origin of all authors to sustainable reviewers to ensure that reviewing in the blinded review paper.

Information Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Entered articles but not published in Epigram may not be used by the editorial team in their research without the written approval of the author. Specific data obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal concerns. The editorial team conducts appropriate actions in addressing this, such as publication.

Cooperation and Engagement in Publication

The editor will take steps when there is an ethics complaint in the paper. These steps start from contacting the author of the article and giving consideration to the claim in objection, but also including further communication with relevant agencies and research bodies, repairs to publications, and appropriate actions related to the charge.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

The Decision of the Editorial Team

Peer-reviews assists the editor in making decisions to be accepted or rejected by an article that enters Epigram, peer-reviewed (a sustainable partner) to conduct a blinded review and evaluation of papers that are reasonable in authors expertise. The reviewers do not know the author's name and the name of the author's institution as blind-review. It means to avoid conflicts of interest and to assure the quality of the paper.

Each paper is reviewed at least by two reviewers using track change in the article. All comments, suggestions, and reviewers' comments are written by using track change. It is to facilitate the editor and writer team in communicating the results of the review. Thus, Epigram does not require any other form to deliver the results of the report from the reviewer to the editorial team.

Punctuality

The review process in Epigram generally takes 1-4 months, and if the review process takes longer because of one reason or another, the editor will communicate to the author. The editor team expects the administrative review process, the improvement of the author and the publication of the article, taken out six months.

Confidentiality

Every received article treated as a confidential document. The section may not be discussed with other parties unless permitted by the editorial board.

The Review Must be Objective

The editor team strives to review articles objectively. The results of the analyses have to sharpen the writing, especially in strengthening the results and discussion of the research objectives so that it can support the improvement of the article.

Source / Reference Recognition

The reviewer should identify relevant research that will be published that there is no plagiarism by the author. The reviewer must observe, explore each statement in the discussion and report by the relevant quote. Reviewers must also provide an understanding of the editor regarding substantial similarities and overlap with the articles before the article is published.

Screening For Plagiarism

The documents must meet the maximum similarity limit of 20% to proceed to the review process. To check the possibility of plagiarism manuscript is submitted using the application Ithenticate

Published Oct 16, 2020

https://doi.org/10.32722/epi.v17i1.3312

Download

PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

Statistic

Vol. 17 No. 1 (2020)

Irma Suryani

Politeknik Negeri Jakarta

Halimatussakdiah Halimatussakdiah

Politeknik Negeri Jakarta

Nidia Sofa

Politeknik Negeri Jakarta

Abstract

Linking three dominan factors namely psychological empowerment, innovative work behavior, and intrinsic motivation, this study developed and examined the relationship among them with a mediating factor. Using questionnaire survey from Higher Education Institutions, the study found that pyschological empowerment significantly affect innovative work behavior. In addition, Intrinsic motivation, as anticipated in the study also affect innovative work behavior. Finally, as an intervening variabel, intrinsic motivation enhance the relationship between psychological empowerment and innovative work behavior.

How to Cite

Suryani, I., Halimatussakdiah, H., & Sofa, N. (2020). PENGARUH PEMBERDAYAAN PSIKOLOGI TERHADAP PERILAKU INOVATIF. Epigram, 17(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.32722/epi.v17i1.3312

References

Amabile, T. M. 1983. The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45: 357–376.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. 1996. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103: 411–423.
Brislin, R. W. 1980. Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 389–444). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. 1991. A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, vol. 38: 237–288. Lincoln: University of Ne- braska Press. Nebraska
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. 2000. The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Ferrari A., Cachia, R., & Punie Yves. 2009. Innovation and Creativity in Education and Training in the EU Member States: Fostering Creative
Learning and Supporting Innovative Teaching. JRC Technical Notes. European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.
Fuller, J. B., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K. 2006. Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: Exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(8), 1089–1120.
Janssen, O., Van de Vliert, E., & West, M. 2004. The bright and dark sides of individual and group innovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior, 25: 129–145.
Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behavior. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 287–302.
Gilson, L. L., & Shalley, C. E. 2004. A little creativity goes a long way: An examination of teams’ engagement in creative processes. Journal of Management, 30: 453– 470.
Grant, A. 2008. Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58.
Hair, J. F., W.C. Black, B.J. Babin, dan R.E. Anderson. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th. New Jersey: Pearson Educational, Inc.
Munton, A. G., & West, M. A. 1995. Innovations and personal change: Patterns of adjustment to relocation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(4), 363–375.
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. 1996. Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 607–634.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. 1990. Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15: 666–681.
Tu, Y. D., & Lu, X. X. 2013. How ethical leadership influence employees’ innovative work behavior: A perspective of intrinsic motivation: Erratum. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(2), 457
Yuan, F., & Woodman, W, R. 2010. Innovative Behavior in the Workplace: The Role of Performance and Image Outcome Expectations. Academy of Management Journal.
Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R. 2004. The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30: 933–958.
Spreitzer, G. M. 1995. Individual empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement,validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 1442–1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. 1996. Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 483–505.
West, M.A. and Farr, J.L. 1989. Innovation at Work: Psychological Perspectives. Social Behavior, 4, 15-30.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. 1993. Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18: 293–321.
Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. 2003. Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. In J. Martocchio
(Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management: 165–217. Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier.
Zhang, Xiaomeng., & Bartol. Kathryn M. 2017. Linking Empowering Leadership and Employee Creativity: The Influence of Psychological Empowerment, Intrinsic Motivation, and Creative Process Engagement. Academy of Management Journal.53(1).



	Published By	: Politeknik Negeri Jakarta
	Address	: Jl. Prof. DR. G.A. Siwabessy, Kukusan, Kecamatan Beji, Kota Depok, Jawa Barat 16424
	Phone	: +62-21-7863532
	E-Mail	: [email protected]
	URL	: https://jurnal.pnj.ac.id/index.php/epigram/index

	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

About Journal

Focus and Scope

Peer Review Process

Open Access Policy

Publication Ethic

Screening For Plagiarism

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Abstract

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References