A Proposal for a Standard With Innovation Management System

Maria de Lurdes Calisto and Soumodip Sarkar
cooperation, for protective and creative behaviour are.., vital to organizational survival and
effectiveness (Katz and Kahn, 1978, pp. 403-404)”.
Intrapreneurship is an individual behaviour within an organizational setting. In fact, several studies on
the entrepreneurship literature (e.g. Ginsberg and Hay 1994; Hornsby, Kuratko and Zahra 2002)
suggest the need to research factors such as leaders’ role, organizational culture, and other aspects
of organizational behaviour related to intrapreneurship.
Considering the above, the goal of this paper is to explore the idea that intrapreneurship, as a field of
research, can benefit from decades of research on organizational behaviour. We will do that by
analysing one particular form of individual organizational behaviour – voice behaviour, and its
similarities with intrapreneurship. Voice behaviour can be described as “proactively challenging the
status quo and making constructive suggestions” (Van Dyne, Cummings and McLean Parks, 1995, p.
266) and is believed to play a critical role in organizations (Edmondson 1999; Morrison and Phelps
1999). This paper is part of a wider research project which intends to bring an organizational
behaviour perspective on corporate entrepreneurship.
Other authors have made the connection between voice behaviour and entrepreneurial behaviour
(Folger 1993) but have not demonstrated the similarities and differences between the constructs. In
the first section, we will describe the constructs as they have been used by researchers in their own
fields, discussing the similarities and differences. In the second section, we will compare the
antecedents of both constructs and the measures used by researchers.
2. Constructs
Voice behaviour as extra-role behaviour: In line with Van Dyne, Cummings and McLean Parks
(1995, p. 218), we consider extra-role behaviour as a “behaviour which benefits the organization
and/or is intended to benefit the organization, which is discretionary and which goes beyond the
existing role expectations.” Extra-role behaviour differs from in-role performance, which is related to a
worker’s expected job duties.
Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) is considered the primary form of extra-role behaviour. To
Organ (1988, p.4), OCB is the “…individual behaviour that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly
recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning
of the organization”.
Researchers have been proposing a variety of specific dimensions of OCB including altruism,
conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, civic virtue (Organ 1988), obedience, loyalty, advocacy
participation, social participation, functional participation (Van Dyne, Graham and Dienesch 1994),
helping and voice (Van Dyne, Cummings and McLean Parks 1995; Van Dyne and LePine 1998), as
well as organization-focused and interpersonal-focused organizational citizenship behaviour (Williams
and Anderson 1991).
Voice behaviour can been seen as challenge-oriented citizenship behaviour (Van Dyne, Cummings
and McLean Parks 1995; Van Dyne, Graham and Dienesch 1994; Van Dyne and LePine 1998), as
voice behaviour is characterized by making constructive suggestions with the intent to improve, and
speaking out and challenging the status quo for the good of the organization (Burris, Detert and
Chiaburu 2008; Choi 2007; Van Dyne and LePine 1998; Whiting, Podsakoff and Pierce 2008). Some
researchers define voice behaviour as expressing one's views (e. g. Thibaut and Walker 1975), while
others see it as consequence of job dissatisfaction (e. g. Withey and Cooper 1989). In this paper we
follow the proposals of Van Dyne and LePine (1998) where voice behaviour is defined as making
innovative suggestions for change and recommending modifications to standard procedures even
when others disagree, and Van Dyne and colleagues (Van Dyne, Cummings and McLean Parks
1995), where voice behaviour is potentially beneficial to others or organizations, so it’s hardly just a
manifestation of dissatisfaction.
Voice behaviour is discretionary because it is not required by management, or outlined in the workers
job description (Van Dyne, Cummings and McLean Parks 1995); it is challenge-oriented, with the aim
of making constructive changes (LePine and Van Dyne 1998; Morrison and Phelps 1999; Van Dyne,
Cummings and McLean Parks 1995); and, it is potentially risky because it implies defying the status
quo, sometimes against everyone else’s opinion.
50