doi: 10.56294/sctconf2024.1452
ORIGINAL
Creativity and Business Performance SMEs: The Interaction Between Job Complexity and Creative Process Engagement
Creatividad Y Desempeño Empresarial En Pymes: La Interacción Entre La Complejidad Del Trabajo Y El Compromiso Con El Proceso Creativo
Muhdiyanto1 
*, Ahyar Yuniawan2 , Fuad Mas’ud2
1Doctoral Program in Economics, Faculty of Economics and Bussiness, Diponegoro University, Indonesia.
2Management Science Study Program, Faculty of Economics and Bussiness, Diponegoro University, Indonesia.
Cite as: Muhdiyanto M, Yuniawan A, Mas’ud F. Creativity and Business Performance SMEs: The Interaction Between Job Complexity and Creative Process Engagement. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias. 2024; 3:.1452. https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf2024.1452
Submitted: 02-06-2024 Revised: 26-09-2024 Accepted: 28-12-2024 Published: 29-12-2024
Editor: Prof.
Dr. William Castillo-González
Corresponding author: Muhdiyanto *
ABSTRACT
Introduction: the performance of small and medium enterprises is essential for maintaining economic stability. The purpose of this study is to examine how job complexity influences employee creativity and how it impacts performance in small and medium-sized businesses through perceived organizational support and creative process involvement. Using the viewpoint of resource dependence theory, this study highlights the value of organizational intervention in improving the performance and innovation of small and medium enterprises.
Method: this study looked at small and medium enterprises in the Magelang region using a survey method. This study utilized a nonprobability sampling approach, especially a purposive sampling technique. This study’s criteria include small and medium-sized businesses that have a high level of inventiveness, like those that make souvenirs, batik, and toys for kids. This study had a sample size of 287 respondents. To test the hypothesis, the study used the technique of structural equation modeling and WarpPLS 7 software.
Results: the results show that employee creativity is influenced by perceived organizational support through participation in the creative process, bolstered by the intricacy of the workers’ tasks. Additionally, even while creativity affects performance, the relationship between creativity among employees and creative process involvement is not influenced by task complexity.
Conclusions: these results serve as a foundation for further research aimed at improving Performance in small and medium enterprises in Indonesia, particularly in the Magelang region.
Keywords: Creativity; Perceived Organizational Support; Creative Engagement Process; Job Complexity; Performance.
RESUMEN
Introducción: el desempeño de las pequeñas y medianas empresas es esencial para mantener la estabilidad económica. El propósito de este estudio es examinar cómo la complejidad del trabajo influye en la creatividad de los empleados y cómo impacta el desempeño en las pequeñas y medianas empresas a través del apoyo organizacional percibido y la participación en el proceso creativo. Utilizando el punto de vista de la teoría de la dependencia de los recursos, este estudio destaca el valor de la intervención organizacional para mejorar el desempeño y la innovación de las pequeñas y medianas empresas.
Método: este estudio analizó las pequeñas y medianas empresas de la región de Magelang utilizando un método de encuesta. En este estudio se utilizó un enfoque de muestreo no probabilístico, especialmente una técnica de muestreo intencional. Los criterios de este estudio incluyen pequeñas y medianas empresas que tienen un alto nivel de inventiva, como las que fabrican souvenirs, batik y juguetes para niños. Este estudio tuvo un tamaño de muestra de 287 encuestados. Para probar la hipótesis, el estudio utilizó la técnica de modelado de ecuaciones estructurales y el software WarpPLS 7.
Resultados: los resultados muestran que la creatividad de los empleados está influenciada por el apoyo organizacional percibido a través de la participación en el proceso creativo, reforzado por la complejidad de las tareas de los trabajadores. Además, aunque la creatividad afecta el rendimiento, la relación entre la creatividad de los empleados y la participación en el proceso creativo no está influenciada por la complejidad de la tarea.
Conclusiones: estos resultados sirven como base para futuras investigaciones destinadas a mejorar el rendimiento de las pequeñas y medianas empresas en Indonesia, particularmente en la región de Magelang.
Palabras clave: Creatividad; Apoyo Organizacional Percibido; Proceso de Compromiso Creativo; Complejidad del Trabajo; Actuación.
INTRODUCTION
The performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is a compelling subject due to their strategic importance in the economy, whether in developed or developing countries.(1,2,3) Various researchers have explored the topic of SMEs performance from an individual(4,5) and group perspective.(2,6) An organization with strong performance will ensure its continued sustainability. SMEs’ consistently strong performance is usually associated with their financial stability(4), adequate investment,(7) high-quality products,(8) and good knowledge.(9) Nonetheless, human resource competencies are among the most crucial factors.(10) When an organization has good organizational capabilities(1,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18), the organization becomes more competitive.
The organizational capabilities that contribute to improved SMEs performance are reflected in the creative mindset of employees.(19,20) Employee creativity is associated with the growth of self-efficacy, which is the belief in one’s talents.(21) The development of creativity influences an individual’s dynamic perspective, particularly in formulating and assessing the effectiveness of their work. This ability significantly affects how well an organization performs.(22) Naturally, when employees possess high creativity, the competitiveness of SMEs will improve, ensuring the maintenance of sustainability.(23,24,25) Thus, employees with a creative mindset are essential in an organization, as their innovative ideas enable the organization to carry out its activities more effectively.
Creativity is developed through interactions with the environment, such as the perceived support from the organization.(26,27,28,29) Perceived organizational support has a tremendous impact on employees. Several research show that organizational support such as recognition,(30) respect for employee work results,(31) or concern for welfare,(32) will affect the assessment of work that has a substantial impact on economic sustainability in the organization.(33) Certainly, this impact will lead to the generation of new ideas that can be implemented, enhancing the organization’s sustainability and effectiveness.(34)
Perceived organizational support is very important,(35) as it fosters the development of individual employee competencies, motivating employees to actively and creatively engage in their jobs. This Creative Process Engagement can lead to an improved innovation process within the organization(36) resulting in higher creativity. Creative process engagement will be effective if there is intervention from the organization,(37) such as job complexity.(38) Complex jobs can pressure employees, which in turn stimulates the generation of creative ideas.(39) When an employee is consistently engaged with pressing issues or jobs, their ability to focus on long-term solutions is constrained, leading to a greater focus on resolving immediate problems. This situation will lead to the creation of fresh ideas or innovative concepts. Consistent with the resource dependence theory, it suggests that external control over essential resources can limit management’s decision-making autonomy, hinder the achievement of organizational objectives, and pose a risk to the organization’s continued existence.(40) By giving them challenging tasks, management may help their staff reach their full potential and encourage creativity.
Research on how employee creativity is impacted by perceived organizational support shows inconsistent results. Employee creativity is encouraged by perceived organizational support, according to several research,(26,27,28,34,41) On the other hand, other research indicates that perceived organizational support has no impact on employee creativity.(42) Creativity processes occur when perceived organizational support is understood and implemented effectively at the level of employee engagement, such as creative process engagement.(43) This cognitive ability drives employees to be more creative. In addition, the varying complexity of jobs in SMEs will also determine the level of Employee Creativity.(44)
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS
Creativity, Perceived Organizational Support, and Creativity Process Engagement
Creativity is a product of an individual’s overall personality, resulting from interactions with their environment. The environment can foster creativity when ideas are effectively communicated through the available media. However, when these media fail to function properly, creativity development is restrained. Nevertheless, individual creativity is employed to address and resolve challenges while interacting with the environment. The successful implementation of this process requires management intervention. According to resource dependence theory, management’s ability to harness the company’s power, particularly in obtaining essential resources, is what determines how long an organization can continue to perform.(45) Therefore, achieving efficient organizational Performance in the organization is determined by management’s capacity to encourage creative thinking.
One way management promotes creativity is by providing perceived organizational support, which is reflected in the organization’s recognition of employee contributions and care for their well-being.(46) Good treatment from the company is reflected in perceived organizational support, which in turn makes employees feel obligated to return to the firm by adhering to the reciprocity norm. Workers will exhibit their responsibilities by engaging in work-related activities that support the objectives of the company. Furthermore, employees tend to personify the organization as a workplace, based on the actions of its leaders, rather than seeing it as a system. Employees’ perception of their employer’s willingness to appropriately recompense them for their efforts by providing suitable working circumstances is known as perceived organizational support. This organizational support fosters high motivation, particularly in enhancing creativity.(19,47,48) The following hypotheses are put out in light of this concept:
H1. Perceived organizational support affects the creativity of employees.
Perceived organizational support creates a reciprocal system based on respect, collective responsibility, and mutual advantage. Furthermore, workplace support enhances empathetic awareness of others’ circumstances through common experiences.(49) This support plays a crucial role in enhancing employees’ mood and self-confidence while performing the job, allowing them to overcome mental and psychological obstacles in the face of failure. The confidence gained in completing jobs subsequently encourages a higher level of creative engagement in employees. Perceived organizational support will encourage the creativity process of employees, depending on their engagement in the creative process itself. Employees who engage in pertinent cognitive processes of creativity, including problem identification, information collection and encoding, and idea and alternative generation, are said to be engaging in the creative process.(50) Worker cognitive techniques for innovative ideas will be improved by those who actively want to increase their knowledge through personal awareness. This ability will foster cognitive thinking related to their problems through original ideas. This concept of creative process engagement drives high creativity. The following hypotheses are put out in light of this concept:
H2. Perceived organizational support influences creative process engagement.
The creative process involves several stages, such as problem identification, information acquisition, idea generation, and evaluation and implementation.(51) In the problem identification stage, an individual prioritizes the knowledge, skills required, the risks, and the importance of success or failure. This stage forms the foundation for discovering solutions and new ideas. In the second stage, an employee may try various solutions, which require some form of innovation or relaxation. During this stage, new ideas are implemented, and problem-solving takes place. In the final stage, the validity of the solution is verified, and the employee examines the implementation of the vision and the new solution, as well as evaluates its value and usefulness. These stages demonstrate how an individual engages in the process of generating ideas that drive creativity within an organization.(43,52,53) The following hypotheses are put out in light of this concept:
H3. Creative process engagement influences employee creativity.
Perceived Organizational Support, Creativity Process Engagement, Employee Creativity, and Job Complexity
Perceived organizational support for employee creativity is also determined by job complexity.(44) Job complexity is often associated with jobs that are unstructured, confusing, and difficult to complete.(54) Job complexity is always related to two aspects: the level of job difficulty and job structure.(55) The quantity of information regarding the work is always linked to its degree of complexity, whereas the information’s clarity is linked to its structure. An increase in complexity in a task or system will reduce the level of task success so that it will increase an employee’s creativity(56) The higher the job complexity within an organization, the more it stimulates cognitive processes and requires creativity to solve the problems. This indicates that the success of organizational support for creativity depends on the jobs assigned to employees and their perception of those jobs.(38)
In addition, complexity arises from ambiguity and weak structures, both in primary jobs and other responsibilities, thus requiring a high level of creativity.(57) This problem-solving process will inevitably involve the employee’s creativity as a means of generating new ideas. Increasingly complex jobs will result in a higher level of creativity, leading to the emergence of new ideas.(38) High-complexity jobs necessitate innovation, whereas low-complexity jobs require comparatively less innovation. This indicates that the level of creativity engagement in an employee’s creativity is also influenced by the degree of Job Complexity(58,59,60) The following hypotheses are put out in light of this concept:
H4. Job complexity moderates the influence of perceived organizational support on creative process engagement.
H5. Job complexity moderates the influence of creative process engagement on employee creativity.
Employee Creativity and Employee Performance
Creativity refers to the initiation of products or processes that are useful, accurate, suitable, and hold value, particularly for more heuristic jobs.(10) Creative behavior emphasizes an open attitude toward experiences, displaying the unusual, dedication, accepting and reconciling contradictions, and the ability to smoothly generalize ideas to unclear phenomena. This ability will, of course, drive innovation in job Performance. Performance refers to the quantity and quality of the work produced or the services provided by someone performing a job within an organization.(61) The performance is the ability to achieve organizational jobs by utilizing resources effectively and efficiently.(62) Therefore, organizational Performance reflects the level of achievement and the attainment of previously set goals, as well as the success of management in running the organization. Improved performance will drive competitive competitiveness. Several studies have explored the performance of SMEs in competitiveness(1, 63, 64). The performance of SMEs is often associated with the level of innovation and employee creativity.(65-68) The following hypotheses are put out in light of this concept:
H6. Employee creativity influences performance.
The creativity process requires management intervention or organizational support, as demonstrated in resource dependence theory. It is supported by the creative process engagement of an employee, taking into account the job complexity of each individual.(54) This concept can certainly drive organizational performance effectively. Based on this concept, the research model is shown in figure 1.
Figure 1. Research Model
METHOD
Samples and Procedures
The selection of this research setting is based on previous studies on creativity and organizational Performance, which were mostly conducted in manufacturing companies and small and medium enterprises.(28,43,54) The three categories of businesses or organizations that make up the research environment were picked because they require both attention to job complexity and creative and inventive thinking. This study focuses on SMEs in the Magelang region. The analysis unit for the research is individuals, with a sample selected based on specific criteria. The sampling technique used is purposive sampling with nonprobability sampling. The following are the requirements for participation in this study: first, the SMEs must demonstrate high levels of creativity, such as in the production of children’s toys, batik, and souvenirs. Second, the company must employ a minimum of ten employees. These standards are meant to guarantee the SMEs’ long-term viability and market competitiveness. Only 287 of the 300 respondents who received questionnaires from this study were able to use them. The remaining ones were excluded due to incomplete answers and data.
Operational Definition and Measurement of Variables
Performance is an employee’s perception of the quantity and quality of work results produced or services provided by someone performing jobs within an organization.(66) The six-question indicators used to measure this variable,(69) use a five-point Likert scale, where “one” represents strongly disagree and “five” indicates strongly agree. Employee creativity is the quality of a worker who is innovative in his work or who approaches tasks in a unique manner(44) The five-question indicators used to measure this variable,(70) use a five-point Likert scale, where “one” represents strongly disagree and “five” indicates strongly agree. Perceived organizational support is a perception that arises in employees as a result of an evaluation of their organization to the extent to which the organization provides appreciation for the contributions and performance made by employees.(71) The six-question indicators used to measure this variable(72), use a five-point Likert scale, where “one” represents strongly disagree and “five” indicates strongly agree. Creative Process Engagement is the perception of worker participation in pertinent creative cognitive processes, such as problem identification, information gathering and encoding, and idea and alternative generation.(50) The four question indicators used to measure this variable(51), use a five-point Likert scale, where “one” represents strongly disagree and “five” indicates strongly agree. Job Complexity is an individual’s perception of the difficulty of a job due to the limited capacity memory and ability to integrate problems that a decision-maker has.(73) The four question indicators used to measure the variable,(74) use a five-point Likert scale, where “one” represents strongly disagree and “five” indicates strongly agree.
Measurement and model analysis tools
In this study, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used as the analysis tool to test the hypotheses, both directly and interactively, utilizing the WarpPLS 7 software.(75) This study assesses how well or poorly the model fits using several metrics, including the average variance inflation factor (AVIF), average path coefficient (APC), and average R-square (ARS). The APC and ARS values must be less than 0,05, while the multicollinearity metric, the AVIF, must be higher than a specific threshold.
Additionally, the validity of this study is assessed using convergent validity, which is the outer model measurement in SEM-PLS. This validity test aims to evaluate each indicator of the variable being measured. The outer model criteria employed in this study include a loading value greater than 0,70 and a p-value of less than 0,05.(76) Meanwhile, reliability testing in this study also uses 2 (two) measures of instrument reliability, namely composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha. Both must have a value above 0,70 as a requirement for reliability.(77,78) This test determines whether each variable utilized in this study is consistent.
RESULTS
Correlation
This study’s latent variables were correlated to see if there might be several overlapping latent variables. According to the analysis, the overall p-value for the correlation between the variables is less than 0,001. In addition, the overall correlation value is below 0,90. This shows that the correlation of all variables does not indicate a collinearity problem and the analysis can be continued to the next stage.
Model Measurement
This study uses the average path coefficient (APC), average variance inflation factor (AVIF), and average R-square (ARS) as metrics to assess how well a model fits the data. In addition to the multicollinearity indicator AVIF being greater than 5 (five), the APC and ARS values must be less than 0,05. APC and ARS are significant with a p-value less than 0,01, indicating that the model fit indications have been satisfied, according to the study model test results. The AVIF indicator, at 1,258.
This study’s validity assessment takes advantage of the questionnaire measurement instrument’s convergent validity. Moreover, the measurement model, also known as the outer model in SEM-PLS, includes convergent validity. For reflective constructs, convergent validity requires that the outer model’s loading be greater than 0,70 and its p-value be less than 0,05.(76) The convergent validity test results are met because all indicators’ loading factor values are> 0,70 and p-value <0,01. Furthermore, indicators below the loading factor are excluded or not included in further analysis, because they do not meet the requirements of the outer model. The Performance indicators (PFC) are PFC4 and PFC5; Employee Creativity indicators (EC) are EC3 and EC4; Perceived Organizational Support indicators (POS) are POS4, POS5 and POS6; creativity process engagement indicators (CPE) are CPE3; and Job Complexity (JC) is JC4. In detail, the indicators that meet the outer model are shown in table 1.
|
Table 1. Combined Loading and Cross-loading |
||||||
|
|
PFC |
EC |
POS |
CPE |
JC |
P Value |
|
PFC1 |
0,777 |
|
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
PFC2 |
0,771 |
|
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
PFC3 |
0,864 |
|
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
PFC6 |
0,825 |
|
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
EC1 |
|
0,747 |
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
EC3 |
|
0,776 |
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
EC5 |
|
0,762 |
|
|
|
<0,001 |
|
POS1 |
|
|
0,816 |
|
|
<0,001 |
|
POS2 |
|
|
0,882 |
|
|
<.0001 |
|
POS3 |
|
|
0,849 |
|
|
<0,001 |
|
CPE1 |
|
|
|
0,801 |
|
<0,001 |
|
CPE2 |
|
|
|
0,915 |
|
<0,001 |
|
CPE4 |
|
|
|
0,779 |
|
<0,001 |
|
JC1 |
|
|
|
|
0,711 |
<0,001 |
|
JC2 |
|
|
|
|
0,935 |
<0,001 |
|
JC3 |
|
|
|
|
0,807 |
<0,001 |
|
Note: ***) p<0,001; **) p<0,01; *)0<0,05; PFC: Performance; EC: Employee Creativity; POS: Perceived Organizational Support; CPE: Creative Process Engagement; JC: Job Complexity |
||||||
This study employs two (two) criteria methodologies for reliability testing: Cronbach alpha and composite reliability. The results of the investigation show that the reliability of the instrument has been reached or is dependable because the composite reliability and Cronbach alpha value for each variable are both above 0,70. The average variance extracted (AVE) value is over 0,50, indicating that the value is satisfied, according to the study’s convergent validity examination.
In addition, full collinearity VIF shows a value of less than 3,3 for all variables. These results indicate that the vertical and lateral multicollinearity values are met. According to Kock (2013), it shows that the full collinearity test criteria must be lower than 3,3. Table 2 presents the reliability analysis’s findings in detail.
|
Table 2. Latent Varibale Coefficient |
|||||
|
|
PFC |
EC |
POS |
CPE |
JC |
|
R-squared |
0,200 |
0,357 |
|
0,811 |
|
|
Composite reliability |
0,860 |
0,898 |
0,855 |
0,857 |
0,900 |
|
Cronbach’s alpha |
0,782 |
0,830 |
0,745 |
0,749 |
0,832 |
|
Avg. variances extracted |
0,606 |
0,746 |
0,663 |
0,667 |
0,750 |
|
Full collinearity VIFs |
1,393 |
1,597 |
1,231 |
1,261 |
1,360 |
|
Q-squares |
0,204 |
0,352 |
|
0,123 |
|
|
Note: PFC: Performance; EC: Employee Creativity; POS: Perceived Organizational Support; CPE: Creative Process Engagement; JC: Job Complexity. |
|||||
Hypothesis Testing
The findings of this study’s direct hypothesis testing are displayed in table 3. The data indicates that there is a significant correlation between employee creativity (EC) and perceived organizational support (POS) (β = 0,298; p <0,01), supporting hypothesis 1 (H1). These findings are consistent with studies showing how perceived organizational support affects employee.(34,79) According to the findings, there is a substantial correlation (β = 0,285; p <0,01) between perceived organizational support (POS) and creativity process engagement (CPE), which supports hypothesis 2 (H2). Significant results (β = 0,409; p <0,01) about creative process engagement (CPE) on creative workers (CE) also support hypothesis 3 (H3). The perceived organizational support influences creativity process participation, and our findings undoubtedly corroborate their findings.(43) In the meantime, Table 4 indicates that employee creativity (EC) has an impact on employee performance (PFC), supporting hypothesis 6 (H6). This is consistent with Pattnaik and Sahoo(53) findings that employee creativity has a significant impact on performance (β = 0,448; p <0,01).
|
Table 3. Direct and Interaction Effect |
|||
|
Paths |
β |
SE |
p-value |
|
H1: POS -> EC |
0,298 |
0,056 |
<0,001 |
|
H2: POS -> CPE |
0,285 |
0,056 |
<0,001 |
|
H3: CPE -> EC |
0,409 |
0,055 |
<0,001 |
|
H6: EC -> PFC |
0,448 |
0,055 |
<0,001 |
|
H4: JC*POS -> CPE |
0,155 |
0,058 |
0,004 |
|
H5: JC*CPE -> EC |
0,007 |
0,059 |
0,454 |
|
Note: ***) p<0,001; **) p<0,01; *) p<0,05; PFC: Performance; EC: Employee Creativity; POS: Perceived Organizational Support; CPE: Creative Process Engagement; JC: Job Complexity |
|||
The interaction test in this study examines the moderating role of job complexity on perceived organizational support for employee creativity and creativity process engagement. The moderating influence of job complexity (JC) on the effects of perceived organizational support (POS) on creativity process engagement (CPE) supports hypothesis 4 (H4) with significant results (β = 0,155; p < 0,01). Job complexity moderates the effect of perceived organizational support on creativity process engagement(67), which is supported by the findings of this study. Thus, hypothesis 5 (H5) is not supported by the results of the moderating effect of job complexity (JC) on the influence of creativity process engagement (CPE) on employee creativity (CE), which is not significant (β = 0,007; p > 0,01). Table 3 displays the interaction test’s specific findings. Figure 2 displays the total test results, both interactive and direct.
Figure 2. Full Model
DISCUSSION
Perceived Organizational Support fosters high levels of creativity within an organization, which supports hypothesis 1 (H1). Perceived organizational support is the degree to which workers believe their efforts are valued and that the company is concerned about their welfare.(80,81,82) It can also be seen as the organization’s commitment to its employees. Employees are more likely to recognize the organization’s commitment when it demonstrates that it recognizes their commitment and loyalty. Effective organizational support, such as providing freedom, independence, or opportunities for self-actualization, positively influences employee creativity. This behavior drives higher levels of creativity within the organization.(34,79,83,84) The results indicate that when the best possible organizational support is provided, small and medium-sized businesses in the Magelang region will operate more effectively. This is consistent with resource dependence theory, which asserts that organizational performance improves with adequate organizational support.(85)
Perceived organizational support encourages employees to engage more deeply in the creative process(43), thus supporting hypothesis 2 (H2). Organizational support motivates employees to independently assess their work performance. The recognition and rewards provided by the organization offer various benefits to employees, such as a sense of acceptance, access to information, and other forms of assistance needed for effective work. This reciprocal relationship between employees and the organization leads to mutual attention to shared goals within the work environment.(50) The engagement fostered by the organization enhances employee creativity, supporting hypothesis 3 (H3). Organizations that empower employees with decision-making authority(19,82) can enhance employees’ perceptions of organizational support.(86) Perceived organizational support also reflects employees’ belief that the organization will assist them in completing tasks and handling stressful situations. This aligns with resource dependence theory, which suggests that when management provides opportunities for employees within the organization’s framework,(82) it can lead to higher creativity. Offering opportunities is an effective strategy for boosting creativity in employees. The support employees perceive from the organization is seen as assurance that help will be available when needed, aiding them in performing their tasks effectively and managing stressful situations.
High Employee Creativity contributes significantly to improved performance within an organization.(2,19) supporting hypothesis 6 (H6). Creativity is an initiative related to products or processes that are useful, correct, appropriate, and valuable for more heuristic tasks. Creative behavior is characterized by openness to new experiences, displaying something unconventional, embracing and reconciling contradictions, and effectively generalizing ideas to ambiguous situations. This capability fosters innovation, leading to better work performance.(10) Employee creativity plays a crucial role in an organization. When creativity is at a high and optimal level, it enables employees to perform their tasks more efficiently, especially in completing workloads. New approaches and breakthroughs typically result in faster task completion, indirectly accelerating overall productivity. Employees who are dedicated to their work tend to be more creative, ensuring smooth operations and, if necessary, going the extra mile to complete tasks exceptionally. Therefore, fostering employee creativity is essential.(87) Without a creative approach, generating fresh and interesting ideas becomes difficult, ultimately relying on the employees’ ability to innovate.
According to hypothesis 4 (H4), which contends that job complexity moderates the association between perceived organizational support and creativity process engagement, job complexity contributes to the improvement of perceived organizational support and employee creativity. This result is consistent with other research showing that the relationship between perceived organizational support and creativity process engagement is moderated by task complexity.(54,88) Effective organizational support leads to greater employee engagement. The impact of this support on employee creativity is heightened when it is complemented by the complexity of the employee’s job. This aligns with the Resource Dependency Theory, which suggests that creativity in individuals is fostered when there is organizational encouragement and job complexity.(85) This concept represents organizational intervention aimed at employees. It shows the capacity of human resources in small and medium-sized businesses in the Magelang region, where higher organizational involvement is required due to the average level of expertise.
Nonetheless, it doesn’t seem that job complexity increases the impact of creativity process involvement on small and medium-sized business innovation. This result contradicts hypothesis 5 (H5), which postulates that job complexity mitigates the impact of employee creativity on creativity process engagement. In cases where employees have complex jobs, it may not necessarily foster organizational creativity. Employees may be less likely to innovate and think creatively when their jobs are more complex. As job complexity increases, employees may focus on simply completing their tasks without critical thinking, particularly given the limited knowledge and capabilities of resources in small and medium enterprises. Additionally, perceived organizational support, when faced with increasingly complex jobs, does not seem to have a significant impact on creativity. According to resource dependence theory, resources are crucial, but their effectiveness is maximized when supported by high intellectual capacity.(73) This suggests that job complexity must be supported by management through proper oversight, enabling employees to complete their tasks effectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Perceived organizational support plays a crucial role in promoting creativity and fostering engagement in the creative process. Organizational support creates a comfortable environment for employees, which in turn enhances their work performance. When employees feel at ease in their work environment, it fosters a positive atmosphere that leads to better outcomes. Moreover, higher levels of employee engagement—such as in information gathering, problem analysis, and idea generation—further contribute to increased creativity. Organizations should pay careful attention to these factors, as they significantly impact employee performance. Job complexity moderates the influence of perceived organizational support on creativity process engagement. Job complexity encourages employees to look for solutions by requiring a high level of creativity in their work and an organizational drive. Of course, increasingly complex work requires a high level of creativity and requires organizational presence. Furthermore, job complexity does not moderate the influence of creativity process engagement on creativity. The job complexity can sometimes overwhelm employees, leading to reduced motivation despite perceived support. Conversely, simpler tasks can increase creativity by allowing individuals to feel more empowered and less limited by expectations.
The research results offer practical implications for small and medium enterprises in addition to their theoretical contributions. Perceived employee creativity and organizational support are very important to improve the performance of employees in the small and medium business sector, especially in creative industries such as children’s toys, souvenirs, and other creative industries. Organizations must empower their employees by providing creative workspaces and offering them the freedom to express ideas that can improve performance results.
REFERENCES
1. Adeniran, T.V. and K.A. Johnston, Investigating the dynamic capabilities and competitive advantage of South African SMEs. African Journal of Business Management, 2012. 6(11): p. 4088-4099.
2. de Zubielqui, G.C., et al., Knowledge quality, innovation and firm performance: a study of knowledge transfer in SMEs. Small Business Economics, 2019. 53(1): p. 145-164.
3. Hoque, A., Z. Awang, and S. Salam. The Effects of Relationship Marketing on Firm Performance: Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in Bangladesh. in 1st International Conference on Business and Management (ICBM-2017), BRAC Business School (BBS), BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladesh, September. 2017.
4. Mabenge, B.K., G.P.K. Ngorora-Madzimure, and C. Makanyeza, Dimensions of innovation and their effects on the performance of small and medium enterprises: the moderating role of firm’s age and size. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 2020: p. 1-25.
5. Papadopoulos, T., K.N. Baltas, and M.E. Balta, The use of digital technologies by small and medium enterprises during COVID-19: Implications for theory and practice. International Journal of Information Management, 2020: p. 102192.
6. Narwane, V.S., et al., Mediating role of cloud of things in improving performance of small and medium enterprises in the Indian context. Annals of Operations Research, 2020: p. 1-30.
7. Terungwa, A., An empirical evaluation of small and medium enterprises equity investment scheme in Nigeria. Journal of Accounting and taxation, 2011. 3(3): p. 79-90.
8. Asad, M., S. Chethiyar, and A. Ali, Total quality management, entrepreneurial orientation, and market orientation: Moderating effect of environment on performance of SMEs. Paradigms; A Research Journal of Commerce, Economics, and Social Sciences, 2020. 14(1): p. 102-108.
9. Valencia-Arias, A., et al., Knowledge Management in Small and Medium Enterprises: Literature Review and Research Agenda. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D. Faculty of Economics and Administration, 2024. 32(1).
10. Edwards-Schachter, M., et al., Disentangling competences: Interrelationships on creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. Thinking skills and creativity, 2015. 16: p. 27-39.
11. Ng, T.W.H., Transformational leadership and performance outcomes: Analyses of multiple mediation pathways. The Leadership Quarterly, 2016.
12. Nguyen, T.T., et al., Effect of transformational-leadership style and management control system on managerial performance. Journal of Business Research, 2017. 70: p. 202-213.
13. Al-Ayed, S.I., The impact of strategic human resource management on organizational resilience: an empirical study on hospitals. Business: Theory and Practice, 2019. 20: p. 179-186.
14. Messersmith, J.G. and W.J. Wales, Entrepreneurial orientation and performance in young firms: The role of human resource management. International Small Business Journal, 2011. 31(2): p. 115-136.
15. Tayyaba, S., D.N.H. Ahmad, and S. Hossain, Innovation Performance of SMEs: The vital roles of Intellectual Capital, Organizational Agility and Organizational Inertia. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología-Serie de Conferencias, 2024. 3: p. 1228.
16. Xia, Y., Z. Ying, and M. Kuppusamy, Pressure and its impact on job satisfaction and organizational performance. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología-Serie de Conferencias, 2024(3): p. 596.
17. Mat, N.A.C. and S.S.M.M. Salleh, The effect of board of director diversity on company performance and the mediating role of director remuneration: Malaysia public companies’ evidence. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología-Serie de Conferencias, 2025(4): p. 14.
18. Zou, W., R. binti Abd Hamid, and M.Z. Arshad, How passion and workplace incivility impact job performance in China: the role of work-life balance. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología-Serie de Conferencias, 2025(4): p. 18.
19. Ferreira, J., A. Coelho, and L. Moutinho, Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Technovation, 2020. 92: p. 102061.
20. Ma, B.D., et al., Analyzing the Role of the Quadruple Helix in Improving MSME Management Performance. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D. Faculty of Economics and Administration, 2024. 32(1).
21. Torrance, E.P., Creativity. Vol. 13. 1969: Dimensions Publishing Company.
22. Joo, B.-K.B. and R.H. Bennett III, The influence of proactivity on creative behavior, organizational commitment, and job performance: evidence from a Korean multinational. Journal of International & Interdisciplinary Business Research, 2018. 5(1): p. 1-20.
23. Wang, S., Z. Sun, and Y. Chen, Effects of higher education institutes’ artificial intelligence capability on students’ self-efficacy, creativity and learning performance. Education and Information Technologies, 2023. 28(5): p. 4919-4939.
24. Wang, Y.Y., et al., Effects of virtual reality on creativity performance and perceived immersion: A study of brain waves. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2023. 54(2): p. 581-602.
25. Korsakienė, R. and A.G. Raišienė, Sustainability drivers of small and medium sized firms: A review and research agenda. 2022.
26. Houghton, J.D. and T.C. DiLiello, Leadership development: The key to unlocking individual creativity in organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2010.
27. Diliello, T.C., J.D. Houghton, and D. Dawley, Narrowing the creativity gap: The moderating effects of perceived support for creativity. The Journal of psychology, 2011. 145(3): p. 151-172.
28. Tsai, C.-Y., et al., Work environment and atmosphere: The role of organizational support in the creativity performance of tourism and hospitality organizations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2015. 46: p. 26-35.
29. Arthur, E.E. and B. Vanicek, Determinants of Knowledge Production Function: A Catalyst for Firm-Level Innovation Performance in the EU. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D. Faculty of Economics and Administration, 2024. 32(3).
30. Mascarenhas, C., A.R. Galvão, and C.S. Marques, How perceived organizational support, identification with organization and work engagement influence job satisfaction: a gender-based perspective. Administrative Sciences, 2022. 12(2): p. 66.
31. Patnaik, S., U.S. Mishra, and B.B. Mishra, Perceived Organizational Support and Performance: Moderated Mediation Model of Psychological Capital and Organizational Justice–Evidence from India. Management and Organization Review, 2023: p. 1-28.
32. Paillé, P., P. Valéau, and A. Carballo-Penela, Green rewards for optimizing employee environmental performance: Examining the role of perceived organizational support for the environment and internal environmental orientation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2023. 66(14): p. 2810-2831.
33. Al Riyami, S., M.R. Razzak, and A.S. Al-Busaidi, Work from home and workplace ostracism, beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: moderating effect of perceived organizational support. International Journal of Manpower, 2023.
34. Duan, W., et al., Perceived organizational support and employee creativity: The mediation role of calling. Creativity Research Journal, 2020. 32(4): p. 403-411.
35. Canivel, R.G., Differences in Faculty Self-Efficacy, Views, and Institutional Support Towards Teaching Competency-Based Education Online: A Non-Experimental, Causal Comparative Study. 2023.
36. El-Kassar, A.-N., et al., Antecedents and consequences of knowledge hiding: The roles of HR practices, organizational support for creativity, creativity, innovative work behavior, and task performance. Journal of Business Research, 2022. 140: p. 1-10.
37. Najar, T. and K. Dhaouadi, Chief Executive Officer’s traits and open innovation in small and medium enterprises: the mediating role of innovation climate. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 2020.
38. Yang, W., et al., How job complexity fosters employee creativity: A contextualized growth perspective and the mechanism of feedback-seeking. European Journal of Training and Development, 2023. 47(7/8): p. 830-845.
39. Li, J., T.C. Burch, and T.W. Lee, Intra‐individual variability in job complexity over time: Examining the effect of job complexity trajectory on employee job strain. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2017. 38(5): p. 671-691.
40. Hillman, A.J., M.C. Withers, and B.J. Collins, Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of management, 2009. 35(6): p. 1404-1427.
41. Aldabbas, H., A. Pinnington, and A. Lahrech, The influence of perceived organizational support on employee creativity: The mediating role of work engagement. Current Psychology, 2023. 42(8): p. 6501-6515.
42. Akgunduz, Y., C. Alkan, and Ö.A. Gök, Perceived organizational support, employee creativity and proactive personality: The mediating effect of meaning of work. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 2018. 34: p. 105-114.
43. Chang, Y.-Y. and H.-Y. Shih, Work curiosity: A new lens for understanding employee creativity. Human Resource Management Review, 2019. 29(4).
44. Wang, C.-J., H.-T. Tsai, and M.-T. Tsai, Linking transformational leadership and employee creativity in the hospitality industry: The influences of creative role identity, creative self-efficacy, and job complexity. Tourism Management, 2014. 40: p. 79-89.
45. Tausch, A., Globalisation and development: the relevance of classical “dependency” theory for the world today. International Social Science Journal, 2010. 61(202): p. 467-488.
46. Eisenberger, R., et al., Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied psychology, 1986. 71(3): p. 500.
47. Yee, W.F., L.S. Pink, and M.L.C. Sern, The effect of a psychological climate for creativity on job satisfaction and work performance. International Journal of Economics and Management, 2014. 8: p. 97-116.
48. Andri, G., et al., The Minang-Nomads Businesses’ Performance: The Role of Proactive Personality, Creativity and Innovative Work Behavior. Jurnal Pengurusan (UKM Journal of Management), 2020. 58.
49. Mead, S., D. Hilton, and L. Curtis, Peer support: a theoretical perspective. Psychiatric rehabilitation journal, 2001. 25(2): p. 134.
50. Amabile, T.M. and M.G. Pratt, The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in organizational behavior, 2016. 36: p. 157-183.
51. Perry-Smith, J.E. and P.V. Mannucci, From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management Review, 2017. 42(1): p. 53-79.
52. Kwon, K. and T. Kim, An integrative literature review of employee engagement and innovative behavior: Revisiting the JD-R model. Human Resource Management Review, 2020. 30(2): p. 100704.
53. Pattnaik, S.C. and R. Sahoo, Employee engagement, creativity and task performance: role of perceived workplace autonomy. South Asian Journal of Business Studies, 2021. 10(2): p. 227-241.
54. Vila-Vázquez, G., C. Castro-Casal, and D. Álvarez-Pérez, From LMX to Individual Creativity: Interactive Effect of Engagement and Job Complexity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2020. 17(8): p. 2626.
55. Peng, X., et al., Perceived overqualification and proactive behavior: The role of anger and job complexity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2023. 141: p. 103847.
56. Gligor, D., I. Russo, and M.J. Maloni, Understanding gender differences in logistics innovation: A complexity theory perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 2022. 246: p. 108420.
57. Fateh, A., M.Z. Aslam, and F. Shahzad, Does personal mastery lead to creativity for complex jobs: a moderated mediation model. Kybernetes, 2023.
58. Noureen, G., et al., Relationship between Work Autonomy and Work Place Creativity as Moderated by Task Complexity at University Level. Pakistan Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation (PJERE), 2022. 9(2).
59. Mai, T.T.T., B.T. Nhi, and P.T.T. Nhung, Influences of innovative climate and autonomy on employees’ creativity: The moderating effects of psychological capital and job complexity. Tạp chí Khoa học và Công nghệ-Đại học Đà Nẵng, 2022: p. 80-85.
60. Venkataramani, V. and C. Tang, When does external knowledge benefit team creativity? The role of internal team network structure and task complexity. Organization Science, 2023.
61. Luthans, F., Organizational behavior: An evidence-based approach. 2010, McGraw-Hill Irwin.
62. Daft, R.L., Organization theory and design. 2004: South-Western Pub.
63. Robert, Z., D. Mumin, and A. Thomas, Impact of network capability on small business performance. Management Decision, 2015. 53(1): p. 2-23.
64. Sulistyo, H. and Siyamtinah, Innovation capability of SMEs through entrepreneurship, marketing capability, relational capital and empowerment. Asia Pacific Management Review, 2016. 21(4): p. 196-203.
65. Khedhaouria, A., C. Gurău, and O. Torrès, Creativity, self-efficacy, and small-firm performance: the mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Small Business Economics, 2015. 44(3): p. 485-504.
66. Wu, M.-S., Information literacy, creativity and work performance. Information Development, 2018: p. 0266666918781436.
67. Yang, Y., P.K. Lee, and T. Cheng, Continuous improvement competence, employee creativity, and new service development performance: A frontline employee perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 2016. 171: p. 275-288.
68. Jaiswal, N.K. and R.L. Dhar, Transformational leadership, innovation climate, creative self-efficacy and employee creativity: A multilevel study. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2015. 51: p. 30-41.
69. Wang, Y. and N. Haggerty, Individual virtual competence and its influence on work outcomes. Journal of management information systems, 2011. 27(4): p. 299-334.
70. Tierney, P. and S.M. Farmer, Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management journal, 2002. 45(6): p. 1137-1148.
71. Caesens, G. and F. Stinglhamber, The relationship between perceived organizational support and work engagement: The role of self-efficacy and its outcomes. European Review of Applied Psychology, 2014. 64(5): p. 259-267.
72. Amabile, T.M., et al., Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity Academy of Management Journal 1996. 39(5): p. 1154-1184.
73. Sung, S.Y., A. Antefelt, and J.N. Choi, Dual effects of job complexity on proactive and responsive creativity: Moderating role of employee ambiguity tolerance. Group & Organization Management, 2017. 42(3): p. 388-418.
74. Morgeson, F.P. and S.E. Humphrey, The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of applied psychology, 2006. 91(6): p. 1321.
75. Hair, J.F., C.M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 2011. 19(2): p. 139-152.
76. Hair, J., et al., Multivariate Data Analysis. ed’India. 2015, Pearson.
77. Fornell, C. and D.F. Larcker, Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 1981. 18(1): p. 39-50.
78. Nunnally, J. and I. Bernstein, This week’s citation classic. Psychom. theory, 1979. 34: p. 1982.
79. Ahsan, U. and M.A. ul Haq, Perceived Organizational Support, Workplace Loneliness, and Creativity: Mediating Role of Workplace Loneliness, and Moderating Role of Proactive Personality. Reviews of Management Sciences, 2021. 3(2): p. 147-164.
80. Robbins, S.P. and T.A. Judge, Organizational behavior. 2019: Pearson education limited.
81. León-Zevallos L, Casco RJE, Macha-Huamán R. Digital marketing positioning in a retail sector company. Edu - Tech Enterprise 2024;2:11–11. https://doi.org/10.71459/edutech202411.
82. Esguerra, G.A., K. Jáuregui, and J.C. Espinosa, Ethical leadership and organizational support for creativity at work. Creativity Studies, 2022. 15(2): p. 526–541-526–541.
83. Jacinto-Alvaro J, Casco RJE, Macha-Huamán R. Social networks as a tool for brand positioning. Edu - Tech Enterprise 2024;2:9–9. https://doi.org/10.71459/edutech20249.
84. Fidel WWS, Cuicapusa EEM, Espilco POV. Managerial Accounting and its Impact on Decision Making in a small company in the food sector in West Lima. Edu - Tech Enterprise 2024;2:8–8. https://doi.org/10.71459/edutech20248.
85. Hays, D.G., Dependency theory: A formalism and some observations. Language, 1964. 40(4): p. 511-525.
86. Rhoades, L. and R. Eisenberger, Perceived organizational support: a review of the literature. Journal of applied psychology, 2002. 87(4): p. 698.
87. Mwesigwa, R. and S. Namiyingo, Job resources, employees‟ creativity and firm performance of commercial banks in Uganda. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 2014. 3(9): p. 1-12.
88. Afsar, B. and W.A. Umrani, Transformational leadership and innovative work behavior: The role of motivation to learn, task complexity and innovation climate. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2020. 23(3): p. 402-428.
FINANCING
This research is funded by the Indonesian Ministry of Higher Education with decree number 8/E1/KPT/2021 and contract number 5/E1/KP.PTNBH/2021.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors agree that this research was conducted in the absence of any self-benefits, commercial or financial conflicts and declare absence of conflicting interests with the funders.
AUTHORSHIP CONTRIBUTION
Conceptualization: Muhdiyanto, Ahyar Yuniawan, Fuad Mas’ud.
Data curation: Muhdiyanto.
Formal analysis: Muhdiyanto.
Research: Muhdiyanto, Ahyar Yuniawan, Fuad Mas’ud.
Methodology: Muhdiyanto, Ahyar Yuniawan, Fuad Mas’ud.
Project management: Muhdiyanto.
Resources: Muhdiyanto, Ahyar Yuniawan, Fuad Mas’ud.
Software: Muhdiyanto.
Supervision: Muhdiyanto, Ahyar Yuniawan, Fuad Mas’ud.
Validation: Muhdiyanto.
Display: Muhdiyanto.
Drafting - original draft: Muhdiyanto.
Writing - proofreading and editing: Muhdiyanto, Ahyar Yuniawan, Fuad Mas’ud.