Palabras clave
Liderazgo inclusivo
Rasgos de personalidad
Modelo de los cinco grandes
Flexibilidad cognitiva
Metacognición
Innovación
PLS-SEM
Cómo citar
Resumen
Se estudió el efecto de varios antecedentes del comportamiento innovador (COI): rasgos de personalidad, flexibilidad cognitiva (FLE) y liderazgo inclusivo (LIN). En línea con los antecedentes en la literatura, los rasgos de personalidad y la FLE se definieron como factores latentes, mientras que el LIN y el COI se modelaron como compuestos. La información se recolectó mediante un cuestionario aplicado a 306 personas que laboraban en diversas ocupaciones y organizaciones costarricenses. Se realizó un análisis PLS-SEM con procedimientos predictivos fuera de la muestra y un análisis de condiciones necesarias (ACN). Los resultados indicaron que la apertura a la experiencia, la FLE y el LIN se asociaron positivamente con el COI; un alto poder predictivo del modelo; y que niveles moderados de estabilidad emocional, extroversión y responsabilidad son necesarios para la innovación.
Referencias
Abdullah, I., Omar, R., & Panatik, S. A. (2016). A literature review on personality, creativity and innovative behavior. International Review of Management and Marketing, 6(1), 177–182. https://www.econjournals.com/index.php/irmm/article/view/1741
Adu, P., & Miles, D. A. (Eds.). (2024). Dissertation research methods: A step-by-step guide to writing up your research in the social sciences. Routledge.
Al-Atwi, A. A., & Al-Hassani, K. K. (2021). Inclusive leadership: Scale validation and potential consequences. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(8), 1222–1240. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-08-2020-0327
Alblooshi, M., Shamsuzzaman, M., & Haridy, S. (2021). The relationship between leadership styles and organisational innovation: A systematic literature review and narrative synthesis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(2), 338–370. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2019-0339
AlEssa, H. S., & Durugbo, C. M. (2022). Systematic review of innovative work behavior concepts and contributions. Management Review Quarterly, 72(4), 1171–1208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-021-00224-x
Alfy, S. E., & Naithani, P. (2021). Antecedents of innovative work behaviour: A systematic review of the literature and future research agenda. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 17(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1504/WREMSD.2021.112082
Ali, I. (2019). Personality traits, individual innovativeness and satisfaction with life. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2017.11.002
Amran, M. S., Zain, S. M., Jamaludin, K. A., & Surat, S. (2021). Thinking about behavior: Perspective on meta-behavior in education. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 727116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.727116
Arthur, W., Hagen, E., & George, F. (2021). The lazy or dishonest respondent: Detection and prevention. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8(1), 105–137. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-055324
Balconi, M., & Angioletti, L. (2021). Neurocognitive enhancement in organizations: Challenges and opportunities. In M. Balconi (Ed.), Neuromanagement: Neuroscience for organizations (pp. 111–131). Nova Medicine & Health. https://hdl.handle.net/10807/196174
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Bastian, B., Hjelle, M., & Shepherd, D. (2025). Systemizing entrepreneurial metacognition: Thinking about the past and future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 50(1), 231–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587251315664
Bernerth, J. B., & Aguinis, H. (2016). A critical review and best‐practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 229–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103
Beugré, C. D. (2018). The neuroscience of organizational behavior. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783475544
Bishop, S. K., Dixon, M. R., Moore, J. W., & Lundy, M. P. (2016). Behavioral perspectives on personality. In V. Zeigler-Hill & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences (pp. 1–11). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_962-1
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Connelly, B. S., Ones, D. S., & Hülsheger, U. R. (2018). Personality in industrial, work and organizational psychology: Theory, measurement and application. In N. Anderson, C. Viswesvaran, & H. Sinangil (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology: Personnel Psychology and Employee Performance (pp. 320–365). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473914940.n13
Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Corzo-Morales, Y., & Contreras-Pacheco, O. E. (2024). Determinants of innovative behavior from the perspective of individual factors: A conceptual framework. Intangible Capital, 20(1), 60–88. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.2389
Cramer, A. O. J., Van Der Sluis, S., Noordhof, A., Wichers, M., Geschwind, N., Aggen, S. H., Kendler, K. S., & Borsboom, D. (2012). Dimensions of normal personality as networks in search of equilibrium: You can’t like parties if you don’t like people. European Journal of Personality, 26(4), 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1866
Curran, P. G. (2016). Methods for the detection of carelessly invalid responses in survey data. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 4–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.07.006
Daniels, A. C. (1993). Gerencia del desempeño (3ra ed.). McGraw-Hill Interamericana.
Daniels, A. C., & Daniels, J. E. (2007). Measure of a leader: The legendary leadership formula for producing exceptional performers and outstanding results. McGraw-Hill.
Dayanti, P. R. (2024). Innovative work behavior on millennial and generation-Z: A literature review. International Journal of Science and Management Studies, 7(3), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.51386/25815946/ijsms-v7i3p114
De Haro, J. M., & Vena, J. (2025). Exploring the relationship between personality traits and innovative behaviour: A mixed-methods approach. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 33(7), 1726–1741. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-04-2024-4461
De Jong, J., & Wennekers, S. (2008). Intrapreneurship: Conceptualizing entrepreneurial employee behaviour (EIM Research Report, No. H200802). EIM Business and Policy Research. https://web.archive.org/web/20150501072335/http://www.entrepreneurship-sme.eu/pdf-ez/H200802.pdf
DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Cybernetic Big Five Theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33–58, 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.004
DeYoung, C. G., Grazioplene, R. G., & Allen, T. A. (2021). The neurobiology of personality. In O. P. John & R. W. Robins (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (4th ed., pp. 193–216). The Guilford Press.
DeYoung, C. G., & Weisberg, Y. (2018). Cybernetic approaches to personality and social behavior. In K. Deaux & M. Snyder (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 387–413). Oxford University Press.
Dimitriou, E., & Galanakis, M. (2022). Organizational psychology re-invented—The Big Five Personality Traits Model as a reliable behavior framework in the workplace. Psychology, 13(5), 798–804. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2022.135053
Dul, J. (2016). Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA): Logic and methodology of “Necessary but Not Sufficient” causality. Organizational Research Methods, 19(1), 10–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115584005
Dul, J. (2024). A different causal perspective with Necessary Condition Analysis. Journal of Business Research, 177, 114618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114618
Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A primer for soft modeling. The University of Akron Press.
Farrukh, M., Meng, F., Raza, A., & Wu, Y. (2023). Innovative work behaviour: The what, where, who, how and when. Personnel Review, 52(1), 74–98. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2020-0854
Farrukh, M., Ying, C. W., & Mansori, S. (2016). Intrapreneurial behavior: An empirical investigation of personality traits. Management & Marketing, 11(4), 597–609. https://doi.org/10.1515/mmcks-2016-0018
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Ferrando, P. J., & Chico, E. (2000). Adaptación y análisis psicométrico de la escala de deseabilidad social de Marlowe y Crowne. Psicothema, 12(3), 383–389. https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/PST/article/view/7607
Ferrando, P. J., Morales-Vives, F., Casas, J. M., & Muñiz, J. (2025). Likert scales: A practical guide to design, construction and use. Psicothema, 37(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.70478/psicothema.2025.37.24
Fleetwood, S. (2005). Ontology in organization and management studies: A critical realist perspective. Organization, 12(2), 197–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508405051188
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Golfried, M. R., & Kent, R. N. (1972). Traditional versus behavioral personality assessment: A comparison of methodological and theoretical assumptions. Psychological Bulletin, 77(6), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032714
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2024). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Sage.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Sharma, P. N., & Liengaard, B. D. (2024). Going beyond the untold facts in PLS–SEM and moving forward. European Journal of Marketing, 58(13), 81–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-08-2023-0645
Halawa, F., Sridadi, A. R., Hardiana, Y., Sundari, A., Susiva Zain, I. A., & Ramadhan, M. N. (2023). The importance of innovative work behavior in the era industrial revolution 4.0. Jurnal Maksipreneur: Manajemen, Koperasi, dan Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 38–55. https://doi.org/10.30588/jmp.v13i1.1493
Haque, F., Sarkar, A., Raj, A., Kumar, P., & Foropon, C. R. H. (2024). Can inclusive leadership foster flexible workplaces? A comprehensive review and analysis. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 25(4), 647–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40171-024-00414-y
Haws, K. L., Sample, K. L., & Hulland, J. (2023). Scale use and abuse: Towards best practices in the deployment of scales. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 33(1), 226–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1320
Haynie, J. M., Shepherd, D. A., & Patzael, H. (2012). Cognitive adaptability and an entrepreneurial task: The role of metacognitive ability and feedback. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(2), 237–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00410.x
Haynie, M., & Shepherd, D. A. (2009). A measure of adaptive cognition for entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 695–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00322.x
Haynie, J. M., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E., & Earley, P. C. (2010). A situated metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2), 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.10.001
Heggestad, E. D., Scheaf, D. J., Banks, G. C., Monroe Hausfeld, M., Tonidandel, S., & Williams, E. B. (2019). Scale adaptation in organizational science research: A review and best-practice recommendations. Journal of Management, 45(6), 2596–2627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319850280
Henseler, J. (2021). Composite-based structural equation modeling: Analyzing latent and emergent variables. The Guilford Press.
Hult, G. T. M., Hair, J. F., Proksch, D., Sarstedt, M., Pinkwart, A., & Ringle, C. M. (2018). Addressing endogeneity in international marketing applications of partial least squares structural equation modeling. Journal of International Marketing, 26(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.17.0151
John, O. P. (2021). History, measurement, and conceptual elaboration of the Big‑Five trait taxonomy: The paradigm matures. In O. P. John & R. W. Robins (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (4th ed., pp. 35–82). The Guilford Press.
Johnston, J. M. (2021). Talking about behavior: Radical behaviorism for ABA practitioners (2nd ed.). Sloan Publishing.
Kim, D., & Lee, D. (2018). Impacts of metacognition on innovative behaviors: Focus on the mediating effects of entrepreneurship. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 4(2), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4020018
Kock, N. (2017). Common method bias: A full collinearity assessment method for PLS-SEM. In H. Latan & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial Least Squares Path Modeling: Basics Concepts, Methodological Issues and Applications (pp. 245–257). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64069-3_11
Kock, N., & Lynn, G. S. (2012). Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: An illustration and recommendations. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(7), 546–580. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00302
Kuknor, S. C., & Bhattacharya, S. (2022). Inclusive leadership: New age leadership to foster organizational inclusion. European Journal of Training and Development, 46(9), 771–797. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-07-2019-0132
Lebuda, I., & Benedek, M. (2025). Contributions of metacognition to creative performance and behavior. Journal of Creative Behavior, 59(1), e652. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.652
Lieberman, M. D., & Eisenberger, N. I. (2009). Pains and pleasures of social life. Science, 323(5916), 890–891. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1170008
Lim, W. M. (2024). A typology of validity: Content, face, convergent, discriminant, nomological and predictive validity. Journal of Trade Science, 12(3), 155–179. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTS-03-2024-0016
Lukes, M., & Stephan, U. (2017). Measuring employee innovation: A review of existing scales and the development of the innovative behavior and innovation support inventories across cultures. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 23(1), 136–158. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-11-2015-0262
MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing: Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001
Maier, C., Thatcher, J., Grover, V., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2023). Cross-sectional research: A critical perspective, use cases, and recommendations for IS research. International Journal of Information Management, 70, 102625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102625
Martins, J. T., & Gonçalves, J. (2022). Cognitive flexibility and the work context: Integrative literature review. Psicologia: Teoria e Prática, 24(2), ePTPSP14027. https://doi.org/10.5935/1980-6906/ePTPSP14027.en
McCracken, S., & Russ-Eft, D. (2025). Cultivating innovative thinking: A literature review. In E. L. S. Tomé (Ed.), Intangibles in the Knowledge Economy (pp. 1–12). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-86660-9_1
Memon, M. A. (2024). Control variables: A review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, 8(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.47263/JASEM.8(2)01
Memon, M. A., Thurasamy, R., Ting, H., & Cheah, J.-H. (2024). Purposive sampling: A review and guidelines for quantitative research. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, 9(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.47263/JASEM.9(1)01
Montero-Rojas, E. (2023). Validez y psicometría. En Estándares de calidad para pruebas estandarizadas de alto impacto en el contexto académico y profesional costarricense (pp. 39–64). Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas. https://hdl.handle.net/10669/90162
Mor Barak, M. E., Lizano, E. L., Kim, A., Duan, L., Rhee, M.-K., Hsiao, H.-Y., & Brimhall, K. C. (2016). The promise of diversity management for climate of inclusion: A state-of-the-art review and meta-analysis. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 40(4), 305–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2016.1138915
Mor Barak, M. E. (2022). Managing diversity: Toward a globally inclusive workplace (5th ed.). SAGE Publishing.
Muñiz, J., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2019). Diez pasos para la construcción de un test. Psicothema, 31(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.291
Nweke, G. I., Nweke, O. C., & Mocha, S. C. (2025). The role of psychology in innovation: A systematic review. Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Science, 9(7), 1244–1258. https://doi.org/10.26855/jhass.2025.07.001
Pan, W., & Sun, L.-Y. (2018). A self-regulation model of Zhong Yong thinking and employee adaptive performance. Management and Organization Review, 14(1), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2017.33
Pardosi, P., Sulistyowati, T., Anwar, K., Frimayasa, A., & Sugeng, I. S. (2025). A systematic literature review on employee performance through innovative work behavior. Indonesia Journal of Engineering and Education Technology (IJEET), 3(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.61991/ijeet.v3i1.127
Parks, N., Barbieri, F., Sain, R., Capell, S. T., & Kirby, B. (2024). The behavior of social justice: Applying Behavior Analysis to understand and challenge injustice (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003432104
Pathki, C. S., Kluemper, D. H., Meuser, J. D., & McLarty, B. D. (2022). The Org-B5: Development of a Short Work Frame-of-Reference Measure of the Big Five. Journal of Management, 48(5), 1299–1337. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063211002627
Patterson, F., Kerrin, M., & Gatto-Roissard, G. (2014). Characteristics and behaviours of innovative people in organisations [Literature review prepared for the NESTA Policy and Research Unit]. Nesta. https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/characteristics-and-behaviours-of-innovative-people-in-organisations/
Peerzadah, S. A., Mufti, S., & Majeed, S. (2024). Mapping the scientific evolution of innovative work behavior: A bibliometric analysis of three decades. International Journal of Innovation Science, 16(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-08-2022-0154
Pérez Álvarez, M. (2014). Contingencia y drama: La psicología según el conductismo. Biblioteca Nueva.
Phelps, B. J. (2015). Behavioral perspectives on personality and self. The Psychological Record, 65(3), 557–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-014-0115-y
Podsakoff, P. M., Podsakoff, N. P., Williams, L. J., Huang, C., & Yang, J. (2024). Common Method Bias: It’s bad, it’s complex, it’s widespread, and it’s not easy to fix. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 17–61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040030
Ramsay, M. C., Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (2002). Essentials of behavioral assessment. J. Wiley & Sons.
Junta Directa de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. (2018, 13 de diciembre). Reglamento para el aseguramiento de microempresas y emprendimientos en el Seguro de Salud. La Gaceta, (232).
Rhemtulla, M., van Bork, R., & Borsboom, D. (2020). Worse than measurement error: Consequences of inappropriate latent variable measurement models. Psychological Methods, 25(1), 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000220
Rice, S. P. M. (2024). Does changing a scale’s context impact its psychometric properties? A comparison using the PERMA-Profiler and the workplace PERMA-Profiler. Merits, 4(2), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.3390/merits4020008
Richter, N. F., Hauff, S., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Kolev, A. E., & Schubring, S. (2023). How to apply necessary condition analysis in PLS-SEM. In H. Latan, J. F. Hair, & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (pp. 267–297). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37772-3_10
Richter, N. F., Schubring, S., Hauff, S., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2020). When predictors of outcomes are necessary: Guidelines for the combined use of PLS-SEM and NCA. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(12), 2243–2267. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-11-2019-0638
Salgado, J. F. (2005). Personality and social desirability in organizational settings: Practical implications for work and organizational psychology. Papeles del Psicólogo, 26(92), 115–128. https://www.papelesdelpsicologo.es/English/1252.pdf
Salgado, J. F., Anderson, N., & Moscoso, S. (2020). Personality at work. In P. J. Corr & G. Matthews (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 427–438). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108264822.040
Sánchez García, J. C., Boada-Grau, J., Prizmic-Kuzmica, A. J., & Hernández-Sánchez, B. (2014). Pyschometric properties and the factor structure of the Spanish version of the cognitive adaptability (MAC) scale. Universitas Psychologica, 13(1), 311–320. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.UPSY13-1.ppfs
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., Thiele, K. O., & Gudergan, S. P. (2016). Estimation issues with PLS and CBSEM: Where the bias lies! Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 3998–4010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.007
Sato, M. (2001). A behavioral analysis of personality. In K. Miyoshi, C. M. Shapiro, M. Gaviria, & Y. Morita (Eds.), Contemporary Neuropsychiatry (pp. 417–419). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-67897-7_69
Sharma, P. N., Liengaard, B. D., Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2023). Predictive model assessment and selection in composite-based modeling using PLS-SEM: Extensions and guidelines for using CVPAT. European Journal of Marketing, 57(6), 1662–1677. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-08-2020-0636
Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
Sidelkivska, V., & Bilbao-Calabuig, P. (2023). Conceptualizing cognitive and behavioral elements of individual’s creativity and innovation: Systematic literature review. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 38(4), 1697–1724. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2023.2231161
Sireci, S., & Benítez, I. (2023). Evidence for test validation: A guide for practitioners. Psicothema, 35(3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2022.477
Skinner, B. F. (1994). Sobre el conductismo. Planeta-Agostini.
Stanek, K. C., & Ones, D. S. (2018). Taxonomies and compendia of cognitive ability and personality constructs and measures relevant to Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology. In D. Ones, N. Anderson, C. Viswesvaran, & H. Sinangil (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology: Personnel Psychology and Employee Performance (pp. 366–407). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473914940.n14
Tan, H. C., Ho, J. A., Teoh, G. C., & Ng, S. I. (2021). Is social desirability bias important for effective ethics research? A review of literature. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 10(2), 205–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-021-00128-9
Tehseen, S., Ramayah, T., & Sajilan, S. (2017). Testing and controlling for Common Method Variance: A review of available methods. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 146–175. https://doi.org/10.20547/jms.2014.1704202
Tett, R. P., Toich, M. J., & Ozkum, S. B. (2021). Trait Activation Theory: A review of the literature and applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8, 199–233. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-062228
van Bork, R., Rhemtulla, M., & Borsboom, D. (2016). Composites can be causal too. European Journal of Personality, 30(4), 304–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2060
Wali, J. A., Muthuveloo, R., Ping, T. A., & Bataineh, M. (2020). An overview of employees’ dynamic capabilities, job performance with innovative work behavior: A conceptual paper. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 20(A14), 32–38. https://journalofbusiness.org/index.php/GJMBR/article/view/102645
Ward, M. K., & Meade, A. W. (2023). Dealing with careless responding in survey data: prevention, identification, and recommended best practices. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 577–596. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-040422-045007
Wissmann, S. (2021). What comes before innovation kicks in: Contemporary evidence and future directions of innovative work behaviour of individuals — a conceptual literature review. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 12(4), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijimt.2021.12.4.909
Yamao, S. (2024). Social exchange theory. In K. Hutchings, S. Michailova, & A. Wilkinson (Eds.), A guide to key theories for Human Resource Management Research (pp. 274–279). Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035308767.ch35
Yating, L., Anuar Bin Arshad, M., & Mengjiao, Z. (2024). A review of the impact of leadership styles on employee innovation performance. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(1), 3081–3092. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i1/20050
Yesil, S., & Sozbilir, F. (2013). An empirical investigation into the impact of personality on individual innovation behaviour in the workplace. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 81, 540–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.474
Yikilmaz, İ. (2023). The role of inclusive leadership in fostering innovation: A focused review of research literature. Toplum Ekonomi ve Yönetim Dergisi, 4(Özel), 198–219. https://doi.org/10.58702/teyd.1357552
Yu, C., Beckmann, J. F., & Birney, D. P. (2019). Cognitive flexibility as a meta-competency. Estudios de Psicología, 40(3), 563–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.2019.1656463
Zare, M., & Flinchbaugh, C. (2019). Voice, creativity, and big five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Human Performance, 32(1), 30–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2018.1550782
Zastempowski, M. (2025). Personality profiles and innovation success: Insights from micro-entrepreneurial ventures. Central European Management Journal, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1108/CEMJ-12-2024-0386
Zhu, H., Jia, F., Zhang, Y., & Wang, R. (2025). The relationship between the Big Five Personality Model and innovation behavior: A three-level meta-analysis. Behavioral Sciences, 15(9), 1143. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15091143
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Derechos de autor 2026 Tomás Vargas-Halabi (Autor/a)