Impacts of work environment and family-work resource spillover on employees’ creativity at work place in the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the Study Adapted from Amabile and Pratt (2016).

Table 1. Measurement model.

Construct	Item code	Loading	Outer weights	CA	CR	AVE
Challenging work				0.881	0.945	0.725
	ChallW1	0.807	0.139
	ChallW2	0.885	0.319
	ChallW3	0.884	0.423
	ChallW4	0.825	0.277
Creativity				0.894	0.904	0.656
	Creativity1	0.706	0.166
	Creativity2	0.876	0.225
	Creativity3	0.836	0.22
	Creativity4	0.885	0.228
	Creativity5	0.812	0.209
	Creativity6	0.725	0.178
Family-work resource spillover				0.751	0.76	0.669
	FaWoSpi1	0.851	0.423
	FaWoSpi2	0.851	0.433
	FaWoSpi3	0.747	0.363
Freedom				0.817	0.868	0.643
	Freedom1	0.788	0.298
	Freedom2	0.854	0.434
	Freedom3	0.778	0.267
	Freedom4	0.784	0.238
Lacks of organizational impediments				0.88	0.896	0.624
	LacOrgIm1	0.83	0.207
	LacOrgIm10	0.742	0.294
	LacOrgIm4	0.727	0.16
	LacOrgIm6	0.794	0.199
	LacOrgIm7	0.802	0.201
	LacOrgIm9	0.838	0.208
Managerial encouragement				0.941	0.949	0.739
	ManagEnc1	0.882	0.181
	ManagEnc2	0.905	0.161
	ManagEnc4	0.738	0.138
	ManagEnc6	0.87	0.196
	ManagEnc7	0.854	0.129
	ManagEnc8	0.917	0.179
	ManagEnc9	0.84	0.176
Organizational encouragement				0.927	0.929	0.604
	OrgEnc1	0.726	0.145
	OrgEnc10	0.825	0.143
	OrgEnc11	0.81	0.128
	OrgEnc2	0.763	0.121
	OrgEnc3	0.785	0.116
	OrgEnc4	0.73	0.149
	OrgEnc5	0.81	0.131
	OrgEnc6	0.829	0.129
	OrgEnc8	0.745	0.115
	OrgEnc9	0.742	0.11
Realistic work load pressure				0.872	0.943	0.711
	RealWLP1	0.859	0.417
	RealWLP2	0.934	0.343
	RealWLP3	0.847	0.26
	RealWLP4	0.718	0.141
Sufficient resources				0.901	0.956	0.654
	SuffiR1	0.767	0.108
	SuffiR2	0.842	0.308
	SuffiR3	0.822	0.192
	SuffiR4	0.755	0.125
	SuffiR5	0.857	0.301
	SuffiR6	0.804	0.182
Work group supports				0.884	0.888	0.684
	WorkGSu1	0.827	0.229
	WorkGSu2	0.828	0.267
	WorkGSu4	0.812	0.213
	WorkGSu5	0.865	0.255
	WorkGSu6	0.8	0.244

Table 2. Discriminant validity (Fornell-Larcker criterion).

	ChallW	Creativity	FaWoSpi	Freedom	LacOrgIm	ManagEnc	OrgEnc	RealWLP	SuffiR	WorkGSu
ChallW	0.852
Creativity	0.117	0.81
FaWoSpi	0.125	0.74	0.818
Freedom	0.193	0.09	0.027	0.802
LacOrgIm	0.144	0.702	0.75	0.161	0.79
ManagEnc	0.172	0.345	0.363	0.115	0.252	0.86
OrgEnc	0.172	0.834	0.64	0.142	0.668	0.277	0.877
RealWLP	0.276	0.137	0.128	0.163	0.116	0.162	0.141	0.843
SuffiR	−0.031	0.157	0.11	0.091	0.059	0.025	0.16	0.208	0.809
WorkGSu	0.182	0.685	0.785	0.086	0.575	0.457	0.591	0.136	0.082	0.827

Table 3. Collinearity statistics (Outer VIF values).

	VIF		VIF		VIF		VIF
ChallW1	3.72			OrgEnc11	3.305	SuffiR1	3.088
ChallW2	2.597	LacOrgIm1	2.535	OrgEnc1	1.837	SuffiR2	2.591
ChallW3	2.314	LacOrgIm10	1.48	OrgEnc10	4.14	SuffiR3	3.511
ChallW4	3.869	LacOrgIm4	1.818	OrgEnc2	2.668	SuffiR4	2.934
Creativity1	1.646	LacOrgIm6	2.017	OrgEnc3	5.401	SuffiR5	3.162
Creativity2	4.011	LacOrgIm7	2.115	OrgEnc4	2.973	SuffiR6	3.639
Creativity3	2.585	LacOrgIm9	2.496	OrgEnc5	2.899	WorkGSu1	2.255
Creativity4	4.117	ManagEnc1	3.483	OrgEnc6	3.922	WorkGSu2	2.18
Creativity5	2.278	ManagEnc2	7.775	OrgEnc8	4.056	WorkGSu4	2.136
Creativity6	1.836	ManagEnc4	2.109	OrgEnc9	3.306	WorkGSu5	2.532
FaWoSpi1	1.698	ManagEnc6	3.289	RealWLP1	1.964	WorkGSu6	1.95
FaWoSpi2	1.68	ManagEnc7	5.408	RealWLP2	4.235
FaWoSpi3	1.334	ManagEnc8	5.078	RealWLP3	2.692
Freedom1	4.891	ManagEnc9	2.684	RealWLP4	2.012
Freedom2	3.383
Freedom3	4.852
Freedom4	3.199

Table 4. Collinearity statistics (inner VIF values).

	Creativity
ChallW	1.16
Creativity
FaWoSpi	4.219
Freedom	1.123
LacOrgIm	2.808
ManagEnc	1.297
OrgEnc	2.12
RealWLP	1.168
SuffiR	1.097
WorkGSu	3.019

Table 5. R-square and model fit.

Construct	R^2	R^2 Adjusted	Q² predict	SRMR
Creativity	0.783	0.777	0.452	0.069

Note: Standardized root mean square residual (SRMR); determination of coefficient (R2); cross-validiated redundancy (Q2).

Figure 2. PLS-SEM showing relationships in variables (Ringle et al., 2022).

Table 6. Hypothesis constructs (Path coefficients, Mean, STDEV, T values, p values).

Effects	Relationships	Beta	STDEV	t-Vales	P Values	Decision	Beta
H1d	ChallW -> Creativity	−0.046	−0.044	0.029	1.596	0.111	H1d; not supported
H2	FaWoSpi -> Creativity	0.171	0.174	0.072	2.382	0.017	H2; supported
H1c	Freedom -> Creativity	−0.025	−0.017	0.027	0.93	0.353	H1c; not supported
H1h	LacOrgIm -> Creativity	0.117	0.114	0.049	2.393	0.017	H1h; supported
H1f	ManagEnc-> Creativity	0.042	0.043	0.033	2.156	0.032	H1f; supported
H1g	OrgEnc -> Creativity	0.556	0.556	0.039	14.391	0	H1g; supported
H1b	RealWLP -> Creativity	0.008	0.008	0.027	0.297	0.767	H1b; not supported
H1a	SuffiR -> Creativity	0.029	0.032	0.027	1.071	0.284	H1a; not supported
H1e	WorkGSu -> Creativity	0.143	0.143	0.059	2.417	0.016	H1e; supported

Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2022). SmartPLS4. SmartPLS GmbH.

 Google Scholar

Availability of data and materials

Datasets for this study are available, and the same can be obtained from the corresponding author on reasonable request. This study was conducted in the context of Ethiopia; the data were collected from researchers working in the Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR).