Victimizing innovative employees: joint roles of in-role behavior and task interdependence

Purpose: This study aims to examine how an employee’s engagement in innovative behavior (IB) can lead to the experience of aggressive actions from other members of an organization and the joint roles of employee in-role performance and task interdependence in this relationship. Design/methodology/approach: A field study conducted among a diverse sample of employees working in various industries provided converging evidence for the theorized predictions. The sample of 204 full-time employees is included in the analyses. Findings: The results confirmed that innovative employees can be targets of victimization in an organization and employees’ high in-role performance and high task interdependence jointly moderate the negative relationship between innovative performance and victimization. Research limitations/implications: The current study should be evaluated in light of some limitations, such as single-source data and the use of cross-sectional data. Practical implications: It is advised that innovative individuals should accomplish their required duties in highly task-interdependent contexts to avoid harmful responses from peers. Managers should be aware of the potential negative side of IB. The data involving various industries provide evidence for the generalizability of the research findings and conclusions. Originality/value: This paper advances the understanding of the consequences of creative behavior by examining the unexplored aspect that innovative employees can become victims of peer mistreatments. It also expands the understanding of negative outcomes of engaging in creativity by concurrently examining moderating roles of in-role behavior and task interdependence.