Job Autonomy sebagai Moderator pada Pengaruh Job Insecurity terhadap Perilaku Kerja Inovatif


  • Ludi Prasetyo Ardy Airlangga University
  • Fajrianthi Fajrianthi Faculty of Psychology, Airlangga University Jl. Dharmawangsa Dalam Surabaya



Job insecurity, job autonomy, perilaku kerja inovatif, manufaktur


This study aims to examine the role of job insecurity towards innovative work behavior with job autonomy as a moderator. The concept of the three variables were tested using the theoretical concepts of job demand and job control. In the condition of "active job", individuals can produce ideas and innovations in responding to work conditions. Previous studies show that active jobs can be obtained when there is a high interaction between high job demand and job control. Based on these studies it can be assumed that job insecurity (job demand) and job autonomy (job control) will influence innovative work behavior. This study used a quantitative approach by using SEM-PLS to analyze data. A total of 194 participants in a manufacturing industry, primarily from its production units, were involved in this study. The results show that job insecurity has a negative significant effect on innovative work behavior while job autonomy has a positive significant effect on the variable. The moderation test of job autonomy on the effect of job insecurity on innovative work behavior show no significant result. The strict operational standard procedure in the production unit is assumed as one of the factors that makes job autonomy does not play a role in reducing the negative influence of job insecurity on innovative work behavior.

Keywords: Job autonomy, job insecurity, innovative work behavior, manufacturing

Author Biographies

Ludi Prasetyo Ardy, Airlangga University

Please click

Fajrianthi Fajrianthi, Faculty of Psychology, Airlangga University Jl. Dharmawangsa Dalam Surabaya

Lecturer of Organization and Industrial Psychology


Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources model: state of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328. doi: 10.1108/02683940710733115

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Isabel, A. (2007). Burn out and Work engagement: The JD-R Approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 389-411. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235

De Jong, J. & Den Hartogg, D. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management,19, 23-36. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x

De Spieagelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., De Witte, H., Niesen, W. & Van Hootegem, G. (2014). On the relation of job insecurity, job autonomy, innovative work behaviour and the mediating effect of work engagement. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(3), 318-330. Retrieved from

De Spieagelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., De Witte, H., & Van Hootegem, G. (2015). Job design, work engagement and innovative work behavior: A multi-level study on Karaseks learning hypothesis. Management Revue. 26(2), 123-137. Retrieved from

De Spieagelaere, S., Van Gyes, G., & Van Hootegem, G. (2016). Not all autonomy is the same. Different Dimensions of Job Autonomy and Their Relation to Work Engagement & Innovative Work Behavior. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 26(4), 515-527. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20666

De Witte, H. (2005). Job Insecurity: Review of the international literature on definitions, prevalence, antecedents and consequences. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 31(4), 1-6. doi: 10.4102/sajip.v31i4.200

Elst, T.V., Naswall, K., Bernhard, O., De Witte & Sverke, M. (2014). The effect of job insecurity on employee health complaints: A within-person analysis of the explanatory role of threats to the manifest and latent benefits of work. Journal Occuputional Health Psychology, 21(1), 65-76. doi: 10.1037/a0039140.

Ghozali, I. & Latan, H. (2014). Partial Least Squares: Konsep, Teknik dan Aplikasi Menggunakan SmartPLS 3.0, (Edisi 2). Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.

Gyes, G. V., Van Hottegem, G., & De Spiegelaere, S. (2012). Job Design and Innovative Work Behavior, Enabling Innovation Throught Active or Low Strain Jobs. Journal research institute for work society, 24(2), 285-308. Retrieved from

Hellgren, J., Sverke, M. & Isaksson, K. (2010). A Two-dimensional Approach to Job Insecurity: Consequences for Employee Attitudes and Well-being. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 179-195. doi: 10.1080/135943299398311

Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work. Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York: Basic books, inc.

Li, X., & Zheng, Y. (2015). The Influential Factors of Employees Innovative Behavior and the Management Advices. Journal of Service Science and Management, 7(6), 446-450. doi: 10.4236/jssm.2014.76042.

Martín, P., Salanova, M., & Peiro, J. M. (2007). Job demands, job resources and individual innovation at work: Going beyond Karasek s model? Psicothema, 19(4), 621626. doi: 10.1037/a0039140

Morgeson, F. P., Delaney-Klinger, K., & Hemingway, M. A. (2006). The importance of job autonomy, cognitive ability, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 99-406, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.399

Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. New York: Pearson.

Niesen, W., Hootegem, A. V., Elst, T. V., Battistelli, A., & De Witte, H. (2018). Job insecurity and innovative work behavior: A psychological Contract Perspective. Psychologica Belgica, 57(04), 174189. doi: 10.5334/pb.381






Abstract views: 966 , PDF Downloads: 411 , PDF Downloads: 0