Table 5 The summary of the organization... | Emerald Publishing

Table 5

The summary of the organization perspective cluster

Macrocluster	Microthemes	Brief description
Organization perspective	Engagement (engagement and study)	This cluster explains the antecedents and outcomes of the concept of engagement: all the papers analyzed rely on one or more of the popular definitions previously introduced as Kahn (1990) or Schaufeli and Bakker (2004). Coming to the concept’s antecedents within the relationship, they range from individual to managerial aspects (Schraub et al., 2014; Jung and Yoon, 2018, Tuzovic et al., 2018),specifically for the latter work climate and job autonomy are encompassed as major variables individuated by authors (Chugthai and Buckely, 2011; Slåtten and Mehmetoglu, 2011; De Spiegelaere et al., 2014; De Spiegelaere et al., 2015; Kumar and Raghavendran, 2015; Orth and Volmer, 2017; Garg and Dhar, 2017; Eldor, 2017; Jung and Yoon, 2018; Pham-Thai et al., 2018; Tuzovic et al., 2018). Finally, the different outcomes of engagement are highlighted: the likely outcomes are employees’ innovative work behaviors along with an enhancement of employees’ performances (Putkonen, 2009; Ayuso et al., 2011; Chugthai and Buckely, 2011; Grissemann et al., 2013; Ehin, 2013; De Spiegelaere et al., 2014; De Spiegelaere et al., 2015; Kumar and Raghavendran, 2015; Roll et al., 2015; Maria Stock et al., 2017; Orth and Volmer, 2017; Eldor, 2017; Garg and Dhar, 2017; Jung and Yoon, 2018; Jena and Memon, 2018).
	Innovation (innovation and service)	This cluster deals with the organizational management of innovation at a deeper level of detail, emphasizing the importance of the employee (Chugthai and Buckely, 2011; Bhatnaghar, 2012; De Spiegelaere et al., 2014, 2015; Gomes et al., 2015; Koch et al., 2015; Roll et al., 2015; Barata, 2016; Maria Stock et al., 2017; Merrilees et al., 2017; Orth and Volmer, 2017; Eldor, 2017; Jung and Yoon, 2018; Jena and Memon, 2018; Pham-Thai et al., 2018). It defines the service industry as the context within which the relationship between engagement and innovation has been studied the most, with the tourism industry the one mostly investigated (Slåtten and Mehmetoglu, 2011; Grissemann et al., 2013; Jung and Yoon, 2018).
	Workforce (insecurity, conflict and model)	It defines how the relationship between engagement and innovation can be influenced also by different negative organizational variables (Putkonen, 2009; De Spiegelaere et al., 2015) such as job insecurity (De Spiegelaere et al., 2014; Roll et al., 2015) or conflict management (Scharub et al., 2014; Jung and Yoon, 2018).

Macrocluster	Microthemes	Brief description
Organization perspective	Engagement (engagement and study)	This cluster explains the antecedents and outcomes of the concept of engagement: all the papers analyzed rely on one or more of the popular definitions previously introduced as Kahn (1990) or Schaufeli and Bakker (2004). Coming to the concept’s antecedents within the relationship, they range from individual to managerial aspects (Schraub et al., 2014; Jung and Yoon, 2018, Tuzovic et al., 2018),specifically for the latter work climate and job autonomy are encompassed as major variables individuated by authors (Chugthai and Buckely, 2011; Slåtten and Mehmetoglu, 2011; De Spiegelaere et al., 2014; De Spiegelaere et al., 2015; Kumar and Raghavendran, 2015; Orth and Volmer, 2017; Garg and Dhar, 2017; Eldor, 2017; Jung and Yoon, 2018; Pham-Thai et al., 2018; Tuzovic et al., 2018). Finally, the different outcomes of engagement are highlighted: the likely outcomes are employees’ innovative work behaviors along with an enhancement of employees’ performances (Putkonen, 2009; Ayuso et al., 2011; Chugthai and Buckely, 2011; Grissemann et al., 2013; Ehin, 2013; De Spiegelaere et al., 2014; De Spiegelaere et al., 2015; Kumar and Raghavendran, 2015; Roll et al., 2015; Maria Stock et al., 2017; Orth and Volmer, 2017; Eldor, 2017; Garg and Dhar, 2017; Jung and Yoon, 2018; Jena and Memon, 2018).
	Innovation (innovation and service)	This cluster deals with the organizational management of innovation at a deeper level of detail, emphasizing the importance of the employee (Chugthai and Buckely, 2011; Bhatnaghar, 2012; De Spiegelaere et al., 2014, 2015; Gomes et al., 2015; Koch et al., 2015; Roll et al., 2015; Barata, 2016; Maria Stock et al., 2017; Merrilees et al., 2017; Orth and Volmer, 2017; Eldor, 2017; Jung and Yoon, 2018; Jena and Memon, 2018; Pham-Thai et al., 2018). It defines the service industry as the context within which the relationship between engagement and innovation has been studied the most, with the tourism industry the one mostly investigated (Slåtten and Mehmetoglu, 2011; Grissemann et al., 2013; Jung and Yoon, 2018).
	Workforce (insecurity, conflict and model)	It defines how the relationship between engagement and innovation can be influenced also by different negative organizational variables (Putkonen, 2009; De Spiegelaere et al., 2015) such as job insecurity (De Spiegelaere et al., 2014; Roll et al., 2015) or conflict management (Scharub et al., 2014; Jung and Yoon, 2018).