Table 4

Structural model results

RelationshipsModel 1Model 2Model 3Model 4f2Support
R2GL = 0.40R2GL = 0.40R2GL = 0.40
R2IB = 0.55R2IB = 0.56R2IB = 0.56R2IB = 0.62
H1: IL → IB(c) 0.74*** (20.36) (0.68; 0.80)(c′) 0.67*** (10.62) (0.67; 0.80)(c′) 0.61*** (7.89) (0.55; 0.77)(c′) 0.70*** (10.91) (0.66; 0.83) Yes
IL → GL = a 0.63*** (14.52) (0.56; 0.70)0.63*** (14.53) (0.56; 0.70)0.63*** (14.61) (0.56; 0.70)  
GL → IB = b1 0.11* (1.87) (0.02; 0.21)0.08 (1.50) (0.01; 0.18)0.09 (1.57) (0.06; 0.19)  
JA → IB = b2  0.11* (1.93) (0.01; 0.21)0.20*** (3.42) (0.11; 0.30)  
H3: IL × JA → IB = b3   0.18*** (4.22) (0.12; 0.26)0.08Yes
Control variables      
Cc0.02 (0.25) (−0.13; 0.16)0.04 (0.57) (−0.08; 0.17)0.01 (0.17) (−0.11; 0.18)0.01 (0.16) (−0.08; 0.13)  

Note(s): GL: Group learning, IL: Individual learning, IB: Innovative behaviour, JA: Job autonomy, Cc: Country-culture. Bootstrapping based on n = 5,000 subsamples. (based on t (4,999), one-tailed test) t (0.05; 4,999) = 1.645; t (0.01, 4,999) = 2.327; t (0.001, 4,999) = 3.092; (based on t (4,999), two-tailed test); t (0.05, 4,999) = 1.960, t (0.01, 4,999) = 2.577; t (0.001, 4,999) = 3.292. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

Source(s): Original table – created by authors of this article from data

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal