Marjolein Feys

When the fire dies: Perceived success and support for innovation shape the motivating potential of innovative work behaviour

In recent years, there seems to have grown a perspective in the literature that innovation will have uniformly positive outcomes for individuals and organizations. This is unfortunate as innovative individuals may not always experience the assumed positive motivational consequences of being innovative at work. Our study aims to examine under which conditions engaging in innovative work behaviour (IWB) may not leads to desired motivational outcomes. We conducted a longitudinal field study involving 100 industrial product design and electronic engineering students participating for 7 days in an innovation boot camp. In support of our hypotheses, we found that day-level IWB leads to higher basic need satisfaction at the subsequent day when perceived success and support for innovation were high. However, when these moderators were low, the hypothesized relationship became non-significant. Our study results yield useful suggestions for helping individuals in maintaining optimal motivation throughout innovation processes.

When idols look into the future: fair treatment modulates the affective forecasting error in talent show candidates

Peoples affective forecasts are often inaccurate because they tend to overestimate how they will feel after an event. As life decisions are often based on affective forecasts, it is crucial to find ways to manage forecasting errors. We examined the impact of a fair treatment on forecasting errors in candidates in a Belgian reality TV talent show. We found that perceptions of fair treatment increased the forecasting error for losers (a negative audition decision) but decreased it for winners (a positive audition decision). For winners, this effect was even more pronounced when candidates were highly invested in their self-view as a future pop idol whereas for losers, the effect was more pronounced when importance was low. The results in this study point to a potential paradox between maximizing happiness and decreasing forecasting errors. A fair treatment increased the forecasting error for losers, but actually made them happier.