Abstract
Orientation: Organisational change is inevitable in the public sector, specifically in developing countries such as Indonesia, which faces demands for accountability and pressure to improve the quality of public services.
Research purpose: This study aims to analyse the influence of authentic leadership and internal locus of control on change readiness and the mediating role of innovative work behaviour among civil servants in Indonesia.
Motivation for the study: This study arose from a gap in the literature, as prior studies have examined authentic leadership and locus of control in isolation and rarely within the Indonesian public-sector context.
Research approach/design and method: This study used a quantitative approach with a cross-sectional survey design. Data were collected via an online questionnaire distributed using purposive sampling, involving 312 civil servants in West Sumatra, Indonesia. Data were analysed using structural equation modelling-partial least squares (SEM-PLS).
Main findings: The study indicates that authentic leadership and an internal locus of control have a positive and significant influence on change readiness. Innovative work behaviour also mediates the relationship between authentic leadership, internal locus of control and change readiness.
Practical/managerial implications: At the managerial level, public-sector organisations need to develop authentic leadership, strengthen internal locus of control through policies and create a work environment that encourages innovation to increase change readiness systematically.
Contribution/value-add: This study simultaneously tests the relationship between authentic leadership, internal locus of control, innovative work behaviour, and change readiness, offering context-specific insights into public-sector change readiness that are absent from the existing literature.
Keywords: readiness for change; authentic leadership; internal locus of control; innovative work behaviour; public sector.
Introduction
Dynamic external changes leave organisations with no choice but to adapt quickly to remain relevant and competitive (Mumtaz et al., 2024; Rafferty & Minbashian, 2019). Despite the necessity of change readiness and the ability to adapt continuously being key prerequisites for organisational sustainability and competitiveness (Talaja et al., 2023), organisations often fall into the comfort-zone trap and fail to implement change effectively (Haffar et al., 2023; Mathur et al., 2023).
The demand for change applies not only to private-sector organisations but also to public-sector organisations. In this context, the government is striving to determine strategic steps to drive change within public-sector organisations (Sawitri & Wahyuni, 2018). The primary goal of these changes is to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of public services. This goal came about because public organisations, including those in Indonesia, are often perceived as large but inefficient, making change a necessity. Public-sector organisations in Indonesia are also known for having bureaucratic, complex structures, with a strong emphasis on rules, procedures, hierarchies and formal, rigid decision-making processes, influenced by political interests (Sawitri & Wahyuni, 2018). This situation is often exacerbated by conflicts of interest that obscure organisational goals, making it difficult for government employees to adapt and understand their role’s contribution to achieving them.
One of the main causes of the failure to implement change in government organisations is resistance from civil servants, who are implementers of change (Abdel-Ghany, 2014; Hameed et al., 2019). Resistance to change is a common phenomenon in public-sector organisations, because civil servants are accustomed to job security and a relatively stable work environment (Setyorini et al., 2025). On the other hand, they have to be ready to adapt to various changes (Gabutti et al., 2023).
Previous research has shown that authentic leadership is significantly correlated with employee commitment to organisational change, suggesting that leaders who demonstrate authenticity can positively influence readiness for change (Alavi & Gill, 2017; Mokhtar et al., 2025). Leadership, particularly authentic leadership, has emerged as a crucial factor in shaping employees’ attitudes and behaviour towards change (Hadi et al., 2026). Authentic leadership is characterised by self-awareness, transparency, balanced and fair processes and an internal moral perspective (Alavi & Gill, 2017). Authentic leadership enhances employee trust, commitment and sense of organisational citizenship (Changar & Sesen, 2025; Qiu et al., 2019; Sepeng et al., 2020).
Leaders who demonstrate authentic behaviour, as evidenced by integrity, transparency and ethical behaviour, can create a positive work environment that supports employee readiness for change (Alavi & Gill, 2017; Lin et al., 2025; Mokhtar et al., 2025). Authentic leadership can increase employee readiness for change by building trust and promoting a culture of innovation.
In addition to authentic leadership, individual differences, such as an internal locus of control, are also linked to employee readiness for change (Mujib & Rosari, 2023). Internal locus of control reflects an individual’s belief that all their actions will affect their work outcomes (Xu et al., 2020). Individuals with a high internal locus of control are more active, innovative and open to change (Syarif et al., 2024).
This study used innovative work behaviour as a mediator. Innovative work behaviour acts as a mediating variable between authentic leadership, internal locus of control and readiness for change. Innovative work behaviour refers to the behaviours employees engage in to foster innovation within their organisations (Kyei-Frimpong et al., 2024). Innovative work behaviour involves the conscious creation, introduction and implementation of new ideas (Sengupta et al., 2023).
Despite growing research on change readiness, a notable gap remains in the literature. Firstly, most prior studies have examined authentic leadership or locus of control in isolation, without testing their joint effects through a unified integrative model. Secondly, research on change readiness in the Indonesian public sector is sparse, despite its distinct bureaucratic culture and structural characteristics. Thirdly, the mediating role of innovative work behaviour in the relationship between leadership, personality and change readiness has not been thoroughly examined in government organisations. This study addresses these gaps by proposing and testing an integrative model within the Indonesian public-sector context.
This study aims to examine the influence of authentic leadership and internal locus of control on readiness for change, with innovative work behaviour as a mediating variable, among civil servants in Indonesia. This study contributes to the literature in three ways: firstly, it extends change readiness research to the Indonesian public-sector context, where bureaucratic rigidity makes change particularly challenging; secondly, it introduces innovative work behaviour as a mediating mechanism linking leadership and personality factors to change readiness and thirdly, it provides an integrative model that combines leadership, individual and behavioural factors, offering practical guidance for human resource (HR) practitioners and public-sector managers seeking to build change-ready organisations.
Literature review
Readiness for change
Readiness for change is a multidimensional concept that reflects the level of readiness, motivation and capacity of an individual or organisation to implement change (Matejun et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2020). It is a critical factor influencing the success of a change initiative, as it determines the initial support and ongoing efforts required for effective implementation. Employee readiness for organisational change can be developed not only in private-sector organisations but also in public-sector organisations. The main purpose of organisational change in the public sector is to develop employees into highly skilled experts with adaptability and innovation (Kumi et al., 2024). Government employees’ readiness for change is influenced by a complex interaction between leadership style, organisational culture, training and development and external pressures (Hameed et al., 2019; Kumi et al., 2024). They are important determinants of employee readiness for change, as they collectively shape the psychological, behavioural and contextual conditions under which employees accept or resist organisational transformation (Hameed et al., 2019). In turn, it can lead to more successful implementation of change initiatives, ultimately benefiting the organisation and the communities it serves.
Authentic leadership
Authentic leadership emphasises the importance of leaders being honest about their values, emotions and beliefs while fostering trust and transparency between leaders and their employees (Kaštelan Mrak & Grudić Kvasić, 2021; Yang, 2024). Authentic leadership is based on four interrelated dimensions (Grobler & Grobler, 2024). Firstly, self-awareness, where leaders have a deep understanding of their strengths, limitations and core values. Secondly, relational transparency, which reflects a leader’s commitment to fostering open dialogue and honest communication with their followers. Thirdly, balanced processing, which refers to a leader’s ability to evaluate information impartially and incorporate diverse perspectives before making decisions. Fourthly, an internalised moral perspective, where leaders’ behaviour is consistently guided by their deeply held ethical beliefs and fundamental principles.
Authentic leadership plays a crucial role in enhancing employee readiness for change by fostering a supportive environment, enhancing psychological resources and encouraging innovative behaviour (Hadi et al., 2026). This leadership style is crucial to the successful implementation of change across various organisational contexts, including public-sector organisations. Authentic leadership also directly influences innovative work behaviour, which is crucial for adapting to change. Employees under authentic leadership are more likely to engage in innovative behaviour (Hadi et al., 2026; Sengupta et al., 2023):
H1: Authentic leadership has a positive and significant influence on employee readiness to change.
H2: Authentic leadership has a positive and significant influence on innovative work behaviour.
Internal locus of control
Internal locus of control is a personality trait that reflects the extent to which individuals believe that their actions determine their outcomes (Gyurák Babeľová et al., 2025; Xu et al., 2020). Employees with a high internal locus of control perceived themselves as active drivers of change, demonstrated greater proactivity and possessed enhanced capacity to navigate workplace challenges effectively (Syarif et al., 2024). An internal locus of control fosters the belief that one’s actions directly influence outcomes, whereas an external locus of control attributes outcomes to luck or external forces (Nießen et al., 2022). It significantly increases readiness for change by fostering personal autonomy, leveraging psychological resources and increasing commitment to change (Mujib & Rosari, 2023; Syarif et al., 2024).
An internal locus of control positively influences innovative work behaviour by promoting psychological empowerment, work engagement and proactive risk taking. Specifically, employees with a strong internal locus of control are more likely to leverage the trust, open communication and ethical foundations established by leaders, thereby enhancing their innovative behaviour (Grošelj et al., 2020; Kafeel et al., 2024):
H3: Internal locus of control has a positive and significant influence on readiness for change.
H4: Internal locus of control has a positive and significant influence on innovative work behaviour.
Innovative work behaviour
Innovative work behaviour is a critical component of organisational success and sustainability, particularly in dynamic, competitive environments (Grošelj et al., 2020). It encompasses the intentional generation, introduction and implementation of novel ideas within a work role, group or organisation, intending to enhance performance and advance innovation (Al Derei & Fam, 2023; Kafeel et al., 2024). Innovative work behaviour is a construct encompassing: (1) Idea generation by generating novel and useful ideas, (2) idea promotion by socialising the idea and building a coalition of supporters, and (3) idea realisation by developing a prototype or innovation model (Sengupta et al., 2023).
Innovative work behaviour plays a crucial role in enhancing readiness for change by fostering adaptability, creativity and openness among employees (Hadi et al., 2026; Kumi et al., 2024). It also mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and readiness for change. Authentic leadership directly influences innovative work behaviour by creating an environment that encourages creativity and innovation (Cougot et al., 2025). Authentic leadership encourages innovative work behaviour, which, in turn, increases employee readiness for change.
Innovative work behaviour also mediates the relationship between internal locus of control and readiness for change. When employees engage in innovative behaviour, they tend to be more adaptable and open to change, thereby increasing their readiness for change (Xu et al., 2020):
H5: Innovative work behaviour has a positive and significant influence on readiness for change.
H6: Innovative work behaviour mediates the influence of authentic leadership on readiness for change.
H7: Innovative work behaviour mediates the influence of internal locus of control on readiness for change.
Research design
Research approach
This study employed a quantitative approach with a survey design because the goal is to examine relationships between variables using statistical procedures (Creswell & Clark, 2018). Cross-sectional data were used to test the hypothesised relationships among these research variables (Cooper & Schindler, 2011). A cross-sectional design was chosen because this study seeks to capture these relationships at a specific point in time, rather than tracking changes over time. This study employed a positivist research paradigm, which emphasises objectivity, empirical observation, quantitative measurement and replicability (Hair et al., 2015). The positivist paradigm is appropriate when conducting confirmatory research that tests pre-specified relationships derived from theory.
Research participants
The population in this study was the civil servants in West Sumatra, Indonesia. The sample consisted of 312 respondents, ensuring the consistency, comparability and statistical power necessary for generalisation and hypothesis testing, in accordance with the principles of quantitative research (Hair et al., 2015). Sampling was conducted using a purposive sampling method, with the following criteria: (1) civil servants, (2) the organisation has experienced changes and (3) a minimum work period of 1 year. Purposive sampling was chosen because this study required participants who could provide meaningful responses to the research constructs, specifically public officials who had experienced organisational change and had at least 1 year of tenure.
Research instrument
Data were collected via a questionnaire distributed by email. The questionnaire used a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The research instrument was adapted from a previously validated research scale. Readiness for change was adapted from a six-item instrument developed by Vakola (2013). Authentic leadership was adapted from a 16-item instrument developed by Qiu et al. (2019). Internal locus of control was adapted from a four-item research instrument developed by Nießen et al. (2022). Innovative work behaviour was measured using a 17-item scale developed by Gkontelos et al. (2022).
Statistical analysis
This study used structural equation modelling with partial least squares for data analysis. Structural equation modelling-partial least squares (SEM-PLS) was chosen as the analytical method because of its suitability for the model complexity and the research objectives of this study. Specifically, it allows for the simultaneous testing of direct and indirect effects within the same framework while addressing four latent constructs with multiple reflective indicators in an integrated analysis (Hair et al., 2019).
Validity
Instrument validity was assessed through convergent and discriminant validity. Convergent validity was evaluated by examining indicator loadings; values above 0.70 were considered acceptable (Hair et al., 2015). Discriminant validity was assessed using the average variance extracted (AVE) criterion, where the square root of each construct’s AVE exceeds its correlation with other constructs. All constructs met this requirement, indicating satisfactory discriminant validity.
The outer loadings for the authentic leadership construct ranged from 0.794 to 0.918, indicating that all indicators for this construct make a strong contribution to it. The internal locus of control construct had outer loading values between 0.789 and 0.934, indicating that all items met convergent validity. The outer loading values for the innovative work behaviour and readiness for change constructs, as seen in Figure 1, were also above 0.7, indicating that all items were worthy of inclusion in further analysis.
Reliability
Construct reliability was assessed using composite reliability, with values above 0.70 indicating acceptable internal consistency (Hair et al., 2015). Table 1 shows that all constructs in the model demonstrated composite reliability values above the recommended threshold, confirming the measurement model’s reliability.
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Universitas Negeri Padang Research Ethics Committee (Ref. No. 732/UN35.7/TU/2026).
Results
The questionnaires were distributed directly by the researcher via email. Overall, 400 questionnaires were distributed, of which 312 were completed, yielding a response rate of 78%. All completed questionnaires were checked and confirmed to be complete, making them ready for processing. Then, it was processed using SEM-PLS to test the hypothesis (H), as seen in Table 2:
H1: The results of data processing indicate that authentic leadership has a positive and significant effect on employee readiness for change. The path coefficient is 0.257 with a t-statistic of 2.523 and a p-value of 0.012 (< 0.05). This result indicates that the higher the employees’ perceived level of authentic leadership, the greater their readiness to face organisational change.
H2: The results of data processing indicate that authentic leadership has a positive and significant effect on innovative work behaviour. The path coefficient is 0.553, the t-statistic is 6.328, and the p-value is 0.000. This finding indicates that authentic leaders can encourage their employees to exhibit innovative work behaviour.
H3: The results of the study indicate that the internal locus of control has a positive and significant effect on readiness for change. The path coefficient is 0.255, with a t-statistic of 3.441 and a p-value of 0.001. This result means that employees who believe they can control their work outcomes are better prepared to face change.
H4: The results of the study indicate that the internal locus of control has a positive and significant effect on innovative work behaviour. The path coefficient is 0.418, the t-statistic is 4.574 and the p-value is 0.000. This finding indicates that employees with a strong internal locus of control are more likely to engage in workplace innovation.
H5: The results of data processing indicate that innovative work behaviour has a positive and significant effect on readiness for change. The path coefficient value is 0.483, with a t-statistic of 3.783 and a p-value of 0.000. This finding indicates that employees accustomed to innovative behaviour are more ready to accept and implement organisational change.
H6: The results of the study indicate that innovative work behaviour mediates the effect of authentic leadership on readiness for change. The indirect coefficient value is 0.267, with a t-statistic of 4.862 and a p-value of 0.000. This finding indicates that authentic leadership can increase employee readiness for change by fostering innovative work behaviour.
H7: The results of the study indicate that innovative work behaviour mediates the effect of internal locus of control on readiness for change. The indirect coefficient value is 0.202, with a t-statistic of 2.278 and a p-value of 0.023 (< 0.05). This finding suggests that employees’ internal beliefs in self-control encourage innovative behaviour, which ultimately increases their readiness for change.
Discussion
Change management is a crucial aspect of organisational planning to guide the transition from the current state to a desired future state (Mlekus et al., 2022; Stouten et al., 2018). Organisational change encompasses a series of systematically designed activities to coordinate various elements of the change process, establish priorities and implementation schedules, allocate responsibilities and determine mechanisms for evaluation and, if necessary, adjustment. For change management to be effective, each change must be carefully planned (Amis & Aïssaoui, 2013; Kirrane et al., 2017). Successful planning ideally begins well before the change is implemented.
The relationship between authentic leadership, innovative work behaviour and readiness for change
Authentic leadership contributes to employee readiness for change (Syarif et al., 2024). Research findings indicate that authentic leadership has a positive and significant effect on change readiness. Authentic leadership, characterised by integrity, transparency, self-awareness and self-confidence, fosters a supportive environment that enhances employees’ psychological resources such as hope, trust, optimism, self-efficacy and resilience. These psychological resources are crucial for developing a positive attitude towards change and enhancing change readiness (Lin et al., 2025). By promoting open communication and building trust, authentic leaders can create an environment where employees feel empowered to embrace change, ultimately leading to more successful organisational transformation. In the context of organisational change, including in public-sector organisations, trust in leaders is a critical factor influencing employees’ readiness to accept, support and engage in the change process. Therefore, the higher the employees’ perception of authentic leadership, the higher their readiness to change.
The results of this study also indicate that authentic leadership has a positive, significant effect on innovative work behaviour. This finding supports the view that authentic leaders can foster creativity and innovation by creating a supportive work climate (Khan et al., 2021). Trust and honesty, characteristics of authentic leadership, encourage employees to reciprocate the leader’s positive treatment through extra-role behaviours, including innovative work. Furthermore, authentic leadership also increases psychological safety, an important prerequisite for employees to venture into new ideas and explore different ways of working. Authentic leadership involves developing employees’ self-awareness and emotional intelligence. Authentic leadership theory offers a promising framework for enhancing leadership effectiveness by promoting transparency, ethical behaviour and trust (Lux & Lowe, 2024).
Authentic leadership directly influences innovative work behaviour (Syarif et al., 2024), which in turn impacts readiness for change (Hadi et al., 2026). Authentic leadership fosters an environment conducive to innovation, which in turn prepares employees to accept and implement change effectively. Authentic leadership plays a crucial role in fostering innovation and adaptability within organisations. Innovative work behaviour, defined as the creation, promotion and implementation of new ideas, can serve as a mediating variable (Lin et al., 2025). When leaders exhibit authentic behaviour, employees are more likely to engage in innovative work, which prepares them to accept and implement change effectively.
The relationship between internal locus of control, innovative work behaviour and readiness for change
An internal locus of control influences employee readiness to face change (Syarif et al., 2024). Empirical findings indicate that an internal locus of control has a positive and significant effect on readiness to change. Individuals with an internal locus of control believe that success and failure are influenced by their own efforts and abilities (Gyurák Babeľová et al., 2025). In situations of conscious organisational change, employees with an internal locus of control tend to view change as a manageable challenge, rather than a threat. This increases their cognitive and emotional readiness to engage in organisational change actively (Syarif et al., 2024).
The results of the study also indicate that an internal locus of control has a positive, significant effect on innovative work behaviour. This finding suggests that employees with strong self-efficacy are more proactive in seeking solutions, trying new approaches and developing innovative ideas (Xu et al., 2020). Internal locus of control strengthens psychological empowerment, engagement, and social competence, especially in a supportive climate. Psychological safety and trust are important mediators, enabling employee risk taking and voice. The interaction between authentic leadership, internal locus of control and innovative work behaviour is strongly supported by empirical evidence (Syarif et al., 2024). An internal locus of control enables employees to leverage the company’s conditions for innovation fully. Internal locus of control significantly influences innovative work behaviour (Xu et al., 2020). For organisations seeking to foster innovation, a dual focus on authentic leadership and developing an internal locus of control among employees is theoretically sound and practically effective (Khan et al., 2021).
The results also show that innovative work behaviour mediates the influence of internal locus of control on change readiness. The mediating role of innovative work behaviour in the relationship between internal locus of control and change readiness is supported by evidence that internal locus of control positively influences innovative work behaviour (Xu et al., 2020), which, in turn, increases change readiness (Hadi et al., 2026). Therefore, innovative work behaviour acts as a link, increasing the trust and control associated with an internal locus of control and leading to a greater willingness to accept organisational change.
Practical implications
Essentially, managing organisational change involves managing the human aspect (Matejun et al., 2024; Zainab et al., 2022). Employees are the primary element that shapes the organisation and the primary drivers of the change process. Employees are the ones who will accept or reject change. Therefore, the successful implementation of organisational change depends heavily on employee readiness and willingness to change (Waisy & Wei, 2020). Thus, the level of employee collaboration with change initiatives will determine whether the change succeeds or fails. This study has significant practical implications for organisational leaders, HR practitioners and organisational policymakers. Firstly, the research findings emphasise the importance of developing authentic leadership within organisations. Organisations are advised to develop programme development policies that emphasise self-awareness, integrity and transparency in decision-making. Secondly, the research results indicate that innovative work behaviour is a strategic lever in increasing readiness for change. Therefore, organisations need to create work systems that encourage innovation, such as providing space for experimentation, tolerance for controlled failure and mechanisms for new ideas. Thirdly, the findings regarding internal locus of control have important implications for HR management practices, particularly in the recruitment, selection and development of employees. Public-sector organisations can consider locus of control as a psychological criterion and design training to increase employees’ sense of responsibility and self-control in facing work challenges and organisational change. Fourthly, from a managerial perspective, this study shows that readiness for change in public-sector organisations cannot be built instantly through structural policies alone. Thus, organisations can build a work culture that is adaptive, resilient and oriented towards sustainable organisational change.
Limitations and recommendations
This research also has a few limitations. Firstly, the research design used a cross-sectional approach, meaning it cannot fully explain the causal relationships between variables or the dynamics of change readiness over time. For example, readiness for change itself may encourage innovative work behaviour, rather than the reverse. This alternative directionality cannot be ruled out from the current data. Secondly, reliance on self-reported questionnaire data may inflate observed relationships because of common method bias, so the reported effect sizes should be interpreted with caution. Thirdly, the sample was drawn exclusively from civil servants in West Sumatra, which may limit transferability to other regional, cultural or organisational contexts within Indonesia or beyond. Readers should therefore be cautious about applying these findings to public-sector organisations with different bureaucratic structures or cultural norms. Given these limitations, the researchers recommend several alternatives for future research. Firstly, a longitudinal study to examine the dynamic changes in employee readiness during the organisational transformation process. Secondly, future research could use a multi-source data approach to minimise perceptual bias. Thirdly, a comparative study across regions or sectors (public and private) could provide a broader understanding of differences in the determinants of change readiness.
Conclusion
The results of this study support an integrative model that combines leadership factors (authentic leadership), personality factors (internal locus of control) and behavioural factors (innovative work behaviour) to explain readiness for change. These findings reinforce the view that readiness for change is a multidimensional construct shaped by the interaction between organisational context and individual characteristics. The relationships among authentic leadership, internal locus of control and readiness for change are strongly influenced by innovative work behaviour. By fostering authentic leadership and an internal locus of control, and encouraging innovative behaviour, government organisations can enhance their employees’ readiness for change, ultimately leading to more effective change management strategies. This understanding is crucial for leaders navigating the complexities of organisational change in the public sector.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Universitas Negeri Padang and the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM).
Competing interests
The authors, Mega A. Zona; Rini Sarianti; Chichi Andriani; Nia A. Erlin; Ilham Thaib and Anggia Paramitha, declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
CRediT authorship contribution
Mega A. Zona: Conceptualisation, Resources, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Rini Sarianti: Methodology, Writing – original draft. Chichi Andriani: Funding acquisition, Supervision, Visualisation, Writing – review & editing. Nia A. Erlin: Data curation, Formal analysis, Project administration. Ilham Thaib: Supervision, Visualisation. Anggia Paramitha: Validation, Writing – review & editing. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.
Funding information
This work was supported by Universitas Negeri Padang through the Institute for Research and Community Service with grant contract number 1779/UN35.15/LT/2026.
Data availability
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Mega A. Zona, upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings, and content.
References
Abdel-Ghany, M.M.M. (2014). Readiness for change, change beliefs and resistance to change of extension personnel in the New Valley Governorate about mobile extension. Annals of Agricultural Sciences, 59(2), 297–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aoas.2014.11.019
Al Derei, S.K., & Fam, S.F. (2023). The impact of business intelligence, knowledge sharing and SMEs innovation on innovative work behavior: A proposed framework for SMEs. Quality – Access to Success, 24(195), 98–105. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/24.195.12
Alavi, S.B., & Gill, C. (2017). Leading change authentically: How authentic leaders influence follower responses to complex change. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 24(2), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816664681
Amis, J.M., & Aïssaoui, R. (2013). Readiness for change: An institutional perspective. Journal of Change Management, 13(1), 69–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2013.768435
Changar, M., & Sesen, H. (2025). Relationship between authentic leadership, service quality, organizational commitment and work engagement: Testing a moderated mediation model. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 46(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-12-2023-0683
Cooper, D.R., & Schindler, P.S. (2011). Business research methods (11th ed.). McGraw Hill.
Cougot, B., Gillet, N., Gauvin, J., Ollierou, F., Le Saout, A., Moret, L., & Tripodi, D. (2025). Nature and outcomes of longitudinal authentic leadership profiles. Journal of Healthcare Leadership, 17, 189–209. https://doi.org/10.2147/JHL.S486730
Creswell, J.W., & Clark, V.L.P. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Gabutti, I., Colizzi, C., & Sanna, T. (2023). Assessing organizational readiness to change through a framework applied to hospitals. Public Organization Review, 23(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-022-00628-7
Gkontelos, A., Vaiopoulou, J., & Stamovlasis, D. (2022). Teachers’ innovative work behavior scale: Psychometric properties of the Greek version and measurement invariance across genders. Social Sciences, 11(7), 306. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11070306
Grobler, A., & Grobler, S. (2024). Dimensionality of an adapted authentic leadership questionnaire: Three independent South African studies. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 50, a2216. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v50i0.2216
Grošelj, M., Černe, M., Penger, S., & Grah, B. (2020). Authentic and transformational leadership and innovative work behaviour: The moderating role of psychological empowerment. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(3), 677–706. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-10-2019-0294
Gyurák Babeľová, Z., Stareček, A., & Vraňaková, N. (2025). Selected attributes of human resources diversity predicting locus of control from a management perspective. Administrative Sciences, 15(9), 333. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15090333
Hadi, H.K., Arifah, I.D.C., Safitri, A., & Rahman, M.F.W. (2026). Authentic leadership and readiness for change: Innovative work behavior in East Java startup context. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 8(3), 2026163. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2026163
Haffar, M., Al-Karaghouli, W., Djebarni, R., Al-Hyari, K., Gbadamosi, G., Oster, F., Alaya, A., & Ahmed, A. (2023). Organizational culture and affective commitment to e-learning’ changes during COVID-19 pandemic: The underlying effects of readiness for change. Journal of Business Research, 155, 113396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113396
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C.M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Hair, J.F., Wolfinbarger, M., Money, A.H., Samouel, P., & Page, M.J. (2015). Essentials of business research methods. Routledge.
Hameed, I., Khan, A.K., Sabharwal, M., Arain, G.A., & Hameed, I. (2019). Managing successful change efforts in the public sector: An employee’s readiness for change perspective. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(3), 398–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17729869
Kafeel, L., Khan, M.M., & Ahmed, S.S. (2024). Authentically flown to innovation: Authentically triggered innovative work behavior through flow at work with moderating role of creative self-efficacy. International Journal of Innovation Science, 16(3), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-05-2022-0099
Kaštelan Mrak, M., & Grudić Kvasić, S. (2021). The mediating role of hotel employees’ job satisfaction and performance in the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational performance. Management, 26(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.30924/mjcmi.26.1.6
Khan, M.M., Ahmed, S.S., & Khan, E. (2021). The emerging paradigm of leadership for future: The use of authentic leadership to lead innovation in VUCA environment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 759241. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.759241
Kirrane, M., Lennon, M., O’Connor, C., & Fu, N. (2017). Linking perceived management support with employees’ readiness for change: The mediating role of psychological capital. Journal of Change Management, 17(1), 47–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2016.1214615
Kumi, E., Osei, H.V., Korantwi-Barimah, J.S., & Kumi-Richardson, E.A. (2024). Innovative work behavior in response to technology readiness: The role of career adaptability in the Ghanaian public sector. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 21(7), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877024500524
Kyei-Frimpong, M., Berko Obeng Damoah, O., & Osafroadu Amankwah, M. (2024). Modeling innovative work behavior through leadership behaviors in the hospitality industry; the role of work–family enrichment. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 7(2), 1010–1030. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-11-2023-0815
Lin, M.-L., Huynh, L.-L., & Yu, T.-K. (2025). Cultivating authentic leadership and its impact on employees’ psychological ownership and readiness for change relationship in family SMEs. Human Systems Management, 44(6), 966–977. https://doi.org/10.1177/01672533251331493
Lux, A.A., & Lowe, K.B. (2024). Authentic leadership: 20-year review editorial. Journal of Management and Organization, 30(6), 1634–1641. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2024.59
Matejun, M., Matusiak, B.E., & Różańska-Bińczyk, I. (2024). Employee readiness for GHRM and its individual antecedents: Instrumental and change-based approach. Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(11), 4776. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114776
Mathur, M., Kapoor, T., & Swami, S. (2023). Readiness for organizational change: The effects of individual and organizational factors. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 20(4), 730–757. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-02-2023-0032
Mlekus, L., Kato-Beiderwieden, A.L., Schlicher, K.D., & Maier, G.W. (2022). With a little help from change management: Effects of a short-term change intervention on employee attitudes and behavior. Zeitschrift Fur Arbeits- Und Organisationspsychologie, 66(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000372
Mokhtar, M.Y.O., Nasir, N.S.M., Ya’Cob, Z., Zakaria, U.A.U.M., & Khalifa, G.S.A. (2025). Authentic leadership as Amanah: Enhancing employee commitment to change in higher education institutions. Global Journal Al-Thaqafah, October Special Issue, 277–295. https://doi.org/10.7187/GJATSI102025-17
Mujib, M., & Rosari, R. (2023). The relationship between transformational leadership, locus of control and employees’ readiness to change: The mediating role of psycap. International Journal of Business and Society, 24(1), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.33736/ijbs.5618.2023
Mumtaz, S., Selvarajah, C., & Meyer, D. (2024). How does human relations climate and organizational support affect readiness to change? The mediating role of employee participation and leadership excellence. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 43(2), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.22223
Nießen, D., Schmidt, I., Groskurth, K., Rammstedt, B., & Lechner, C.M. (2022). The Internal–External Locus of Control Short Scale–4 (IE-4): A comprehensive validation of the English-language adaptation. PLoS One, 17(7), e0271289. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0271289
Qiu, S., Alizadeh, A., Dooley, L.M., & Zhang, R. (2019). The effects of authentic leadership on trust in leaders, organizational citizenship behavior, and service quality in the Chinese hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 40, 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.06.004
Rafferty, A.E., & Minbashian, A. (2019). Cognitive beliefs and positive emotions about change: Relationships with employee change readiness and change-supportive behaviors. Human Relations, 72(10), 1623–1650. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718809154
Sawitri, H.S.R., & Wahyuni, S. (2018). Readiness to change in the public sector. International Journal of Business and Society, 19(1), 259–267.
Sengupta, S., Bajaj, B., Singh, A., Sharma, S., Patel, P., & Prikshat, V. (2023). Innovative work behavior driving Indian startups go global – The role of authentic leadership and readiness for change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 36(1), 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-05-2022-0156
Sepeng, W., Stander, M.W., Van der Vaart, L., & Coxen, L. (2020). Authentic leadership, organisational citizenship behaviour and intention to leave: The role of psychological capital. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 46, a1802. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v46i0.1802
Setyorini, T.D., Sulastiana, M., Abidin, Z., & Agustiani, H. (2025). Change readiness in Central Java Government: Effect of leadership, political skill and learning culture. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 23, a2981. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v23i0.2981
Stouten, J., Rousseau, D.M., & De Cremer, D. (2018). Successful organizational change: Integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 752–788. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0095
Syarif, B.S., Raharjo, K., Ruhana, I., & Nurtjahjono, G.E. (2024). Navigating readiness for change: Exploring the influence of authentic leadership, culture, learning and internal locus of control. Cogent Business and Management, 11(1), 2433170. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2433170
Talaja, A., Škokić, V., & Mise, N. (2023). Organizational change capability and ambidexterity: The mediating role of innovativeness and responsiveness. Cogent Business and Management, 10(3), 2279380. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2279380
Vakola, M. (2013). Multilevel readiness to organizational change: A conceptual approach. Journal of Change Management, 13(1), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2013.768436
Waisy, O.H., & Wei, C.C. (2020). Transformational leadership and affective commitment to change: The roles of readiness for change and type of university. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 10(10), 459–482.
Wang, T., Olivier, D.F., & Chen, P. (2020). Creating individual and organizational readiness for change: Conceptualization of system readiness for change in school education. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 26(6), 1037–1061. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1818131
Xu, L., Du, J., Lei, X., & Hipel, K.W. (2020). Effect of locus of control on innovative behavior among new generation employees: A moderated mediation model. Social Behavior and Personality, 48(10), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2224/SBP.9379
Yang, Y.K. (2024). A conceptual model of authentic leadership in cross-cultural context. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 24(3), 609–629. https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958241286690
Zainab, B., Akbar, W., & Siddiqui, F. (2022). Impact of transformational leadership and transparent communication on employee openness to change: Mediating role of employee organization trust and moderated role of change-related self-efficacy. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 43(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-08-2020-0355
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
