# Introduction owadays, the importance of employee innovative work behaviour for desired organizational outcomes and wellbeing is widely accepted (Yuan & Woodman, 2010). Employee's capacity for creativity and innovativeness as expressed within the organization is vital and imperative for the wellbeing and functionality of both private (de Jong & den Hartog, 2010) as well as the public sector (Bartos, 2003;Breul & Kamensky, 2008;Walker & Damanpour, 2008). The growing interest in employee innovative work behaviour stems primarily from the need to remain competitive and as such can be considered as having both strategic as well as functional implications for the organization. In general, employee innovative work behaviour studies have dealt with the expressions of creativity and innovativeness by the employees or workers within the framework of the organization (King & Anderson, 2002). This includes conditions concerned with determining several practices, mechanisms and factors stimulating or inhibiting the expressions of creativity, originality, uniqueness and exceptionality. Employee innovative work behaviour (IWB), which is described as the development, adoption and implementation of new ideas by the employees for products, technologies and work methods by employees (Yuan & Woodman, 2010) is often argued to be an important asset for firms pursuing innovativeness and as a determinant for success in dynamic environments (Kanter, 1983). The imperatives of employee innovative work behaviour are premised on the fact that the origin as well as the consumption of innovation lies with individuals, causing individuals' actions to be of crucial importance for the continuous improvement of business processes and products (Janssen, 2000). This assumption is generally drawn not only in the academic literature on innovativeness, but is also found in the domains of total quality management (Mc Louglin & Harris, 1997) and corporate entrepreneurship (Sharma & Chrisman, 1999) Several factors have been studied as stimulators or barriers towards employee innovative work behaviour including organization culture and climate (Scott & Bruce, 1994), the interaction between subordinates and supervisors (Janssen & Van Yperen, 2004), job characteristics (Oldham & Cummings, 1996), social group context (Munton & West, 1995), as well as individual differences and intermediate psychological processes that explain how different individual and contextual antecedents affect innovative behaviour (Yuan & Woodman, 2010). Examples of such psychological processes are an individual's intrinsic interest in his or her task (Amabile, 1996;Woodman et al., 1993) and expected payoffs (Far and Ford, 1990). Several issues, or barriers, contribute to the fact that within the public sector, the success and effectiveness of initiatives meant to foster employee N These studies have led to the development and assessment of several conceptual models meant to predict relationships between such factors and employee innovative behaviour (Farr & Ford, 1990;Yuan & Woodman, 2010). Scholars studying the process of employee innovative work behaviour within the public sector noted that innovative work behaviour is likely to be restrained by more barriers and to a larger extend in the public sector than in the private sector (Rainey & Bozeman, 2001;Rainey, 2009). innovative behaviour can be inhibited. One of those barriers is the fact that in general, public firms lack competitive pressures vis-à-vis private firms ( Verhoest et al., 2007), taking away an important trigger towards managers and policy-makers to stimulate the innovativeness of, and IWB within, their firm. This is as employee's perceptions about top management may subsequently become realigned with the motivation to express dissatisfactory attitudes based on their distrust of the organization (Agnieszka & Dariusz, 2016;Braun et al., 2013). According to Joe (2014), employees' perception of top management as trustworthy is vital for facilitating the development and diffusion of innovative ideas within the workforce. Pay, Balaji and Kok (2015) postulate that a major factor that also influences employees' willingness to share their innovative ideas is their trustworthiness perception of their leaders and of the organization itself. In this case, the diffusion of innovative ideas may very well depend on top managements' ability, benevolence and integrity to engage in interpersonal relationships that can help to engender employee innovative work behaviour (Rebecca & David, 2015). In this vein, the success and substantiality of employee innovative work behavioru are often built on trustworthiness perceptions that then determine the emergence or continuity of trust relationships, and invariable expressions of innovation. Trustworthiness is an important factor that facilitates an employee's decision-making process to become vulnerable to organisational top management leaders (Vathsala & Ruvini, 2012). It further promotes employee's commitment and engagement towards employee innovative initiatives (Jan & Hazel, 2013). According to Upasna (2014), it is thus, important for top management and employees to develop, and maintain a strong trust relationship in order to sustain positive organisational impact on employee innovative work behaviour. As such this paper discussed the role of organizational trustworthiness in stimulating employee innovative work behaviour. # II. # Literature Review a) Theoretical Foundation (Leader-Member Exchange) The leader-member exchange theory is adopted as the theoretical framework in this study. The theory describes the relationship between leaders and their subordinates in a manner that identifies the imperatives of recognition, support and empowerment in the development of trust-based relationships (Hodson, 2004). The leader-member exchange theory is a form of the social exchange theory which advances the need for stronger levels of cooperation and collaboration between leaders and their subordinates (Hardin, 2002). This paper therefore adopts the leader-exchange theory as a foundation in describing the features of leadership and the manner of its relationship with subordinates that drive improved work behaviour and employee outcomes such as innovative work behaviour. # b) The Concept of Trust Trust is a trans-disciplinary construct that has been used in psychology, sociology, economics, political science, and marketing to study different types of relationships (Ben-Rechav, 2000; Mayer, James & Schoorman, 1995). In marketing, it has been an important component in a significant research stream focusing on employer-employee and organizationcustomer relationships (Ganesan & Hess, 1997) as well as in services area where a customer does not have an opportunity to evaluate the service prior to its use (Dovaliene, Gadeikiene & Piligrimiene, 2007). There is no agreed-upon definition of trust in the literature. There are probably as many definitions as there are authors on the subject. A quick review of the literature found over ten definitions of trust (Wang and Huff, 2007). In spite of this diversity, however, a common thread cuts across all definitions. Trust refers to a mutual confidence that no party to an exchange will exploit another's vulnerabilities (Sabel, 1993;Huff, 2005). As such, it alleviates the uncertainty inherent in an exchange relationship. At its core, trust reflects reliability and confidence in the exchange party to fulfil its obligation in a way that leads to positive outcomes. In the services sector, the intangibility and high risk involved in service transactions means that the concept of trust is even more crucial in developing and maintaining business relationships. Trust is a multidimensional phenomenon. In a study of the relationship between the organization and its employees, Heffernan et al. (2008) identified three dimensions of trust: credibility, integrity and benevolence. They found a positive and significant relationship between the dimensions of trust, relationship manager's level of trust, emotional intelligence and organizational financial performance. In a study of partnering, Wong, Cheung and Ho (2005) identified four underlying factors in successful partnering between developers and consultant groups: performance, permeability, system-based trust and relational bonding. Dovalien?, Gadeikien? and Piligrimien? (2007) analysed the role of trust as an antecedent of long-term customer relationship. They conducted an empirical study on odontology services to identify the determinants of customers' trust and the relationship between the various determinants and the overall level of trust. They found that trust plays a key role in determining the behavioural intentions of customers to pursue a long-term relationship (intentions to visit the same deontologist again and intentions to recommend) with the service provider. In subsequent # Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XX Issue III Version I Year 2020 ( ) analysis they found strong correlations between trust and satisfaction, outcome quality and customization. A strong positive correlation was also found between trust and its determinants and behavioural intentions. Finally, a multiple linear regression was carried out to determine the presence of linear relationship between trust and its determinants. Here, only satisfaction emerged as a significant variable in explaining the variance in trust whereas the quality dimensions and communications were not significant. Ndubisi and Wah (2005) conducted an empirical study to examine the relationship between perceived quality of bank-customer relationship and customer satisfaction in the Malaysian banking industry. The key underpinnings of the relationship identified in this study were trust, commitment, competence, communication and conflict handling. # c) The Concept of Organizational Trustworthiness While trust is an attribute of the relationship between exchange partners, trustworthiness is an attribute of the individuals involved in the exchange. An exchange partner is trustworthy if he or she does not exploit the vulnerabilities of the other exchange partner (Barney & Hansen 1994;Huff 2005). The way the construct of trustworthiness has been conceptualized in the literature is not very clear cut. Much of the literature on trust hardly mentions trustworthiness, even though implicitly much of it is primarily about trustworthiness, not about trust (Hardin 2002). Where the construct has been explicitly conceptualized, its conceptualization has primarily revolved around perceived qualities or attributes of an exchange partner that leads the partner to act in the interest of the other partner (Mayer et al. 1995;Hodson, 2004). As such, trustworthiness is belief-based and accumulates over time as a result of repeated experiences (Buttner & Goritz, 2008;Caldwell & Clapham, 2003;Caldwell & Jeffries, 2001). Given the subjective nature of trustworthiness it is not surprising to note that two individuals may have very different views about who they can trust. Lee and Turban (2001) identified integrity, competency, ability and benevolence as the underlying dimensions of organizational trustworthiness. These dimensions were later confirmed by Chong et al. (2003) in a study of e-commerce organizations. In a study by Caldwell and Clapham (2003) ability and skills, competencies and expertise emerged as the key elements of organizational trustworthiness. Similarly, Bews and Rossouw (2002) found openness, integrity, benevolence, and competency as the dimensions of organizational trustworthiness in insurance service provider. Mayer et al. (1995) espoused that organizational trustworthiness, moderated by the employee's propensity to trust relates a willingness to trust. However, when trust is established, the organization and the employee are bound by a system of shared values (Lipponen, Bardi, & Haapamaki, 2008) to initiate the risk of achieving a desired outcome (Ann-Marie et al., 2015). These shared values are thus integrated values expressed through the interpersonal trust relationship that exists and are reflected in defined organisational cultures (Cameron, 2008;Carlos & Maria, 2014). Thus, organizational trustworthiness is that vital part of organisational members' lives which influences the relationship between the organisational culture and employee sense of trust (Colquitt & Rodell, 2011;Rawlins, 2008;Shalley & Gilson, 2004). # d) Employee Innovative Work Behaviour Innovation theory states that innovativeness is broader than only creativity and also includes the implementation of ideas (King & Anderson, 2002). Thus, innovative work behaviour (IWB) does not only include idea generation, but also behaviours needed to implement ideas and achieve improvements that will enhance personal and/or business performance. Following Farr and Ford (1990) we define innovative work behaviour as an individual's behaviour that aims to achieve the initiation and intentional introduction (within a work role, group or organization) of new and useful ideas, processes, products or procedures. The measure of IWB developed here thus captures both the initiation and implementation of creative ideas. The construct of IWB is closely related to employee creativity. Creativity is defined as the production of new and useful ideas concerning products, services, processes and procedures (Oldham & Cummings, 1996). However, some differences between the constructs exist (West & Farr, 1990;Scott & Bruce, 1994). Unlike creativity IWB is explicitly intended to provide some kind of benefit. It has a clearer applied component and is expected to result in innovative output. Creativity can be seen as a crucial component of IWB, most evident in the beginning of the innovation process, when problems or performance gaps are recognized and ideas are generated in response to a perceived need for innovation (West, 2002). Despite the differences between IWB and creativity, the overlap is clear and the application processes has also started to receive attention in the creativity literature. For example, in his review of creativity research, Mumford (2003) calls for the investigation of so-called 'late cycle' skills, that is, the implementation of creative ideas. He stresses that real world performance -the expression, shaping and execution of ideas -represents 'another important component of creative work and considers the investigation of implementing ideas to be an important emerging issue for creativity research. Similarly, Basad ur (2004) included 'solution implementation' in his model of leading the creative process. The distinction between IWB and creativity thus seems to be one of emphasis rather than substance. More recent measures of IWB distinguish between various dimensions, which are often linked to different stages of the innovation process. For example, Scott and Bruce (1994) operationali zed IWB as a multistage process. Drawing on Kanter (1988), they outline three stages relevant to IWB, namely idea generation, coalition building and implementation. Individual innovation begins with problem recognition and the generation of ideas or solutions, either novel or adopted. Next, an innovative individual seeks sponsorship for an idea and through coalition building tries to gain support for it. Finally, the innovative individual contributes to idea implementation, for example, by producing a prototype or model of the innovation or working on the execution of the idea in other ways. Of the three forms of innovative behaviour Scott and Bruce (1994) distinguish, idea generation is rather broad as it includes both generating ideas and the recognition of problems (Scott & Bruce, 1994). Several creativity studies indicate that these two behaviours rely on distinct cognitive abilities (Runco & Chand, 1994). # e) Organizational Trustworthiness and Employee Innovative Work Behaviour Pay, et al (2015) espouse that organizational trustworthiness is a major bedrock on which interpersonal relationships involving trust can be built. Trustworthiness is thus expedient to foster the fruition and diffusion of innovative ideas among employees (Ghosh, 2015;Liu et al., 2016). Employees that perceive organizational as not trustworthy enough or even un trust worthy, may not be willing to exhibit certain creative or innovative behaviours. This may consequently limit the extent at which employee creativity may be engendered within an organisation. Nevertheless, Amabile et al. (1996) and Amabile and Mueller (2008) further opine that employee innovative work behaviour should reflect its highest degree when an intrinsically motivated employee with high expertise and high creativity skills exhibit creative behaviours within a highly supportive organisational culture. According to Pay et al. (2015), literature on trust recognizes the concept of trustworthiness as a critical component of social and interpersonal interaction, although, its definition and measurement are yet to be consistent. This is because the concept of trustworthiness is complex in that it is clustered with issues surrounding its definition and measurement (Carlos & Maria, 2014). Likewise, studies conducted over 50 years ago relate several trustworthiness dimensions which creates a pattern in regards to trustworthiness definitions and measurements (Rawlins, 2008). Nevertheless, the concept of trustworthiness yet proves to be imperative for the effective diffusion of creative ideas (Carlos & Maria, 2014). Trustworthiness is necessary for the continuous development and maintenance of interpersonal relationships between the manager and the employee. It is an indispensable element of satisfactory relationship which reassures the organization about increasing commitment towards employee creativity and innovativeness (Carlos & Maria, 2014). Organizational trustworthiness plays several roles. Even in positively impacting the organisational culture by facilitating transparency and openness in communication between organisational members (Liu et al., 2016). Studies argue that trustworthiness could be characterized by integrity, just personality and fairness, dependability, reliability, and competence (Colquitt & Rodell, 2011;Liu et al., 2016). Similarly, trustworthiness makes it less difficult for an employee to commit willingly and sincerely towards self-openness. For this to occur in most cases, the employee must have been able to prove an acceptable degree of integrity, dependability, reliability, honesty, commitment and acts of goodwill (Morrow et al., 2004). Although, through cognitive submission processes the employee may become vulnerable and dependent on the choices of another employee (Liu et al., 2016). Correspondingly, the effect of organizational trustworthiness in interpersonal trust relationships is a key instrument of organizational co-ordination and control (Carlos & Maria, 2014). This is in view that it facilitates employee commitment to engage in employee creativity initiatives. Employee creativity initiatives in this regard could be a program tailored towards the effective and efficient diffusion of creative ideas within the organisation (Carlos & Maria, 2014). Upasna (2014) also support that employee innovativeness involves the risk of employee participation in decision making processes, thus mistakes are inevitable. This could often be the outcome when perceived trustworthiness levels of organisational members are high. Another probable outcome could be an experience of employees' freedom of action as well as employees trusting their managers towards engagement and support in employee creativity initiatives (Carlos & Maria, 2014). # III. # Conclusion The theories and the discussion of literature offered in this paper, identify the imperatives of trust in the context of the relationship between the organization and its workers. The views expressed as well as the theories assessed offer a supportive framework which advance the importance of organizational trustworthiness in the actualization of employee innovative work behaviour. As noted in the discussion, particular reference is made to the need for workers to identify the organization as possessing certain qualities # Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XX Issue III Version I Year 2020 ( ) A and features (e.g. benevolence, integrity etc.) which as specified in the study, are considered as imperative in enhancing their confidence in the organization and also in driving their desire to be more innovative in their work behaviour and actions. In conclusion, this paper therefore affirms that there is the need for organizations to emphasis on practices and qualities which express their substantial levels of benevolence, integrity and competence as a way of enhancing their trustworthiness and as such, increasing employee innovative behaviour within the workplace. # Recommendations i. Management should focus on developing work structures that are transparent and which allow for active participation and involvement; such that actions and decisions by the leadership are can be justified on the basis of competency and integrity, thus boosting the confidence of employees in the organization. ii. Work designs should be such that offer the necessary support and conditions for consistent communication and correspondence between managers/supervisors and their subordinates. Such designs should be enriched with delegated roles that allow for the increased responsibilities on the employee as a way of expressing confidence in their own capacities. iii. Learning platforms and programs within the organization should be developed to enable workers within the organization acquaint themselves with the particular skills and exposure necessary in driving innovative work. This is also linked to workers considerations of support from management for the development and consistency of such programs © 2020 Global Journals * The significance of perceived social organization climate for creating employees' innovativeness W.-TAgnieszka TDariusz 2016 * Management Research Review 39 2 * Studying creativity, its processes, and its antecedents: An exploration of the componential theory of creativity TMAmabile JSMueller Handbook of organizational creativity JZhou CEShalley New York Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 2008 * The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations TMAmabile KGHill BAHennessey EMTighe Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66 5 1994 * A qualitative meta-analysis of trust in supervisor-subordinate relationships NAnn-Marie DRPhilipp SRosalind SGerhard Journal of Managerial Psychology 30 5 2015 * Trustworthiness as a source of competitive advantage J& MBarney Hansen Strategic Management Journal 15 1994 * Creating and sustaining innovation SBartos Australian Journal of Public Administration 62 1 2003 * Relationship selling and trust: Antecedents and outcomes GilaBen-Rechav Gabay 2000 Portland State University Ph.D. dissertation * The role of business ethics in facilitating trustworthiness NFBews GJRossouw Journal of Business Ethics 39 4 2002 * Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: A multilevel mediation model of trust SBraun CPeus SWeisweiler DFrey The Leadership Quarterly 24 1 2013 * Federal government reform: Lessons from Clinton's ''Reinventing Government and Bush's Management Agenda initiatives JDBreul JMKamensky Public Administration Review 68 2008 * Perceived trustworthiness of online shops OB A SButtner Goritz Journal of Consumer Behaviour 7 1 2008 * Ethics, norms, dispositional trust, and context: components of the missing link between trustworthiness and trust, paper presented at Eight Annual Conference on Ethics in Business CF LCaldwell Jeffries 2001 Chicago, IL DePaul University * Organisational trustworthiness: An international perspective CS ECaldwell Clapham Journal of Business Ethics 47 4 2003 * A process for changing organizational culture KCameron C. G. Thomas 2008 Sage Publishing Thousand Oaks, CA Handbook of organizational development * Knowledgecentred culture and knowledge sharing: the moderator role of trust propensity FPCarlos FSMaria Journal of Knowledge Management 18 3 2014 * Asymmetrical impact of trustworthiness attributes on trust, perceived value and purchase intention: A conceptual framework for cross-cultural study on consumer perception of online auction BChong ZYang MWong ACM International Conference Proceeding Series Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 2003 50 * Justice, trust, and trustworthiness: A longitudinal analysis integrating three theoretical perspectives JAColquitt BJRodell Academy of Management Journal 54 6 2011 * Measuring innovative work behaviour DeJong JHartog D Creativity and Innovation Management 19 1 2010 * Individual innovation JLFarr CMFord Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies MAWest & JLFarr Chichester, U.K. Wiley 1990 * Dimensions and levels of trust: Implications for commitment to a relationship SGanesan RHess Marketing Letters 8 4 1997 * Developing organizational creativity and innovation KGhosh Management Research Review 38 11 2015 * Trust and trustworthiness, Russell Sage Foundation Series on Trust RHardin 2002 New York * Relationship marketing -the impact of emotional intelligence and trust on bank performance THeffernan GNeill G TTravaglione & MDroulers International Journal of Bank Marketing 26 3 2008 * Organizational trustworthiness: Findings from the population of organizational ethnographies RHodson Organization Science 15 4 2004 * Stages in the development of customers, trust for services providers LCHuff Asia Pacific Advances in Consumer Research 6 2005 * Organisational culture in knowledge creation, creativity and innovation: towards the Freiraum model AJan HHazel Journal of Information Science 2013 * Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness, and innovative work behaviour OJanssen Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 73 2000 * OJanssen NWVan Yperen 2004 * Employees' goal orientations, the quality of leadermember exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction Academy of Management Journal 47 * Do my staff trust me? KJoe Leadership & Organization Development Journal 35 5 2014 * The change masters: Innovation and entrepreneurship in the American Corporation RMKanter 1983 Touchstone Book * Managing innovation and change: A critical guide for organizations NKing NAnderson 2002 Thomson, London * A trust model of consumer internet shopping MatthewKLee Efraim Turban International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6 1 2001 * The interaction between values and organizational identification in predicting suggestion-making at work JLipponen ABardi JHaapamaki Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 81 2008 * Abusive supervision and employee creativity: The mediating role of psychological safety and organizational identification WLiu PZhang JLiao PHao JMao Management Decision 54 1 2016 * An integrative model of organizational trust RCMayer HD DJames & F Schoorman Academy of Management Review 20 3 1995 * Innovation, organizational change and technology IMc Loughl In MHarris 1997 Thompson, London * Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation MDMumford SBGustafson Psychological bulletin 103 1 27 1988 * Innovations and personal change: Patterns of adjustment to relocation AGMunton MAWest Journal of Organizational Behaviour 16 1995 * Factorial and discriminant analyses of the underpinnings of relationship marketing and customer satisfaction NO C KNdubisi Wah International Journal of Bank Management 23 7 2005 * Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work GROldham ACummings Academy of Management Journal 39 1996 * Building trust in internet banking: A trustworthiness Perspective LYPay MSBalaji WKKok Industrial Management & Data Systems 115 2 2015 * Comparing public and private organizations: Empirical research and the power of the a priori HGRainey BBozeman Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 10 2000 * Understanding and managing public organizations HGRainey 2009 Jossey-Bass San Francisco, CA 4th ed * Measuring the relationship between organizational transparency and employee trust BRRawlins Public Relations Journal 2 2 2008 * Facilitating tacit knowledge transfer: routine compatibility, trustworthiness, and integration in M & As ARRebecca SDavid Journal of Knowledge Management 19 2 2015 * Development and psychometric integrity of a measure of ideational behaviour MARunco JAPlucker WLim Creativity Research Journal 13 3-4 2001 * Studied trust: Building new forms of cooperation in a volatile economy CFSabel Human Relations 46 9 1993 * Determinants of innovative behaviour: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace SGScott RABruce Academy of Management Journal 38 1994 * What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity CEShalley LLGilson The Leadership Quarterly 15 2004 * Toward a reconciliation of the definitional issues in the field of corporate entrepreneurship PSharma JJChrisman Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 23 1999 * Linking justice, trust and innovative work behaviour to work engagement AAUpasna Personnel Review 43 1 2014 * Effects of interpersonal trust, team leader support, rewards, and knowledge sharing mechanisms on knowledge sharing in project teams WVathsala WRuvini VINE 42 2 2012 * Resulta at gerichtverzelfstandigen: Een analyse vanuite enver ruimd principa al-agent perspectief. KUL. Nieuwe reeks van doctoraten in de sociale wetens chap pen KVerhoest 2002 70 * Innovation type and organizational performance: An empirical exploration RMWalker F; CDamanpour JDonaldson CHartley MSkelcher Wallace Cambridge Managing improvement in public service delivery: Progress and prospects Cambridge Univ. Press 2008 * Explaining buyers responses to sellers violation of trust SWang LCHuff European Journal of Marketing 41 9 2007 * Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups MAWest Applied Psychology: An International Review 51 3 2002 * Innovation at work: Psychological perspectives MAWest JLFarr Social Behaviour 1989 * Contractor as Trust Initiator in Construction Partnering -Prisoners Dilemma Perspective PS PWong SOCheung PK MHo Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 131 10 2005 * Toward a theory of organizational creativity RWWoodman JESawyer RWGriffin Academy of Management Review 18 1993 * Innovative behaviour in the workplace: The role of performance and image outcome expectations FYuan RWWoodman Academy of Management Journal 53 2 2010