Above all, our Innovative Leader Survey (ILS) measures the innovation promotion behaviour of leaders in any organisation. Hence, it helps the management of an organisation understand whether the leaders behaviour is supporting innovative work behaviour (IWB) of their staff.
Research has been done on the role of leaders in instilling innovative work behaviour (IWB) in their followers (Tan , A. B. C. et al, 2021). As a result of this research, a new survey has been developed that focusses on the behaviours of leaders that most likely effects their employees creative role identity and their IWB. This survey is best used as part of a 360 leadership assessment exercise.
Most importantly, our Innovative Leader Survey measures the innovation promoting behaviour of leaders with the three factors Head, Heart, Hand. So, data have shown that there is a strong relationship between these factors of leader behaviours and the innovative work behaviour (IWB) of their staff.
Innovative work behaviour of their staff is measured with Individual Innovation Readiness (IIR) survey.
The Innovative Leader Survey (ILS) is designed to examine 11 leadership behaviours in the factors Head, Heart and Hand.
Whilst Head stands for Strategic Leadership Competencies, Heart includes Relationship Management Competencies and Hand means Tactical Leadership Competencies.
Altogether, in total these 11 behaviours are measured with 31 statements.
Whilst the Innovative Leader Survey examines leaders’ behaviours for evoking innovative work behaviour (IWB) in their staff, our Innovation Readiness Survey (IRS) survey questions the individual readiness for innovation of this staff. Hence, it includes other factors like individual creativity, psychological capital, environmental support for innovation and the leadership practice.
Both surveys complement each other, IRS is targeting the staff, ILS focuses on their managers.
The Innovative Leader Survey (ILS) is designed to examine 11 leadership behaviours in the factors Head, Heart and Hand.
And, it uses a 7-point Likert scale on 31 statements.
In conclusion, with the information presented in ILS, it is easy to craft an individual development plan per employee. Hence, after implementing the development plan, a higher IWB of the leader’s staff is likely to be achieved.