Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Bootleg innovation, self-initiated innovation by employees without formal organizational approval, plays an important role in enhancing organizational adaptability, especially in fast-changing digital work environments. While previous research has focused on structural or managerial antecedents, limited attention has been given to the cognitive and psychological foundations that motivate such informal innovation. Drawing on social cognitive theory, we examine how paradox mindset, learning from failure, and strength use jointly influence employees’ engagement in bootleg innovation. Using two-wave survey data from 518 employees in a large information and communications technology company, our findings show that paradox mindset promotes bootleg innovation both directly and indirectly by enhancing learning from failure and use of personal strengths. These results suggest that employees’ internal resources and adaptive cognition are key to driving innovation beyond formal roles. This study contributes by uncovering mechanisms that explain bootleg innovation and offers practical implications for supporting informal innovation in digitally transforming workplaces.

Keywords

bootleg innovation digital transformation paradox mindset learning from failure strength use employee innovation innovation culture

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amabile

T. M.

Pratt

M. G.

(2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001

Argote

Miron-Spektor

(2011). Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organization Science, 22(5), 1123–1137. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0619

Augsdorfer

(2012). A diagnostic personality test to identify likely corporate bootleg researchers. International Journal of Innovation Management, 16(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919612400045

Bakker

A. B.

van Woerkom

(2018). Strengths use and work engagement: A daily diary study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(1), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1379871

Bandura

(1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175

Bandura

(1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L

Berente

Recker

Santhanam

(2021). Managing artificial intelligence. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1433–1450. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16274

Burcharth

Præst Knudsen

Søndergaard

H. A.

(2017). The role of employee autonomy for open innovation performance. Business Process Management Journal, 23(6), 1245–1269. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-10-2016-0209

Cannon

M. D.

Edmondson

A. C.

(2012). Learning from failure. In Seel

N. M.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 1859–1863). Springer.

10.

Cole

D. A.

Maxwell

S. E.

(2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 558–577. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.558

11.

Criscuolo

Salter

Ter Wal

A. L.

(2014). Going underground: Bootlegging and individual innovative performance. Organization Science, 25(5), 1287–1305. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0899

12.

Dieste

Sauer

P. C.

Orzes

(2022). Organizational tensions in Industry 4.0 implementation: A paradox theory approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 251, 108532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108532

13.

Ding

Lin

(2021). Employee strengths use and innovative behavior: A moderated mediation model. Chinese Management Studies, 15(2), 350–362. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-05-2019-0191

14.

El-Gazar

H. E.

Shawer

Alenezi

Shaban

Zaky

M. E.

Zoromba

M. A.

(2025). Strengths mindset as a mediator in the relationship between paradoxical leadership and nurses’ positive attitudes towards artificial intelligence: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 81, 8690–8703. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.16841

15.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300

16.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

17.

Frese

Keith

(2015). Action errors, error management, and learning in organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1), 661–687. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015235

18.

Fuller

C. M.

Simmering

M. J.

Atinc

Babin

B. J.

(2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.003

19.

Gao

Wang

(2024). The influence of bootleg innovation on individual innovation performance: The mediating effect of cognitive flexibility and the moderating effect of leadership’s emotional intelligence. PLoS ONE, 19(2), e0296782. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0296782

20.

Ghasemzadeh

Bunjak

Bortoluzzi

Černe

(2021). Efficaciously smuggling ideas: Untangling the relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy, creative bootlegging, and embedded lead users. International Journal of Innovation Management, 25(03), 2150032. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919621500328

21.

Gibson

C. B.

Birkinshaw

(2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226.

22.

Globocnik

Peña Häufler

Salomo

(2022). Organizational antecedents to bootlegging and consequences for the newness of the innovation portfolio. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 39(5), 717–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12788

23.

Globocnik

Salomo

(2015). Do formal management practices impact the emergence of bootlegging behavior? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(4), 505–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12215

24.

Hirak

Peng

A. C.

Carmeli

Schaubroeck

J. M.

(2012). Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: The importance of psychological safety and learning from failures. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.06.002

25.

Howard

A. L.

(2013). Handbook of structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(2), 354–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2013.853345

26.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

27.

Huang

Zhu

Sun

(2022). A study on paradoxical leadership and multiple path mechanisms of employees’ bootleg innovation. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 15, 3391–3407. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S383115

28.

Jia

Liu

Zheng

(2021). How does paradoxical leadership promote bootlegging: A TPB-based multiple mediation model. Chinese Management Studies, 15(4), 919–939. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-04-2021-0457

29.

Keller

Loewenstein

Jordan

(2017). Culture, conditions, and paradoxical frames. Organization Studies, 38(3-4), 541–557. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840616685590

30.

Keller

Loewenstein

Jordan

(2018). How national culture influences individuals’ subjective experience with paradoxical tensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(3), 348–368. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-017-0103-7

31.

Khan

M. T.

Ullah

Sami

Kukreti

Shaukat

M. R.

(2025). Cultivating a paradoxical mindset: Enhancing transformative learning through paradoxical leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 46(2), 334–350. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-04-2024-0223

32.

Kokshagina

Schneider

(2023). The digital workplace: Navigating in a jungle of paradoxical tensions. California Management Review, 65(2), 129–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256221137720

33.

Lanzolla

Pesce

Tucci

C. L.

(2021). The digital transformation of search and recombination in the innovation function: Tensions and an integrative framework. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(1), 90–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12526

34.

Leung

A. K. Y.

Maddux

W. W.

Galinsky

A. D.

Chiu

C. Y.

(2018). Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when and how. American Psychologist, 73(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000225

35.

Liu

Zhang

(2022). Making things happen: How employees’ paradox mindset influences innovative performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1009209. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1009209

36.

Lyu

Zhang

Gao

(2022). Why does distributed leadership foster or hamper bootlegging behavior of employees: The role of exploratory-exploitative learning tension and paradox mindset. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2022(1), 3093641. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3093641

37.

MacKinnon

D. P.

(2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203809556

38.

Masoudnia

Szwejczewski

(2012). Bootlegging in the R&D departments of high-technology firms. Research-Technology Management, 55(5), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.5437/08956308X5505004

39.

Mazmanian

Orlikowski

W. J.

Yates

(2013). The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals. Organization Science, 24(5), 1337–1357. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0806

40.

Miron-Spektor

Ingram

Keller

Smith

W. K.

Lewis

M. W.

(2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26–45. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0910

41.

Mitchell

T. R.

James

L. R.

(2001). Building better theory: Time and the specification of when things happen. Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 530–547. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.5393889

42.

Nambisan

Lyytinen

Majchrzak

Song

(2017). Digital innovation management. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2017/41.1.10

43.

Nanyangwe

C. N.

Wang

Cui

(2021). Work and innovations: The impact of self-identification on employee bootlegging behavior. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30(4), 713–725. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12400

44.

Nanyangwe

C. N.

Wang

Cui

(2023). The end justifies the means: The role of organizational identification on bootleg innovation behavior. Journal of Management & Organization, 31(2), 929–944. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2022.92

45.

Nunnally

J. C.

(1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). Tata McGraw-Hill.

46.

Pedler

Brook

(2017). The innovation paradox: A critical review of the literature on innovation and action learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 14(3), 216–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767333.2017.1342777

47.

Peterson

Seligman

M. E.

(2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

48.

Pindek

Howard

D. J.

Krajcevska

Spector

P. E.

(2019). Organizational constraints and performance: An indirect effects model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(2), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-03-2018-0122

49.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J. Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

50.

Podsakoff

P. M.

Podsakoff

N. P.

Williams

L. J.

Huang

Yang

(2024). Common method bias: It's bad, it's complex, it's widespread, and it's not easy to fix. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 17–61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040030

51.

Pradies

Aust

Bednarek

Brandl

Carmine

Cheal

Keller

(2021). The lived experience of paradox: How individuals navigate tensions during the pandemic crisis. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30(2), 154–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926211012689

52.

Rubin

Miron-Spektor

Keller

(2023). Unlocking creative tensions with a paradox approach. In Reiter-Palmon

Hunter

(Eds.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 125–145). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91840-4.00006-2

53.

Scott

S. G.

Bruce

R. A.

(1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580–607. https://doi.org/10.2307/256701

54.

Selig

J. P.

Preacher

K. J.

(2009). Mediation models for longitudinal data in developmental research. Research in Human Development, 6(2–3), 144–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427600902911247

55.

Shepherd

D. A.

Patzelt

Wolfe

(2011). Moving forward from project failure: Negative emotions, affective commitment, and learning from the experience. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1229–1259. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.64869433

56.

Smith

Beretta

(2021). The Gordian knot of practicing digital transformation: Coping with emergent paradoxes in ambidextrous organizing structures. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(1), 166–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12548

57.

Smith

W. K.

Lewis

M. W.

(2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223

58.

Sonnentag

(2003). Recovery, work engagement, and proactive behavior: A new look at the interface between nonwork and work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 518–528. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.518

59.

Spencer-Rodgers

Williams

M. J.

Peng

(2010). Cultural differences in expectations of change and tolerance for contradiction: A decade of empirical research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(3), 296–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310362982

60.

Tjemkes

Schad

Uslu

Konijn

(2025). Cultivating a collective paradox mindset: Design principles for learning interventions. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 24(3), 287–316. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2023.0553

61.

Van Der Schaft

A. H.

Lub

X. D.

Van Der Heijden

Solinger

O. N.

(2024). How employees experience digital transformation: A dynamic and multi-layered sensemaking perspective. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 48(5), 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480221123098

62.

van Woerkom

Mostert

Els

Bakker

A. B.

De Beer

Rothman

(2016). Strengths use and deficit correction in organizations: Development and validation of a questionnaire. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25(6), 960–975. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1152862

63.

Wang

Zhang

(2025). Error management climate, psychological security, and employee bootleg innovation behavior: The moderating role of risk-taking traits. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1538584. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1538584

64.

Wang

X. H.

Fang

Qureshi

Janssen

(2015). Understanding employee innovative behavior: Integrating the social network and leader-member exchange perspectives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(3), 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1981

65.

Wilhelm

Richter

A. W.

Semrau

(2019). Employee learning from failure: A team-as-resource perspective. Organization Science, 30(4), 694–714. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1255

66.

Wimelius

Mathiassen

Holmström

Keil

(2021). A paradoxical perspective on technology renewal in digital transformation. Information Systems Journal, 31(1), 198–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12263

67.

Wood

A. M.

Linley

P. A.

Maltby

Kashdan

T. B.

Hurling

(2011). Using personal and psychological strengths leads to increases in well-being over time: A longitudinal study and the development of the strengths use questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.08.020

68.

Yin

(2022). Living with tensions in the workplace: A grounded theory of paradoxical leadership in cultivating subordinates’ paradox mindset. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(6), 862–873. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-04-2021-0151

69.

Yin

(2023). Promoting unlearning at work through paradox mindset: A grounded theory approach. Baltic Journal of Management, 18(5), 627–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-03-2022-0372

70.

Zhang

Chen

(2024). Exploring human resource management digital transformation in the digital age. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(1), 1482–1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01214-y

71.

Zhang

Bartol

K. M.

(2010). The influence of creative process engagement on employee creative performance and overall job performance: A curvilinear assessment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 862.

72.

Zheng

Mai

Zhou

Sun

(2022). As above, so below? The influence of leader humor on bootleg innovation: The mechanism of psychological empowerment and affective trust in leaders. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 956782. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956782

73.

Zhou

Chen

Cheng

(2024). Bringing employee learning to AI stress research: A moderated mediation model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 209, 123773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123773

Unlocking Bootleg Innovation: The Roles of Paradox Mindset,Learning from Failure,and Strength Use

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References