Malevolent Innovation in the Workplace: Laying the Foundation

Abstract

Scholarly interest in the areas of innovation and harmful workplace behaviors has grown rapidly in recent years. Despite parallel growth in interest, research has largely failed to address the intersection of these phenomena. Moreover, although malevolent innovation is conceptually distinct in the fields of crime, terrorism, and extremism, there is limited clarity for how it differs from established workplace constructs (e.g., workplace incivility, counterproductive work behavior). In this review, we consider related workplace constructs and examine how they overlap with and, more centrally, differ from malevolent innovation. We distinguish deviance and other forms of norm-violating behaviors from the primary elements of malevolent innovation: novelty and intentional harm, as well as secondary elements: intensity, perpatrator-target relationship, and planning. Together, we provide a review to distinguish malevolent innovation as a unique workplace construct. Areas for future research are also discussed.

Plain Language Summary

Malevolent Innovation in the Workplace

In this paper, we distinguish malevolent innovation as a workplace construct in comparison to related, norm-violating behaviors such as social innovation, destructive and constructive deviance, counterproductive work behaviors, workplace incivility, and errors. Malevolent innovation represents inherent and purposeful harm and stands in contrast to the often-benevolent stereotype of creativity. As seen in early research, creativity can result in unintended negative outcomes (see McLaren, 1993; Runco, 2010). Of course, creativity inherently breaks some rules and may walk the line of ethicality to achieve novelty (e.g., Winchester & Medeiros, 2021). In comparison, we distinguish malevolent innovation from norm-violating behaviors by focusing on the two primary features of novelty and intent. Deviance and malevolent innovation are not mutually exclusive, but as alluded to earlier, novelty and intention to harm distinguish malevolent innovation from related constructs. We also compare the differences in perpetrator-target relationship, intensity, and planning.