The Effect of a High-Performance Work System on Organizational Innovation Performance: The Mediating Effect of Employees’ Intrinsic Motivation and the Moderating Effect of Person–Organization Fit

Abstract

The organizational system is directly associated with overall organizational management and sustainability. The reason is that the organizational system has a strong relationship with organizational performance. One of the most important functions of the organizational system is the high-performance work system, which is the system that manages the employees so that they can maximize their functions, this study focuses on the importance of a high-performance work system in order to achieve organizational goals and increase performance. In particular, a high-performance work system is directly related to innovation performance that secures the competitive advantage of organizations. Based on such background, this study focused on how a high-performance system improves innovation performance. Unlike previous studies, rather than simply focusing on variables exploration or main effect verification, we provided and verified the research model related to the process by which innovation performance occurs. Specifically, this study aimed to investigate whether high-performance work systems in organizations enhance employees’ innovation performance and examined the mediating role of employees’ intrinsic motivation in enhancing innovation performance. In addition, we investigated the moderating role of employee person–organization fit in high-performance work systems and employee intrinsic ation directly. To validate this model, we collected data from 309 members of Chinese SMEs. We found that high-performance work systems positively affect employees’ innovation performance through a person–organization fit and that employees’ person–organization fit significantly moderates the relationship between high-performance work systems and employees’ intrinsic motivation directly. Overall, this study expands the scope of research on the enhancement of employee innovation performance and provides a theoretical basis for related research, which is also a contribution of this study.

1. Introduction

Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in China generally lack an effective human resource management system, which leads to a continuous decline in the competitiveness of enterprises and makes it difficult for them to achieve greater benefits [1]. Moreover, due to the weak awareness of human resource management (HRM), many employees lack an understanding of the management model of the enterprise and are not willing to learn in-depth, considering HRM not as a beneficial resource but as a burden, making them unable to fully utilize their roles in the enterprise [2]. Shahzad et al. argued that SMEs with limited resources must invest more in HRM systems compared to large firms to gain a sustainable advantage [3]. This fully reflects the importance of HRMS, and the current dilemma faced by SMEs in China.

A high-performance work system in an organization continuously influences employees’ attitudes and behaviors [4] and can help employees perform their jobs effectively even during challenging and difficult times for the organization [5]. A high-performance work system is a series of human resource management practices implemented by an organization to improve performance [6]. Specifically, they include selection management, education and training, closing status gaps, information sharing, and participation opportunities [7]. Prior studies have demonstrated their impact mainly in terms of employee sentiment, employee performance, innovative behavior, and organizational citizenship behavior [8,9,10]. This study aims to improve the competitiveness of organizations by elucidating the impact of high-performance work systems on employees’ innovation performance. Employees can achieve innovation performance in the context of an organizational high-performance work system, which can improve firm competitiveness.

Innovation performance refers to employees applying novel approaches and ideas to solve the problems they encounter at work [11]. Employees’ innovation performance directly affects organization innovation, and in the face of complex challenges, the only way for companies to get out of the dilemma and improve their competitiveness is to rely on innovation [12]. This behavior not only shows the creativity and flexibility of employees but also promotes the overall innovation ability of the organization, which is a decisive factor affecting the development of the enterprise. A high-performance work system will provide employees with the replenishment and assistance of work resources, which makes employees more actively engaged in their work and, thus, facilitates the achievement of work tasks [13]. Moreover, high-performance work systems stimulate employees’ positive attitudes and behaviors, not only facilitating the integration of resources within the organization but also helping employees to create new knowledge and improve their innovation performance [14]. Therefore, this study hypothesizes that a high-performance work system lays the foundation for enhancing employees’ innovation performance by providing employees with a large amount of work resources, education, and training, thereby creating a positive work atmosphere.

This study aims to verify whether high-performance work systems affect employees’ innovation performance and to determine which factors mediate the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. Intrinsic motivation involves interest and enjoyment [15]. Since it is driven by employees’ interest in the activity itself, this behavior is typically autonomous [16]. High-performance work systems, such as employee participation in decision-making processes, extensive training, or job security, provide employees with avenues to express their work and personal needs. These practices help employees to better adapt to their work environment, which typically generates intrinsic motivation when employees perceive that their psychological needs are being met [17].

Moreover, strong intrinsic motivation makes employees feel joy in their work and increases their willingness to invest more time in it. When employees invest more time in their work, they are more focused on improving it, which stimulates new creativity and ideas and enhances innovation performance [18]. Prior research has also shown a positive association between intrinsic motivation and high-performance work systems and innovation performance [18,19]. This suggests that high-performance work systems stimulate employees’ intrinsic motivation, leading to innovation performance. This study hypothesized that intrinsic motivation mediates the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance.

In addition, this study hypothesized that person–organization fit affects the level of employees’ intrinsic motivation. Person–organization fit refers to the extent to which an employee’s personal values fit with the norms and values of the organization that employs them [20,21]. When employees believe that their values align with those of the organization, they are more likely to feel a sense of purpose for the organization and show not only higher motivation at work but also more willingness to take on additional responsibilities that further the goals and vision of the organization [22]. Conversely, low person–organization fit may diminish employees’ motivation and engagement by causing them to feel alienated from the organization, which gradually decreases motivation [23]. More specifically, employees with high person–organization fit tend to view the management practices of high-performance work systems as opportunities, and this mechanism of participation in decision-making and information sharing not only allows employees to feel valued by the organization but also inspires confidence in their abilities, which leads to high intrinsic motivation by investing more energy and hard work [24]. It is, therefore, necessary to explore the moderating role of person–organization fit in the relationship between high-performance work systems and intrinsic motivation and to determine how its interaction affects the level of intrinsic motivation.

Therefore, the objectives of this study are as follows: first, this study takes the human resource management system dilemma faced by Chinese SMEs as the background of the study. Moreover, it emphasizes the importance of high-performance work systems and employees’ innovation performance in improving the competitiveness of the enterprise by ensuring their survival and development in the highly competitive and dynamic market environment. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the relationship between high-performance work systems and employee innovation performance.

Secondly, this study introduces intrinsic motivation as a mediating variable based on social exchange theory. Social exchange theory suggests that people tend to reciprocate for favors they receive [25]. High-performance work systems shape the exchange relationship between the organization and its employees. High-performance work systems create a mutually beneficial environment where employees feel cared for and supported by the organization, which enhances their intrinsic motivation. This feeling motivates employees to put in more effort and exhibit more positive behaviors, which ultimately contributes to innovation performance. Therefore, this study hypothesizes that high-performance work systems affect employees’ innovation performance by stimulating and strengthening their intrinsic motivation. This helps to expand the field of research on innovation performance.

Finally, most of the prior studies considered the mediating role of person–organization fit or explored the moderating role of person–organization fit on employee behavior or performance [26,27,28,29,30]. This study is a novel attempt to determine how this interaction affects employees’ intrinsic motivation by exploring the interaction between high-performance work systems and person–organization fit.

Overall, this study provides a new perspective on enhancing employee innovation performance based on social exchange theory. The mediating role of intrinsic motivation between high-performance work systems and innovation performance is emphasized. A research model that can shed light on innovation performance is proposed, and its significance is discussed. Thus, this study extends the research scope of innovation performance and provides a theoretical basis for related research.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. High-Performance Work System and Intrinsic Motivation

Huselid (1995) defines a high-performance work system as a series of closely complementary individual human resource systems designed to enhance work and organizational commitment by improving the competencies, attitudes, and motivation of organizational members and ultimately having a positive impact on organizational performance [31]. A high-performance work system, in a theoretical sense, is one in which organizational members can work across job domains and form extensive networks with a diverse group of other organizational members to gain access to the resources and knowledge needed to function in the organization [32]. A high-performance work system facilitates the development of skills, knowledge, and competencies by providing employees with opportunities to participate in the decision-making process, increasing the recognition and motivation of organizational members [33]. Previous research shows that high-performance job systems can stimulate positive, motivated attitudes and behaviors in members that contribute to competitiveness and improved organizational performance [34,35]. A high-performance work system shapes desired employee behaviors and attitudes through the psychological connection between organizational goals and members’ goals. In other words, a high-performance work system focuses on developing competent organizational members. When members’ demands and goals are aligned with organizational goals, they are trusted by the organization and free to make decisions within it [36].

High-performance work systems maximize members’ knowledge and skills through a specific combination of work structures and processes that are self-specific to the organization through a human resource practice that encourages members to deliver outputs by motivating them to mobilize their self-competence development after being given a sense of purpose and responsibility by the organization [37]. For individual members with high potential, the organization also conducts regular personal comprehensive training in order to enable them to better utilize their abilities. The efforts of the members of the organization are directly aligned with the goals of the organization, and the organization is also based on rewarding high-performing members, thus motivating the members to go beyond their original roles and collaboratively fostering an organizational culture in which the members provide innovative solutions more proactively and effectively work towards a common goal [38]. Each organization has a unique and complementary set of human resource practices that develops flexibility by encouraging members to acquire up-to-date knowledge and skills through an intensive training and incentive system, where members experience a sense of self-fulfillment in the organization along with a commitment to risk-taking and calm analysis in the face of resistance [39]. By establishing clear, measurable goals and providing regular feedback as a necessity for organizational members of high-performance work systems, organizations and their members realize that they care more about whether the organization has a well-defined organizational structure relative to the expectations and performance of these benchmarks. Once members decide that a good organization is aligned with their own goals and values, they become more productive and promote consistent alignment of organizational members with organizational goals [40]. Members acquire and maintain work-related resources through a high-performance work system. The organization allows members to participate in the decision-making process and maintains good communication between hierarchical levels. The organization also possesses talent while members are motivated to work hard enough to complete their work tasks, and the organization and the members maintain common communication so that the members will treat the organization as an opportunity to demonstrate their talents [41,42]. Therefore, this study suggests that a high-performance work system in an organization can intrinsically motivate the members of the organization.

Hypothesis 1.

High-performance work systems will positively influence intrinsic motivation.

2.2. High-Performance and Innovation Performance

High-performance work systems facilitate the development of skills, knowledge, and competencies by providing employees with opportunities to participate in the decision-making process, increasing the recognition and motivation of organizational members [33]. The process of individual knowledge management attracts them to generate innovations through interactions and innovative behaviors, which creates a positive feedback loop that then transforms these capabilities into innovation performance [43]. Innovation performance is the ability of an organization to innovate and create value through new ideas, processes, products, or services [44]. Inter-firm affiliation characteristics in collaborative innovation ecosystems in 2019 positively impacted the innovation performance of SMEs) through knowledge absorption and transfer capabilities [45]. A friendly work environment enhances communication between members, facilitates the creation, transfer, storage, and application of members’ knowledge, and motivates followers to develop knowledge. Therefore, the organization’s innovation performance is a key pathway to organizational success [46].

An approach to human resource management from an organizational systems perspective is rapidly evolving, seeking to move from managing organizational members as costs to engaging and motivating organizational members as organizational assets that drive performance [47]. Emphasizing that organizational members implement learning practices at work, participate in organizational decision-making processes, and cooperate in organizational integration can also help deploy human capital within the organization, thereby facilitating the development of complex innovation processes [48]. From this perspective, changes in an organization’s work processes, procedures, or workplace can increase employee engagement, awareness, and commitment, which can improve innovation performance and contribute to the achievement of societal goals [49,50]. Organizations provide ways for members to participate in organizational decision-making to increase the motivation of organizational members, and members who are recognized will exert higher innovation dynamism in the organization with a positive attitude, thereby improving the innovation, absorption, and adaptive capacity of their firms, which contributes to a stronger positive effect on innovation performance [51]. Within the organization, each member has a different level of ability. When the organization is willing to take the initiative to give the power of participation to the members, it can effectively motivate them to take the initiative to participate in the company’s decision-making, the formation of a collective consciousness, and the continuous improvement of members’ knowledge and skills by learning from each other, which enhances innovation ability and increases innovation performance [52]. Organizational members in the market competition use closely complementary individual human resource systems to enhance the competitive advantage of work and organizational commitment under the choice of diverse technological strategies to occupy a favorable position and improve the organization’s profitability and protection of the members’ motivation. It also effectively enhances the enterprise’s innovation capacity, reduces innovation costs, and diversifies innovation risk so that the enterprise can achieve technological innovation and improve competitive advantage [53]. In this study, innovation performance stems from the individual’s spontaneous behavior, which is the result of the organization’s members actively taking initiative, and the members’ innovation behavior receives the support of the leader’s supervisor to implement it more diligently [54]. From the above summary, we make the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2.

High-performance work systems will positively influence innovation performance.

2.3. Intrinsic Motivation and Innovation Performance

Intrinsic motivation can be defined as a drive that originates from within an individual and motivates them to engage in work to experience the pleasure or satisfaction that comes from the work itself rather than any extrinsic material rewards [55]. Motivation is an important research topic in organizational psychology and organizational behavior theory and refers to the mental state or mental process that encourages specific work behaviors and leads to goal-directed behavior [56]. On the other hand, intrinsic motivation refers to the factors that motivate organizational members to do what they want to do or obtain intrinsic rewards [57]. The motivational role of intrinsic motivation and the relationship between the two were explored in a study by Zou, Yao, Zhang, & Huang (2024), which showed that teachers’ intrinsic motivation to teach was significantly and positively correlated with students’ intrinsic motivation to learn [58]. Innovation performance increases with the degree of seriousness with which organizational members approach their work and their courage to be open to innovative practices in their work [59]. Intrinsic motivation of organizational members is characterized by high commitment to the work, high satisfaction with the work process, and persistence because the activity itself is seen as rewarding [60].

In addition, because the creative behavior of individual members of the organization is the result of both the influence of the organization and members’ individual psychological states and attitudes, members show their own strengths while developing a plan for the organization, which contributes to the development of the organization’s innovation performance [60]. Intrinsic motivation and innovation performance in the organization are also closely related, and facing challenges can also help members maintain a stable state of mind, with self-supervision, willingness to take the initiative for self-development, and other characteristics of the organization under the promotion of innovation performance [11]. Organizational members use their abilities in the process of realizing technological and product innovation, shared vision goals, beliefs, and attitudes, where using the tacit understanding of the knowledge required for innovation significantly drives organizational innovation performance [61]. Members’ self-formed perceptions in proportion to their attitudes toward the organization will actively form norms and guidelines in the organization. Research has shown that members’ values that are similar to those of the organization can increase conflict due to innovation uncertainty, enhance innovation cohesion between members and the organization, and ultimately increase innovation success and innovation performance [62]. Once organizational members establish a clear goal and continuously optimize their resource allocation in the organization, they can effectively adjust the organization’s technological innovation strategy and choose a combination of factors that is suitable for the company’s high innovation performance so as to seize technological breakthrough opportunities [53]. Overall, intrinsic motivation promotes desirable behaviors and is the greatest source of employees’ creative practices, creative processes, and creative performance, and members’ competencies explain the success of an organization’s innovation performance [63]. Therefore, this study proposes the following hypotheses.

Hypothesis 3.

Intrinsic motivation will positively influence innovation performance.

2.4. The Mediating Effect of Intrinsic Motivation

Intrinsic motivation encourages increased work effort through a sense of accomplishment, challenge, and trust in the work process [64]. High-performance work systems provide a competitive advantage to organizations by facilitating the development of the self-skills of their members, providing opportunities to participate in organizational decision-making, and increasing work motivation [65]. Self-determination theory suggests that intrinsic motivation occurs when people have the right to self-determination, which requires that basic psychological needs such as autonomy, competence, and relevance are met [60].

High-performance work systems make members feel cared for and supported by the organization by providing them with positive management practices such as training and knowledge sharing, which not only increases their work engagement and intrinsic motivation but also prompts them to exhibit more positive feedback behaviors, thus enhancing innovation performance [66]. High-performance work systems not only focus on improving members’ general skills, developing training programs, giving employees higher job autonomy, and encouraging them to participate in team decision-making but also effectively enhance members’ intrinsic motivation so that they can better apply knowledge and effective information, leading to innovation performance [67]. Member motivation policies and participation practices in high-performance work systems demonstrate the organization’s recognition and appreciation of members’ work, which helps members feel valued, fully apply their abilities at work, and increase intrinsic motivation to implement positive behaviors [68]. Intrinsic motivation stimulates members’ curiosity, learning, and exploration, which in turn leads them to devote more attention to innovation, which may result in creative outcomes, which in turn helps them achieve innovation performance goals [69]. By intrinsically motivating members, organizations can make them passionate about and attentive to their work, thereby enhancing members’ innovation performance by supporting creative thinking [70]. High-performance work systems provide members with fair opportunities, allow them to participate in organizational decision-making, as well as eliminate their concerns about risk, which not only enhances their intrinsic motivation but also inspires them to use their innovative abilities to improve innovation performance [3]. High-performance work systems satisfy the intrinsic psychological needs of employees and enhance their intrinsic motivation, leading employees to generate innovative ideas [71]. Thus, this study proposes the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 4.

Intrinsic motivation will positively mediate the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance.

2.5. The Moderating Effects of Person–Organization Fit

This study emphasizes the moderating role of person–organization fit. Person–organization fit refers to the degree of fit between organizational members and their organizations in terms of values, culture, and goals [72]. Congruence between organizational members’ personal values and organizational culture provides various criteria for judging work attitudes and work behaviors [73]. In a prior study, Lee & Bang (2012) mentioned that high-performance work systems lead to strong person–organizational fit [26]. Moreover, members whose values match those of the organization are more satisfied and less likely to leave the organization [21], and employees with a consistent person–organization fit are more likely to exhibit positive behaviors and improve organizational performance [74]. Workers choose between jobs and organizations with different value profiles based on their personal values [21]. When person–organization fit is high, members are more likely to be attracted to the organization and, thus, spontaneously engage in behaviors that benefit it [75].

When organizations implement a range of human resource management practices, such as formal training and mentoring programs, the positive effects of these management practices are enhanced by organizational members with a high person–organization fit, which not only strengthens the person–organization fit but also motivates employees to exhibit positive behaviors in the organization [20]. Strong cultural management practices in high-performance work systems instill a “strong” organizational culture in employees, and a strong individual–organizational fit enhances their cultural strengths, improves the knowledge, skills, and abilities of organizational members, and increases positive motivation [26]. High-performance work systems provide opportunities for organizational members to participate in decision-making, effective competency training, and create a positive work climate in the organization, which not only helps organizational members to acquire more knowledge and skills, but also satisfies their basic psychological needs, which in turn enhances intrinsic motivation [38]. Organizational members’ psychological needs are satisfied by perceiving the environment, which leads to the autonomous formation of intrinsic motivation [76]. Members with a high person–organization fit tend to feel a stronger sense of security and a positive organizational climate, which inspires a more focused work ethic, a higher level of engagement, and greater enjoyment in their work, thus increasing intrinsic motivation [77]. Moreover, they are more likely to be intrinsically motivated and to attribute positive motivation to the organization’s influence on their behaviors and attitudes [22].

In contrast, when members have a low person–organization fit, the organization may not be able to understand, agree with, or support the signals conveyed by the high-performance work system, which makes it difficult for the system to inspire high intrinsic motivation among members [78]. When organizations promote positive management practices, such as selection, reward systems, promotion, and training and development that focus on organizational members, organizational members with high person–organization fit reinforce positive perceptions of these practices, which increases motivation and intrinsic motivation toward work [79]. High person–organization fit makes them perceive the organizational atmosphere positively and respond with positive work attitudes [77]. Moreover, employees with a higher person–organization fit are usually more productive and adaptable [80].

Hypothesis 5.

Person–organization fit will moderate the relationship between a high-performance work system and intrinsic motivation.

3. Methods

3.1. Sample Characteristics

This study surveyed organization members working in Chinese SMEs using an online questionnaire. A total of 309 data samples were collected and used for empirical analysis. Among them, firms with 100 or more employees are considered medium-sized enterprises; firms with 10 or more employees are considered small-sized enterprises [81]. Participants included 165 (53.4%) males and 144 (46.6%) females.

Regarding age, 112 (36.2%) were 20 to 30, 94 (30.5%) were 31 to 40, 64 (20.7%) were 41 to 50, 38 (12.3%) were 51 to 60, and 1 (0.3%) was 60 or over.

Regarding education, 153 (49.5%) were junior college graduates and below, 108 (35%) were university graduates, 34 (11%) had a master’s degree, and 14 (4.5%) had a doctoral degree.

Regarding service years, 30 (9.7%) participants had worked for one year or less, 62 (20.1%) for 1 to 3 years, 39 (12.6%) for 3 to 5 years, 24 (7.8%) for 5 to 7 years, and 154 (49.8%) for 7 years or more.

Regarding enterprise type, 29 (9.4%) worked in construction, 57 (18.4%) in services, 16 (5.2%) in finance, 21 (6.8%) in education, 6 (1.9%) in the medical industry, 8 (2.6%) in information technology, and 172 (55.7%) in other occupations.

3.2. Measurement

To measure high-performance work systems, this study used a tool from Lawler, Chen, Wu, Bae, and Bai (2011), consisting of 12 items [82]. Sample items include: “To improve interpersonal skills, the company will provide training opportunities” and “The company encourages me to work hard”.

To measure participants’ intrinsic motivation, this study used the measurement scale in Tierney, Farmer, and Graen (1999), which consists of 5 items [55]. Sample items include: “I enjoy finding solutions to complex problems” and “I like to think analytically”.

To measure participants’ person–organization fit, this study used the tool in Cable and DeRue (2002), which consists of 9 items [22]. Sample items include: “My personal values match those of the company”, and “I am a good fit with the company’s organizational culture”.

To measure participants’ innovation performance, this study used the tool in Janssen and Van Yperen (2004), which consists of 9 items [83]. Sample items include: “I will create new and improved ideas” and “I will proactively support innovative ideas”.

All items were measured on a seven-point Likert scale, with responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The higher the score, the stronger the intent. The research model is shown in Figure 1.

4. Results

4.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Through confirmatory factor analysis, the applicability of data and different models can be confirmed [84]. CFA was performed using structural equation modeling with AMOS 22.0.

First, six models were established to determine the model’s fit index. Model 1 was an expected model, in which four factors were loaded independently and input simultaneously. The results showed X²(p) = 2004.908(0.000), X²/df = 3.747, RMSEA = 0.094, IFI = 0.908, CFI = 0.907, PNFI = 0.790, and PGFI = 0.629. Model 2 was designed using all items loaded on a single factor. The results showed X²(p) = 3215.899(0.000), X²/df = 5.722, RMSEA = 0.140, IFI = 0.787, CFI = 0.786, PNFI = 0.720, and PGFI = 0.492. Model 3 was designed by combining a high-performance work system and person–organization fit (Factor 1) and combining intrinsic motivation and innovation performance (Factor 2) to set two factors. The results showed X²(p) = 1488.677(0.000), X²/df = 4.581, RMSEA = 0.124, IFI = 0.832, CFI = 0.832, PNFI = 0.759, and PGFI = 0.562. Model 4 was designed by combining a high-performance work system and intrinsic motivation (Factor 1) and by combining innovation performance and person–organization fit (Factor 2) to set two factors. The results showed X²(p) = 3227.453(0.000), X²/df = 5.743, RMSEA = 0.124, IFI = 0.771, CFI = 0.770, PNFI = 0.666, and PGFI = 0.554. Model 5 was designed by combining a high-performance work system (Factor 1), innovation performance (Factor 2), and intrinsic motivation and person–organization fit (Factor 3) to create three factors. The results showed X²(p) = 3655.867(0.000), X²/df = 6.494, RMSEA = 0.134, IFI = 0.806, CFI = 0.805, PNFI = 0.736, and PGFI = 0.530. Model 6 was designed by combining intrinsic motivation (Factor 1), innovation performance (Factor 2), and a high-performance work system and person–organization fit (Factor 3) to create three factors. The results showed X²(p) = 3569.381(0.000), X²/df = 6.340, RMSEA = 0.132, IFI = 0.811, CFI = 0.811, PNFI = 0.741, and PGFI = 0.531. Based on these results, we acknowledge that Model 1 is acceptable with a good fit.

Table 1. Summary of structural model fit results.

Model	χ2(p)	χ2/df	RMSEA	IFI	CFI	PNFI	PGFI
Model 1 (expected model of four-factor a)	2004.908(0.000)	3.747	0.094	0.908	0.907	0.790	0.629
Model 2 (one-factor b)	3215.899(0.000)	5.722	0.140	0.787	0.786	0.720	0.492
Model 3 (two-factor c)	1488.677(0.000)	4.581	0.124	0.832	0.832	0.759	0.562
Model 4 (two-factor d)	3227.453(0.000)	5.743	0.124	0.771	0.770	0.666	0.554
Model 5 (three-factor e)	3655.867(0.000)	6.494	0.134	0.806	0.805	0.736	0.530
Model 6 (three-factor f)	3569.381(0.000)	6.340	0.132	0.811	0.811	0.741	0.531

Note: ^a = High-performance work systems, intrinsic motivation, person–organization fit, and innovation performance. ^b = All items were loaded on a single factor. ^c = High-performance work systems and person–organization fit, innovation performance and intrinsic motivation. ^d = High-performance work systems and intrinsic motivation, innovation performance and person–organization fit. ^e = High-performance work systems, innovation performance, innovation performance and person–organization fit. ^f = Intrinsic motivation, innovation performance, high-performance work systems and person–organization fit.

summarizes the results of the structural model fit index.

The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of Model 1 (four-factor model) showed that the scale was a good fit and had adequate construct validity. Next, we tested convergent validity. The results were as follows: The standardized regression weights of the high-performance work system ranged from 0.709 to 0.846, intrinsic motivation from 0.773 to 0.909, innovation performance from 0.845 to 0.935, and person–organization fit from 0.875 to 0.92. Furthermore, the average variance extracted (AVE) for high-performance work systems was 0.630, intrinsic motivation was 0.708, innovation performance was 0.819, and person–organization fit was 0.789. These values were all greater than 0.5. The value of the composite reliability (CR) of a high-performance work system was 0.930, intrinsic motivation was 0.888, innovation performance was 0.967, and person–organization fit was 0.961. All these values were greater than 0.7. A measurement is considered to have significant validity if the AVE of variables is higher than 0.5 and CR is higher than 0.7 [85].

Furthermore, based on these results, the CFA indicates that the measures satisfy the requirements for acceptability [85]. Therefore, the structural equation model was found to be significant. We examined three types of model fit indices: the absolute fit index, incremental fit index, and parsimonious adjusted index. First, the absolute fit index was X²(p) = 2004.91(0.000), X²/df = 3.74, and RMSEA = 0.094. The RMSEA is indeed a “badness of fit” index, with values very close to 0 indicating almost perfect fit and greater values indicating worse fit. For the RMSEA, values less than 0.05 reflect a small approximation error, values between 0.05 and 0.08 reflect an acceptable error of approximation, and those greater than 0.10 constitute poor model fit [86]. Second, the incremental fit index was IFI = 0.908 and CFI = 0.907. If the incremental fit index is more than 2 and is 0.9, it is considered a good fit [87]. Third, the parsimonious adjusted index was PNFI = 0.79 and PGFI = 0.629. The parsimonious fit index is considered to be between 0 and 1 (with 0 or 1 if outside this range) [88].

Table 2. The result of confirmatory factor analysis.

Variables		Effect	S.E.	C.R.	p	Standardized Regression Weights	AVE	C.R
High-Performance Work System (A)	A1	1				0.800	0.630	0.930
	A2	0.860	0.049	17.416	***	0.746
	A3	0.855	0.054	15.927	***	0.709
	A4	0.993	0.041	24.203	***	0.870
	A5	1.024	0.047	21.610	***	0.833
	A6	0.967	0.048	20.217	***	0.807
	A7	1.052	0.053	19.811	***	0.799
	A8	0.800	0.048	16.742	***	0.751
	A9	0.878	0.044	19.777	***	0.797
	A10	1.108	0.049	22.453	***	0.846
	A11	1.048	0.061	17.179	***	0.742
	A12	1.116	0.055	20.467	***	0.812
Intrinsic Motivation (B)	B1	1				0.773	0.708	0.888
	B2	1.077	0.041	26.170	***	0.909
	B3	0.992	0.045	21.936	***	0.843
	B4	1.045	0.045	22.978	***	0.859
	B5	1.015	0.050	20.173	***	0.820
Innovation Performance (C)	C1	1				0.893	0.819	0.967
	C2	1.012	0.033	30.817	***	0.886
	C3	1.039	0.032	32.362	***	0.892
	C4	1.073	0.042	25.725	***	0.845
	C5	1.057	0.029	35.959	***	0.935
	C6	1.063	0.035	30.140	***	0.917
	C7	1.034	0.032	31.985	***	0.931
	C8	1.122	0.037	30.112	***	0.916
	C9	1.054	0.033	31.768	***	0.93
Person–Organization Fit (D)	D1	1				0.889	0.789	0.961
	D2	1.017	0.030	33.966	***	0.893
	D3	0.984	0.033	29.942	***	0.902
	D4	0.978	0.037	26.156	***	0.881
	D5	1.024	0.039	26.438	***	0.883
	D6	1.082	0.041	26.328	***	0.883
	D7	1.054	0.044	24.149	***	0.875
	D8	1.086	0.039	28.197	***	0.901
	D9	1.067	0.039	27.060	***	0.890
Model Fit Index		X²(p) = 2004.91(0.000), X²/df = 3.74, RMSEA = 0.094, IFI = 0.908, CFI = 0.907, PGFI = 0.629, PNFI = 0.790

***: p < 0.001.

provides the results of the convergent validity tests.

4.2. Reliability Analysis

Reliability analysis refers to the consistency or stability of the results obtained from the questionnaire, which reflects the true degree of the tested characteristics, whereas validity implies that the measuring tools can measure the accuracy of the aspects to be measured [84]. Therefore, this study analyzed Cronbach’s α values, which are as follows: First, the high-performance work system was measured using 12 items rated on a seven-point Likert scale to assess participants’ degree of recognition related to shared leadership. The results showed that Cronbach’s alpha for high-performance work systems was 0.962. Second, intrinsic motivation was measured using five items rated on a seven-point Likert scale to assess the extent to which participants in the workplace degree of motivation. The results showed that Cronbach’s alpha for intrinsic motivation was 0.935. Third, innovation performance was measured using nine items rated on a seven-point Likert scale assessing participants’ degree of innovation performance in their workplace. The results showed that Cronbach’s alpha for employees’ innovation performance was 0.981. Finally, person–organization fit was measured using nine items rated on a seven-point Likert scale to assess participants’ feelings of person–organization fit in their workplace. The results showed that Cronbach’s alpha for person–organization fit was 0.978. All coefficient values of Cronbach’s alpha were confirmed to be higher than 0.7. Nunnally (1978) suggested that reliability is significant when its value is higher than 0.7 [89]. Thus, the reliability of the variables was significant and valid [89].

Table 3. Reliability analysis results.

Variables	Item	Cronbach’s Alpha
High-Performance Work System (A)	1. This subsidiary offers training to improve the interpersonal skills of employees.	0.962
	2. New employees undergo extensive orientation training in order to learn the values and culture of this subsidiary and/or its American parent company.
	3. Many of this subsidiary’s employees are moved through a series of different job assignments in order to prepare them for future assignments.
	4. This subsidiary devotes considerable resources to manager training and development.
	5. We do a great deal of cross-training, so that managers are familiar with different jobs and can fill in for others when necessary.
	6. The employee selection process is very rigorous in this subsidiary (e.g., use of tests, aptitude test, interviews, etc.).
	7. There is advance planning as to which of this subsidiary’s current employees will be transferred or promoted when there is a job vacancy.
	8. An employee’s job performance is appraised, to a significant extent, on how well he or she follows orders and company procedures and rules.
	9. We strive to keep a large salary difference between high and low performers in the same position.
	10. An employee’s pay is closely tied to individual or group performance in this subsidiary.
	11. Employees often work in self-directed teams.
	12. This subsidiary extensively shares its financial and/or performance data with its employees.
Intrinsic Motivation (B)	1. I enjoy finding solutions to complex problems.	0.935
	2. I enjoy coming up with new ideas for products.
	3. I enjoy engaging in analytical thinking.
	4. I enjoy creating new procedures for work tasks.
	5. I enjoy improving existing processes or products.
Innovation Performance (C)	1. Creating new ideas for improvements.	0.981
	2. Mobilizing support for innovative ideas.
	3. Searching out new working methods, techniques, or instruments.
	4. Acquiring approval for innovative ideas.
	5. Transforming innovative ideas into useful applications.
	6. Generating original solutions to problems.
	7. Introducing innovative ideas in a systematic way.
	8. Making important organizational members enthusiastic for inno.
	9. Thoroughly evaluating the application of innovate ideas.
Person–Organization Fit (D)	1. The match is very good between the demands of my job and my personal skills.	0.978
	2. My abilities and training are a good fit with the requirements of my job.
	3. My personal abilities and education provide a good match with the demands that my job places on me.
	4. There is a good fit between what my job offers me and what I am looking for in a job.
	5. The attributes that I look for in a job are fulfilled very well by my present job.
	6. The job that I currently hold gives me just about everything that I want from a job.
	7. The things that I value in life are very similar to the things that my organization values.
	8. My personal values match my organization’s values and culture.
	9. My organization’s values and culture provide a good fit with the things that I value in life.

shows the reliability analysis results.

4.3. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

The descriptive statistical analyses included means and standard deviations. The mean values of high-performance work systems, intrinsic motivation, person–organization fit, and innovation performance were 5.619, 5.607, 5.625, and 5.653, respectively. The standard deviations of high-performance work systems, intrinsic motivation, person–organization fit, and innovation performance were 1.114, 1.190, 1.183, and 1.188, respectively. The results of the correlation analysis showed that a high-performance work system was associated with intrinsic motivation (r = 0.837, p < 0.001), and person–organization fit (r = 0.848, p < 0.001) and innovation performance (r = 0.810, p < 0.001) have a positive correlation. Additionally, intrinsic motivation was positively correlated with person–organization fit (r = 0.784, p < 0.001) and innovation performance (r = 0.821, p < 0.001). There was also a positive correlation between person–organization fit and innovation performance (r = 0.838, p < 0.001).

Table 4. The result of descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

	Mean	S.D	High-Performance Work System	Intrinsic Motivation	Person–Organization Fit	Innovation Performance
High-Performance Work System	5.619	1.114	-
Intrinsic Motivation	5.607	1.190	0.837 ***	-
Person–Organization Fit	5.625	1.183	0.848 ***	0.784 ***	-
Innovation Performance	5.653	1.188	0.810 ***	0.821 ***	0.838 ***	-

***: p < 0.001.

shows the results of the descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.

To verify possible problems with multicollinearity, a linear regression analysis was performed using SPSS software. The results show that the value of the variance inflation factor (VIF) of a high-performance work system is 4.897, intrinsic motivation is 3.575, and person–organization fit is 3.798. Furthermore, when intrinsic motivation is used as a media variable, the VIF value is 3.342. As these are all less than 5, no serious multicollinearity problem is indicated.

4.4. Hypotheses Tests

SPSS Process Model 4 was used to analyze the mediation effect of intrinsic motivation. The results showed that a high-performance work system has a positive impact on perceptions of intrinsic motivation (Estimate = 0.871, p < 0.001) and innovation performance (Estimate = 0.425, p < 0.001). Additionally, perception of intrinsic motivation has a significant impact on innovation performance (Estimate = 0.476, p < 0.001). Therefore, Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were supported.

Hypothesis 4 proposed that intrinsic motivation mediated the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. The indirect effect was 0.415. The bootstrapped confidence intervals were Boot LLCI = 0.215 and Boot ULCI = 0.594, as 0 was not included between Boot LLCI and Boot ULCI. These results indicate that the mediation effect of intrinsic motivation was significant. Thus, Hypothesis 4 is supported.

Table 5. The results of Process Model 4.

Path			Estimate	S.E.	t	p	LLCI	ULCI
High-Performance Work System	→	Intrinsic Motivation	0.871	0.032	26.812	0.000	0.8070	0.9349
High-Performance Work System	→	Innovation Performance	0.425	0.056	7.475	0.000	0.3136	0.5377
Intrinsic Motivation	→	Innovation Performance	0.476	0.054	8.711	0.000	0.3691	0.5845
Indirect Effect(s) of X on Y
Indirect Effect			Effect	Boot SE	Boot LLCI		Boot ULCI
High-Performance Work System → Intrinsic Motivation → Innovation Performance			0.415	0.096	0.215		0.594

gives the results of the hypotheses tests.

4.5. Descriptive Moderating Role of Person–Organization Fit

Fourth, this study tested the moderating role of person–organization fit on the relationship between high-performance work systems and intrinsic motivation. A multiple regression analysis was conducted using the SPSS 23.0 to verify the hypothesis.

Table 6. The result of moderation.

Dependent Variable: Intrinsic Motivation
	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
	β	t	VIF	β	t	VIF	β	t	VIF
High-Performance Work System	0.837 ***	26.812	1.000	0.614 ***	10.778	3.550	0.639 ***	11.174	3.648
Person–Organization Fit				0.263 ***	4.623	3.550	0.276 ***	4.879	3.576
A*B							0.088 **	2.666	1.209
R2 (Adj-R2)	0.701 (0.700)			0.720 (0.718)			0.727 (0.724)
ΔR2 (Adj-R2)				0.019 (0.018)			0.007 (0.006)
F	718.893 ***			393.989 ***			270.269 ***

***: p < 0.001, **: p < 0.01.

presents the analysis results for Hypotheses 5. The results showed that person–organization fit positively moderated the effect of a high-performance work system on intrinsic motivation (ß = 0.088, p < 0.01). Therefore, Hypotheses 5 were supported.

Figure 2 illustrates the moderating role of person–organization fit. As can be seen from the figure, when subordinates’ endorsement of person–organization fit increases, the high-performance work system has a higher perception of intrinsic motivation for organizational members. In contrast, when subordinates’ endorsement of person–organization fit is lower, the high-performance work system perceives lower intrinsic motivation in organization members.

5. Discussion

This study examined the impact of high-performance work systems on employee innovation performance in organizational systems among Chinese SME employees working across diverse work domains. The results show that training opportunities, competitive pay for performance, reasonable promotion packages, and effective channels of communication and sharing in the organization help members satisfy their intrinsic psychological needs and enhance their intrinsic motivation. As a result, employees will generate innovative ideas at work, thereby improving the firm’s innovation performance [10]. This study focused on identifying the processes through which a high-performance work system influences innovation performance. We also focused on the intrinsic motivation of organizational members in SMEs, and in particular, verified through the mediating effect that intrinsic motivation is a key factor in high-performance work systems causing innovation performance among employees. This suggests that the higher the high-performance work system in which employees increase their motivation to work to provide a competitive advantage for the organization, the more intrinsic motivation of employees can be improved, which ultimately enhances the improvement of innovation performance. Furthermore, the interaction between high-performance work systems and person–organization fit was tested to reveal differences in how the level of intrinsic motivation can change. In the end, person–organization fit showed a moderated mediating effect by positively controlling the relationship between a high-performance work system and intrinsic motivation.

Based on the results of this study, we summarize the following implications.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

First, high-performance work systems positively impact members’ intrinsic motivation. When members become aware of the organization’s ideology of pursuing organizational growth through members’ self-development by adopting and actively implementing a high-performance work system, trust and commitment to the organization increase, creating a positive work attitude through motivation [90]. In organizational systems, high-performance work system models that fail to retain members lose their only competitive advantage, resulting in low retention of organizational members, while in-position organizational members have unsatisfied psychosocial needs and are deprived of autonomy in the organization, which gradually degrades the intrinsic motivation of the members to work for the organization by reducing work meaningfulness and value [91]. Thus, high-performance work systems affect the intrinsic motivation of organizational members.

Second, the results show that the intrinsic motivation of organizational members positively impacts innovation performance. This finding suggests that higher intrinsic motivation among members triggers higher innovation performance. In an organizational system, individual organizational members who are intrinsically motivated are more satisfied with their work, more engaged, and more motivated in their work, which promotes creativity and effectively contributes to organizational innovation performance [92]. Intrinsic motivation drives members to increase work effort through a sense of accomplishment, challenge, and trust in the work process, whereas organizational members’ intrinsic motivation is characterized by a high level of commitment to their work, which psychologically creates a self-determined pattern through increased interest in the work itself [60,64]. Intrinsic motivation is an important variable that can effectively improve the innovation performance of organizational members and promote member retention. A literature review highlighted the importance of intrinsic motivation of organizational members with outcome variables such as innovation performance and psychological capital [93]. Therefore, the present study concludes that the intrinsic motivation of organizational members positively impacts innovation performance.

Third, the results show that the intrinsic motivation of organizational members positively mediates the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. High-performance work systems are an important expression of the closely complementary individual human resource system with the potential to promote each member’s role in the organization, stimulating the development of individual self-competence and the effective sharing of information among members. Under conditions of spontaneity, high-performance work systems encourage employees to actively participate in decision-making, pursue challenges, and explore new possibilities, which helps to satisfy their need for autonomy, enhances intrinsic motivation, and pushes them to demonstrate higher innovation performance [15]. On the other hand, organizational members feel valued and maximize the application of their abilities to their work, thereby increasing intrinsic motivation and positive behaviors. This intrinsic motivation stimulates curiosity, learning, and exploration among organizational members, leading them to devote more of their attention to innovation, potentially leading to creative outcomes, which facilitates innovation performance [69].

Finally, person–organization fit may play a key role in enabling intrinsic motivation in organizational members. According to research findings, high-performance work systems focus on developing competent organizational members who are trusted by the organization and free to make decisions within it [36]. Because of this characteristic of high-performance work systems, this study expects that the stronger the high-performance work system, which not only provides abundant resource support but also promotes a fair organizational climate, the higher the intrinsic motivation and person–organization fit among members [23]. Thus, members with a higher person–organization fit tend to have high intrinsic motivation [75]. The weaker the high-performance work system, the more likely an organization is to use strong cultural management practices to instill an organizational culture in organizational members, not actively seek out the opinions of organizational members, not value individual competencies, and not actively provide regular appraisals and rewards or promotion and training. Under such circumstances of low person–organization fit, organizational members may be unable to understand and agree or support the signals sent by high-performance work systems, which makes it difficult for these systems to inspire high intrinsic motivation in organizational members [78,79]. Overall, the stronger the high-performance work system, the higher the level of the person–organization fit and the higher the intrinsic motivation of organization members. Hypothesis 5 tests the moderating role of person–organization fit by taking a more integrated approach to high-performance work system induction, providing a basis for future research to explore or find ways to more readily promote intrinsic motivation in organizational members.

5.2. Practical Implication

In addition to the theoretical contributions mentioned above, based on our theoretical and research findings, we propose the following practical implications. First, high-performance work systems improve members’ motivation to provide a competitive advantage to the organization as a key variable in the organizational system. Thus, with the increasingly dynamic nature of the business environment, today’s firms can benefit significantly by adopting high-performance work systems to maximize the potential of organizational members, emphasizing the use of diversified organizational systems brought about by high-performance work system–style collaboration [94]. Therefore, the positive impact of high-performance work systems is emphasized in the context of Chinese SMEs. High-performance work systems shape desired organizational member behaviors and attitudes by fostering psychological connections between organizational goals and member goals, creating highly motivated members who will provide a competitive advantage for the organization [65].

Second, whereas traditional high-performance work systems emphasize defining themselves as a series of closely complementary individual human resource systems, this study emphasizes making high-performance work systems more prominent in organizational systems as two features of enhanced knowledge management processes and strong organizational support. This study confirmed the effectiveness of a culture focused on grasping individual members’ competencies, a catalyst for the development of individual members’ technological strengths, and an environment that facilitates the exchange of information and knowledge among members, which is essential for cultivating the intrinsic motivation of organizational members [95]. For example, organizational members who strive to improve their personal expertise and skills while taking the initiative to overcome challenging tasks at work not only improve their personal competence but also gain recognition from their leaders and co-workers, making them more likely to enhance and support innovative decisions and activities within the organization and positively impact firm performance [96]. Moreover, it is positively associated with knowledge sharing, job satisfaction, and employee proactive behavior [97,98,99].

Third, the role of the organization enhances the intrinsic motivation of its members. Therefore, enterprises should be committed to providing them with a working environment in which they can strive for collaborative innovation within the organization and simultaneously take advantage of the diversified benefits of high-performance work system–style cooperation for the horizontal expansion of their innovations. Unlike previous eras where the market of SMEs was dominated by the rapid improvement of the competitiveness of the enterprise in the industry, then the research and development activities of SMEs using the complementary individual human resource systems of the organization members combined with the company-specific resources and the effective combination of the self-determination and individual capabilities of the organization members can improve the performance of the enterprise and stimulate more innovation. In addition, highly digitalized enterprises can promote organizational members’ proactive creativity, collaboration, and agility, thereby increasing innovation performance. Therefore, studies related to intrinsic motivation among organizational members have recently increased [100]. These suggestions on how to enhance the recognition and motivation of organizational members positively contribute to organizational development, sustainable survival, and organizational performance and enhance the innovation performance of organizational members.

Finally, person–organization fit is one of the most important factors in the attitudes of organizational members toward high-performance work systems. The positive moderating effect of a person–organization fit suggests that enterprises should adhere to people-oriented ideas in the pursuit of corporate profits while simultaneously taking humane leadership and management measures to provide members of the organization the appropriate organizational support, regular training, a clear reward system, clear standards for promotion, etc. This approach allows for members’ psychological needs to be satisfied. Secondly, in the context of the increasingly dynamic business environment, enterprises should update their management concepts, create an open, inclusive, and respectful corporate culture, focus on organizational humanistic care, and motivate organizational members to work with a more positive attitude. Previous studies have shown that high-performance work systems are positively correlated with autonomous learning ability and organizational performance [26]. Therefore, organizations should pay more attention to the extent to which organizational members understand enhanced person–organization fit.

5.3. Limitations and Future Research

Although this study validates the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance, it has some limitations that provide directions for future research.

First, this study only focused on the mediating role of the intrinsic motivation of organizational members in the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. However, this study argues that other variables besides intrinsic motivation can mediate the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. We anticipate that the psychological empowerment of organizational members will mediate the relationship between high-performance work systems and innovation performance. Based on these findings, we suggest that future research should empirically test these mediators.

Second, only person–organization fit was investigated as a moderator of the relationship between high-performance work systems and the intrinsic motivation and innovation performance of organizational members. However, future research should explore other parameters related to the personal, organizational, and leadership aspects of SME members. These variables include person–organization fit versus person–job fit, employee creativity, and innovation climate [101,102,103]. Future studies should investigate the role of these variables and verify their moderating effects.

Third, this study was limited to members of organizations working in Chinese SMEs. Considering the different cultural backgrounds of Chinese firms, future researchers should conduct empirical studies on organizational members with special characteristics, such as state-owned enterprises or foreign-funded firms, e.g., civil servants, to compare the differences between them and whether the results of this study can be generalized to other types of organizations.

Fourth, most of the employees surveyed were members of an organization. The survey was self-reported. Therefore, we believe there may be common method bias. Future research should continue to examine and design methods of data collection by organizational leaders and organizational members relative to each other to avoid this bias. Therefore, organizations or leaders should give more autonomy to the organization members themselves so that they will consider themselves as a part of the organization and try to create high performance for the organization. In addition, the organization and its members working for the same goal is a shared vision goal that companies have been pursuing. This study found that organizational systems are particularly important high-performance work systems that constantly emphasize providing information to share with members and resource complementarity, allowing organizational members to rely on their own technological advantages to gain dominance and voice in the enterprise. The organization members can contribute to the enterprise’s competitiveness in the industry to overcome obstacles to innovation. This will lead to improved innovation performance under the premise of guaranteeing the survival of the enterprise, which is essential.

Finally, this study is a cross-sectional study with only one measurement. A longitudinal study should be conducted to generate more accurate results and reliable conclusions. The research topic should focus on exploring the antecedents of increasing job performance [104], trust [105], innovation performance [106], ethical climate [107], and provide the way to decrease knowledge hiding [108] and counterproductive work behavior [109].