Institutional pressure and innovative behavior of knowledge workers: a moderated mediation model of leadership style and public service motivation

Purpose This study aims to investigate the impact of three types of organizational institutional pressures – coercive, normative and mimetic – on the innovative behavior of knowledge workers. It examines the distinct moderating roles of transformational and transactional leadership, with public service motivation (PSM) serving as the mediating mechanism. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on two independent studies (Study 1:36 teams, 380 responses on transformational leadership; Study 2:41 teams, 407 responses on transactional leadership), the authors used a cross-level moderated mediation model. Confirmatory factor analysis validated the measurement structure, and the use of cross-level data ensured methodological rigor. Findings Transformational leadership amplifies the positive impact of normative and mimetic pressures on PSM, thereby enhancing innovation. Conversely, transactional leadership undermines the motivational link of coercive pressure to PSM, suppressing innovation. These results highlight the situational dependency of leadership: transformational leadership can unlock the innovative potential inherent in norms and imitation pressures, whereas transactional leadership tends to exacerbate execution rigidity in compliance-emphasizing environments, weakening the translation of coercive pressure into innovative behavior. Research limitations/implications While this study uses cross-level data, it relies on self-reported measures. Although steps were taken to ensure validity in the data analysis, future research could directly measure performance using objective scales to achieve greater scientific rigor. Practical implications Organizations should strategically align leadership styles with types of institutional pressure. Transformational leadership is critical for leveraging the motivational and innovative potential of normative and mimetic pressures. In contrast, transactional leadership should be minimized in coercive contexts to avoid suppressing creativity. Cultivating PSM through clear communication of institutional goals and fostering autonomy in rule-driven environments can help convert external pressures into sustainable drivers of innovation. Originality/value This study categorizes institutional pressures into coercive, normative and mimetic types, exploring their unique interplay with leadership styles. The research reveals an asymmetrical leadership effect: transformational leaders enhance innovation in value-driven contexts, whereas transactional leaders impede it in environments tightly regulated by policies and rules. By integrating institutional theory with leadership studies, this research offers a framework for understanding the innovation processes of knowledge workers.