This research is essential for both theoretical and practical reasons. Theoretically, it contributes to the literature by integrating workplace spirituality into the study of innovative work behavior within public sector institutions, a setting that has been underexplored compared to private organizations. Practically, the findings will offer insights for managers and policymakers in GLAM institutions to design strategies that enhance employee well-being, foster creativity, and improve institutional performance through workplace spirituality. By focusing on the Indonesian context, this study further enriches the global discourse on workplace spirituality and innovation by providing evidence from a developing-country perspective.

IWB refers to employees’ development, adoption, and implementation of new ideas for products, technologies, and work methods, and is widely recognized as a determinant of organizational success ( Yuan & Woodman, 2010). Rather than focusing solely on innovation outcomes, IWB emphasizes the process through which employees identify opportunities, generate ideas, champion them, and implement solutions ( De Jong & Den Hartog, 2010). Sustaining IWB is crucial for organizational effectiveness, survival, and long-term development.

Research on IWB has spanned both private and public organizations, with recent reviews highlighting personal, team, and organizational antecedents ( Srirahayu et al., 2023). However, empirical studies within information institutions remain limited, with most focusing on libraries and museums. Little is known about IWB in archives and galleries, where innovation is typically examined through product-oriented practices rather than employee behavior ( Hintz, 2015; Vitkauskaitė, 2017). Table 1 summarizes prior IWB studies in information institutions. Table 1.

No	Author(s), Year	Context/Institution	Method	Main Findings
1	Peng (2018)	Libraries	Quantitative	Job involvement and LMX significantly influence IWB; LMX moderates this relationship.
2	Chuang et al. (2019)	Libraries	Quantitative case study	Environmental and organizational barriers hinder IWB processes.
3	Kermani & Solhdoost (2017)	Libraries	Quantitative	Innovation climate explains 44% of variance in librarians’ IWB.
4	Sa’ari, Roslim et al. (2018)	Libraries	Quantitative case study	Media networks, organizational commitment, and teamwork cooperation support IWB.
5	Sa’ari, Idrus et al. (2018)	Libraries	Quantitative case study	Opportunity recognition for IWB is supported by knowledge, prior experience, self-awareness, and networks.
6	Kung et al. (2020)	Libraries	Quantitative	Ambidextrous leadership exerts the strongest influence on IWB.
7	Goulaptsi et al. (2019)	Museums	Quantitative	Demographics, transformational leadership, and task orientation significantly explain museum employees’ IWB.

Note: No empirical studies on IWB were found in archives or galleries. Existing literature focuses primarily on innovation products or adoption opportunities ( Hintz, 2015; Vitkauskaite, 2017).

Coworker incivility—manifested in dismissive comments, social exclusion, or subtle disrespect—undermines psychological safety and drains cognitive-emotional resources needed for creativity. Drawing on Affective Events Theory ( Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) and Conservation of Resources Theory ( Hobfoll, 1989), incivility reduces trust, knowledge sharing, and willingness to take risks, thereby inhibiting IWB ( Scott & Bruce, 1994; Janssen, 2004). H1:

Coworker incivility negatively affects IWB.

Workplace spirituality encompasses meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment ( Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). Incivility erodes trust and connectedness, weakening these dimensions and limiting employees’ sense of purpose ( Giacalone & Jurkiewicz, 2010). Reducing incivility, conversely, fosters harmony and care, enhancing spiritual work climates ( Rego & Pina e Cunha, 2008). H2:

Coworker incivility negatively affects workplace spirituality.

Core job dimensions—skill variety, task significance, autonomy, and feedback—enhance intrinsic motivation and responsibility, which in turn encourage creativity and innovation ( Hackman & Oldham, 1976). Autonomy fosters experimentation, while feedback supports idea refinement. Meaningful and significant tasks further strengthen engagement in innovative behaviors ( De Jong & Den Hartog, 2010). H3:

Job characteristics positively affect IWB.

Well-designed job characteristics also foster workplace spirituality by enhancing meaning, purpose, and connectedness ( Ashmos & Duchon, 2000). Autonomy aligns employees’ decisions with their values, while significance and feedback enhance purpose and growth, thus nurturing spiritual fulfillment at work. H4:

Job characteristics positively affect workplace spirituality.

Leadership shapes organizational climate and meaning-making processes. Transformational and servant leadership foster vision, hope, compassion, and ethical alignment, which strengthen workplace spirituality ( Kim Quy et al., 2023; Mohammed & Elashram, 2022). Conversely, authoritarian leadership undermines these dimensions. H5:

Leadership style positively affects workplace spirituality.

Supportive leadership is a primary driver of IWB, as it promotes trust, autonomy, and intellectual stimulation. Transformational and servant leadership foster risk-taking and knowledge sharing, which enhance idea generation, promotion, and implementation ( Afsar & Umrani, 2018; Rehman et al., 2023). H6:

Leadership style positively affects IWB.

Workplace spirituality enriches meaning, purpose, and interconnectedness, which strengthen employees’ motivation and creativity. Spiritual fulfillment enhances collaboration, reduces fear of failure, and fosters innovation-supportive climates ( Petchsawang & Duchon, 2019). H7:

Workplace spirituality positively affects IWB.

Workplace spirituality represents employees’ ability to bring their whole selves to work without being tied to specific religious practices. Prior research links workplace spirituality with job satisfaction, engagement, and productivity ( Lee et al., 2014; Vyas-Doorgapersad, 2017). As an enabler, workplace spirituality is influenced by leadership style, job characteristics, and coworker interactions, and in turn enhances IWB ( Garg & Saini, 2023). H8:

Workplace spirituality mediates the relationship between coworker incivility and IWB.

This research utilized a quantitative methodology to investigate the associations among leadership style, job characteristics, coworker incivility, workplace spirituality, and innovative work behavior (IWB). A confirmatory analysis was conducted to assess the congruence of the empirical data with the proposed measurement and structural models ( Gatignon, 2010).

The study concentrated on personnel employed within public-sector information institutions in Indonesia. These institutions include galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAM). To address the research gap in archives and galleries, these institutions were included alongside libraries and museums. The sample consisted of 150 employees, selected through a purposive sampling approach, ensuring representation across different types of institutions. The relatively limited number of employees in galleries and museums was addressed by combining respondents from multiple institutions.

Data were collected through a structured questionnaire distributed electronically using Google Forms and disseminated via WhatsApp, social media, and professional networks. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. The consent was provided in written form, and participants were informed about the purpose of the study, confidentiality, and their right to withdraw at any time. Items were adapted from validated scales in previous research: •

Workplace Spirituality: Ashmos & Duchon (2000), Milliman et al. (2003)

The definition and examples of statements for each variable can be seen in table 2. Table 2.

Variable	Definition	Example Item
IWB	Employee engagement in generating, promoting, and implementing ideas	“I often suggest new ways to improve work processes.”
WPS	Perception of meaningful work, sense of community, and value alignment	“I feel my work contributes to a greater purpose.”
Job Characteristics	Skill variety, autonomy, task significance, feedback	“My job allows me to use a variety of skills.”
Leadership Style	Transformational/servant behaviors affecting motivation	“My supervisor encourages me to innovate.”
Coworker Incivility	Exposure to rudeness, gossip, or dismissive behavior	“Colleagues ignore my contributions.”

The data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS, which is suitable for complex models, smaller sample sizes, and non-normal data distributions ( Hair et al., 2019). The analysis followed a two-step procedure: (1) Measurement model assessment: to evaluate reliability (Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability), convergent validity (AVE), and discriminant validity (Fornell–Larcker criterion, HTMT); and (2) Structural model assessment: to examine path coefficients, R ² values, effect sizes (f ²), and predictive relevance (Q ²).

The profiles of the 150 respondents were analyzed to offer insights into the data distribution, as shown in Table 3. Table 3.

Profile	Classification	N	Percentage
Gender	Male	55	36.7%
	Female	95	63.3%
Affiliation	Library	93	62%
	Archive	57	38%
	Gallery	0	0%
	Museum	0	0%
Job Experience	< 1 year	22	14.7%
	< 5 years	52	34.7%
	< 10 years	33	22%
	> 10 years	43	28.6%

To measure validity, a validity test was conducted using SmartPLS 4.0 software, which can be seen from the loading factor value for each indicator. The requirement used to assess validity is that the loading factor must be >0.50. The measurement model was first evaluated to ensure the reliability and validity of the constructs. All variables demonstrated satisfactory values of composite reliability (CR > 0.70) and average variance extracted (AVE > 0.50), confirming convergent validity (according to Hair et al. (2021). In addition, discriminant validity was established based on the Fornell–Larcker criterion. These results indicate that the measurement items adequately captured the intended constructs ( table 4). Table 4.

Variables	Item	SLF	CA	CR	AVE	Conclusion
Transformational Leadership	TL1	0.842	0,925	0,940	0,692	Valid and reliable
	TL2	0.821
	TL3	0.866
	TL4	0.837
	TL5	0.868
	TL6	0.861
	TL7	0.721
	TF8	0.697
Job characteristics	JC1	0.639	0,800	0,870	0,628	Valid and reliable
	JC2	0.779
	JC3	0.652
	JC4	0.891
	JC5	0.756
	JC7	0.563
	JC8	0.734
Coworker incivility	CI1	0.760	0,926	0,938	0,629	Valid and reliable
	CI2	0.871
	CI3	0.771
	CI4	0.756
	CI5	0.748
	CI6	0.747
	CI7	0.864
	CI8	0.818
	CI9	0.791
Workplace spirituality	WS1	0.651	0,840	0,893	0,676	Valid and reliable
	WS2	0.799
	WS3	0.867
	WS4	0.813
	WS5	0.809
	WS7	0.538
	WS8	0.552
	WS9	0.525
	WS12	0.634
	WS13	0.527
	WS14	0.502
	WS16	0.623
IWB	IWB10	0.819	0,937	0,893	0,664	Valid and reliable
	IWB2	0.768
	IWB3	0.777
	IWB4	0.828
	IWB5	0.859
	IWB6	0.758
	IWB7	0.858
	IWB8	0.845
	IWB9	0.815

Note: TL = transformational leadership; JC = job characterisctic; CI = coworker incivility; WS = workplace spirituality; IWB = innovative work behavior.

The structural model was assessed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The overall model fit achieved a goodness-of-fit (GoF) value of 0.856 (see Table 5 ), which exceeds the recommended threshold of 0.36 for large effect sizes ( Wetzels et al., 2009). This indicates that the proposed model has strong explanatory power and predictive relevance. Table 5.

Variable	AVE	R-square
Coworker incivility	0.629
IWB	0.664	0.52
Job characteristics	0.628
Leadership	0.692
Workplace spirituality	0.676	0.594
Average	0.6578	1.114
Goodness of fit	0.856

Figure 2 and Table 6 shows the results of hypothesis testing, noting which of the relationships exhibited significant effects, thus also indicating which hypotheses are accepted or rejected. Figure 2. Table 6.

Hypothesis	Relationship	SD	P-values	Conclusion
H1	Coworker incivility ➔ IWB	0.073	0.148	Not Supported
H2	Coworker incivility ➔ workplace spirituality	0.057	0.003	Supported
H3	Job characteristics ➔ IWB	0.084	0.000	Supported
H4	Job characteristics ➔ workplace spirituality	0.062	0.000	Supported
H5	Tranformational Leadership ➔ workplace spirituality	0.078	0.001	Supported
H6	Tranformational ➔ IWB	0.069	0.130	Not Supported
H7	Workplace spirituality ➔ IWB	0.091	0.000	Supported
H8	Coworker incivility ➔ Workplace spirituality ➔ IWB	0.027	0.008	Supported
H9	Job characteristics ➔ Workplace spirituality ➔ IWB	0.051	0.000	Supported
H10	Tranformational ➔ Workplace spirituality ➔ IWB	0.044	0.017	Supported

The results indicate that H1 and H6 were not supported, suggesting that coworker incivility has no direct effect on IWB, and leadership style does not directly influence IWB. However, all other hypotheses (H2, H3, H4, H5, H7, H8, H9, and H10) were supported, highlighting the central role of workplace spirituality as both an independent predictor and a mediator of IWB.

This research offers novel perspectives on the antecedents of innovative work behavior (IWB) within Indonesian information institutions. The results emphasize the significant influence of workplace spirituality (WPS) as both a direct antecedent and an intermediary factor in promoting IWB. Additionally, the study uncovers some unforeseen outcomes that contribute to the understanding of these dynamics.

The analysis indicated that coworker incivility did not exert a significant direct influence on innovative work behavior (IWB). This finding diverges from previous research, which demonstrated that negative social interactions tend to diminish employees’ propensity for innovation (e.g., Janssen, 2017; De Jong & Den Hartog, 2010). A potential explanation is that employees within information institutions may develop coping strategies or depend on organizational support mechanisms that mitigate the immediate impact of incivility on innovation-related conduct. Additionally, the collectivist cultural context in Indonesia may foster behaviors aimed at maintaining social harmony, thereby lessening the detrimental effect of incivility on innovation. Nevertheless, the indirect effect of incivility via work-related psychological states (WPS) was statistically significant, indicating that incivility diminishes employees’ sense of purpose and community. This reduction subsequently leads to a decline in IWB, suggesting that the influence of incivility operates indirectly by weakening spiritual values within the workplace ( O’Brien, 2023).

Similarly, leadership style did not demonstrate a direct effect on innovative work behavior (IWB), which contrasts with previous research highlighting transformational and servant leadership as catalysts for innovation ( Afsar & Umrani, 2018; Rehman et al., 2023). This discrepancy may be attributed to the specific context of public sector information institutions, where formalized procedures, bureaucratic structures, and regulatory constraints limit leaders’ capacity to directly influence employees’ innovative conduct. Instead, leadership influences IWB indirectly through workplace spiritual factors (WPS). Leaders who cultivate a sense of purpose, community, and value congruence foster an environment that intrinsically motivates employees to engage in innovative activities (HATEM, 2024). This suggests that within the public sector, leadership alone is inadequate to promote IWB unless it concurrently enhances employees’ spiritual experiences at work.

The strong connections observed between job characteristics, leadership style, workplace spirituality (WPS), and innovative work behavior (IWB) align with existing research ( Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Petchsawang & Duchon, 2019; Kim Quy et al., 2023). When jobs are well-designed and leadership is supportive, employees’ sense of purpose and community is strengthened, which subsequently fosters innovation. The mediating role of WPS underscores its importance as a crucial facilitator of innovation, providing evidence that its influence extends beyond private organizations to include the public sector.

To better understand how employees engage in innovative work behavior—particularly in the process of implementing ideas—it is essential to explore the enabling factors involved. Enablers, also known as supporting, driving, or motivating factors ( Craig et al., 2016; Johnson, 2017), are defined as conditions that promote specific behaviors ( Lister et al., 2022). In this research, workplace spirituality (WPS) is regarded as an enabler of IWB. This perspective is supported by prior studies ( Garg & Saini, 2023; Masyhuri et al., 2021; Rizkiah & Mubarok, 2022), which highlight that WPS enhances employee creativity and innovative behavior.

Job characteristics such as skill variety, task significance, autonomy, and feedback were found to positively influence both WPS and IWB, supporting earlier findings ( Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Oldham & Cummings, 1996). Complex and meaningful jobs encourage employees to continuously develop knowledge, skills, and abilities, which stimulate intrinsic motivation and innovative behavior ( Ohly & Fritz, 2010; Cangialosi et al., 2021). In this study, enriched job design not only facilitated IWB directly but also strengthened the mediating role of WPS, indicating that employees are more likely to innovate when they perceive their work as purposeful and aligned with organizational values.

Although coworker incivility did not have a significant direct effect on IWB (H1 rejected), it showed a strong negative influence on WPS. Persistent exposure to dismissive behaviors, gossip, or subtle disrespect can erode trust, connectedness, and harmony in the workplace, which are key components of WPS ( Iqbal & Hassan, 2016; Tutar & Oruc, 2019). This supports the notion that workplace spirituality functions as a buffer, allowing employees to maintain their innovative behaviors despite interpersonal challenges. In essence, fostering a spiritually rich environment mitigates the adverse effects of incivility on innovation.

The finding that leadership style does not directly affect IWB (H6 rejected) further emphasizes the mediating role of WPS. Leaders may exhibit transformational or servant behaviors, but in rigid bureaucratic structures, the impact on employees’ innovation is dependent on whether leadership fosters spiritual engagement. Leaders who encourage meaningful work, provide autonomy, and align organizational values with employee values enhance employees’ intrinsic motivation to generate, promote, and implement ideas ( Carmeli et al., 2010; Pieterse et al., 2010). This finding contributes to the literature by highlighting the contextual boundary conditions under which leadership translates into innovation.

The role of spirituality in fostering collaboration among professionals is increasingly recognized as essential for improving workplace dynamics, particularly in Indonesian organizational settings. Spirituality creates conditions that encourage open communication, empathy, and mutual respect, thereby supporting innovative work behavior ( Naseer et al., 2020). The findings of this study indicate that integrating workplace spirituality into public sector institutions enhances employee well-being and creativity, which, in turn, promotes collaborative practices that strengthen institutional performance. Complementing this, research by Azzahra et al. (2025) demonstrates that organizational cultures emphasizing collaboration and empowerment tend to generate higher levels of innovation, thereby positioning spirituality as a foundational element for effective teamwork. By cultivating spiritually enriched work environments, institutions can harness the benefits of collaboration, including knowledge sharing and creative problem-solving. This holistic approach not only improves interpersonal relationships but also builds an organizational culture that sustains long-term innovation ( Khazanchi et al., 2007).

The link between spirituality and innovation outcomes can be examined through multiple dimensions of workplace spirituality (WPS) that stimulate creativity and proactive behaviors. A spiritually supportive workplace enhances employees’ capacity for innovation and contributes positively to organizational performance, particularly within Indonesia’s galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAM). Spiritual practices at work foster a strong sense of belonging and community while mitigating negative interactions such as coworker incivility, which may otherwise hinder innovation ( Wang et al., 2020). Leadership, especially transformational and servant styles, plays a pivotal role in shaping this environment by embedding spiritual values into daily organizational practices, thereby reinforcing both WPS and innovative work behavior ( Cai et al., 2018; Susilo et al., 2023). Assessing the influence of spirituality on innovation thus requires attention to how these elements collectively contribute to a culture of creativity, collaboration, and resilience. In doing so, the study underscores the importance of embedding spirituality in professional contexts as a means of sustaining innovation and advancing institutional development over the long term.

The primary innovation of this research is its identification of WPS as a crucial facilitator of IWB within information institutions. Although previous studies acknowledged WPS’s importance for employee well-being and performance ( Ashmos & Duchon, 2000; Rego & Pina e Cunha, 2008), this study provides empirical evidence of its mediating function between job characteristics, leadership styles, coworker incivility, and IWB. Importantly, the results showed that leadership style and coworker incivility did not directly affect IWB but exerted significant indirect effects through WPS. This indicates that in highly formalized, bureaucratic environments such as public information institutions, innovation is less about direct managerial influence or interpersonal conflict, and more about whether employees find meaning, community, and value alignment in their work.

The novelty of this study lies in situating workplace spirituality within the context of information professionals in Indonesia, a sector that has received little attention in the global IWB literature. Prior studies on IWB in information institutions primarily focused on libraries and museums (e.g., Peng, 2018; Chuang et al., 2019; Goulaptsi et al., 2019), leaving archives and galleries largely unexplored. By including these institutions, this study fills a critical gap and highlights the unique challenges and opportunities for fostering innovation in public-sector information services.

This theoretical contribution advances the understanding of IWB by shifting the focus from conventional predictors (leadership and job design) toward the spiritual dimension of the workplace, which has been relatively underexplored in the literature on public sector innovation.

For practitioners and policymakers, the study offers several actionable insights. First, managers in information institutions should develop programs that nurture workplace spirituality, such as value-driven leadership, participatory decision-making, and community-building practices. Second, designing enriched job characteristics—with autonomy, task variety, and feedback—can further strengthen employees’ sense of purpose and innovation. Third, organizations need to mitigate coworker incivility by establishing clear behavioral norms, conflict resolution mechanisms, and trust-building initiatives. By addressing these factors, information institutions can create spiritually supportive environments that encourage employees to innovate in delivering services to the public. By prioritizing spiritual dimensions, institutions can transform bureaucratic environments into more enabling spaces for innovation.

This research expands the knowledge base on IWB by examining information institutions beyond libraries and museums, providing new empirical evidence from archives and galleries. Future studies could extend this research by: •

Testing WPS and IWB relationships in other public-sector domains to examine the generalizability of the model.

This study has several limitations. First, the cross-sectional design restricts causal inference. Second, the reliance on self-reported survey data may be prone to common method bias, although steps were taken to mitigate this. Third, the sample was drawn exclusively from Indonesian information institutions, which limits generalizability to other cultural or institutional contexts. Finally, the study did not account for organizational-level variables (e.g., funding structures, policy environment), which may also shape innovation capacity in the public sector.