Leadership, culture, intellectual capital and knowledge processes for organizational innovativeness across industries: the case of Poland

Purpose: This study aims to present the overview of intellectual capital creation micro-mechanisms concerning formal and informal knowledge processes. The organizational culture, transformational leadership and innovativeness are also included in the investigation as ascendants and consequences of the focal relation of intellectual capital and knowledge processes. Design/methodology/approach: Based on a sample of 1,418 Polish knowledge workers from the construction, healthcare, higher education and information technology (IT) industries, the empirical model was developed using the structural equation modeling (SEM) method. Findings: The study exposes that the essence of transformational leadership innovativeness oriented is developing all intellectual capital components. To do so, leaders must support both formal and informal knowledge processes through the organizational culture of knowledge and learning. Furthermore, for best results of the knowledge transformation into intellectual capital, the learning culture must be shaped by both components: learning climate and acceptance of mistakes. Practical implications: Presented findings can be directly applied to organizations to enhance innovativeness. Namely, leaders who observe that the more knowledge is formally managed in their organizations, the less effective the knowledge exchange is-should put more effort into supporting informal knowledge processes to smoothly develop human and relational intellectual capital components. Shortly, leaders must implement an authentic learning culture, including the mistakes acceptance component, to use the full organizational potential to achieve intellectual capital growth. Intellectual capital growth is essential for innovativeness. Originality/value: This study presents the “big picture” of all intellectual capital creation micro-mechanisms linking transformational leadership with organizational innovativeness and explains the “knowledge paradox” identified by Mabey and Zhao (2017). This explanation assumes that intellectual capital components are created informally (i.e. human and relational ones) and formally (i.e. structural ones). Therefore, for best effects, both formal and informal knowledge processes, must be supported. Furthermore, this study exposes that the intensity of all explored micro-mechanisms is industry-specific.