Cultural Intelligence and Innovation: The Roles of Employee Voice,Work Engagement,and Innovation Climate in HEIs

COR Theory

Grounded in COR theory, a resource is an ability, tangible resource, personal trait, state, or energy valued for attaining an objective (Hobfoll, 1989, 2002), including materials or circumstances that assist someone in fulfilling an objective or satisfying a need (Halbesleben et al., 2014). COR theory states that individuals use their resources to gain what they perceive as valuable new resources in order to sustain their social functioning (Hobfoll, 2011). Resource accumulation can create a spiral of resource gain, creating a more favorable situation (Lin, 2023). Conversely, when resource loss is expected, individuals feel stressed and tend to adopt resource conservation behaviors to reduce the risk of resource depletion (J. Xie et al., 2020). The COR theory has been widely applied to explain the formation mechanisms of individual behavior in the workplace (Lin & He, 2025; Y. Zhang et al., 2025). Building upon this theory, the current study views CQ as a crucial individual resource for employees in cross-cultural contexts and systematically examines its mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions in influencing employees’ innovative work behavior.

According to COR theory, people endowed with greater resources are less vulnerable to resource loss and are motivated and capable of proactively investing existing resources to generate greater gains, forming a resource gain spiral (Hobfoll, 1989; Salanova et al., 2010). Thus, employees with higher CQ, leveraging their relatively abundant resource pools (A. S. Chen et al., 2024; Min et al., 2023), prioritize allocating resources (e.g., knowledge) toward innovative activities such as work improvement and creative implementation. Additionally, this study employs COR theory to elucidate the mediating mechanisms of employee voice and work engagement in the relationship between CQ and innovative work behavior. From one perspective, employees with higher CQ tend to proactively engage with their environment to expand their resource stockpile (He et al., 2019). In this regard, employee voice may serve as a deliberate proactive strategy through which such individuals seek to acquire external resources. Specifically, by actively offering suggestions, raising concerns, and participating in organizational decision-making, high-CQ employees endeavor to garner organizational support, secure supplementary resources, and ultimately achieve resource augmentation (L. Chen, Li, et al., 2020). From another perspective, such employees effectively mitigate resource depletion in multicultural settings by demonstrating stronger cross-cultural adaptability (Afsar et al., 2020; Y. Chen et al., 2023), thus accumulating ample psychological and social resources to establish stable resource security. This, in turn, motivates employees to continuously allocate resources to their work with greater positivity (manifested as higher levels of work engagement; Gabel-Shemueli et al., 2019). Through the combined effects of these two pathways, employees’ resource reserves are strengthened, providing robust support for resource-consumption activities such as innovative work behavior. Simply, although innovation requires substantial resource investment, it also generates potential resource gains (Montani et al., 2018), including enhanced performance and expanded career development opportunities.

Furthermore, COR theory indicates that individuals with relatively abundant resources not only excel at seizing opportunities to gain benefits and effectively avoiding the risk of resource depletion (Hobfoll, 1989), but also tend to prioritize allocating workplace resources toward work-related activities (Halbesleben et al., 2009; Zhu et al., 2023). A higher level of innovation climate enables employees to form expectations that the organization will continuously replenish critical resources, thereby alleviating resource constraints and uncertainty pressures faced during innovation (Lin, 2024) and reducing perceptions of innovation risk. In this context, employees with stronger cross-cultural adaptability (i.e., those with high CQ) may further invest existing resources in innovative work behavior to achieve sustained resource gains. Furthermore, grounded in COR theory, we examined the moderating role of innovation climate across two mediating pathways. Specifically, culturally intelligent employees, leveraging their cross-cultural perception and communication strengths, are more inclined to proactively express constructive opinions and innovative ideas (Jiang et al., 2018; L. Yuan et al., 2023). When innovation climate is robust, such voices are more likely to receive resource support from management and peers (e.g., information resources, developmental feedback, and implementation opportunities), thus facilitating the adoption of novel ideas into organizational practice and reinforcing employees’ dedication to exploring, generating, and implementing innovative solutions (Yue et al., 2025; Tsameti et al., 2023). Similarly, employees with elevated CQ maintain high engagement levels in daily work through their deep understanding and flexible adaptation to multicultural contexts (Y. Chen et al., 2023). Within innovation-supportive organizational environments, encouragement of creative experimentation, tolerance for unconventional thinking, and adequate allocation of innovation resources (Lin, 2024; Miao et al., 2023) further amplify the conversion of work engagement into innovative work behavior, directing more cognitive and emotional resources toward exploratory thinking and innovative practices. In summary, drawing on COR theory, this study demonstrates that employee voice, work engagement, and innovation climate are pivotal in shaping the relationship between CQ and innovative work behavior, and it extends the literature on this theory.

CQ and Innovative Work Behavior

CQ is the ability to recognize, analyze, and address issues in multicultural settings (Ang et al., 2007). It enhances communication, coordination, adaptation, and efficiency in cross-cultural contexts (Ramalu & Subramaniam, 2019). Earley and Ang (2003) identify four facets: metacognitive (mental processes for acquiring and interpreting cultural knowledge), cognitive (understanding of cultural conventions and systems), motivational (the willingness and determination to interact and remain engaged within culturally diverse contexts), and behavioral (the ability to enact appropriate verbal and nonverbal behaviors). Though distinct, these dimensions collectively represent a holistic capacity for effective performance across cultures. Researchers thus emphasize examining CQ at the overall level, since the interplay among its components may shape its effects more than individual facets (Diamantopoulos et al., 2008; Jiang et al., 2018). Building on past studies (Afsar et al., 2020; Kistyanto et al., 2022), we also treat CQ as an overall construct.

Innovative work behavior involves an individual’s conscious effort to generate, cultivate, and apply fresh ideas for sustainable organizational growth (Janssen, 2000). Thus, experimenting with new methods and bringing ideas to fruition are critical characteristics of innovative work behavior (de Jong & Den Hartog, 2007). Unlike creativity, innovative work behavior is not limited to ideation but implementation (Sarooghi et al., 2015). Research suggests that culture consists of programmed cognitive structures that may limit development of innovative thoughts (Leung et al., 2008). However, CQ helps employees to be more sensitive to intercultural differences and implicit cues, making them more confident in coming up with innovative ideas, which helps to break through cognitive stereotypes and enhance innovation potential.

CQ facilitates individuals to recognize knowledge and differences across cultures, thereby expanding their mindsets and generating new perspectives and scripts (Ang et al., 2007). It also boosts confidence in cross-cultural interactions, facilitates strong interpersonal connections among colleagues, superiors, and specialists, and promotes the development and integration of original and valuable insights (R. Brislin et al., 2006). Culturally intelligent employees tend to reduce social categorization biases, enhance cross-cultural communication, and stimulate creativity (Awad et al., 2025; Bogilović et al., 2017). Through frequent exchanges, such employees gain access to more information and diverse perspectives, thereby broadening their thinking and generating novel, useful ideas (Khan & Usman, 2025; Madjar, 2005). Furthermore, CQ enables people to gain deeper insight into others’ cognitions and actions, fostering trust and cooperative ties. This social support enhances employee confidence and mitigates negative emotions when confronting new tasks, risks, or challenges (Liu et al., 2023). Thus, employees may undertake innovative assignments, devote considerable energy to achieving demanding objectives, and develop and apply novel concepts, despite encountering difficulties (Afsar et al., 2020; Khan & Usman, 2025).

COR theory indicates that culture, as a valuable resource (Hobfoll, 2002), enables high-CQ employees to adapt to multicultural environments, reduce cognitive friction, and foster organizational integration (Gabel-Shemueli et al., 2019; Korzilius et al., 2017). Culturally intelligent employees not only avoid cultural conflicts but also show greater confidence and motivation when facing challenges (Fan et al., 2020; Muñoz-Doyague & Nieto, 2012). Resource-rich individuals tend to gain more opportunities, forming a virtuous cycle (Salanova et al., 2010). Thus, individuals possessing elevated levels of CQ are more capable of integrating information and knowledge across cultures (Fischer, 2011), thereby enhancing the quality and feasibility of innovation while reducing failure risk. They treat innovation as a strategic investment, expecting organizational support, recognition, and opportunities that offset potential resource losses (Hernawati & Tajib, 2024; Lin, 2024). Moreover, high CQ reduces communication barriers and interpersonal friction (Davaei et al., 2022), thereby mitigating resource loss. It also provides psychological security in uncertain environments, promoting long-term resource gains through continuous learning and relationship-building (Baker et al., 2025). Consequently, high CQ not only lowers innovation risks but also inspires employees to pursue innovation by reinforcing expected benefits and buffering against potential threats. Drawing on this argument, we advance the subsequent hypothesis:

Employee Voice as a Mediator

Employee voice denotes the voluntary articulation of work-related viewpoints and proposals aimed at enhancing operational efficiency (Huai et al., 2024; Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). Aryee et al. (2017) stated that organizations need to strengthen employee voice to achieve sustained growth and improve decision-making processes, product quality, and competitiveness by listening to employees (Afsar et al., 2019; Lin, 2023). However, expressing opinions can be a risky act because it typically means confronting prevailing routines and driving change (Aryee et al., 2017; Wilkinson et al., 2014). In multicultural environments, cultural differences can easily lead to misunderstandings, prompting some employees to remain silent to avoid social or professional risks (Jiang et al., 2018). Research shows that the COR theory plays a significant role in explaining the antecedents and consequences of employee voice (T. W. Ng & Feldman, 2012). According to this theory (Hobfoll, 1989), individuals are driven to protect existing resources and acquire additional resources, particularly those who already possess initial resources (Zhu et al., 2023; Zong et al., 2025). Employee voice facilitates individuals’ acquisition of additional resources, which can further enhance job performance and promote career development (Fuller et al., 2007; Lin & He, 2024). For example, employees with greater initial resources, such as strong interpersonal relationships or higher organizational status, are generally more inclined to speak up proactively, as they have a greater capacity to bear risks and are also more motivated to gain recognition and trust from leaders by expressing their views and suggestions, which helps them expand their social capital and accumulating additional resources that facilitate career development (L. Chen, Li, et al., 2020).

Culturally intelligent individuals can more effectively acquire and interpret information, form evaluations, and adjust their cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses based on cultural cues in multicultural settings (Jyoti & Kour, 2015). They excel at recognizing cultural differences, building positive relationships with organizational members, and reducing cross-cultural misunderstandings (L. Yuan et al., 2023). Empirical evidence suggests that individuals possessing high CQ better understand others’ cultural intentions, recognize cultural symbols, and know when and how to express opinions. They continuously learn and adapt both verbal and nonverbal behaviors to meet cultural demands (Afsar et al., 2019; Ang et al., 2007). These competencies enable them to more accurately gauge the content and timing of suggestions, reducing conflicts and risks stemming from cultural differences (Jiang et al., 2018), while lowering barriers and increasing willingness to offer suggestions in cross-cultural interactions (Lee & Sukoco, 2010). From the CQ dimensions: metacognitive CQ helps employees monitor and adjust their understanding of cultural differences to accurately grasp communication norms; cognitive CQ provides intercultural communication knowledge (Khan & Usman, 2025), aiding in adjusting content and delivery methods; motivational CQ boosts interaction confidence and reduces concerns about speaking up (C. Yang, 2023); while behavioral CQ promotes flexible adoption of appropriate communication styles, increasing the acceptance of suggestions. Collectively, these dimensions help employees better adapt to multicultural contexts and reduce the risks associated with offering suggestions.

Indeed, the first step toward innovation begins with employees’ deep reflection on workplace issues and constructive feedback (Soomro et al., 2021). Employee voice not only sparks innovative ideas among staff but also propels dialogue toward creative engagement (Ashiru et al., 2022; Miao et al., 2020). Essentially, innovation is not achieved overnight; it builds on employees expressing opinions and offering suggestions. Such feedback often reveals new challenges or opportunities, driving problem-solving through innovative solutions (Ajmal et al., 2024). As employees develop confidence in expressing their unique insights, they tend to translate those insights into creative ideas and transformative initiatives (Huai et al., 2024; Vu, Doan, et al., 2025). As Tang et al. (2020) noted, actively sharing perspectives can activate employees’ creative thinking, making them more inclined to explore new solutions for problems identified at work. Even if employees’ suggestions are not immediately adopted, voicing their opinions may prompt deeper reflection and cognitive processing of work issues, thereby motivating them to further explore and improve their work (Ajmal et al., 2024). Previous research emphasizes that employee voice serves as a vital link connecting individual goals with organizational development needs. By continuously contributing new ideas and driving process optimization, it ultimately fosters innovative work behavior (Mahmood et al., 2025; Miao et al., 2020). Elsetouhi et al. (2022) also found that employees demonstrate higher levels of innovation when they propose suggestions to the organization or exchange ideas with colleagues.

Grounded in COR theory, we propose that CQ can enhance employee voice and further drive innovative work behavior. As a critical individual resource, CQ helps people establish and maintain social networks within organizations, thereby gaining additional information and emotional support (K. Y. Ng et al., 2025; Rafiq et al., 2020). These resources enhance employees’ visibility and recognition among peers and managers (Henry et al., 2025), thereby reducing the risk of rejection, questioning, or interpersonal conflict when voicing suggestions (Liu et al., 2022). Simultaneously, information sharing and emotional support enable employees to better integrate others’ viewpoints and resources, thus enhancing the rigor and practicality of suggestions and boosting their confidence and the frequency with which they voice opinions (K. H. Kim et al., 2025). Furthermore, employee voice itself may serve as a driving force for innovation practices (Botha & Steyn, 2022). Employees who propose suggestions often seek to validate their ideas through action, proactively taking responsibility for driving change. This helps them cultivate a reputation for “walking the talk,” building personal credibility and trustworthiness (L. Chen, Li, et al., 2020). They are also predisposed to view innovative work behavior as a pathway to improved performance and resource returns, encompassing organizational assistance, leader recognition, and peer regard (Amabile et al., 1996). Consequently, those with abundant personal resources tend to translate suggestions into tangible innovation actions. In other words, CQ not only stimulates employees’ willingness to contribute suggestions by facilitating resource acquisition and risk management, but also provides psychological safety and enabling conditions for the realization of innovative ideas, ultimately driving innovative work behavior in multicultural organizations. Given the preceding arguments, we put forward the following hypothesis:

Work Engagement as a Mediator

Work engagement is a positive, emotionally rich state experienced during work activities, characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli et al., 2002). Vigor means that the employee is energetic and able to overcome difficulties; dedication is reflected in enthusiasm and positive commitment to the job; and absorption emphasizes deep focus and immersion. Dedicated employees generally maintain positive attitudes and are eager to apply their physical, mental, and heartfelt efforts to reach both individual and organizational objectives (Meyer & Gagnè, 2008). Thus, they tend to exhibit innovative work behavior, be able to withstand frustration, take on complex tasks, and actively solve problems (L. Chen, Luo, et al., 2020; Janssen, 2000). The COR theory has been widely applied in the field of work engagement research (Quan & van Dierendonck, 2025), conceptualizing work engagement as a motivational process and positing that the acquisition and allocation of resources constitute the core mechanisms determining individuals’ levels of engagement (Y. Chen et al., 2023; Memon et al., 2021). According to COR theory, individuals may invest existing resources to generate and mobilize additional resources (Hobfoll et al., 2018). In particular, individuals possessing a strong resource base are often more motivated and willing to devote resources to daily work, exhibiting greater work engagement (Y. Chen et al., 2023). Furthermore, engaged employees, with their psychological needs met, will further seek resource surplus and continuously invest remaining resources into the work context, driving positive behavioral outcomes and fulfilling their self-worth (Lebrón et al., 2018). Existing research indicates that individual resources (e.g., psychological capital) possess intrinsic motivational potential, guiding employees to invest their involvement and effort into their work, resulting in a significant positive impact on job performance (Alessandri et al., 2018).

Empirical research examining how CQ affects employees’ work engagement is still limited. Despite this gap, CQ appears promising as a predictor of work engagement across cultures. Culturally intelligent employees tend to achieve greater success in intercultural exchanges and accumulate resources, thereby avoiding resource depletion caused by poor interactions. This process, in consequence, increases employees’ motivation and vitality in performing their tasks (Min et al., 2023). Recent research suggests that individuals with higher levels of CQ are better able to develop positive psychological states in culturally diverse contexts (Presbitero et al., 2025). CQ enables employees to effectively manage challenges (e.g., communication, collaboration, and negotiation) arising from diversity and enhances their sense of competence by increasing confidence and comfort in intercultural interactions (Triandis, 2006). Moreover, by fulfilling essential mental and emotional needs, including autonomy, belonging, and efficacy, they motivate employees to participate in their work (Christian et al., 2011; Salanova & Schaufeli, 2008). Indeed, analogous to job resources, personal resources can also initiate a motivational process. Those possessing elevated cross-cultural awareness and competence often display heightened vigor, dedication, and absorption (Gabel-Shemueli et al., 2019). Specifically, CQ helps individuals overcome cultural barriers and uncertainty in new cultural contexts, enhancing their sense of environmental mastery and stimulating intrinsic motivation (Bukhari et al., 2025; Ramalu & Subramaniam, 2019), while alleviating cultural anxiety and preserving energy and psychological resilience during work (vigor). Furthermore, although multicultural environments often impede role clarity and value alignment, CQ strengthens employees’ cross-cultural cognitive and interpretive capacities, enabling them to decode diverse communication styles and value systems more effectively (Afsar et al., 2020). This, in turn, facilitates the accurate internalization of organizational goals and behavioral norms, reduces role ambiguity and value conflicts, and ultimately deepens employees’ sense of mission and work enthusiasm (dedication). Finally, with respect to absorption, employees with high CQ leverage their awareness of multicultural norms and patterns of interpersonal interaction to build trust-based social networks within cross-cultural settings (Gabel-Shemueli et al., 2019; L. Yuan et al., 2023), mitigating cognitive interference arising from cultural misunderstandings and allowing them to immerse fully in their work tasks (Ramalu & Subramaniam, 2019). In summary, this study anticipates that employees with higher CQ will exhibit greater levels of work engagement.

Moreover, engaged employees report greater happiness, mental health, and superior job outcomes, and they also inspire similar engagement among others (Othman & Nasurdin, 2019). They are motivated to invest in their work because it brings them joy (Gorgievski & Bakker，2010). Hence, such employees typically exhibit greater perseverance and are more inclined to choose tasks that stimulate intrinsic motivation (Schaufeli et al., 2002). High work engagement enhances employees’ initiative and cross-boundary task management, further stimulating autonomous behavior and creativity (Koroglu & Ozmen, 2022; Selmer & Lauring, 2016). In this state, employees exhibit abundant energy and heightened enthusiasm, immersing themselves fully in their work. They go beyond their defined responsibilities, proactively taking on additional duties and exhibiting civic-minded behaviors (Afsar et al., 2020; Şahin et al., 2014). In essence, work engagement provides employees with sustained motivation to confront complex situations while maintaining focus and accountability. Innovative work demands significant time and effort to solve problems and realize creative ideas; thus, only through persistence can innovative outcomes be achieved (Orth & Volmer, 2017). As employees sustain concentration on their tasks, they tend to generate creative outcomes consistently, thereby cultivating novel ideas and practices (G. Zhang & Wang, 2021). Conversely, disengaged employees often experience burnout, which undermines creative thinking and capabilities (Ghanizadeh & Jahedizadeh, 2016). Consequently, employees who demonstrate strong engagement may implement innovative work behavior, proposing and implementing improved and novel solutions.

According to COR theory, this study posits that CQ can stimulate innovative work behavior by enhancing employees’ work engagement. Individuals possessing greater resources tend to pursue acquiring more resources (Hobfoll, 1989), while work engagement stems from people’s high-level resources (Knight et al., 2017; Kühnel et al., 2012). CQ represents an important form of personal resource, equipping employees with the psychological adaptability needed to navigate cross-cultural contexts. It helps alleviate anxiety and stress arising from cultural differences, facilitates adjustment to unfamiliar cultural environments, and promotes effective interaction in cross-cultural workplaces (R. Brislin et al., 2006). This process lays the foundation for employees to develop psychological comfort and confidence in multicultural settings (Le et al., 2018), serving as a key driver of enhanced work engagement. Building on this, highly engaged employees can allocate more cognitive and emotional resources to task challenges, facilitating deep information processing and creative integration. This, in turn, enhances insight into complex problems and improves problem-solving efficiency (Boštjančič et al., 2018; L. Ye et al., 2024). Additionally, sustained resource allocation strengthens psychological resilience and persistence in the face of uncertainty and setbacks, enabling individuals to maintain the willingness and capacity for continuous engagement throughout the entire creative generation and implementation process (Petrou et al., 2020). Overall, CQ enables employees to allocate resources effectively to navigate cultural differences, fulfill cross-cultural adaptation demands, and retain a surplus of resources (A. S. Chen et al., 2024). With this resource advantage, greater work engagement facilitates the strategic reinvestment of surplus resources into exploratory thinking and creative practices, ultimately fostering the emergence and maintenance of innovative work behavior (Afsar et al., 2020). Therefore, we hypothesize:

The Moderating Role of Innovation Climate

Organizational climate is an essential determinant of innovation (Ashforth, 1985). Studies indicate a strong link between employee success and the work environment (A. S.-Y. Chen & Hou, 2016; Somech & Drach-Zahavy, 2013). Creating a climate that supports new ideas can influence employee attitudes and motivation and enhance organizational innovation performance (P. Ye et al., 2022). Innovation climate describes how employees view policies and actions that support the creation and execution of innovative ideas (van der Vegt et al., 2005), reflecting the organization’s emphasis on innovation (Lin, 2024). Anchored in the COR theory, we argue that an innovation climate provides resources such as innovation support and autonomy, making employees more willing to engage in innovation.

Research indicates that within organizational cultures that encourage innovation, tolerate failure, and reward novel thinking, employees are more likely to integrate and leverage organizational resources, effectively translating constructive suggestions into tangible innovative actions (Jaiswal & Dhar, 2015). According to COR theory, resource investment can be viewed as a key strategy for individuals to prevent resource depletion (Hobfoll, 2011). An innovative atmosphere reflects an organization’s commitment to exploratory endeavors and employee growth, signifying its willingness to invest necessary resources to support the incubation and implementation of innovative ideas (Lin, 2023). This enhances employees’ confidence that their suggestions will be adopted and followed by subsequent resource support (e.g., technology, funding, and personnel). Employees possessing CQ demonstrate heightened sensitivity in identifying organizational needs and opportunities within multicultural contexts (Lee & Sukoco, 2010) and express suggestions in more appropriate ways. However, voice behavior may not always be appreciated by supervisors or colleagues (e.g., Huai et al., 2024). When a strong innovation climate is present, such constructive voices are more expected to receive organizational acknowledgment, dedicated resources, and positive responses. Consequently, employees become more inclined to proactively drive the implementation of change proposals (i.e., engage in innovative work behavior).

Indeed, within multicultural organizations, employees possessing CQ are typically better at identifying and understanding the expectations and reactions of people from varied cultural milieus (Gregory et al., 2009). This enables them to more accurately gauge the timing and manner of offering suggestions, thereby enhancing their willingness to speak up (K.-Y. Ng et al., 2019). However, the journey from proposing suggestions to translating them into innovative work behavior is not always smooth sailing (Ajmal et al., 2024). Employees often encounter internal and external organizational resistance when implementing suggestions, such as skepticism from superiors, resistance from colleagues, or conservative tendencies regarding the organization’s status quo. These factors can lead to tangible resource losses (e.g., strained interpersonal relationships, damaged personal reputation, limited promotion opportunities) and emotional costs. Although CQ can help employees communicate more effectively and construct meaning in cross-cultural contexts (Ang et al., 2007), understand others’ concerns and doubts, and enhance their expectations for positive feedback and support (Abdul Malek & Budhwar, 2013), whether this resource advantage can be sustained and translated into innovative practices ultimately depends on whether the organization fosters an innovation-supportive atmosphere. In environments lacking an innovation orientation, with restricted information flow and weak feedback mechanisms, employees may anticipate that their constructive suggestions will be ignored, rejected, or even punished. This heightens their perception of resource loss (Lin, 2023). In such contexts, even highly CQ-endowed employees might decide against acting on their proposals due to insufficient expected returns on resources or perceived excessive risks. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

Furthermore, an organizational climate that encourages innovation emphasizes exploration, learning, and sharing new perspectives, values cross-cultural exchange and collaboration, and provides employees with psychological safety and flexible work environments (Eisenbeiss et al., 2008). Within such an environment, organizations not only encourage employees to propose novel ideas (Lin, 2023) but also reduce potential uncertainties arising from cross-cultural communication and innovative attempts through reward mechanisms and institutional arrangements. Thus, when organizations champion innovation and tolerate failure, employees gain greater confidence and motivation to leverage their CQ, transforming their ability to understand, communicate, and integrate diverse cultural information into innovative work behavior (Fan et al., 2020). Consequently, employees with high CQ can better integrate diverse resources during cross-cultural interactions, reduce concerns stemming from uncertainty and cultural differences, and thus engage more actively in innovative practices (Afsar et al., 2020). In other words, in a high-innovation climate, employees may translate their cross-cultural adaptation and communication strengths into innovative solutions, thereby enhancing their self-efficacy and confidence in the process. This positive psychological state further helps them secure greater organizational resources and peer support, enhancing the sustainability of their innovative intentions and behaviors (Iqbal et al., 2020). Existing research indicates that an innovation climate may serve as a contextual moderator shaping the association between individual traits and innovation outcomes, such as moderating the mechanism linking emotional intelligence and innovative work behavior (Jegerson et al., 2024).

Conversely, we also propose that if an organization’s innovation climate is low, employees with high CQ may still harbor reservations during the innovation process due to a lack of institutional support and resource guarantees. Such employees often worry about misunderstandings, friction, and potential conflicts arising from cross-cultural communication (Tenzer et al., 2014), while also being more sensitive to the potential resource losses from failure, such as limited career advancement, strained interpersonal relationships, or reputational damage. As posited by the COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989), under conditions of resource threat, individuals typically adhere to established work methods and adopt conservative, defensive strategies to avoid further losses. Thus, although employees with CQ may exhibit cross-cultural insight and innovative capabilities (Fan et al., 2020), these abilities often remain underutilized in environments that are less supportive of innovation. This implies that employees may choose not to initiate innovation or even abandon it altogether to safeguard their resource status and personal well-being. Therefore, we hypothesize:

Building upon H3, this study further indicates that the impact of CQ on innovative work behavior via work engagement depends on the organization’s innovation climate. Specifically, an innovation-encouraging organizational environment typically values exploring new ideas and supports employee development (Martín-de Castro et al., 2013). In line with COR theory, the continuous accumulation of resources can form an upward spiral (Hobfoll et al., 2018). Employees often gain additional resources (e.g., new skills and methods) through innovative work, thereby enhancing their competitiveness. Within a strong innovation climate, employees are more inclined to believe that the organization will provide adequate resources for innovation, such as funding, information, and technology. This belief reduces their concerns about the potential futility of their efforts and increases their willingness to invest personal resources in innovative activities. Employees with CQ can effectively leverage surrounding resources (e.g., information and support) (He et al., 2019) and they are expected to transform their high work engagement into more outstanding innovative outcomes. The existence of an innovation climate reinforces this transformative capacity, encouraging employees with positive work orientations to devote greater focus to innovation efforts, conceive original and applicable solutions, and demonstrate exceptional commitment during their implementation (Svendsen & Joensson, 2016).

Conversely, in organizations lacking an innovative atmosphere, even employees with high CQ may feel constrained during the innovation process due to insufficient institutional support and resource guarantees. While CQ enhances employees’ cross-cultural communication and adaptability, motivating them to engage in work with a positive attitude (Afsar et al., 2020), this engagement often struggles to translate into tangible innovative outcomes in environments with an inadequate innovation culture. When organizations fail to provide necessary resource support and psychological safety, employees frequently encounter feelings of powerlessness during innovation and exhibit “helplessness” response patterns (Silver et al., 2006), thereby reducing the likelihood of converting their engagement into innovative outputs. In such environments, employees not only worry about resource losses from innovation failures but may also doubt their own capabilities due to a lack of encouragement and feedback (Lin, 2023). This psychological state heightens their tension and anxiety, making them tend to perceive complex and challenging innovation tasks as potential threats (VandeWalle et al., 1999). Consequently, they tend to avoid high-risk innovative work behavior. Thus, even when employees with high CQ demonstrate strong motivation and responsibility through work engagement, this commitment struggles to translate effectively into innovative work behavior in the absence of an innovation-friendly atmosphere. Based on the above arguments, we propose the following hypothesis:

Data and Samples

The data for this research were obtained from employees and their immediate leaders in organizations with cross-cultural characteristics across 156 HEIs in China. In this study, we focused on administrative units (e.g., offices, divisions, or centers) as the primary organizational unit. When more than one unit from the same HEI participated, each unit was treated as a separate organizational entity in the analyses. Each participating administrative unit had one immediate leader, ensuring alignment between the supervisory level and the defined organizational unit. These organizations include the International Cooperation and Exchange Division, the International Admissions Office, the Centers for International Research and Academic Collaboration, and other administrative units responsible for implementing internationalization projects. Employees in these organizations frequently interact with students, scholars, and partner institutions from diverse cultural backgrounds. Their responsibilities extend beyond administrative coordination and information exchange to include the design and implementation of international cooperation programs, the refinement of procedures for international collaboration, the development of innovative cross-cultural communication mechanisms, the organization of online seminars and academic visits involving foreign scholars/experts, and the improvement of processes that facilitate the internationalization of teaching, research, and institutional management. Unlike traditional administrative positions, the work in these cross-cultural departments relies heavily on employees’ CQ and innovative problem-solving capabilities. Employees are required to apply creative thinking and behavior to propose constructive solutions when facing complex situations involving cultural differences, communication barriers, and institutional mismatches, thereby advancing organizational internationalization and knowledge integration.

In addition, the sample of this study includes cross-cultural professionals from multiple functional roles, such as international affairs officers, research collaboration specialists, international admissions and student affairs officers, as well as faculty members who concurrently undertake responsibilities in managing international academic and research collaborations. This diversity ensures that the sample effectively captures a broad spectrum of job functions and roles. Such cross-cultural organizational contexts not only require employees to possess strong cultural adaptability and an innovative mindset but also provide a typical and representative setting for examining the role of CQ in facilitating innovative work behavior. More importantly, HEIs, as knowledge-intensive and highly internationalized organizations, rely on cross-cultural communication, knowledge creation, and sharing as core components of their operational mechanisms, making CQ’s influence particularly salient (Kistyanto et al., 2022; Sousa et al., 2023). In multicultural environments, employees coordinate diverse interests, integrate different perspectives, and facilitate knowledge transformation—processes that inherently reflect the innovation-driven logic of CQ.

Following established data collection procedures from prior empirical studies on innovative work behavior, we conducted the data collection in two phases, two months apart (Hoang et al., 2022). During the Time-1 phase, employees were asked to assess their CQ, employee voice, work engagement, innovation climate, and demographics. At this stage, 587 of the 862 questionnaires (response rate = 68.10%) distributed to employees were returned by the deadline. In the second phase (Time-2), a subsequent investigation was made with the employees’ immediate leaders. Out of 258 leaders contacted, they were required to assess the innovative work behavior of their respective subordinates (i.e., employees in the same organization reporting to the same leader), and 182 questionnaires were retrieved (response rate = 70.54%). Participants provided the final six digits of their mobile numbers as a unique identifier during the study. Their immediate leaders were similarly required to enter these digits of their corresponding employees when scoring for them. This guarantees matching the responses of two data collection rounds.

Subsequently, data screening was conducted to remove unmatched cases and missing values. Following the procedures described by H. Kim and Qu (2020), Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was employed to identify univariate and multivariate outliers to ensure data quality. For univariate outlier diagnosis, Z-scores were computed for all theoretical variables. For multivariate outlier diagnosis, innovative work behavior was designated as the dependent variable, and the Mahalanobis distance, in combination with the corresponding p-values, was calculated between this variable and other study variables (Sun et al., 2025). Two extreme outliers were identified and removed. In addition, skewness (−1.065 to −0.557) and kurtosis (−0.483 to 1.166) were examined to assess the normality of the data, indicating that the data were normally distributed (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2014). The ultimate dataset comprised 541 (usability rate = 62.76%) valid questionnaires from employees and 170 (usability rate = 65.89%) leader questionnaires from 156 HEIs for further data analysis. The surveyed sample of employees and their immediate leaders demonstrated a higher proportion of males, with 54.9% of the employees and 67.8% of the leaders being male. The age distribution among the employees showed a majority in the 31 to 40 age range (57.3%). In contrast, most leaders were found within the 41 to 50 age cohort (65.5%). As for the educational level, 64.7% of the employees held a master’s degree, whereas most leaders (56.1%) had attained a doctoral degree.

Measures

Following R. W. Brislin’s (1986) approach, this study utilized back translation to ensure equivalence between the Chinese surveys and the original English questionnaires. Additionally, this study used different scale points to avoid common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003).

Common Method Variance

To mitigate CMV, the study adopted a multi-respondent approach, where employees provided ratings for CQ, employee voice, work engagement, and innovation climate, and leaders rated their managed employees’ innovative work behavior. Recommendations from Podsakoff et al. (2003) were followed, and alternative anchor points were used for different scales to reduce the impact of common scale anchors. Harman’s single-factor test assessed CMV severity, with the variance for a single factor (20.42%) below the 50% threshold (Dupuis et al., 2017), indicating CMV did not affect the data.

Data Aggregation

Since the hypothesized model of this study is cross-level in nature, variables at the organizational level should primarily reflect organizational-level variance (Preacher et al., 2010). The measurement of innovation climate in this study is based on employees’ shared perceptions of their organizational innovation environment; therefore, it is necessary to empirically validate the appropriateness of aggregating individual-level data to the organizational level. Following the guidelines proposed by Klein et al. (2001), multiple statistical indices were employed to examine the adequacy of data aggregation, ensuring both conceptual and empirical robustness. First, the within-group agreement index (r _wg(j) ) was calculated, yielding a value of .90, which substantially exceeds the minimum threshold of .70 (James, 1982;Klein & Kozlowski, 2000), indicating a high level of agreement among respondents regarding their perceptions of the innovation climate within their organizations, thus justifying the aggregation of this construct.

Furthermore, the intra-class correlation coefficients, ICC (1) and ICC (2), were computed to assess the proportion of variance attributable to between-group differences (ICC (1)) and the reliability of group means (ICC (2)) for data aggregation. The results showed that ICC(1) = .35, exceeding the threshold value of .12 (James, 1982), suggesting that approximately 35% of the total variance in innovation climate can be attributed to organizational-level differences. Furthermore, ICC(2) was .63, higher than the recommended cutoff value of .50 (Koo & Li, 2016), indicating satisfactory reliability of group means. This suggests that employees’ perceptions of innovation climate within the same organization reliably reflect the collective organizational-level construct. Taken together, these findings demonstrate a high degree of within-organization consistency in employees’ perceptions of the innovation climate, along with substantial variance across different organizations. This indicates that respondents within the same organization share a sufficiently convergent perception, and that the aggregated innovation climate reflects an organizational-level collective cognition rather than random individual deviations. Therefore, aggregating individual-level data to the organizational level for analysis is both theoretically justified and statistically robust.

Theoretical Implications

This research advances the scholarly comprehension of the topic in several respects. First, our study provides important theoretical insights into the CQ domain through broadening perspectives on how CQ influences employee behavior within culturally dynamic contexts. In contemporary organizations, employees from diverse backgrounds come together to facilitate communication, achieve objectives, and contribute to organizational development. Employees possessing CQ can overcome cultural differences, navigate inconsistencies across various contexts (Leung & Chiu, 2010), and better access information to stimulate innovative potential (Fan et al., 2020). However, research on CQ and innovative work behavior remains limited, primarily concentrated in healthcare industries and multinational corporations (Afsar et al., 2020; Jain, 2022), with a notable absence in the organizational setting of HEIs. This research addresses this gap through an empirical investigation within HEIs. Building upon prior research (Khan & Usman, 2025; Ott & Michailova, 2018), our findings further demonstrate that individuals with high CQ can more effectively integrate and utilize cross-cultural information to generate innovative ideas with broad applicability. This discovery aligns with J. Li et al.’s (2021) conclusion, which emphasizes CQ’s crucial function in promoting cross-cultural adaptability and fostering innovation.

Second, this study introduces employee voice and work engagement as mediating mechanisms, thereby unraveling the black box in the transmission process from CQ to innovative work behavior and expanding the theoretical perspective of related research. The current study responds to Jain’s (2022) call for further investigation into the underlying mechanisms linking CQ and innovative work behavior. Specifically, our findings confirm that CQ can enhance innovative work behavior by elevating employee voice. This discovery extends the conclusions of Jiang et al. (2018), Afsar et al. (2019), and L. Yuan et al. (2023), who highlighted CQ’s positive influence on employee voice. By defining employee voice as a key mediating variable, this study provides deeper insight into how CQ drives individual innovation. Meanwhile, this study found that employees with higher levels of CQ may exhibit work engagement and further foster innovative work behavior. Existing literature has established a positive relationship between CQ and work engagement and has suggested that work engagement may serve as an important mechanism that stimulates employees’ higher contextual performance and proactive behaviors (Gabel-Shemueli et al., 2019; Ramalu & Subramaniam, 2019). Building upon this foundation, this study posits and empirically demonstrates that work engagement functions as a mediating mechanism linking CQ and innovative work behavior. These findings collectively deepen insights into the pathways through which CQ positively fosters employees’ innovative outcomes.

Third, this study incorporates the organizational-level innovation climate, offering new theoretical insights into the organizational climate literature in cross-cultural management research. While earlier studies have demonstrated that CQ positively contributes to individual innovation, the contextual mechanisms that sustain this association have received scant empirical exploration. To fill this research void, the current work examines the moderating effect of innovation climate in the linkage between CQ and innovative work behavior, thereby revealing an important boundary condition within cross-cultural organizational contexts. The findings indicate that in a high-innovation climate, the effects of CQ on innovative work behavior—via employee voice and work engagement—are strengthened. This indicates that for employees who are more proactive in voicing ideas and demonstrating higher engagement, an innovation climate fosters psychological safety and trust, encouraging them to take risks, express novel ideas, and more effectively integrate organizational resources into tangible innovative outcomes. Although previous scholars have explored the mechanisms of innovation climate (Huang & Li, 2021; Jaiswal & Dhar, 2015), related research remains relatively limited, particularly in cross-cultural contexts. Therefore, this study empirically verified the moderating impact of innovation climate within cross-cultural organizations in HEIs, extending knowledge of its underlying mechanisms. Moreover, the findings reveal that a high level of innovation climate does not always produce positive outcomes; it may also exert a significant negative effect on innovative work behavior (β = −3.249, p < .001; Model 11 in Table 2). One possible explanation is that a strong innovation climate often reflects higher organizational expectations and institutionalized norms regarding innovation, which, while encouraging creativity, may simultaneously generate performance pressure and psychological strain among employees (Fischer & Riedl, 2022). When innovation becomes increasingly institutionalized and is perceived as a "mandatory task," employees may experience innovation fatigue, resistance, ultimately inhibiting innovation (Chung et al., 2017). Accordingly, this study reveals the dual nature of innovation climate: on the one hand, it facilitates the translation of innovation-related behaviors through resource support; on the other hand, in overly institutionalized settings, it may trigger stress and fatigue, thereby diminishing employees’ innovative momentum. By uncovering the coexistence of these motivational and inhibitory mechanisms, this study enriches the theoretical understanding of innovation climate and its complex impact on innovation outcomes.

Finally, this study broadens the applicability of COR theory by conceptualizing CQ as a key individual resource that enables employees to identify, integrate, and leverage diverse cultural information in cross-cultural contexts. This capability fosters adaptability, enhances resource acquisition, and promotes novel ways of thinking that drive innovative work behavior—consistent with COR theory’s core proposition that individuals enhance performance by acquiring and investing in resources (Hobfoll, 1989). Notably, to our knowledge, research applying the COR theory to explain the CQ—innovation linkage remains limited. By providing empirical evidence that supports and extends this theoretical perspective, this research advances the integration of COR theory into cross-cultural management and organizational behavior research and offers new insights into how individuals leverage critical resources to achieve innovative outcomes.

Managerial Implications

This study advances theoretical knowledge on CQ and innovative work behavior and yields meaningful implications for cross-cultural management practice. Findings indicate that organizations can enhance employees’ understanding and adaptability toward diverse cultures through systematic cross-cultural training and exchange opportunities, thereby better stimulating innovation potential in complex, multicultural environments. Managers can integrate cultural communication styles, values, and work habits into training programs, combining interactive formats such as workshops, online courses, or role-playing to heighten employees’ sensitivity and acceptance of cultural differences. Simultaneously, establishing effective feedback and experience-sharing mechanisms enables employees to exchange insights and challenges from cross-cultural interactions, further fostering knowledge sharing and a learning culture within the organization. By providing appropriate incentives and recognition to employees who excel in cross-cultural contexts, organizations can highlight the importance of CQ and motivate employees to proactively pursue creative exploration and practice within multicultural settings.

Second, organizational managers should also encourage employees to actively voice their opinions and engage in communication to foster innovation. Research indicates that employee voices not only help CQ-equipped employees integrate more effectively into innovation processes but also reduce potential conflicts, enhance psychological satisfaction, and further motivate them to propose and implement innovative suggestions. Based on this, organizations should foster a transparent, inclusive communication culture, ensuring that employee opinions are heard and addressed. For instance, managers can establish anonymous feedback channels or online platforms that provide opportunities for employees to express their views at different levels, thereby promoting cross-cultural communication and understanding. Simultaneously, managers should reinforce communication of the organization’s purpose, mission, and objectives, enabling employees to perceive their close connection to the organization’s overall development and thereby enhancing work engagement. Additionally, career development training, cross-departmental collaboration, and skill enhancement programs can effectively support employees’ growth in capability and potential realization. This approach improves their cross-cultural adaptability and job satisfaction, ultimately driving more effective innovation practices.

Finally, organizational leaders should recognize that in innovation-driven environments, employees with high CQ can more effectively translate their innovative potential into tangible outcomes by enhancing employee voice and work engagement. To achieve this, organizations must commit to creating an inclusive and innovation-oriented climate in which employees representing diverse cultural backgrounds are encouraged to voice their perspectives, take an active role in decision processes, and exchange experiences and knowledge through collaboration. Managers can establish open, equitable communication platforms by regularly organizing cross-cultural workshops, creative exchanges, or experience-sharing activities, thereby promoting the blending of diverse viewpoints and the collaborative creation of ideas. Simultaneously, organizations should implement robust incentive mechanisms—such as recognition, rewards, or promotion opportunities—to acknowledge employees’ contributions to cross-cultural collaboration and innovation activities, further strengthening their motivation and sustained engagement. It is worth noting that while a positive innovation climate can stimulate employee creativity, excessive institutionalization or an overly results-driven approach to innovation may backfire. Excessive pressure to innovate often traps employees in formalistic innovation or innovation fatigue, undermining their creative engagement and psychological safety. Therefore, managers should maintain a balance between “incentives” and “pressure,” avoiding turning innovation into an administrative task. By fostering a culture that tolerates trial and error, ensuring a supportive atmosphere, and providing adequate resources, organizations can achieve sustained innovation and learning. In other words, managers should cultivate a “moderately guided” innovation environment—one that provides clear direction and necessary support while preserving flexibility and inclusivity. This approach fully unleashes the innovative potential of employees from diverse cultural backgrounds, enhancing organizational adaptability and long-term competitive advantage.

Limitations and Future Studies

Although there are considerable implications, some limitations within this investigation necessitate further scrutiny in forthcoming research endeavors. First, despite collecting data from various sources, it is essential to note that this research employs a cross-sectional design; therefore, the findings may not entirely reflect the enduring impact of CQ on innovative work behavior. A longitudinal study or experimental design would help better understand the causal relationships involved and provide insight into the associations explored in this study.

Second, this study only collected data from cross-cultural organizations of HEIs in China; therefore, there may be limitations in the applicability of these results to other countries and industries. It suggests that future studies consider expanding the sample, including collecting more respondents from different countries and regions or even adopting other industries, to verify the generalizability and replicability of the findings.

Third, CQ was considered a composite variable to assess its impact on innovative work behavior. Going forward, other researchers may be expected to follow Thomas et al.’s (2015) suggestion of exploring the different dimensions of CQ; this will facilitate a deeper insight into the specific impact of each CQ dimension on innovative work behavior.

Fourth, this study positions employee voice as a mediating mechanism through which CQ influences innovative work behavior, with particular emphasis on the possibility that employees may leverage their voice to obtain organizational resource support and facilitate innovation. It should be noted, however, that organizational endorsement of employee voice may play a key moderating role in this process. When organizations actively acknowledge and adopt employee suggestions, the resource acquisition effect activated by employee voice is likely to be amplified. Conversely, if employee voice remains persistently unvalued, it may gradually diminish their willingness to express opinions and their motivation for innovation. Future research should consider incorporating organizational endorsement of employee voice as a moderating variable to further clarify the boundary conditions under which employee voice affects innovative work behavior.

Fifth, objective differences may exist among HEIs regarding international students, foreign faculty and staff, and overall exposure to cultural diversity. These contextual factors could influence employees’ opportunities for cross-cultural interaction and, in turn, affect their CQ development. Therefore, it cannot be entirely ruled out that employees in environments with higher levels of cross-cultural exposure may develop higher CQ through sustained interaction, thereby exhibiting a certain self-reinforcing tendency. Future research could integrate HEI internationalization indicators or direct measures of staff intercultural interaction frequency to more precisely examine the impact of contextual exposure on CQ formation. It would also be worthwhile to explore whether there are differences in the pathways through which CQ impacts employee attitudes and behaviors across organizational contexts with varying levels of cross-cultural exposure (e.g., high or low opportunities for cross-cultural interactions), to validate the generalizability of the findings.

Finally, the measurement of innovation climate in this study relies on employees’ subjective perceptions; however, different occupational groups (e.g., researchers, faculty, and administrative staff) may interpret specific items on the scale differently, particularly those related to innovation rewards and recognition. Within HEIs, formal innovation reward mechanisms tend to be more prominent in research domains than in administrative work, which may influence how different occupational groups interpret organizational signals of innovation support. Future research could further develop contextually adaptive innovation-climate measurement tools tailored to HEI characteristics. For instance, while retaining reward-oriented items, supplementary indicators reflecting process improvements, service innovations, or other informal forms of innovation support (e.g., tolerance for innovation failure or verbal recognition of innovation efforts) could be incorporated to more comprehensively capture different occupational groups’ perceptions of innovation support. In addition, it is recommended to verify the cross-group equivalence of the scale across different occupational groups through measurement invariance testing (Braksiek, 2022; Dybro Liengaard, 2024; Rattanapon et al., 2023). These measures may help enhance the contextual sensitivity of the innovation climate and improve the precision and applicability of this construct across various occupational roles within HEIs.