Using surveys and interview data this research examines teams’ engagement in creative processes. Results of cluster analysis indicated that the more creative teams were those that perceived that their tasks required high levels of creativity, were working on jobs with high task interdependence, were high on shared goals, valued participative problem-solving, and had a climate supportive of creativity. In addition, members of the more creative teams spent more time socializing with each other and had moderate amounts of organizational tenure. Implications for management are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldenderfer, M. S., & Blashfield, R. K.1984. Cluster analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Amabile, T. M.1988. A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: Vol. 10, 123–167. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
3.
Amabile, T. M.1996. Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
4.
Axtell, C. J., Holman, D. J., Unsworth, K. L., Wall, T. D., & Waterson, P. E.2000. Shopfloor innovation: Facilitating the suggestion and implementation of ideas. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73: 311–322.
5.
Bailyn, L.1988. Autonomy in the industrial R&D lab. In R. Katz (Ed.), Managing professionals in innovative organizations. A collection of readings: 223–236. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.
6.
Blau, P. M.1977. Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.
7.
Bonito, J. A., & Hollingshead, A. B.1997. Participation in small groups. In B. R. Burleson & A. W. Kunkel (Eds.), Communication yearbook: Vol. 20, 227–261. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C.1993. Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46: 823–847.
9.
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E.1997. What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23: 239–290.
10.
Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanjian, R. K.1999. Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A sensemaking perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24: 286–307.
11.
Edmondson, A.1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 350–383.
12.
Ford, C. M.1996. A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. Academy of Management Review, 1: 1112–1142.
13.
Gilson, L. L. 2001. Diversity, dissimilarity and creativity: Does group composition or being different enhance or hinder creative performance. Academy of Management Meetings, Washington, DC.
14.
Gladstein, D.1984. A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29: 499–517.
15.
Guzzo, R. A., & Shea, G. P.1992. Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: 269–313. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
16.
Hackman, J. R.1987. The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior: 315–342. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
17.
Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G.1975. Group tasks, group interaction processes, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Advances in experimental social psychology. New York, NY: Academic Press.
18.
Hage, J., & Aiken, M.1969. Routine technology, social structure, and organizational goals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14: 366–376.
19.
Jabri, M.1991. The development of conceptually independent subscales in the measurement of modes of problem solving. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51: 975–983.
20.
Jehn, K. A.1995. A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 256–282.
21.
Kahn, W. A.1990. Psychological conditions of personally engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33: 692–724.
22.
Kanter, R. M.1977. Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, 82: 965–990.
23.
Kanter, R. M.1988. When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organizations. In B. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: Vol. 10, 169–211. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
24.
Kazanjian, R. K., Drazin, R., & Glynn, M. A.2000. Creativity and technological learning: The roles of organization architecture and crisis in large-scale projects. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17: 273–298.
25.
Ketchen, D., & Shook, C.1996. The application of cluster analysis in strategic management: An analysis and critique. Strategic Management Journal, 17: 441–458.
26.
King, N., & Anderson, M. A.1990. Innovation and creativity in working groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
27.
Latham, G. P., & Saari, L. M.1979. The importance of supportive relationships in goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64: 151–156.
28.
Maier, N. R.1983. Assets and liabilities in group problem-solving: The need for an integrative function. In J. R. Hackman, L. W. Porter, & E. E. Lawler (Eds.), Perspectives on behavior in organizations (2nd ed.): 385–392. New York: McGraw-Hill.
29.
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J.2001. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26: 356–376.
30.
McGrath, J. E.1984. Groups, interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31.
Moreland, R. L., & Myaskovsky, L.2000. Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication?Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82: 117–133.
32.
Nemeth, C., & Staw, B. M.1989. The trade offs of social control and innovation within groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology: Vol. 22, 175–210. New York: Academic Press.
33.
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A.1996. Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 607–634.
34.
Parnes, S. J.1964. Research on developing creative behavior. In C. W. Taylor (Ed.), Widening horizons in creativity: 145–169. New York: Wiley.
35.
Perry-Smith, J. E., & Shalley, C. E.2003. The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 28: 89–106.
36.
Pinto, M. B., Pinto, J. K., & Prescott, J. E.1993. Antecedents and consequences of project team cross-functional cooperation. Management Science, 39: 1281–1297.
37.
Scott, R. K.1995. Creative employees: A challenge to managers. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29: 64–71.
38.
Shalley, C. E.1991. Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76: 179–185.
39.
Shalley, C. E.1995. Effects of coaction, expected evaluation, and goal setting on creativity and productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 483–503.
40.
Shalley, C. E., Gilson, L. L., & Blum, T. C.2000. Matching creativity requirements and the work environment: Effects on satisfaction and intent to turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 215–224.
41.
Shea, G. P., & Guzzo, R. A.1987. Groups as human resources. In K. R. Rowland & G. R. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management: Vol. 5, 323–356. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
42.
Stein, M. K.1974. Stimulating creativity. New York: Academic Press.
43.
Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B.1999. An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52: 591–620.
44.
Torrance, E. P.1988. The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological views: 43–75. Cambridge, England: University Press.
45.
Unsworth, K.2001. Unpacking creativity. Academy of Management Review, 26: 289–297.
46.
Wageman, R.1995. Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 145–180.
47.
Weick, K. E.1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48.
Weisberg, R. W.1999. Creativity and knowledge: A challenge to theories. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity: 226–250. Cambridge University Press.
49.
West, M. A.1990. The social psychology of innovation in groups. In M. A. West & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies: 555–576. Chichester, England: Wiley.
50.
Witt, L. A., & Beorkren, M. N.1989. Climate for creative productivity as a predictor of research usefulness and organizational effectiveness in an R&D organization. Creativity Research Journal, 2: 30–40.
51.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W.1993. Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18: 293–321.
52.
Zhou, J.1998. Feedback valence, feedback style, task autonomy, and achievement orientation: Interactive effects of creative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 261–276.
53.
Zhou, J., & George, J. M.2001. When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 682–696.
