In job design and creativity literature, challenging and complex jobs drive individual creativity, whereas routinization impedes creative outcomes. This study challenges this prevailing view by exploring the intermediate psychological mechanism and boundary conditions enabling the potential benefits of routinization to foster creativity in organizations. Routinization economizes employees’ use of resources in performing tasks, thereby generating free cognitive resources that can be utilized for creative problem-solving. In addition, the effect of routinization on creativity, as mediated by free cognitive resources, is positively moderated by two boundary conditions: learning goal orientation of employees and supervisor support for creativity. Field data collected from 198 engineers and technicians and 56 supervisors working in manufacturing companies in South Korea confirm the moderated mediation hypotheses. The conditional indirect effects of routinization on creativity through free cognitive resources are significant and positive when the learning goal orientation of employees and supervisor support for creativity are high. These findings highlight the need for a balanced consideration of the ambivalent effects of task complexity and routinization on employee creativity along with further investigations on the contingencies of their effects.
AckermanPLHumphreysLG (1990) Individual differences theory in industrial and organizational psychology. In: DunnetteMDHoughLM (eds) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 223–282.
2.
AmabileTMContiRCoonHet al. (1996) Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal39: 1154–1184.
3.
AmesCArcherJ (1988) Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology80(3): 260–267.
4.
AndersonNDe DreuCKWNijstadBA (2004) The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior25: 147–173.
5.
AndersonNPotočnikKZhouJ (2014) Innovation and creativity in organizations a state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management40: 1297–1333.
6.
BarrickMRMountMK (2009) Select on conscientiousness and emotional stability. In: LockeEA (ed.) Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 19–40.
7.
BeckerMC (2005) The concept of routines: Some clarifications. Cambridge Journal of Economics29: 249–262.
8.
BernerthJBAguinisH (2016) A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology69(1): 229–283.
9.
BrislinRW (1986) The wording and translation of research instruments. In: LonnerWBerryJ (eds) Field Methods in Cross-cultural Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 137–164.
10.
BrunkenRPlassJLLeutnerD (2003) Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist38: 53–61.
11.
ByronKKhazanchiS (2012) Rewards and creative performance: A meta-analytic test of theoretically derived hypotheses. Psychological Bulletin138: 809–830.
12.
ByronKKhazanchiSNazarianD (2010) The relationship between stressors and creativity: A meta-analysis examining competing theoretical models. Journal of Applied Psychology95: 201–212.
13.
CrosbyPB (1989) Let’s Talk Quality. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
14.
De JongeJDormannC (2003) The DISC Model: Demand-induced strain compensation mechanisms in job stress. In: DollardMFWinefieldHRWinefieldAH (eds) Occupational Stress in the Service Professions. London: Taylor & Francis, 43–74.
15.
DweckCS (1999) Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
16.
EdmondsonAC (2003) Speaking up in operating room: How team leaders promote learn interdisciplinary action teams. Journal of Management Studies40: 1419–1452.
17.
EdwardsJRLambertLS (2007) Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods12(1): 1–22.
18.
ElsbachKDHargadonAB (2006) Enhancing creativity through ‘mindless’ work: A framework of workday design. Organization Science17: 470–483.
19.
FeldmanMS (2000) Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science11: 611–629.
20.
FeldmanMSPentlandBT (2003) Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly48: 94–118.
21.
FreseMGarstHFayD (2007) Making things happen: Reciprocal relationships between work characteristics and personal initiative in a four-wave longitudinal structural equation model. Journal of Applied Psychology92: 1084–1102.
22.
GilsonLLMathieuJEShalleyCERuddyTM (2005) Creativity and standardization: Complementary or conflicting drivers of team effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal48: 521–531.
23.
GrantAMParkerSK (2009) Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. The Academy of Management Annals3: 317–375.
24.
HackmanJROldhamGR (1980) Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
25.
HirstGVan KnippenbergDZhouJ (2009) A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal52: 280–293.
26.
HolmanDJWallTD (2002) Work characteristics, learning-related outcomes, and strain: A test of competing direct effects, mediated, and moderated models. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology7: 283–301.
27.
IqbalSTZhengXSBaileyBP (2004) Task evoked pupillary response to mental workload in human-computer interaction. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY: ACM, 1477–1480.
28.
JanssenOVan YperenNW (2004) Employees’ goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal47(3): 368–384.
29.
JettQRGeorgeJ (2003) Work interrupted: A closer look at the role of interruptions in organizational life. Academy of Management Review28: 494–507.
30.
KanferRAckermanPL (1989) Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. Journal of Applied Psychology74(4): 657–690.
31.
KimTYHonAHLeeDR (2010) Proactive personality and employee creativity: The effects of job creativity requirement and supervisor support for creativity. Creativity Research Journal22: 37–45.
32.
LillrankP (2003) The quality of standard, routine and nonroutine processes. Organization Studies24(2): 215–233.
33.
MadjarNOldhamGRPrattMG (2002) There’s no place like home? The contributions of work and nonwork creativity support to employees’ creative performance. Academy of Management Journal45: 757–767.
34.
MarchJG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science2(1): 71–87, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71.
35.
MarshHWLüdtkeONagengastBet al. (2013) Why item parcels are (almost) never appropriate: Two wrongs do not make a right: Camouflaging misspecification with item parcels in CFA models. Psychological Methods18(3): 257–284.
36.
MelamedSBen-AviILuzJGreenMS (1995) Objective and subjective work monotony: Effects of job satisfaction, psychological distress, and absenteeism in blue-collar workers. Journal of Applied Psychology80: 29–42.
37.
MorganJFHancockPA (2011) The effect of prior task loading on mental workload: An example of hysteresis in driving. Human Factors53(1): 75–86.
38.
NormanDABobrowDB (1975) On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology7: 44–64.
39.
OhlySSonnentagSPluntkeF (2006) Routinization, work characteristics and their relationships with creative and proactive behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior27: 257–279.
40.
OldhamGRCummingsA (1996) Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal39: 607–634.
41.
PaasFGVan MerriënboerJJAdamJJ (1994) Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills79(1): 419–430.
42.
PattersonMGWestMAShackletonVJet al. (2005) Validating the organizational climate measure: Links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior26: 379–408.
43.
PentlandBTRueterH (1994) Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Sciences Quarterly39: 484–510.
44.
PreacherKJHayesAF (2004) SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods36(4): 717–731.
QuinnRWSpreitzerGMLamCF (2012) Building a sustainable model of human energy in organizations: Exploring the critical role of resources. Academy of Management Annals6(1): 337–396.
47.
RaudenbushSWBrykAS (2002) Hierarchical Linear Models. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
48.
ReidGBNygrenTE (1988) The subjective workload assessment technique: A scaling procedure for measuring mental workload. In: HancockPAMeshkatiN (ed.) Human Mental Workload. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 185–218.
49.
RubioSDiazEMartinJPuenteJM (2004) Evaluation of subjective mental workload: A comparison of SWAT, NASA-TLX and Workload Profile Methods. Applied Psychology: An International Review53: 61–86.
50.
SantanenELBriggsRODe VreedeGJ (2004) Causal relationships in creative problem solving: Comparing facilitation interventions for ideation. Journal of Management Information Systems20: 167–198.
51.
ShalleyCEGilsonLL (2004) What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly15(1): 33–53.
52.
ShalleyCEGilsonLLBlumTC (2009) Interactive effects of growth need strength, work context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance. Academy of Management Journal52: 489–505.
53.
SonensheinS (2016) Routines and creativity: From dualism to duality. Organization Science27: 739–758.
54.
SonnentagSBinnewiesCMojzaEJ (2010) Staying well and engaged when demands are high: The role of psychological detachment. Journal of Applied Psychology95: 965–976.
55.
SungSYAntefeltAChoiJN (2017) Dual effects of job complexity on proactive and responsive creativity moderating role of employee ambiguity tolerance. Group and Organization Management42: 388–418.
56.
VandeWalleD (1997) Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement8: 995–1015.
57.
VandeWalleDBrownSPCronWLSlocumJW (1999) The influence of goal orientation and self-regulation tactics on sales performance: A longitudinal field test. Journal of Applied Psychology84: 249–259.
58.
VerplankenBOrbellS (2003) Reflections on past behavior: A self-report index of habit strength. Journal of Applied Social Psychology33: 1313–1330.
59.
VossGBSirdeshmukhDVossZG (2008) The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal51: 147–164.
60.
ZhangXBartolKM (2010) Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal53: 107–128.
61.
ZhaoXLynchJGJrChenQ (2010) Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research37(2):197–206.
62.
ZhouJGeorgeJM (2001) When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal44: 682–696.
