Enhancing creativity: Managing work contexts for the high potential employee

California Management Review

Volumn , Issue 1, 1997, Pages 22-38

  Cummings, Anne ^a   Oldham, Greg R ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031322915     PISSN: 00081256     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/41165920     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. The notion of the right people in the right place is more generally developed elsewhere. See B. Schneider, "Interactional Psychology and Organizational Behavior," in L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw, eds., Research in Organizational Behavior, 5 (1983): 1-31.
2. See, for example B.M. Staw, "An Evolutionary Approach to Creativity and Innovation," in M.A. West and J.L. Farr, eds., Innovation and Creativity at Work (Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 1990), pp. 287-308.
3. See M. Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention (New York, NY: HarperCollins, 1996); F.B. Barron and D.M. Harrington, "Creativity, Intelligence, and Personality," Annual Review of Psychology, 32 (1981): 439-476.
4. See M. Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention (New York, NY: HarperCollins, 1996); F.B. Barron and D.M. Harrington, "Creativity, Intelligence, and Personality," Annual Review of Psychology, 32 (1981): 439-476.
5. See, for example, D.C. Pelz and F.M. Andrews, Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climates for Research and Development, 2nd Edition (New York, NY: Wiley, 1976); S.G. Scott and R.A. Bruce, "Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace," Academy of Management Journal, 37 (1994): 580-607.
6. See, for example, D.C. Pelz and F.M. Andrews, Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climates for Research and Development, 2nd Edition (New York, NY: Wiley, 1976); S.G. Scott and R.A. Bruce, "Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace," Academy of Management Journal, 37 (1994): 580-607.
7. For a complete discussion, see M.J. Kirton, Adaptors and Innovators (London: Routledge, 1989).
8. Details of the instrument can be obtained from M.J. Kirton, Occupational Research Center, Highlands, Gravel Path, Berkhamsted, Herts, U.K. HP4 2PQ or in M.J. Kirton, "Adaptors and Innovators: A Description and Measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, 61/5 (October 1976): 622-629.
9. Details of the instrument can be obtained from M.J. Kirton, Occupational Research Center, Highlands, Gravel Path, Berkhamsted, Herts, U.K. HP4 2PQ or in M.J. Kirton, "Adaptors and Innovators: A Description and Measure, Journal of Applied Psychology, 61/5 (October 1976): 622-629.
10. See R.T. Keller, "Predictors of the Performance of Project Groups in R&D Organizations," Academy of Management Journal, 29 (1986): 715-726; R.T. Keller and W.E. Holland, "A Cross Validation Study of The Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory in Three Research and Development Organizations," Applied Psychological Measurement, 2 (1978): 563-570.
11. See R.T. Keller, "Predictors of the Performance of Project Groups in R&D Organizations," Academy of Management Journal, 29 (1986): 715-726; R.T. Keller and W.E. Holland, "A Cross Validation Study of The Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory in Three Research and Development Organizations," Applied Psychological Measurement, 2 (1978): 563-570.
12. See works cited in Note 3, plus C. Martindale, "Personality, Situation, and Creativity," in J.A. Glover, R.R. Ronning, and C.R. Reynolds, eds., Handbook of Creativity (New York, NY: Plenum, 1989), pp. 211-232.
13. For a comprehensive review of these tools, see G.A. Davis, "Testing for Creative Potential," Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14 (1989): 257-274.
14. The CPS was empirically derived from a broader, 300-item personality test, called the Adjective Check List. This broader instrument is the work of H.G. Gough and A.B. Heilbrun and details are available in The Adjective Check List Manual (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1965). Details of the 30-item CPS can be found in H.G. Gough, "A Creative Personality Scale for the Adjective Check List," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37/8 (August 1979): 1398-1405.
15. The CPS was empirically derived from a broader, 300-item personality test, called the Adjective Check List. This broader instrument is the work of H.G. Gough and A.B. Heilbrun and details are available in The Adjective Check List Manual (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1965). Details of the 30-item CPS can be found in H.G. Gough, "A Creative Personality Scale for the Adjective Check List," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37/8 (August 1979): 1398-1405.
16. See, for example, J.R. Terborg, "Interactional Psychology and Research on Human Behavior in Organizations," Academy of Management Review, 6/4 (October 1981): 569-576.
17. See J.R. Hackman, G. Oldham, R. Janson, and K. Purdy, "A New Strategy for Job Enrichment," California Management Review, 17/4 (Summer 1975): 57-71.
18. See, for example, D. McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1960).
19. B. Dumaine, "The Trouble with Teams," Fortune, September 5, 1994, pp. 86-92.
20. This argument derives largely from Teresa Amabile and her colleagues, who argue that people will be creative when they are intrinsically motivated by the work itself, rather than extrinsically motivated by external factors such as rewards. See T.M. Amabile, The Social Psychology of Creativity (New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1983).
21. Accepted suggestions were scheduled for implementation. Once these suggestions were implemented, a senior executive of the firm attached a monetary value to them. By the end of the study period, the value of each employee's implemented suggestions ranged from $217 to $374,899.
22. These results display statistical interactions previously reported in G.R. Oldham and A. Cummings, "Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work," Academy of Management Journal, 39/3 (June 1996): 607-634. Figure 1 illustrates the CPS x job complexity two-way interaction and Figure 2 shows the CPS x job complexity x supportive supervision x non-controlling supervision four-way interaction.
23. For a detailed list of these measures of competition, please contact one of the authors.
24. Figures 3 and 4 display three-way statistical interactions between scores on the CPS, scores on the KAI, and the amount of co-worker competition present. These interactions were determined using hierarchical Ordinary Least Squares Regression and were plotted by dividing employees into groups based on above-median versus below-median scores on the CPS and the KAI. The number of creative suggestions shown in Figure 3 reflect a log-linear scale.
25. For more detail, see Hackman et al, op. cit.
26. For evidence supporting this general notion, see M.L. Kohn and C. Schooler, "Job Conditions and Personality: A Longitudinal Assessment of Their Reciprocal Effects," American Journal of Sociology, 87 (1973): 1257-1286.