One of Us or One of My Friends: How Social Identity and Tie Strength Shape the Creative Generativity of Boundary-Spanning Ties

Organization Studies

Volumn 35, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 703-726

  Dokko, Gina ^a   Kane, Aimée A ^b   Tortoriello, Marco ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c IESE BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Spain)

Author keywords

creativity; dyadic interaction; innovation; social identity; social networks; superordinate social identity; teams; tie strength

Indexed keywords

EID: 84899639824     PISSN: 01708406     EISSN: 17413044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0170840613508397     Document Type: Article

References (107)

1. Amabile T. M.A model of creativity and innovation in organizations.Research in Organizational Behavior. 1988;10:123-167.
2. Argote L.,Kane A. A.Knowledge governance. Foss N. J.Michailova S., ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009:166-190.
3. Ashforth B. E.,Johnson S. A.Social identity processes in organizational contexts. Hogg M. A.Terry D. J., ed. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press; 2001:31-48.
4. Babcock P.Shedding light on knowledge management.HR Magazine. 2004;49:46-50.
5. Baer M.The strength-of-weak-ties perspective on creativity: A comprehensive examination and extension.Journal Of Applied Psychology. 2010;95 (3): 592-601.
6. Baer M.Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations.Academy Of Management Journal. 2012;55 (5): 1102-1119.
7. Borgatti S. P.,Cross R.A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks.Management Science. 2003;49 (4): 432-445.
8. Brambor T.,Clark W. R.,Golder M.Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses.Political Analysis. 2006;14 (1): 63-82.
9. Brewer M. B.In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive motivational analysis.Psychological Bulletin. 1979;86:237-243.
10. Brewer M. B.,Gardner W.Who is this "we"? Levels of collective identity and self representations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;71 (1): 83-93.
11. Brewer M. B.,Kramer R. M.The psychology of intergroup attitudes and behavior.Annual Review Of Psychology. 1985;36:219-243.
12. Burt R. S.Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1992:.
13. Burt R. S.Structural holes and good ideas.American Journal Of Sociology. 2004;110:349-399.
14. Cabrera A.,Cabrera E. F.Knowledge-sharing dilemmas.Organization Studies. 2002;23 (5): 687-710.
15. Carlile P. R.Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries.Organization Science. 2004;15 (5): 555-568.
16. Constant D.,Kiesler S.,Sproull L.What's mine is ours, or is it?: A study of attitudes about information sharing.Information Systems Research. 1994;5 (4): 400-421.
17. Corredoira R. A.,Rosenkopf L.Should auld acquaintance be forgot? The reverse transfer of knowledge through mobility ties.Strategic Management Journal. 2010;31 (2): 159-181.
18. Cross R.,Sproull L.More than an answer: Information relationships for actionable knowledge.Organization Science. 2004;15 (4): 446-462.
19. Dokko G.,Rosenkopf L.Social capital for hire? Mobility of technical professionals and firm influence in wireless standards committees.Organization Science. 2010;21 (3): 677-695.
20. Dougherty D.Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms.Organization Science. 1992;3 (2): 179-202.
21. Dovidio J. F.,Gaertner S. L.,Saguy T.Commonality and the complexity of "we": Social attitudes and social change.Personality And Social Psychology Review. 2009;13 (3): 3-20.
22. Dukerich J. M.,Golden B. R.,Shortell S. M.Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: The impact of organizational identification identity and image on the cooperative behaviors of physicians.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2002;47 (3): 507-533.
23. Ellemers N.The group self.Science. 2012;336 (6083): 848-852.
24. Elsbach K. D.Research in organizational behavior. Cummings L. L.Staw B. M., ed. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press; 1999:163-200.
25. Evans M. G.A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1985;36:305-323.
26. Fleming L.,Mingo S.,Chen D.Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2007;52 (3): 443-475.
27. Freeman L. C.,Romney A. K.,Freeman S. C.Cognitive structure and informant accuracy.American Anthropologist. 1987;89 (2): 310-325.
28. Gaertner S. L.,Dovidio J. F.Reducing intergroup bias-The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press; 2000:.
29. George E.,Chattopadhyay P.One foot in each camp: The dual identification of contract workers.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2005;50 (1): 68-99.
30. Granovetter M.The strength of weak ties.American Journal Of Sociology. 1973;78:1360-1380.
31. Greene W.Testing hypotheses about interaction terms in nonlinear models.Economics Letters. 2010;107 (2): 291-296.
32. Hansen M. T.The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1999;44 (1): 82-111.
33. Hansen M. T.,Mors M. L.,Lovas B.Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases.Academy Of Management Journal. 2005;48 (5): 776-793.
34. Hargadon A. B.Creativity and innovation in organizational teams. Thompson L.Choi H. S., ed. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006:199-216.
35. Hargadon A. B.,Bechky B. A.When collections of creatives become creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work.Organization Science. 2006;17 (4): 484-500.
36. Hargadon A. B.,Sutton R. I.Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1997;42 (4): 716-749.
37. Haslam S. A.Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. 2004). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2004:.
38. Haslam S. A.,Eggins R. A.,Reynolds K. J.The aspire model: Actualizing social and personal identity resources to enhance organizational outcomes.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2003;76:83-113.
39. Haslam S. A.,Ellemers N.International Review of Industrial And Organizational Psychology. Hodgkinson G. P.Ford J. K., ed. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons; 2005:39-118.
40. Henderson R. M.,Clark K. B.Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990;35 (1): 9-30.
41. Hennessy B.Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration. Paulus P. B.Nijstad B. A., ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003:181-201.
42. Hewstone M.,Rubin M.,Willis H.Intergroup bias.Annual Review of Psychology. 2002;53:575-604.
43. Hinds P. J.,Mortensen M.Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication.Organization Science. 2005;16 (3): 290-307.
44. Hirst G.,van Dick R.,van Knippenberg D.A social identity perspective on leadership and employee creativity.Journal Of Organizational Behavior. 2009;30:963-982.
45. Hoetker G.The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues.Strategic Management Journal. 2007;28 (4): 331-343.
46. Hogg M. A.,Hains S. C.Intergroup relations and group solidarity: Effects of group identification and social beliefs on depersonalized attraction.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;70 (2): 295-309.
47. Homans G. C.The human group. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace; 1950:.
48. Hornsey M. J.,Hogg M. A.Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations.Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2000;4 (2): 143-156.
49. Ibarra H.Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles.Academy of Management Journal. 1993;36 (3): 471-501.
50. Ibarra H.,Kilduff M.,Tsai W.Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research.Organization Science. 2005;16 (4): 359-371.
51. Jaccard J.,Turrisi R.,Wan C. K.Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990:.
52. Kane A. A.Unlocking knowledge transfer potential: Knowledge demonstrability and superordinate social identity.Organization Science. 2010;21 (3): 643-660.
53. Kane A. A.,Argote L.,Levine J. M.Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2005;96 (1): 56-71.
54. Kanter R. M.Research in organizational behavior. Cummings L. L.Staw B. M., ed. Greenwich, CT: Jai Press; 1988:169-211.
55. Katz D.,Kahn R. L.The social psychology of organizations. 1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.New York, NY: Wiley; 1978:.
56. Katz R.,Allen T. J.Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups.R&D Management. 1982;12 (1): 7-19.
57. Kijkuit B.,van den Ende J.With a little help from our colleagues: A longitudinal study of social networks for innovation.Organization Studies. 2010;31 (4): 451-479.
58. Kleinbaum A. M.Organizational misfits and the origins of brokerage in intrafirm networks.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2012;57 (3): 407-452.
59. Kozlowski S. W. J.,Ilgen D. R.Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams.Psychological Science. 2006;7:77-124.
60. Krackhardt D.Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990;35 (2): 342-369.
61. Krackhardt D.Networks and organizations: Structures, form and action. Nohria N.Eccles R., ed. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1992:216-239.
62. Levin D. Z.,Cross R.The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer.Management Science. 2004;50 (11): 1477-1490.
63. Levin D. Z.,Walter J.,Murnighan J. K.Dormant ties: The value of reconnecting.Organization Science. 2011;22 (4): 923-939.
64. Lomi A.,Lusher D.,Pattison P. E.,Robins G.The focused organization of advice relations: A study in boundary crossing.Organization Science. 2013;:.
65. Luckmann T.On social interaction and the communicative construction of personal identity, knowledge and reality.Organization Studies. 2008;29 (2): 277-290.
66. Mael F. A.,Ashforth B. E.Alumni and their alma-mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification.Journal of Organizational Behavior. 1992;13 (2): 103-123.
67. Mael F. A.,Ashforth B. E.Loyal from day one: Biodata, organizational identification, and turnover among newcomers.Personnel Psychology. 1995;48 (2): 309-333.
68. March J. G.,Simon H. A.Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley; 1958:.
69. Marsden P. V.Network data and measurement.Annual Review of Sociology. 1990;16:435-463.
70. Marsden P. V.,Campbell K. E.Measuring tie strength.Social Forces. 1984;63 (2): 482-501.
71. Maurer I.,Bartsch V.,Ebers M.The value of intra-organizational social capital: How it fosters knowledge transfer, innovation performance, and growth.Organization Studies. 2011;32 (2): 157-185.
72. McPherson M.,Smith-Lovin L.,Cook J. M.Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.Annual Review of Sociology. 2001;27:415-444.
73. Mehra A.,Kilduff M.,Brass D. J.At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups.Academy Of Management Journal. 1998;41 (4): 441-452.
74. Millward L. J.,Haslam S. A.,Postmes T.Putting employees in their place: The impact of hot desking on organizational and team identification.Organization Science. 2007;18 (4): 547-559.
75. Moran P.Structural vs. relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial performance.Strategic Management Journal. 2005;26 (12): 1129-1151.
76. Morrison E. W.Newcomers' relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization.Academy of Management Journal. 2002;45 (6): 1149-1160.
77. Mouw T.Social capital and finding a job: Do contacts matter?.American Sociological Review. 2003;68 (6): 868-898.
78. Newell A.,Simon H. A.Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1972:.
79. Obstfeld D.Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation and involvement in innovation.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2005;50 (1): 100-130.
80. Penley L. E.,Hawkins B.Studying interpersonal-communication in organizations: A leadership application.Academy Of Management Journal. 1985;28 (2): 309-326.
81. Perry-Smith J. E.Social yet creative: The role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity.Academy Of Management Journal. 2006;49 (1): 85-101.
82. Perry-Smith J. E.,Shalley C. E.The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective.Academy Of Management Review. 2003;28 (1): 89-106.
83. Pettigrew T. F.Ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1979;5 (4): 461-476.
84. Reagans R.Preferences, identity, and competition: Predicting tie strength from demographic data.Management Science. 2005;51 (9): 1374-1383.
85. Reagans R.,McEvily B.Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range.Administrative Science Quarterly. 2003;48 (2): 240-267.
86. Reagans R.,Zuckerman E. W.Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams.Organization Science. 2001;12 (4): 502-517.
87. Riketta M.,van Dick R.Foci of attachment in organizations: A meta-analytic comparison of the strength and correlates of workgroup versus organizational Identifi{ligature}cation and commitment.Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2005;67:460-510.
88. Rodan S.,Galunic C.More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness.Strategic Management Journal. 2004;25 (6): 541-562.
89. Rotondi T.Organizational identification: Issues and implications.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 1975;13 (1): 95-109.
90. Rousseau D. M.,Sitkin S. B.,Burt R. S.,Camerer C.Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust.Academy of Management Review. 1998;23 (3): 393-404.
91. Sethi R.Superordinate identity in cross-functional product development teams: Its antecedents and effect on new product performance.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 2000;28 (3): 330-344.
92. Song J.,Almeida P.,Wu G.Learning-by-hiring: When is mobility more likely to facilitate interfirm knowledge transfer?.Management Science. 2003;49 (4): 351-365.
93. Sosa M. E.Where do creative interactions come from? the role of tie content and social networks.Organization Science. 2011;22 (1): 1-21.
94. Stuart T. E.Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1998;43 (3): 668-698.
95. Tajfel H.Introduction à la psychologie sociale. Moscovici S., ed. Paris, France: Larousse; 1972:.
96. Tortoriello M.,Krackhardt D.Activating cross-boundary knowledge: The role of simmelian ties in the generation of innovations.Academy of Management Journal. 2010;53 (1): 167-181.
97. Tortoriello M.,Reagans R.,McEvily B.Bridging the knowledge gap: The influence of strong ties, network cohesion, and network range on the transfer of knowledge between organizational units.Organization Science. 2012;23 (4): 1024-1039.
98. Tyler T. R.,Blader S. L.Identity and cooperative behavior in groups.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2001;4 (3): 207-226.
99. van Knippenberg DSocial identity and social cognition. Abrams D.Hogg M. A., ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing; 1999:315-331.
100. van Knippenberg D.,van Schie E. C. M.Foci and correlates of organizational identification.Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology. 2000;73 (2): 137-147.
101. Sociale categoristaie, verwerking van argumenten en attitudeverandering. van Knippenberg D.Wilke H., ed. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University Press; 1991:.
102. Von Hippel E.The sources of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1988:.
103. Wasserman S.,Faust K.Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1994:.
104. Wilson J. M.,O'Leary M. B.,Metiu A.,Jett Q. R.Perceived proximity in virtual work: Explaining the paradox of far-but-close.Organization Studies. 2008;29 (7): 979-1002.
105. Wooldridge J.Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2002:.
106. Zelner B. A.Using simulation to interpret results from logit, probit, and other nonlinear models.Strategic Management Journal. 2009;30 (12): 1335-1348.
107. Zhou J.,Shin S. J.,Brass D. J.,Choi J.,Zhang Z. X.Social networks, personal values, and creativity: Evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009;94 (6): 1544-1552.