In this article we develop a theoretical framework for understanding creativity in complex social settings. We define organizational creativity a s the creation of a valuable. useful new product. service. idea. procedure. or process by individuals working together in a complex social system. The starting point for our theoretical development is provided by the interactionist model of creative behavior developed by Woodman a n d Schoenfeldt (1989). This model and supporting literature on creative behavior a n d organizational innovation are used to develop a n interactional framework for organizational creativity. The theoretical framework is summarized by three propositions that can effectively guide the development of testable hypotheses.

Information technology can facilitate the dissemination of knowledge across the organizationeven to the point of making virtual teams a viable alternative to face-to-face work. However, unless managed, the combination of information technology and virtual work may serve to change the distribution of different types of knowledge across individuals, teams, and the organization. Implications include the possibility that information technology plays the role of a jealous mistress when it comes to the development and ownership of valuable knowledge in organizations; that is. information technology may destabilize the relationship between organizations and their employees when it comes to the transfer of knowledge. The paper advances theory and informs practice by illustrating the dynamics of knowledge development and transfer in more and less virtual teams.

Measures of 2 constructs of role ambiguity (process and goal clarity) were developed. Mental health workers (N = 402) from 2 organizations provided evidence that a confirmatory 2-factor model fit the data better than a 1 -factor model. A path model including antecedents (autonomy, job feedback, agent feedback, recognition) and consequences (job satisfaction, job search behavior, turnover) of process and goal clarity was proposed based on the model of role ambiguity developed by Bedeian and Armenakis (1981) and modified in light of evidence on role ambiguity reviewed by Fisher and Gitelson (1983) and Jackson and Schuler (1985). A structural equation model confirmed the fit of the hypothesized model and a slightly more restricted model. Job tenure, need for clarity, and job classification were investigated as moderators but did not moderate the structural paths of the model.

No abstract

No abstract