No abstract

3Research in the field of management and organizational sciences has yielded a deeper 4 understanding of many emerging business issues. However, the relevance of the contributions has 5 been increasingly criticised, in both the academic and public spheres. This paper proposes the Paris -as a design-science approach able to address both the relevance gap issue and the growing 8 complexity of management practice. It is argued that increasing our understanding of management 9 requires research that is more insightful, influential, and immediately applicable. This in turn 10 requires closer collaboration between management and researchers during the inquiry process, 11 which is not always easy to achieve. An illustrative case study of an intervention research project 12 focusing on creativity, conducted in Italy in collaboration with a fashion company, demonstrates 13 how intervention research can be rigorous and relevant to practitioners, and how it can advance 14 theoretical knowledge in management science. This perspective seeks to assimilate the scientific quest for truth ('is this proposition true?') into a 31 practical concern for relevance ('will it work better?') (Jelinek et al., 2008). Design science calls for 32 the production of knowledge and artefacts that simultaneously advance our body of knowledge and 33 improve performances (Van Aken, 2005). 34The opportunity to adopt a 'design science' perspective has sparked considerable debate in English-based literature that maps out and clarifies the essence of its inquiry process.

The goal of this article is to propose a theoretical framework of collective creativity within an organizational design perspective and contribute to clarify this concept and how collective creativity can be purposefully managed. In particular, this study identifies relevant organizational variables for enhancing collective creativity and examines the relationship between collective creativity and organizational performance. The research draws upon a survey developed in the context of an in-depth collaborative research study with an Italian fashion design company. Since the theory on collective creativity is quite dispersed, the first part of the article attempts to define collective creativity and integrate different theoretical perspectives. Then, method and empirical findings are described. In the last part, the discussion illustrates why it is important for researchers and practitioners to be aware of the concept of collective creativity and the purposeful management of it.

This paper investigates the relationship between different types of organizational learning mechanisms and creative climate. In the context of an action research study, this paper focuses on insights from a survey that was administered to all the employees of the Product Design and Development unit of the company. The results indicate that the three different types of organizational learning mechanisms considered in the study (cognitive, structural and procedural mechanisms) are associated with creative climate. The results generate new scientific knowledge about the understanding of the role of organizational learning mechanisms and provide specific recommendations for organizations that aim to enhance creative climate.Keywords -organizational learning mechanisms, creativity, creative climate. 2 IntroductionCreativity is crucial for sustaining competitiveness (e.g. Epstein et al., 2013;Caniëls et al., 2014). The intensity of today's global economy requires an increased pace of creativity carried out in short time-cycles (Cirella and Shani, 2012;Sundgren and Styhre, 2003). To what extent creativity can be conceived as an organizational attribute is still under debate and, in particular, organizational scholars argue that analysing creativity at an individual level does not address either the nature or the complexity of creativity within organizations (Amabile, 1983). Most creative ideas within organizations are the outcome of exchange in a collective space, when interaction triggers ideas through collaboration, dialogue and debate (Catmull, 2008). Under the organizational creativity perspective (Woodman et al., 1993), creativity in organizations relies on a creative climate (Styhre and Sundgren, 2005).Learning and creative climate are crucial for the establishment of mental models of creativity (Lozano, 2014) and creative climate can be enhanced by organizational learning mechanisms (Cirella and Shani, 2012). Moreover, the relationship between organizational learning mechanisms and creative climate seems relevant to innovation, considering that both learning and creative climate in organizations contributed to 58.5% of the explanation of the observed variances in the innovation construct (Ismail, 2005). As such, different types of organizational learning mechanisms (Popper and Lipshitz, 1998) need to be tested to investigate their potential impact on creative climate. Such new insights can also guide managerial actions around the design of organizational learning mechanisms (Mitki et al., 2008) to foster creativity.The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between different types of organizational learning mechanisms and creative climate. Despite the increased attention given to this focus and challenge (e.g. Catmull, 2008), scientific literature has yet to demonstrate the empirical link between organizational learning mechanisms and creative 3 climate. Building on literature relating to organizational learning mechanisms and creative climate, this study analyses the effect of different or...

Leading change is an enduring managerial challenge that encompasses individual and collective efforts within an organization. Among the levers that managers can use to foster change, mobilizing activities are considered particularly relevant since they enable leaders to activate the resources and processes necessary for change to actually occur. This study investigates whether individual person-and task-centred orientations to leadership relate to an emphasis on mobilizing change through their effect on distributed leadership. These hypotheses are tested using an international survey involving 459 middle managers from different firms, countries and industries who had implemented a planned organizational change project. The findings reveal that both person-centred and task-centred orientations to leadership relate positively to mobilizing change, and that distributed leadership may explain the relationship between orientations to leadership and mobilizing activities.