Creative Scientists Rate Creativity Factors

Parmerter, Stanley M.; Garber, Jonathan

doi:10.1080/00345334.1971.11756097

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Job security, pay and rewards (Parmeter, 1971;Dessauer, 1971;Blume, 1973;Powers, 1976;Coltrin and Glueck, 1977) are also desired by scientists. Since in the basic sciences job security often depends on one's ability to get research grants, concern over the danger of unemployment and loss of income become significant in periods of government fiscal restraint and a contracting economy.…”

Section: Safety Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulating creativity through managerial intervention

Lovelace

1986

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By linking creativity enhancement constructs to motivation theory, this paper theorizes how research managers, by virtue of their relationship with research personnel, may engage in behaviour which stimulates creative effort. Proposed is that the stimulation of creativity results from a basic scientist experiencing self‐actualization needs. Self‐actualization becomes prepotent in part as a result of the research manager's effort to satisfy lower level and higher level needs of scientists. Research managers may help satisfy such needs by virtue of their linking pin function, by engaging in goal setting and task definition, and by acquiring needed resources. The specific needs of basic scientists are specified based on the characteristics of basic scientists; two are predominant:— 1. The scientist is a professional, exhibiting many of the characteristics of professionals. 2. The scientist is a creative individual who, when sufficiently motivated produces novel ideas, combines old ideas in a novel way, or applies knowledge of one field to another. By satisfying the particular needs aroused by professional norms and creative ability, the research manager hence may help satisfy the needs of basic scientists. Appropriate managerial behaviours are linked to creativity enhancement in a model depicting the mechanisms whereby scientists are so motivated. Hypotheses are proposed as a basis for future research in testing the model.

show abstract

Section: Safety Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulating creativity through managerial intervention

Lovelace

1986

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…T HE PROBLEM OF how to increase the innovativeness, creativity, and output of research and development (R&D) continues to be a major concern for administrators [3], [6] - [9], [12]. For example, increased idea output has been postulated to result from management policies that period ically release scientists from their regular assignments to work on their own ideas, i.e, "10 percent time," "free time," or "release time" Release-time wil l b e viewe d b y th e scientist s a s a polic y tha t stimulates radicall y innovativ e an d creativ e ne w produc t ideas .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of release-time on R&D outputs and scientists' gratification

Souder

1981

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A release-time policy which permitted scientists to periodically work on their own ideas was implemented on an ex perimental basis at a market oriented R&D laboratory. Only a small percentage of the laboratory personnel took advantage of the new policy. These few participants quickly became disillusioned, and their attitudes spread among the remaining nonparticipants. Reasons for the apparent failure of release-time in this situation are cited, and several general pitfalls to be avoided in administering release-time are enumerated. The compelling conclusion is advanced that the seem ingly innocuous idea of letting scientists work on their own ideas is an extremely complex and difficult concept to successfully implement.The particular case studied here involved an R&D labora tory which had developed several leading technologies and products in the past. During recent years, the laboratory's efforts had shifted toward maintaining existing products and market positions. This change in emphasis had resulted in the curtailment of a large amount of fundamental research and an increase in product maintenance research. The laboratory administration sensed an increasing discontent among their most productive personnel, as a result of these changes.Although the administration felt that the laboratory could never return to its earlier mode of heavy emphasis on funda mental research, the administration sought to regain some of the former atmosphere through a release-time policy. This policy allowed any scientist 1 to propose a one-man effort, four-month duration project which he or she could carry out when his or her current assignment was completed. Funds for equipment, travel, supporting service, and technician time also were provided. Projects were selected at random from the population of proposals, up to a maximum of fifteen con currently ongoing release-time projects. Selected release-time individuals were allowed to work unsupervised for a period of up to four months. The policy specified that the disposition of each release-time project's results would be determined in a postproject review meeting between the individual and the laboratory director. All release-time personnel were required to return to their prior research groups at the end of their four-month periods. 1 The term "scientist" is here used in its broadest sense, to include all 197 degreed professional employees of the laboratory. 0018-9391/81/0200-0008$00.75 © 1981 IEEE SOUDER: EFFECT S O F RELEASE-TIM E O N R& D OUTPUT S 9 CONDITIONS BEFOR E TREATMENT : Scientists dissatisfie d wit h th e (lew ) leve l o f organizational receptivit y fo r thei r ideas . Management dissatisfie d wit h th e (low ) leve l o f "creativity" an d "ide a outputs" . TREATMENT Release-time policy Release-time policy INTERVENING VARIABLE S (for scientists ) Perceived organizationa l reward s Perceived persona l reward s Perceived persona l risk s EXPECTED EFFECT S O F TREATMENT : Decrease i n scientist' s dissatisfaction s (a s measure d by thei r attitudes ) wit h respec t t o ...

show abstract

“…What has been established is that the difference in orientations of group members will be evident in the solutions made by that group (Dearborn and Simon 1958). It has also been shown that a diversity in 99 orientations will positively influence creative performance in organizations Aiken 1967, Aiken andHage 1971;Parmenter and Garber 1971;Pelz and Andrews 1976), in individuals (Kasperson 1978;Parmenter and Garber 1971;Pelz 1959;Graham 1965), and in heterogeneous groups (Hoffman 1959;Hoffman and Maier 1961;Milton 1959;Hoffman et al 1964;Triandis et al 1965). …”

Section: Diversity and Creative Idea Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The articles of Pelz (1958), Kasperson (1978), and Parmenter and Garber (1971) defined diversity in terms of the variety and frequency of communication contacts.…”

Section: Individual Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Creativity in Organizations

Dhillon¹

2006

Creativity for Engineers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creative Scientists Rate Creativity Factors

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Stimulating creativity through managerial intervention

Stimulating creativity through managerial intervention

Effects of release-time on R&D outputs and scientists' gratification

Creativity in Organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About