The paradoxes of creativity management

DSpace Repository

Show simple item record Kačerauskas, Tomas
dc.contributor.other Ekonomická fakulta cs 2016-12-05 2016-12-05 2016-12-05
dc.identifier.issn 1212-3609
dc.description.abstract Creativity is a very important aspect of market economy. Creativity is an ambivalent and contradictory phenomenon that covers both positive and negative aspects. As a result, management of creativity faces some paradoxes. The paper deals with 10 paradoxes of creativity management including one grand paradox (GP) and nine minor paradoxes (MP). By stimulating creativity, the managers risk to provoke the disobedience for their instructions including an instruction to develop creativity (GP). Successful period of an organization is an obstacle to develop the creative ideas (MP1). A radical implementation of creative ideas threatens the identity of organization (MP2). Creativity provokes the conflicts in organization (MP3). Every inventor or innovator tries to negate his (her) social environment that has educated and stimulated him (her) (MP4). Although hard management kills creativity, the latter needs sometimes very hard decisions (MP5). The worse the results are, the more creative the decisions in organization are (MP6). Organizations should manage both quantity and quality (MP7). Organization needs not only management of knowledge but also management of ignorance and naiveté (MP8). The managers should forget the past success of organization and think about future end of it (MP9). The main aim of this paper is to describe these paradoxes. Another aim is to present the different approaches towards creativity management. Finally, the paper seeks to dethrone a naive attitude that creativity in economy solves all possible problems. The biggest challenge to the management is the very creativity. en
dc.format.extent 33-43 s. cs
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher Technická Univerzita v Liberci cs
dc.publisher Technical university of Liberec, Czech Republic en
dc.relation.ispartof Ekonomie a Management cs
dc.relation.ispartof Economics and Management en
dc.relation.isbasedon Alexander, E. R. (1979). The design of alternatives in organizational contexts: a pilot study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(3), 382-404. doi:10.2307/2989919.
dc.relation.isbasedon Amabile, T. M. (1998). . Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 76-86.
dc.relation.isbasedon Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: a consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997-1013. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997.
dc.relation.isbasedon Amabile, T. M. (1983). Social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357-376. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357.
dc.relation.isbasedon Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
dc.relation.isbasedon Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
dc.relation.isbasedon Anderson, N., Potocnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). . Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333. doi:10.1177/0149206314527128.
dc.relation.isbasedon Anzai, Y. (1984). Cognitive control of real-time event driven systems. Cognitive Science, 8(3), 221-254. .
dc.relation.isbasedon Arndt, J, Greenberg, J, Solomon, S. et al. (1999). . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 19-32. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.19.
dc.relation.isbasedon Barevičiūtė, J. (2014). Pagrindiniai kūrybiškumo ir kūrybingumo aspektai šiuolaikiniuose humanitariniuose bei socialiniuose moksluose [The aspects of creativity and creativeness in contemporary humanities and social sciences]. Filosofija. Sociologija, 25(1), 19-28.
dc.relation.isbasedon Basadur, M., & Hausdorf, P. A. (1996). Measuring divergent thinking attitudes related to creative problem solving and innovation management. Creativity Research Journal, 9(1), 21-32. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj0901_3.
dc.relation.isbasedon Bilton, C., & Cummings, S. (2014). . In C. Bilton, & S. Cummings (Eds.), Handbook of management and creativity (pp. 1-12). Regency: Edward Elgar Publishing.
dc.relation.isbasedon Bilton, C. (2015). . International Journal of Cultural Policy, 21(2), 153-167. doi:10.1080/10286632.2014.892933.
dc.relation.isbasedon Bilton, C. (2007). Management and creativity: from creative industries to creative management. Oxford: Blackwell.
dc.relation.isbasedon Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009). A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 305-337. doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01154.
dc.relation.isbasedon Černevičiūtė, J. (2014). Creativity Understandings, Evolution: from Genius to Creative Systems. Santalka: Filosofija, Komunikacija, 22(2), 113-125. doi:10.3846/cpc.2014.10.
dc.relation.isbasedon Chen, M.-H., Chang, Y.-Y., & Lo, Y.-H. (2015). Creativity cognitive style, conflict, and career success for creative entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Research, 68(4), 906-910. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.050.
dc.relation.isbasedon Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999). Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A sense making perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 286-307. doi:10.5465/AMR.1999.1893937.
dc.relation.isbasedon Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of Creative Class. And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
dc.relation.isbasedon Ford, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). . Journal of Management, 26(4), 705-732. doi:10.1177/014920630002600406.
dc.relation.isbasedon Gelfand, M. J., Leslie, L. M., & Keller, K. M. (2008). On the etiology of conflict cultures. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 137-166. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. doi:10.2307/20159573.
dc.relation.isbasedon Gilson, L. L. (2001). Diversity, dissimilarity and creativity: Does group composition or being different enhance or hinder creative performance. Washington: Academy of Management Meetings.
dc.relation.isbasedon Gilson, L. L., & Shalley, C. E. (2004). . Journal of Management, 30(4), 453-470. doi:10.1016/
dc.relation.isbasedon Greene, R. (2007). The 33 Strategies of War. New York: Penguin.
dc.relation.isbasedon Hamel, G. (2007). The future of management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
dc.relation.isbasedon Heidegger, M. (1996). Being and Time. Trans. by J. Stambaugh. New York: State University of New York Press.
dc.relation.isbasedon Hoever, I. J., van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P. et al. (2012). . Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 982-996. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Howkins, J. (2007). The Creative Economy. London: Penguin.
dc.relation.isbasedon Izak, M. (2013). The foolishness of wisdom: Towards an inclusive approach to wisdom in organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29(1), 108-115. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Johnsen, C. G. (2015). . Futures, 68(April), 57-66. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Jung, E. J., & Lee, S. (2015). . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 130(September), 44-57. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Kanišauskas, S. (2016). Creative technologies entrapped by instrumental mind. Filosofija. Sociologija, 27(1), 45-50.
dc.relation.isbasedon Kazanjian, R. K., Drazin, R., & Glynn, M. A. (2000). Creativity and technological learning: The roles of organization architecture and crisis in large-scale projects. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 17(3-4), 273-298. doi:10.1016/S0923-4748(00)00026-6.
dc.relation.isbasedon Klimczuk, A. (2014). Barriers to the Development of Creative industries in Culturally Diverse Region. Santalka: Filosofija, Komunikacija, 22(2), 145-152. doi:10.3846/cpc.2014.13.
dc.relation.isbasedon Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
dc.relation.isbasedon Lane, C., & Lup, D. (2015). . Industry and Innovation, 22(8), 654-676. doi:10.1080/13662716.2015.1113861.
dc.relation.isbasedon McLeod, P. L., Baron, R. S., Marti, M. W., & Yoon, K. (1997). The eyes have it: Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 706-718. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.5.706.
dc.relation.isbasedon Mullen, B. (1991). Group composition, salience, and cognitive representations: The phenomenology of being in a group. , ), 297-323. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Mumford, M. D., Schultz, R. A., & Osburn, H. K. (2002). Planning in organizations: Performance as a multi-level phenomenon. In F. J. Yammarino, & F. Dansereau (Eds.), Many faces of multi-level issues (pp. 3-65). Oxford: Elsevier.
dc.relation.isbasedon Nijstad, B. A., Berger-Selman, F., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2014). . European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(2), 310-322. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2012.734038.
dc.relation.isbasedon Noice, H. (1991). The role of explanations and plan recognition in the learning of theatrical scripts. Cognitive Science, 15(3), 425-460. doi:10.1016/0364-0213(91)80004-O.
dc.relation.isbasedon Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work, Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607-634. doi:10.2307/256657.
dc.relation.isbasedon Osburn, H. K., & Mumford, M. D. (2006). . Creativity Research Journal, 18(2), 173-190. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1802_4.
dc.relation.isbasedon Paulus, P. B. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea-generating groups. Applied Psychology, 49(2), 237-262. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00013.
dc.relation.isbasedon Pečiulis, Ž. (2015). Vienetiškumas ir tiražas – kūrybos visuomenės paradoksas [Paradoxes of the creative society]. Filosofija. Sociologija, 26(1), 81-85.
dc.relation.isbasedon Plato. (1992). The Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
dc.relation.isbasedon Pruskus, V. (2015). Kūrybingumo panaudojimo gerinant aplinkos kokybę etiniai ir socialiniai kultūriniai aspektai [Ethical and sociocultural aspects of creativity use in improving the quality of the environment]. Filosofija. Sociologija, 26(3), 201-209.
dc.relation.isbasedon Rank, J., Pace, V. L., & Frese, M. (2004). Three avenues for future research on creativity, innovation, and initiative. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 518-528. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00185.x.
dc.relation.isbasedon Reimeris, R. (2016). Theoretical features of the creative society. Creativity studies, 9(1), 15-24. doi:10.3846/23450479.2015.1088902.
dc.relation.isbasedon Schumpeter, J. (1939). Business cycles: A theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. New York: McGraw Hill.
dc.relation.isbasedon Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33-53. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2009). Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4), 690-709. doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.85.
dc.relation.isbasedon Staw, B. M. (1990). An evolutionary approach to creativity and innovation. In M. A. West, & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 287-308). Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
dc.relation.isbasedon Storr, A. (1972). The dynamics of creation. London: Secker and Warburg.
dc.relation.isbasedon Sutton, R. I. (2001). . Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 94-103.
dc.relation.isbasedon Tekleab, A. G., & Quigley, N. R. (2014). Team deep-level diversity, relationship conflict, and team members’ affective reactions: A cross-level investigation. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 394-402. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon West, M. A. (1990). The social psychology of innovation in groups. In M. A. West, & J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (309-333). Chichester: Wiley.
dc.relation.isbasedon West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 355-387. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00951.
dc.relation.isbasedon Zhou, J. (1998). Feedback valence, feedback style, task autonomy, and achievement orientation: Interactive effects on creative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 261-276. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedon Zhou, J., & Shalley, C. E. (2010). Deepening our understanding of creativity in the workplace: A review of different approaches to creativity research. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (275-302). Washington: American Psychological Association.
dc.relation.isbasedon Zhou, J. (2006). A model of paternalistic organizational control and group creativity. Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 9, 75-95. doi:10.1016/S1534-0856(06)09004-9.
dc.rights CC BY-NC
dc.subject creativity management en
dc.subject paradoxes en
dc.subject conflict en
dc.subject organization en
dc.subject creative economy en
dc.subject.classification B5
dc.subject.classification J5
dc.subject.classification L2
dc.subject.classification M1
dc.title The paradoxes of creativity management en
dc.type Article en
dc.publisher.abbreviation TUL
dc.relation.isrefereed true
dc.identifier.doi 10.15240/tul/001/2016-4-003
dc.identifier.eissn 2336-5604
local.relation.volume 19
local.relation.issue 4
local.relation.abbreviation E&M en
local.relation.abbreviation E+M cs
local.faculty Faculty of Economics
local.citation.spage 33
local.citation.epage 43
local.access open
local.fulltext yes

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace

Advanced Search


My Account