The paradoxes of creativity management

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorKačerauskas, Tomas
dc.contributor.otherEkonomická fakultacs
dc.date.accessioned2016-12-05
dc.date.available2016-12-05
dc.date.issued2016-12-05
dc.description.abstractCreativity 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.extent33-43 s.cs
dc.identifier.doi10.15240/tul/001/2016-4-003
dc.identifier.eissn2336-5604
dc.identifier.issn1212-3609
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/19267
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTechnická Univerzita v Libercics
dc.publisherTechnical university of Liberec, Czech Republicen
dc.publisher.abbreviationTUL
dc.relation.isbasedonAlexander, 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.isbasedonAmabile, T. M. (1998). . Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 76-86.
dc.relation.isbasedonAmabile, 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.isbasedonAmabile, 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.isbasedonAmabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
dc.relation.isbasedonAmabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
dc.relation.isbasedonAnderson, N., Potocnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). . Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333. doi:10.1177/0149206314527128.
dc.relation.isbasedonAnzai, Y. (1984). Cognitive control of real-time event driven systems. Cognitive Science, 8(3), 221-254. .
dc.relation.isbasedonArndt, 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.isbasedonBarevičiūtė, 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.isbasedonBasadur, 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.isbasedonBilton, C., & Cummings, S. (2014). . In C. Bilton, & S. Cummings (Eds.), Handbook of management and creativity (pp. 1-12). Regency: Edward Elgar Publishing.
dc.relation.isbasedonBilton, C. (2015). . International Journal of Cultural Policy, 21(2), 153-167. doi:10.1080/10286632.2014.892933.
dc.relation.isbasedonBilton, C. (2007). Management and creativity: from creative industries to creative management. Oxford: Blackwell.
dc.relation.isbasedonBledow, 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.isbasedonČernevičiūtė, 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.isbasedonChen, 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.isbasedonDrazin, 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.isbasedonFlorida, R. (2002). The Rise of Creative Class. And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.
dc.relation.isbasedonFord, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). . Journal of Management, 26(4), 705-732. doi:10.1177/014920630002600406.
dc.relation.isbasedonGelfand, 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.isbasedonGibson, 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.isbasedonGilson, 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.isbasedonGilson, L. L., & Shalley, C. E. (2004). . Journal of Management, 30(4), 453-470. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2003.07.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonGreene, R. (2007). The 33 Strategies of War. New York: Penguin.
dc.relation.isbasedonHamel, G. (2007). The future of management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
dc.relation.isbasedonHeidegger, M. (1996). Being and Time. Trans. by J. Stambaugh. New York: State University of New York Press.
dc.relation.isbasedonHoever, I. J., van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P. et al. (2012). . Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 982-996. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedonHowkins, J. (2007). The Creative Economy. London: Penguin.
dc.relation.isbasedonIzak, 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.isbasedonJohnsen, C. G. (2015). . Futures, 68(April), 57-66. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedonJung, E. J., & Lee, S. (2015). . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 130(September), 44-57. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedonKanišauskas, S. (2016). Creative technologies entrapped by instrumental mind. Filosofija. Sociologija, 27(1), 45-50.
dc.relation.isbasedonKazanjian, 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.isbasedonKlimczuk, 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.isbasedonKuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
dc.relation.isbasedonLane, C., & Lup, D. (2015). . Industry and Innovation, 22(8), 654-676. doi:10.1080/13662716.2015.1113861.
dc.relation.isbasedonMcLeod, 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.isbasedonMullen, B. (1991). Group composition, salience, and cognitive representations: The phenomenology of being in a group. , ), 297-323. doi:.
dc.relation.isbasedonMumford, 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.isbasedonNijstad, 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.isbasedonNoice, 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.isbasedonOldham, 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.isbasedonOsburn, H. K., & Mumford, M. D. (2006). . Creativity Research Journal, 18(2), 173-190. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1802_4.
dc.relation.isbasedonPaulus, 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.isbasedonPečiulis, Ž. (2015). Vienetiškumas ir tiražas – kūrybos visuomenės paradoksas [Paradoxes of the creative society]. Filosofija. Sociologija, 26(1), 81-85.
dc.relation.isbasedonPlato. (1992). The Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
dc.relation.isbasedonPruskus, 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.isbasedonRank, 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.isbasedonReimeris, R. (2016). Theoretical features of the creative society. Creativity studies, 9(1), 15-24. doi:10.3846/23450479.2015.1088902.
dc.relation.isbasedonSchumpeter, J. (1939). Business cycles: A theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. New York: McGraw Hill.
dc.relation.isbasedonShalley, 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.isbasedonStahl, 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.isbasedonStaw, 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.isbasedonStorr, A. (1972). The dynamics of creation. London: Secker and Warburg.
dc.relation.isbasedonSutton, R. I. (2001). . Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 94-103.
dc.relation.isbasedonTekleab, 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.isbasedonWest, 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.isbasedonWest, 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.isbasedonZhou, 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.isbasedonZhou, 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.isbasedonZhou, 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.relation.ispartofEkonomie a Managementcs
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics and Managementen
dc.relation.isrefereedtrue
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjectcreativity managementen
dc.subjectparadoxesen
dc.subjectconflicten
dc.subjectorganizationen
dc.subjectcreative economyen
dc.subject.classificationB5
dc.subject.classificationJ5
dc.subject.classificationL2
dc.subject.classificationM1
dc.titleThe paradoxes of creativity managementen
dc.typeArticleen
local.accessopen
local.citation.epage43
local.citation.spage33
local.facultyFaculty of Economics
local.fulltextyes
local.relation.abbreviationE&Men
local.relation.abbreviationE+Mcs
local.relation.issue4
local.relation.volume19
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EM_4_2016_3.pdf
Size:
797.07 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
článek
Download
Collections
Číslo 4