This article presents a meta-analysis of team-level antecedents of creativity and innovation in the workplace. Using a general input-process-output model, the authors examined 15 team-level variables researched in primary studies published over the last 30 years and their relation to creativity and innovation. An exhaustive search of the international innovation literature resulted in a final sample (k) of 104 independent studies. Results revealed that team process variables of support for innovation, vision, task orientation, and external communication displayed the strongest relationships with creativity and innovation (rhos between 0.4 and 0.5). Input variables (i.e., team composition and structure) showed weaker effect sizes. Moderator analyses confirmed that relationships differ substantially depending on measurement method (self-ratings vs. independent ratings of innovation) and measurement level (individual vs. team innovation). Team variables displayed considerably stronger relationships with self-report measures of innovation compared with independent ratings and objective criteria. Team process variables were more strongly related to creativity and innovation measured at the team than the individual level. Implications for future research and pragmatic ramifications for organizational practice are discussed in conclusion.

This paper reports the development and psychometric validation of a multi-dimensional measure of facet-speci®c climate for innovation within groups at work: the Team Climate Inventory (TCI). Brief reviews of the organizational climate and work group innovation literatures are presented initially, and the need for measures of facet-speci®c climate at the level of the proximal work group asserted. The four-factor theory of facet-speci®c climate for innovation, which was derived from these reviews, is described, and the procedures used to operationalize this model into the original version measure described. Data attesting to underlying factor structure, internal homogeneity, predictive validity and factor replicability across groups of the summarized measure are presented. An initial sample of 155 individuals from 27 hospital management teams provided data for the exploratory factor analysis of this measure. Responses from 121 further groups in four occupations (35 primary health care teams, 42 social services teams, 20 psychiatric teams and 24 oil company teams; total N 971) were used to apply con®rmatory factor analysis techniques. This ®ve-factor, 38-item summarized version demonstrates robust psychometric properties, with acceptable levels of reliability and validity. Potential applications of this measure are described and the implication of these ®ndings for the measurement of proximal work group climate are discussed. # The concept of climate has received considerable attention from applied psychologists and organizational sociologists over the last three decades. Numerous empirical studies have been conducted and regular reviews of the research ®ndings have appeared (the major reviews are

Business School. Her main research interests cover innovation and creativity in the workplace, managing aging workforce, and successful ageing. She has recently completed a British Academy funded project on selecting for innovation. Kristina has published several papers in different journals, including

SummaryIn this review we argue that facilitators of innovation at the individual, group, and organizational levels have been reliably identified, and that validated process models of innovation have been developed. However, a content analysis of selected research published between 1997 and 2002 suggests a routinization of innovation research, with a heavy focus on replication-extension, cross-sectional designs, and a single level of analysis. We discuss five innovative pathways for future work: Study innovation as an independent variable, across cultures, within a multi-level framework, and use meta-analysis and triangulation. To illustrate we propose a 'distress-related innovation' model of the relations between negatively connotated variables and innovation at the individual, group, and organizational levels of ana- Imaginative writers, the reader will have noticed, dropped out of this [Soviet] history when it moved from the 1920's into the period of Stalinism. Of course industrious typewriters continued to manufacture novels, plays and poems, but they no longer revealed authors in search of the authentic self and true community, as the works of Olesha and Babel had, not to speak of the pre-revolutionary masters. From 1930 to 1953 Stalin's engineers of human souls typed out their works to formula. Their product has its fascinations, like mass-market fiction and popular drama in the West, but hardly for understanding the psychologies of high culture. They help one understand mass psychology in its relation with the authorities.(Joravsky, Russian psychology: A critical history, 1989, pp. 463-464)

A longitudinal study of the functioning of top management teams in 27 hospitals examined relationships between group and organizational factors and team innovation. A model of group inputs, processes, and outputs was used, and it was predicted that group size, resources, team tenure, group processes, and proportion of innovative team members would affect the level and quality of team innovation. The results suggested that group processes best predict the overall level of team innovation, whereas the proportion of innovative team members predicts the rated radicalness of innovations introduced. Resources available to teams do not predict overall team innovation. The quality of team innovation (radicalness, magnitude, and novelty) may be determined primarily by the composition of the team, but overall level of innovation may be more a consequence of the team's characteristic social processes.

Innovation, the development and intentional introduction of new and useful ideas by individuals, teams, and organizations, lies at the heart of human adaptation. Decades of research in different disciplines and at different organizational levels have produced a wealth of knowledge about how innovation emerges and the factors that facilitate and inhibit innovation. We propose that this knowledge needs integration. In an initial step toward this goal, we apply a dialectic perspective on innovation to overcome limitations of dichotomous reasoning and to gain a more valid account of innovation. We point out that individuals, teams, and organizations need to self‐regulate and manage conflicting demands of innovation and that multiple pathways can lead to idea generation and innovation. By scrutinizing the current use of the concept of organizational ambidexterity and extending it to individuals and teams, we develop a framework to help guide and facilitate future research and practice. Readers expecting specific and universal prescriptions of how to innovate will be disappointed as current research does not allow such inferences. Rather, we think innovation research should focus on developing and testing principles of innovation management in addition to developing decision aids for organizational practice. To this end, we put forward key propositions and action principles of innovation management.

SummaryThis paper reports the development and psychometric validation of a multi-dimensional measure of facet-speci®c climate for innovation within groups at work: the Team Climate Inventory (TCI). Brief reviews of the organizational climate and work group innovation literatures are presented initially, and the need for measures of facet-speci®c climate at the level of the proximal work group asserted. The four-factor theory of facet-speci®c climate for innovation, which was derived from these reviews, is described, and the procedures used to operationalize this model into the original version measure described. Data attesting to underlying factor structure, internal homogeneity, predictive validity and factor replicability across groups of the summarized measure are presented. An initial sample of 155 individuals from 27 hospital management teams provided data for the exploratory factor analysis of this measure. Responses from 121 further groups in four occupations (35 primary health care teams, 42 social services teams, 20 psychiatric teams and 24 oil company teams; total N 971) were used to apply con®rmatory factor analysis techniques. This ®ve-factor, 38-item summarized version demonstrates robust psychometric properties, with acceptable levels of reliability and validity. Potential applications of this measure are described and the implication of these ®ndings for the measurement of proximal work group climate are discussed. # 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.J. Organiz. Behav. 19: 235±258 (1998) Climate: De®nitional IssuesThe concept of climate has received considerable attention from applied psychologists and organizational sociologists over the last three decades. Numerous empirical studies have been conducted and regular reviews of the research ®ndings have appeared (the major reviews are

No abstract