Generating creative ideas and turning them into innovations is key for competitive advantage. However, endeavors toward creativity and innovation are bounded by constraints such as rules and regulations, deadlines, and scarce resources. The effect of constraints on creativity and innovation has attracted substantial interest across the fields of strategic management, entrepreneurship, industrial organization, technology and operations management, organizational behavior, and marketing. Research in these fields has focused on various constraints that trigger distinct mediating mechanisms but is fragmented and yields conflicting findings. We develop a taxonomy of constraints and mediating mechanisms and provide an integrative synthesis that explains how constraints impact creativity and innovation. Our review thus facilitates cross-disciplinary learning and sets the stage for further theoretical development.

No abstract

The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen's d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.'s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity

Srull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications (N = 7,373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5,610 in the

No abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link: CUSTOMER EMPOWERMENT IN THE DIGITAL AGEThe Internet and advances in digital technologies are fundamentally transforming marketing.Armed with an abundance of information and opportunities, consumers no longer accept the role of passive recipients of marketing communication. This is turning traditional communication approaches upside down and forcing brands to interact with individual customers quickly, openly, and continuously. In the digital age, customer engagement is more important than ever. TheMarketing Science Institute, for example, has identified understanding how marketing activities create engagement as one of its top research priorities for 2014-16. More and more brands are using social media platforms to connect with their customers by creating engaging content so that customers can interact (e.g., sharing an interesting and current tweet) and/or by initiating dialog with them (e.g., responding to a customer comment or complaint).These steps are undoubtedly very important in connecting with customers, but they are not sufficient. Most visionary brands do not only interact with customers; they also empower them.Take LEGO for example. The company enables its customers to create and vote for new product designs in the 'LEGO Ideas' platform. The designs that receive considerable votes from other customers (i.e., 10,000 'supports') are then reviewed formally, and those that pass the review are transformed into actual products to be sold all over the world. The initiative of LEGO not only involves the emotional, cognitive, and behavioral engagement of customers -characteristics of a successful customer engagement initiative -but also shifts the power and control of the company's product development to its customers. This paper focuses on customer empowerment -engagement strategies that give customers a sense of control over a brand's general offerings (Fuchs, Prandelli, & Schreier, 2010;Ramani & Kumar, 2008). Brands have increasingly started to embrace these strategies, which can be evidenced by the growing prevalence of co-creation, crowdsourcing, user innovation, brand communities, and mass customization practices. Here, we first explain why empowerment is a

Prior research has provided conflicting arguments and evidence about whether people who are outsiders or insiders relative to a knowledge domain are more likely to demonstrate scientific creativity in that particular domain. We propose that the nature of the relationship between creativity and the distance of an individual’s expertise from a knowledge domain depends on his or her cognitive processes of problem solving (i.e., cognitive-search effort and cognitive-search variation). In an analysis of 230 solutions generated in a science contest platform, we found that distance was positively associated with creativity when problem solvers engaged in a focused search (i.e., low cognitive-search variation) and exerted a high level of cognitive effort. People whose expertise was close to a knowledge domain, however, were more likely to demonstrate creativity in that domain when they drew on a wide variety of different knowledge elements for recombination (i.e., high cognitive-search variation) and exerted substantial cognitive effort.

No abstract