Organizational Variables for Developing Collective Creativity in Business: A Case from an Italian Fashion Design Company

Abstract

The goal of this article is to propose a theoretical framework of collective creativity within an organizational design perspective and contribute to clarify this concept and how collective creativity can be purposefully managed. In particular, this study identifies relevant organizational variables for enhancing collective creativity and examines the relationship between collective creativity and organizational performance. The research draws upon a survey developed in the context of an in-depth collaborative research study with an Italian fashion design company. Since the theory on collective creativity is quite dispersed, the first part of the article attempts to define collective creativity and integrate different theoretical perspectives. Then, method and empirical findings are described. In the last part, the discussion illustrates why it is important for researchers and practitioners to be aware of the concept of collective creativity and the purposeful management of it.

Why happy employees help

“…Similarly, we argued that employees may expect resource gains from their helping behaviours, such as a sense of personal accomplishment (Lemoine et al, 2015) or reciprocity from co-workers (Hui et al, 2000). A logical extension of this study would be to measure these resource gains explicitly, as well as investigate other possible performance-related outcomes, such as the ability to establish effective dynamics of help seeking and giving (Hargadon and Bechky, 2006) or create intra-organizational micro-social systems that facilitate the generation and exploitation of creative ideas (Cirella, 2016).…”

Transition rather than balance: Organizing constraints for collective creativity in pharmaceutical development

“…A similar ambivalent role of constraint is depicted regarding collective creativity, which increases under careful planning of phases and deadlines, well‐communicated tasks, and assignment of specific roles, whereas too rigid and formal structures are inhibiting as well (Cirella, 2016). Constraints limit group creativity, but they can also enable it, if contributors are able to accept and embrace them (Rosso, 2014): for instance, process constraints can guide and structure the collective creative process toward better results, as is the case with brainstorming sessions (Stroebe, Nijstad, & Rietzschel, 2010).…”

“…However, this insight leads to an all too simple message concerning constraint management for creativity: “ tight enough, but not too tight; difficult enough, but not too difficult ” (Ortmann & Sydow, 2018, p. 915). In summary, the literature suggests balancing constraint, meaning to establish and keep an optimized middling amount of constraints to organize for collective creativity (see also Cirella, 2016; Lampel et al, 2014). This suggestion rests on the notion that constraints and freedom are mutually exclusive.…”

“…Especially in pharmaceutical development, collective creativity depends on tight control and clear objectives as well as experimentation, surprise, and uncertainty (Dougherty, 2015; Dunne & Dougherty, 2015; Styhre & Sundgren, 2011; Sundgren & Styhre, 2003). Accordingly, the relation between creativity and constraint is typically conceptualized as an inverted U‐shape: too much as well as too little constraint hinders collective creativity (Acar, Tarakci, & van Knippenberg, 2018; Cirella, 2016; Rosso, 2014). Therefore, management scholars suggest balancing constraints, meaning to establish an optimized and middle ground “sweet spot” of constraints, in order to organize for creative output (Chen, 2012; Cirella, 2016; Davis & Scase, 2000; Gilson, Mathieu, Shalley, & Ruddy, 2005; Lampel et al, 2014; Rosso, 2014; Shalley & Gilson, 2017).…”

Attention! Cosmopolitans ahead – They may not be as creative as they think!

“…Early creativity research focused on personality traits as predictors of creative outcomes. Further work on creativity has continued to examine personality traits, finding significant and positive relationships between the Big‐Five personality factors of openness to experience, extraversion and conscientiousness, and creative output (Cirella, ; Gassmann, ; George & Zhou, ; Guo, Su, & Zhang, ; Perkins, Lean, & Newbery, ; Shalley, ; Sung & Choi, ). On a different track, creativity researchers separately began to focus on cognitive styles to explore the impact on creative behaviour.…”