Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration

Miron-Spektor, Ella; Gino, Francesca; Argote, Linda

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.006

Cited by 339 publications

(389 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

355

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While we do not address the potential for learning and developing a paradox mindset in our studies, other research suggests that experiences, coaching, and reframing aid development of alternative mindsets (Lüscher & Lewis, 2008;Miron-Spektor et al, 2011). Assessment and awareness provides a first step towards understanding the nature of a paradox mindset and its impact on job outcomes.…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…=.13, p < .05). Finally, prior research suggested that paradoxical thinking contributes to creativity (Miron-Spektor, et al, 2011;Rothenberg, 1979). To test for this possibility we collected data from 155 students in Israel (Table 1, Sample 7) who completed our instruments and then performed a common creativity task (Remote Association Test, Mednick, 1962).…”

Section: Scale Validationmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Intervention studies that have used paradoxical inquiry methods suggest that managers can learn to change their experience of and approaches to tensions (Lüscher & Lewis, 2008). Similarly, experimental studies suggest that induced paradox mindsets (i.e., paradoxical frames) improve individual creativity and ability to address competing task demands (Miron-Spektor et al, 2011).…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Artists feel torn between passionately expressing their ideas and securing profits. In general, employees experience pressure to emphasize individual and collective accomplishments (Keller, Loewenstein, & Yan, 2016;Smith & Berg, 1986), achieve performance and learning goals (Dobrow, Smith, & Posner, 2011), and demonstrate creativity and efficiency (Miron-Spektor, Gino, & Argote, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem

Miron-Spektor

Ingram

Keller

et al. 2018

AMJ

Self Cite

484

750

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Scale Validationmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem

Miron-Spektor

Ingram

Keller

et al. 2018

AMJ

Self Cite

484

750

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It emphasizes that by using paradoxical thinking managers accept tensions and accommodate conflicting yet interrelated economic, environmental and social concerns, rather than eliminate them (Gao & Bansal, 2013;Smith & Lewis, 2011;Smith & Tushman, 2005). Accordingly, we label the second cognitive frame the paradoxical frame (Miron-Spektor, Gino, & Argote, 2011;Smith & Tushman, 2005). Table 1 summarizes the main characteristics of the two frames.…”

Section: Business Case Frame and Paradoxical Framementioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Frames in Corporate Sustainability: Managerial Sensemaking with Paradoxical and Business Case Frames

Hahn

Preuss

Pinkse

et al. 2014

AMR

724

895

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2014) Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability: managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames. Academy of Management Review (AMR), 39 (4). pp. This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/63539/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse:Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. 1 COGNITIVE FRAMES IN CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY: MANAGERIAL SENSEMAKING WITH PARADOXICAL AND BUSINESS CASE FRAMES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe would like to thank Associate Editor Peer Fiss for his strong guidance throughout the review process, as well as three anonymous reviewers for their most constructive feedback and suggestions. 2 ABSTRACTCorporate sustainability confronts managers with complex issues and tensions between economic, environmental and social aspects. Drawing on the literature on managerial cognition, corporate sustainability, and strategic paradoxes, we develop a cognitive framing perspective on corporate sustainability. We propose two cognitive frames -a business case frame and a paradoxical frame -and explore how differences between them in cognitive content and structure influence the three stages of the sensemaking process, i.e. managerial

show abstract

Unraveling the Black Box of New Venture Team Processes

Bjørnåli

Knockaert

Foss

et al. 2017

The Wiley Handbook of Entrepreneurship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paradoxical frames and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through conflict and integration

Cited by 339 publications

References 64 publications

Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem

Microfoundations of Organizational Paradox: The Problem Is How We Think about the Problem

Cognitive Frames in Corporate Sustainability: Managerial Sensemaking with Paradoxical and Business Case Frames

Unraveling the Black Box of New Venture Team Processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About