Planning and the Innovation Process

Jefferson, Ray

doi:10.1016/0305-9006(73)90004-4

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On average, employees enter a new organization every four years, which each time requires them to adapt to the new situation. Organizations undergo a major restructuring, such as changing from a functional structure to a divisional structure once every three to five years (Jefferson, ). Furthermore, lifelong learning is required for almost every job, and the apprenticeship under investigation in the present study is chosen by 36 percent as qualification in Germany (Statista, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance

Mussel

2012

J Organ Behavior

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The present paper provides a conceptual and empirical examination regarding the relevance of the construct curiosity for work‐related outcomes. On the basis of a review and integration of the literature regarding the construct itself, the construct is conceptually linked with performance in the work context. In line with a confirmatory research strategy, the sample of the present study (N = 320) has requirements which reflect this conceptual link. Results from a concurrent validation study confirmed the hypothesis regarding the significance of curiosity for job performance (r = .34). Furthermore, incremental validity of curiosity above 12 cognitive and non‐cognitive predictors for job performance suggests that curiosity captures variance in the criterion that is not explained by predictors traditionally used in organizational psychology. It is concluded that curiosity is an important variable for the prediction and explanation of work‐related behavior. Furthermore, given the dramatic changes in the world of work, the importance is likely to rise, rather than to decline, which has important implications for organizational theories and applied purposes, such as personnel selection. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance

Mussel

2012

J Organ Behavior

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Friedmann, having surveyed the planning theory landscape, argued that the concept of innovation is essential to planning, both in theory and in practice. Some other planning theorists also actively use the terms "innovation" and "innovative planning" for some years to come (Ackoff 1970;And and Heskin 1973;Etzioni 1967;Jefferson 1973;Nambiar 1976;Kulinski 1970). Innovation, however, largely disappears from the discussion of planning theory for the next thirty years, with Friedmann as one of the few exceptions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…He continued to contribute over the next three decades (Friedmann 1966(Friedmann , 1967(Friedmann , 1969a(Friedmann , 1969b(Friedmann , 1973(Friedmann , 1987(Friedmann , 1993(Friedmann , 1994(Friedmann , 2004Rosenbloom 2018). Other planning theorists soon joined the discussion (Ackoff 1970;And and Heskin 1973;Jefferson 1973;Nambiar 1976;Kulinski 1970). In 1968, the Journal of the American Institute of Planners published a special issue, "Social Change: The Planner and Innovation" (p. 273).…”

Section: Planning Theory and Innovation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In “Regional development, regional policies and regional planning: problems and issues,” Kuklinski (1970) referred to the two main forms (1) “allocative” and (2) “innovative” planning, where innovative planning seeks to introduce and legitimize new social goals. In 1973, Jefferson (1973) conducted an evaluation of the relationship between innovation and planning in government in terms of the planning environment, the planning organization, and the individual planner.…”

Section: The Term “Innovation” In Planning Theory Texts 1945–2000mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Calculate, Communicate, and Innovate: Do We Need “Innovate” as a Third Position?

Hagen

Higdem

2019

Journal of Planning Literature

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Innovation” has become a pertinent and frequently used term in relation to public-sector administration and planning. This article is a review of the planning theory debate from the 1960s until today focusing on the definitions, understandings, and uses of the innovation. We seek to answer the following three questions regarding the use of the overlapping terms “innovate,” “innovative,” and “innovation” in planning theory texts: (i) To what extent have they been used? (ii) In what sense and to what purpose? and (iii) Are we heading for a third position (“innovate”) in planning theory, such that “communicate,” “calculate,” and “innovate” are three interplaying approaches?

show abstract

“…Jefferson's (1973) planning organizations are not very complex (mean size of 53 persons) nor do they operate in highly mobilized environments (Elkin, 1974b). The hypotheses presented above suggest then that a performance process should be at work and again our expectations are confirmed.…”

Section: Sources Of Variationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a contextual theory of innovation

Elkin

1983

Policy Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A contextual theoretical strategy should be pursued to overcome past deficiencies in the study of organizational innovation. The strategy is likely to lead to greater success in efforts to promote innovation. The heart of this strategy is to define the types of innovation processes at work and the contexts in which they operate. There are at least three innovation processes at work which operate in contexts defined by organizational and environmental characteristics and by the type of innovation under consideration.

show abstract

Planning and the Innovation Process

Cited by 8 publications

References 41 publications

Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance

Introducing the construct curiosity for predicting job performance

Calculate, Communicate, and Innovate: Do We Need “Innovate” as a Third Position?

Towards a contextual theory of innovation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About