The Interactive Effects of Self‐Perceptions and Job Requirements on Creative Problem Solving

Abstract

Over the years, researchers have focused on ways to facilitate creativity in the workplace by looking at individual factors and organizational factors that affect employee creativity (Woodman, Sawyer, & Griffin, ). In many cases, the factors that affect creativity are examined independently. In other words, it is uncommon for researchers to look at the interaction among individual and organizational factors. In this study, it is argued that to get a true understanding of how to maximize creativity in the workplace, organizational researchers must look at the interaction between organizational factors and individual factors that affect employee creativity. More specifically, the current study looked at an individual's perceptions about his or her ability to be creative (i.e., individual factor) and perceptions of requirements for creativity in the workplace (i.e., an organizational factor). The results indicated that individuals who have a high belief about their ability to be creative (an individual factor) were most creative when they also perceived requirements for creativity in the workplace (an organizational factor). Furthermore, individuals who had low perceptions of creative ability were still able to perform creatively when they had high perceptions of requirements for creativity. This suggests that, to maximize creativity, organizations should focus on both individual and organizational factors that affect employee creativity.

Creative Self-efficacy Mediates the Relationship Between Knowledge Sharing and Employee Innovation

“…In research on innovation, it may be beneficial to explore the interaction of individual and environmental factors (Robinson-Morral, Reiter-Palmon, & Kaufman, 2013). In this study, we linked job satisfaction to creative self-efficacy and employee innovation.…”

When perceived innovation job requirement increases employee innovative behavior: A sensemaking perspective

“…A number of prior studies have suggested the importance of individual differences in shaping the relationship between a contextual factor and employee innovation (e.g. Choi, ; Oldham & Cummings, ; Rank, Nelson, Allen, & Xu, ; Robinson‐Morral et al, ; Wu et al, ). In particular, in their reviews, Hennessey and Amabile (Hennessey, ; Hennessey & Amabile, ) suggest that individual differences such as one's initial level of intrinsic interest in a task may be an important factor in this regard.…”

“…While some individuals enjoy coming up with new ideas and implementing them, others lack such an interest. Drawing insights from recent studies (e.g., Malik, Butt, & Choi, ; Robinson‐Morral, Reiter‐Palmon, & Kaufman, ; Wu, Parker, & de Jong, ), in this study, we build on and extend the sensemaking perspective by underscoring the importance of examining individual differences when understanding the effects of external influences on employee innovative behavior. Specifically, we propose that perceived innovation job requirement would have a stronger positive effect on innovative behavior for employees with lower levels of intrinsic interest in innovation.…”

Creativity and Innovation: State of the Art and Future Perspectives for Research

“…This creative problem solving approach extends to more real settings, where either the task is composed of real elements (for instance: "Design a device that allows people to pick up a book from a shelf (e.g. in a library) that is out of their reach, for instance, above their head") (Cardoso & Badke-Schaub, 2011), or the participants are real employees given a real problem related to their work environment (Robinson-Morral, Reiter-Palmon, & Kaufman, 2013). Third, beyond the sole individual level, many qualitative case studies have focused on methods, tools and techniques deployed in teams, firms and organizations to support different facets of creativity.…”