In their article “Measuring Climate for Work Group Innovation: Development and Validation of the Team Climate Inventory” Anderson and West search for a way to measure the climate for innovation in “shared perception” work groups. They define shared perception as a level of interdependence between team members who interact and rely on each other as a group to develop innovative outcomes.

The authors developed the Team Climate Inventory (TCI), their method for measuring innovative climate that is based on four factors:

• Vision – In a work group, clear vision motivates each team member for a higher goal and depends on clarity, visionary nature, attainability, and “sharedness”.
• Participative Safety – ensures that team members feel safe to contribute ideas for innovation.
• Task Orientation – describes the general commitment and accountability of tram members to search for the best methods of obtaining their goals.
• Support for Innovation – entails the resources and support bestowed on the group.
  

The TCI focuses on the development of innovation in work groups, instead of the organization as a whole, and can be best demonstrated in the following fictional example:
Lets say Googuly Gum, Inc. is the world’s largest manufacturer of Pineapple flavored bubble-gum and they want to expand their customer base through a new and innovative marketing plan. In order to generate the most creative and ingenious ideas, the President of Googuly Gum decides to create two different teams, one team headed by John, and the other by Ron.

Ron starts off the first meeting talking about himself and how he really wants to get a promotion. When Sally, a member of his team, begins to ask about the vision, he cuts her off and tells her to stop asking stupid questions. He then lays out an incredibly vague vision: get customers to buy gum. His team doesn’t know where to begin, and gets frustrated with the process. When a different member tries to come up with an idea, Ron shuts him down and says his idea isn’t feasible. Not knowing what they are trying to accomplish or what their guidelines are, the group gets off task and settles for a second rate solution. Googuly Gum is disappointed and puts the plan on the shelf, never to be implemented.

John, on the other hand, starts off his first meeting getting to know the members of the team and making sure they all feel comfortable sharing their ideas and expressing their feelings. The team then establishes a detailed vision. They not only want to increase the customer base, but they also want to stay within a reasonable budget and maintain former customers. By having a clear vision and allowing members to participate “safety,” each member of the team feels invested in the outcome and remains task-oriented throughout the brainstorming process. They end up with a revolutionized marketing plan for Googuly Gum! John gets a promotion, and all the members of his team get an all expense paid vacation to the Caribbean!!! John’s group successfully encompasses all four factors of the TCI and subsequently did better in coming up with more innovative ideas.

Ok. fiction aside, lets look at what other people say about some of these concepts. In a recent article titled “Can Genius Flourish in a Team,” author Wan Lixin argues that a team-based decision-making process is more likely to lead to original ideas (makes complete sense, no?). Lixin quotes author Keith Sawyer (Group Genius: The Creative Power of Collaboration) who also debunks the idea of creative geniuses growing in isolation. In our example, Ron represents the obsolete innovation method of the “isolated genius inventor,” while John’s group portrays the web of collaboration Lixin and Sawyer talk about. The shared vision, “safe” participation, and clear task orientation may depend more on the work group (and their leader, of course) while support for innovation (such as resources) often depends on the organization itself. Googuly Gum may support its employees with ample resources but it depends on how each team and leader chooses to use these resources.

Related posts

• Richard Florida and The Creative Class (0)
• Assessing The Work Environment for Creativity (2)
• Malcolm Gladwell – Age Before Beauty (2)
• Can Gladwell predict the next hit song or movie? (0)
• Superbowl XLII / 2008 – Vote For The Most Creative Super Bowl Ads (5)

Creativity in the Workplace
Good for them (employees). Great for you (managers)

By Senior Editors Jaclyn Jacobson & Paige Phillips.

More and more researchers and managers nowadays realize the importance of creativity in the organization. Unfortunately (and sometimes unintentionally) many managers are killing the creativity of their employees (and thus new ideas and innovation).

How can managers foster creativity in their organization?

The academic article reviewed lends advice to managers who want to foster their employees’ intrinsic motivation and, in turn, their creativity. Doing this will lead to employee satisfaction and retention as well as the generation of new ideas, reinvigorating the organization and even yielding financial gains.

In “Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity,” researchers Teresa Amabile, Regina Conti, Heather Coon, Jeffrey Lazenby, and Michael Herron describe a model for assessing creativity in the work place known as KEYS. The model attempts to measure and predict the potential for creativity taking into account 6 different possible stimulants and 2 possible obstacles.

Factors which encourage creativity include:

1. Organizational culture that promotes creativity
2. Encouragement from supervisors
3. Support from work groups
4. Sufficient resources (money, time, etc)
5. Challenging work that is equally suited for the employee, and
6. Freedom to decide how to carry out your own work.

The two obstacles pointed out are:

1. Organizational impediments, such as internal politics, rejection of new ideas, negative competition within the organization, and aversion to risk taking.
2. Negative pressures, including unrealistic productivity and time constraints.

Both of these obstacles may discourage intrinsic motivation that allows innovation and creativity to take root, and in doing so they kill the possibility of new ideas.

The researchers found that employee’s perceptions of the presence of stimulants and obstacles to creativity affected their capacity to do their work to the best of their ability.

In that sense, PERCEPTION can be more important than REALITY.

Challenge, organizational encouragement, work group supports, supervisory encouragement, and organizational impediments were found to be the dimensions that affect creativity the most.

Here are some examples of how some organizations are building a culture that fosters creativity (from WSJ – The Work Force of One):

• Clothing chain Men’s Wearhouse Inc. cultivates intrinsic motivation by establishing sales targets for its stores, but allowing employees the freedom to decide how to reach those targets to the best of their ability. “’Stores hit their goals in different ways, and that is not only tolerated but encouraged,’ says Charlie Bresler, president of Men’s Wearhouse.”
• Software company SAP Americas, promotes supervisory encouragement by making sure that human-resources professionals focus on coaching managers on how to provide informal feedback to their employees through coaching and mentoring.
• Sun Microsystems Inc. insures that their employees feel they have sufficient resources by asking them to identify the type of physical setting that suits them best — a private office, team room, satellite center, or their home office.
  

These companies offer a culture dedicated to the promotion of intrinsic motivation, and this organizational encouragement surely leads to more creativity and employee satisfaction.

CEOs of other corporations should take heed of the advantages (if not the necessity) of encouraging employee creativity and innovation. Many might offer monetary rewards (extrinsic motivation) to increase employee productivity. This research shows, however, that using the KEYS model will be a more beneficial way for managers to foster organizational creativity.

Establishing an organizational culture of creativity may be a difficult task, requiring work place leaders to completely transform their managerial practices. “However, companies that do it right will have unprecedented opportunities to develop the talent they need to become more competitive, high-performance organizations.” (WSJ – The Work Force of One).

Related posts

• Measuring Climate for Work Group Innovation: Development and Validation of the Team Climate Inventory (TCI) (1)
• Reward, Intrinsic Motivation and Creativity (1)
• Looking Inside the Fishbowl of Creativity (2)
• Superbowl XLII / 2008 – Vote For The Most Creative Super Bowl Ads (5)
• Richard Florida and The Creative Class (0)

He is best known for his work in developing his concept of the creative class and its ramifications in urban regeneration. He received a PhD from Columbia University in 1986 and taught at Carnegie Mellon University from 1987 to 2005. He is the author of the bestselling books:

The Rise of the Creative Class

The Flight of the Creative Class

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1156163746651756400

For Florida’s websites, visit:
http://www.creativeclass.org/

Related posts

• Measuring Climate for Work Group Innovation: Development and Validation of the Team Climate Inventory (TCI) (1)
• Malcolm Gladwell – Age Before Beauty (2)
• Looking Inside the Fishbowl of Creativity (2)
• From Dracula to Hedy Lamarr – The Many Catalysts of Creativity (2)
• Can Gladwell predict the next hit song or movie? (0)