Routinization, work characteristics and their relationships with creative and proactive behaviors

By Sandra Ohly, Sabine Sonnentag, Franziska Pluntke. 2006

593 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Summary Researchers have claimed that routinization hinders creativity. However, empirical evidence for this assumption is sparse. In this study, we argue that routinization may be beneficial for creativity and related behavior due to available resources that can be used to develop new ideas while working. We examine the relationship between routinization and four work character istics (job control, job complexity, time pressure, and supervisor support) on the one hand and a range of creative and proactive behaviors on the other hand in a randomly selected sample of 278 employees of a German high tech company. Regression analyses reveal that in addition to work characteristics, routinization is generally positively related to creative and proactive behaviors. Ways to enhance routinization and thereby creative and proactive behaviors are discussed.

Subfields: Communication, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d38ad91188aa93302af6392ac76f22a341343a9f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Need for Cognition as an Antecedent of Individual Innovation Behavior (2014, result): “Although extreme time pressure might inhibit innovation behavior as reported by Ohly, Sonnentag, and Pluntke (2006) and Baer and Oldham (2006), in this study we found a linear positive association of time pressure on innovation behavior.3 Our finding is consistent with research reporting a positive…”
Proactive Work Behavior: Forward-Thinking and Change-Oriented Action in Organizations (2011, background): “Whilst some research has found that supervisor support predicts higher levels of personal initiative (β=.15, p<.05; Ohly et al., 2006) and the implementation of ideas (β=.18, p<.05; Axtell et al., 2000), other research has found nonsignificant relationships between supportive leadership and the…”
HRM and innovative work behaviour: a systematic literature review (2017, background): “Tasks that are particularly routine can help preserve important cognitive and time resources that are necessary to generate and implement useful ideas (Ohly et al., 2006).”
Leader–member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and creative work involvement (2012, background): “Creative work involvement is regarded as an important precursor of creative outcomes because it is strongly related to creative performance and innovation (Ohly et al., 2006).”
Empowering employees: job standardization and innovative behavior (2014, background): “Without the need to think of what to do and how to complete the work itself, employees in a formalized work environment can save time and deal with other more complicated problems and work aspects (Ohly et al., 2006).”
Antecedents of Day-Level Proactive Behavior: A Look at Job Stressors and Positive Affect During the Workday† (2009, background): “Although such a positive relationship may be counterintuitive at first, research on more stable job demands and proactivity seem to support this idea (Fay & Sonnentag, 2002; Ohly et al., 2006; Sonnentag, 2003).”
Proactivity, job characteristics, and engagement: a longitudinal study (2010, background): “In a commonly adopted definition (e.g. Parker and Sprigg, 1999; Parker et al., 2006; Ohly et al., 2006; Sonnentag, 2003; Thompson, 2005), Frese et al. (1996) define proactivity as a behavioral syndrome that causes an individual to take initiative and to adopt an active orientation that goes beyond…”