RESEARCH ON EMPLOYEE CREATIVITY: A CRITICAL REVIEW AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

By Jing Zhou, Christina E. Shalley. 2003

783 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e14f77e7c89b4f97e29065a2e4833479ac4676c7

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Overcoming Resistance to Change and Enhancing Creative Performance (2014, background): “Prior research on creativity has found that team members’ helping and supportive behaviors can also increase individuals’ confidence in their own capabilities and their ability to change things (Amabile et al., 1996; Zhou & Shalley, 2003).”
Creativity and Constraints: Exploring the Role of Constraints in the Creative Processes of Research and Development Teams (2014, background): “…1996; Shalley et al., 2004), effective communication and collaboration (e.g. West, 2002; Zhou & George, 2001), clear task structure (e.g. Amabile & Gryskiewicz, 1987), and effective leadership dynamics (e.g. Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Zhou & Shalley, 2003) are related to team-level creativity.”
The Effects of Personal and Contextual Characteristics on Creativity: Where Should We Go from Here? (2004, background): “A number of early studies examined the effects of anticipated evaluation of an individual’s work on the creativity of that work (Zhou & Shalley, 2003).”
Need for Cognition as an Antecedent of Individual Innovation Behavior (2014, background): “Although the role of cognitive abilities in individual innovation behavior has been discussed in the literature (Unsworth & Parker, 2003; Zhou & Shalley, 2003), an individual’s need for cognition has not been considered.”
When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. (2007, methodology): “In addition, although we avoided potential common method biases by collecting the data from two different sources, as with most creativity studies (Zhou & Shalley, 2003), we did not have any objective measures of creativity.”
Employee Self-Perceived Creativity After Mergers and Acquisitions (2008, methodology): “Yet, to date, much research on workplace creativity has focused on other-perceived creativity—through, for example, supervisors’ ratings of employee creativity (Zhou & Shalley, 2003).”
Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, and Employee Creativity in Entrepreneurial Firms (2018, background): “Email: jane_mxf@sjtu.edu.cn Ma and Jiang 303 or a group of individuals working together (Madjar, Oldham, & Pratt, 2002; Shalley, Gilson, & Blum, 2000; Zhou & Shalley, 2003).”
Leadership, creativity and innovation: a meta-analytic review (2020, neutral): “…in design (e.g., Anderson et al., 2014; Hughes et al., 2018; Mainemelis, Kark, & Epitropaki, 2015; Rank, Pace, & Frese, 2004; Reiter-Palmon & Illies, 2004; Zhou & Shalley, 2003) or provided theoretical overviews and identified “gaps” in the literature (Klijn & Tomic, 2010; Shalley & Gilson, 2004).”
Not All Autonomy is the Same. Different Dimensions of Job Autonomy and Their Relation to Work Engagement & Innovative Work Behavior (2016, background): “As both the employee innovation and work engagement literature are relatively young (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008; Zhou & Shalley, 2003), the hypothesis will be largely based on the overall theoretical proposition that job autonomy is beneficial for employee development and motivation.”