Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Systematische Integration konzeptioneller Modelle: Eine prototypische Betrachtung am Beispiel der Arbeitsumgebung für Kreativität und Innovation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Symposium Qualitative Forschung 2018

Part of the book series: Hallesche Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaft ((HSBW,volume 34))

  • 5684 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Die wachsende Zahl an Literaturbeiträgen stellt insbesondere in stark fragmentierten Forschungsbereichen eine Herausforderung für klassische Integrationsansätze dar. Ein alternativer Ansatz für die Integration bestehender Konzepte und ganzheitliche Betrachtung von Forschungsbereichen liegt in der Analyse konzeptioneller Modelle. Der vorliegende Beitrag beschreibt am Beispiel der fragmentierten Literatur im Bereich der Arbeitsumgebung für Kreativität und Innovation einen qualitativen Analyseansatz zur systematischen Integration konzeptioneller Modelle. Dabei liegt der Fokus insbesondere auf der computergestützten Analyse der unterstellten Beziehungen zwischen den Elementen der Modelle mit Hilfe eines adaptierten Verfahrens zur qualitativen Kausalanalyse in der Software WinRelan. Aufbauend darauf werden Anwendungsmöglichkeiten, Limitationen und Potentiale für die Weiterentwicklung dieses qualitativen Integrationsansatzes aufgezeigt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Agars, M. D., Kaufman, J. C., Deane, A., & Smith, B. 2012. Fostering individual creativity through organizational context: A review of recent research and recommendations for organizational leaders. In Mumford, M. D. (Hrsg.) Handbook of Organizational Creativity: 271-291. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvargonzalez, D. 2011. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and the sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 25: 387-403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. 2016. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36:157-183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. 1996. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1154-1184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. 2014. Innovation and creativity in organizations: A stateof- the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40: 1297-1333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, M. 2012. Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1102-1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bansal, P. T., Smith, W. K., & Vaara, E. 2018. From the editors: New ways of seeing through qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 61: 1189-1195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertels, H. M. J., Kleinschmidt, E. J., & Koen, P. A. 2011. Communities of practice versus organizational climate: Which one matters more to dispersed collaboration in the front end of innovation? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28: 757-772.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg, A., Kallio, T., Pohjanpaa, H. 2017. Antecedents of organizational creativity: Drivers, barriers, or both? Journal of Innovation Management, 5: 78-104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-J., Huang, J.-W., & Hsiao, Y.-C. 2010. Knowledge management and innovativeness: The role of organizational climate and structure. International Journal of Manpower, 31: 848-870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-J., Huang, J.-W., & Hsiao, Y.-C. 2010. Knowledge management and innovativeness: The role of organizational climate and structure. International Journal of Manpower, 31: 848-870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Farh, J.-L., Campbell-Bush, E. M., & Wu, Z. 2013. Teams as innovative systems: Multilevel motivational antecedents of innovation in R&D teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 1018-1027.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M., & Apaydin, M. 2010. A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47: 1154-1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan, M., M., & Apaydin, M. 2010. A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47: 1154-1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihaly, M. 1999. Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Hrsg.), Handbook of creativity: 313-335. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. 1984. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9: 284-294.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. 1995. Comments on “What theory is not.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 391-397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhart, M. G., Schneider, B., & Macey, W. H. 2014. Organizational climate and culture: An introduction to theory, research, and practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärdenfors, P. 2004. Conceptual spaces: The geometry of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwet, K. L. 2010. Handbook of inter-rater reliability. Gathersburg, MD: Advanced Analytics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, Y, Müller, J., & Neyer, A.-K. 2018. Meta-Review – Systematische Überprüfung von Literatur und qualitativen empirischen Forschungsergebnissen. In Müller, J. & Raich, M. (Hrsg.), Die Zukunft der qualitativen Forschung: Herausforderungen für die Wirtschafts-, Gesundheits- und Sozialwissenschaften: 23-40. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, Y. 2019. Systemdynamik komplexer Systeme – eine Untersuchung mit qualitativen Daten und GABEK-Kausalnetzen. In Müller, J. & Raich, M. (Hrsg.), Die Zukunft der qualitativen Forschung: Herausforderungen für die Wirtschafts-, Gesundheits- und Sozialwissenschaften. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A. 2017. Taking a systems view of creativity: On the right path toward understanding. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51: 341-344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. 2010. Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61: 569-598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., & Zhou, J. 2009. A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 280-293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. 2011. Organizations: Theory, design, future. In Zedek, S. (Hrsg.), American Psychological Association Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology: 117-160. Chicago, Illinois: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. 1983. Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Some techniques of data reduction and display. Quality and Quantity, 17: 281-339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imenda, S., 2014. Is there a conceptual difference between theoretical and conceptual frameworks?, Journal of the Scientific Society, 38: 185-195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen, S. G. 2017. Leadership’s role in creative climate creation. In M. D. Mumford, & S. Hemlin (Hrsg.), Handbook of research on leadership and creativ-ity: 131-158. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen, S. G., & Tidd, J. 2006. Meeting the innovation challenge: Leadership for transformation and growth. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaksen, S. G., Hoßbach, C., & Neyer, A.-K. 2019. Mental model mayhem: Conceptualizing the work environment for creativity and innovation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, E., & Shaw, D. 1998. Socio-cognitive perspectives on representations. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 33: 157-158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koc, T. & Ceylan, C. 2007. Factors impacting the innovative capacity in largescale companies. Technovation, 27: 105-114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuenzi, M., & Schminke, M. 2009. Assembling fragments into a lens: A review, critique, and proposed research agenda for the organizational work climate literature. Journal of Management, 35: 634-717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, C.-M., & Ngo, H.-Y. 2004. The HR system, organizational culture, and product innovation. International Business Review, 13: 685-703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, C.-R., Lin, C.-J., Tien, Y.-H., & Chen, C.-M. 2017. A multilevel model of team cultural diversity and creativity: The role of climate for inclusion. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51: 163-179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. 2002. Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28: 587-604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. 1989. Some procedures for causal analysis of multiple-case data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 2: 55-68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minor, J. B. 2006. Organizational behavior 3: Historical origins, theoretical foundations, and the future. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. 1988. Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103: 27-43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ninck, A., Bürki, L., Hungerbühler, R., Mühlemann, H. 2004. Systemik: Vernetztes Denken in komplexen Situationen. Zürich: Industrielle Organisation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldham, G. R., & Baer, M. 2012. Creativity and the work context. In Mumford, M. D. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity: 387-420. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parthemore, J. 2015. Specification of the unified conceptual space, for purposes of empirical investigation. In Zenker, F. & Gärdenfors, P. (Hrsg.), Applications of conceptual spaces: 223-244. Luzerne, Switzerland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Politis, J. D. 2004. Transformational and transactional leadership predictors of the stimulant determinants to creativity in organisational work environments. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 2: 23-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Politis, J. D. 2005. Dispersed leadership predictor of the work environment for creativity and productivity. European Journal of Innovation Management, 8: 182-204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puccio, G. J., Firestien, R. L., Coyle, C., & Masucci, C. 2006. A review of the effectiveness of CPS training: A focus on workplace issues. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15: 19-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puccio, G. J., Talbot, R. J., & Joniak, A. J. 2000. Examining creative performance in the workplace through a person-environment fit model. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34: 227-247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raj, R., & Srivastava, K. B. L. 2013. The mediating role of organizational learning on the relationship among organizational culture, HRM practices and innovativeness. Management and Labour Studies, 38: 201-223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rock, L. 2013. Mental models: A robust definition. The Learning Organization, 20: 38-47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. 2017. Organizational culture and leadership. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, B., González-Romá, V., Ostroff, C., & West, M. A. 2017. Organizational climate and culture: Reflections on the history of the constructs in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102: 468-482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterman, J. D. 2002. All models are wrong: Reflections on becoming a systems scientist. System Dynamics Review, 18: 501-531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanriover, O. O., & Bilgen, S. 2011. A framework for reviewing domain specific conceptual models. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 33: 448-464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasardani, M., Timpf, S., Winter, S., & Tomko, M. 2013. From Descriptions to Depictions: A Conceptual Framework. In T. Tenbrink, J. G. Stell, A. Galton & Z. Wood (Hrsg.), Conference on Spatial Information Theory: Proceedings of COSIT: 299-319. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vester, F. 2000. Die Kunst vernetzt zu denken: Ideen und Werkzeuge für einen neuen Umgang mit Komplexität. Stuttgart: DVA.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M. A. & Sacramento, C. A. 2012. Creativity and innovation: The role of team and organizational climate. In M. D. Mumford (Hrsg.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity: 359-385. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M. A., & Richter, A. W. 2008. Climate and cultures for innovation and creativity at work. In: J. Zhou, & C. E. Shalley (Hrsg.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity: 211-236). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelger, J. 2000. Twelve Steps of GABEK WinRelan: A procedure for qualitative opinion research, knowledge organization and systems development. In Buber, R., & Zelger, J. (Hrsg.), GABEK II: 205-220. Innsbruck-Wien: Studien Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. J. (2014). Research on workplace creativity: A review and redirection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 333-359

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Deutschland

    Christian Hoßbach & Anne-Katrin Neyer

  2. BI Norwegian Business School - Department of Leadership an Organizational Behavior, Bergen, Norwegen

    Scott G. Isaksen

Authors
  1. Christian Hoßbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott G. Isaksen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne-Katrin Neyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Hoßbach .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institution Fachhochschule Management und Ökonomie, UMIT Private Universität, Hall, Austria

    Margit Raich

  2. Lehrstuhl für BWL (Unternehmensführung), Martin-Luther-Universität, Halle, Germany

    Julia Müller-Seeger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hoßbach, C., Isaksen, S.G., Neyer, AK. (2020). Systematische Integration konzeptioneller Modelle: Eine prototypische Betrachtung am Beispiel der Arbeitsumgebung für Kreativität und Innovation. In: Raich, M., Müller-Seeger, J. (eds) Symposium Qualitative Forschung 2018. Hallesche Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaft, vol 34. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28693-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28693-4_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-28692-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-28693-4

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation