Advertisement

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

  • Christian HoßbachEmail author
  • Scott G. Isaksen
  • Anne-Katrin Neyer
Chapter
Part of the Hallesche Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaft book series (HSBW, volume 34)

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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. 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
  2. Alvargonzalez, D. 2011. Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and the sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 25: 387-403.Google Scholar
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Baer, M. 2012. Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1102-1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. Blomberg, A., Kallio, T., Pohjanpaa, H. 2017. Antecedents of organizational creativity: Drivers, barriers, or both? Journal of Innovation Management, 5: 78-104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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
  11. 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
  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. 1984. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9: 284-294.Google Scholar
  17. DiMaggio, P. J. 1995. Comments on “What theory is not.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 391-397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ehrhart, M. G., Schneider, B., & Macey, W. H. 2014. Organizational climate and culture: An introduction to theory, research, and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Gärdenfors, P. 2004. Conceptual spaces: The geometry of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Gwet, K. L. 2010. Handbook of inter-rater reliability. Gathersburg, MD: Advanced Analytics.Google Scholar
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. Hennessey, B. A. 2017. Taking a systems view of creativity: On the right path toward understanding. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51: 341-344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. 2010. Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61: 569-598.Google Scholar
  25. 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
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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
  28. Imenda, S., 2014. Is there a conceptual difference between theoretical and conceptual frameworks?, Journal of the Scientific Society, 38: 185-195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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
  30. Isaksen, S. G., & Tidd, J. 2006. Meeting the innovation challenge: Leadership for transformation and growth. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  31. 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
  32. Jacob, E., & Shaw, D. 1998. Socio-cognitive perspectives on representations. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 33: 157-158.Google Scholar
  33. Koc, T. & Ceylan, C. 2007. Factors impacting the innovative capacity in largescale companies. Technovation, 27: 105-114.Google Scholar
  34. 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
  35. Lau, C.-M., & Ngo, H.-Y. 2004. The HR system, organizational culture, and product innovation. International Business Review, 13: 685-703.Google Scholar
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. Minor, J. B. 2006. Organizational behavior 3: Historical origins, theoretical foundations, and the future. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  40. Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. 1988. Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103: 27-43.Google Scholar
  41. Ninck, A., Bürki, L., Hungerbühler, R., Mühlemann, H. 2004. Systemik: Vernetztes Denken in komplexen Situationen. Zürich: Industrielle Organisation.Google Scholar
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. Politis, J. D. 2005. Dispersed leadership predictor of the work environment for creativity and productivity. European Journal of Innovation Management, 8: 182-204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. 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
  49. Rock, L. 2013. Mental models: A robust definition. The Learning Organization, 20: 38-47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
  51. Schein, E. H. 2017. Organizational culture and leadership. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  52. 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
  53. Sterman, J. D. 2002. All models are wrong: Reflections on becoming a systems scientist. System Dynamics Review, 18: 501-531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tanriover, O. O., & Bilgen, S. 2011. A framework for reviewing domain specific conceptual models. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 33: 448-464.Google Scholar
  55. 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
  56. Vester, F. 2000. Die Kunst vernetzt zu denken: Ideen und Werkzeuge für einen neuen Umgang mit Komplexität. Stuttgart: DVA.Google Scholar
  57. 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
  58. 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
  59. 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
  60. Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. J. (2014). Research on workplace creativity: A review and redirection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 333-359Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Hoßbach
    • 1
    Email author
  • Scott G. Isaksen
    • 2
  • Anne-Katrin Neyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-WittenbergHalleDeutschland
  2. 2.BI Norwegian Business School - Department of Leadership an Organizational BehaviorBergenNorwegen

Personalised recommendations