Network Diversity and Social Cohesion in Creative Performance: A View of Communication Media Mix

Creative performance is a fundamental form of knowledge creation in knowledge intensive organizations. While some studies emphasize the importance of diversity on creative performance, others argue for the role of socially cohesive groups with strong third-party connections. To address the gaps in the literature, this study examines the influence of three attributes of dyadic ties (i.e., network diversity, social cohesion, and communication media mix) on creative performance. From the knowledge, social and technology perspectives, we empirically tested our model using a social network methodology with dyads working on knowledge intensive tasks. The results suggest that network diversity is positively associated with creative performance, and moderate level of social cohesion is preferred for creative performance. The findings also show that the influence of social cohesion on creative performance is weakened by the degree of communication media mix. Implications for research and practice are discussed with respect to creativity in organizations.

[1]  Rob Cross,et al.  A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[2]  P. V. Marsden,et al.  NETWORK DATA AND MEASUREMENT , 1990 .

[3]  Mason A. Carpenter,et al.  Social Network Research in Organizational Contexts , 2012 .

[4]  ReagansRay,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity , 2001 .

[5]  Ronald S. Burt,et al.  Network items and the general social survey , 1984 .

[6]  D. Simonton.  Origins of genius : Darwinian perspectives on creativity , 1999 .

[7]  Klarissa Ting-Ting Chang,et al.  Knowledge Diversity and Simmelian Tie in Generating Creative Ideas: The Importance of Media Multiplexity , 2012, ICIS.

[8]  C. Shalley,et al.  The Social Side of Creativity: A Static and Dynamic Social Network Perspective , 2003 .

[9]  L. Sproull,et al.  Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams , 2000 .

[10]  Y. Connie Yuan,et al.  The impact of awareness and accessibility on expertise retrieval: A multilevel network perspective , 2010 .

[11]  Ezra W. Zuckerman,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams , 2001 .

[12]  L. Freeman,et al.  Cognitive Structure and Informant Accuracy , 1987 .

[13]  G. R. Oldham,et al.  Employee Creativity: Personal and Contextual Factors at Work , 1996 .

[14]  Manuel E. Sosa.  Where Do Creative Interactions Come From? The Role of Tie Content and Social Networks , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[15]  J. Perry-Smith.  Social Yet Creative: The Role Of Social Relationships In Facilitating Individual Creativity , 2006 .

[16]  Mark S. Granovetter.  Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  Monica J. Garfield,et al.  Modifying Paradigms: Individual Differences, Creativity Techniques and Exposure to Ideas in Group Idea Generation , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[18]  G. Simmel.  The sociology of Georg Simmel , 1950 .

[19]  S. West,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. , 1994 .

[20]  R. Burt.  Structural Holes and Good Ideas1 , 2004, American Journal of Sociology.

[21]  Gino Cattani,et al.  A Core/Periphery Perspective on Individual Creative Performance: Social Networks and Cinematic Achievements in the Hollywood Film Industry , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[22]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[23]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Penguins, Camels, and Other Birds of a Feather: Brokerage, Boundary Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Communities , 2005 .

[24]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention , 1996 .

[25]  Younghwa Lee,et al.  The Moderating Effect of Extraversion–Introversion Differences on Group Idea Generation Performance , 2012 .

[26]  Susan A. Brown,et al.  Individual creativity in teams: The importance of communication media mix , 2010, Decis. Support Syst..

[27]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[28]  Klarissa Ting-Ting Chang,et al.  Simmelian ties, organizational justice, and knowledge sharing in virtual workgroups , 2009, ECIS.

[29]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  The Role of Instrumental and Expressive Social Ties in Employees' Perceptions of Organizational Justice , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[30]  Markus Baer.  The strength-of-weak-ties perspective on creativity: a comprehensive examination and extension. , 2010, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  Alexander Fliaster,et al.  Dyadic ties among employees: Empirical analysis of creative performance and efficiency , 2010 .

[32]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity , 1996 .

[33]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Understanding Fit and Appropriation Effects in Group Support Systems via Meta-Analysis , 2001, MIS Q..

[34]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Scientific Genius: A Psychology of Science , 1988 .

[35]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[36]  Ned Kock,et al.  Media naturalness and compensatory encoding: The burden of electronic media obstacles is on senders , 2007, Decis. Support Syst..

[37]  M. Lorenzen.  Creativity in context : Content, cost, chance and collection in the organization of the film industry , 2009 .

[38]  Clint Chadwick,et al.  TO AGREE OR NOT TO AGREE: THE EFFECTS OF VALUE CONGRUENCE, INDIVIDUAL DEMOGRAPHIC DISSIMILARITY, AND CONFLICT ON WORKGROUP OUTCOMES , 1997 .

[39]  Melvin Blumberg,et al.  The Missing Opportunity in Organizational Research: Some Implications for a Theory of Work Performance , 1982 .

[40]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[41]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Embeddedness in the Making of Financial Capital: How Social Relations and Networks Benefit Firms Seeking Financing , 1999, The New Economic Sociology.

[42]  A. Paivio,et al.  Dual coding theory and education , 1991 .

[43]  Ezra W. Zuckerman,et al.  How to Make the Team: Social Networks vs. Demography as Criteria for Designing Effective Teams , 2004 .

[44]  Ederyn Williams,et al.  Experimental comparisons of face-to-face and mediated communication: A review. , 1977 .

[45]  M. Mizruchi.  Similarity of Political Behavior Among Large American Corporations , 1989, American Journal of Sociology.

[46]  P. Shah,et al.  Who Are Employees' Social Referents? Using a Network Perspective to Determine Referent Others , 1998 .

[47]  L. Fleming,et al.  Collaborative Brokerage, Generative Creativity, and Creative Success , 2007 .

[48]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Activating Cross-Boundary Knowledge: The Role of Simmelian Ties in the Generation of Innovations , 2010 .

[49]  France Bélanger,et al.  Communication Media Repertoires: Dealing with the Multiplicity of Media Choices , 2007, MIS Q..

[50]  T. Allen.  Managing the flow of technology , 1977 .

[51]  C. Ford.  A Theory of Individual Creative Action in Multiple Social Domains , 1996 .

[52]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Media, Tasks, and Communication Processes: A Theory of Media Synchronicity , 2008, MIS Q..

[53]  Anne P. Massey,et al.  Unraveling the Temporal Fabric of Knowledge Conversion: A Model of Media Selection and Use , 2006, MIS Q..

[54]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range , 2003 .