Unpacking the cross‐level effects of tenure diversity, explicit knowledge, and knowledge sharing on individual creativity

The composition of the workforce with regard to organizational tenure is rapidly changing. In this paper, we examine the cross-level effects of tenure diversity on individual-level creativity. In keeping with the categorization-elaboration model, we propose individual-level explicit knowledge as a mediating mechanism between tenure diversity and individual creativity, and knowledge sharing as moderating the relationship between tenure diversity and individual explicit knowledge. Using a sample of 341 Korean insurance agents from 76 groups, we find that knowledge sharing moderates the relationship between tenure diversity and individual explicit knowledge. Results further support the direction of the hypothesized relationships, with tenure diversity positively influencing individual explicit knowledge at high levels of knowledge sharing and exhibiting a negative influence at low levels. Individual explicit knowledge carries these indirect effects to individual creativity, although directional significance was only found at extremely high and low values. Practitioner Points Tenure diversity is now a fact of organizational life that managers need to embrace. While our results suggest that tenure diversity is positively related to individual creativity, individual explicit knowledge and knowledge sharing play important roles in the association. Knowledge sharing appears to be a key boundary condition, which modifies the influence of tenure diversity on individual explicit knowledge. Working in a diverse group is not enough; the knowledge has to be shared. Individual explicit knowledge mediates the relationship between tenure diversity and individual creativity; it carries a positive indirect effect when knowledge sharing is high and a negative indirect effect when knowledge sharing is low. For complex jobs, where creativity is desired, but much of the work is independent, managers need to encourage employees with diverse levels of tenure to share experiences and ways of performing their tasks.

[1]  Markus Baer,et al.  Creative self-efficacy and individual creativity in team contexts: cross-level interactions with team informational resources. , 2012, The Journal of applied psychology.

[2]  Jeong-Yeon Lee,et al.  Cognitive Team Diversity and Individual Team Member Creativity: A Cross-Level Interaction , 2012 .

[3]  J. Mathieu,et al.  The Etiology of the Multilevel Paradigm in Management Research , 2011 .

[4]  Aleksander P. J. Ellis,et al.  Motivating interdependent teams: individual rewards, shared rewards, or something in between? , 2010, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  Nai‐Wen Chi,et al.  A Double-Edged Sword? Exploring the Curvilinear Relationship Between Organizational Tenure Diversity and Team Innovation: The Moderating Role of Team-Oriented HR Practices , 2009 .

[6]  Y. Gong.  Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: the mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy , 2009 .

[7]  S. Voelpel,et al.  WHEN AND HOW DIVERSITY BENEFITS TEAMS: THE IMPORTANCE OF TEAM MEMBERS' NEED FOR COGNITION , 2009 .

[8]  Ute R. Hülsheger,et al.  Team-level predictors of innovation at work: a comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. , 2009, The Journal of applied psychology.

[9]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Testing Multilevel Mediation Using Hierarchical Linear Models , 2008 .

[10]  Stephen E. Humphrey,et al.  Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to experience, salience of intra-group differences, and performance of diverse work groups , 2008 .

[11]  Laura M. Stapleton,et al.  The Performance of Methods to Test Upper-Level Mediation in the Presence of Nonnormal Data , 2008, Multivariate behavioral research.

[12]  Reaching beyond disciplines through collaboration: Academics' learning in a national multidisciplinary research programme , 2008 .

[13]  Aleda V. Roth,et al.  Incentives That Induce Task-Related Effort, Helping, and Knowledge Sharing in Workgroups , 2007, Manag. Sci..

[14]  J. George,et al.  Dual Tuning in a Supportive Context: Joint Contributions of Positive Mood, Negative Mood, and Supervisory Behaviors to Employee Creativity , 2007 .

[15]  Jin Nam Choi.  Group composition and employee creative behaviour in a Korean electronics company: Distinct effects of relational demography and group diversity , 2007 .

[16]  D. van Knippenberg,et al.  Work group diversity. , 2007, Annual review of psychology.

[17]  J. Mathieu,et al.  A framework for testing meso‐mediational relationships in Organizational Behavior , 2007 .

[18]  N. Allen,et al.  Assessing dissimilarity relations under missing data conditions: evidence from computer simulations. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[19]  John E. Mathieu,et al.  Clarifying conditions and decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior , 2006 .

[20]  Daniel J. Bauer,et al.  Computational Tools for Probing Interactions in Multiple Linear Regression, Multilevel Modeling, and Latent Curve Analysis , 2006 .

[21]  Chiang Ku Fan,et al.  A Study to Identify the Training Needs of Life Insurance Sales Representatives in Taiwan Using the Delphi Approach , 2006 .

[22]  H. Greve,et al.  Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge Combination and Experience in Innovative Teams , 2006 .

[23]  Daniel J. Bauer,et al.  Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation in multilevel models: new procedures and recommendations. , 2006, Psychological methods.

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

[25]  L. Unwin,et al.  Surveying the scene: learning metaphors, survey design and the workplace context , 2005 .

[26]  Thomas E. Becker.  Potential Problems in the Statistical Control of Variables in Organizational Research: A Qualitative Analysis With Recommendations , 2005 .

[27]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[28]  C. Shalley,et al.  The Effects of Personal and Contextual Characteristics on Creativity: Where Should We Go from Here? , 2004 .

[29]  Keith Rollag,et al.  The impact of relative tenure on newcomer socialization dynamics , 2004 .

[30]  C. Shalley,et al.  A Little Creativity Goes a Long Way: An Examination of Teams’ Engagement in Creative Processes , 2004 .

[31]  Jonathon N. Cummings.  Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a Global Organization , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[32]  David P Mackinnon,et al.  Confidence Limits for the Indirect Effect: Distribution of the Product and Resampling Methods , 2004, Multivariate behavioral research.

[33]  S. Jackson,et al.  Recent Research on Team and Organizational Diversity: SWOT Analysis and Implications , 2003 .

[34]  Michael C. Sturman,et al.  Searching for the Inverted U-Shaped Relationship Between Time and Performance: Meta-Analyses of the Experience/Performance, Tenure/Performance, and Age/Performance Relationships , 2003 .

[35]  John R. Austin.  Transactive memory in organizational groups: the effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[36]  D. Boud,et al.  Learning from others at work: communities of practice and informal learning , 2003 .

[37]  Kyle Lewis.  Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[38]  Frances J. Milliken,et al.  Diversity and creativity in work groups: A dynamic perspective on the affective and cognitive processes that link diversity and performance. , 2003 .

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

[40]  Lyman W. Porter,et al.  When Both Similarities and Dissimilarities Matter: Extending the Concept of Relational Demography , 2002 .

[41]  S. Taggar.  Individual Creativity and Group Ability to Utilize Individual Creative Resources: A Multilevel Model , 2002 .

[42]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Minority dissent and team innovation: the importance of participation in decision making. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[43]  Mie Augier,et al.  Understanding context: its emergence, transformation and role in tacit knowledge sharing , 2001, J. Knowl. Manag..

[44]  Daniel C. Smith,et al.  Cross-Functional Product Development Teams, Creativity, and the Innovativeness of New Consumer Products , 2001 .

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

[46]  Onne Janssen.  Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behaviour , 2000 .

[47]  P. Paulus.  Groups, Teams, and Creativity: The Creative Potential of Idea-generating Groups , 2000 .

[48]  G. Northcraft,et al.  You have printed the following article : Why Differences Make a Difference : A Field Study of Diversity , Conflict , and Performance in Workgroups , 2007 .

[49]  Paul E. Tesluk,et al.  Toward an integrated model of work experience. , 1998 .

[50]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Looking Inside the Fishbowl of Creativity: Verbal and Behavioral Predictors of Creative Performance , 1998 .

[51]  Mary Tripsas.  Unraveling The Process Of Creative Destruction: Complementary Assets And Incumbent Survival In The Typesetter Industry , 1997 .

[52]  Frances J. Milliken,et al.  Searching for Common Threads: Understanding the Multiple Effects of Diversity in Organizational Groups , 1996 .

[53]  Lisa Hope Pelled.  RELATIONAL DEMOGRAPHY AND PERCEPTIONS OF GROUP CONFLICT AND PERFORMANCE: A FIELD INVESTIGATION , 1996 .

[54]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Evidence to Support the Componential Model of Creativity: Secondary Analyses of Three Studies , 1996 .

[55]  Mark S. Teachout,et al.  THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORK EXPERIENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A CONCEPTUAL AND META‐ANALYTIC REVIEW , 1995 .

[56]  Michael J. Kavanagh,et al.  Applying Trained Skills on the Job: The Importance of the Work Environment , 1995 .

[57]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[58]  L. James,et al.  rwg: An assessment of within-group interrater agreement. , 1993 .

[59]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance , 1992 .

[60]  Arvind Parkhe.  Interfirm Diversity, Organizational Learning, and Longevity in Global Strategic Alliances , 1991 .

[61]  A. Tsui,et al.  Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. , 1991 .

[62]  Christina E. Shalley,et al.  Effects of Productivity Goals, Creativity Goals, and Personal Discretion on Individual Creativity , 1991 .

[63]  S. Jackson,et al.  Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? , 1989 .

[64]  M. Mumford,et al.  Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. , 1988 .

[65]  C. Nemeth.  Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[66]  T. M. Amabile.  The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. , 1983 .

[67]  J. Teachman.  Analysis of Population Diversity , 1980 .

[68]  L. R. Hoffman.  Homogeneity of member personality and its effect on group problem-solving. , 1959, Journal of abnormal psychology.