Drawing Snow White and Animating Buzz Lightyear: Technological Toolkit Characteristics and Creativity in Cross-Disciplinary Teams

The use of technological tools to execute creative tasks is pervasive within cross-disciplinary teams, yet little attention has been paid to their role in influencing team creativity. In particular, no research has focused on how the characteristics of a team’s technological toolkit—the set of technological tools a team can draw upon to construct its actions—can affect team creativity. I propose that considering the toolkit, rather than just isolated tools, and the multiple functions played by tools is critical to understanding how technology characteristics influence team creativity. I hypothesize that creativity in cross-disciplinary teams is influenced by the size and field diffusion of the team toolkit, with size having a curvilinear relationship with creativity, and diffusion having a positive relationship. Moreover, I hypothesize that these effects will be attenuated when the number of team members who are experts with the focal tool is high. I test and find support for these hypotheses in a study s...

[1]  R. Hanneman.  Introduction to Social Network Methods , 2001 .

[2]  Linda Argote,et al.  Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[3]  Ralph Katz,et al.  Shifting Innovation to Users via Toolkits , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[4]  Ammon Salter,et al.  Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects , 2017 .

[5]  Paul M. Leonardi,et al.  Innovation Blindness: Culture, Frames and Cross-Boundary Problem Construction in the Development of New Technology Concepts , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[6]  Leslie Perlow,et al.  Beyond Occupational Differences: the Importance of Cross-cutting Demographics and Dyadic Toolkits for Collaboration in a Us Hospital , 2014 .

[7]  B. Uzzi,et al.  Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem1 , 2005, American Journal of Sociology.

[8]  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..

[9]  Greta Hsu.  Jacks of All Trades and Masters of None: Audiences' Reactions to Spanning Genres in Feature Film Production , 2006 .

[10]  Ann Swidler.  CULTURE IN ACTION: SYMBOLS AND STRATEGIES* , 1986 .

[11]  Fabrizio Perretti,et al.  Mixing genres and matching people: a study in innovation and team composition in Hollywood , 2007 .

[12]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  The Novelty Paradox & Bias for Normal Science: Evidence from Randomized Medical Grant Proposal Evaluations , 2012 .

[13]  Victor P. Seidel,et al.  Managing the Repertoire: Stories, Metaphors, Prototypes, and Concept Coherence in Product Innovation , 2014, Organ. Sci..

[14]  Eugenia Cacciatori,et al.  Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms , 2008 .

[15]  Grit Laudel,et al.  Conclave in the Tower of Babel: how peers review interdisciplinary research proposals , 2006 .

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

[17]  C. Fritz,et al.  Work characteristics, challenge appraisal, creativity, and proactive behavior: A multi‐level study , 2010 .

[18]  Katherine C. Kellogg,et al.  Beyond Occupational Differences , 2014 .

[19]  Giuseppe Delmestri,et al.  Reputation and Strength of Ties in Predicting Commercial Success and Artistic Merit of Independents in the Italian Feature Film Industry , 2005 .

[20]  G. Stasser,et al.  Pooling Unshared Information: The Benefits of Knowing How Access to Information Is Distributed among Group Members , 2000 .

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

[22]  D. Gann,et al.  One Foot in, One Foot Out: How Does Individuals’ External Search Breadth Affect Innovation Outcomes? , 2016 .

[23]  T. Baker,et al.  Creating Something from Nothing: Resource Construction through Entrepreneurial Bricolage , 2005 .

[24]  K. Weick.  Drop Your Tools: An Allegory for Organizational Studies. , 1996 .

[25]  L. Argote,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A BASIS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN FIRMS , 2000 .

[26]  K. Weick,et al.  Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. , 1993 .

[27]  Jacques Desrosiers,et al.  The Process of Improvisation , 1998 .

[28]  Pino G. Audia,et al.  Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry , 2007, Manag. Sci..

[29]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  Innovation and the Challenge of Novelty: The Novelty-Confirmation-Transformation Cycle in Software and Science , 2011 .

[30]  D. Wegner.  Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind , 1987 .

[31]  David M. Waguespack,et al.  Social Structure and Exchange: Self-confirming Dynamics in Hollywood , 2006 .

[32]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Implications of a Systems Perspective for the Study of Creativity , 1998 .

[33]  Zi-Lin He,et al.  Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U‐ and inverted U‐shaped relationships in strategy research , 2016 .

[34]  Pier Vittorio Mannucci,et al.  From Creativity to Innovation: The Social Network Drivers of the Four Phases of the Idea Journey , 2017 .

[35]  Beth A. Bechky,et al.  When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[36]  Tarald O. Kvålseth,et al.  Note on Cohen's Kappa , 1989 .

[37]  M. Haas,et al.  Microfoundations of Knowledge Recombination: Peripheral Knowledge and Breakthrough Innovation in Teams , 2015 .

[38]  T. Lant,et al.  Balancing Act: Learning from Organizing Practices in Cultural Industries , 2000 .

[39]  S. Harvey.  Creative Synthesis: Exploring the Process of Extraordinary Group Creativity , 2014 .

[40]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving , 1989, Distributed Artificial Intelligence.

[41]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction , 2007, Organ. Sci..

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

[43]  Spencer H. Harrison,et al.  Let's Dance! Elastic Coordination in Creative Group Work: A Qualitative Study of Modern Dancers , 2014 .

[44]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[45]  Linda Argote,et al.  Group Processes in Organizational Contexts , 2008 .

[46]  Jane Stokes.  Animation: A World History , 2017 .

[47]  D. Price.  The Pixar Touch: The Making of a Company , 2008 .

[48]  Dean Keith Simonton.  Film Awards as Indicators of Cinematic Creativity and Achievement: A Quantitative Comparison of the Oscars and Six Alternatives , 2004 .

[49]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[50]  Sarah Harvey,et al.  A different perspective: The multiple effects of deep level diversity on group creativity , 2013 .

[51]  A. Giddens.  Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis , 1979 .

[52]  Margaret A. Neale,et al.  Who's Really Sharing? Effects of Social and Expert Status on Knowledge Exchange Within Groups , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[53]  David M. Waguespack,et al.  Social Networks and Exchange: Self-Confirming Dynamics in Hollywood , 2005 .

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

[55]  S. Mednick.  The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[56]  J. Sinacore.  Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions , 1993 .

[57]  Matthijs Baas,et al.  Hedonic tone and activation level in the mood-creativity link: toward a dual pathway to creativity model. , 2008, Journal of personality and social psychology.

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

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

[60]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives. , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[61]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[62]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Society, Culture, and Person: A Systems View of Creativity , 2014 .

[63]  P. Blau.  Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure , 1978 .

[64]  Siobhan O’Mahony,et al.  Nexus Work: Brokerage on Creative Projects , 2010 .

[65]  Srilakshmi,et al.  Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration , 2001 .

[66]  Randall S. Peterson,et al.  A Dynamic Perspective on Diverse Teams: Moving from the Dual-Process Model to a Dynamic Coordination-based Model of Diverse Team Performance , 2016 .

[67]  J. Myles Shaver,et al.  Interpreting Empirical Results in Strategy and Management Research , 2007 .

[68]  Linda Argote,et al.  First, get your feet wet: The effects of learning from direct and indirect experience on team creativity , 2010 .

[69]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing , 2002, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[70]  Jill E. Perry-Smith,et al.  A Social Composition View of Team Creativity: The Role of Member Nationality-Heterogeneous Ties Outside of the Team , 2014, Organ. Sci..

[71]  Jacky Swan,et al.  Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[72]  Beth A. Bechky,et al.  10 Coordination in Organizations: An Integrative Perspective , 2009 .

[73]  Benjamin F. Jones,et al.  Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact , 2013, Science.

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

[75]  Philip Smith.  Roger Bakeman John M. Gottman , 1987, Animal Behaviour.

[76]  W. Orlikowski.  The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations , 2014 .

[77]  Tridas Mukhopadhyay,et al.  Information Technology and Organizational Learning: An Empirical Analysis , 2004, ICIS.

[78]  R. Bakeman,et al.  Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis, 2nd ed. , 1997 .

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

[80]  Yuqing Ren,et al.  Transactive Memory Systems 1985–2010: An Integrative Framework of Key Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences , 2011 .

[81]  R. Hastie,et al.  The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. , 1993 .

[82]  Beth A. Bechky.  Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[83]  Dusya Vera,et al.  Improvisation and Innovative Performance in Teams , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[84]  D. Dougherty.  Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms , 1992 .

[85]  Ken Kamoche,et al.  Minimal Structures: From Jazz Improvisation to Product Innovation , 2001 .

[86]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  The curse of expertise: The effects of expertise and debiasing methods on prediction of novice performance. , 1999 .

[87]  Ed Calmull.  How Pixar Fosters Collective Creativity , 2008 .

[88]  Katherine C. Kellogg.  Hot Lights and Cold Steel: Cultural and Political Toolkits for Practice Change in Surgery , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[89]  Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi,et al.  Designing Information Technology to Support Distributed Cognition Ceo Publication G 93-16 (236) Designing Information Technology to Support Distributed Cognition Designing Information Technology to Support Distributed Cognition , 1994 .

[90]  Nora Madjar,et al.  Factors for radical creativity, incremental creativity, and routine, noncreative performance. , 2011, The Journal of applied psychology.

[91]  Linus Dahlander,et al.  One Foot in, One Foot Out: How Does Individuals’ External Search Breadth Affect Innovation Outcomes? , 2013 .

[92]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Into the black box: the knowledge transformation cycle , 2003, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[93]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

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

[95]  W. Orlikowski.  Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations , 2000 .

[96]  Jeffrey T. Polzer,et al.  Capitalizing on Diversity: Interpersonal Congruence in Small Work Groups , 2001 .

[97]  J. George.  9 Creativity in Organizations , 2007 .

[98]  L. Mann,et al.  The relationship between individual creativity and team creativity: aggregating across people and time , 2004 .

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

[100]  J. Hackman,et al.  The design of work teams , 1987 .

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

[102]  A. Pickering.  The Mangle of Practice: Agency and Emergence in the Sociology of Science , 1993, American Journal of Sociology.

[103]  G. R. Oldham,et al.  The curvilinear relation between experienced creative time pressure and creativity: moderating effects of openness to experience and support for creativity. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[104]  Issac C. Robledo,et al.  Creativity in Organizations: Importance and Approaches , 2012 .

[105]  David Norman Rodowick,et al.  The Virtual Life of Film , 2007 .