Lovable fools and creativity in teams

Although employees with low task performance are typically perceived as outcasts in organizations, one group of such employees has the potential to generate positive outcomes. We seek to understand how lovable fools (i.e., individuals with low task performance and high contextual performance) influence creativity within teams. Specifically, we study the countervailing effects of increased psychological safety and decreased useful feedback as mediators of the relationship between the perceived existence of lovable fools in a team and individual and team creativity. We conduct two studies using individual and team‐level analyses to examine the hypothesized direct and indirect effects. Our findings support a positive relationship between perceived existence of lovable fools and individual/team creativity through increased psychological safety, even after accounting for the effects of reduced useful feedback provided by lovable fools. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

[1]  David M. Townsend,et al.  Red Giants or Black Holes? The Antecedent Conditions and Multilevel Impacts of Star Performers , 2020, Academy of Management Annals.

[2]  Ning Li,et al.  The Boon and Bane of Creative “Stars”: A Social Network Exploration of How and When Team Creativity Is (and Is Not) Driven by a Star Teammate , 2020 .

[3]  Philip M. Podsakoff,et al.  Experimental designs in management and leadership research: Strengths, limitations, and recommendations for improving publishability , 2019, The Leadership Quarterly.

[4]  Alexander R. Bolinger,et al.  Contributing from Inside the Outer Circle: The Identity-Based Effects of Noncore Role Incumbents on Relational Coordination and Organizational Climate , 2018, Academy of Management Review.

[5]  Steven W. Whiting,et al.  Selecting team players: Considering the impact of contextual performance and workplace deviance on selection decisions in the National Football League. , 2016, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  Monica C. Higgins,et al.  Understanding Psychological Safety in Health Care and Education Organizations: A Comparative Perspective , 2016 .

[7]  Rebecca R. Kehoe,et al.  Lighting the way or stealing the shine? An examination of the duality in star scientists' effects on firm innovative performance , 2015 .

[8]  A. Edmondson,et al.  Psychological Safety: The History, Renaissance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct , 2014 .

[9]  E. Molleman,et al.  Reciprocal Expertise Affirmation and Shared Expertise Perceptions in Work Teams : Their Implications for Coordinated Action and Team Performance , 2013 .

[10]  Markus Baer.  Putting Creativity to Work: The Implementation of Creative Ideas in Organizations , 2012 .

[11]  Jody Hoffer Gittell,et al.  Relational Bureaucracy: Structuring Reciprocal Relationships into Roles , 2012 .

[12]  Y. Gong,et al.  Unfolding the Proactive Process for Creativity , 2012 .

[13]  Herman Aguinis,et al.  THE BEST AND THE REST: REVISITING THE NORM OF NORMALITY OF INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE , 2012 .

[14]  Gordon W. Cheung,et al.  Estimating and Comparing Specific Mediation Effects in Complex Latent Variable Models , 2012 .

[15]  Tamera L. McKinniss,et al.  The moderation of conscientiousness by cognitive ability when predicting workplace safety behavior , 2009 .

[16]  Fred O. Walumbwa,et al.  Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior: mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety. , 2009, The Journal of applied psychology.

[17]  Dusya Vera,et al.  Transformational leadership and ambidexterity in the context of an acquisition , 2009 .

[18]  M. Lobo,et al.  When Competence Is Irrelevant: The Role of Interpersonal Affect in Task-Related Ties , 2008 .

[19]  James M. LeBreton,et al.  Answers to 20 Questions About Interrater Reliability and Interrater Agreement , 2008 .

[20]  Jing Zhou,et al.  When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[21]  Scott E. Page,et al.  Making the Difference: Applying a Logic of Diversity , 2007 .

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

[23]  M. Lobo,et al.  Competent jerks, lovable fools, and the formation of social networks. , 2005, Harvard business review.

[24]  Mitchell J. Neubert,et al.  The Impact of Poor Performers on Team Outcomes: An Empirical Examination of Attribution Theory , 2004 .

[25]  P. Tierney,et al.  The Pygmalion Process and Employee Creativity , 2004 .

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

[27]  Pamela Tierney,et al.  Employee Creativity in Taiwan: An Application of Role Identity Theory , 2003 .

[28]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[29]  Christine L. Jackson,et al.  Peer responses to a team's weakest link: a test and extension of LePine and Van Dyne's model. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[30]  F. Gibbons,et al.  Comparison-level preferences after performance: is downward comparison theory still useful? , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  Jim Blascovich,et al.  Challenge and threat responses during downward and upward social comparisons , 2001 .

[32]  J. George,et al.  When Job Dissatisfaction Leads to Creativity: Encouraging the Expression of Voice , 2001 .

[33]  J. V. Wood,et al.  Downward comparison in everyday life: reconciling self-enhancement models with the mood-cognition priming model. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[34]  A. Edmondson.  Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams , 1999 .

[35]  Walter C. Borman,et al.  Task Performance and Contextual Performance: The Meaning for Personnel Selection Research , 1997 .

[36]  N. Anderson,et al.  Innovation in top management teams , 1996 .

[37]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting. , 1993 .

[38]  Edgar H. Schein,et al.  On Dialogue, Culture, and Organizational Learning , 1993 .

[39]  William A. Kahn.  Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work , 1990 .

[40]  T. Wills.  Downward Comparison Principles in Social Psychology , 1981 .

[41]  M. Taylor,et al.  Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. , 1979 .

[42]  Martin M. Greller,et al.  Sources of feedback: A preliminary investigation , 1975 .

[43]  H. Masumeh,et al.  IDENTIFYING POOR PERFORMANCE DIMENSIONS AND CLUSTERING POOR PERFORMERS: A CASE STUDY IN TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES , 2015 .

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

[45]  J. A. Lepine,et al.  Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[46]  L. V. Dyne,et al.  Peer Responses to Low Performers: An Attributional Model of Helping in the Context of Groups , 2001 .