When Does External Knowledge Benefit Team Creativity? The Role of Internal Team Network Structure and Task Complexity

References

• Allen TJ, Cohen SI (1969) Information flow in research and development laboratories. Admin. Sci. Quart. 14:12–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (1988) A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Res. Organ. Behav. 10(1):123–167.Google Scholar
• Amabile TM, Conti R (1999) Changes in the work environment for creativity during downsizing. Acad. Management J. 42(6):630–640.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ambrose ML, Schminke M, Mayer DM (2013) Trickle-down effects of supervisor perceptions of interactional justice: A moderated mediation approach. J. Appl. Psych. 98(4):678–689.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ancona D, Bresman H (2007) X-Teams: How to Build Teams That Lead Innovate and Succeed (Harvard Business Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Anderson BS, Butts C, Carley K (1999) The interaction of size and density with graph-level indices. Soc. Networks 21(3):239–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Brown CE (2010) The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Res. Org. Behav. 30:55–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L, Aven BL, Kush J (2018) The effects of communication networks and turnover on transactive memory and group performance. Organ. Sci. 29:191–206.Link, Google Scholar
• Backmann J, Hoegl M, Cordery JL (2015) Soaking it up: Absorptive capacity in interorganizational new product development teams. J. Prod. Innov. Manage. 32(6):861–877.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baer M (2012) Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Acad. Management J. 55(5):1102–1119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis (Analytic Technologies, Harvard, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Brass DJ, Burkhardt ME (1993) Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior. Acad. Management J. 36(3):441–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bresman H (2010) External learning activities and team performance: A multimethod field study. Organ. Sci. 21(1):81–96.Link, Google Scholar
• Bresman H, Zellmer-Bruhn M (2013) The structural context of team learning: Effects of organizational and team structure on internal and external learning. Organ. Sci. 24(4):1120–1139.Link, Google Scholar
• Brislin RW (1976) Comparative research methodology: Cross-cultural studies. Internat. J. Psych. 11(3):215–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunderson SJ, Van Der Vegt GS, Cantimur Y, Rink F (2016) Different views of hierarchy and why they matter: Hierarchy as inequality or as cascading influence. Acad. Management J. 59(4):1265–1289.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt R, Kilduff M, Tasselli S (2013) Network structure of advantage. Ann. Rev. Psych. 64:527–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell DJ (1988) Task complexity: A review and analysis. Acad. Management Rev. 13:40–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Barsade S, Edmondson A, Gibson C, Krackhardt D, Labianca G (2015) The integration of psychological and network perspectives in organizational scholarship. Organ. Sci. 26(4):1162–1176.Link, Google Scholar
• Catmull E, Wallace A (2014) Creativity Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration (Random House, New York).Google Scholar
• Chan D (1998) Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. J. Appl. Psych. 83(2):234–246.Google Scholar
• Chen G, Casper WJ, Cortina JM (2001) The roles of self-efficacy and task complexity in the relationships among cognitive ability conscientiousness and work-related performance: A meta-analytic examination. Human Performance 14:209–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (2013) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Routledge Academic, Abingdon, UK). Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1989) Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Econom. J. 99(397):569–596.Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crawford E, Reeves CJ, Stewart G, Astrove SL (2019) To link or not to link? Multiple team membership and unit performance. J. Appl. Psych. 104(3):341–356.Google Scholar
• Crawford ER, LePine JA (2013) A configural theory of team processes: Accounting for the structure of taskwork and teamwork. Acad. Management Rev. 38:32–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cropley A (2006) In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Res. J. 18:391–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cross R, Borgatti SP, Parker A (2002) Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Rev. 44:25–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Innocenzo L, Mathieu JE, Kukenberger MR (2016) A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership–team performance relations. J. Management 42(7):1964–1991.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Daft RL, Macintosh NB (1981) A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. Admin. Sci. Quart. 26(2):207–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dane E (2010) Reconsidering the trade-off between expertise and flexibility: A cognitive entrenchment perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 35:579–603.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diehl M, Stroebe W (1991) Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effects. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 61:392–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dosi G, Nelson RP, Winter SG (2000) The Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Drach-Zahavy A, Somech A (2001) Understanding team innovation: The role of team processes and structures. Group Dynam. 5:111–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DTI (2003) Third Community Innovation Survey (Department of Trade and Industry, London).Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Lambert LS (2007) Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psych. Methods 12(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Efron B (1979) Computers and the theory of statistics: Thinking the unthinkable. SIAM Rev. 21(4):460–480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management J. 21(10‐11):1105–1121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Enders CK, Tofighi D (2007) Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psych. Methods 12(2):121–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farh JL, Lee C, Farh CI (2010) Task conflict and team creativity: A question of how much and when. J. Appl. Psych. 95:1173–1180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman LC (1978) Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Networks 1:215–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gardner HK, Gino F, Staats BR (2012) Dynamically integrating knowledge in teams: Transforming resources into performance. Acad. Management J. 55:998–1022.Crossref, Google Scholar
• George JM, Zhou J (2001) When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. J. Appl. Psych. 86(3):513–524.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gersick CJ, Hackman JR (1990) Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Org. Behav. Human Decision Processes 47(1):65–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR, Taylor A (2000) Innovations as catalysts for organizational change: Shifts in organizational cognition and search. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):54–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grosser T, Park S, Mathieu J, Roebuck A (2019) Network thinking in teams research. Brass DJ, Borgatti SP, eds. Social Networks at Work (Routledge, New York), 309–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grosser TJ, Venkataramani V, Labianca GJ (2017) An alter-centric perspective on employee innovation: The importance of alters’ creative self-efficacy and network structure. J. Appl. Psych. 102:1360–1374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hackman JR, Oldham GR (1980) Work Redesign (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Hansen MT (1999) The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):82–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hargadon A, Sutton RI (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(4):716–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hargadon AB, Bechky B (2006) When collections of creatives become creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work. Organ. Sci. 17(4):484–500.Link, Google Scholar
• Harvey S (2014) Creative synthesis: Exploring the process of extraordinary group creativity. Acad. Management Rev. 39(3):324–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoever IJ, van Knippenberg D, van Ginkel WP, Barkema HG (2012) Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. J. Appl. Psych. 97:982–996.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollenbeck JR, Ellis APJ, Humphrey SE, Garza AS, Ilgen DR (2011) Asymmetry in structural adaptation: The differential impact of centralizing vs. decentralizing team structures. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 114:64–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu L, Randel AE (2014) Knowledge sharing in teams: Social capital extrinsic incentives and team innovation. Group Organ. Management 39:213–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang S, Cummings JN (2011) When critical knowledge is most critical: Centralization in knowledge-intensive teams. Small Group Res. 42(6):669–699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hülsheger UR, Anderson N, Salgado JF (2009) Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. J. Appl. Psych. 91:1128–1145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ilgen DR, Hollenbeck JR, Johnson M, Jundt D (2005) Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Ann. Rev. Psych. 56:517–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jansen JJ, Van Den Bosch FA, Volberda HW (2005) Managing potential and realized absorptive capacity: How do organizational antecedents matter? Acad. Management J. 48(6):999–1015.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jia L, Shaw JD, Tsui AS, Park TY (2014) A social-structural perspective on employee-organization relationships and team creativity. Acad. Management J. 57:869–891.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R, Ahuja G (2002) Something old something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. 45:1183–1194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz D, Kahn RL (1978) The Social Psychology of Organizations (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Kessel M, Kratzer J, Schultz C (2012) Psychological safety, knowledge sharing, and creative performance in healthcare teams. Creativity Innovation Management 21:147–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 3(3):383–397.Link, Google Scholar
• Kurtzberg TR, Amabile TM (2001) From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team level creativity. Creativity Res. J. 13:285–294.Google Scholar
• Lane PJ, Koka BR, Pathak S (2006) The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. Acad. Management Rev. 31(4):833–863.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laursen K, Salter A (2006) Searching high and low: What types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Res. Policy 33:1201–1215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leenders RT, Van Engelen JL, Kratzer J (2007) Systematic design methods and the creative performance of new product teams: Do they contradict or complement each other? J. Product Innovation Management 22(2):166–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewin AY, Massini S (2003) Knowledge creation and organizational capabilities of innovating and imitating firms. Tsoukas H, Mylonopoulos N, eds. Organizations as Knowledge Systems: Knowledge Learning and Dynamic Capabilities (Palgrave Macmillan, New York), 209–237.Google Scholar
• Lewin AY, Massini S, Peeters C (2011) Microfoundations of internal and external absorptive capacity routines. Organ. Sci. 22(1):81–98.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewis K (2003) Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. J. Appl. Psych. 88:587–604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Y, Li N, Li C, Li J (2020) 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. Acad. Management J. 63(2):613–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu S, Bartol K, Venkataramani V, Zheng X, Liu X (2019) Pitching novel ideas to the boss: The interactive effects of employees’ idea enactment and influence tactics on creativity assessment and implementation. Acad. Management J. 62(2):579–606.Crossref, Google Scholar
• MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Williams J (2004) Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behav. Res. 39:99–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Madjar N, Greenberg E, Chen Z (2011) Factors for radical creativity incremental creativity and routine non-creative performance. J. Appl. Psych. 96:730–743.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mairesse J, Mohnen P (2002) Accounting for innovation and measuring innovativeness: An illustrative framework and an application. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92:226–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsden PV (1990) Network data and measurement. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 16:435–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matusik SF (2002) An empirical investigation of firm public and private knowledge. Strategic Management J. 23(5):457–467.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McNeish DM, Stapleton LM (2016) The effect of small sample size on two-level model estimates: A review and illustration. Ed. Psych. Rev. 28:295–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mell JN, Van Knippenberg D, Van Ginkel WP (2014) The catalyst effect: The impact of transactive memory system structure on team performance. Acad. Management J. 57(4):1154–1173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Men C, Luo J, Fong PS, Zhong J, Huo W (2020) Translating external knowledge to team creativity in turbulent environments: The role of absorptive capacity and knowledge integration. J. Creative Behav. 54(2):363–377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H, Raisinghani D, Theoret A (1976) The structure of “unstructured” decision processes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 21:246–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miron-Spektor E, Erez M, Naveh E (2011) The effect of conformist and attentive-to- detail members on team innovation: Reconciling the innovation paradox. Acad. Management J. 54:740–750.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moorhead G, Montanari JR (1986) An empirical investigation of the groupthink phenomenon. Human Relations 39(5):399–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgeson FP, Humphrey SE (2006) The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. J. Appl. Psych. 91(6):1321–1339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mukherjee S (2016) Leadership network and team performance in interactive contests. Soc. Netw. 47:85–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2012) Mplus User’s Guide, 7th ed. (Muthén, Muthén, Los Angeles).Google Scholar
• Nemeth CJ (1986) Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psych. Rev. 93:23–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oh H, Chung MH, Labianca G (2004) Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties. Acad. Management J. 47:860–875.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oh H, Labianca GJ, Chung M (2006) A multilevel model of group social capital. Acad. Management Rev. 31:569–582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park S, Grosser TJ, Roebuck AA, Mathieu JE (2020) Understanding work teams from a network perspective: A review and future research directions. J. Management 46(6):1002–1028.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paulus PB, Yang H (2000) Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 82:76–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith JE (2006) Social yet creative: The role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Acad. Management J. 49:85–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pertusa-Ortega EM, Zaragoza-Sáez P, Claver-Cortés E (2010) Can formalization complexity and centralization influence knowledge performance? J. Bus. Res. 63(3):310–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phelps C, Heidl R, Wadhwa A (2012) Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: A review and research agenda. J. Management 38:1115–1166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Zuckerman EW (2001) Networks diversity and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organ. Sci. 12:502–517.Link, Google Scholar
• Reiter-Palmon R, Illies JJ (2004) Leadership and creativity: Understanding leadership from a creative problem-solving perspective. Leadership Quart. 15:55–77.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rodan S, Galunic C (2004) More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management J. 25:541–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rulke DL, Galaskiewicz J (2000) Distribution of knowledge group network structure and group performance. Management Sci. 46(5):612–625.Link, Google Scholar
• Scott J (2002) Social Network Analysis (Sage Publications, London).Google Scholar
• Shalley CE, Perry-Smith J (2008) The emergence of team creative cognition: The role of diverse outside ties, socio-cognitive network centrality, and team evolution. Strategic Entrepreneurship J. 2:23–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaw ME (1964) Communication networks. Berkowitz L, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Academic Press, New York), 111–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sheremata WA (2000) Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Acad. Management Rev. 25(2):389–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrout PE, Bolger N (2002) Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psych. Methods 7:422–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smart C, Vertinsky I (1984) Strategy and the environment: A study of corporate responses to crises. Strategic Management J. 5:199–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sparrowe RT, Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Kraimer ML (2001) Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Acad. Management J. 44:316–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G, Titus W (1987) Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53(1):81–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stockdale B (2002) UK Innovation survey 2001. Econom. Trends 580:36–42.Google Scholar
• Taggar S (2002) Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: a multilevel model. Acad. Management J. 45:315–330.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teachman J (1980) Analysis of population diversity. Sociol. Methods Res. 8:341–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tellis GJ, Prabhu JC, Chandy RK (2009) Radical innovation across nations: The preeminence of corporate culture. J. Marketing 73(1):3–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Todorova G, Durisin B (2007) Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):774–786.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tortoriello M (2015) The social underpinnings of absorptive capacity: The moderating effects of structural holes on innovation generation based on external knowledge. Strategic Management J. 36(4):586–597.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Troster C, Mehra A, van Knippenberg D (2014) Structuring for team success: The interactive effects of network structure and cultural diversity on team potency and performance. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 124:245–255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsai W (2001) Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Acad. Management J. 44:996–1004.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsai W, Ghoshal S (1998) Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Acad. Management J. 41(4):464–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML (1977) Special boundary roles in the innovation process. Admin. Sci. Quart. 22(4):587–605.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Bosch FA, Volberda HM, De Boer M (1999) Coevolution of firm absorptive capacity and knowledge environment: Organizational forms and combinative capabilities. Organ. Sci. 10(5):551–568.Link, Google Scholar
• Van Ginkel WP, Van Knippenberg D (2008) Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations. Org. Behav. Human Decision Processes 105:82–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Knippenberg D (2017) Team Innovation. Ann. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 4:211–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Knippenberg D, De Dreu CKW, Homan AC (2004) Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. J. Appl. Psych. 89:1008–1022.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vashdi DR, Bamberger PA, Erez M (2013) Can surgical teams ever learn? The role of coordination complexity and transitivity in action team learning. Acad. Management J. 56:945–971.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkataramani V, Richter AW, Clarke R (2014) Creative benefits from well-connected leaders: Leader social network ties as facilitators of employee radical creativity. J. Appl. Psych. 99:966–975.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Verona G (1999) A resource-based view of product development. Acad. Management Rev. 24(1):132–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Volberda HW, Foss NJ, Lyles MA (2010) Perspective—Absorbing the concept of absorptive capacity: How to realize its potential in the organization field. Organ. Sci. 21(4):931–951.Link, Google Scholar
• Von Hippel E (1994) “Sticky information” and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Sci. 40(4):429–439.Link, Google Scholar
• Wasserman SK, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiley J, Jarosz AF (2012) How working memory capacity affects problem solving. Ross BH, ed. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Academic Press, London), 185–227.Google Scholar
• Woodman RW, Sawyer JE, Griffin RW (1993) Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Acad. Management Rev. 18(2):293–321.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW (2010) Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Sci. 330(6004):686–688.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wuchty S, Jones BF, Uzzi B (2007) The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Sci. 316(5827):1036–1039.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zahra SA, George G (2002) Absorptive capacity: A review reconceptualization and extension. Acad. Management Rev. 27(2):185–203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zeffane RM, Gul F (1993) The effects of task characteristics and sub-unit structure on information processing: An empirical study. Inform. Processing Management 29(1):21–37.Google Scholar
• Zhang Z, Peterson S (2011) Advice networks in teams: The role of transformational leadership and members’ CSE. J. Appl. Psych. 96:1004–1017.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou J, Shin SJ, Brass DJ, Choi J, Zhang ZX (2009) Social networks, personal values, and creativity: Evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects. J. Appl. Psych. 94:1544–1552.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zohar D, Tenne-Gazit O (2008) Transformational leadership and group interaction as climate antecedents: A social network analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 93(4):744–757.Crossref, Google Scholar