The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of creativity within organizations from a psychological perspective
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: The aim of this paper is to survey the main creativity models, mediators as well as the enhancers of organizational creativity, all from a psychological perspective. In addition, the paper seeks to identify gaps in knowledge of organizational creativity. Aspects of creativity that require closer inspection are described. Design/methodology/approach: A review of the literature on creativity within organizations from a psychological perspective was undertaken. A large number of research papers, mainly published after 1985 covering creativity and/or innovation, were identified and critically evaluated for relevance to the paper's purpose, and were judged on sufficient scholarship in order to create a narrative literature review. Findings: Despite the great amount of psychological research on creativity and innovation, only a few models and theories appear to be defined. Moreover, their predictive value and incorporation of possible influencing factors is limited. In general, it can be concluded that the field of creativity requires more in‐depth research as well as a synthesis of results of various studies and models in order to effectively develop, promote and predict creativity within organizations. Research limitations/implications: The review focuses mainly on psychological aspects of creativity in organizations as published in research papers. In future studies for determining generic theories and conclusions, other aspects, e.g. sociological, cultural, economic and biological, should be taken into account. Originality/value: A large and diverse number of studies on creativity in organizations have been conducted, but a comprehensive review paper on organizational creativity is still lacking. This paper supplies this need for survey. The findings of the current paper provide a well documented framework in addressing creativity enhancers in organizational environments. Furthermore, it articulates suggestions for further research and can be a good starting‐point for newcomers in this research domain.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
ASSESSING THE WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR CREATIVITY.
AMABILE, T. M., CONTI, R., COON, H., LAZENBY, J., & HERRON, M. (1996) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256995 · Cited by 6,029
The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization.
Amabile, T. M. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357 · Cited by 4,034
Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556620 · Cited by 4,020
The support of autonomy and the control of behavior.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.53.6.1024 · Cited by 3,242
Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. (1997) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256948 · Cited by 2,855
Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique.
Amabile, T. M. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997 · Cited by 2,278
Expert performance: its structure and acquisition.
Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.8.725 · Cited by 2,072
Motivational and emotional controls of cognition
Simon, H. A. (1967) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0024127 · Cited by 1,410 · cited 2×
“In the latter case, it seems that the higher the amount of self-regulation, the greater the intrinsic motivation and creativity (Simon, 1967; Kanfer and Ackerman, 1989; Amabile, 1983a, b).”
BackgroundBurkhardt, M. E., & Brass, D. J. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393552 · Cited by 947
Cited by
Leadership, creativity, and innovation: A critical review and practical recommendations
Hughes, D. J., Lee, A., Tian, A. W., Newman, A., & Legood, A. (2018) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.03.001 · Cited by 1,080
Leadership, creativity and innovation: a meta-analytic review
Lee, A., Legood, A., Hughes, D., Tian, A. W., Newman, A., & Knight, C. (2020) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2019.1661837 · Cited by 425
Metadata
- Authors
- Klijn, M., & Tomic, W.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Development
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2010-04-13
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 322-343
- ISSN
- 0262-1711 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2026925887
- Cited by
- 171
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 8.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of creativity within organizations from a psychological perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/02621711011039141
- The paper
- Klijn, M., & Tomic, W. (2010). A review of creativity within organizations from a psychological perspective. Journal of Management Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711011039141
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.