Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 171

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 access
Klijn, Marja, Tomic, Welko·2010·Journal of Management Development

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/02621711011039141

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 13 references

Cited by

See all 171

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.