The DOI matches its Crossref record; 106 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Balancing on the Creative Highwire: Forecasting the Success of Novel Ideas in Organizations
Abstract
Betting on the most promising new ideas is key to creativity and innovation in organizations, but predicting the success of novel ideas can be difficult. To select the best ideas, creators and managers must excel at creative forecasting, the skill of predicting the outcomes of new ideas. Using both a field study of 339 professionals in the circus arts industry and a lab experiment, I examine the conditions for accurate creative forecasting, focusing on the effect of creators’ and managers’ roles. In the field study, creators and managers forecasted the success of new circus acts with audiences, and the accuracy of these forecasts was assessed using data from 13,248 audience members. Results suggest that creators were more accurate than managers when forecasting about others’ novel ideas, but not their own. This advantage over managers was undermined when creators previously had poor ideas that were successful in the marketplace anyway. Results from the lab experiment show that creators’ advantage over managers in predicting success may be tied to the emphasis on both divergent thinking (idea generation) and convergent thinking (idea evaluation) in the creator role, while the manager role emphasizes only convergent thinking. These studies highlight that creative forecasting is a critical bridge linking creativity and innovation, shed light on the importance of roles in creative forecasting, and advance theory on why creative success is difficult to sustain over time.
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
(1994) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(94)92216-0 · Cited by 45,910
The Social Psychology of Organizations.
Hackman, J. R., Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2989929 · Cited by 12,235
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 10,899
An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change
Berkowitz, M. K., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1983) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/1058233 · Cited by 10,549
Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610393980 · Cited by 9,996
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022
A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(03)00046-1 · Cited by 8,307
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121 · Cited by 7,731
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250141009 · Cited by 7,283
The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered.
Merton, R. K. (1968) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56 · Cited by 6,720
Cited by
Virtual communication curbs creative idea generation
Brucks, M. S., & Levav, J. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04643-y · Cited by 380
A bibliometric analysis of creativity in the field of business economics
Castillo-Vergara, M., Alvarez-Marin, A., & Placencio-Hidalgo, D. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.011 · Cited by 339
Toward a Meta-Theory of Creativity Forms: How Novelty and Usefulness Shape Creativity
Harvey, S., & Berry, J. W. (2023) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2020.0110 · Cited by 125
The sociology of scientific validity: How professional networks shape judgement in peer review
Teplitskiy, M., Acuna, D., Elamrani-Raoult, A., Körding, K., & Evans, J. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.014 · Cited by 113
N. Lane, J., Friis, S., Cai, T., Menietti, M., Weber, G., & Guinan, E. (2024) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4769282 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Berg, J. M.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-08
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 433-468
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3815
- OpenAlex
- W1518432050
- Cited by
- 252
- References
- 106
- FWCI
- 26.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Balancing on the Creative Highwire: Forecasting the Success of Novel Ideas in Organizations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0001839216642211
- The paper
- Berg, J. M. (2016). Balancing on the Creative Highwire: Forecasting the Success of Novel Ideas in Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839216642211
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.