TRANSFORMATIONALLEADERSHIP,CONSERVATION,ANDCREATIVITY:
EVIDENCEFROMKOREA
SHUNGJAESHIN
WashingtonStateUniversity
JINGZHOURiceUniversity
Usingasampleof290employeesandtheirsupervisorsfrom46Koreancompanies,wefoundthat(1)transformationalleadershipwaspositivelyrelatedtofollowercreativity,(2)followers’“conservation,”avalue,moderatedthatrelationship,and(3)intrinsicmotivationmediatedthecontributionoftheinteractionoftransformationalleadershipandconservationandpartiallymediatedthecontributionoftransformationalleader-shiptocreativity.Wediscussimplicationsoftheseresultsforresearchandpractice.
Thefieldoforganizationalbehaviorhaswit-nessedanincreasinginterestinunderstandingfac-torsthatpromoteemployeecreativity—thegenera-tionofnewandusefulideasconcerningproducts,services,processes,andproceduresinorganiza-tions(Amabile,1988;Amabile,Conti,Coon,Lazenby,&Herron,1996;Oldham&Cummings,1996;Scott&Bruce,1994;Woodman,Sawyer,&Griffin,1993;Zhou,1998).Giventhedominantroleofleadershipintheworkplace(Redmond,Mum-ford,&Teach,1993),onekeysituationalfactorthatmayhavesubstantialimpactoncreativityislead-ership(Scott&Bruce,1994;Tierney,Farmer,&Graen,1999).Transformationalleadership,inpar-ticular,hasbeenstudiedintensivelybyleadershipresearchersinrecentyears(Avolio,Bass,&Jung,1999;Judge&Bono,2000),andhasbeenlinkedtocreativityinadhocgroups(Sosik,Kahai,&Avolio,1998,1999).Transformationalleadershiphasbeendefinedasinfluencingfollowersby“broadeningandelevatingfollowers’goalsandprovidingthem
Wecontributedequallytothisproject,andthustheorderofauthorshipisalphabetical.Weextendourap-preciationtoBertCannella,AdrienneColella,AngeloDeNisi,andDickWoodmanforhelpfulcommentsonearlierversionsofthisarticle,andtoRamonaPaetzoldandVictorWillsonforhelpwithdataanalysis.WealsothankHyunjaeShinforassistancewithdatacollection.TheDepartmentofManagementandtheCenterforInter-nationalBusinessStudiesatTexasA&MUniversitypro-videdfinancialsupportforthisresearch.TheMultifactorLeadershipQuestionnaire(MLQ)Form5X-Short(copy-right2000byBernardBassandBruceAvolio)isusedwithpermissionofMindGarden,Inc.,1690WoodsideRoadSuite202,RedwoodCity,CA94061.Allrightsreserved.
703
withconfidencetoperformbeyondtheexpecta-tionsspecifiedintheimplicitorexplicitexchangeagreement”(Dvir,Eden,Avolio,&Shamir,2002:735).However,despitethistypeofleadership’stheoreticalsignificanceandpotentiallysubstantialenhancementofcreativity,todate,fewstudieshavefocusedonanunderstandingofhowtransfor-mationalleadershipisrelatedtoindividualem-ployees’creativity.Thisissurprising,giventhatcreativityresearchershaveoftenlamentedthelackofunderstandingaboutwhichmanagementprac-ticesorbehaviorsareespeciallyeffectiveinen-hancinginsteadofrestrictingindividualcreativity(Zhou&Oldham,2001).Thegoalofthepresentstudywastoaddressthisimportantyetrelativelyunstudiedissue.
Inadditiontoexaminingtheextenttowhichtransformationalleadershipcontributestocreativ-ity,wealsousedanintrinsicmotivationtheorytoprobethepsychologicalmechanismbywhichthiscontributionoccurs.Althoughcreativityresearchhasreliedonintrinsicmotivationtheory(Amabile,1996;Oldham&Cummings,1996),fewstudieshavetestedthemediatingroleofintrinsicmotiva-tion.Inthepresentstudy,wenotonlytheorizedabouttheroleofintrinsicmotivationbutalsodi-rectlytestedwhetherintrinsicmotivationmediatedtherelationbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativity.
Moreover,creativityresearchershaveadoptedaninteractionalapproachinarguingthatsituationalandpersonalfactorsjointlycontributetoemploy-ees’creativity(George&Zhou,2001;Oldham&Cummings,1996;Woodmanetal.,1993).Thisap-proachsuggeststhattofullyunderstandtherela-tionshipbetweentransformationalleadershipand
704AcademyofManagementJournalDecember
followercreativity,onealsoneedstolookatfol-lowers’characteristics.Likewise,contributorstotheleadershipliteraturehavemaintainedthatitiscriticaltotakefollowers’individualdifferencesintoconsiderationinordertounderstandhowleadershipfunctions(Dansereauetal.,1995).
Amongfollowers’characteristicsandindividualdifferences,valuesplayanimportantroleinpre-dictinghowfollowersrespondtoleaders’influ-ences(Ehrhart&Klein,2001;Shamir,1991).Forexample,iffollowers’valuessuggestthatitisim-portanttoacceptandfollowleaders’influence,thefollowerswillbemorereceptivetotheirleaders’influence,includingtheirtransformationalleader-ship.Ontheotherhand,iffollowersvaluefreedomandindependence,theywillbelessreceptivetotheirleaders’influence.Inaddition,individualizedleadershiptheory(Dansereauetal.,1995)impliesthattheinfluencesofleadershipvaryforsubordi-nateswhodifferonhowtheyvaluetherelation-shipsbetweentheirleadersandthemselves.Thus,itisimportanttoinvestigatetheroleoffollowers’valuesintherelationshipbetweentransforma-tionalleadershipandfollowercreativity.
Insum,wesoughttocontributetotheliteraturebyexplaininghowtransformationalleadershipwasrelatedtocreativity.First,weinvestigatedtherela-tionshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativity.Second,wetestedwhetherintrinsicmo-tivationmediatedthisrelationship.Third,wetestedwhetherfollowers’valuesmoderatedthisrelationship.
TRANSFORMATIONALLEADERSHIP,INTRINSICMOTIVATION,ANDCREATIVITYBecauseintrinsicmotivationisoneofthekeyingredientsofcreativity(Amabile,1988),anditisoftenconsideredthemechanismbywhichsitua-tionalfactorssuchasleadershipcontributetocre-ativity(Amabile,1988;Oldham&Cummings,1996),muchofthecontemporaryresearchoncre-ativityhasbeenguidedbyintrinsicmotivationthe-ory(Amabile,1996;Oldham&Cummings,1996;Shalley,1995;Zhou,1998).Accordingtothisthe-ory,employees’motivationtoperformataskcanbeintrinsicorextrinsic(Deci&Ryan,1985).Intrinsicmotivationreferstothemotivationalstateinwhichemployeesareattractedtoandenergizedbyataskitself,insteadofmerelybytheexternaloutcomesthatdoingthetaskmightyield(Deci&Ryan,1985).Intrinsicallymotivatedemployeestendtobecog-nitivelymoreflexibleandpersevering(McGraw&Fiala,1982;McGraw&McCullers,1979).There-fore,theyaremorelikelytofindmanyalternativemeansofsolvingproblems,tousenontraditionalapproaches,andtobepersistent.Allofthesebe-haviorssuggestthatanintrinsicallymotivatedin-dividualismorelikelytoexhibitahighlevelofcreativity.Moreover,accordingtointrinsicmotiva-tiontheory,situationalfactors,suchastransforma-tionalleadership,exertinfluenceoncreativityviainfluencingintrinsicmotivation(Amabile,1988;Oldham&Cummings,1996).
Bass(1985)theorizedthattransformationallead-ershipcomprisesfourdimensions:intellectualstimulation,individualizedconsideration,cha-risma,andinspirationalmotivation.Intellectualstimulationinvolvesstimulatingfollowersbyques-tioningassumptions,challengingthestatusquo,andencouragingproblemreformulation,imagina-tion,intellectualcuriosity,andnovelapproaches.Individualizedconsiderationfocusesonfollowers’development.Itinvolvespayingattentiontofol-lowers’needs,showingempathy,andshowingap-preciationandsupportofindividualfollowers’in-itiativesandviewpoints.Charisma,oridealizedinfluence,hastodowithservingasfollowers’char-ismaticrolemodel.Itcanbeviewedintermsofbothbehaviorsandattributions(Bass&Avolio,1995).Andinspirationalmotivationreferstoener-gizingfollowersbyarticulatingacompellingvision(Avolioetal.,1999;Sosik,Avolio,&Kahai,1998).Theabovedefinitionssuggestthattransforma-tionalleadershipispositivelyrelatedtofollowercreativitybecauseitcanboostintrinsicmotivation.Morespecifically,whenaleaderprovidesintellec-tualstimulation,followersareencouragedtochal-lengethestatusquoandoldwaysofdoingthings.Theyareencouragedtoreformulateissuesandproblems,topursueandsatisfytheirintellectualcuriosity,tousetheirimaginations,andtobeplay-fulwithideasandsolutions(e.g.,Avolioetal.,1999).Undertheseconditions,thefollowersarelikelytobeinterestedinandtofocusontheirtasksinsteadofonexternalworriesandconcerns.Ac-cordingtotheintrinsicmotivationtheoryofcre-ativity,thisenhancedinterestinataskitselfshouldenablefollowerstosearchfornewandbetterwaysofdoingthings,whichislikelytoleadtohighlevelsofcreativity(e.g.,Amabile,1996).
Likewise,individualizedconsiderationislikelytobepositivelyrelatedtocreativity.Whenleaderspracticeindividualizedconsideration,theypayat-tentiontotheirfollowers’needsandwants,showsupportandempathy,andencouragepersonalde-velopmentandexpression.Givenleaders’under-standing,support,andencouragement,followersarelikelytobeinterestedinandfocusontheirtasksinsteadofonextraneousworriesandfears,andtheyarelikelytotakerisksandtofreelyex-ploreandexperimentwithideasandapproaches
2003ShinandZhou705
(Amabile,1996;Deci&Ryan,1985;Shamir,House,&Arthur,1993).Moreimportant,whenleadersshowindividualizedconsideration,theyfocusondevelopingfollowers’capabilities,provideinfor-mationandresources,andgivefollowersdiscretiontoact(Avolioetal.,1999;Bass,1985).Conse-quently,followersmaybeencouragedtotrynewanddifferentapproachestotheirwork,tooperateindependently,anddeveloptheircapacitytothinkontheirown.Takentogether,thefeelingsofen-hancedcapabilitiesorcompetencies,andtheper-ceptionsofpersonaldiscretionandresponsibility,arelikelytoboostfollowers’intrinsicmotivation(Deci&Ryan,1985;Zhou&Oldham,2001),which,inturn,resultsinheightenedcreativity(Amabile,1996).
Finally,whenleadersserveasrolemodelsandarticulateacompellingvisiontoenergizefollowerstoperformbeyondexpectations,thefollowersshouldbeexcitedandenergizedtoworkhardto-wardachievinghighergoalsandobjectives(Shamiretal.,1993).Inthisprocess,theyarelikelytofocusonthetaskathandinsteadofonissuesexternaltothetask.Accordingtotheintrinsicmotivationper-spective,thisincreasedexcitement,energy,andconcentrationarelikelytobeassociatedwithhighlevelsofcreativity(Amabile,1996).
Becauseempiricalstudieshaveshownover-whelminglythattheabovedimensionsarehighlycorrelatedandreflectthehigher-orderconstructoftransformationalleadership(e.g.,Avolioetal.,1999;Bass,1985),andbecausethereislittletheo-reticalrationaletosupportdifferentialrelation-shipsfortheseparatedimensions,weexaminedtherelationshipbetweencreativityandtransforma-tionalleadershipasawhole.Thus,
Hypothesis1.Leaders’transformationalleader-shipispositivelyrelatedtofollowers’creativity.Thusfar,wehavearguedthattransformationalleadershipcontributestointrinsicmotivation,which,inturn,contributestocreativity.Inthepresentstudy,wedirectlytestedthistheorizedme-diatingroleofintrinsicmotivation.
Hypothesis2.Intrinsicmotivationmediatestherelationshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativity.
THEMODERATINGROLEOF
INDIVIDUALVALUES
Becauseofthefundamentalrolethatvaluesplayinshapingindividuals’goalsandbehaviors,indi-vidualdifferencesinvaluesmaysubstantiallyin-fluencethewayindividualsrespondtotransforma-tionalleadership.AccordingtoSchwartz,“Valuesaredefinedasdesirabletrans-situationalgoalsthatserveasguidingprinciplesinthelifeofaperson.Theycanmotivateaction—givingitdirectionandemotionalintensity,theyfunctionasstandardsforjudgingandjustifyingaction”(1994a:21).
AmongthevaluesconceptualizedbySchwartz,conservation—avaluefavoringproprietyandhar-monyininterpersonalandperson-to-grouprela-tions(Schwartz,1992,1994a)—appearedtobepar-ticularlyrelevanttoleadershipandcreativity.Schwartz(1992)theorizedthatconservationin-cludedtradition,conformity,andsecurity.Tradi-tionreferstocommitmentto,respectfor,andac-ceptanceofthecustomsandnormsthatatraditionalcultureprescribes.Conformityreferstotherestraintofactions,inclinations,andimpulseslikelytoupsetorharmothersandviolatesocialexpectationsornorms.Finally,securityreferstothesafety,harmony,andstabilityofsociety,rela-tionships,andself.Thus,individualswithhighlevelsofthevalueofconservationtendtoavoidanydisturbanceofestablishedortraditionalsocialorderandhierarchy,toactaccordingtotheirsocialrolesandconformtoexpectations,andtofavorproprietyandharmonyininterpersonalrelation-ships(Schwartz,1992,1994a).
Theabovedefinitionandanalysissuggestthattherelationshipbetweenleadershipandfollowers’creativityvariesasafunctionoffollowers’valueofconservation:thosewithhigherlevelsofconserva-tiongenerallyrespondmorefavorablytoleaders’influencebecausetheyaremorelikelytorespectsubordinate-superiorhierarchicalrelationshipsandmorelikelytoactaccordingtotheirsubordi-naterole.Althoughweareawareofnoresearchthathasexaminedthedegreetowhichthevalueofconservationmoderatesinfluencesoftransforma-tionalleadership,priortheoryandresearchhaveprovidedindirectandsuggestivesupportforourarguments.Forexample,accordingtoindividual-izedleadershiptheory(Dansereauetal.,1995),dif-ferentfollowersrespondtothesameleadershipstyledifferently,dependingonhowtheyregardtheirleader.Researchalongthislineofinquiryhasdemonstratedthatasupervisordoesnotbecomealeaderforsubordinateswithoutprovidingsupportforthesubordinates’feelingsofself-worth.Thisimpliesthatfollowersmaydifferintheirinterpre-tationsofandreactionstoidenticalleadershipbehaviors.
Theabovediscussionsuggeststhatfollowershighonconservationrespondmorestronglyandpositivelytotheinfluenceoftransformationallead-ershipbyexperiencinghigherlevelsofintrinsicmotivationandsubsequentlyexhibitinggreatercre-
706AcademyofManagementJournalDecember
ativity.Morespecifically,whentheirleaderspro-videintellectualstimulation,theyaremorelikelytobesensitivetothestimulation,tobeinterestedinandfocusontheirtasks,totryhardtochangethestatusquo,usetheirimagination,andcomeupwithnewandbetterwaysofdoingthings.Like-wise,whentheirleadersshowindividualizedcon-sideration,theyaremorelikelytorespondtotheleaders’supportanddevelopmentbybeingexcitedabouttheirtasksandexpressingindividualview-pointsandnewideas,whichtendtoresultinhighlevelsofcreativity.Finally,withtheirleaders’cha-rismaandinspirationalmotivation,followershighonconservationaremorelikelytoshowincreasedconcentrationandenergyindoingtheirtasks,whichleadstogreatercreativity.
Hypothesis3.Conservationmoderatestherela-tionshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativityinsuchawaythatforfollowershigheronconservation,transformationalleader-shiphasastronger,positiverelationshipwithcreativitythanforfollowersloweronconservation.
Moreover,astheabovediscussionindicates,themechanismbywhichfollowerswithhigherlevelsofconservationarelikelytoshowgreatercreativityundertransformationalleadershipisthattheyex-periencehigherlevelsofintrinsicmotivation.Ontheotherhand,theintrinsicmotivationexperi-encedandcreativityexhibitedbyfollowerswithrelativelylowlevelsofconservation,whotendtobelessreceptivetotheirleaders’influence,maynotberelatedasmuchtotransformationalleader-ship.Thus,
Hypothesis4.Intrinsicmotivationmediatesthemoderatedrelationshipbetweentrans-formationalleadership,conservation,andcreativity.
METHODS
ResearchSetting,Sample,andProceduresR&Demployeesandtheirsupervisorsfrom6es-tablishedcompaniesand40newventurecompa-niesoperatingintheindustriesofcablemanufac-turing,compressors,constructiondesign,defensivetechnology,electronics,informationtechnology,networking,telecommunication,andsoftwareinKoreaparticipatedinthepresentstudy.Comparedwiththemoreestablishedcompanies,thenewven-turesweresmaller(theyhad4to13employees)andhadbeenfoundedlessthantwoyearspriortodatacollection.AlltheemployeesinoursampleheldR&Djobs.Weconductedsemistructuredinter-
viewswiththesixR&Dgeneralmanagersfromtheestablishedcompaniesandwiththreefoundersofthenewventurestovalidateourscaleitems.Later,oneofthecoauthorsvisitedeachcompanyanddistributedthesurveyduringregularworkhours.Theparticipantswereinstructedtoputtheircom-pletedquestionnairesintoprovidedreturnenve-lopesandtosealthem.Onthenextvisit,there-searchercollectedthesealedenvelopes.
Wecollecteddatafromtwosources:theemploy-eesandtheirsupervisors.First,theemployeescompletedscalesontheirsupervisors’leadershipattributesandbehaviorsandontheirownvalues(thatis,conservation),intrinsicmotivation,andde-mographicinformation.Second,onaseparatequestionnaire,theleaders(supervisors)evaluatedtheirfollowers’(theemployees’)creativity.Ontheaverage,fourfollowers(therangewasonethroughten)ratedeachleader.Wedistributedquestion-nairesto333employeesandtheir77supervisorsandreceived290pairsofcompletedandusablequestionnairesoutofthe333possiblepairs,givingusanoverallresponserateof87percent.Ofthese,148pairswerefromtheestablishedfirms,and142werefromthenewventurefirms.Theaverageageoftherespondingfollowerswas31years.Theav-eragecompanytenureforemployeesworkinginthenewventureswasoneyear,andforthoseintheestablishedcompanies,itwasfiveyears.Theaver-agejobtenuresforemployeesworkinginthenewventuresandtheestablishedcompaniesweretwoandthreeyears,respectively.Therewere31women(11%)and259men(89%)inthesample.Employees’highesteducationlevelwasdistributedasfollows:8employees(3%)hadPh.D.’s,84(29%)hadmaster’sdegrees,173(60%)hadbachelor’sdegrees,and25(8%)employeesdidnotreporttheireducationlevel.AllparticipantswereKorean.Measures
WecreatedKoreanversionsofallmeasuresbyfollowingBrislin’s(1980)translation-back-transla-tionprocedure.
Creativity.WeusedZhouandGeorge’s(2001)13-itemscaletomeasurecreativity.Onafive-pointscalerangingfrom1,“notatallcharacteristic,”to5,“verycharacteristic,”asupervisorratedhowchar-acteristiceachof13behaviorswasoftheemployeeheorshewasrating.Sampleitemsare“Comesupwithnewandpracticalideastoimproveperfor-mance”and“Comesupwithcreativesolutionstoproblems.”Weaveragedthe13itemstocreateameasureofcreativity(␣ϭ.95).Althoughsomesupervisorsratedmorethanoneemployee,there-sultsoftwoWithinandBetweenAnalysis(WABA;
2003ShinandZhou707
Dansereau,Alutto,&Yammarino,1984)testswerenonsignificant(Eϭ.98;1/Fϭ.36),suggestingthatthecreativityratingscoresreceivedbyindividualemployeeswereindependentofrateridentity.Transformationalleadership.WeusedtheMul-tifactorLeadershipQuestionnaire(MLQ)Form5X-Short(Bass&Avolio,1995),whichhasfouritemsforeachsubdimensionoftransformationalleader-ship:idealizedinfluence(attributed),idealizedin-fluence(behavior),inspirationalmotivation,intel-lectualstimulation,andindividualconsideration.Onafive-pointscalerangingfrom0,“notatall,”to4,“frequently,ifnotalways,”employeesindicatedhowfrequentlyeachstatementfittedtheirimmedi-atesupervisors.Thevaluesforinterraterreliability(rwg(j))forfollowers’ratingthesameleaderwere
quitehigh(x
¯ϭ.94;medianϭ.97).Thus,differentfollowers,whowererateddifferentlyoncreativity,evaluatedtheirleaderswithahighlevelofagree-ment.Consistentwithpriorresearch,ourresultsshowedthatthesedimensionswerehighlyinter-correlated(r’sϭ.66–.73).Weconductedaconfir-matoryfactoranalysisforahigher-ordermodel(Bollen,1989;Marsh&Hocevar,1985)inwhichthefiveleadershipfactorscontributedtoanoveralltransformationalleadershipindex.Resultsshowedthatthehigher-orderfactormodelfittedthedatasatisfactorily(2ϭ188,dfϭ131,GFIϭ.94,AGFIϭ.90,RMSRϭ.04,NFIϭ.93).Allfivefactorssignificantlyloadedonthetransformationalleadershipindex(␥’sϭ.92–.99,t’sϭ6.36–12.50).Becausethesinglehigher-orderconstructade-quatelycapturedthevarianceintheleadershipdi-mensions,andbecausepriorresearchshowedthatthedimensionsfailedtoexhibitdiscriminantva-lidityinpredictingoutcomes(e.g.,Bycio,Hackett,&Allen,1995),weaveragedthe20itemstocreateasingleindextappingtransformationalleadership(␣ϭ.93)andusedthisindexinourstatisticalanalyses.
Conservation.Wemeasuredconservationbyav-eraging16items(␣ϭ.88)adaptedfromSchwartz(1992).Sampleitemsare“respectfortradition(preservationoftime-honoredcustoms)”and“obe-dient(dutiful,meetingobligations).”Onaseven-pointscalerangingfrom0,“notimportant,”to6,“ofsupremeimportance,”employeesindicatedhowimportanteachitemwasasaguidingprinci-pleintheirlives.
Intrinsicmotivation.WeaveragedfiveitemsadaptedfromTierneyetal.(1999)tocreatethismeasure(␣ϭ.84).Onaseven-pointscalerangingfrom0,“correspondsnotatall”to“correspondsexactly,”employeesindicatedtheextenttowhicheachofthefiveitemsappliedtothemintermsofenjoyingtheircurrentcreativity-relatedtasks.Sam-
pleitemswere“Iamcurrentlyengagedinmytasks(1)becauseIenjoyfindingsolutionstocomplexproblemsand(2)becauseIenjoycomingupwithnewideasforproducts.”
Companysupportforcreativity.Wemeasuredthisvariablebyaveraging11items(␣ϭ.90)adaptedfromAmabileetal.(1996).Onaseven-pointscalerangingfrom1,“correspondsnotatall”to7“correspondsexactly,”employeesindicatedtheextenttowhichtheircompaniessupportedcre-ativity.Sampleitemsare“Mycompany(1)encour-agesfairandconstructivejudgmentofideasand(2)encouragesemployeestotakeriskstogeneratenewideas.”
Controlvariables.Weincludedseveralcontrolvariablessuggestedbypriorresearch.First,wecre-atedadummyvariableforcompanytype(0,“es-tablishedcompany,”1,“newventure”)tocontrolfordifferencesinhowleadershipmightfunction.Forexample,employeesinlarge,establishedcom-paniesmightrelyonwell-establishedrulesandpoliciesinadditiontoleadershiptoguidetheirworkbehaviors,whereasemployeesinnewven-turesmightdependmainlyontheirleaders.Sec-ond,itwasnecessarytocontrolforcompanysup-portforcreativity(describedabove)becauseourparticipantsweresampledfromdifferentcompa-nies.Third,educationallevel(doctoral,master’s,andbachelor’sdegrees)wascontrolledforbecauseitmightbeassociatedwithcreativitythroughtaskdomainexpertise(Amabile,1988;Mumford&Gustafson,1988).Fourth,wecreatedthreedummyvariablestocontrolfortypeofR&Dtasktopreventconfoundingeffectsoftaskrequirementsontherelationships.OurdummyvariableswerebasedonKeller’s(1992)categorization:basic,ornonmis-sion,research;applied,ormission-oriented,re-search;newproductorprocessdevelopment;andtechnicalserviceorexistingproductdevelopment.Finally,becausethedurationofaleader-followerrelationshipmightaffectleaders’ratingsoftheirfollowers,thelengthoftheleader-followerrela-tionshipwasmeasuredinyearsandusedasacon-trolvariable(Duarte,Goodson,&Klich,1994).
RESULTS
Table1displaysmeans,standarddeviations,andcorrelationsamongallvariables.Creativityissig-nificantlyandpositivelycorrelatedwithtransfor-mationalleadershipandintrinsicmotivation,anditisnotcorrelatedwithconservation.Transforma-tionalleadershipissignificantlyandpositivelycor-relatedwithconservationandintrinsicmotivation.Totestthehypotheses,weconductedhierarchi-calregressionanalyses.Anyvariableusedasa
708AcademyofManagementJournalDecember
TABLE1
Means,StandardDeviations,andIntercorrelationsamongAllVariablesan
1.Creativity2.Transfor-mationalleadership3.Conservation4.Intrinsicmotivation5.Ph.D.b6.Master’sdegreeb7.Lengthof
leader-followerrelationship8.Companytype9.Companysupport
10.Basicresearch11.Applied
research
12.Newproduct
abMeans.d.3.262.46
0.780.77
1(.95).22**
23456789101112
290290
(.93)
290288290290280
4.033.620.030.291.77
0.81Ϫ.011.07.19**0.160.45
.23**.35**(.88).30**.02.07.04
(.84).04.00Ϫ.09
.06Ϫ.08.18**.09
Ϫ.14*
Ϫ.11.00
Ϫ.06
2.00Ϫ.03
290
288282282282
0.493.330.030.210.55
0.50Ϫ.14*1.10.010.18Ϫ.070.41Ϫ.010.50Ϫ.06
.17**.43**Ϫ.02.09Ϫ.08
.00.12*Ϫ.07.09Ϫ.09
.09Ϫ.12*Ϫ.34**Ϫ.31**.30**Ϫ.06Ϫ.08Ϫ.30**Ϫ.01Ϫ.03Ϫ.08.18**.12*.01Ϫ.08
Ϫ.02
Ϫ.06
Ϫ.07
Ϫ.06.08
.57**.08.04Ϫ.05
(.90).00.11Ϫ.02
.10
Ϫ.21**Ϫ.58**
Internalconsistencyreliabilitiesareonthediagonal,inparentheses.Dummyvariables.*pϽ.05**pϽ.01
componentofaninteractiontermwascentered(Aiken&West,1991).Table2summarizesthere-gressionresultsfortestingHypothesis1,whichstatesthattransformationalleadershipispositivelyrelatedtofollowercreativity,andHypothesis3,statingthatconservationmoderatestherelation-shipbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativity.Specifically,atsteps1through4,weenteredthecontrolvariables,transformationalleadership,conservation,andtheinteractionoftransformationalleadershipandconservation,re-spectively.InsupportofHypotheses1and3,theresultsshowedthatthechangeinthemultiplesquaredcorrelationcoefficient(⌬R2)associatedwithtransformationalleadershipanditsinterac-tionwithconservationwerebothstatisticallysig-
TABLE2
ResultsofRegressionAnalysisofCreativityonTransformational
Leadership,Conservation,andTheirInteractionaIndependentVariables
Step1:ControlsCompanytypePh.D.
Master’sdegree
Lengthofleader-followerrelationshipCompanysupportBasicresearchAppliedresearch
NewproductdevelopmentStep2:TransformationalleadershipStep3:Conservation
Step4:Transformationalleadershipϫconservation
aR2.06*
⌬R2.06*
⌬F2.21*
Ϫ.13.06.10Ϫ.02Ϫ.02Ϫ.07Ϫ.09Ϫ.12
.11**.11**.13**
.05**.00.02*
14.01**1.374.21*
.25**Ϫ.06.12*
Betaweightsarereportedforthefinalstep(nϭ279).*pϽ.05**pϽ.01
2003ShinandZhou709
FIGURE1
TransformationalLeadership–ConservationInteractionforCreativity
nificant.Figure1demonstratesthatthepatternofthetwo-wayinteractionwasashypothesized(Aiken&West,1991).
Table3showstheresultsfortestsofHypotheses2and4,bothofwhichpositamediatingroleofintrinsicmotivation.Totestmediation,wefol-lowedthewidelyusedproceduresuggestedbyBaronandKenny(1986).Inmodel1,weregressedintrinsicmotivationonthecontrolvariables,trans-formationalleadership,conservation,andthetwo-wayinteractionbetweentransformationalleader-shipandconservation.Inmodel2,weregressedcreativityonthesamesetofcontrolandindepen-dentvariablesaswereenteredinmodel1.Inmodel
TABLE3
ResultsofHierarchicalRegressionAnalysisforMediationaIndependentVariables
Controls
CompanytypePh.D.
Master’sdegree
Lengthofleader-followerrelationshipCompanysupportBasicresearchAppliedresearch
NewproductdevelopmentTransformationalleadershipandconservationTransformationalleadershipConservation
TransformationalleadershipϫconservationMediator
IntrinsicmotivationFR2AdjustedR2⌬R2df
aModel1:IntrinsicMotivationModel2:CreativityModel3:Creativity
Ϫ.08.03Ϫ.04Ϫ.03.18*.02.11.03.22**.22**.12*
Ϫ.13.06.10Ϫ.02Ϫ.02Ϫ.07Ϫ.09Ϫ.12.25**Ϫ.06.12*
Ϫ.11.06.10Ϫ.02Ϫ.06Ϫ.08Ϫ.11Ϫ.13.21**Ϫ.10.10.18**
7.02**.23.2011,267
3.50**.13.1011,2673.90**.15.11.02**12,266
Betaweightsarereportedforthefinalstepineachmodel(nϭ279).*pϽ.05**pϽ.01
710AcademyofManagementJournalDecember
3,weregressedcreativityonthecontrols,transfor-mationalleadership,conservation,thetwo-wayinteraction,andintrinsicmotivation.TheresultssupportedHypotheses2and4asfollows:(1)Trans-formationalleadershipandtheinteractionwerestatisticallysignificantincontributingtointrinsicmotivation.(2)Transformationalleadershipandtheinteractionweresignificantincontributingtocreativity.(3)Theregressioncoefficientforintrin-sicmotivationwassignificantincontributingtocreativitywhenwecontrolledforthecontrolvari-ables,transformationalleadership,conservation,andtheinteraction.Thedecreased,butstillstatis-ticallysignificant,coefficientfortransformationalleadershipinmodel3indicatedthatintrinsicmo-tivationpartiallymediatedthecontributionoftransformationalleadershiptofollowers’creativity.Inaddition,thenonsignificantcoefficientfortheinteractioninmodel3indicatedthatintrinsicmo-tivationcompletelymediatedtherelationshipbe-tweenthetransformationalleadership–conserva-tioninteractionandcreativity.
DISCUSSION
Althoughtransformationalleadershiphasbeenlinkedtogroupcreativity(Sosiketal.,1998,1999),thiswasthefirststudytoinvestigatetherelation-shipbetweentransformationalleadershipandin-dividualcreativityintheworkplace.Notably,Tier-neyandhercolleagues(1999)examinedtheeffectsofleader-memberexchange(LMX)oncreativity.AlthoughGerstnerandDay(1997)arguedthatleader-followerrelationshipsinwhichLMXishigh(high-LMXrelationships)wereconceptuallyindis-tinctfromrelationshipswithtransformationallead-ers,mostoftheleadershipliteraturehastreatedthemasdifferent,andwefollowedthislatterstreamofresearch(e.g.,Graen&Uhl-Bien,1995).Whileitwasbeyondthescopeofthisstudytosettlethescholarlydebatewithregardtowhethertrans-formationalleadershipandLMXaredistinct,itwasimportanttorecognizethatboththeTierneyetal.(1999)studyandthepresentstudymovedcreativ-ityresearchforwardbyidentifyingtheory-based,creativity-conduciveleadershipbehaviors,whichhasrarelybeendoneintheliterature.
Thesecondandmoreimportantcontributionofourstudyisthatitidentifiedapsychologicalpro-cessbywhichtransformationalleadershipisre-latedtocreativity.Amabile(1996)emphasizedtheroleofintrinsicmotivationasamechanismbywhichcontextualfactorsinfluencecreativity.How-ever,fewstudieshavetestedthispossibilityinactualworksettings.Tierneyandhercolleagues(1999)examinedintrinsicmotivationasemploy-ees’self-orientation,atraitlikecharacteristic.Theirstudycontributedtoourknowledgebaseconcern-ingindividualtraitsandcreativity,andwefol-lowedmuchofthecontemporarycreativityre-search(e.g.,Amabile,1988,1996;Oldham&Cummings,1996;Shalley,1995;Zhou,1998)intheorizingthatfollowerintrinsicmotivationwasthemechanismbywhichtransformationalleader-shipcontributestofollowers’creativity.Thus,inthisstudywecontributedtothecreativityliteraturebyformulatingandempiricallytestinganintrinsicmotivationperspectiveexplainingtherelationshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandemployeecreativity.Futureresearchmightidentifyotherpsychologicalprocesses(forinstance,self-efficacy;seeRedmondetal.[1993])thatmediaterelationsbetweencontextualfactorsandcreativity.
Third,inrevealingthemoderatingroleofconser-vationasafollowervalue,ourstudycontributedtotheliteraturebyusinganinteractionalapproach(Woodmanetal.,1993)toprovideamorepreciseunderstandingoftherelationshipbetweentransfor-mationalleadershipandcreativity.Wechosecon-servationfortworeasons:(1)Ourgoalwastoiden-tifyanindividual-levelvaluerootedinuniquepersonalbeliefsandexperiencesaswellassharedbeliefs,insteadofacultural,nation-levelvalue(suchascollectivismor“powerdistance,”orre-spectforauthority[Hofstede,1980])thatpeoplesharedinasociety(cf.Schwartz,1994b).(2)Con-servation,asafine-tunedmeasureofindividualvalues(Schwartz,1992),wasconceptuallyrelevanttotherelationshipbetweentransformationallead-ershipandfollowercreativity.Itisconsistentwiththe“individualizedleadership”andthe“romanceofleadership”perspectives(Meindl,1998;Danse-reauetal.,1995)thatwefoundthatthenatureofthetransformationalleadership–followercreativityrelationshipwasdifferentforemployeeswithdif-ferentlevelsofconservation.Interestingly,thispat-ternofresultswasalsoconsistentwiththeneutral-izer-enhancertypologyputforthintheleadershipliterature(Howell,Dorfman,&Kerr,1986;Kerr&Jermier,1978).Morespecifically,asisshowninFigure1,ahighlevelofconservationenhancedtherelationshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativity,whereasalowlevelofconservationreducedthisrelationship.Becauseourdatashowedthatconservationhadnodirectrelationshipwithcreativity,itcouldbeviewedasanenhancer(whenitwashigh)oraneutralizer(whenitwaslow)insteadofaleadershipsubstitute(Howelletal.,1986).AccordingtoHowellandcoauthors(1986),anecessaryconditionforamoderatorvariabletobeclassifiedasaleadershipsubstituteisthatthevari-ableshouldhaveadirectandpositiveeffectonthe
2003ShinandZhou711
criterion.Futureresearchisneededtoidentifyad-ditionalmoderatorsasenhancers,neutralizers,orsubstitutesforleadershipinthecontextofpromot-ingcreativity.
Afewmethodologicalstrengthsincreasedconfi-denceinourresults.Tobegin,wereducedthepossibilityofcommonmethodbiasbycollectingdatafromtwosources:followersandtheirsupervi-sors.Inaddition,thesamplewasrelativelylarge(nϭ290),therebyprovidingrelativelystablere-sults.Moreover,giventhefavorableresponserate(87%),self-selectionbiaswasnotamajorconcern.Furthermore,oursampleincludedcompaniesofdifferentsizes,indifferentindustries,andinacul-turalcontext(Korea)characterizedbycollectivismandhighpowerdistanceatthenationalorculturallevel(Cha,1994).Weknowofnootherstudythathasexaminedtransformationalleadershipandem-ployeecreativityinKorea.Thus,ourstudycontrib-utedtotheliteraturebyshowingtheexternalva-lidityofcreativityandtransformationalleadershiptheoriesdevelopedinWesterncountries.Limitations
First,althoughtheuseofaKoreansamplewasanadvantage,asdiscussedabove,itwasalsoapoten-tialdisadvantage.Inparticular,themoderatingroleofconservationfoundinthepresentstudymaynotbegeneralizabletoWesternsocieties.ThemeaningandfunctionofconservationmaybequitedifferentinKoreathaninWesternsocieties.InKorea,be-causeemployeesfocusonactingaccordingtotheirsocialrolesandconformingtoexpectations,andonmaintaininggoodrelationshipswiththeirsuperi-ors,ratherthanfocusingonindependentselves,(e.g.,Cha,1994),employeeshighonconservationweremorewillingtoaccepttheirleaders’influ-ences.Ontheotherhand,inWesternsocieties,whereemployeesprefermaintainingindependentselvesandfocusoncongruencebetweentheirval-uesandtheirleaders’influence,theroleofconser-vationmightbeoppositetowhatwasevidentinthepresentstudy:followershighonconservationmightactuallyexhibitlowcreativitywhentheirleadersprovidetransformationalleadership.Com-parativeresearchisneededtoexaminetheseinter-estingpossibilities.Second,theeffectsizesweremodest.Third,ourcross-sectionaldesignpre-cludedtheinterpretationthattherewasacausalrelationshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandcreativity.Forexample,followerswithdiffer-entvaluesmightevaluatetheirleaderdifferently,creativeemployeesmightbringoutmoretransfor-mationalleadershipamongtheirsupervisors,andleaderswhoweremoretransformationalmightat-
tractandselectmorecreativefollowers,orbemoresensitiveindetectingcreativityintheirfollowers.Despiteourresults’consistencewiththeoreticalreasoning,thecross-sectionaldesigndidnotallowustocompletelyruleoutalternativeexplanations.Futureresearchmightaddressthisissuebyobtain-ingindependentorobjectiveconfirmationofem-ployees’creativityandbyusinglongitudinalandexperimentaldesignstostrengthencausalinfer-ence.Finally,althoughwedidnothypothesizeastotheincrementalcontributionoftransformationalleadershipovertransactionalleadership—asrepre-sented,forinstance,byuseof“contingentrewards”or“management-by-exception”(Howell&Avolio,1993;Judge&Bono,2000;Podsakoff,MacKenzie,Moorman,&Fetter,1990)—manypriorstudieshavecontrolledfortransactionalleadershipwhileexaminingtransformationalleadership.Thiswasaclearlimitation,andwecallforreplicationofourresultsinresearchinwhichtransactionalleader-shipiscontrolled.PracticalImplications
Giventheneedforcreativityasasolutiontothecomplexchallengesfacedbyorganizations,findingneutralizers/enhancersofthelinkbetweentrans-formationalleadershipandcreativityisimportanttopractitioners.Beingawareofmoderatorshelpsmanagerstoidentifytheorganizationalcontextsinwhichtransformationalleadershipismostlikelytoenhancecreativity,andthoseinwhichsuchen-hancementisunlikelytooccur.Ourresultsalsosuggestthattakingindividualdifferencesintoac-countisimportantintrainingleadersanddesign-ingleader-followerrelationships.Particularly,whileonemightintuitivelythinkthatthereisnotmuchmanagerscandotoboostcreativityinem-ployeeshighonconservation,ourstudyshowedthatmanagersinfactcouldengageintransforma-tionalleadershipbehaviorstoenhancetheseem-ployees’creativity.Becausetransformationallead-ershipofemployeeshighonconservationislikelytomaximizetheemployees’intrinsicmotivationandcreativity,organizationsmayinvestintrans-formationalleadershiptrainingforsupervisorsandinselectionofemployeeshighonconservation.Inaddition,byshowingintrinsicmotivationasamediator,ourresultssuggestthatmanagersneedtoconsiderthemechanismbywhichtransformationalleadershipisrelatedtocreativity.Bydoingso,managersmaybebetterabletodirecttheinfluenceoftransformationalleadershiptoproperpsycholog-icalprocesses,andultimatelytoobtaingreatercre-ativity.Nodoubtthereareothermediatorsnotexaminedinthisstudy.Forexample,creativity-
712AcademyofManagementJournalDecember
relevantskillsarealsokeyingredientsforcreativity(Amabile,1996).Priorresearchhassuggestedthatsupervisorybehaviorsfacilitateemployees’learn-ingandacquiringcreativityskills,which,inturn,resultsingreatercreativity(Zhou,2003).Thus,cre-ativityskilldevelopmentmaybeanothermediatorlinkingtransformationalleadershiptocreativity.Bytrainingsupervisorstoexerttransformationalleadership,organizationsmayhelptheiremploy-eestoacquirecreativityskills.Moreover,thisprac-ticemaybeespeciallyhelpfulforemployeeswithrelativelylittleexperienceincreativeactivitiesorwithrelativelylowlevelsofcreativityskillsandstrategies.
REFERENCES
Aiken,L.S.,&West,S.G.1991.Multipleregression:
Testingandinterpretinginteractions.NewburyPark,CA:Sage.Amabile,T.M.1988.Amodelofcreativityandinnova-tioninorganizations.InB.M.Staw&L.L.Cum-mings(Eds.),Researchinorganizationalbehavior,vol.10:123–167.Greenwich,CT:JAIPress.Amabile,T.M.1996.Creativityincontext:Updateto
thesocialpsychologyofcreativity.Boulder,CO:Westview.Amabile,T.M.,Conti,R.,Coon,H.,Lazenby,J.,&Herron,
M.1996.Assessingtheworkenvironmentforcre-ativity.AcademyofManagementJournal,39:1154–1184.Avolio,B.J.,Bass,B.M.,&Jung,D.I.1999.Re-examining
thecomponentsoftransformationalandtransac-tionalleadershipusingtheMultifactorLeadershipQuestionnaire.JournalofOccupationalandOrgani-zationalPsychology,72:441–462.Baron,R.M.,&Kenny,D.A.1986.Themoderator-medi-atorvariabledistinctioninsocialpsychologicalre-search:Conceptual,strategic,andstatisticalconsid-erations.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,51:1173–1182.Bass,B.M.1985.Leadershipandperformancebeyond
expectation.NewYork:FreePress.Bass,B.M.,&Avolio,B.J.1995.MLQmultifactorlead-ershipquestionnaire(2nded.).RedwoodCity,CA:MindGarden.Bollen,K.A.1989.Structuralequationswithlatent
variables.NewYork:Wiley.Brislin,R.W.1980.Translationandcontentanalysisof
oralandwrittenmaterials.InH.C.Triandis&W.W.Lambert(Eds.),Handbookofcross-culturalpsy-chology,vol.2:349–444.Boston:Allyn&Bacon.Bycio,P.,Hackett,R.D.,&Allen,J.S.1995.Further
assessmentofBass’s(1985)conceptualizationoftransactionalandtransformationalleadership.Jour-nalofAppliedPsychology,80:468–478.
Cha,J.H.1994.Aspectsofindividualismandcollectiv-isminKorea.InU.Kim,H.C.Triandis,etal.(Eds.),Individualismandcollectivism:Theory,method,andapplications:157–174.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Dansereau,F.,Alutto,J.A.,&Yammarino,F.J.1984.
Theorytestinginorganizationalbehavior:Thevariantapproach.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall.Dansereau,F.,Yammarino,F.J.,Markham,S.E.,Alutto,
J.A.,Newman,J.,Dumas,M.,Nachman,S.A.,Naughton,T.J.,KimK.,Al-KelabiS.A.,LeeS.,&Keller,T.1995.Individualizedleadership:Anewmultiple-levelapproach.LeadershipQuarterly,6:413–450.Deci,E.L.,&Ryan,R.M.1985.Intrinsicmotivationand
self-determinationinhumanbehavior.NewYork:PlenumPress.Duarte,N.T.,Goodson,J.R.,&Klich,N.R.1994.Effects
ofdyadicqualityanddurationonperformanceap-praisal.AcademyofManagementJournal,37:499–521.Dvir,T.,Eden,D.Avolio,B.J.,&Shamir,B.2002.Impact
oftransformationalleadershiponfollowerdevelop-mentandperformance:Afieldexperiment.Acad-emyofManagementJournal,45:735–744.Ehrhart,M.G.,&Klein,K.J.2001.Predictingfollowers’
preferencesforcharismaticleadership:Theinflu-enceoffollowervaluesandpersonality.LeadershipQuarterly,12:153–179.George,J.M.,&Zhou,J.2001.Whenopennesstoexpe-rienceandconscientiousnessarerelatedtocreativebehavior:Aninteractionalapproach.JournalofAp-pliedPsychology,86:513–524.Gerstner,C.R.,&Day,D.V.1994.Cross-culturalcom-parisonofleadershipprototypes.LeadershipQuar-terly,5:121–134.Graen,G.B.,&Uhl-Bien,M.1995.Relationship-based
approachtoleadership:Developmentofleader-memberexchange(LMX)theoryofleadershipover25years—Applyingamulti-levelmulti-domainper-spective.LeadershipQuarterly,6:219–247.Hofstede,G.1980.Culture’sconsequences.Beverly
Hills,CA:Sage.Howell,J.M.,&Avolio,B.J.1993.Transformational
leadership,transactionalleadership,locusofcon-trol,andsupportforinnovation:Keypredictorsofconsolidated-business-unitperformance.JournalofAppliedPsychology,78:891–902.Howell,J.M.,Dorfman,P.W.,&Kerr,S.1986.Moderator
variablesinleadershipresearch.AcademyofMan-agementReview,11:88–102.Judge,T.A.,&Bono,J.E.2000.Five-factormodelof
personalityandtransformationalleadership.Jour-nalofAppliedPsychology,85:751–765.
2003ShinandZhou713
Keller,R.T.1992.Transformationalleadershipandthe
performanceofresearchanddevelopmentprojectgroups.JournalofManagement,18:489–501.Kerr,S.,&Jermier,J.M.1978.Substitutesforleadership:
Theirmeaningandmeasurement.OrganizationalBehaviorandHumanDecisionProcesses,22:375–403.Marsh,H.W.,&Hocevar,D.1985.Applicationofconfir-mationfactoranalysistothestudyofself-concept:First-andhigher-orderfactormodelsandtheirin-varianceacrossgroups.PsychologicalBulletin,97:562–582.McGraw,K.O.,&Fiala,J.1982.UnderminingtheZeigar-nikeffect:Anotherhiddencostofreward.JournalofPersonality,50:58–66.McGraw,K.O.,&McCullers,J.C.1979.Evidenceof
detrimentaleffectsofextrinsicincentivesonbreak-ingamentalset.JournalofExperimentalSocialPsychology,15:285–294.Meindl,J.R.1998.Theromanceofleadershipasafol-lower-centrictheory:Asocialconstructionistap-proach.InF.Dansereau&F.J.Yammarino(Eds.),Leadership—Themultiple-levelapproaches:Con-temporaryandalternative:427–458.Stamford,CT:JAIPress.Mumford,M.D.,&Gustafson,S.B.1988.Creativitysyn-drome:Integration,application,andinnovation.PsychologicalBulletin,103:27–43.Oldham,G.R.,&Cummings,A.1996.Employeecreativ-ity:Personalandcontextualfactorsatwork.Acad-emyofManagementJournal,39:607–634.Podsakoff,P.M.,MacKenzie,S.B.,Moorman,R.H.,&
Fetter,R.1990.Transformationalleaderbehaviorsandtheireffectsonfollowers’trustinleader,satis-faction,andorganizationalcitizenshipbehaviors.LeadershipQuarterly,1:107–142.Redmond,M.R.,Mumford,M.D.,&Teach,R.1993.
Puttingcreativitytowork:Effectsofleaderbehavioronsubordinatecreativity.OrganizationalBehaviorandHumanDecisionProcesses,55:120–151.Schwartz,S.H.1992.Universalsinthecontentand
structureofvalues:Theoryandempiricaltestsin20countries.InM.Zanna(Ed.),Advancesinexperi-mentalsocialpsychology,vol.25:1–65.NewYork:AcademicPress.Schwartz,S.H.1994a.Arethereuniversalaspectsinthe
contentandstructureofvalues?JournalofSocialIssues,50:19–45.Schwartz,S.H.1994b.Beyondindividualism/collectiv-ism:Newculturaldimensionsofvalues.InU.Kim,H.C.Triandis,etal.(Eds.),Individualismandcol-lectivism:Theory,method,andapplications:85–119.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Scott,S.G.,&Bruce,R.A.1994.Determinantsofinno-vativebehavior:Apathmodelofindividualinnova-
tionintheworkplace.AcademyofManagementJournal,37:580–607.
Shalley,C.E.1995.Effectsofcoaction,expectedevalu-ation,andgoalsettingoncreativityandproductiv-ity.AcademyofManagementJournal,38:483–503.Shamir,B.1991.Meaning,selfandmotivationinorgan-izations.OrganizationalStudies,12:405–424.Shamir,B.,House,R.J.,&Arthur,M.B.1993.Themo-tivationaleffectsofcharismaticleadership:Aself-conceptbasedtheory.OrganizationalScience,4:577–594.Sosik,J.J.,Avolio,B.J.,&Kahai,S.S.1998.Inspiring
groupcreativity:Comparinganonymousandidenti-fiedelectronicbrainstorming.SmallGroupRe-search,29:3–31.Sosik,J.J.,Kahai,S.S.,&Avolio,B.J.1998.Transforma-tionalleadershipanddimensionsofcreativity:Mo-tivatingideagenerationincomputer-mediatedgroups.CreativityResearchJournal,11:111–121.Sosik,J.J.,Kahai,S.S.,&Avolio,B.J.1999.Leadership
style,anonymity,andcreativityingroupdecisionsupportsystems:Themediatingroleofoptimalflow.JournalofCreativeBehavior,33:227–256.Tierney,P,Farmer,S.M.,&Graen,G.B.1999.Anexam-inationofleadershipandemployeecreativity:Therelevanceoftraitsandrelationships.PersonnelPsy-chology,52:591–620.Woodman,R.W.,Sawyer,J.E.,&Griffin,R.W.1993.
Towardatheoryoforganizationalcreativity.Acad-emyofManagementReview,18:293–321.Zhou,J.1998.Feedbackvalence,feedbackstyle,task
autonomy,andachievementorientation:Interactiveeffectsoncreativeperformance.JournalofAppliedPsychology,83:261–276.Zhou,J.2003.Whenthepresenceofcreativecoworkers
isrelatedtocreativity:Roleofsupervisorclosemon-itoring,developmentalfeedback,andcreativeper-sonality.JournalofAppliedPsychology,88:413–422.Zhou,J.,&George,J.M.2001.Whenjobdissatisfaction
leadstocreativity:Encouragingtheexpressionofvoice.AcademyofManagementJournal,44:682–696.Zhou,J.,&Oldham,G.R.2001.Enhancingcreativeper-formance:Effectsofexpecteddevelopmentalassess-mentstrategiesandcreativepersonality.JournalofCreativeBehavior,35:151–167.
ShungJaeShin(sshin@tricity.wsu.edu)isanassistantprofessorintheDepartmentofManagementandDeci-sionSciencesatWashingtonStateUniversity.HedidhisPh.D.atTexasA&MUniversity.Hisresearchincludes
714AcademyofManagementJournalDecember
thehumansideofmergersandacquisitions,creativityintheworkplace,andcross-culturalstudies.
JingZhou(jzhou@rice.edu)isanassociateprofessorofmanagementintheJesseH.JonesGraduateSchoolofManagementatRiceUniversity.ShereceivedherPh.D.fromtheUniversityofIllinoisatUrbana-Champaign.Hercurrentresearchinterestsincludecontextualfac-
torsthatpromoteorinhibitemployeecreativeperfor-mance.PriortojoiningtheJonesSchoolatRiceUni-versity,sheservedonthefacultyintheManagementDepartmentattheMaysBusinessSchoolatTexasA&MUniversity.
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容