A meta‐analysis of creativity training in organizational settings

IF 3.7 3区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Alexander S. McKay, Roni Reiter‐Palmon, Susan M. T. Coombes, Joseph E. Coombs
{"title":"A meta‐analysis of creativity training in organizational settings","authors":"Alexander S. McKay, Roni Reiter‐Palmon, Susan M. T. Coombes, Joseph E. Coombs","doi":"10.1111/caim.12605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Creativity training involves instruction to improve learners' capability related to the generation of new and useful ideas. Although prior meta‐analyses have examined training's effectiveness, the studies included are almost solely with children or many organizational samples are excluded. Authors of notable reviews on creativity in organizational settings have noted that they were unable to find adequately conducted and reported studies using genuine intervention designs at the individual, team, or organizational level, raising the question: is creativity training research in organizational settings lacking rigor, visibility, or just lacking? In this meta‐analysis, we examine creativity training effectiveness using Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation (reactions, learning, behavior, results) and moderators reflecting study rigor and training delivery/content. Results indicate that training is effective overall (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic> = 0.68) and for learning outcomes (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic> = 0.73). However, effects are nonsignificant for on‐the‐job behavior/transfer outcomes (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic> = 0.34). All moderator analyses were nonsignificant except for timing of outcome evaluation. Studies with a delayed assessment showed a significantly smaller training effect (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic> = 0.40) than did studies with an immediate assessment (<jats:italic>g</jats:italic> = 0.86). These results indicate that rigorous creativity training research in organizational settings with behavioral outcomes measured after a delay is lacking. We discuss implications for future research and practical implications for creativity training.","PeriodicalId":47923,"journal":{"name":"Creativity and Innovation Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Creativity and Innovation Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12605","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Creativity training involves instruction to improve learners' capability related to the generation of new and useful ideas. Although prior meta‐analyses have examined training's effectiveness, the studies included are almost solely with children or many organizational samples are excluded. Authors of notable reviews on creativity in organizational settings have noted that they were unable to find adequately conducted and reported studies using genuine intervention designs at the individual, team, or organizational level, raising the question: is creativity training research in organizational settings lacking rigor, visibility, or just lacking? In this meta‐analysis, we examine creativity training effectiveness using Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation (reactions, learning, behavior, results) and moderators reflecting study rigor and training delivery/content. Results indicate that training is effective overall (g = 0.68) and for learning outcomes (g = 0.73). However, effects are nonsignificant for on‐the‐job behavior/transfer outcomes (g = 0.34). All moderator analyses were nonsignificant except for timing of outcome evaluation. Studies with a delayed assessment showed a significantly smaller training effect (g = 0.40) than did studies with an immediate assessment (g = 0.86). These results indicate that rigorous creativity training research in organizational settings with behavioral outcomes measured after a delay is lacking. We discuss implications for future research and practical implications for creativity training.
组织环境中创造力培训的荟萃分析
创造力培训是指通过教学来提高学习者产生新的有用想法的能力。尽管之前的荟萃分析对培训的有效性进行了研究,但所包含的研究几乎都是针对儿童的,或者排除了许多组织样本。关于组织环境中创造力的著名综述的作者指出,他们无法找到在个人、团队或组织层面使用真正的干预设计进行的充分研究和报告,这就提出了一个问题:组织环境中的创造力培训研究是否缺乏严谨性、可见性,或者仅仅是缺乏?在本荟萃分析中,我们使用柯克帕特里克的四个评估层次(反应、学习、行为、结果)以及反映研究严谨性和培训实施/内容的调节因子来考察创造力培训的有效性。结果表明,培训总体有效(g = 0.68),学习成果有效(g = 0.73)。但是,对在职行为/转移结果的影响不显著(g = 0.34)。除结果评估的时间外,所有调节因素分析均不显著。采用延迟评估的研究显示的培训效果(g = 0.40)明显小于采用即时评估的研究(g = 0.86)。这些结果表明,目前还缺乏在组织环境中对延迟评估后的行为结果进行严格的创造力培训研究。我们讨论了未来研究的意义以及对创造力培训的实际影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
11.40%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Creativity and Innovation Management bridges the gap between the theory and practice of organizing imagination and innovation. The journal''s central consideration is how to challenge and facilitate creative potential, and how then to embed this into results-oriented innovative business development. The creativity of individuals, coupled with structured and well-managed innovation projects, creates a sound base from which organizations may operate effectively within their inter-organizational and societal environment. Today, successful operations must go hand in hand with the ability to anticipate future opportunities. Therefore, a cultural focus and inspiring leadership are as crucial to an organization''s success as efficient structural arrangements and support facilities. This is reflected in the journal''s contents: -Leadership for creativity and innovation; the behavioural side of innovation management. -Organizational structures and processes to support creativity and innovation; interconnecting creative and innovative processes. -Creativity, motivation, work environment/creative climate and organizational behaviour, creative and innovative entrepreneurship. -Deliberate development of creative and innovative skills including the use of a variety of tools such as TRIZ or CPS. -Creative professions and personalities; creative products; the relationship between creativity and humour; arts and amp; humanities side of creativity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信