BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Tognazzo Alessandra (University of Padova), Mazzurana Paola Angela Maria (University of Padova)
Tytuł
Friends Doing Business : an Explorative Longitudinal Case Study of Creativity and Innovation in an Italian Technology-Based Start-Up
Źródło
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI), 2017, vol. 13, nr 2, s. 77-103, rys., tab., aneks, bibliogr. s. 97-102
Tytuł własny numeru
Determinants of Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Słowa kluczowe
Spin-off, Kreatywność, Innowacje
Spin-off, Creativity, Innovations
Uwagi
streszcz., summ.
Kraj/Region
Włochy
Italy
Abstrakt
Z perspektywy procesu wywodzącego się z kilku dyscyplin, dyskutujemy teoretycznie o tym, jak dynamika przyjaźni w zespołach założycielskich może wpłynąć na firmę. Opracowujemy konceptualny model, który uwzględnia odmienną naturę wymiany w biznesie i przyjaźni, co może posłużyć za użyteczną podstawę dla przyszłych badań (w załączniku przedstawiamy kilka miar przyjaźni). Następnie badamy przykładowy przypadek. Skupiamy się na spójności grup (pełnomocnictwa do przyjaźni), podejmowaniu decyzji i organizacji zespołu założycielskiego włoskiej firmy technologicznej oraz poznajemy proces generowania twórczych pomysłów i wdrażania innowacji. Nasze wstępne ustalenia wskazują, że chaos niekoniecznie sprzyja kreatywności i innowacji: przy niskiej spójności grupowej prowadzi do dezorganizacji, ponieważ normy biznesowe przeważają nad przyjaźnią, wysoka spójność grup tworzy strukturę organizacyjną, która podtrzymuje generowanie kreatywnych efektów, wzmacniając rolę przyjaźni w procesie decyzyjnym. Tłumaczymy to stwierdzenie w świetle zasady wzajemności wymiany. (abstrakt oryginalny)

With a process perspective based on a framework derived from several disciplines, we theoretically discuss how friendship dynamics in founding teams may affect a business. We develop a conceptual model that considers the different nature of exchanges in business and friendship, which may serve as a useful starting base for future investigation (in the Appendix we report some measures of friendship). We then examine an exemplary case. We focus on group cohesiveness (a proxy for friendship), decision-making, and organization of an Italian technology-based firm's founding team over time and explore the process of generating creative ideas and implementing innovation. Our speculative findings show that chaos does not necessarily favor creativity and innovation: while low group cohesiveness leads to disorganization because business norms prevail over friendship ones, high group cohesiveness creates structure in the organization that sustains the generation of creative outcomes by enhancing the role of friendship norms in decision-making. We explain this finding in the light of the principle of reciprocity of exchanges. (original abstract)
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Adams, R.G., & Blieszner, R. (1994). An integrative conceptual framework for friendship research. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11(2), 163-184.
  2. Allan, G. A. (1989) Friendship: Developing a sociological perspective. Boulder: Westview Press.
  3. Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
  4. Amason, A.C., & Sapienza, H.J. (1997). The effects of top management team size and interaction norms on cognitive and affective conflict. Journal of Management, 23(4), 495-516.
  5. Anderson, N., & King, N. (1993) Innovation in organizations. In C.L. Cooper & I.T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology Vol. 8 (pp.1-34). Chichester: Wiley.
  6. Baron, R.A., & Tang, J. (2011). The role of entrepreneurs in firm-level innovation: Joint effects of positive affect, creativity, and environmental dynamism. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1), 49-60.
  7. Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 11(3), 497-529.
  8. Bergendahl, M., & Magnusson, M. (2014). Combining collaboration and competition: A key to improved idea management? European Journal of International Management, 8(5), 528- 547.
  9. Berndt, T.J., & McCandless, M.A. (2009). Methods for investigating children's relationships with friends. In K. H. Rubin, W. M. Bukowski & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of Peer Interactions, Relationships, and Groups (pp. 63- 81). New York: Guilford.
  10. Blieszner, R., & Adams, R. G. (1992). Adult Friendship (Vol. 3). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
  11. Brockman, B.K., Rawlston, M.E., Jones, M.A., & Halstead, D. (2010). An exploratory model of interpersonal cohesiveness in new product development teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(2), 201- 219.
  12. Burt, R. (1992). Structural Holes: The Structure of Social Capital Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  13. Burt, R.S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349- 399.
  14. Cesaroni, F., Minin, A.D., & Piccaluga, A. (2005). Exploration and exploitation strategies in industrial R&D, Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(3), 222-232.
  15. Chen, M. H. (2007). Entrepreneurial leadership and new ventures: Creativity in entrepreneurial teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(3), 239-249.
  16. Churchill, N. C., & Lewis, V. L. (1983). The five stages of small business growth. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), 30-50.
  17. Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386-405.
  18. Cohen, D., Whitmyre, J.W., & Funk, W.H. (1960). Effect of group cohesiveness and training upon creative thinking. Journal of Applied Psychology, 44(5), 319- 322.
  19. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
  20. Collins, A., & van Dulmen, M. (2006). Friendships and Romance in Emerging Adulthood: Assessing Distinctiveness in Close Relationships. In A.J. Jensen & T.J. Lynn (Eds.), Emerging Adults in America: Coming of Age in the 21st Century (pp. 219-234). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association..
  21. Corley, K.G., & Gioia, D.A. (2004). Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 173-208.
  22. Corte, U. (2013). A Refinement of Collaborative Circles Theory Resource Mobilization and Innovation in an Emerging Sport. Social psychology quarterly, 76(1), 25-51.
  23. Craig, T.Y., & Kelly, J.R. (1999). Group cohesiveness and creative performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3(4), 243-256.
  24. Hays, R. B. (1988). Friendship. In S. W. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of Personal Relationships: Theory, Research, and Interventions (pp. 391-408). New York: Wiley.
  25. Hemlin, S. (2009). Creative knowledge environments: An interview study with group members and group leaders of university and industry R&D groups in biotechnology. Creativity and Innovation Management, 18(4), 278-285.
  26. Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50(1), 93-98.
  27. Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H.G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science, 12(4), 435- 449.
  28. Hoegl, M., Gibbert, M., & Mazursky, D. (2008). Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more? Research Policy, 37(8), 1382-1391.
  29. Hogg, M.A., Fielding, K.S., Johnson, D., Masser, B., Russell, E., & Svensson, A. (2006). Demographic category membership and leadership in small groups: A social identity analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(4), 335-350.
  30. Hogg, M.A., & Hains, S.C. (1998). Friendship and group identification: A new look at the role of cohesiveness in groupthink. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28(3), 323- 341.
  31. Hülsheger, U.R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J.F. (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1128- 1137.
  32. Kammerlander, N., Dessl, C., Bird, M., Floris, M., & Murru, A. (2015). The impact of shared stories on family firm innovation: A multicase study. Family Business Review, 28(4), 332-354.
  33. Klotz, A.C., Hmieleski, K.M., Bradley, B.H., & Busenitz, L.W. (2014). New venture teams: A review of the literature and roadmap for future research. Journal of Management, 40(1), 226-255.
  34. Kohtamäki, M., Kekäle, T., & Viitala, R. (2004). Trust and innovation: From spin-off idea to stock exchange. Creativity and Innovation Management, 13(2), 75-88.
  35. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
  36. Laursen, B. (1993). Conflict management among close peers. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 60, 39-54.
  37. Levine, J.M., & Moreland, R.L. (2004). Collaboration: The social context of theory development, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(2), 164-172.
  38. Mendelson, M. J., & Aboud, F. (1999). Measuring friendship quality in late adolescents and young adults: McGill friendship questionnaires. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 31(2), 130-132.
  39. Milliken, F.J., Bartel, C.A., & Kurtzberg, T.R. (2003). Diversity and creativity in work groups: A dynamic perspective on the affective and cognitive processes that link diversity and performance. In P.B. Paulus & B.A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration (pp. 32-62). New York: Oxford University Press.
  40. Morry, M. M. (2003). Perceived locus of control and satisfaction in same-sex friendships. Personal Relationships, 10(4), 495-509.
  41. Mudrack, P.E. (1989). Defining group cohesiveness a legacy of confusion? Small Group Research, 20(1), 37-49.
  42. Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115(2), 210.
  43. Nerkar, A., & Paruchuri, S. (2005). Evolution of R&D capabilities: The role of knowledge networks within a firm. Management Science, 51(5), 771-785.
  44. Obstfeld, D. (2005). Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 100-130.
  45. Parker, J.G., & Asher, S.R. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low accepted children "at risk"? Psychological Bullettin, 102(3), 357-389.
  46. Paulus, P. B., & Yang, H. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76-87.
  47. Perry-Smith, J.E., & Shalley, C.E. (2003). The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 89-106.
  48. Rank, J., Pace, V.L., & Frese, M. (2004). Three avenues for future research on creativity, innovation, and initiative. Applied Psychology, 53(4), 518-528.
  49. Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48 (2), 240-267.
  50. Ross, W. D. (1925). The Oxford Translation of Aristotle. Vol. IX: The Nichomachean Ethics. London: Oxford University Press.
  51. Sarooghi, H., Libaers, D., & Burkemper, A. (2015). Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 714-731.
  52. Shalley, C.E. (1991). Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 179.
  53. Solano, C. H. (1986). People without friends: Loneliness and its alternatives. In V. J. Derlega & B. A. Winstead (Eds.), Friendship and Social Interaction (pp. 227-246). New York: Springer Verlag.
  54. Sosa, M.E. (2011). Where do creative interactions come from? The role of tie content and social networks. Organization Science, 22(1), 1-21.
  55. Starko, A. J. (2013). Creativity in the Classroom: Schools of Curious Delight. USA: Routledge.
  56. Sullivan, H.S. (1953). The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: Norton.
  57. Uzzi, B. & Spiro, J. (2005). Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. American Journal of Sociology, 111(2), 447-504.
  58. West, M. A. (2002). Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(3), 355-387.
  59. Williams, W., & Yang, L. (1999). Organizational creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp. 373-391). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  60. Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E., & Griffin, R.W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293321.
  61. Yin, R. K. (2013). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
2299-7075
Język
eng
URI / DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.7341/20171324
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu