ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R

心理科学进展 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (1): 1-18.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2021.00001

• 研究构想 •    下一篇


赵锴1, 向姝婷2()   

  1. 1中国人民大学劳动人事学院, 北京 100872
    2西南财经大学国际商学院, 成都 611130
  • 收稿日期:2019-11-28 出版日期:2021-01-15 发布日期:2020-11-23
  • 通讯作者: 向姝婷
  • 基金资助:
    * 国家自然科学基金项目(71802015);国家自然科学基金项目(71902164)

How to reconcile team innovation paradox? An explorative study from the perspectives of members’ cognitive style “composition” and “configuration”

ZHAO Kai1, XIANG Shuting2()   

  1. 1School of Labor and Human Resources, Renming University of China, Beijing 100872, China
    2School of International Business, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 611130, China
  • Received:2019-11-28 Online:2021-01-15 Published:2020-11-23
  • Contact: XIANG Shuting


如何提升团队创新绩效?这是近年来管理实践界与学术界共同关注的热门话题。鉴于创新是一项兼具“探索”与“利用”双元特征的活动, 懂得如何平衡二者之间的悖论关系就成为提升团队创新绩效的关键。基于成员认知风格的微观视角, 从“组型”与“构型”两方面探索了解决这一悖论关系的方法。具体而言:(1)成员认知风格组型与团队领导行为之间的互补效应有助于解决团队创新悖论; (2)在合理的“成员认知风格-工作角色要求”构型基础上, 营造良好的团队协作氛围, 有助于解决团队创新悖论。进一步地, 还基于阴阳哲学思想研究了解决团队创新悖论的内在机制。为论证相关理论命题, 将开展三个研究模块, 采用定量与定性相结合的研究方法对提出的研究模型进行检验。相关发现不仅有助于丰富从微观视角研究团队创新前因、悖论管理方法的理论成果, 还将为企业的创新管理实践提供建议。

关键词: 创新悖论, 团队双元性, 认知风格, 团队组型, 团队构型


In recent years, “How to improve team innovative performance?” is a popular topic in both management practice and academia fields. Because innovation is an ambidextrous activity including both “exploration” and “exploitation”, understanding how to balance the paradoxical relationship between them is crucial to improve team innovative performance. Based on a micro-perspective of team members’ cognitive styles, “compositional approach” and “configurational approach” were adopted to explore how to reconcile this kind of paradox. Specifically, (1) the complementary effects between members’ cognitive composition and team leader behaviors will contribute to the reconciliation of team innovation paradox; (2) an appropriate “members’ cognitive styles-work role requirements” configuration incorporated with a high level of team coordination climate will be useful to reconcile team innovation paradox. Further, based on the ideology of yin-yang philosophy, the mechanism embedded in the process of reconciling team innovation paradox was also studied. To justify the relevant theoretical propositions, three sub-projects will be conducted to examine the proposed research model with both quantitative and qualitative methods. The findings will not only enrich two streams of literature regarding exploration of the antecedents of team innovation and the approaches to management paradox from a micro perspective, but also provide suggestions on the innovation management practices of companies.

Key words: innovation paradox, team ambidexterity, cognitive style, team composition, team configuration