夙敌之争影响决策者创新识别的双刃剑效应及其认知深度和广度机制

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2024.01961

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 面对激烈竞争, 决策者能否准确识别出符合企业需求的创新方案, 关系到企业的存亡和发展。决策者的创新识别已成为组织创造力和创新研究的重点议题。然而, 创新识别的已有研究忽略了决策者之间竞争因素的重要影响, 无法全面揭示决策者的认知偏差及导致偏差的内在机制。企业创新过程中, 决策者常常与领域接近、实力相当的对手长时间较量, 普通竞争演变为夙敌之争。鉴于此, 本项目基于夙敌之争的理论视角, 探讨决策者间的竞争如何影响双方创新识别的准确性。拟综合采用实验室和现场实验、档案分析等研究手段, 设计4个研究探讨夙敌之争对决策者创新识别的积极和消极影响, 揭示认知加工深度和广度路径的中介作用, 并在决策者-决策者二元结对水平探寻其边界条件。本研究从夙敌间竞争角度切入, 有望更准确地诊断决策者创新识别的偏差以及导致偏差的内在机制, 以帮助决策者更好认识和防范偏差。

关键词: 创造力与创新, 创新识别, 竞争, 夙敌, 领导行为

Abstract:

While leading organizations to engage in innovation, decision-makers constantly face fierce competition from counterparts in other organizations targeting the same markets, clients, suppliers, technologies, and/or regions. To survive and thrive amid intense competition, organizational decision-makers must identify the most promising and creative ideas and allocate limited resources for subsequent innovation stages. Existing research on decision-makers' creativity recognition has primarily focused on the interactions among creators, decision-makers, and the environment, examining how these subsystems collectively influence the ability to recognize truly creative ideas. However, studies have generally focused on a single decision-maker, overlooking the significant role of competition among decision-makers, thereby limiting the explanatory power for real-world phenomena.

It is well-established that decision-makers often perceive each other as rivals when their respective organizations are closely matched and engaged in extended competition. As competition intensifies into rivalry, decision-makers become increasingly motivated to outperform their rivals. Rivalry theory posits that such rivalry can have a double-edged sword impact on decision-makers' effectiveness to identify truly innovative ideas. On one hand, rivalry may incentivize decision-makers to engage in systematic and in-depth analysis of innovation strategies of their own, thereby improving the efficiency and accuracy of creativity recognition. On the other hand, rivalry may induce tunnel vision, leading decision-makers to disproportionately focus on the creative potential of ideas under scrutiny by their rivals, while neglecting those ideas that fall outside their rivals' consideration.

To gain a deeper understanding of the impact of rivalry on creativity recognition, the current study employs a mixed-methods design. Laboratory experiments test the causal relationship between rivalry and decision-makers' recognition efficiency, while field studies examine the external validity of experimental findings in real-world contexts. Specifically, Study 1 utilizes a laboratory experiment to manipulate competition forms and measure the cognitive processing depth and breadth of decision-makers in various competitive environments, investigating rivalry's impact on creativity recognition accuracy. Studies 2 and 3 explore how rivalry influences decision-makers’ creativity recognition through cognitive depth (systematic processing) and cognitive breadth (tunnel vision) pathways. Study 4 validates laboratory findings in real organizational contexts by analyzing mutual fund managers' investment decisions and examining how rivalry relationships among fund managers influence their identification and selection of corporate innovations.

By integrating rivalry theory with the cognitive processing perspective, this study proposes a dual-pathway model to illustrate how rivalry influences decision-makers' creativity recognition. The model posits that rivalry exerts a double-edged sword effect on creativity recognition by affecting the depth and breadth of decision-makers' cognitive processing. Rivalry can catalyze more in-depth systematic processing, thereby enhancing the accuracy of creativity recognition. However, an excessive focus on competition may constrict cognitive breadth, inducing tunnel vision and the potential neglect of highly creative ideas. The principal theoretical contribution of this research lies in introducing the rivalry perspective into the domain of creativity recognition research. By delineating rivalry's effect on the cognitive mechanisms underpinning creativity recognition, our study provides a novel theoretical framework for understanding and improving organizational innovation management. Furthermore, it assists decision-makers in identifying cognitive biases within the innovation decision-making process, thereby facilitating more informed and rational innovation decisions.

Key words: creativity and innovation, creativity recognition, competition, rivalry, leadership

中图分类号:

B849: C93

白新文, 齐舒婷, 王琢钧, 任思羽, 孙文. (2024). 夙敌之争影响决策者创新识别的双刃剑效应及其认知深度和广度机制. 心理科学进展 , 32(12), 1961-1979.

BAI Xinwen, QI Shuting, WANG Zhuojun, REN Siyu, SUN Wen. (2024). The double-edged sword effect of rivalry on decision-makers’ creativity recognition: An information processing perspective. Advances in Psychological Science, 32(12), 1961-1979.

参考文献

[1] 白新文, 齐舒婷, 明晓东, 周意勇, 黄明权.(2019). 骏马易见, 伯乐难寻:决策者心智模式影响创意识别的机制及边界条件. 心理科学进展, 27(4), 571-586. https://doi.org/ 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00571
[2] 董念念, 王雪莉. (2020). 有志者, 事竟成:内在动机倾向, 创意质量与创意实施. 心理学报, 52(6), 801-810. https:// doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00801
[3] 郭名媛, 杨欢维. (2017. 共享单车的“橙黄大战”——ofo与摩拜的动态竞争. 中国管理案例共享中心(案例编号: EPSM-0195). 2023-03-10取自: 2017). 共享单车的“橙黄大战”——ofo与摩拜的动态竞争. 中国管理案例共享中心(案例编号: EPSM-0195). 2023-03-10取自: http://www.cmcc-dlut.cn/ Cases/Detail/2775
[4] 霍伟伟, 罗瑾琏, 李鲜苗, 黄懿. (2018). 好创意为何易“夭折”: 创意领地视角的多层次研究.科学学与科学技术管理, 39(9), 165-176.
[5] 李艳, 杨百寅.(2016). 创意实施——创新研究未来走向. 心理科学进展, 24(4), 643-653. https://doi.org/10.3724/ SP.J.1042.2016.00643
[6] 齐舒婷, 白新文, 林琳.(2019). 慧眼识珠:创意识别的研究现状及未来方向. 外国经济与管理, 41(7), 42-57. https://doi.org/10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2019.07.003
[7] 齐舒婷, 周意勇, 白新文. (2021). 决策者的组织创新困境及创意识别偏差的心理机制. 见:胡卫平 (编), 中国创造力研究进展报告 (pp. 264-276). 陕西师范大学出版总社.
[8] 吴梦, 白新文.(2012). 动机性信息加工理论及其在工业与组织心理学中的应用. 心理科学进展, 20(11), 1889- 1898. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2012.01889
[9] 许长勇, 翟丹华, 李风华, 果飒. (2019. 共享单车:风投是天使还是魔鬼. 中国管理案例共享中心(案例编号: MSL-0043). 2023-03-10取自: 2019). 共享单车:风投是天使还是魔鬼. 中国管理案例共享中心(案例编号: MSL-0043). 2023-03-10取自: http://www.cmcc-dlut.cn/ Cases/Detail/3753
[10] 周意勇, 白新文, 齐舒婷. (2020). 领导认可你的创造力吗?——员工与主管特征对员工创造力评价的影响. 中国社会心理学评论, 19(2), 127-152.
[11] Adam M. T.P., Krämer, J., & Müller, M. B.(2015). Auction fever! How time pressure and social competition affect bidders’ arousal and bids in retail auctions. Journal of Retailing, 91 2015.01.003
[12] Ager P., Bursztyn L., Leucht L., & Voth H. -J. (2022). Killer incentives: Rivalry, performance and risk-taking among german fighter pilots, 1939-45. Review of Economic Studies, 89(5), 2257-2292. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/ rdab085
[13] Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations.Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123-167.
[14] Anderson N., Potocnik K., & Zhou J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
[15] Antons D.,& Piller, F. T.(2015). Opening the black box of “not invented here”: Attitudes, decision biases, and behavioral consequences. Academy of Management Perspectives, 292013.0091
[16] Assanskiy A., Shaposhnikov D., Tylkin I.,& Vasiliev, G.(2022). Prove them wrong: Do professional athletes perform better when facing their former clubs? Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 98, Article 101879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2022.101879
[17] Baer, M. (2012). Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1102-1119. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj. 2009.0470
[18] Bechtoldt M. N., De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad B. A., & Choi H. S. (2010). Motivated information processing, social tuning, and group creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 622-637. https://doi.org/10.1037/ a0019386
[19] Berg, J. M. (2016). Balancing on the creative high-wire: Forecasting the success of novel ideas in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(3), 433-468. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0001839216642211
[20] Boudreau K., Guinan E. C., Lakhani K. R.,& Riedl, C.(2016). Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource allocation in science. Management Science, 622015.2285
[21] Buckert M., Schwieren C., Kudielka B. M.,& Fiebach, C. J.(2017). How stressful are economic competitions in the lab? An investigation with physiological measures. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 231-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.joep.2017.07.004
[22] Chaiken S.,& Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. Guilford Press..
[23] Chen M.-J.(1996). Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 211996.9602161567
[24] Chen, M. -J., & Miller, D. (2012). Competitive dynamics: Themes, trends, and a prospective research platform. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 135-210. https:// doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2012.660762
[25] Clarke J. S., Cornelissen J. P.,& Healey, M.(2019). Actions speak louder than words: How figurative language and gesturing in entrepreneurial pitches influences investment judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 622016.1008
[26] Converse, B. A., & Reinhard, D. A. (2016). On rivalry and goal pursuit: Shared competitive history, legacy concerns, and strategy selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(2), 191-213. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000038
[27] Converse B. A., Reinhard D. A., & Austin, M. M. K. (2021). Psychology of rivalry: A social-cognitive approach to competitive relationships In S M Garcia, A Tor, & A J Elliot (Eds), The Oxford handbook of the psychology of competition (pp 422-443) Oxford University Press https://doiorg/101093/oxfordhb/9780190060800 A social-cognitive approach to competitive relationships. In S. M. Garcia, A. Tor, & A. J. Elliot (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the psychology of competition (pp. 422-443). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190060800.013.18
[28] Correa, J. A., & Ornaghi, C. (2014). Competition & innovation: Evidence from U.S. Patent and productivity data. Journal of Industrial Economics, 62(2), 258-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/joie.12050
[29] Criscuolo P., Dahlander L., Grohsjean T.,& Salter, A.(2017). Evaluating novelty: The role of panels in the selection of R&D projects. Academy of Management Journal, 602014.0861
[30] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 313-335). Cambridge University Press.
[31] De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad B. A., & van Knippenberg D. (2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(1), 22-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868307304092
[32] Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of co-operation and competition. Human Relations, 2(2), 129-152. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 001872674900200204
[33] Duan J., Yin J.,& Xu, Y.(2022). Distance makes the heart grow fonder: A construal-level perspective on entrepreneurial opportunity evaluation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 136, Article 103730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2022.103730
[34] Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 255-278. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
[35] Ford, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). Factors influencing creativity in the domain of managerial decision making. Journal of Management, 26(4), 705-732. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/014920630002600406
[36] Galinsky A. D., Magee J. C., Gruenfeld D. H., Whitson J. A., & Liljenquist K. A. (2008). Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1450-1466. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012633
[37] George, J. M. (2007). Creativity in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 439-477. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/078559814
[38] Guo W., Sengul M.,& Yu, T.(2020). Rivals' negative earnings surprises, language signals, and firms' competitive actions. Academy of Management Journal, 632018.0397
[39] Haselhuhn M. P., Wong E. M.,& Ormiston, M. E.(2022). Investors respond negatively to executives’ discussion of creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 171, Article 104155. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.obhdp.2022.104155
[40] Hill L. A., Tedards E., & Swan T. (2021). Drive innovation with better decision-making: Don't let old habits undermine your organization's creativity.Harvard Business Review, 99(6), 70-79.
[41] Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121-140. https:// doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.2791606
[42] Huang S. -C., Lin S. C., & Zhang Y. (2019). When individual goal pursuit turns competitive: How we sabotage and coast. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117, 605-620. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000170
[43] Jiang L., Yin D., Liu D., & Johnson R. (2023). The more enthusiastic, the better? Unveiling a negative pathway from entrepreneurs’ displayed enthusiasm to funders’ funding intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 47(4), 1356-1388. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221076391
[44] Katz, R., & Allen, T. J. (1982). Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups. R&D Management, 12(1), 7-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 9310. 1982.tb00478.x
[45] Kilduff, G. J. (2014). Driven to win: Rivalry, motivation, and performance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(8), 944-952. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614539770
[46] Kilduff G. J.(2019). Interfirm relational rivalry: Implications for competitive strategy. Academy of Management Review, 44(4), 775-799. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0257
[47] Kilduff G. J., Elfenbein H. A.,& Staw, B. M.(2010). The psychology of rivalry: A relationally dependent analysis of competition. Academy of Management Journal, 532010.54533171
[48] Kilduff G. J.,& Galinsky, A. D.(2017). The spark that ignites: Mere exposure to rivals increases machiavellianism and unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 156-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp. 2016.10.007
[49] Kilduff G. J., Galinsky A. D., Gallo E.,& Reade, J. J.(2016). Whatever it takes to win: Rivalry increases unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 592014.0545
[50] Kornish, L. J., & Ulrich, K. T. (2014). The importance of the raw idea in innovation: Testing the sow's ear hypothesis. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(1), 14-26. https://doi.org/ 10.1509/jmr.12.0401
[51] Krieger J. L.(2021). Trials and terminations: Learning from competitors' R&D failures. Management Science, 67(9), 5525-5548. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3775
[52] Ku G., Malhotra D.,& Murnighan, J. K.(2005). Towards a competitive arousal model of decision-making: A study of auction fever in live and internet auctions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 962004.10.001
[53] Levin I. P., Huneke M. E.,& Jasper, J. D.(2000). Information processing at successive stages of decision making: Need for cognition and inclusion-exclusion effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 822000.2881
[54] Li J., Chen X. -P., Kotha S., & Fisher G. (2017). Catching fire and spreading it: A glimpse into displayed entrepreneurial passion in crowdfunding campaigns. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1075-1090. https://doi.org/10.1037/ apl0000217
[55] Lu S., Bartol K. M., Venkataramani V., Zheng X., & Liu X. (2019). Pitching novel ideas to the boss: The interactive effects of employees’ idea enactment and influence tactics on creativity assessment and implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 62(2), 579-606. https:// doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0942
[56] Luan, Y., & Kim, Y. J. (2022). An integrative model of new product evaluation: A systematic investigation of perceived novelty and product evaluation in the movie industry. PLoS ONE, 17(3), e0265193. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0265193
[57] Malhotra, D. (2010). The desire to win: The effects of competitive arousal on motivation and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 111(2), 139- 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.11.005
[58] Markou P., Kavadias S.,& Oraiopoulos, N.(2023). Rival signals and project selection: Insights from the drug development process. Management Science, 692022.4642
[59] Menon T., Thompson L., & Choi H. -S. (2006). Tainted knowledge vs. Tempting knowledge: People avoid knowledge from internal rivals and seek knowledge from external rivals. Management Science, 52(8), 1129-1144. https://doi.org/ 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0525
[60] Milstein N., Striet Y., Lavidor M., Anaki D., & Gordon I. (2022). Rivalry and performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Organizational Psychology Review, 12(3), 332-361. https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866221082128
[61] Mount M. P., Baer M., & Lupoli M. J. (2021). Quantum leaps or baby steps? Expertise distance, construal level, and the propensity to invest in novel technological ideas. Strategic Management Journal, 42(8), 1490-1515. https:// doi.org/10.1002/smj.3267
[62] Mueller J.,& Yin, Y. (2021). Unraveling the bias against novelty: Guiding the study of our tendency to desire but reject the new. In J. Zhou & E. D. Rouse (Eds.), Handbook of research on creativity and innovation (pp. 267-289). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788977272.00023
[63] Mueller J. S., Melwani S., & Goncalo J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23(1), 13-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611421018
[64] Mueller J. S., Melwani S., Loewenstein J.,& Deal, J.(2018). Reframing the decision-makers’ dilemma: Towards a social context model of creative idea recognition. Academy of Management Journal, 612013.0887
[65] Mueller J. S., Wakslak C. J.,& Krishnan, V.(2014). Construing creativity: The how and why of recognizing creative ideas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 81-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.007
[66] Murayama, K., & Elliot, A. J. (2012). The competition- performance relation: A meta-analytic review and test of the opposing processes model of competition and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1035-1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028324
[67] Nijstad B. A., De Dreu, C. K. W., Rietzschel E. F., & Baas M. (2010). The dual pathway to creativity model: Creative ideation as a function of flexibility and persistence. European Review of Social Psychology, 21, 34-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463281003765323
[68] Packalen, M., & Bhattacharya, J. (2015). New ideas in invention (NBER Working Paper No. 20922). Retrieved March 6, 2023, from https://doi.org/ 10.3386/w20922
[69] Packalen, M., & Bhattacharya, J. (2020). NIH funding and the pursuit of edge science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(22), 12011-12016. https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1910160117
[70] Perry-Smith,J. E., & Mannucci, P. V.(2017). From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management Review, 422014.0462
[71] Piezunka H., Lee W., Haynes R., & Bothner M. S. (2018). Escalation of competition into conflict in competitive networks of formula one drivers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(15), E3361-E3367. https://doi.org/10.1073/ pnas.1717303115
[72] Pike B. E., Kilduff G. J., & Galinsky A. D. (2018). The long shadow of rivalry: Rivalry motivates performance today and tomorrow. Psychological Science, 29(5), 804- 813. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1177/0956797617744796
[73] Pirlott A. G.,& MacKinnon, D. P.(2016). Design approaches to experimental mediation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 29-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.09.012
[74] Posavac S. S., Kardes F. R.,& Joško Brakus, J.(2010). Focus induced tunnel vision in managerial judgment and decision making: The peril and the antidote. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1132010.07.002
[75] Qi S., Bai X., & Lin L. (2022). The contradicting effect of intergroup relations on creativity recognition of creators and creations. Paper presented at the Academy of Management 82nd Annual Meeting, August 5-9, 2022, Seattle, Washington, USA.
[76] Rassin E., Muris P., Booster E.,& Kolsloot, I.(2008). Indecisiveness and informational tunnel vision. Personality and Individual Differences, 452008.03.006
[77] Siler K., Lee K., & Bero L. (2015). Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(2), 360-365. https:// doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418218112
[78] Spencer S. J., Zanna M. P., & Fong G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845-851. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.89.6.845
[79] Staw, B. M. (1995). Why no one really wants creativity. In C. M. Ford & D. A. Gioia (Eds.), Creative action in organizations(pp. 161-166). Sage.
[80] Stevens G. A.,& Burley, J.(1997). 3, 000 raw ideas = 1 commercial success! Research-Technology Management, 401997.11671126
[81] Swab, R. G., & Johnson, P. D. (2019). Steel sharpens steel: A review of multilevel competition and competitiveness in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(2), 147-165. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2340
[82] To C., Kilduff G. J., Ordonez L.,& Schweitzer, M. E.(2018). Going for it on fourth down: Rivalry increases risk-taking, physiological arousal, and promotion focus. Academy of Management Journal, 612016.0850
[83] To C., Kilduff G. J.,& Rosikiewicz, B.(2020). When interpersonal competition helps and when it harms: An integration via challenge and threat. Academy of Management Annals, 142016.0145
[84] Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963
[85] West, M. A. (2002). Ideas are ten a penny: It’s team implementation not idea generation that counts. Applied Psychology, 51(3), 411-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464- 0597.01006
[86] Wilden R., Lin N., Hohberger J., & Randhawa K. (2023). Selecting innovation projects: Do middle and senior managers differ when it comes to radical innovation? Journal of Management Studies, 60(7), 1720-1751. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12874
[87] Woodman R. W., Sawyer J. E.,& Griffin, R. W.(1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 181993.3997517
[88] Yip J. A., Schweitzer M. E.,& Nurmohamed, S.(2018). Trash-talking: Competitive incivility motivates rivalry, performance, and unethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144, 125-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.06.002
[89] Zhou, J., & Hoever, I. J. (2014). Research on workplace creativity: A review and redirection. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 333-359. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych- 031413-091226
[90] Zhou J., Wang X. M., Bavato D., Tasselli S., & Wu J. (2019). Understanding the receiving side of creativity: A multidisciplinary review and implications for management research. Journal of Management, 45(6), 2570-2595. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319827088
[91] Zhou J., Wang X. M., Song L. J., & Wu J. (2017). Is it new? Personal and contextual influences on perceptions of novelty and creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 180-202. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000166
[92] Zhou J., Wu J., & Wang X. M. (2022). Interactive effects of receiver power and generator status on endorsement of creative ideas. Journal of Management, 50(2), 620-653. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063221123262