A Multilevel Model of Team Goal Orientation, Information Exchange, and Creativity

    Published Online:https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0177

    Adopting a multilevel approach, we examined how team goal orientation may relate to team creativity and individual creativity. We also theorized and examined the bottom-up process linking individual creativity and team creativity. Multisource data were collected from 485 members and their leaders within 100 R&D teams. The results indicated that a team learning goal and team performance approach goal were positively related—whereas a team performance avoidance goal was negatively related—to both team creativity and individual creativity through team information exchange. Furthermore, a trust relationship with a team leader played a moderating role: when the trust was stronger, the indirect positive relationship with team creativity and individual creativity was stronger for the team learning goal but weaker for the team performance approach goal. We also found that average individual creativity within a team was positively related to team creativity (going above and beyond the effect of team information exchange) through a supportive climate for creativity.


    • Amabile T. M. 1988. A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In Staw B. M.Cummings L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 10: 123–167. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Google Scholar
    • Anderson N. R. , West M. A. 1998. Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19: 235–258. Google Scholar
    • Anderson N. , De Dreu C. K. W. , Nijstad B. A. 2004. The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25: 147–173. Google Scholar
    • Bandura A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
    • Bell S. T. 2007. Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 595–615. Google Scholar
    • Brislin R. W. 1986. The wording and translation of research instruments. In Lonner W. J.Berry J. W. (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research: 137–164. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
    • Bunderson S. J. , Sutcliffe K. M. 2002a. Comparing alternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 875–893.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Bunderson S. J. , Sutcliffe K. M. 2002b. Why some teams emphasize learning more than others: Evidence from business unit management teams. In Sondak H. (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams, vol. 4: 49–84. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science. Google Scholar
    • Bunderson J. S. , Sutcliffe K. M. 2003. Management team learning orientation and business unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 552–560. Google Scholar
    • Campion M. A. , Medsker G. J. , Higgs A. C. 1993. Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46: 823–850. Google Scholar
    • Chan D. 1998. Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 234–246. Google Scholar
    • Chen G. , Kanfer R. 2006. Toward a systems theory of motivated behavior in work teams. In Staw B. M. (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 27: 223–267. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Google Scholar
    • Chen G. , Mathieu J. E. , Bliese P. D. 2004. A framework for conducting multilevel construct validation. In Yammarino F. J.Dansereau F. (Eds.), Research in multilevel issues: Multilevel issues in organizational behavior and processes, vol. 3: 273–303. Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Google Scholar
    • Collins C. J. , Smith K. G. 2006. Knowledge exchange and combination: The role of human resource practices in the performance of high-technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 544–560.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • De Dreu C. K. , Nijstad B. A. , van Knippenberg D. 2008. Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12: 22–49. Google Scholar
    • Deshon R. P. , Kozlowski S. W. , Schmidt A. M. , Milner K. R. , Wiechmann D. 2004. A multiple goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 1035–1056. Google Scholar
    • Dirks K. T. , Ferrin D. L. 2001. The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12: 450–467. Google Scholar
    • Drazin R. , Glynn M. A. , Kazanjian R. K. 1999. Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A sensemaking perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24: 286–307.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Ebadi Y. M. , Utterback J. M. 1984. The effects of communication on technological innovation. Management Science, 30: 572–585. Google Scholar
    • Eden D. 1992. Leadership and expectations: Pygmalion effects and other self-fulfilling prophecies in organizations. Leadership Quarterly, 3: 271–305. Google Scholar
    • Edmondson A. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 350–383. Google Scholar
    • Edwards J. R. , Lambert L. S. 2007. Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12: 1–22. Google Scholar
    • Elliot A. J. , Church M. A. 1997. A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72: 218–232. Google Scholar
    • Gargiulo M. , Ertug G. 2006. The dark side of trust. In Bachmann R.Zaheer A. (Eds.), Handbook of trust research: 165–186. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. Google Scholar
    • George J. M. , Zhou J. 2007. Dual tuning in a supportive context: Joint contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 605–622.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Gong Y. , Cheung S. Y. , Wang M. , Huang J. C. 2012. Unfolding proactive process for creativity: Integration of employee proactivity, information exchange, and psychological safety perspective. Journal of Management, 38: 1611–1633. Google Scholar
    • Gong Y. , Fan J. 2006. Longitudinal examination of the role of goal orientation in cross-cultural adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 176–184. Google Scholar
    • Gong Y. , Huang J. C. , Farh J. L. 2009. Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 765–778.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Gully S. M. , Phillips J. M. 2005. A multilevel application of learning and performance orientations to individual, group, and organizational outcomes. In Martocchio J. (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management, vol. 24: 1–51. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Google Scholar
    • Harrison D. A. , Price K. H. , Gavin J. H. , Florey A. T. 2002. Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1029–1045.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Hinsz V. B. , Tindale R. S. , Vollrath D. A. 1997. The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121: 43–64. Google Scholar
    • Hirst G. , van Knippenberg D. , Chen C. , Sacramento C. A. 2011. How does bureaucracy impact individual creativity? A cross-level investigation of team contextual influences on goal orientation-creativity relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 54: 624–641.AbstractGoogle Scholar
    • Hirst G. , van Knippenberg D. , Zhou J. 2009. A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 280–293.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 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: 1128–1145. Google Scholar
    • Humphrey S. E. , Morgeson F. P. , Mannor M. J. 2009. Developing a theory of the strategic core of teams: A role composition model of team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 48–61. Google Scholar
    • Janssen O. , Van Yperen N. W. 2004. Employees' goal orientations, the quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 368–384.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Johnson M. D. , Hollenbeck J. R. , Humphrey S. E. , Ilgen D. R. , Jundt D. , Meyer C. J. 2006. Cutthroat cooperation: Asymmetrical adaptation of team reward structures. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 103–119.AbstractGoogle Scholar
    • Kanter R. M. 1988. When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organizations. In Staw B. M.Cummings L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 10: 169–211. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Google Scholar
    • Katz-Navon T. , Naveh E. , Stern Z. 2005. Safety climate in health care organizations: A multidimensional approach. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 1075–1089.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Keller R. T. 1992. Transformational leadership and the performance of research and development project groups. Journal of Management, 18: 489–501. Google Scholar
    • Kirkman B. L. , Chen G. , Farh J. , Chen Z. X. , Lowe K. B. 2009. Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 744–764.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Kogut B. , Zander U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24: 625–645. Google Scholar
    • Kozlowski S. W. J. , Klein K. J. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. In Klein K. J.Kozlowski S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 3–90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
    • Langfred C. W. 2004. Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 385–399.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Liao H. , Liu D. , Loi R. 2010. Looking at both sides of the social exchange coin: A social cognitive perspective on the joint effects of relationship quality and differentiation on creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1090–1109.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • MacKinnon D. P. , Lockwood C. M. , Hoffman J. M. , West S. G. , Sheets V. 2002. A comparison of methods to test meditation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7: 83–104. Google Scholar
    • MacKinnon D. P. , Lockwood C. M. , Williams J. 2004. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39: 99–128. Google Scholar
    • Madjar N. , Oldham G. R. , Pratt M. G. 2002. There's no place like home? The contributions of work and nonwork creativity support to employees' creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 757–767.AbstractGoogle Scholar
    • Madjar N. , Ortiz-Walters R. 2009. Trust in supervisors and trust in customers: Their independent, relative, and joint effects on employee performance and creativity. Human Performance, 22: 128–142. Google Scholar
    • Mayer R. C. , Davis J. H. , Schoorman F. D. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20: 709–734.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • McAllister D. J. 1995. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 24–59.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • McNatt D. B. 2000. Ancient Pygmalion joins contemporary management: A meta-analysis of the result. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85: 314–322. Google Scholar
    • Mesmer-Magnus J. R. , DeChurch L. A. 2009. Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 535–546. Google Scholar
    • Morgeson F. P. , Hofmann D. A. 1999. The structure and function of collective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theory development. Academy of Management Review, 24: 249–265.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Nahapiet J. , Ghoshal S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23: 242–266.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Pieterse A. N. 2009. Goal orientation in teams: The role of diversity. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Erasmus University. Google Scholar
    • Podsakoff P. M. , MacKenzie S. B. , Lee J. Y. , Podsakoff N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 879–903. Google Scholar
    • Polyhart R. E. , Moliterno T. P. 2011. Emergence of the human capital resource: A multilevel model. Academy of Management Review, 36: 127–150. Google Scholar
    • Raudenbush S. W. , Bryk A. , Cheong Y. F. , Congdon R. 2004. HLM6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago: Scientific Software. Google Scholar
    • Rousseau D. M. , Sitkin S. B. , Burt R. S. , Camerer C. 1998. Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23: 393–404.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Rousseau D. 1985. Issues of level in organizational research: Multilevel and cross-level perspectives. In Cummings L. L.Staw B. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 7: 1–37. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Google Scholar
    • Salancik G. R. , Pfeffer J. 1978. A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 224–253. Google Scholar
    • Schneider B. 1990. The climate for service: An application of the climate construct. In Schneider B. (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture: 383–412. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
    • Schneider B. , Smith D. B. , Taylor S. , Fleenor J. 1998. Personality and organizations: A test of the homogeneity of personality hypothesis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 462–470. Google Scholar
    • Shalley C. E. , Zhou J. , Oldham G. R. 2004. The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30: 933–958. Google Scholar
    • Shin S. J. , Kim T. K. , Lee J. Y. , Bian L. 2012. Cognitive team diversity and individual team member creativity: A cross-level interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 197–212.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Shin S. J. , Zhou J. 2007. When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 1709–1721. Google Scholar
    • Shrout P. E. , Bolger N. 2002. Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7: 422–445. Google Scholar
    • Siegel S. M. , Kaemmerer W. F. 1978. Measuring the perceived support for innovation in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 553–562. Google Scholar
    • Smith K. G. , Collins C. J. , Clark K. D. 2005. Existing knowledge, knowledge creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 48: 346–357.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Sullivan D. , Ford C. M. 2010. The alignment of measures and constructs in organizational research: The case of testing measurement models of creativity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25: 505–521. Google Scholar
    • Taggar S. 2002. Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: A multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 315–330.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Tsai W. , Ghoshal S. 1998. Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41: 464–476.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Van der Vegt G. S. , Janssen O. 2003. Joint impact of interdependence and group diversity on innovation. Journal of Management, 29: 729–751. Google Scholar
    • van Knippenberg D. , De Dreu C. K. , Homan A. C. 2004. Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89: 1008–1022. Google Scholar
    • VandeWalle D. 1997. Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational Psychological Measurement, 57: 995–1015. Google Scholar
    • Weingart L. R. 1992. Impact of group goals, task component complexity, effort, and planning on group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 682–693. Google Scholar
    • Weldon E. , Jehn K. A. , Pradhan P. 1991. Processes that mediate the relationship between a group goal and improved group performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61: 555–569. Google Scholar
    • West M. A. 1990. The social psychology of innovation in groups. In West M. A.Farr J. L. (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies: 309–333. Chichester, UK: Wiley. Google Scholar
    • Williams K. Y. , O'Reilly C. A. 1998. Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In Staw B. M.Sutton R. I. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 20: 77–140. Greenwich, CT: JAI. Google Scholar
    • Woodman R. W. , Sawyer J. E. , Griffin R. W. 1993. Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18: 293–321.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Youndt M. A. , Subramaniam M. , Snell S. A. 2004. Intellectual capital profiles: An examination of investments and returns. Journal of Management Studies, 41: 335–361. Google Scholar
    • Zhou J. , George J. M. 2001. When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 682–696.LinkGoogle Scholar
    • Zhou J. , Shalley C. E. 2003. Research on employee creativity: A critical review and directions for future research. In Martocchio J. (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management: 165–217. Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Google Scholar
    • Zhou J. , Shalley C. E. 2008. Expanding the scope and the impact of organizational creativity research. In Zhou J.Shalley C. E. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational creativity: 347–368. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
    Academy of Management
      Academy of Management
      100 Summit Lake Drive, Suite 110
      Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
      Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
      Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900