REPOZYTORIUM UNIWERSYTETU
W BIAŁYMSTOKU
UwB

  1. Repozytorium Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
  2. Czasopisma naukowe / Journals
  3. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications
  4. Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2021, Vol. 8, Issue 1

Szukanie zaawansowane
  • Zespoły i Kolekcje


  • Zaloguj się
  • Zarejestruj się
  • Mój RUB
  • FAQ
  • Polityka
  • Regulamin
  • DOI
  • Instrukcja
  • Aspekty prawne
  • Open Access
  • Archiwum


  • Kontakt
  • O Dspace
  • Strona Biblioteki
  • Strona Uczelni



    • Proszę używać tego identyfikatora do cytowań lub wstaw link do tej pozycji: http://hdl.handle.net/11320/20057
    Pełny rekord metadanych
    Pole DCWartośćJęzyk
    dc.contributor.authorReiter-Palmon, Roni-
    dc.contributor.authorKramer, William-
    dc.contributor.authorAllen, Joseph A.-
    dc.contributor.authorMurugavel, Vignesh R.-
    dc.contributor.authorLeone, Salvatore A.-
    dc.date.accessioned2026-04-13T09:34:54Z-
    dc.date.available2026-04-13T09:34:54Z-
    dc.date.issued2021-
    dc.identifier.citationCreativity. Theories – Research – Applications, Vol. 8, Issue 1, 2021, pp. 165-188pl
    dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11320/20057-
    dc.description.abstractAs communication technology capabilities have improved and the globalization of the workforce has resulted in distributed teams, organizations have been shifting towards virtual teams and virtual meetings over the last decade. This trend has been accelerated with current work-from-home orders due to COVID-19. Even though virtual collaboration has, in the past, been the focus of multiple studies, there are some surprising gaps in our knowledge. For instance, there are few empirical studies examining the impact of virtual devices and tools on creative problem-solving. While there is a substantial body of research on electronic brainstorming and the use of virtual tools for idea generation, less is known about earlier processes such as problem construction or later processes such as idea evaluation and idea selection. Furthermore, as a dynamic process, creativity and innovation is heavily influenced by the people engaged in the process and their collaborative environment, yet there is a gap in the literature regarding the type of virtual tools used in the process (i.e., audio + video vs. audio alone, or the use of file-sharing technologies). In this paper, we will review the current literature on virtual teams, virtual meetings, and creativity. We will then explore theoretical frameworks such as media richness theory that can help us understand how virtuality and virtual tools may influence team creativity across the dynamic range of the creative problem-solving process. Finally, given the limited research in the domain of virtual team creativity we provide questions to help guide future research. Research questions will help identify those areas where virtual teams may be beneficial for creativity and areas where virtual teams may be likely to perform less effectively on creative tasks.pl
    dc.language.isoenpl
    dc.publisherUniversity of Białystokpl
    dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License-
    dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/-
    dc.subjectCreativitypl
    dc.subjectinnovationpl
    dc.subjectteamspl
    dc.subjectvirtual teamspl
    dc.titleCreativity in Virtual Teams: A Review and Agenda for Future Researchpl
    dc.typeArticlepl
    dc.rights.holder© 2021 Roni Reiter-Palmon, William Kramer, Joseph A. Allen, Vignesh R. Murugavel, Salvatore A. Leone, published by University of Białystokpl
    dc.rights.holderThis work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.pl
    dc.identifier.doi10.2478/ctra-2021-0011-
    dc.description.EmailRoni Reiter-Palmon: rreiter-palmon@unomaha.edupl
    dc.description.AffiliationRoni Reiter-Palmon - Department of Psychology University of Nebraska at Omaha, USApl
    dc.description.AffiliationWilliam Kramer - Department of Psychology University of Nebraska at Omaha, USApl
    dc.description.AffiliationJoseph A. Allen - Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah Health, USApl
    dc.description.AffiliationVignesh R. Murugavel - Department of Psychology University of Nebraska at Omaha, USApl
    dc.description.AffiliationSalvatore A. Leone - Department of Psychology University of Nebraska at Omaha, USApl
    dc.description.referencesAbdulla, A.M., Paek, S.H., Cramond, B., & Runco, M.A. (2020). Problem finding and creativity: A meta-analytic review. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 14(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000194pl
    dc.description.referencesAllison, B.B., Shuffler, M.L., & Wallace, A.M. (2015). The successful facilitation of virtual team meetings. In The Cambridge handbook of meeting science (pp. 680–706). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesAnderson, 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(2), 147–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.236pl
    dc.description.referencesAnderson, N., Potočnik, 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/10.1177/0149206314527128pl
    dc.description.referencesAndriessen J.H.E. (2003) System match theories. In: J.H. Andriessen (Ed.), Working with Groupware: Understanding and Evaluating Collaborative Technology. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-14471-0067-6_5pl
    dc.description.referencesArreola, N.J., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2016). The effect of problem construction creativity on solution creativity across multiple everyday problems. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10(3), 287–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0040389pl
    dc.description.referencesAritz, J., Walker, R., & Cardon, P. W. (2018). Media use in virtual teams of varying levels of coordination. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 81(2), 222–243. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2329490617723114pl
    dc.description.referencesBarki, H., & Pinsonneault, A. (2001). Small group brainstorming and idea quality: Is electronic brainstorming the most effective approach? Small Group Research, 32(2), 158–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200203pl
    dc.description.referencesBasadur, M., Runco, M.A., & Vega, L.A. (2000). Understanding how creative thinking skills, attitudes and behaviors work together: A causal process model. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34, 77–100. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2000.tb01203.xpl
    dc.description.referencesBenedek, M., Nordtvedt, N., Jauk, E., Koschmieder, C., Pretsch, J., Krammer, G., & Neubauer, A.C. (2016). Assessment of creativity evaluation skills: A psychometric investigation prospective teachers. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.007pl
    dc.description.referencesBlair, C.S., & Mumford, M.D. (2007). Errors in idea evaluation: Preference for the unoriginal? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41(3), 197–222. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2007.tb01288.xpl
    dc.description.referencesBos, N., Gergle, D., Olson, J.S., & Olson, G.M. (2001). Being there versus seeing there: Trust via video. In: M. M. Tremaine (Ed.), Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 291–292). https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634240pl
    dc.description.referencesBowers, C., Smith, P.A., Cannon-Bowers, J., & Nicholson, D. (2008). Using virtual worlds to assist distributed teams. In: P. Zemliansky & K.S. Amant (Eds.), The Handbook of Research on Virtual Workplaces and the New Nature of Business Practices (pp. 408–423). Idea Group Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904893-2pl
    dc.description.referencesBreuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1151–1177. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000113pl
    dc.description.referencesCaniëls, M.C., & Rietzschel, E.F. (2015). Organizing creativity: Creativity and innovation under constraints. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(2), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12123pl
    dc.description.referencesCannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In N.J. Castellan, Jr. (Ed.), Individual and group decision making: Current issues (pp. 221–246). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.pl
    dc.description.referencesCarmeli, A., & Spreitzer, G.M. (2009). Trust, connectivity, and thriving: Implications for innovative behaviors at work. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43(3), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01313.xpl
    dc.description.referencesCascio, W.F. (2000). Managing a virtual workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 14(3), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2000.4468068pl
    dc.description.referencesChamakiotis, P., Dekoninck, E.A., & Panteli, N. (2013). Factors influencing creativity in virtual design teams: An interplay between technology, teams and individuals. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(3), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12039pl
    dc.description.referencesCollaros, P.A., & Anderson, L.R. (1969). Effect of perceived expertness upon creativity of members of brainstorming groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53(2, Pt.1), 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027034pl
    dc.description.referencesCooke, N.J. (2015). Team Cognition as Interaction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), 415–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415602474pl
    dc.description.referencesCrisp, C.B., & Jarvenpaa, S.L. (2013). Swift trust in global virtual teams: Trusting beliefs and normative actions. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(1), 45–56. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1027/1866-5888/a000075pl
    dc.description.referencesCronin, M.A., & Weingart, L.R. (2007). Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. The Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 761–773. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159333pl
    dc.description.referencesCultureWizard by RW3. (2016). Trends in Global Virtual Teams: Virtual Teams Survey Report. https://www.rw3.com/2016-trends-in-virtual-teams-report?submissionGuid=06a8ef96-e6e6-4c77-a010-6b5e71b33d24pl
    dc.description.referencesCurşeu, P.L., Schalk, R., & Wessel, I. (2008). How do virtual teams process information? A literature review and implications for management. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(6). 628–652. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810894729pl
    dc.description.referencesDaft, R.L., & Lengel, R.H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554pl
    dc.description.referencesDe Dreu, C.K.W. (2006). When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams. Journal of Management, 32(1), 83–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305277795pl
    dc.description.referencesDe Dreu, C.K.W., Nijstad, B.A., Bechtoldt, M.N., & Baas, M. (2011). Group creativity and innovation: A motivated information processing perspective. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017986pl
    dc.description.referencesDe Guinea, A. O., Webster, J., & Staples, D. S. (2012). A meta-analysis of the consequences of virtualness on team functioning. Information & Management, 49(6), 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2012.08.003pl
    dc.description.referencesDe Jong, B.A., & Elfring, T. (2010). How does trust affect the performance of ongoing teams? The mediating role of reflexivity, monitoring, and effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 535–549.pl
    dc.description.referencesDe Leede, J., Kraan, K.O., Den Hengst, M., & van Hooff, M.L. (2008). Conditions for innovation behaviour of virtual team members: a’high-road’for internationally dispersed virtual teams. Journal of eWorking, 2(1).pl
    dc.description.referencesDennis, A.R., & Kinney, S.T. (1998). Testing media richness theory in the new media: The effects of cues, feedback, and task equivocality. Information Systems Research, 9(3), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.3.256pl
    dc.description.referencesDennis, A.R., & Valacich, J.S. (1993). Computer brainstorms: More heads are better than one. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 531–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.531pl
    dc.description.referencesDennis, A.R., & Williams, M.L. (2003). Electronic brainstorming: Theory, research, and future directions. In P.B. Paulus & B.A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 160–178). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195147308.003.0008pl
    dc.description.referencesDess, G.G., & Picken, J.C. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century. Organizational dynamics, 28(3), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(00)88447-8pl
    dc.description.referencesDeRosa, D.M., Hantula, D.A., Kock, N., & D’Arcy, J. (2004). Trust and leadership in virtual teamwork: A media naturalness perspective. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 43(2–3), 219–232.pl
    dc.description.referencesDeRosa, D.M., Smith, C.L., & Hantula, D.A. (2007). The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the electronic group brainstorming literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1549–1581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.07.003pl
    dc.description.referencesDiehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1991). Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 392–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.392pl
    dc.description.referencesDrach-Zahavy, A., & Somech, A. (2001). Understanding team innovation: The role of team processes and structures. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1037/10892699.5.2.111pl
    dc.description.referencesDriskell, J.E., Radtke, P.H., & Salas, E. (2003). Virtual teams: Effects of technological mediation on team performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(4), 297–323. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1089-2699.7.4.297pl
    dc.description.referencesEdmondson, A. (2004). Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: A group-level lens. In R.M. Kramer, & K.S. Cook (Eds.), Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and approaches (pp. 239–272). Russell Sage Foundation.pl
    dc.description.referencesFiol, C.M., & O’Connor, E.J. (2005). Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams: Untangling the contradictions. Organization Science, 16, 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0101pl
    dc.description.referencesFleury, S., Agnes, A., Cados, L., Denis-Lutard, Q., Duchêne, C., Rigaud, N., & Richir, S. (2020). Effects of social influence on idea selection in creativity workshops. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100691pl
    dc.description.referencesFosslien, L., & Duffy, M.W. (2020). How to combat zoom fatigue. Harvard Business Review, 29.pl
    dc.description.referencesFrey, K., Lüthje, C., & Haag, S. (2011). Whom should firms attract to open innovation platforms? The role of knowledge diversity and motivation. Long Range Planning, 44(5–6), 397–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2011.09.006pl
    dc.description.referencesGaan, N. (2012). Collaborative tools and virtual team effectiveness: An inductively derived approach in India’s software sector. Decision (0304–0941), 39(1).pl
    dc.description.referencesGallupe, R.B., Dennis, A.R., Cooper, W.H., Valacich, J.S., Bastianutti, L.M., & Nunamaker Jr, J.F. (1992). Electronic brainstorming and group size. Academy of Management Journal, 35(2), 350–369. https://doi.org/10.5465/256377pl
    dc.description.referencesGish, L., & Clausen, C. (2013). The framing of product ideas in the making: a case study of the development of an energy saving pump. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(9), 1085–1101. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2013.832746pl
    dc.description.referencesGoh, K.T., Goodman, P.S., & Weingart, L.R. (2013). Team innovation processes: An examination of activity cycles in creative project teams. Small Group Research, 44(2), 159–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496413483326pl
    dc.description.referencesGrawitch, M.J., Munz, D.C., & Kramer, T.J. (2003). Effects of member mood states on creative performance in temporary workgroups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.7.1.41pl
    dc.description.referencesHambley, L.A., O’Neill, T.A., & Kline, T.J. (2007). Virtual team leadership: The effects of leadership style and communication medium on team interaction styles and outcomes. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 103(1), 1–20.pl
    dc.description.referencesHan, H.J., Hiltz, S.R., Fjermestad, J., & Wang, Y.Q. (2011). Does medium matter? A comparison of initial meeting modes for virtual teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 54, 376–391. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2011.2175759pl
    dc.description.referencesHarvey, S. (2014). Creative synthesis: Exploring the process of extraordinary group creativity. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 324–343. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0224pl
    dc.description.referencesHarvey, S., & Kou, C.Y. (2013). Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58, 346–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213498591pl
    dc.description.referencesHaught-Tromp, C. (2016). Creativity and constraint: Friends, not foes. In J.C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Current perspectives in social and behavioral sciences. Creativity and reason in cognitive development (p. 211–225). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139941969.011pl
    dc.description.referencesHennessey, B.A., & Amabile, T.M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569-598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416pl
    dc.description.referencesHoegl, M., Weinkauf, K., & Gemuenden, H.G. (2004). Interteam Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study. Organization Science, 15(1), 38–55. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1030.0053pl
    dc.description.referencesHogg, M.A., & Reid, S.A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00003.xpl
    dc.description.referencesHollingshead, A.B., McGrath, J.E., & O’Connor, K.M. (1993). Group task performance and communication technology: A longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups. Small Group Research, 24(3), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1046496493243003pl
    dc.description.referencesHülsheger, 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), 1128–1145. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015978pl
    dc.description.referencesIshii, K., Lyons, M.M., & Carr, S.A. (2019). Revisiting media richness theory for today and future. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 1(2), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.138pl
    dc.description.referencesJarvenpaa, S.L., & Keating, E. (2021). When do good communication models fail in global virtual teams? Organizational Dynamics, 50(1), No. 100843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2021.100843pl
    dc.description.referencesJarvenpaa, S.L., & Leidner, D.E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.6.791pl
    dc.description.referencesKanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2007). The impact of knowledge coordination on virtual team performance over time. MIS quarterly, 783–808. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148820pl
    dc.description.referencesKanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2002). Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00019-7pl
    dc.description.referencesKirkman, B.L., & Mathieu, J.E. (2005). The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management, 31(5), 700–718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279113pl
    dc.description.referencesKozlowski, S.W., & Bell, B.S. (2008). Team learning, development, and adaptation. In: V.I. Sessa & M.L. London (Eds.), Work Group Learning: Understanding, Improving & Assessing how Groups Learn in Organizations (pp. 15–44). Psychology Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesKwak, H. (2012). Self-disclosure in online media: An active audience perspective. International Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 485–510. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-31-3-485-510pl
    dc.description.referencesLamm, H., & Trommsdorff, G. (1973). Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency (brainstorming): A review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3(4), 361–388. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420030402pl
    dc.description.referencesLehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Allen, J.A. (2018). Modeling temporal interaction dynamics in organizational settings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(3), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9506-9pl
    dc.description.referencesLehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Allen, J.A. (2014). How fun are your meetings? Investigating the relationship between humor patterns in team interactions and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1278–1287. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038083pl
    dc.description.referencesLehmann-Willenbrock, N., Allen, J.A., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). A sequential analysis of procedural meeting communication: How teams facilitate their meetings. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41(4), 365–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.844847pl
    dc.description.referencesLeonardi, P.M. (2011). Innovation blindness: Culture, frames, and cross-boundary problem construction in the development of new technology concepts. Organization Science, 22(2), 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0529pl
    dc.description.referencesLovelace, K., Shapiro, D.L., & Weingart, L.R. (2001). Maximizing cross-functional new product teams’ innovativeness and constraint adherence: A conflict communications perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 779–793. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069415pl
    dc.description.referencesMaaravi, Y., Heller, B., Shoham, Y., Mohar, S., & Deutsch, B. (2020). Ideation in the digital age: literature review and integrative model for electronic brainstorming. Review of Managerial Science, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-020-00400-5pl
    dc.description.referencesMa, H.H. (2009). The effect size of variables associated with creativity: A meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 21, 30–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802633400pl
    dc.description.referencesMarks, G. (2020). On CRM: should you, or should you not turn on your camera for that Zoom meeting? Forbes, May 1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2020/05/01/on-crm-should-you-or-should-you-not-turn-on-your-camera-for-that-zoom-meeting/?sh=2595ba88bb06pl
    dc.description.referencesMathieu, J.E., Heffner, T.S., Goodwin, G.F., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J.A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of applied psychology, 85(2), 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.273pl
    dc.description.referencesMarlow, S.L., Lacerenza, C.N., & Salas, E. (2017). Communication in virtual teams: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.005pl
    dc.description.referencesMcGrath, J.E., & Hollingshead, A.B. (1993). Putting the group back in group support systems: Some theoretical issues about dynamic processes in groups with technological enhancements. In L.M. Jessup & J.S. Valacich (Eds.), Group support systems: New perspectives (pp. 78-96). New York: Macmillan.pl
    dc.description.referencesMckinsey (2021). The future of work after COVID-19. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-work/the-future-of-work-after-covid-19#pl
    dc.description.referencesMedeiros, K.E., Watts, L.L., Mulhearn, T.J., Steele, L.M., Mumford, M.D., & Connelly, S. (2017). What is working, what is not, and what we need to know: A meta-analytic review of business ethics instruction. Journal of Academic Ethics, 15(3), 245–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-017-9281-2pl
    dc.description.referencesMesmer-Magnus, J., & DeChurch, L. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535–546. https://doi.org/10.1109/emr.2012.6172774pl
    dc.description.referencesMesmer-Magnus, J.R., DeChurch, L.A., Jimenez-Rodriguez, M., Wildman, J., & Shuffler, M. (2011). A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 214–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.002pl
    dc.description.referencesMicrosoft (2020). Microsoft Teams at 3: Everything you need to connect with your teammates and be more productive. https://www.microsoft.com/enus/microsoft-365/blog/2020/03/19/microsoft-teams-3-everything-you-need-connectteammates-be-more-productive/pl
    dc.description.referencesMueller, J., Melwani, S., Loewenstein, J., & Deal, J.J. (2018). Reframing the Decision-Makers’ Dilemma: Towards a Social Context Model of Creative Idea Recognition. Academy of Management Journal, 61, 94-110. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0887pl
    dc.description.referencesMullen, B., Johnson, C, & Salas, E. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022856pl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M.D., Feldman, J.M., Hein, M.B., & Nagao, D.J. (2001). Tradeoffs between ideas and structure: Individuals versus group performance in creative problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 35(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2001.tb01218.xpl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M.D., & Hunter, S.T. (2005). Innovation in organizations: A multi-level perspective on creativity. In: F. Dansereau & F.J. Yammarino (Eds.), Multi-level Issues in Strategy and Methods (Research in Multi-Level Issues, Vol. 4) (pp. 9–73). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-9144(05)04001-4pl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M.D., Mobley, M.I., Reiter-Palmon, R., Uhlman, C.E., & Doares, L.M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419109534380pl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M., Reiter-Palmon, R, & Redmond, M. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In M. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 3–39). Ablex Publishing Corporation.pl
    dc.description.referencesMumford, M.D., Lonergan, D.C., & Scott, G. (2002). Evaluating Creative Ideas: Processes, standards, and context. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 22(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryct-news20022213pl
    dc.description.referencesNemiro, J.E. (2002). The creative process in virtual teams. Communication Research Journal, 14(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1401_6pl
    dc.description.referencesNijstad, B.A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affect the mind: a cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10(3), 186–213. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_1pl
    dc.description.referencesOcker, R.J. (2005). Influences on creativity in asynchronous virtual teams: A qualitative analysis of experimental teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2004.843294pl
    dc.description.referencesO’Leary, M.B., & Cummings, J.N. (2007). The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in teams. MIS Quarterly, (31), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148802pl
    dc.description.referencesPaulus, P., & Brown, V. (2003). Enhancing ideational creativity in groups: Lessons from research on brainstorming. In P.B. Paulus, B.A. Nijstad, & A. Bernard (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 110–136). Oxford University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesReed, K.M. & Allen, J.A. (2021). Suddenly Virtual: Making Remote Meetings Work. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R. (2018). Creative cognition at the individual and team levels: What happens before and after idea generation. In: R.J. Sternberg & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Nature of Human Creativity (pp. 184-202). Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., & Harms, M. (2017). Team creativity and innovation: Importance and directions. In: R.R. Palmon (Ed.), Team Creativity and Innovation (pp. 3–10). Oxford University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R, Herman, A.E., & Yammarino, F.J. (2008), Creativity and cognitive processes: Multi-level link-ages between individual and team cognition. In: M.D. Mumford, S.T. Hunter, & K.E. Bedell-Avers (Eds.), Multi-Level Issues in Creativity and Innovation: Research in Multi-Level Issues (Vol. 7, pp. 203–267). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., Kennel, V.L., & Allen, J.A. (2020). Teams in small organizations: Conceptual, methodological, and practical considerations. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1664–1078. https://doi.org/10.3389/fp-syg.2021.530291pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., Kennel, V., Allen, J., & Jones, K.J. (2018). Good catch! using interdisciplinary teams and team reflexivity to improve patient safety. Group & Organization Management, 43(3), 414–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051818781820pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., Kennel, V., de Vreede, T., & de Vreede, G.J. (2018). Structuring team idea evaluation and selection of solution: Does it influence creativity? (pp. 209–224). In I. Lebuda & V. Glavenou (Eds.), Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research. Palgrave Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M.D., O’Connor Boes, J., & Runco, M.A. (1997). Problem construction and creativity: The role of ability, cue consistency, and active processing. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1001_2pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., & Murugavel, V. (2018). The effect of problem construction on team process and creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2098. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02098pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., & Robinson, E. (2009). Problem identification and construction: What do we know, what is the future? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014629pl
    dc.description.referencesReiter-Palmon, R., Wigert, B., & Vreede, T.D. (2011). Team creativity and innovation: The effect of group composition, social processes, and cognition. In: M.D. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity (pp. 295–326). Elsevier.pl
    dc.description.referencesRice, R.E. (1992). Task analyzability, use of new media, and effectiveness: A multi-site exploration of media richness. Organization Science, 3(4), 475–500. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.4.475pl
    dc.description.referencesRietzschel, E.F., & Ritter, S.M. (2018). Moving from creativity to innovation. In R. Reiter-Palmon, V.L. Kennel, & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.), Individual creativity in the workplace (p. 3–34). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813238-8.00001-2pl
    dc.description.referencesRietzschel, E.F., Nijstad, B.A., & Stroebe, W. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609X414204pl
    dc.description.referencesRobert Half (2021). 1 In 3 Remote Workers May Quit If Required To Return To The Office Full Time, Robert Half Survey Finds. https://rh-us.mediaroom.com/2021-04-06-1-In-3-Remote-Workers-May-Quit-If-Required-To-Return-To-The-Office-Full-Time-Robert-Half-Survey-Findspl
    dc.description.referencesRobey, D., Schwaig, K.S., & Jin, L. (2003). Intertwining material and virtual work. Information and organization, 13(2), 111–129.pl
    dc.description.referencesRosso, B.D. (2014). Creativity and constraints: Exploring the role of constraints in the creative processes of research and development teams. Organization Studies, 35(4), 551–585. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613517600pl
    dc.description.referencesRunco, M.A., & Vega, L. (1990). Evaluating the creativity of children’s ideas. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(5), 439–452.pl
    dc.description.referencesSaunders, C.S. (2000). Virtual teams: Piecing together the puzzle. In R.W. Zmud (Ed.), Framing the domain of IT management: Projecting the future… through the past (pp. 29–50). Pinnaflex.pl
    dc.description.referencesShalley, C.E., & Gilson, L.L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.12.004pl
    dc.description.referencesShalley, 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(6), 933–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007pl
    dc.description.referencesSharma, A. (1999). Central dilemmas of managing innovation in large firms. California Management Review, 41, 146–164. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166001pl
    dc.description.referencesShearn, A. (2021). It’s time to start leaving our Zoom cameras off. Forge, February 18. https://forge.medium.com/its-time-to-start-leaving-our-zoom-cameras-off-c8a58bc66ae1pl
    dc.description.referencesSosik, J.J., Avolio, B.J., & Kahai, S.S. (1997). Effects of leadership style and anonymity on group potency and effectiveness in a group decision support system environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.89pl
    dc.description.referencesStaples, D.S., & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 617–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652575.2007.00244.xpl
    dc.description.referencesSternberg, R.J. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives (pp. 125–147). Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesSuchan, J., & Hayzak, G. (2001). The communication characteristics of virtual teams: A case study. IEEE transactions on Professional Communication, 44(3), 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1109/47.946463pl
    dc.description.referencesSuh, K.S. (1999). Impact of communication medium on task performance and satisfaction: an examination of media-richness theory. Information & Management, 35(5), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00097-4pl
    dc.description.referencesSutton, R.I., & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 685–718. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393872pl
    dc.description.referencesTaggar, S. (2002). Individual creativity and group ability to utilize individual creative resources: A multilevel model. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069349pl
    dc.description.referencesTaggar, S. (2019). The cognitive underpinnings of creativity in teams: Distal and proximal antecedents. In P.B. Paulus & B.A. Nijstad (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Group Creativity and Innovation, 11–32. Oxford University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesThomas, E. (2013). Supplier integration in new product development: Computer mediated communication, knowledge exchange and buyer performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(6), 890–899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.05.018pl
    dc.description.referencesToader, A.F., Cantner, U., & Kessler, T. (2019). The effect of team mental models divergence on creative performance during situational changes. Creativity Research Journal, 31(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1577206pl
    dc.description.referencesToader, A. F., & Kessler, T. (2018). Team mental models, team goal orientations, and information elaboration, predicting team creative performance. Creativity Research Journal, 30(4), 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2018.1530912pl
    dc.description.referencesVernon, D., & Hocking, I. (2016). Beyond belief: Structured techniques prove more effective than a placebo intervention in a problem construction task. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.10.009pl
    dc.description.referencesWard, T.B., Smith, S.M., & Finke, R.A. (1999). Creative cognition. In: J.C. Kaufman & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), Handbook of Creativity, 189–212. Cambridge University Press.pl
    dc.description.referencesWasche, V. (2020, November 19). Women, don’t turn your camera off for Zoom calls. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/90577160/women-dont-turn-your-camera-off-for-zoom-callspl
    dc.description.referencesWeingart, L., Cronin, M., Houser, C., Cagan, J., & Vogel, C. (2005). Functional diversity and conflict in crossfunctional product development teams: considering representational gaps and task characteristics. In L. Neider & C. Schriesheim (Eds.), Understanding Teams (pp. 89–100). IAP.pl
    dc.description.referencesWeingart, L.R., Todorova, G., & Cronin, M.A. (2008). Representational gaps, team integration and team creativity. Paper Presented at the Academy of Management 2008 Annual Meeting: The Questions We Ask, AOM 2008, Briarcliff Manor, NY.pl
    dc.description.referencesWest, M.A., & Anderson, N.R. (1996). Innovation in top management teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(6), 680–693. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.680pl
    dc.description.referencesWhite, M. (2014). The management of virtual teams and virtual meetings. Business Information Review, 31(2), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0266382114540979pl
    dc.description.referencesZajac, S., Gregory, M.E., Bedwell, W.L., Kramer, W.S., & Salas, E. (2014). The cognitive underpinnings of adaptive team performance in ill-defined task situations: A closer look at team cognition. Organizational Psychology Review, 4(1), 49–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386613492787pl
    dc.identifier.eissn2354-0036-
    dc.description.volume8pl
    dc.description.issue1pl
    dc.description.firstpage165pl
    dc.description.lastpage188pl
    dc.identifier.citation2Creativity. Theories – Research – Applicationspl
    Występuje w kolekcji(ach):Creativity. Theories – Research – Applications, 2021, Vol. 8, Issue 1

    Pliki w tej pozycji:
    Plik Opis RozmiarFormat 
    Creativity_8_1_2021_R_Reiter_Palmon_W_Kramer_J_A_Allen_V_R_Murugavel_S_A_Leone_Creativity_in_Virtual_Teams.pdf336,93 kBAdobe PDFOtwórz
    Pokaż uproszczony widok rekordu Zobacz statystyki


    Pozycja ta dostępna jest na podstawie licencji Licencja Creative Commons CCL Creative Commons