Search

Over the years, the topic of creativity -- the development of novel and useful ideas (Amabile, 1988; Shalley, 1991) -- has generated considerable interest from management scholars. This work has produced important insights into the antecedents and consequences of creativity, both at the individual and team levels. For example, scholars have identified factors such as positive emotional experiences (Amabile et al., 2005), perspective-taking (Hoever et al., 2012), a willingness to share and exchange ideas (Perry-Smith & Shalley, 2003), team composition (Somech & Drach-Zahavy, 2013), team diversity (Perry-Smith & Shalley, 2014), role identity (Farmer & Tierney, 2003), prior experience (Miron-Spektor & Beenen, 2015), and leadership (Carnevale et al., 2017; Shin et al., 2012; Zhang & Bartol, 2010) as important predictors of creativity. In addition, recent work has turned to understanding the potential outcomes of creativity (Carnevale et al., 2021; Kaufman, 2017; Meyer et al., 2019), including its potential to produce harmful consequences for organizations and its members (Gino & Ariely, 2012; Harrison & Wagner, 2016; Mai et al., 2015; Ng & Yam, 2019; Vincent & Kouchaki, 2016). Despite these important discussions, there are still notable gaps in our understanding of creativity, particularly across levels of analysis. For example, at the individual level, beyond creative role-identity (Farmer & Tierney, 2003; Vincent & Kouchaki, 2016), little is known about how creatives express aspects of their identity at work and whether such identity expressions influence work-related outcomes. Moreover, at the team-level, there are new and interesting pathways for research that, to date, are almost exclusively considered at the individual level. For instance, understanding the impressions of creative individuals is an emerging area in the creativity literature (Carnevale et al., 2021; Katz et al., 2022; Ng & Yam, 2019), one that could open exciting avenues for research on creative teams. Another important limitation in creativity research is scholars' tendency to focus on the antecedents and outcomes of creativity at either the individual (e.g., Liu et al., 2016) or team level (e.g., Farh et al., 2020; Hoever et al., 2012 Jia et al., 2014). Comparatively fewer studies have taken a cross-level approach to understanding creativity, such as how lone employees can impact group creative processes. In addition to these specific areas of inquiry, there are more general ways to broaden our sights and open new opportunities for creativity research, such as shifting focus from the causes of creativity across levels to its consequences, an area of research that has received far less attention from creativity scholars (Khessina et al., 2018). Thus, it appears we have neither a complete understanding of the forest or the trees, and that more work is needed to fully understand creativity across levels. To address this issue, our symposium aims to simultaneously sharpen and broaden our sights by honing in on specific areas of inquiry that can generate new avenues of research as well as providing a "bird's eye view" of creativity across levels. Utilizing various methodologies and contexts, the papers included in this symposium will explore new and exciting avenues on the antecedents of creativity at the individual, team, and cross-levels of analysis, while also offering a review of the consequences of creativity across levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]