Does receiving knowledge catalyze creativity? A dyadic-level contingency model of knowledge type and psychological closeness on knowledge elaboration

IF 6.2 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Organizational Behavior Pub Date : 2023-08-19 DOI:10.1002/job.2741
Chu-Ding Ling, Wei He, Yaping Gong, Wu Liu, Vincent Cho
{"title":"Does receiving knowledge catalyze creativity? A dyadic-level contingency model of knowledge type and psychological closeness on knowledge elaboration","authors":"Chu-Ding Ling,&nbsp;Wei He,&nbsp;Yaping Gong,&nbsp;Wu Liu,&nbsp;Vincent Cho","doi":"10.1002/job.2741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Does receiving knowledge necessarily catalyze the recipient's creativity? Drawing upon the literature on knowledge management, we propose a dyadic-level contingency model in which the type of received knowledge (i.e., explicit vs. tacit) from the partner and the recipient's psychological closeness to the partner jointly determine the recipient's knowledge elaboration and consequent creativity as catalyzed by the partner's knowledge (i.e., catalytic creativity). Results based on three samples from various settings show that receiving tacit knowledge from a partner leads a recipient to elaborate the received knowledge, and this relationship is stronger when the recipient's psychological closeness to the partner is higher. This dyadic-level knowledge elaboration in turn boosts the recipient's catalytic creativity. In contrast, receiving explicit knowledge from a partner generally has a much weaker effect on the recipient's elaboration of the knowledge, regardless of whether the recipient's psychological closeness to the partner is high or low. We extend research on dyadic-level creativity by illustrating (a) the differential effects of explicit versus tacit knowledge receiving and (b) the recipient's knowledge elaboration as a mechanism and dyadic psychological closeness as a boundary condition for such differential effects.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48450,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","volume":"44 9","pages":"1436-1463"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Organizational Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.2741","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Does receiving knowledge necessarily catalyze the recipient's creativity? Drawing upon the literature on knowledge management, we propose a dyadic-level contingency model in which the type of received knowledge (i.e., explicit vs. tacit) from the partner and the recipient's psychological closeness to the partner jointly determine the recipient's knowledge elaboration and consequent creativity as catalyzed by the partner's knowledge (i.e., catalytic creativity). Results based on three samples from various settings show that receiving tacit knowledge from a partner leads a recipient to elaborate the received knowledge, and this relationship is stronger when the recipient's psychological closeness to the partner is higher. This dyadic-level knowledge elaboration in turn boosts the recipient's catalytic creativity. In contrast, receiving explicit knowledge from a partner generally has a much weaker effect on the recipient's elaboration of the knowledge, regardless of whether the recipient's psychological closeness to the partner is high or low. We extend research on dyadic-level creativity by illustrating (a) the differential effects of explicit versus tacit knowledge receiving and (b) the recipient's knowledge elaboration as a mechanism and dyadic psychological closeness as a boundary condition for such differential effects.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
接受知识能促进创造力吗?知识类型与知识阐述心理亲密度的二元层次权变模型
接受知识一定会促进接受者的创造力吗?在借鉴知识管理文献的基础上,我们提出了一个二元水平的偶然性模型,在该模型中,从合作伙伴那里获得的知识类型(即显性与隐性)和接受者与合作伙伴的心理亲密度共同决定了接受者的知识阐述和由此产生的由合作伙伴的知识催化的创造力(即催化创造力)。基于来自不同环境的三个样本的结果表明,从伴侣那里获得隐性知识会导致接受者详细阐述所获得的知识,并且当接受者与伴侣的心理亲密度越高时,这种关系就越牢固。这种二元层次的知识阐述反过来又增强了接受者的催化创造力。相比之下,无论接受者与伴侣的心理亲密度是高还是低,从伴侣那里获得明确的知识通常对接受者对知识的阐述影响要小得多。我们通过说明(a)显性和隐性知识接受的差异效应,以及(b)接受者的知识阐述作为一种机制,二元心理亲密度作为这种差异效应的边界条件,扩展了对二元水平创造力的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
98
期刊介绍: The Journal of Organizational Behavior aims to publish empirical reports and theoretical reviews of research in the field of organizational behavior, wherever in the world that work is conducted. The journal will focus on research and theory in all topics associated with organizational behavior within and across individual, group and organizational levels of analysis, including: -At the individual level: personality, perception, beliefs, attitudes, values, motivation, career behavior, stress, emotions, judgment, and commitment. -At the group level: size, composition, structure, leadership, power, group affect, and politics. -At the organizational level: structure, change, goal-setting, creativity, and human resource management policies and practices. -Across levels: decision-making, performance, job satisfaction, turnover and absenteeism, diversity, careers and career development, equal opportunities, work-life balance, identification, organizational culture and climate, inter-organizational processes, and multi-national and cross-national issues. -Research methodologies in studies of organizational behavior.
期刊最新文献
Working from everywhere: The future of work and inclusive organizational behavior (IOB) Issue Information Getting away “Scott” (but not Susan) free: The effects of safety-specific abusive supervision and supervisor gender on follower attributions and safety outcomes How and when do frequent daily work interruptions contribute to or undermine daily job satisfaction? A stress appraisal perspective Algorithmic management in the gig economy: A systematic review and research integration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1