IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v124y2023ics0166497223000500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Work curiosity and R&D professionals’ creative performance: Scientists vs. engineers

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Yu-Yu
  • Shih, Hui-Yu
  • Lin, Bou‐Wen

Abstract

Curiosity embodies individual motivation to explore the unknown to either seek the pleasant experience of cognitive stimulation or eliminating the unpleasant feelings of ignorance. Drawing upon the regulatory focus theory, this paper investigates how work curiosity affects professional employees' creativity for improvement and creativity for innovation through the intervening role of creative process engagement. We used structural equation modeling to test our hypothesized framework with a sample of 372 R&D personnel, in-house scientists, and middle managers of R&D divisions, together with archival patent data from knowledge-intensive industries. The findings reveal that work curiosity influences R&D professionals' creativity by regulating their creative process engagement. More interestingly, the results suggest that research type (engineering/technology development vs. scientific discoveries) moderates the mediating effects of creative process engagement in the curiosity-creativity nexus. We leverage insights from psychology research to explore the motivational mechanisms that awaken professional employees' willingness to engage in cognitive activities for creative ideation, which can yield innovative solutions and profitable ideas.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Yu-Yu & Shih, Hui-Yu & Lin, Bou‐Wen, 2023. "Work curiosity and R&D professionals’ creative performance: Scientists vs. engineers," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s0166497223000500
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102739
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497223000500
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102739?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liu, Dong & Jiang, Kaifeng & Shalley, Christina E. & Keem, Sejin & Zhou, Jing, 2016. "Motivational mechanisms of employee creativity: A meta-analytic examination and theoretical extension of the creativity literature," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 236-263.
    2. Saeedeh Ahmadi & Saeed Khanagha & Luca Berchicci & Justin J. P. Jansen, 2017. "Are Managers Motivated to Explore in the Face of a New Technological Change? The Role of Regulatory Focus, Fit, and Complexity of Decision‐Making," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 209-237, March.
    3. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Chunmian Ge & Ke-Wei Huang & Ivan P. L. Png, 2016. "Engineer/scientist careers: Patents, online profiles, and misclassification bias," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 232-253, January.
    4. Blind, Knut & Filipović, Ellen & Lazina, Luisa K., 2022. "Motives to Publish, to Patent and to Standardize: An Explorative Study Based on Individual Engineers’ Assessments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Rajshree Agarwal & Atsushi Ohyama, 2013. "Industry or Academia, Basic or Applied? Career Choices and Earnings Trajectories of Scientists," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 950-970, April.
    6. Bessen, James, 2008. "The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 932-945, June.
    7. Thompson, Phillip S. & Klotz, Anthony C., 2022. "Led by curiosity and responding with voice: The influence of leader displays of curiosity and leader gender on follower reactions of psychological safety and voice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    8. Sarooghi, Hessamoddin & Libaers, Dirk & Burkemper, Andrew, 2015. "Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 714-731.
    9. Sacramento, Claudia A. & Fay, Doris & West, Michael A., 2013. "Workplace duties or opportunities? Challenge stressors, regulatory focus, and creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 141-157.
    10. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    11. Erez, Miriam & Nouri, Rikki, 2010. "Creativity: The Influence of Cultural, Social, and Work Contexts," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 351-370, November.
    12. Crowe, Ellen & Higgins, E. Tory, 1997. "Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations: Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 117-132, February.
    13. Mammassis, Constantinos S. & Kostopoulos, Konstantinos C., 2019. "CEO goal orientations, environmental dynamism and organizational ambidexterity: An investigation in SMEs," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 577-588.
    14. Fabiano, Gianluca & Marcellusi, Andrea & Favato, Giampiero, 2021. "R versus D, from knowledge creation to value appropriation: Ownership of patents filed by European biotechnology founders," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Zwick, Thomas & Frosch, Katharina & Hoisl, Karin & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2017. "The power of individual-level drivers of inventive performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 121-137.
    16. Chang, Yu-Yu & Chen, Ming-Huei, 2020. "Creative entrepreneurs’ creativity, opportunity recognition, and career success: Is resource availability a double-edged sword?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 750-762.
    17. Yu-Yu Chang & Wisuwat Wannamakok & Katharina Schatzl, 2022. "The Influence of Institutional Environment on the Development of Technology-Intensive Start-Ups: The Case of Austria," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 30(02), pages 215-240, June.
    18. Hardy, Jay H. & Day, Eric Anthony & Hughes, Michael G. & Wang, Xiaoqian & Schuelke, Matthew J., 2014. "Exploratory behavior in active learning: A between- and within-person examination," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 98-112.
    19. Marc Gruber & Dietmar Harhoff & Karin Hoisl, 2013. "Knowledge Recombination Across Technological Boundaries: Scientists vs. Engineers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 837-851, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    2. Shao, Yan & Nijstad, Bernard A. & Täuber, Susanne, 2019. "Creativity under workload pressure and integrative complexity: The double-edged sword of paradoxical leadership," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 7-19.
    3. Stern Neill & Raghuvar Dutt Pathak & Barbara A. Ribbens & Terry W. Noel & Gurmeet Singh, 2020. "The influence of managerial optimism and self-regulation on learning and business growth expectations within an emerging economic context," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 187-204, March.
    4. Ryan Mullins & Bulent Menguc & Nikolaos G. Panagopoulos, 2020. "Antecedents and performance outcomes of value-based selling in sales teams: a multilevel, systems theory of motivation perspective," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1053-1074, November.
    5. Wagner, Stefan & Goossen, Martin C., 2018. "Knowing me, knowing you: inventor mobility and the formation of technology-oriented alliances," IRTG 1792 Discussion Papers 2018-007, Humboldt University of Berlin, International Research Training Group 1792 "High Dimensional Nonstationary Time Series".
    6. Jiao, Hao & Wang, Tang & Yang, Jifeng, 2022. "Team structure and invention impact under high knowledge diversity: An empirical examination of computer workstation industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    7. Arroyabe, M. F. & Hussinger, Katrin & Hagedoorn, John, 2020. "Hiring new key inventors to improve firms' post-M&A inventive output," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-029, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Quentin Plantec & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2020. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: a study in the oil & gas industry," Post-Print hal-02613665, HAL.
    9. Jiang, Lin & Clark, Brent B. & Turban, Daniel B., 2023. "Overcoming the challenge of exploration: How decompartmentalization of internal communication enhances the effect of exploration on employee inventive performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    10. Bleda, Mercedes & Querbes, Adrien & Healey, Mark, 2021. "The influence of motivational factors on ongoing product design decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 562-569.
    11. Xiaohua Li & Daozhou Yang & Wu Zhao, 2021. "Scholars’ Identity Transition and Its Impact on Spin-Offs’ R&D Input," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    12. Sauermann, Henry & Roach, Michael, 2014. "Not all scientists pay to be scientists: PhDs’ preferences for publishing in industrial employment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 32-47.
    13. Alfonso Gambardella & Martin Ganco & Florence Honoré, 2015. "Using What You Know: Patented Knowledge in Incumbent Firms and Employee Entrepreneurship," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 456-474, April.
    14. Servet Nasifoglu Elidemir & Ali Ozturen & Steven W. Bayighomog, 2020. "Innovative Behaviors, Employee Creativity, and Sustainable Competitive Advantage: A Moderated Mediation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    15. Montani, Francesco & Torres, Claudio & Ferreira, Maria Cristina & Mendonça, Helenides & Silva, Ana Junça & Courcy, François & Dagenais-Desmarais, Véronique, 2021. "Self-image goals, compassionate goals and innovative work behavior: The role of organizational support for innovation across countries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 588-600.
    16. Alfonso Gambardella & Dietmar Harhoff & Bart Verspagen, 2017. "The economic value of patent portfolios," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 735-756, December.
    17. Yong, Kevyn & Mannucci, Pier Vittorio & Lander, Michel W., 2020. "Fostering creativity across countries: The moderating effect of cultural bundles on creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 1-45.
    18. Wang, Jian & Shibayama, Sotaro, 2022. "Mentorship and creativity: Effects of mentor creativity and mentoring style," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    19. Uijun Kwon & Youngjung Geum, 2020. "Identification of promising inventions considering the quality of knowledge accumulation: a machine learning approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 1877-1897, December.
    20. Plantec, Quentin & Le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoît, 2021. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: A study in the oil & gas industry through dynamic patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s0166497223000500. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.