A Model of Creativity in Organizations: John Holland's Theory of Vocational Choice (1973) at Multiple Levels of Analysis

This conceptual paper serves to create a model of creativity and innovation at different organizational levels. It draws on John Holland's Theory of Vocational Choice (1973) as the basis for its structure by incorporating the six different personality types from his theory: conventional, enterprising, realistic, social, investigative, and artistic, as working together with each other within and between teams in organizations. The model begins with opposite personalities working together in two‐person groups to generate creative ideas and then expands to all six personalities working together as one team to implement innovative products and services. It is the underlying contrast of personalities in Holland's (1973) theory, where each personality contributes diverse ideas and skills, that when combined, produce new products and services that are financially beneficial, useful, and enhancing of well‐being for organizations and society.     

Re‐Operationalizing Established Groups in Brainstorming: Validating Osborn's Claims

Since the introduction of brainstorming as an idea‐generation technique to address organizational problems, researchers have struggled to replicate some of the claims around the technique. One major concern has been the differences in the number of ideas generated between established groups as found in industry versus the non‐established groups used in the laboratory. The impact of group establishment on idea quality has also been an area of interest. This study addresses these issues by using a more in‐depth induction to establish groups and testing some discrepancies in the relationship between idea quality and idea quantity using 42 three‐person brainstorming groups. Results indicate that brainstorming groups, given an adequate amount of time (10 weeks) to become established, did generate more ideas and higher quality ideas than non‐established groups. Also, a relationship between idea quality and idea quantity was found. Further discussion of results and implications follows.     

Guest Editorial: Conceptualizing Justice and Counter-Expertise

ABSTRACT

Systemic injustices exclude counter-experts from telling their stories and influencing the collective imagination. Four papers and some discussant essays illustrate the ways in which counter-experts cross boundaries to contest knowledge claims, legal institutions, and forms of data in order to resist various forms of injustice. Literature on counter-expertise, socio-technical imaginaries, and epistemic injustice highlights how marginalized groups are prevented from participating in the process of collective imagining. A definition of counter-expertise and a new typology of counter-expertise demonstrate how marginalized groups navigate boundaries to pursue epistemic justice. The four papers in the special issue exemplify the ways in which counter-experts navigate identity politics. To combat epistemic injustice within our field, STS scholars can be more inclusive with teaching, mentoring, reviewing and other forms of scholarly gatekeeping.