A study by Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan throws fresh light on the steps employees can take that make them more creative at work, and more productive as a result.
Innovation is usually highly prized by employers. But how might employees selfregulate their own creative stimulus by seeking feedback? Might they be more inclined to share or try out new ideas if they know feedback will be forthcoming? And if that’s the case, what can employers do to create the conditions in which people are unafraid to brainstorm out loud?
The extent to which feedback-seeking enhances creative performance has until recently been something of an inexact science. Research conducted by Vlerick Leuven Gent and Ross School of Business explores how proactive feedback-seeking helps knowledge-workers to outperform against their own or their bosses’ expectations, enhancing their own creative performance through self-regulation. The research adds a brand new dimension to studies relating to workplace creativity, which have largely focused on strategies for managers to encourage greater creativity amongst their teams.
Employees tend to seek feedback by making direct inquiries to line managers or team members, or by looking out (monitoring) for giveaway signals in others’ behavior. The purpose of seeking feedback may vary – some employees use the information they collect to help stay in control of a particular situation, or to convince a colleague to take a certain course of action. Others may use feedback to better understand how they’re regarded by those who might influence a promotion or pay rise, or to help them conform to corporate culture.
Researchers wanted to identify a correlation between frequency of feedback-seeking and creative performance. Regular inquiry-generated feedback might prompt employees to take action to enhance creativity. Monitoring is a more covert tactic that, while risking misjudgment on the part of employees, conceals their desire to know what others think of them (frequent direct inquiries might expose weaknesses in mental agility or lack of industry knowledge). But if monitoring carries such a risk, how might the degree of risk depend on the employee’s powers of observation and ability to ‘read’ the signals that others send out?
Potential links between creative performance and the breadth of feedback-seeking warranted exploration. Many employees limit feedback-seeking to line managers or experienced colleagues. Yet peers, subordinates and people in other departments may have valid views, as might those employed at competitors or doing similar jobs for other organizations. Might feedback from more diverse sources generate greater creativity?
Researchers acknowledged two approaches to gathering, organizing and applying information, at either end of a spectrum of cognitive styles. Some employees are ‘adaptive’, viewing the world in black-and-white, with reference to objective, logical facts, figures and procedures. At the other extreme are ‘innovators’, who solve problems more intuitively, often with a more open mind, selecting the best elements from otherwise divergent schools of thought. Researchers conjectured that innovators seek feedback with greater frequency and breadth.
Perceptions of organizational support might also impact on feedback-seeking. Will employees who feel it’s safe to voice ideas more readily seek feedback? If they do, might they also be more inclined to self-reflect and engage in learning and development activities, or even bounce ideas off people outside the confines of their natural constituency?
Amongst the team’s findings, what stood out – and what has until now been largely unverified by research – is the extent to which employees can, and do, take actions to enhance their own creative performance at work:
Of course, recruiting only innovative people and providing an environment of relentless feedback-seeking won’t miraculously enhance workplace creativity. Managers need to encourage subordinates to develop the instincts and skills to seek feedback under their own steam, and as a matter of habit – but also to follow up on that feedback. But individuals themselves can learn to use feedback more advantageously. Even those who are adaptive (rather than innovative) might inquire for feedback to help them play to their strengths or deviate from accepted norms, rather than just measure their own corporate conformity.
The more ambiguous nature of feedback generated by monitoring may explain why there is less to link it to creative performance. But it might also be the case that some individuals who monitor for feedback don’t recognize valuable, creativity-stimulating viewpoints (or that greater conformity is actually their aim). Employees who managers or mentors agree have justifiable confidence in their own judgment may be more securely given freedom to be creative, counting on the observations and conclusions they make when monitoring feedback.
So employers can indeed develop safe places in which brilliant ideas can flourish. Embedding creativity in job descriptions, goal-setting, appraisals and reward schemes should stimulate feedback-seeking, while encouraging those who already self-regulate to seek feedback more often, and to build their own professional networks, diversifying potential feedback sources.
Whether the views of supervisors, peers and subordinates are sought spontaneously and informally, or through structured formalized procedures, encouraging employees to proactively seek feedback – instead of waiting patiently for others to be forthcoming – may well represent a winning strategy.
While this survey advances thinking about feedback-seeking and creative performance, options for more specific studies might include:
The study covered 456 supervisor-employee relationships within four organizations, examining how knowledge workers proactively seek feedback to enhance creative performance. Supervisors (overseeing teams of up to 11 people) and subordinates were asked different questions. Researchers defined certain parameters:
Researchers acknowledge certain limitations. Some definitions or judgments might be subject to respondents’ generalities or personal bias, while restricting the sample to consulting firms mean that findings may be less applicable to other sectors. However, control variables and mechanisms were introduced to minimize inconsistent or spurious results.
Katleen De Stobbeleir, Susan J. Ashford, Dirk Buyens. 2010. Self-Regulation Of Creativity At Work: The Role Of Feedback-Seeking Behavior In Creative Performance. The academy of management Journal (forthcoming)
Published on 19/01/2011
