Korean Management Science Review (경영과학)

The Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society (한국경영과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Investigating the Effect of Both Team Diversity and Task Difficulty on Team Creativity : Multi-Agent Simulation Approach

팀 다양성과 과업난이도가 팀 창의성에 미치는 영향 : 다중 에이전트 시뮬레이션 접근방법을 중심으로

  • Chae, Seong Wook (Department of Business Administration, Hoseo University) ;
  • Seo, Young Wook (Department of Business Consulting, Graduate School at Daejeon University) ;
  • Lee, Kun Chang (SKKU Business School and Creativity Science Research Institute, Sungkyunkwan University)
  • 채성욱 (호서대학교 경영학부) ;
  • 서영욱 (대전대학교 융합컨설팅학과) ;
  • 이건창 (성균관대학교 경영대학)
  • Received : 2015.05.06
  • Accepted : 2015.06.26
  • Published : 2015.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In the management literature, it has been widely accepted among both researchers and practitioners that the level of team creativity is significantly related to the organizational performance. Besides, researchers posited with confidence that team diversity and task difficulty would affect team creativity through team members' activities of exploration and exploitation. However, empirical approaches to proving this belief suffered from lack of real data and proper methods as well. To tackle the research void like this, we propose a multi-agent simulation (MAS) mechanism. By adopting a set of parameters which validity were proven in the related literature, we conducted a series of experiments in the environment of the MAS platform named NetLogo. There sults suggest that managers can differentiate team diversity strategies according to task difficulty. In the case of a difficult task, managers need to increase team diversity so that their teams can maximize team creativity through rigorous exploration and exploitation. It is desirable to maintain an average level of team diversity when performing an easy task.

Keywords

References

  1. 권오병, 이주철, "상황인지 기반 최적화가 가능한 개인화된 모바일 웹서비스 구축을 위한 다중에이전트 접근법에 관한 연구," 경영과학, 제21권, 제3호(2004), pp.23-38.
  2. 김대영, 강복영, 강석호, "구조적 공백 기반 주문 분배 전략의 에이전트 기반 모델링 및 시뮬레이션," 경영과학, 제29권, 제1호(2012), pp.153-168. https://doi.org/10.7737/KMSR.2012.29.1.153
  3. 이건창, 한민희, 서영욱, "탐색 및 활용을 통한 컴퓨터 매개 커뮤니케이션의 팀 창의성에 관한 연구," 경영과학, 제28권, 제1호(2011), pp.91-105.
  4. Alder, P.S.G.B. and D.I. Levine, "Flexibility versus efficiency : A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system," Organization Science, Vol.10, No.1(1999), pp.43-68. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.1.43
  5. Alexander, J., B. Nuchols, J. Bloom, and S. Lee, "Organizational demography and turnover : An examination of multiform and nonlinear heterogeneity," Human Relations, Vol.48(1995), pp.1455-1480. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679504801204
  6. Amabile, T.M., "The social psychology of creativity : A componential conceptualization," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.45, No.2(1983), pp.357-376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
  7. Amabile, T.M., "A model of creativity and innovation in organizations," Research in Organizational Behavior, B.M. Staw and L. L. Cummings, eds., pp.123-167, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1988.
  8. Ancona, D.G. and D.F. Caldwell, "Demography and design : Predictors of new product team productivity," Organization Science, Vol.3(1992), pp.321-341. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.3.321
  9. Bantel, K.A. and S.E. Jackson, "Top management and innovations in banking : Does the composition of the top team make a difference?," Strategic Management Journal, Vol.10(1989), pp.107-124. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100709
  10. Benner, M.J. and M.L. Tushman, "Exploitation, exploration, and process management : The productivity dilemma revisited," Academy of Management Review, Vol.28, No.2(2003), pp.238-256. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2003.9416096
  11. Blau, P.M., Inequality and heterogeneity, Free Press, New York, 1977.
  12. Bohensky, E., "Learning Dilemmas in a Social- Ecological System : An Agent-Based Modeling Exploration," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Vol.17, No.1(2014), p.2.
  13. Cesaroni, F., A.D. Minin, and A. Piccaluga, "Exploration and Exploitation Strategies in Industrial R&D," Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol.14, No.3(2005), pp.222-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2005.00342.x
  14. Chang, M.-H. and J.E. Harrington, Jr., "Agentbased Models of organizations," Handbook of Computational Economics, L. Tesfatsion and K.L. Judd, eds., Elsevier, 2006.
  15. Earley, P.C. and E. Mosakowski, "Creating hybrid team cultures : An empirical test of transnational team functioning," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.43(2000), pp.26-49. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556384
  16. Epstein, J.M. and R.L. Axtell, Growing artificial societies : social science from the bottom up, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, 1996.
  17. Garcia, R., R. Calantone, and R. Levine, "The Role of Knowledge in Resource Allocation to Exploration versus Exploitation in Technologically Oriented Organizations," Decision Sciences, Vol.34, No.2(2003), pp.323-349. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5915.02407
  18. Gibson, C.B. and J. Birkinshaw, "The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.47, No.2(2004), pp.209-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159573
  19. Gupta, A.K., K.G. Smith, and C.E. Shalley, "The interplay between exploration and exploitation," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.49(2006), pp.693-706. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083026
  20. Hahn, C., B. Fley, M. Florian, D. Spresny, and K. Fischer, "Social Reputatiuon : a Mechanism for Flexible Self-Regulation of Multiagent Systems," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Vol.10, No.1(2007), Retrieved from http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/10/1/2.html.
  21. He, Z.-L. and P.-K. Wong, "Exploration vs. Exploitation : An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, Vol.15, No.4(2004), pp.481-494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
  22. Hogg, L.M.I. and N.R. Jennings, "Socially intelligent reasoning for autonomous agents," IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics Part A : Systems and Humans, Vol.31, No.5(2001), pp.381-393.
  23. Jansen, J.J.P., F.A.J.V.D. Bosch, and H.W. Volberda, "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance : Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, Vol.52, No.11(2006), pp.1661-1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
  24. Kim, T. and M. Rhee, "Exploration and exploitation : internal variety and environmental dynamism," Strategic Organization, Vol.7(2009), pp.11-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127008100125
  25. Lau, D.C. and J.K. Murnighan, "Demographic diversity and faultlines : The compositional dynamics of organizational groups," Academy of Management Review, Vol.23(1998), pp.325-340.
  26. Lawrence, P.R., J.W. Lorsch, and J.S. Garrison, Organization and environment : Managing differentiation and integration, Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University Boston, MA, 1967.
  27. Levinthal, D.A. and J.G. March, "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Vol.14(1993), pp.95-112. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250141009
  28. Malone, T.W. and M.R. Lepper, "Making learning fun : A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning," Aptitude, learning and instruction, R.E. Snow and M.J. Farr, eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1987.
  29. March, J.G., "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, Vol.2, No.1(1991), pp.71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  30. Marshall, M.A. and J.D. Brown, "Expectations and realizations : The role of expectancies in achievement settings," Motivation and Emotion, Vol.28(2004), pp.347-361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-004-2388-y
  31. McGrath, R.G., "Exploratory Learning, Innovative Capacity, and Managerial Oversight," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.44, No.1 (2001), pp.118-131. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069340
  32. Morgan, G., Images of organization, 1997.
  33. Nikolai, C. and G. Madey, "Tools of the Trade : A Survey of Various Agent Based Modeling Platforms," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Vol.12, No.2(2009).
  34. O'Reilly, C.A.I., D.F. Caldwell, and W.P. Barnett, "Work group demography, social integration, and turnover," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.34(1989), pp.21-37. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392984
  35. Page, S.E., The Difference : How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2007.
  36. Pelled, L.H., K.M. Eisenhardt, and K.R. Xin, "Exploring the Black Box : An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict, and Performance," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.44, No.1 (1999), pp.1-28. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667029
  37. Pfeffer, J., "Organizational demography," Research in organizational behavior, L.L. Cummings and B. M. Staw, eds., pp.299-357, JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn, 1983.
  38. Reagans, R. and E.W. Zuckerman, "Networks, Diversity, and Productivity : The Social Capital of Corporate R& D Teams," Organization Science, Vol.12(2001), pp.502-517. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.502.10637
  39. Rivkin, J.W. and N. Siggelkow, "Balancing search and stability : Interdependencies among elements of organizational design," Management Science, Vol.49(2003), pp.290-311. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.49.3.290.12740
  40. Smith, K.G., K.A. Smith, J.D. Olian, H.P. Sims, D.P. O'Bannon, and J.A. Scully, "Top management team demography and process : The role of social integration and communication," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.39(1994), pp.412-438. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393297
  41. Sternberg, R.J., The Nature of Creativity : Contemporary Psychological Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
  42. Tajfel, H. and J. Turner, "The social identity theory of intergroup behavior," Psychology and intergroup relations, S. Worchel and W. Austin, eds., pp.7-24, Nelson-Hall, Chicago, 1985.
  43. Taylor, A. and H.R. Greve, "Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge Combination And Experience in Innovative Teams," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.49, No.4(2006), pp.723-740. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083029
  44. Teece, D.J., G.P. Pisano, and A. Schuen, "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Vol.18(1997), pp.509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
  45. Thompson, J.D., Organizations in action, McGraw Hill, New York, 1967.
  46. Tiwana, A. and E.R. McLean, "Expertise Integration and Creativity in Information Systems Development," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol.22, No.1(2005), pp.13-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045836
  47. Tsui, A., T. Egan, and C. O'Reilly, "Being different : Relational demography and organizational attachment," Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.37, No.4(1992), pp.549-579. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393472
  48. Van Velsor, E. and C.D. McCauley, "Our view of leadership development," The center for creative leadership : Handbook of leadership development, C.D. McCauley and E.V. Velsor, eds., pp.1-22, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 2004.
  49. Wilensky, U., "NetLogo. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/," Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, 1999.
  50. Williams, K.Y. and C.A. O'Reilly, "Demography and diversity in organizations : A review of 40 years of research," Research in organizational behavior, B. M. Staw and L.L. Cummings, eds., pp.77-140, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 1998.
  51. Woodman, R.W., J.E. Sawyer, and R.W. Griffin, "Toward a Theory of Organizational Creativity," Academy of Management Review, Vol.18, No.2(1993), pp.293-321. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1993.3997517
  52. Xu, B., R. Liu, and W. Liu, "Individual Bias and Organizational Objectivity : An Agent-Based Simulation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Vol.17, No.2(2014), p.2.
  53. Zenger, T.R. and B.S. Lawrence, "Organizational demography : The differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication," Academy of Management Journal, Vol.32(1989), pp.353-376. https://doi.org/10.2307/256366
  54. Zhang, Y. and Y.P. Tian, "Consensus of Data-Sampled Multi-Agent Systems With Random Communication Delay and Packet Loss," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.55, No.4(2010), pp.939-943. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2010.2041612