Tamara L. Friedrich

The Effects of Conflicting Information on Creative Thought: A Source of Performance Improvements or Decrements?

Creative problem-solving is, more often than not, studied as an isolated phenomenon. In real-world settings, however, events occur as people seek to generate creative problem solutions—some of which might contribute to and some of which might inhibit creative thought. The present study examined the effects of presenting conflicting information. The conflicting information presented was varied with respect to manner of presentation (either abstract versus specific) and content (either goals versus causes). This conflicting information was introduced at different points as 245 undergraduates worked on a marketing problem calling for creative thought. It was found that presentation of conflicting information, especially early presentation of conflicting information, resulted in decreased performance. The implications of these findings for understanding creative thought are discussed.

Managing Creative Performance Important Strategies for Leaders of Creative Efforts

The problem. Decades of research on performance management has been undertaken in an effort to improve both the validity of the process and the effectiveness of its outcomes (Budworth & Mann, 2011). This issue becomes even more potent when discussed in relation to those individuals attempting to foster creative efforts within organizations. The solution. This article reviews literature on creative performance in organizations and how performance management tactics can enhance the effectiveness of leaders who seek creative products and services from their employees in the new knowledge and service-based economy of the 21st century. More specifically, we attempt to integrate the findings in the literature related to creativity with the literature on leadership and performance management to offer suggestions for specific practices leaders can engage in to foster creative performance from individuals who are working in either routine (i.e., not thought of as requiring high levels of creativity) or nonroutine (i.e., generally considered creative) positions. Stakeholders. The suggestions within this article should be of interest to professionals in the HRD field, particularly those who are interested in leader development. In addition, these suggestions may be of interest to the HRD professional within an organization that intends to increase or encourage the creative capacities of both leaders and subordinates.

Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership: An examination of multi-level influences on emergence and performance

Theories of outstanding, historically notable, leadership have traditionally emphasized charisma. Recent research, however, suggests that charisma may represent only one pathway to outstanding leadership. Outstanding leadership may also emerge from ideological and pragmatic leadership. In this article, we examine the conditions influencing the emergence and performance of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. It is argued that different conditions operating at the environmental, organizational, group, and individual levels influence the emergence and performance of each of these three types of leaders. Implications for understanding the origins and impact of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders are discussed.

Closing Comments on ‘Leading for Innovation’ We’ve Only Just Begun

The Problem: Insights and recommendations on developing leaders of creative efforts have been offered from various scholars and practitioners in this issue. However, we felt it would best serve the overall effort of this issue to provide several specific linkages between the overall themes presented. The Solution: In this closing piece, we briefly summarize the articles within this issue of Advances in Developing Human Resources. Stakeholders: This synthesis is intended to integrate key aspects of each article within the issue in order to stimulate further thought, and eventually action, for scholars and practitioners in Human Resource Development (HRD) and other related fields.

Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership: where we are, and where do we need to go?

Mumford, Friedrich, Hunter, and Caughron (2009) propose a multilevel theory of leadership intended to allow for the emergence and performance of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. In their commentaries, Hunt and Davis (2009) and Simonton (2009) provide additional support for this model. Their observations also broach questions about how charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leadership styles should be measured, and how hypotheses should be developed with regard to multilevel influence on leader emergence and performance. This commentary discusses the implications of these observations for future research on styles of outstanding leadership.