33
4, XIX, 2016
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
DOI: 10.15240/ ul/001/2016-4-003
In oduc ion
C ea i i y is a e y impo an aspec o ma ke
economy. Some schola s (Howkins, 2007;
Flo ida, 2002) a e absolu ely en husias ic abou
c ea i i y ha should gi e a compe i i e p io i y
in espec o he compe i o s. Ne e heless,
c ea i i y also aises many p oblems in
managemen o i om eeling o guil y o h ea
agains iden i y o o ganiza ion. In gene al,
c ea i i y is an ambi alen and con adic o y
phenomenon ha co e s bo h posi i e and
nega i e aspec s. As a esul , managemen o
c ea i i y aces some pa adoxes. The main aim
o his pape is o desc ibe hese pa adoxes.
Ano he aim is o p esen he di e en
app oaches owa ds c ea i i y managemen .
Finally, he pape seeks o de h one a nai e
a i ude ha c ea i i y in economy sol es all
possible p oblems. The bigges challenge o he
managemen is he e y c ea i i y.
In he i s chap e I will p esen di e en
concep s o c ea i i y and inno a ion in he
pe spec i e o managemen . In he second
chap e I will analyze en pa adoxes o c ea i i y
managemen including one g and and nine
mino pa adoxes.
1. C ea i i y and Inno a ion in he
Pe spec i e o Managemen
Some schola s (Pečiulis, 2015; Reime is,
2016) speak abou con empo a y socie y as
a c ea i e one. The unde s anding o c ea i i y
has an e olu ion om he concep o genius o
he concep o c ea i e sys ems (Če ne ičiū ė,
2014). C ea i i y has been ea ed in di e en
ways om he pe spec i es o di e en
sciences (Ba e ičiū ė, 2014). Besides his,
unde s andings o c ea i i y depend on di e en
cul u al en i onmen s (Klimczuk, 2014;
P uskus, 2015). Table 1 shows he de i ni ions
o c ea i i y in he con ex o managemen . I is
an example how ce ain con ex changes he
unde s anding o a phenomenon. On he one
hand, he in en ion o manage helps o na ow
and unde s and he phenomenon o c ea i i y.
On he o he hand, his con ex like any o he
p esupposes he a ie y o de i ni ions. The
manage s ea c ea i i y as a unc ion o wo k
(Amabile, 1998; A nd e al., 1999; D azin e
al., 1999), o he no el p oduc s (Fo d & Gioia,
2000; Amabile, 1988; Zhou & Shalley, 2010),
o social ac i i y (Fo d & Gioia, 2000; A nd
e al., 1999), o di e gen hinking and idea
gene a ions (Amabile, 1996; Paulus, 2000;
Amabile, 1983), o cogni ion and judgemen
(Rank e al., 2004; Amabile, 1982; Fo d & Gioia,
2000), o ela ionship be ween an indi idual and
his (he ) en i onmen (Ande son e al., 2014;
Fo d & Gioia, 2000; D azin e al., 1999).
Table 2 shows he impac o c ea i i y
in a mic o en i onmen (in an o ganiza ion).
Besides his, he pe spec i e o managemen
supplemen s he concep o c ea i i y wi h
he speci i c cha ac e is ics. The impac o
c ea i i y is no always posi i e speaking bo h
– abou social connec ions and abou indi idual
eelings. The schola s pay a en ion o he ac
ha an indi idual c ea i i y h ea ens o he
social connec ions (A nd e al., 1999; S o ,
1972). Addi ionally, c ea i i y p o okes no
only a ejec ion and c i icism (Su on, 2001),
bu also he con l ic s in an o ganiza ion (Jung
& Lee, 2015). Finally, c ea i i y causes eeling
o guil (A nd e al., 1999) o can lead o sel -
des uc ion (S o , 1972). As a esul , i could
be said ha he posi i e aspec s o c ea i i y
a e insepa able om i s nega i e ac o s.
Tha is why he schola s speak abou he
complex in e ac ions (Ande son e al., 2014)
o c ea i i y. Ano he sou ce o complexi y is
he double na u e o c ea i i y ha is di ec ed
owa ds he social en i onmen , al hough i
s ems as he indi idual aspi a ions ha in
THE PARADOXES OF CREATIVITY
MANAGEMENT
Tomas Kače auskas
EM_4_2016.indd 33EM_4_2016.indd 33 30.11.2016 16:31:3230.11.2016 16:31:32
34 2016, XIX, 4
Ekonomika a managemen
u n a e insepa able om he social wo ld.
I is no enough o say ha he o ganiza ions
need a balance be ween con e gen (logical)
and di e gen (imagina i e) hinking (Basadu
& Hausdo , 1996; Chen e al., 2015), be ween
sea ch and c ea i i y (Alexande , 1979) o
e en be ween c ea i i y and no c ea i i y
(Bil on, 2015). The idea o balance o ha mony
is insepa able om he idea o com o able
clima e in an o ganiza ion. Howe e , he
c ea i e decisions a e he esul s o discom o ,
s ess o c isis and p o oke in ole ance, ange
o igno ance. The social ies in a com o able
o ganiza ion could be called mic o social capi al
ha ex e mina es a mic o c ea i e capi al as
possibili y o he c ea i e ideas. Flo ida (2002)
speaks abou he clash be ween social capi al
and c ea i e capi al. Ne e heless, Flo ida is no
consequen by ising ole ance as one o h ee
Ts (beside echnology and alen ) cha ac e is ic
o c ea i e class. Technology and c ea i i y has
been in e wined bu no necessa y in a posi i e
way (Kanišauskas, 2016).
On he o he hand, he so called
ha monic ela ions o en hide an au ho i a ian
managemen ha supp esses any c ea i i y.
So he Pla onic ( o be p ecise, Py hago ean)
idea o ha mony is inconsis en wi h c ea i e
dynamics in an o ganiza ion and could lead o
i s collapse because o s agna ion o he social
ela ions ha lead o a de i ci o new ideas
wi hin i . I is no abou a kind o managemen
o c ea i i y – ha d one o so one. Flo ida
(2002) sees only his aspec o managemen
by ad oca ing so called so managemen .
Some imes, we need o make e y di i cul
decisions o p o oke he c ea i e ideas. Su on
(2001) calls o hi ing he pe suasi e he e ics
and o i gh ing be ween people wi hin an
o ganiza ion. The managemen o c ea i i y
should be c ea i e oo. In o he wo ds, i should
be bo h unexpec ed bu s ill ha ing a clea
s a egy. G eene (2007) speaks abou he
di e en wa s a egies including he a ea o
managemen . Howe e , he clea manage ial
s a egy does no mean he ob usion o ce ain
ac ical ways. On he con a y, hese ways
should be open o he expe imen s e en i
hey lead o he ailu es. Tha is why Amabile
(1988) and Su on (2001) sugges ewa ding
Desc ip ion Re e ences
A subjec i e judgmen Amabile, 1982
The gene a ion o “o iginal and use ul ideas” Amabile, 1983
Idea gene a ion Amabile, 1996
A unc ion o he componen s as ollows: expe ise, c ea i e- hinking skills,
mo i a ion (in insic and ex insic) Amabile, 1998
The join no el y and use ulness o ideas ega ding
p oduc s, p ocesses and se ices
Amabile, 1988;
Zhou & Shalley, 2010
A complex in e ac ion be ween he indi idual and his (he ) wo k en i onmen
(o ganiza ion) Ande son e al., 2014
Cha ac e ized by he c ea i e wo k as o iginal one, i. e. di e en om wha
o he s ha e done; he case o subcul u e A nd e al., 1999
A c i ical p ocess necessa y o indi iduals, g oups and o ganiza ions aced
wi h complex and in e dependen wo k D azin e al., 1999
A social ac i i y wi hin pa icula con ex s Fo d & Gioia, 2000
A mul idimensional phenomenon ha depends on di e en p ocesses, an
a ea o subjec i e judgmen Fo d & Gioia, 2000
The di e gen hinking wi h he a ibu es as ollows: l uency, l exibili y,
o iginali y, and elabo a ion Paulus, 2000
In ol ing p ima ily in a-indi idual cogni i e p ocesses Rank e al., 2004
Sou ce: own
Tab. 1: De i ni ions o c ea i i y in he con ex o managemen
EM_4_2016.indd 34EM_4_2016.indd 34 30.11.2016 16:31:3230.11.2016 16:31:32
35
4, XIX, 2016
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
e en he ailu e by ese ing punishmen
only o inac ion. O en, inac ion o imi a ion
o wo k is a esul o au ho i a ian p essu e
owa ds he ac ical ways ha a e no open
o he wo ke s. In gene al, manage ial cul u e
should be ich (wi h clea s a egy and open
ac ics) and di e se (so and ha d) enough in
o de o suppo s a cons an con es o he new
winning ideas. The en i onmen o c ea i i y
is a he a climax o wo y and compe i ion o
e en i gh ing ins ead o ha mony and ole ance
ha o en hide au ho i a ian managemen and
inac ion. A ha mony should be a ask bu no
eali y wi hin a mul i-colo ed wo k g oup. No by
acciden , he schola s (S ahl e al., 2009; Gilson
& Shalley, 2004; S aw, 1990) s ess ha he
mos p oduc i e wo king g oups consis o he
inconsis en membe s in di e en senses. Wha
conce ns eali y in such c ea i e en i onmen ,
he mos eal hings a e he inno a i e ideas o
be implemen ed because o he ac ha hey
change he social (economic) o de .
Table 3 shows he peculia i ies o inno a ion
in he pe spec i e o managemen . C ea i i y
is a e y b oad concep used o desc ibe
e y di e en human ac i i ies, i s o all a
and gene a ion o ideas no necessa y o be
implemen ed. On he con a y, inno a ion
deals wi h he idea implemen a ion (Amabile,
1996; Kazanjian e al., 2000; Lane & Lup,
2015; Bledow e al., 2009; Wes , 2002) o idea
applica ion (Bil on, 2015). Being such, he
inno a ion is a mo e social p ocess compa ing
wi h mo e o less indi idual c ea i i y. I
appeals bo h o a collec i e c ea i i y and o job
ela ionship wi hin an o ganiza ion. As a esul ,
he inno a ion is no such a ague objec o
managemen as c ea i i y. In o he wo ds, he
managemen o inno a ion could be a model
o managemen o c ea i i y. Speaking abou
managemen o c ea i i y, many schola s ha e
in mind namely he inno a ion, i.e. he applied
c ea i i y.
2. Managemen o C ea i i y
Managemen o c ea i i y co e s he di e en
manage ial p ac ices including challenge,
eedom, esou ces, wo k-g oup ea u es,
supe iso y encou agemen and o ganiza ional
suppo (Amabile, 1998). Acco ding o some
schola s (Wes , 1990), he managemen o
c ea i i y p esupposes a social en i onmen o
a eam and i s ac o s such as ise o ision,
pa icipa i e sa e y, ask o ien a ion, and suppo
o inno a ion. Howe e , c ea i i y appeals o
an indi idual ac i i y o a ension be ween he
Cha ac e is ics Re e ences
An e ec i e gene a ion p ocess combines bo h sea ch and c ea i i y wi hin
a con ex ha balances bo h Alexande , 1979
Communica ion o ideas as pa o c ea i e p ocesses Amabile, 1996;
Gilson, 2001
Th ea ening social connec ion; eelings o guil A nd e al., 1999
C ea i i y in o ganiza ion and di e gen /con e gen hinking Basadu & Hausdo ,
1996
Dialec ics o c ea i i y and no c ea i i y; ’no c ea i i y’ as a “necessa y
ballas “ Bil on, 2015
Di e gen hinking as gene a ing he ideas, imagina ion, and non-linea
hough s Chen e al., 2015
Socializing as a posi i e ac o o such aspec s o c ea i i y as a ee l ow o
ideas, mo e b ains o ming, and iendlie wo k en i onmen Gilson & Shalley, 2004
C ea i i y as ” he combina ion o ela ionship con l ic and he ela ional sel ” Jung & Lee, 2015, p. 45
The i a ional d i e necessa y o c ea i e wo k can lead o he na cissis ic,
an i-social o sel -des uc i e beha io S o , 1972
Rejec ion and c i icism owa ds c ea i e people con i den in hei wo k Su on, 2001
Sou ce: own
Tab. 2: Cha ac e is ics and impac o c ea i i y in an o ganiza ion
EM_4_2016.indd 35EM_4_2016.indd 35 30.11.2016 16:31:3230.11.2016 16:31:32
36 2016, XIX, 4
Ekonomika a managemen
indi idual aspi a ions and he asks o a eam.
Tha is why i s o all a ques ion a ises how
o ha monize a p inciple o managemen and
a p inciple o c ea i i y. Speaking abou c ea i i y,
we ace inde e mina ion and unce ain y ha
could be compa ed wi h chaos. Addi ionally,
c ea i i y b akes s a us quo including social
ela ions wi hin an o ganiza ion, p o okes he
con l ic s and eeling o guil as we ha e seen
in he p e ious chap e . Finally, c ea i i y
opens he uns able and unclea u u e o he
o ganiza ion. I seems ha he cos is oo big
o a mo e o less success ul o ganiza ion wi h
he s able income. I is no s ange ha mos o
manage s do no ole a e any mani es a ion o
c ea i i y ha ha e associa ed wi h a e olu ion
agains hem pe sonally and agains wel a e o
hei o ganiza ions. In his sense, he inno a ion
has be e p es ige han c ea i i y while he
i s could be be e combined wi h manage ial
p ac ices. He e, we ace ano he de i ni ion o
he inno a ion as c ea i i y unde con ol o
a comp omise o chao ic c ea i i y. On he o he
hand, we can speak abou ashion o e en
mania o inno a ion ou inized in a manage ial
way. As a esul , some schola s speak abou
manage ial o hodoxy as abou ”dogma ic belie
in he powe o inno a ion“ (Johnsen, 2015,
p. 63).
The apo ia o pa adox o c ea i i y
managemen is as ollows: „ he employees
should sys ema ically ollow he ins uc ions
o hei manage s. Howe e , his p esc ip ion
os e s con o mi y a he han spa king new
ini ia i es“ (Johnsen, 2015, p. 63). In o he
wo ds, c ea i i y managemen is a sel -
con adic ion since managemen should con ol
and educe he chaos associa ed wi h c ea i i y.
By s imula ing c ea i i y, he manage s isk o
p o oke he disobedience o hei ins uc ions
including an ins uc ion o de elop c ea i i y. We
can call his con adic ion he majo o g and
pa adox o c ea i i y managemen (GP). Ha ing
in mind GP, he Hamel’s (2007) a gumen ha
managemen can spa k inno a ion is a om
being e iden .
This pa adox is especially sha p in so
called ha d con ol ha limi s any ini ia i e o
he employees. Flo ida (2002) pays a en ion
ha he ha d con ol elimina es any c ea i i y
in he o ganiza ion. Howe e , some imes all
he c ea i i y needs is a “ha d“ decision o he
manage s, as men ioned abo e. Addi ionally,
we ha e he di e en manage ial adi ions
including pa e nalis ic ones in he di e en
cul u al en i onmen a ound he wo ld (Zhou,
2006). In gene al, we ha e he di e en
combina ions o ha d and so con ol in di e en
en i onmen s and si ua ions. Simila ly, we ha e
he di e en models o democ acy ha is s ong
because o his a ie y.
Besides his, we ha e ano he pa adox ha
could be called he i s mino pa adox (MP1).
C ea i i y is he mos ac ual du ing a pe iod o
c isis wi hin an o ganiza ion. On he one hand,
success ul pe iod o an o ganiza ion is an
obs acle o de elop he c ea i e ideas (Bil on &
Cummings, 2014) since he s abili y and sa e y
has mo e p io i y. Rou ine is an ine i able esul
o success ul p esen ha in u n comes a e
s o my pas pe iod o he c ea i e ideas and hei
implemen a ion. On he o he hand, c ea i i y
Cha ac e is ics Re e ences
Rep esen s in e -indi idual social p ocesses in he wo kplace Rank e al., 2004
Idea implemen a ion Amabile, 1996
The “applica ion o a c ea i e idea, ypically owa ds new p oduc s,
new business models o managemen p ocesses.” Bil on, 2015, p. 154-155
En ep eneu ial inno a ion as a des uc i e p ocess Schumpe e , 1939
No el y plus alue Bil on, 2015, p. 157
Implemen a ion e ec i eness Kazanjian e al., 2000
Use ul c ea i e ideas a e he p ocess o hei success ul implemen a ion Lane & Lup, 2015
Implemen a ion bu no jus idea gene a ion Bledow e al., 2009;
Wes , 2002
Sou ce: own
Tab. 3: De i ni ion o inno a ion in he con ex o managemen
EM_4_2016.indd 36EM_4_2016.indd 36 30.11.2016 16:31:3230.11.2016 16:31:32
37
4, XIX, 2016
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
is insepa able om des uc ion, unce ain y,
con l ic s o e en chaos as men ioned. In
o he wo ds, any o ganiza ion should a oid i
in o de o su i e as a whole body. Howe e ,
one o mos impo an condi ions o su i e
in he compe i ion be ween he o ganiza ions
is namely c ea i i y and inno a ion as i s
implemen a ion. In gene al, c ea i i y des oys
he s a us quo ela ionships bo h inside an
o ganiza ion (ho izon al ela ionships) and
ou side i ( e ical ela ionships). The la e
ones a e no only he exis ing comme cial
in e es s o he selle s (p oduce s) and he
consume s (Bil on & Cummings, 2014), bu also
he alue chains (Bil on, 2007) wi hin a socie y.
In o he wo ds, c ea i i y con uses he social
o de o e en cleans he social boa d o new
ela ionships. I could be compa ed wi h he
p ocedu e o b acke ing in phenomenology:
we ake he con en o ou consciesness in he
b acke s o he sake o new con en .
The ques ion o managemen also asks
how o implemen he c ea i e ideas – s ep
by s ep, by using he sub le and inc emen al
changes (Bil on & Cummings, 2014) o by
using he adical decisions wi h ailu es and
men ioned isks (Su on, 2011). This leads o
a pa adox oo. I could be called he second
mino pa adox (MP2) o he pa adox o
inno a ion. I we choose a way s ep by s ep we
a oid he undesi able seconda y e ec s such
as con l ic s o diso de in he o ganiza ion bu
we lose a s a egic ad an age in espec o
he compe i o s. I we choose a adical way i
h ea ens o he e y iden i y o an o ganiza ion.
I sounds also pa adoxically, bu he si ua ion o
an o ganiza ion should be eally bad in o de o
ake he adical decisions. And ice e sa, he
bigges obs acles owa ds he inno a ions a e
he good esul s o he o ganiza ion.
The hi d mino pa adox (MP3) o c ea i i y
managemen is as ollows: by inc easing
c ea i i y in an o ganiza ion we inc ease
he p obabili y o he con l ic , diso de and
disha mony wi hin i . O en a mic osocial con l ic
in an o ganiza ion ollows om he si ua ion
when “a mino i y in he eam publicly opposes
he belie s, a i udes, ideas, p ocedu es, o
policies assumed by he majo i y o he eam”
(McLeod e al., 1997). Acco ding o Lane and
Lup (2015), ensions and con adic ions in
managing o c ea i i y lead o o ganiza ional
success. Addi ionally, he s uc u al solu ions
could be e alua ed as a way o spli and place
he con adic o y asks (ibid). As men ioned,
c ea i i y des oys he s a us quo. Al hough
some schola s (Bil on & Cummings, 2014)
openly call o such des oy in o de o o m new
en i onmen , i does no gua an ee any new
o de . E en in he case o success ul inno a ion
he success could be (and usually is) an apple
o disco d. We can emembe he pe ipe eias o
S. Jobs’ ca ee in Apple Company. In gene al,
c ea i i y managemen is insepa able om
con l ic managemen (Gel and e al., 2008;
Hoe e e al., 2012; Tekleab & Quigley, 2014;
Nijs ad e al., 2014; Jung & Lee, 2015; Chen
e al., 2015). MP3 has one mo e aspec . On
he one hand, he e is a need o highe le el
o c ea i e en ep eneu s’ di e gen hinking
in o de o sol e he in e pe sonal con l ic s in
o ganiza ion (Chen e al., 2015). On he o he
hand, he di e gen hinking inc eases he
possibili y o he con l ic s as no hing else. He e,
i is no enough o say in unp oblema ic way
ha a ie y o in o ma ion, skills and poin s o
iew exchange ideas while wo king oge he
p esupposes mo e no el solu ions (S aw,
1990). The di e en e sions o such ado a ion
o a ie y in a eam we ace in Howkins (2007)
and in Flo ida (2002). I MP1 deals wi h he
s uc u e o an o ganiza ion and MP2 appeals
o he echnology o managemen , MP3 co e s
he psychological aspec s o he c ea i i y
agen s.
Besides he men ioned issues, we ha e
also he sociological aspec s in c ea i i y
managemen . On he one hand, c ea i i y
is an indi idual ac i i y while an ou s anding
indi idual demons a es he o iginal solu ions
and app oach owa ds he p oblems. On he
o he hand, i is a social ac i i y in wo old
sense. Fi s , e en he mos o iginal ideals a ise
in a social en i onmen as in he backg ound
o hese ou s anding ideas. Any in en o o
inno a o is no alone bo h by being educa ed
in one o ano he way and by wo king in
a eam. Second, he p oduc o c ea i i y
appeals o ce ain social en i onmen (ma ke
o consuming). We can call he inno a ion also
as socializa ion o c ea i i y. As a esul , we ace
one mo e pa adox as ollows: e e y in en o
o inno a o ies o nega e his (he ) social
en i onmen ha has educa ed and s imula ed
him (he ). I could be called o h mino pa adox
(MP4).
As men ioned, he al e na i e be ween
ha d and so managemen is pa adoxical, oo.
EM_4_2016.indd 37EM_4_2016.indd 37 30.11.2016 16:31:3230.11.2016 16:31:32

38 2016, XIX, 4
Ekonomika a managemen
Ac ually, c ea i i y needs enough au onomy and
does no ole a e any ha d con ol. Howe e ,
i we ha e so con ol we do no ha e any
c ea i i y, because o i s ambi alen na u e. I
could be said bo h abou indi idual and social
c ea i i y in a eam. The his o y o a shows
ha almos all mas e pieces o a eme ge a e
an a is has he o de o c ea e i and ce ain
con ol o a cus ome . And ice e sa, c ea i i y
is impossible wi hou ce ain eedom o ac i i y
and especially wi hou eedom o hinking. The
schola s (Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Zhou,
1998) s ess job au onomy o expe imen ing
and explo ing al e na i e ideas. Su on (2001)
speaks abou managemen o eedom and
gi es an example o ee idea gene a ion on
F ydays a Coming’s Sulli an Pa k R&D lab.
As a esul o his F yday eedom, we ha e
in en ed genomics- echnology ” ha was
o i cially killed by he head o esea ch bu was
pu sued in F yday a e noon expe imen s.“
(Su on, 2001, p. 100) A kind o ha d con ol
is he hie a chical con ol ha p esupposes
he p esence o an au ho i y i gu e. Usually, i
makes a nega i e impac on idea gene a ion
(Mullen, 1991). Acco ding o Shalley and
Gilson (2004), he hie a chical o ganiza ional
s uc u es migh discou age employees om
aking c ea i e app oaches o hei wo k. Lane
and Lup (2015) call i “mimic ia o au oc a ic
go e nmen “. I we emembe Pla o (1992)
any au oc acy o y anny i nally leads o
a e olu ion, diso de and ana chy. We no ice
i in di e en con empo a y egimes a ound he
wo ld. Usually, a de elopmen o he ideas in
he ame o a scien i i c o a is ic school is also
a kind o sa e bu cons ic ed ac i i y in espec
o no el y. We should always choose be ween
obedience o ou school and c ea i e eedom
ha h ea ens he sanc ions o his school. No
by acciden , he mos p ominen a is s ha e
been ei he ou side any school (such as V. an
Gogh o M. K. Čiu lionis) o he a he s o hem
(such as Picasso o S. Dali). Ne e heless, i
is al eady men ioned ha he implemen a ion
o he c ea i e ideas needs some imes e y
ha d decisions. This pa adox o ha d/so
managemen also ollows om GP and could
be called he i h mino pa adox (MP5).
Addi ionally, we ace he pa adox o
nega i e eedback ha is posi i ely associa ed
wi h c ea i e manage ial decisions (Fo d &
Gioia, 2000). In o he wo ds, he wo se a e
he esul s he mo e c ea i e a e he decisions
in o ganiza ion. To be mo e p ecise, such
decisions should be because o he ac ha he
decisions o he manage s ha e been in l uenced
by many ac o s. Some o hem ( o example,
he au ho i a i e managemen ) simply block
c ea i i y. Howe e , e en he de i ci o c ea i i y
in managemen could be a challenge o changes
bo h in mic o-en i onmen o o ganiza ion and in
ways o managemen . This pa adox could be
called six h mino pa adox (MP6).
The se en h mino pa adox (MP7) deals
wi h ela ionship be ween quan i y and quali y.
On he one hand, we need quan i y in o de o
de elop c ea i e quali y. On he o he hand,
he quan i y nega es he quali y. We can speak
abou his dialec ics no only in espec o
p oduc ion, bu also in espec o he employees
and e en o he manage s. Should we manage
he quan i y o quali y? Fo example, Su on
(2001) belie es ha namely quan i y should be
managed since quali y s ems om he la e .
The eigh h mino pa adox (MP8) is abou
ela ionship be ween knowledge and igno ance
(nai e é). I seems ha he knowledge is
he base o any c ea i i y. Su on appeals o
a company’s knowledge in o de o ”see old
p oblems in new ways“ and o ”b eak om he
pas “ (2001, p. 96). Howe e , he knowledge o
pas success does no allow any new app oach
owa ds he u u e. Tha is why we need no as
much knowledge as nai e é o e en igno ance
in o de o ”see-and pe haps sol e-p oblems
om a new pe spec i e“ (Su on, 2001, p. 99).
In a b oade con ex , Kuhn (1996) speaks
abou he scien i i c e olu ions implemen ed
ei he by he young scien is s o by he scien is
om o he a eas. In o he cases, hey a e
enough nai e and igno an , i.e. no ballas ed
by adi ional scien i i c app oach, o see he
new ways. As a esul , he companies need
no only managemen o knowledge, bu
also managemen o igno ance and nai e é.
Speaking abou he opposi ion o wisdom and
oolishness in o ganiza ion, Izak (2013) appeals
namely o MP8.
Las bu no leas , we ha e he pa adox o
ime in c ea i i y managemen . The schola s
speak abou he con as be ween “ he possible
u u e (‘wha could be’) and he p esen condi ion
(‘wha is’)“ (Johnsen, 2015, p. 64), as well abou
yes e day’s success ha becomes he ” oday’s
ch onic malady in o ganiza ions“ (Johnsen,
2015, p. 62). Tha is why he schola s sugges
a planning o any ac i i y in an o ganiza ion.
EM_4_2016.indd 38EM_4_2016.indd 38 30.11.2016 16:31:3230.11.2016 16:31:32
39
4, XIX, 2016
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
Howe e , he planning leads o o he pa adox
since c ea i i y has usually been ea ed
as unexpec ed and spon aneous ac i i y.
Ne e heless, he schola s discuss abou he
in l uence o such planning skills as pene a ion
and o ecas ing on c ea i e hough (Osbu n
& Mum o d, 2006, p. 173). Addi ionally, he
planning could be ea ed as a c ea i e, i. e.
inhe en ly gene a i e ac i i y in ol ing he
men al simula ion o u u e ac ions (Anzai, 1984;
Mum o d e al., 2002; Noice, 1991). Acco ding o
Osbu n and Mum o d, ”planning may con ibu e
o c ea i e hough h ough a leas h ee
mechanisms: (a) p omo ing idea e i nemen , (b)
p omo ing oppo unis ic exploi a ion o eme gen
oppo uni ies, and (c) s imula ing he gene a ion
o new ideas and app oaches in an a emp
o o e come an icipa ed p oblems“ (Osbu n
& Mum o d, 2006, p. 174). Ne e heless,
he pa adox o ime could be deepened by
appealing o Heidegge (1996) who speaks
abou ou being owa ds dea h. Reph asing
M. Heidegge , all ha makes us c ea i e is
ou possible u u e collapse. The manage s
should o ge he pas success o o ganiza ion
and hink abou u u e end o i . In o he wo ds,
he u u e dea h o o ganiza ion makes he
employees ali e wi hin i . The pa adox o ime
in managemen could be called he nin h mino
pa adox (MP9).
Table 5 shows he speci i ca ion o all
men ioned pa adoxes. Howe e , he pa adoxes
a e in e wined wi h each o he . In o he wo ds,
hey walk no alone. Fo example, Jung and
Lee (2015) appeal o he pas ela ionship
con l ic o he sake o c ea i i y. This a gumen
co e s MP3 and MP9. The discussions abou
o ganiza ional ambidex e i y and i s ing edien s
such as discipline, s e ch, suppo and us
(Gibson & Bi kinshaw, 2004; Lane & Lup,
2015) appeal o MP4 and MP5. The a gumen
o Su on (2001) ha he manage s should hi e
he pe suasi e he e ics in o de o inc ease he
c ea i e con l ic s wi hin o ganiza ion appeals o
MP3 and MP8.
Conclusions
Managemen o c ea i i y leads o he di e en
pa adoxes ha could be classi i ed in o one
g and and nine mino pa adoxes. The g and
pa adox (GP) is abou he con adic ion be ween
he p inciple o managemen and c ea i i y in
gene al. Usually, any managemen educes
c ea i i y since i equi es ollowing he ules o
an o ganiza ion, i.e. o obey he wo k ou ine
ha is inconsis en wi h c ea i i y. In he case
o c ea i i y s imula ion, he manage s isk o
p o oke he disobedience o hei ins uc ions
including an ins uc ion o de elop c ea i i y.
The mino pa adoxes ollow om GP and co e
Pa adox Desc ip ion
GP By s imula ing c ea i i y, he manage s isk o p o oke he disobedience o hei
ins uc ions including an ins uc ion o de elop c ea i i y
MP1 Success ul pe iod o an o ganiza ion is an obs acle o de elop he c ea i e ideas
MP2 A adical implemen a ion o c ea i e ideas h ea ens he iden i y o o ganiza ion
MP3 C ea i i y p o okes he con l ic s in o ganiza ion
MP4 E e y in en o o inno a o ies o nega e his (he ) social en i onmen ha has
educa ed and s imula ed him (he )
MP5 Al hough ha d managemen kills c ea i i y, he la e needs some imes e y ha d
decisions
MP6 The wo se he esul s a e, he mo e c ea i e he decisions in o ganiza ion a e
MP7 O ganiza ions should manage bo h quan i y and quali y
MP8 O ganiza ion needs no only managemen o knowledge bu also managemen o
igno ance and nai e é
MP9 The manage s should o ge he pas success o o ganiza ion and hink abou u u e
end o i
Sou ce: own
Tab. 4: The pa adoxes o c ea i i y managemen
EM_4_2016.indd 39EM_4_2016.indd 39 30.11.2016 16:31:3330.11.2016 16:31:33
40 2016, XIX, 4
Ekonomika a managemen
he di e en aspec s o men ioned con adic ion
including he dange s bo h o success ul pas
and o iden i y, he c ea i e con l ic s, he social
en i onmen , he ha d decisions, equilib ium
be ween quan i y and quali y, igno ance and
nai e é, as well as u u e end o o ganiza ion.
All his shows ha c ea i i y gene a es many
addi ional p oblems ins ead o gi ing only
a compe i i e ad an age. As a esul , we
should e use nai e en husiasm conce ning
managemen o c ea i i y.
Re e ences
Alexande , E. R. (1979). The design o
al e na i es in o ganiza ional con ex s: a pilo
s udy. Adminis a i e Science Qua e ly, 24(3),
382-404. doi:10.2307/2989919.
Amabile, T. M. (1998). How o kill c ea i i y.
Ha a d Business Re iew, 76(5), 76-86.
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology
o c ea i i y: a consensual assessmen
echnique. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology, 43(5), 997-1013. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.43.5.997.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). Social psychology
o c ea i i y: A componen ial concep ualiza ion.
Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology,
45(2), 357-376. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.45.2.357.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model o c ea i i y
and inno a ion in o ganiza ions. Resea ch in
O ganiza ional Beha io , 10, 123-167.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). C ea i i y in con ex .
Boulde , CO: Wes iew.
Ande son, N., Po ocnik, K., & Zhou,
J. (2014). Inno a ion and c ea i i y in
o ganiza ions: A s a e-o - he-science e iew,
p ospec i e commen a y, and guiding
amewo k. Jou nal o Managemen , 40(5),
1297-1333. doi:10.1177/0149206314527128.
Anzai, Y. (1984). Cogni i e con ol o
eal- ime e en d i en sys ems. Cogni i e
Science, 8(3), 221-254. doi:10.1016/S0364-
0213(84)80002-6.
A nd , J., G eenbe g, J., Solomon, S. e
al. (1999). C ea i i y and e o managemen :
E idence ha c ea i e ac i i y inc eases
guil and social p ojec ion ollowing mo ali y
salience. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology, 77(1), 19-32. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.77.1.19.
Ba e ičiū ė, J. (2014). Pag indiniai
kū ybiškumo i kū ybingumo aspek ai
šiuolaikiniuose humani a iniuose bei socialiniuose
moksluose [The aspec s o c ea i i y and
c ea i eness in con empo a y humani ies and
social sciences]. Filoso i ja. Sociologija, 25(1),
19-28.
Basadu , M., & Hausdo , P. A. (1996).
Measu ing di e gen hinking a i udes ela ed
o c ea i e p oblem sol ing and inno a ion
managemen . C ea i i y Resea ch Jou nal,
9(1), 21-32. doi:10.1207/s15326934c j0901_3.
Bil on, C., & Cummings, S. (2014).
A amewo k o c ea i e managemen and
managing c ea i i y. In C. Bil on, & S. Cummings
(Eds.), Handbook o managemen and c ea i i y
(pp. 1-12). Regency: Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Bil on, C. (2015). Unc ea i i y: he shadow
side o c ea i i y. In e na ional Jou nal o
Cul u al Policy, 21(2), 153-167. doi:10.1080/10
286632.2014.892933.
Bil on, C. (2007). Managemen and
c ea i i y: om c ea i e indus ies o c ea i e
managemen . Ox o d: Blackwell.
Bledow, R., F ese, M., Ande son, N., E ez,
M., & Fa , J. (2009). A dialec ic pe spec i e
on inno a ion: Con l ic ing demands, mul iple
pa hways, and ambidex e i y. Indus ial and
O ganiza ional Psychology, 2(3), 305-337.
doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01154.
Če ne ičiū ė, J. (2014). C ea i i y Unde -
s andings, E olu ion: om Genius o C ea i e
Sys ems. San alka: Filoso i ja, Komunikacija,
22(2), 113-125. doi:10.3846/cpc.2014.10.
Chen, M.-H., Chang, Y.-Y., & Lo, Y.-H.
(2015). C ea i i y cogni i e s yle, con l ic , and
ca ee success o c ea i e en ep eneu s.
Jou nal o Business Resea ch, 68(4), 906-910.
doi:10.1016/j.jbus es.2014.11.050.
D azin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanjian, R.
K. (1999). Mul ile el heo izing abou c ea i i y
in o ganiza ions: A sense making pe spec i e.
Academy o Managemen Re iew, 24(2), 286-
307. doi:10.5465/AMR.1999.1893937.
Flo ida, R. (2002). The Rise o C ea i e
Class. And how i ’s ans o ming wo k, leisu e,
communi y and e e yday li e. New Yo k: Basic
Books.
Fo d, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). Fac o s
in l uencing c ea i i y in he domain o manage ial
decision making. Jou nal o Managemen , 26(4),
705-732. doi:10.1177/014920630002600406.
Gel and, M. J., Leslie, L. M., & Kelle , K.
M. (2008). On he e iology o con l ic cul u es.
Resea ch in O ganiza ional Beha io , 28, 137-
166. doi:10.1016/j. iob.2008.06.001.
EM_4_2016.indd 40EM_4_2016.indd 40 30.11.2016 16:31:3330.11.2016 16:31:33
41
4, XIX, 2016
Business Adminis a ion and Managemen
Gibson, C. B., & Bi kinshaw, J. (2004). The
an eceden s, consequences, and media ing
ole o o ganiza ional ambidex e i y. Academy
o Managemen Jou nal, 47(2), 209-226.
doi:10.2307/20159573.
Gilson, L. L. (2001). Di e si y, dissimila i y
and c ea i i y: Does g oup composi ion o
being di e en enhance o hinde c ea i e
pe o mance. Washing on: Academy o Mana-
gemen Mee ings.
Gilson, L. L., & Shalley, C. E. (2004). A li le
c ea i i y goes a long way: An examina ion o
eams’ engagemen in c ea i e p ocesses.
Jou nal o Managemen , 30(4), 453-470.
doi:10.1016/j.jm.2003.07.001.
G eene, R. (2007). The 33 S a egies o
Wa . New Yo k: Penguin.
Hamel, G. (2007). The u u e o managemen .
Bos on: Ha a d Business School P ess.
Heidegge , M. (1996). Being and Time.
T ans. by J. S ambaugh. New Yo k: S a e
Uni e si y o New Yo k P ess.
Hoe e , I. J., an Knippenbe g, D., an
Ginkel, W. P. e al. (2012). Fos e ing eam
c ea i i y: Pe spec i e aking as key o unlocking
di e si y’s po en ial. Jou nal o Applied
Psychology, 97(5), 982-996. doi:10.1037/
a0029159.
Howkins, J. (2007). The C ea i e Economy.
London: Penguin.
Izak, M. (2013). The oolishness o wisdom:
Towa ds an inclusi e app oach o wisdom
in o ganiza ion. Scandina ian Jou nal o
Managemen , 29(1), 108-115. doi:10.1016/j.
scaman.2012.07.002.
Johnsen, C. G. (2015). Decons uc ing
he u u e o managemen : Pha makon, Ga y
Hamel and he impossibili y o in en ion.
Fu u es, 68(Ap il), 57-66. doi:10.1016/j.
u u es.2014.05.007.
Jung, E. J., & Lee, S. (2015). The combined
e ec s o ela ionship con l ic and he ela ional
sel on c ea i i y. O ganiza ional Beha io and
Human Decision P ocesses, 130(Sep embe ),
44-57. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.006.
Kanišauskas, S. (2016). C ea i e echno-
logies en apped by ins umen al mind.
Filoso i ja. Sociologija, 27(1), 45-50.
Kazanjian, R. K., D azin, R., & Glynn, M. A.
(2000). C ea i i y and echnological lea ning:
The oles o o ganiza ion a chi ec u e and c isis
in la ge-scale p ojec s. Jou nal o Enginee ing
and Technology Managemen , 17(3-4), 273-
298. doi:10.1016/S0923-4748(00)00026-6.
Klimczuk, A. (2014). Ba ie s o he
De elopmen o C ea i e indus ies in
Cul u ally Di e se Region. San alka: Filoso i ja,
Komunikacija, 22(2), 145-152. doi:10.3846/
cpc.2014.13.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The s uc u e o scien i i c
e olu ions. Chicago and London: Uni e si y o
Chicago P ess.
Lane, C., & Lup, D. (2015). Cooking unde
i e: Managing mul ile el ensions be ween
c ea i i y and inno a ion in hau e cuisine.
Indus y and Inno a ion, 22(8), 654-676.
doi:10.1080/13662716.2015.1113861.
McLeod, P. L., Ba on, R. S., Ma i, M. W.,
& Yoon, K. (1997). The eyes ha e i : Mino i y
in l uence in ace- o- ace and compu e -
media ed g oup discussions. Jou nal o Applied
Psychology, 82(5), 706-718. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.82.5.706.
Mullen, B. (1991). G oup composi ion,
salience, and cogni i e ep esen a ions: The
phenomenology o being in a g oup. Jou nal
o Expe imen al Social Psychology, 27(4),
297-323. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(91)90028-5.
Mum o d, M. D., Schul z, R. A., & Osbu n,
H. K. (2002). Planning in o ganiza ions:
Pe o mance as a mul i-le el phenomenon. In
F. J. Yamma ino, & F. Danse eau (Eds.), Many
aces o mul i-le el issues (pp. 3-65). Ox o d:
Else ie .
Nijs ad, B. A., Be ge -Selman, F., &
De D eu, C. K. W. (2014). Inno a ion in
op managemen eams: Mino i y dissen ,
ans o ma ional leade ship, and adical
inno a ions. Eu opean Jou nal o Wo k and
O ganiza ional Psychology, 23(2), 310-322.
doi:10.1080/1359432X.2012.734038.
Noice, H. (1991). The ole o explana ions
and plan ecogni ion in he lea ning o hea ical
sc ip s. Cogni i e Science, 15(3), 425-460.
doi:10.1016/0364-0213(91)80004-O.
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996).
Employee c ea i i y: Pe sonal and con ex ual
ac o s a wo k, Academy o Managemen
Jou nal, 39(3), 607-634. doi:10.2307/256657.
Osbu n, H. K., & Mum o d, M. D. (2006).
C ea i i y and planning: T aining in e en ions
o de elop c ea i e p oblem-sol ing skills.
C ea i i y Resea ch Jou nal, 18(2), 173-190.
doi:10.1207/s15326934c j1802_4.
Paulus, P. B. (2000). G oups, eams,
and c ea i i y: The c ea i e po en ial o idea-
gene a ing g oups. Applied Psychology, 49(2),
237-262. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00013.
EM_4_2016.indd 41EM_4_2016.indd 41 30.11.2016 16:31:3330.11.2016 16:31:33