Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between individual creative productivity and learning aboutideas of others. I report evidence from a two-stage real-effort lab experiment, in which subjects perform ideageneration tasks. In the first stage some subjects observe creative output of other players, while the othersnot. This design makes possible to assess whether learning ideas of others is an important input for ideageneration and quantify its importance. In the second stage, I make ideas costly and study the subjects’willingness to pay for them. I compare the costs of ideas to the expected monetary benefits from increasedcreative productivity and characterize investment behavior of the subjects. The results show that observingoutput of others boosts productivity in creative tasks, but only when it shows truly new, previously unknownby the subject items. When ideas of others become costly, I find that the subjects do not act in a profitmaximizing way. To minimize the costs they choose to see the ideas of less creative players, which usually donot contribute many original items. As a result, the participants get less than optimum benefits. This effect ismore pronounced for subjects of lower creative ability, more risk-averse or self-confident participants andfemales. In aggregate, such behavior does not lead to the highest possible level of creative production. Thesefindings make an argument for policies that encourage exchange of information at a workplace (e.g.teamwork, workshops) and at the same time show the need for oversight, central planning of collaborativeactivities or other actions that may help to creative professionals to invest efficiently, when access to ideas ofothers is costly.

Highlights

  • The understanding that more interactions between professionals lead to higher productivity has been widely supported by organizations1

  • Average levels of creative ability measured as a total number of distinct items produced in Stage 1 are similar across groups and sessions

  • The absence of significant differences ex-ante between Control and Treatment groups should imply that any differences in the output produced during the last 4 minutes is due to the unique variable attribute of the experimental design, access to the ideas of others

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The understanding that more interactions between professionals lead to higher productivity has been widely supported by organizations. Network analysis of creative professionals in different fields suggest that more productive individuals are at the same time more connected and central in their networks, for instance in academia (Goyal et al, 2006) or management (Burt, 2004 and Cross et al, 2008). Understanding as to whether access to new ideas leads to higher creative productivity is insightful An answer to this question may serve as an argument for or against teamwork, increasing the level of interactions at the workplace or making privileged information available to a wider public.

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call