The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0951-3558.htm

IJPSM
27,3 Developing creative leadership in
a public sector organisation
Pauline Anne Loewenberger
190 Department of Management and Business Systems,
University of Bedfordshire Business School, Luton, UK
Received 22 November 2012 Mark Newton
Revised 4 July 2013
10 July 2013
Corporate Resources, British Transport Police, London, UK, and
Accepted 12 July 2013 Kylie Wick
L-Area, British Transport Police, London, UK

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to demonstrate the effective development of creative and innovative
capability in a rigid bureaucratic public sector environment of an area of the British Transport Police,
championed by the Area Commander and informed by extant literature.
Design/methodology/approach – The focus is on an intervention that addressed two related
issues suggested by extant literature, cognitive blocks to creative thinking and organisational barriers.
A diagnostic assessment of the climate for creativity prompted reflection leading to simultaneous
interventions, combining supervisory and senior management support with a structured process of
creative problem solving focusing on problems generated at a strategic level.
Findings – This has proved highly effective. At the end of the first year, five six-week cycles had
already resulted in more than 600 new ideas, of which 52 were in the pipeline and 13 had already been
endorsed. Few required financial investment and have increased effectiveness and optimised use of
resources – literally doing more with less. Evidence is emerging of a climate more supportive of
creativity and innovation.
Practical implications – Positive outcomes have significant implications for the enhancement of
creativity and innovation through intrinsic motivation. This example has potential for other public
service organisations.
Originality/value – Simultaneous interventions across multiple levels are rare. That this has been
achieved in a rigid bureaucratic environment public sector organisation adds to the unique value of
this contribution.
Keywords Leadership, Innovation, Public sector organizations, Management learning,
Organisational climate, Problem-solving
Paper type Case study

Introduction
British Transport Police is a not-for-profit organisation responsible for policing the
national rail network of the UK and employing 5,000 staff and officers divided into
seven command units with three additional central support units. The organisation
International Journal of Public Sector works towards a three year strategic plan and each command unit focuses on
Management objectives of a local policing plan (BTP, 2010). The business is predominantly target
Vol. 27 No. 3, 2014
pp. 190-200 driven and the operating environment is heavily regulated with the majority of
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited enforcement activity taking place within a legal framework accountable to courts and
0951-3558
DOI 10.1108/IJPSM-11-2012-0152 government. The early formation of the police service was on a military basis and
hierarchical progression through a rigid rank structure retains command levels leading Developing
to poor formal communication and leadership styles of managers that are ineffective creative
for twenty-first century policing given the complexity of challenges with which they
are faced. UK police services face a dual challenge of increasing efficiency and leadership
effectiveness with increasingly limited resources and where improved performance
necessitates change to a culture of continuous improvement (Barton and Barton, 2011)
supported by performance management systems. 191
Increasing demands of delivering more for less in public services calls for fresh
ideas yet typically creativity and innovation are stifled by rigid bureaucracy. The
specific focus of this case study is on a local command unit of 1,000 officers and staff
which delivers policing to the London Underground system and Docklands Light
Railway. Prior to the intervention unstructured and spontaneous creative meetings
were taking place across the organisation at team and department level, largely to
solve current tactical problems, but were rarely shared more widely. The only
mechanism for idea generation was the suggestion scheme, based on extrinsic rather
than intrinsic motivation, and discredited by poor feedback leading to dissatisfaction
of staff. No known successes were apparent from ideas submitted and recognition of
creative ideas failed to feature in the performance management system (Patterson et al.,
1999). There was no framework to allow the formal sharing of ideas and evidence of
“intergroup” hostility (West and Sacramento, 2012) rather than cross fertilisation
between teams.
The focus of this case study is the development of creative and innovative
capability initiated by meta-cognitive reflection of the Area Commander of L-Area
while working towards the Executive MBA and leading to active and highly successful
intervention. Of particular significance to this intervention was the unit on mobilising
organisational creativity and innovation led by the first author of this paper and
informed by expertise developed whilst completing her doctoral research. Informed by
extant literature the focus of this unit is on the need to overcome cognitive blocks and
organisational barriers and encourages professional and organisational development
through reflection. Reflection on practice by the Area Commander was extremely
powerful in emphasising perpetuation of the institutionalised command structure and
transactional leadership as a result of rising through the ranks of the hierarchy in the
rigid bureaucracy. This led to the further realisation of the negative impact of lack of
management training on personal leadership with opportunities to unlock the creative
and innovative potential of a workforce. This is entirely supportive of the new model of
transformational leadership suggested as relevant to the needs of public sector
organisations (Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe, 2006) and suggestions that
leadership by police managers is needed to encourage knowledge sharing (Berg et al.,
2008).

Theoretical background
Creativity and innovation are essential to adding value in challenging dynamic
environments, yet capability and commitment are frequently lacking in practice
(Salaman and Storey, 2002). Extant literature suggests two related issues contribute to
this problem. First, regardless of recognition that employees in any position and at any
level can benefit the organisation by being creative (Madjar, 2005; Madjar et al., 2002)
idea generation is not common for most individuals (Egan, 2005). This calls for
IJPSM effective training in creative thinking skills. The commercialisation of creative
27,3 processes, the selling of the golden egg that will lead to the flourishing of ideas, is
potentially damaging, as some may not have effectively tested or understood the
theory behind the process (Sternberg and Lubart, 1999). Growing evidence supports
the effectiveness of creative problem solving (Puccio et al., 2006) using the
Osborn-Parnes (Osborn, 1957; Parnes and Noller, 1973) process. This is very effectively
192 used as a training program employing structured techniques (VanGundy, 1988) to
develop facilitation skills for key individuals within organisations. In this way the
process becomes embedded into the organisational climate as individuals develop their
repertoire of facilitation and creative thinking skills.
Second, creativity and innovation challenge established order and stability (Storey,
2000) and neither might be perceived as desirable by members of organisations that
operate on the basis of routines and standardisation, reinforced by power and status
systems. Translation of creative ideas into innovative practice depends on social
validation which means that successful exploitation of new ideas must overcome
competing expectations, strategies and rationales in addition to institutionalised
routines and inertia. Within the organisational setting potential barriers and
facilitators to creativity and innovation operate at the level of the individual, group and
organisation (Amabile et al., 1996; Csikszentmihalyi, 1999; Folkestad and Gonzalez,
2010; Tidd and Bessant, 2009; Woodman et al., 1993). The development of creative and
innovative capability demands effective intervention across multiple levels
(Loewenberger, 2009) rather than fragmented approaches that address a single level
or issue in isolation. Surprisingly, given the problems highlighted by extant literature
only rarely do contributions focus explicitly on the dynamic interaction between
individual development of creative problem solving skills and a supportive climate
(Williams and Foti, 2011). Rarely are individual and organisational interventions
implemented simultaneously to overcome cognitive blocks to creative idea generation
and organisational barriers.
Woodman et al. (1993) suggest individual creativity is the multiplicative function of
past experience, cognitive style and ability, personality, relevant knowledge, intrinsic
motivation, social and contextual influences. Group creativity mediates individual
creativity and is influenced by group composition and diversity, group characteristics,
processes and contextual influences. Organisational creativity is a function of the
outputs of component groups and contextual influences, including, for example,
structure, culture, climate, resources, reward systems and the external environment. At
the heart of interactional models is climate, the aggregate of individual psychological
perceptions of organisational policies, practices and procedures that influence
behaviour (Amabile et al., 1996; Isaksen, 2007) and that operates at an accessible level
conducive to improvement. Climate models are valuable in drawing attention to
dimensions of the work environment demonstrated as important to stimulating,
supporting and sustaining creativity and innovation. Recent evidence suggests climate
as the most important supportive factor in enhancing creative performance (Folkestad
and Gonzalez, 2010; Hunter et al., 2007). Yet reports on the use of climate measures
appear lacking both in empirical research and in practice (Loewenberger, 2009).
Climate surveys represent a diagnostic measure of the creative and innovative
health of the organisation based on workforce perceptions (e.g. Amabile et al., 1996,
1999; Isaksen, 2007) highlighting areas for intervention. The KEYS assessment of
climate (Amabile et al., 1999; Amabile et al., 1996) draws on intrinsic motivation in Developing
identifying six stimulant, and two obstacle scales, that support or inhibit creativity. creative
Subsequent research suggests the significance of five scales, four stimulant scales and
one obstacle scale (Amabile, 1997). Stimulants comprise organisational and leadership
supervisory encouragement, work group support and challenging work. The
obstacle scale is organisational impediments. For example, the organisational
encouragement scale (Amabile et al., 1996) emphasises the need for shared vision, trust, 193
acceptance of failure, mentoring, reward and recognition, supportive mechanisms,
communication, collaboration and encouragement from other groups. Supervisory
encouragement is concerned with awareness of a clear vision, encouragement and
support from upper management and from the immediate supervisor or line manager.
Creative requirement, management expectation of creative behaviour, is increasingly
recognised as significant (Unsworth and Clegg, 2010; Unsworth et al., 2003).
Organisational impediments (Amabile et al., 1996), on the other hand, inhibit creativity
and innovation through destructive competition, criticism, political behaviour, risk
avoidance, apathy, management control, rigid procedures and a desire to maintain the
status quo.

Intervention
Starting from a diagnostic assessment of climate through a KEYS assessment of
climate for creativity (Amabile et al., 1996, 1999) organisational barriers to creativity
and opportunities for improvement were explored. Reflection by the Area Commander
led to powerful insights that enabled the identification of specific improvement
strategies to encourage the flourishing of creative ideas, leading to innovative practice
and an improved and more cost-effective policing service. Of the stimulant scales,
organisational encouragement, work group support and challenging work were all
unremarkably mid-range. Both obstacle scales, (lack of) organisational impediments
and (lack of) workload pressure, were very-low, as were creativity and productivity
criteria (Amabile et al., 1996). Given the emphasis on compliance and control these
results were unsurprising in confirming a work environment that was unsupportive of
creativity and innovation.
Recognition of dynamic interactions across multiple organisational levels called for
simultaneous intervention to overcome cognitive blocks and organisational barriers.
The intervention comprised the development of creative thinking skills alongside
enhancing management and supervisory support. Supervisory encouragement is
defined as “A supervisor who serves as a good work model, sets goals appropriately,
supports the work group, values individual contributions and shows confidence in the
work group” (Amabile et al., 1996). Salient questions concern openness to new ideas,
the valuing of individual contributions and constructive feedback. The supervisor or
line manager provides the first level of support, or obstruction, for encouraging
creativity and innovation. The appointment and training of facilitators was key to
encouraging idea generation at this level.
The support of senior management, shared vision, the expectation of creative work,
and mechanisms for supporting creativity and innovation addressed elements of
organisational encouragement and contributed to the reduction of organisational
impediments. Organisational encouragement is defined as “An organisational culture
that encourages creativity through the fair, constructive judgement of ideas, rewards
IJPSM and recognition for creative work, mechanisms for developing new ideas, an active
27,3 flow of ideas, and a shared vision of what the organisation is trying to do” (Amabile
et al., 1996). For example, questions in this scale include the encouragement of creative
problem solving, a lively flow of ideas, shared vision, reward and recognition for
creativity and fair judgement of ideas. Organisational impediments is defined as “An
organisational culture that impedes creativity through internal political problems,
194 harsh criticism of new ideas, destructive internal competition, an avoidance of risk, and
an over emphasis on the status quo” (Amabile et al., 1996). Salient elements include
strict control by upper management, maintenance of the status quo, formal procedures
and structures and excessive criticism of new ideas. As such this might be perceived as
the inverse of elements of organisational encouragement such that enhancing support
will also help to overcome barriers.
The intervention very effectively combined top down and bottom up approaches,
focusing on leadership and creative problem solving sessions informed by quality
academic sources (Amabile et al., 1996; Osborn, 1957; Parnes and Noller, 1973;
VanGundy, 1984; Woodman et al., 1993), driven by the Area Creativity Champion and
administered by the Area Process Manager, both co-authors of this paper. Issues for
discussion were identified in consultation with the Senior Management Team to
maintain direct links to the business need and planning cycle. They also plug in to the
Strategic Development Department who prepare content for the Force Management
Team to identify ideas for force wide consideration. The appointment and training of
facilitators from various departments was key to encouraging idea generation at this
level, and were intentionally not chosen from management (Loewenberger, 2009). At
the request of the Area Commander, and creativity champion, the first author of this
paper has been involved as a critical friend throughout the process. For example,
master classes for facilitators and presentations to other areas of BTP. Group
facilitation sessions generated as many ideas as possible based on structured
techniques of creative thinking, emphasising divergent thinking and deferred
judgement (e.g. VanGundy, 1988). Ideas were collected by facilitators for presentation
to the panel consisting of members of the Senior Management Team, for evaluation
and further development, leading to endorsement of ideas for action. In generating
problems for group discussion at a strategic level, management retained overall control
while encouraging bottom-up participation and involvement. This is powerful in
communicating creative requirement (Unsworth et al., 2003; Unsworth and Clegg,
2010), empowering participants, recognising valuable contributions and providing
feedback. This directly addresses elements of climate for creativity (Amabile et al.,
1996) that is underpinned by intrinsic motivation.

Results
Evaluation of the effectiveness of the intervention at the end of the first year proved
highly positive. First, the successes arising from enhancing creative thinking skills are
overwhelming. This evaluation process took place at the end of the fifth six-week cycle
of the intervention, approximately one year into the process, and provides clear
evidence of improvement in the flourishing of creative ideas. At that time
approximately 600 new ideas had been generated by participants in the group
creative thinking process led by trained facilitators. Of these 52 were in the pipeline to
take forward for further planning and 13 had been implemented to date leading to more
innovative practice contributing to an improved policing service. Significantly, most Developing
suggest improved cost-effectiveness of the service rather than placing increased creative
demands on public resources and associated risks. Some examples of ideas already
implemented include: leadership
.
LCD screens to display known pickpockets to increase recognition: The reduction
of Theft of Personal Property is a policing target for BTP (London). The previous
process of inclusion of printed pictures of suspects in their pocket notebooks 195
(PNB) had been discontinued without explanation. It was highlighted that larger
quantity and size as well as higher quality images on the briefing systems would
increase the likelihood of the suspects being identified and stopped. These two
ideas combined resulted in LCD screens in stations. This means that images can
be regularly changed and updated and overcomes Data Protection issues in
relation to printing images in PNBs.
.
Utilisation of multilingual staff as interpreters: BTP pay for the use of an Applied
Language Service in order to translate for communication defendants and
victims/witnesses at the initial stages of an inquiry. BTP has many staff that are
multi-lingual and utilisation of these skills provides this service without any
additional cost. As well as saving money, this can save time – the Force Control
room have access to the language data base and can utilise this in order to task a
specific individual to assist. Furthermore, when Justice Units liaise with victims
and witnesses of crime as obligated, they can utilise staff language skills to
produce documentation in the required language, such as a court warning letter
in French. This is particularly relevant to BTP in dealing with a transient
community where English might not be the first language of victims and
witnesses.
.
Implementation of a GPS Key Fob: Metal theft is a significant drain on BTP
police resources, there has been a sharp rise in the volume of metal (particularly
cable) theft in recent years. One of the key issues was the requirement of BTP to
confirm the exact locations of the thefts to both Train Operating Companies and
also for the police documentation for court. Due to the locations where the thefts
generally take place (along railways) it can be difficult to pinpoint the exact
location. Fitting global positioning system key fobs to all key sets for police
vehicles meant that Police Officers were able to confirm the exact location of the
theft. The impact of this simple suggestion is enormous and there are now plans
to roll this out nationally.
.
Need to create and publish a fair and transparent attachment process: Staff and
Officers felt that there was no formal structure to apply for a secondment to a
specific department. They felt that any process was unfair and was based on an
individual contacts rather than the skills that might be contributed or developed
from an attachment. A formal process was produced with a bi-annual formal
application process forming part of the individual’s Performance Development
Review. This has been publicised via Force Media and is now a transparent
process with an Appeals procedure. Applicants now request attachments,
subject to meeting the necessary criteria, and the process is moderated by two
area superintendents to overcome any potential for bias.
IJPSM .
Creativity and innovation intranet: Detailed action plans and information for
27,3 each of the local teams on the process are shared. The “Bright Idea” page allows
input for those unable to attend the group sessions. For the proposed national roll
out of the process this will also facilitate the sharing of ideas between areas.

Ideas implemented have increased effectiveness of the service and optimised use of
196 available resources – literally doing more with less. Very few have required financial
investment and where this has been necessary, as in the case of the LCD screens and
GPS key fobs, the cost was minimal relative to the potential benefits gained.
Second, early indications clearly suggest a climate more supportive of creativity and
innovation within the existing organisational structure. A second diagnosis of
organisational climate for creativity (Amabile et al., 1996) undertaken in June 2012
provides clear evidence of improvement. Supervisory encouragement and (lack of)
organisational impediments scales have progressed from very-low to mid-range and
(lack of) work load pressure has moved from very-low to very-high.
Results provide clear evidence of the effectiveness of simultaneous intervention to
overcome cognitive blocks, through a focus on individual and group creative idea
generation, combined with a more supportive organisational climate, through
enhanced management and supervision, to overcome organisational barriers.
Organisational climate for creativity represents the aggregate of employees’
perceptions, underpinned by intrinsic motivation and the impact on staff appears
very positive. For example, utilisation of multilingual skills results in staff feeling more
valued, as does the increased fairness of the enhanced attachment process. Creativity
and innovation processes have improved communication, not only by empowering
staff to contribute to strategic plans or issues through the formal idea generation
sessions, but also empowers staff to improve their own working environment.
Supportive of the notion of creative requirement (Unsworth and Clegg, 2010; Unsworth
et al., 2003), the importance of creativity and innovation to the service is increasingly
recognised. Local creativity sessions are taking place and new and innovative ideas are
coming through outside of the set cycles. Increasing numbers of staff are volunteering
to become facilitators. Both the creativity and productivity criteria remain in the
very-low range but the standard scores have improved. Change takes time and these
results are highly encouraging at the end of the first year of this intervention within the
rigid bureaucratic environment.

Discussion
This case is exemplary in demonstrating organisational transformation, reigniting the
spark for creativity and innovation in a rigid bureaucracy typical of many public sector
organisations that struggle to function efficiently or effectively due to resource
constraints and increasingly complex challenges and constraints. Central to this is
effective leadership, prompted by personal and professional development of the Area
Commander. Of particular interest in this intervention is on how this is combined with
a bottom-up approach to creative idea generation, involving participants in real issues
of strategic concern, and leading to increased effectiveness of the service through
interventions that involve minimal cost and many of which are cost negative.
Realisation of the need to drive and embed change through leadership and the
organisational climate is key to such transformation.
 Shared roles and responsibilities minimise time resources necessary for major Developing
enhancements to creative idea generation and a climate that is more supportive, creative
leading to outcomes that add value to the effectiveness of the service and are
cost-effective. Positive outcomes are evident, emerging from simultaneous intervention leadership
at the level of the individual and the organisation informed by the extant literature that
highlights the need to encourage idea generation (e.g. Egan, 2005; Madjar, 2005; Madjar
et al., 2002) and overcome organisational barriers to creativity and innovation (Amabile 197
et al., 1996; Isaksen, 2007; Woodman et al., 1993). Group facilitation of creative idea
generation adds to the growing evidence that supports the effectiveness of creative
problem solving (Puccio et al., 2006) employing structured techniques (VanGundy,
1988). In this way the process becomes embedded into the organisational climate as
individuals develop their repertoire of facilitation and creative thinking skills.
Evidence is already emerging of local creative thinking sessions and increasing
numbers of staff volunteering as facilitators.
At the heart of this is the enhancement of intrinsic motivation (Amabile et al., 1996)
through climate change, based on psychological perceptions of the work environment.
Not only does this provide evidence for supervisory encouragement and senior
management support but there is also evidence of support for challenging work that is
intellectually demanding, valued and important (Amabile et al., 1996; Loewenberger,
2009) as well as for organisational encouragement and a reduction in organisational
impediments through participation and involvement that gives staff a voice that is
listened to, acted on, and regular feedback provided. Perceptions of staff that they are
free to voice their ideas, and will be heard, is critical in encouraging creativity and
innovation (Loewenberger, 2009). Of course, this provides further support for the need
of creative requirement (Unsworth and Clegg, 2010).
This has enormous implications for the theory and practice of creativity and
innovation. That this has been achieved in a rigid bureaucratic environment typical of
public sector organisations, adds to the uniqueness of this contribution. In contrast to
leaders who perceive such approaches unrealistic in a controlling, compliant
environment, clear evidence of reciprocal interaction between theory and practice is
demonstrated through this intervention, adapting and extending climate models to the
needs of a rigid bureaucratic public sector organisation in need of revitalisation to meet
current and future challenges.

Conclusions
This paper provides evidence of effective intervention led by senior management
across multiple levels in the development of creative and innovative capability and
commitment, rather than fragmented approaches that address a single level or issue
(Loewenberger, 2009). Rarely are individual and organisational interventions
implemented simultaneously to overcome cognitive blocks to creative idea
generation and organisational barriers. Positive outcomes emerging from
simultaneous intervention have enormous implications for the theory and practice of
creativity and innovation, at the heart of which is the enhancement of intrinsic
motivation through climate change, based on psychological perceptions of the work
environment (Amabile et al., 1996). Central to this is an awareness of creative
requirement, simply are staff encouraged to be creative in their work (Unsworth and
Clegg, 2010). Perceptions of staff that they are free to voice their ideas, and will be
IJPSM heard, is critical in encouraging creativity and innovation (Loewenberger, 2009).
27,3 Top-down and bottom-up interventions combine effective leadership with creative idea
generation at the level of the individual and the group that has had very positive
outcomes in terms of the quality and quantity of ideas generated and in a climate that
is more supportive of creativity and innovation.
Implications for how creativity and innovation might be stimulated, supported and
198 sustained in other organisations, is likely to be of particular interest in typically
hierarchical, command and control style organisations faced with increasingly
complex challenges and resource constraints. Climate models provide useful
diagnostics of factors that are supporting or inhibiting organisational creativity and
innovation to inform interventions for improvement. Of course, it is likely that there
will be a need to prioritise as in the example of this case, where the focus was initially
on improving the climate through enhanced supervision and management. While
climate models indicate the importance of creative idea generation, how this might be
achieved is not explicit. This is where the growing evidence of the effectiveness of
creative problem solving (Puccio et al., 2006) using the Osborn-Parnes process (Osborn,
1957; Parnes and Noller, 1973) is important in providing a training program to
overcome cognitive blocks employing structured techniques (VanGundy, 1988). In this
case, this was effectively implemented by the training of key individuals to
disseminate skills through facilitation of group creative idea generation sessions. The
achievement of this aim without major changes to structure represents an example of
creative problem solving in itself and organisations need to consider how this might
best be implemented within the work environment.
Influence is an important consideration but, arguably, this might not always be
necessary at a senior level. For example, this could be initiated locally at a team level
and disseminated through sharing of successes more widely within the larger
organisation. The approach facilitated by this intervention encourages processes to
become embedded into the organisation such that they are sustainable and, rather than
seek prescribed solutions, organisations aspiring to creativity and innovation are
encouraged to use this structured methodology as the basis for creative adaptation to
the complexities of individual work environments.
This contribution would be incomplete in the absence of a consideration of potential
limitations. One limitation is that this is at an early stage in the intervention and
embedding creativity and innovation is crucial to longer-term sustainability.
Continuous reflection on and in action will need to be evaluated regularly
throughout the transformation in recognition that it is an emergent and iterative
process. Another potential limitation is the implication in this case of the need for
intervention at senior management level within the rigid bureaucratic work
environment. In the case on which this paper is based the intervention was
championed by the Area Commander of the L-Area whilst studying for his MBA. The
intervention is currently being rolled-out nationally to other command units where
continued perpetuation of ineffective leadership is evident by those less supportive of
developing creative and innovative capability. Resistance experienced from some
senior managers is being addressed through raising awareness and understanding and
it is planned that this will become a permanent item on the agenda for senior
management meetings to increase their engagement in the process and encourage their
support.
References Developing
Alimo-Metcalfe, B. and Alban-Metcalfe, J. (2006), “More (good) leaders for the public sector”, creative
International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 293-315.
Amabile, T.M. (1997), “Motivating creativity in organisations: on doing what you love and loving
leadership
what you do”, California Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 39-58.
Amabile, T.M., Burnside, R.M. and Gryskiewicz, N. (1999), User’s Manual for KEYS: Assessing
the Climate for Creativity. A survey from the Centre for Creative Leadership, CCL, 199
Greensboro, NC.
Amabile, T.M., Coon, H., Conti, R., Lazenby, J. and Herron, M. (1996), “Assessing the work
environment for creativity”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 1154-1185.
Barton, L.C. and Barton, H. (2011), “Challenges, issues and change: what’s the future for UK
policing in the twenty-first century?”, International Journal of Public Sector Management,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 146-156.
Berg, M.E., Dean, G., Gottschalk, P. and Karlsen, J.T. (2008), “Police management roles as
determinants of knowledge sharing attitude in criminal investigations”, International
Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 271-284.
BTP (2010), Media and Marketing: Policing Strategy and Plans.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999), “Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity”,
in Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Egan, T.M. (2005), “Factors influencing individual creativity in the workplace: an examination of
quantitative empirical research”, Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 160-181.
Folkestad, J. and Gonzalez, R. (2010), “Teamwork for innovation: a content analysis of the highly
read and highly cited literature on innovation”, Advances in Developing Human Resources,
Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 115-136.
Hunter, S.T., Bedell, K.E. and Mumford, M.D. (2007), “Climate for creativity: a quantitative
review”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 69-90.
Isaksen, S.G. (2007), “The situational outlook questionnaire: assessing the context for change”,
Psychological Reports, Vol. 100 No. 2, pp. 455-466.
Loewenberger, P. (2009), “Facilitating organisational creativity: exploring psychological, social
and organisational factors”, unpublished PhD thesis, presented to the University of
Bedfordshire, December.
Madjar, N. (2005), “The contributions of different groups of individuals to employees’ creativity”,
Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 182-206.
Madjar, N., Oldham, G.R. and Pratt, M.G. (2002), “There’s no place like home? The contributions
of work and non-work creativity support to employees’ creative performance”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 757-767.
Osborn, A.F. (1957), Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking,
Scribner, New York, NY.
Parnes, S.J. and Noller, R.B. (1973), “Applied creativity: the creative studies project: IV
personality findings and conclusions”, Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 15-36.
Patterson, F., Kerrin, M., Gatto-Roissard, G. and Coan, P. (1999), Everyday Innovation: How to
Enhance Innovative Working in Employees and Organisations, NESTA, London.
Puccio, G.J., Firestien, R.L., Coyle, C. and Masucci, C. (2006), “A review of the effectiveness of CPS
training: a focus on workplace issues”, Creativity & Innovation Management, Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp. 19-33.
IJPSM Salaman, G. and Storey, J. (2002), “Managers’ theories about the process of innovation”, Journal
of Management Studies, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 147-165.
27,3 Sternberg, R.J. and Lubart, T.I. (1999), “The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms”, in
Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Storey, J. (2000), “The management of innovation problem”, International Journal of Innovation
Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, p. 347.
200 Tidd, J. and Bessant, J. (2009), Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and
Organisational Change, 4th ed., John Wiley, Chichester.
Unsworth, K. and Clegg, S.R. (2010), “Why do employees undertake creative action?”, Journal of
Occupational and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 83, pp. 77-99.
Unsworth, K.L., Wall, T.D. and Carter, A. (2003), “Creative requirement: a neglected construct in
the study of employee creativity?”, XIth European Congress of Work and Occupational
Psychology, May 2003, Lisbon.
VanGundy, A.G. (1984), “How to establish a creative climate in the work group”, Management
Review, Vol. 73 No. 8, p. 24.
VanGundy, J.A.B. (1988), Techniques of Structured Problem Solving, 2nd ed., Van Nostrand
Reinhold, New York, NY.
West, M.A. and Sacramento, C.A. (2012), “Creativity and innovation: the role of team and
organizational climate”, in Mumford, M. (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity,
Elsevier, London.
Williams, F. and Foti, R.J. (2011), “Formally developing creative leadership as a driver of
organizational innovation”, Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 279-296.
Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E. and Griffin, R.W. (1993), “Toward a theory of organisational
creativity”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18 No. 2, p. 293.

About the authors

Dr Pauline Anne Loewenberger is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Management and
Business Systems at the University of Bedfordshire and a Fellow of the Higher Education
Academy. Experience draws on in excess of 20 years’ work experience in the commercial sector.
Teaching and research interests include international HRM, cross-cultural management,
creativity, innovation, learning and the management of knowledge. This contribution draws on
doctoral research into the facilitation of creativity and innovation presented at international
conferences. Pauline Anne Loewenberger is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
pauline.loewenberger@beds.ac.uk
Mark Newton was Area Commander of British Transport Police L-Area responsible for
policing London Underground and Docklands Light Railway.
Kylie Wick is the Creativity and Innovation Process Manager for L-Area of British Transport
Police.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints