Literature DB >> 28062926

Selecting for creativity and innovation potential: implications for practice in healthcare education.

Fiona Patterson1,2, Lara Dawn Zibarras3,4.   

Abstract

The ability to innovate is an important requirement in many organisations. Despite this pressing need, few selection systems in healthcare focus on identifying the potential for creativity and innovation and so this area has been vastly under-researched. As a first step towards understanding how we might select for creativity and innovation, this paper explores the use of a trait-based measure of creativity and innovation potential, and evaluates its efficacy for use in selection for healthcare education. This study uses a sample of 188 postgraduate physicians applying for education and training in UK General Practice. Participants completed two questionnaires (a trait-based measure of creativity and innovation, and a measure of the Big Five personality dimensions) and were also rated by assessors on creative problem solving measured during a selection centre. In exploring the construct validity of the trait-based measure of creativity and innovation, our research clarifies the associations between personality, and creativity and innovation. In particular, our study highlights the importance of motivation in the creativity and innovation process. Results also suggest that Openness to Experience is positively related to creativity and innovation whereas some aspects of Conscientiousness are negatively associated with creativity and innovation. Results broadly support the utility of using a trait-based measure of creativity and innovation in healthcare selection processes, although practically this may be best delivered as part of an interview process, rather than as a screening tool. Findings are discussed in relation to broader implications for placing more priority on creativity and innovation as selection criteria within healthcare education and training in future.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Creativity; Healthcare education selection; Innovation potential; Predictive validity

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28062926     DOI: 10.1007/s10459-016-9731-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract        ISSN: 1382-4996            Impact factor:   3.853


  6 in total

Review 1.  Innovation in Orthopaedics: Part 2-How to Translate Ideas and Research into Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Tiago Lazzaretti Fernandes; Rafaella Rogatto de Faria; Maria Alice Gonzales; Seth L Sherman; Sara Goldchmit; Andre Fleury
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2022-03-04

2.  Do different curriculum aligned selection procedures admit students with different personality profiles to medical school?

Authors:  Marieke de Visser; Cornelia Fluit; Janke Cohen-Schotanus; Roland Laan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Identification and evaluation of the core elements of character education for medical students in Korea.

Authors:  Yera Hur; Keumho Lee
Journal:  J Educ Eval Health Prof       Date:  2019-08-20

4.  Intention to Receive the COVID-19 Vaccination in China: Application of the Diffusion of Innovations Theory and the Moderating Role of Openness to Experience.

Authors:  Phoenix Kit-Han Mo; Sitong Luo; Suhua Wang; Junfeng Zhao; Guohua Zhang; Lijuan Li; Liping Li; Luyao Xie; Joseph T F Lau
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-05

5.  Individual-Level Factors are Significantly More Predictive of Employee Innovativeness Than Job-Specific or Organization-Level Factors: Results From a Quantitative Study of Health Professionals.

Authors:  Sarah J Hewko
Journal:  Health Serv Insights       Date:  2022-02-23

6.  Lessons learned from 15 years of non-grades-based selection for medical school.

Authors:  Karen M Stegers-Jager
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 6.251

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.