Survey‐Based Research for Creativity and Innovation Management: Review and Recommendations

Marco Mismetti; Cristina Bettinelli; Paola Rovelli

doi:10.1111/caim.70034

journal article Open Access Dec 23, 2025

Survey‐Based Research for Creativity and Innovation Management: Review and Recommendations

Marco Mismetti

Cristina Bettinelli

Paola Rovelli

Creativity and Innovation Management · Wiley

View at Publisher Save 10.1111/caim.70034

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Survey methodology remains a widely used data collection method in creativity and innovation management studies. However, evolving technological advancements and methodological challenges necessitate a reassessment of best practices to benefit the most from it. In this study, we conduct a comprehensive review of 311 articles that rely on survey‐based research to identify critical aspects that influence data quality, including sampling strategies, response rates, construct validity and data integration. We synthesize existing recommendations and propose a structured framework that connects specific methodological challenges to best practices and examples from the literature. By distinguishing between survey research design (predata collection decisions) and survey data management (postdata collection activities), we provide guidance for scholars on ensuring methodological rigour, enhancing data reliability and improving the representativeness of findings. Finally, we offer practical examples tailored to the unique demands of creativity and innovation management research. By implementing the identified best practices, future studies can ensure the quality and impact of survey‐based research in this and related fields.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

161

[1]

10.1111/caim.12540

[2]

10.1111/1748-8583.12250

[3]

Best-Practice Recommendations for Defining, Identifying, and Handling Outliers

Herman Aguinis, Ryan K. Gottfredson, Harry Joo

Organizational Research Methods 10.1177/1094428112470848

[4]

Best Practices in Data Collection and Preparation: Recommendations for Reviewers, Editors, and Authors

Herman Aguinis, N. Sharon Hill, James R. Bailey

Organizational Research Methods 10.1177/1094428119836485

[5]

What You See Is What You Get? Enhancing Methodological Transparency in Management Research

Herman Aguinis, Ravi S. Ramani, Nawaf Alabduljader

Academy of Management Annals 10.5465/annals.2016.0011

[6]

10.1177/1094428120943281

[7]

10.1057/s41267-020-00353-7

[8]

10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091231

[9]

10.1177/0149206320969787

[10]

10.1111/1748-8583.12225

[11]

Alreck P. L. (1995)

[12]

10.5465/amj.2019.0231

[13]

10.1016/j.respol.2018.07.016

[14]

Innovation and Creativity in Organizations

Neil Anderson, Kristina Potočnik, Jing Zhou

Journal of Management 10.1177/0149206314527128

[15]

10.1007/s10997-021-09590-w

[16]

Managing Innovation Paradoxes: Ambidexterity Lessons from Leading Product Design Companies

Constantine Andriopoulos, Marianne W. Lewis

Long Range Planning 10.1016/j.lrp.2009.08.003

[17]

Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys

J. Scott Armstrong, Terry S. Overton

Journal of Marketing Research 10.1177/002224377701400320

[18]

Advancing innovation in the public sector: Aligning innovation measurement with policy goals

Anthony Arundel, Carter Bloch, Barry Ferguson

Research Policy 10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.001

[19]

10.1057/s41267-020-00310-4

[20]

10.1177/1094428113493120

[21]

Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research

Yehuda Baruch, Brooks C. Holtom

Human Relations 10.1177/0018726708094863

[22]

10.1177/0149206318773411

[23]

10.1002/smj.3077

[24]

10.1177/10422587211000339

[25]

10.1111/1748-8583.12320

[26]

10.1177/0149206312455245

[27]

10.1111/caim.12123

[28]

10.1111/jpim.12473

[29]

10.1111/caim.12532

[30]

10.1111/caim.12518

[31]

10.1111/jasp.12165

[32]

10.1111/caim.12482

[33]

10.1287/mnsc.2019.3499

[34]

10.4324/9781315258119

[35]

10.1177/2053168018822174

[36]

Cornesse C. "Is There an Association Between Survey Characteristics and Representativeness? A Meta‐Analysis" Survey Research Methods (2018)

[37]

10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053613

[38]

10.1109/tem.2011.2136437

[39]

Cropley D. H. "Measuring Creativity for Innovation Management" Journal of Technology Management and Innovation (2011)

[40]

Combinative Effects of Innovation Types and Organizational Performance: A Longitudinal Study of Service Organizations

Fariborz Damanpour, Richard M. Walker, Claudia N. Avellaneda

Journal of Management Studies 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00814.x

[41]

Darren K. B. "A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Exploring the Relationship Between Leader Humility and Unethical Behavior" Journal of Management (2022)

[42]

Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour

Jeroen de Jong, Deanne Den Hartog

Creativity and Innovation Management 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00547.x

[43]

De Jong J. P. "Innovative Work Behavior: Measurement and Validation" EIM Business and Policy Research (2008)

[44]

10.5465/amj.2021.4004

[45]

10.1177/0001839219879646

[46]

Dillman D. A. (2011)

[47]

10.1177/07591063221088317

[48]

10.1002/9781394260645

[49]

10.5465/amj.2016.0245

[50]

10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.017

Showing 50 of 161 references

Metrics

1

Citations

161

References

Details

Published: Dec 23, 2025
License: View

Authors

M

Marco Mismetti

Stockholm School of Economics House of Innovation Stockholm Sweden

C

Cristina Bettinelli

University of Bergamo Department of Management Bergamo Italy

P

Paola Rovelli

Free University of Bozen‐Bolzano Faculty of Economics and Management Bozen‐Bolzano Italy

Cite This Article

Marco Mismetti, Cristina Bettinelli, Paola Rovelli (2025). Survey‐Based Research for Creativity and Innovation Management: Review and Recommendations. Creativity and Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.70034

Survey‐Based Research for Creativity and Innovation Management: Review and Recommendations

You May Also Like