1. EXPLORING THE ROLE OF ORGANISATIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON CREATIVE ROUTINES AT ABC AND BBC PRODUCTIONS     Aneesh Banerjee City University London   Stephen Burdon University of Technology, Sydney City University London Presentation at the developmental paper session at BAM 2016

2. Are constraints good or bad for creative routines?
In the capabilities based view, routines provide answers to ‘how to do’ (e.g., production or implementation) and ‘how to choose’ questions (e.g., deliberation or planning) (Becker, 2008; Nelson & Winter, 1982).
When organisations operate under constraints it essentially influences the decision-makers’ ability to adopt a routine or a set of routines.
Constraints restrict creativity by depriving creative routines of critical resources that can ultimately threaten the long term survival of the organisation (Amabile, 1988; Amabile, Hadley, & Kramer, 2002; Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978)
Freedom and abundance of resources enable firms to explore and experiment with new ideas that is likely to provide new growth opportunities as well as provide a buffer in times of distress (Levinthal & March, 1993; Meyer, 1982)
 Constraints restricts search and creativity
Constraints can also trigger innovation (Baker & Nelson, 2005; Lampel, Honig, & Drori, 2014; Weiss, Hoegl, & Gibbert, 2011)
Focuses their attention on generating better rather than more opportunities
Designing qualitatively superior solutions specific to a problem e.g. bricolage, ingenuity
 Constraints focus search and can generate creative ideas

3. Current theoretical understanding of the mechanisms of search for new routines
Search in behavioural theory
Search is triggered when performance does not meet the aspiration (Cyert and March, 1963)
Aspiration is the minimum performance that would be deemed satisfactory by the decision maker (Schneider, 1992).
Aspiration is set as a combination of own historical performance and the performance of peers (Greve, 2003; Shinkle, 2012)
Introduction of constraints have an impact on expected performance
Influence on aspiration setting
Influence on actual performance
Ability to change routines
This ability of an organisation to purposefully adjust and reinvent its routines in response to changes in its environment is called its dynamic capability (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997)
Dynamic capabilities are triggered as firms change routines in response to constraints. Change is influenced by decision makers’ sensemaking of
Constraints
Aspiration
(Weick, Sutcliffe, & Obstfeld, 2005; Gioia, & Chittipeddi, 1991)

4. Research question and research site
RQ: What are the key constraints experienced by teams working in the creative industry and what influence do these have on the creative routines in this industry?
Exploratory nature, inductive design
In line with prior studies in the capabilities tradition, we conducted field research on the creative routines specific to a context (Lampel & Shamsie, 2003; Lippman & Rumelt, 1982; Teece & Pisano, 1994).
Production of TV programs by national public broadcasters: Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
6 productions across genres
Interviews in , scope to do follow-up interviews with key informants

5. Productions Name of production (Genre) Parent broadcaster
Number of episodes aired
First aired
Number of interviews
East Enders (Soap/Drama)
BBC
5000+
On-going
1985 5
Big Blue Live (Factual) 3
2015 4
Diet Tribes (Factual)
2014
Reality Check (Panel discussion on reality TV)
ABC 8
The Code (Drama)
6 On-going 6
Giggle & Hoot
5 seasons On-going
2010

6. Constraints Aspiration Social Quality Resource constraints:
Financial resources e.g. budget
Human resources e.g. actors, productions staff, technical staff
Time e.g. turn-around time
Institutional constraints:
Production guidelines e.g. Adult theme or scene and time of broadcast
Organisational structure e.g. centralised publicity teams
Decision making structure e.g. content selection
Strategic mandate e.g. online content
Financial performance:
Cost of production
Potential to distribute programmes and services internationally
Viewership
Share of target demographic
Competition (Ranking)
Awards / Recognition
Social
Raising, debating, discussion social issues
Quality
High-quality programming

7. Four central responses influenced by how decision makers perceive constraints and aspiration
Sensemakingof aspiration
Sensemaking of constraints
Brief description
I. Do-as-told
Negotiable
Non-negotiable
Production team accepts the constraints as limitations and revises aspiration i.e. adjusts the minimum performance expectation that would be deemed satisfactory, in line with the expected fall in performance due to the constraints.
II. Give-up
Production team does not pursue a part or the whole set of creative routines under the constraints. Often leads to a deadlock, non-starter, or cancellation of production or an idea.
III. Work-arounds
Production team invents workarounds that circumvent some constraints keeping most of the creative routines while revising the expectations under the limitations.
IV. Reinvent
Production team creates and adopts new creative routines to meet aspirations under constraints. Often leading to new routines for the industry.

8. Proposed framework to understand the restrictive and generative influence of constraints
Resource and institutional limitations within which activities are to be performed
III. Workarounds
(Limited change in routines)
I: Do as told (No change in routines)
II: Give-up
(No change in routines)
IV. Reinvent
(Significant change in routines)
Aspiration
Minimum performance outcome deemed satisfactory
Performance
Outcome of applying the creative routines
Search
Innovation in new routines when performance does not meet aspiration