ABSTRACT Creativity and innovation are often understood as the result of a complex interplay of hierarchical factors, such as national, regional and firm characteristics, or between organisational and individual factors. While recent applications of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) have begun to model such configurational links, their hierarchical nature has received little empirical attention. As this paper demonstrates, theories that posit hierarchical configurations can and should be explored using the two‐step variant of QCA. The paper outlines the potential of the method for the field of creativity and innovation and helps to navigate key modelling decisions. An illustrative study explores the occurrence of informal employee innovation behaviour—workarounds—based on the Ability‐Motivation‐Opportunity (AMO) framework. The results of the two‐step QCA are superior in terms of reduced limited diversity and complexity to those of the conventional one‐step QCA. Overall, the method has considerable potential for empirically capturing the complex, hierarchical interactions inherent in many innovation processes.
Sandfort et al. (Thu,) studied this question.