دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی نسبت خوش بینی و بد بینی به عنوان پیش گوی خلاقیت کارمند: وعده دوگانگی - امرالد 2017

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to study if the employees’ optimism-pessimism ratio predicts their creativity. Design/methodology/approach – In total, 134 employees reported their optimism and pessimism, and the respective supervisors described the employees’ creativity. Findings – The relationship between the optimism-pessimism ratio and creativity is curvilinear (inverted U-shaped); beyond a certain level of the optimism-pessimism ratio, the positive relationship between the ratio and creativity weakens, suggesting that the possible positive effects of (high) optimism may be weakened by a very low level of pessimism. Research limitations/implications – Being cross-sectional, the study examines neither the causal links between the optimism-pessimism ratio and creativity nor other plausible causal links. The study was carried out at a single moment and did not capture the dynamics that occur over the course of time involving changes in optimism/pessimism and creativity. Future studies may adopt longitudinal or quasi-experimental designs. Practical implications – Managers and organizations must consider that, even though positivity promotes creativity, some level of negativity may help positivity to produce creativity. Originality/value – This study suggests that scholars who want to study the antecedents of creativity (and innovation) must be cautious in focusing only on the positive or the negative sides of individuals’ characteristics, and rather they must explore the interplay between both poles. Individuals may experience both positive and negative states/traits (Smith et al., 2016), and this both/and approach may impel them to think divergently, to challenge the status quo and to propose “out the box” and useful ideas.

Conclusion

The study enriches literature on employees’ creativity and the dynamics emerging from the optimism-pessimism interplay as well as the literature on the dualities of organization. Positivity promotes creativity, but some level of negativity may help positivity to produce positive outcomes, namely in terms of creativity (George and Zhou, 2007; Kaufmann, 2015; Tsai et al., 2012). Therefore, our study is, to a certain extent, aligned with Csikszentmihalyi (1997), who defended that a creative personality contains opposites (see also Hoff et al., 2012). It is also aligned with Kaufmann (2015), who argued that the “mainstream view,” which strongly celebrates the significance of positive affect, is insufficient to explain creativity, and that negative affect and positive affect may facilitate, or reinforce, the potential presented in each other in influencing/predicting creativity. Our research suggests that a similar pattern may emerge from the interplay between optimism and pessimism. Instead of viewing optimism and pessimism as opposite poles of the same construct, research may consider that they represent different constructs and that, at least in certain circumstances, both may interact and thus influence creativity in a positive way. Duality approaches enrich organizational studies by presenting processes in a richer and nuanced way than those advanced by dualistic forms of polarity.

This duality also has practical implications. First of all, it is important that organizations are not caught in the “positivity trap.” Adopting the assumption that optimists experience Predictor of employee creativity Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 05:17 31 January 2018 (PT) more positive affect and thus are more creative (Rego et al., 2012a, b; Wojtczuk-Turek and Turek, 2015), and looking to drive the pessimism away from the organization may lead to poor HR selection decisions and induce managers to create overoptimistic contexts that end up jeopardizing employees’ creativity. Both optimism and pessimism are important in organizational contexts and may contribute to employee creativity. Second, considering that most of the work in modern organizations is carried out in teams, where individuals interact and cooperate in producing individual and team outcomes, it may be advisable (Hmieleski and Baron, 2009) to have team members with varying levels of optimism and pessimism.