Optimizing Employee Creativity in the Digital Era: Uncovering the Interactional Effects of Abilities, Motivations, and Opportunities

Abstract

An increasing digitalization in all aspects of life and work reshapes traditional assumptions about human creativity. Both scholars and practitioners raise many questions with regards to how to stimulate employee creativity in the digital work context. While there are many studies that examine predictors of employee creativity, little effort has been made thus far to synthesize these findings in way that would provide meaningful guidance to organizations and to provide bases for future research. With this paper we aim to contribute to filling this gap. We systematically review empirical studies on predictors of employee creativity published in the past 30 years and organize findings following an established human resources management framework: Ability–Motivation–Opportunity (AMO) theory. This organizing framework enables us to clearly depict how contextual factors (a) separately and (b) jointly influence individual employee creativity. Specifically, it enables us to depict two possible models—combination and multiplicative models—through which contextual factors interact with individual factors in predicting employee creativity. Through synthesizing evidence for each of the models, we demonstrate to scholars and practitioners what is known about the interactional effects of contextual and personal factors on employee creativity, and what still needs to be studied if we are to take the field of research on creativity in the digital era forward.

From LMX to Individual Creativity: Interactive Effect of Engagement and Job Complexity

“…When a job provides little room for personal contribution and is undemanding and not challenging (low-complexity job), an engaged employee has less of a chance to integrate diverse information and come up with unusual and singular ideas while working. In line with that proposed by Cai et al [11], an synergistic effect of job design (contextual factor) and job engagement (individual factor) for predicting individual creativity was found.…”

“…Recently, Lee et al [12] have highlighted that creativity thrives when employees are in psychologically safe and motivating environments. The relational leadership style, and LMX in particular, is considered to be a practice that encourages employees' engagement [11], so that they direct all their energies towards creativity. Furthermore, according to social exchange theory, employees in high-quality LMX relationships feel obligated to reciprocally respond to the good treatment by their supervisor by showing positive attitudes and behaviors [37,38,66].…”

“…Although creativity and innovation are conceptually different, they are closely related constructs [11,12]. Individual creativity focuses on the generation of new and useful ideas, while innovative behavior also encompasses their application [2,4,13].…”

“…Research has extensively analyzed employee characteristics (such as creative self-efficacy, personality traits or creative skills, among others) as antecedents of individual creativity (see the narrative review by Anderson et al [2], and the review by Cai et al [11]). The importance of social context knowledge, only two studies [37,38], carried out in the service sector in India and South Korea, have empirically tested engagement as an intervening mechanism between LMX and innovative behavior.…”

Hope and Creative Self-Efficacy as Sequential Mediators in the Relationship Between Family Socioeconomic Status and Creativity

“…Additionally, compared to those with low levels of hope, individuals with higher hope have greater agency and are more willing to invest in goal-directed efforts (Snyder, 2002). For instance, previous research indicates that hopeful employees enjoy pursuing their goals (Oldham and Cummings, 1996). As a result, they are more intrinsically motivated and prefer to implement their agency in creative ways.…”