The optimism-pessimism ratio as predictor of employee creativity: the promise of duality

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.

Does a creative identity encourage innovative behaviour? Evidence from knowledge-intensive IT service firms

“…A creative climate is embedded in an organizational working environment and comprises multi-faceted factors (Amabile and Gryskiewicz, 1989; Caniëls, 2018; Rego et al , 2018). A creative environment possesses challenges, freedom, idea support, openness, dynamism, debates, conflicts, playfulness, risk-taking and idea time (Ekvall, 1996; Sica et al , 2018).…”

The link between interpersonal conflict and knowledge hiding: mediated by relatedness need frustration, moderated by narcissistic rivalry

“…Second, our investigation of narcissistic rivalry as a central contingency factor and catalyst of the indirect relationship between interpersonal conflict and knowledge hiding could be complemented by considerations of other potentially relevant personal factors, such as employees’ neuroticism (De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2009), negative affectivity (Penney and Spector, 2005) or pessimism (Rego et al , 2018). Moreover, it would be useful to examine how certain personal resources may buffer or diminish the frustrations that employees experience in the presence of emotion-based conflict, such as their emotion regulation skills (Jiang et al , 2013), empathy (Clark et al , 2019) or political savvy (Ferris et al , 2005).…”

Perceived organizational politics, knowledge hiding and diminished promotability: how do harmony motives matter?

“…Second, our investigation of disintegration avoidance and harmony enhancement, as two critical contingencies that moderate the indirect relationship between POP and promotability, is consistent with the acclaimed relevance of both harmony motives when employees confront difficult work situations (Leung et al , 2011; Wang et al , 2014). To extend beyond this limited focus on two contingency factors, future studies could investigate other likely moderators, such as employees’ negative and positive affectivity (Van Yperen, 2003) or their pessimistic versus optimistic tendencies (Rego et al , 2018). Such studies could compare the relative potency of these alternative contingencies and establish how the moderating roles of harmony motives shift in their presence.…”