Literature DB >> 10185433

How to kill creativity.

T M Amabile1.   

Abstract

In today's knowledge economy, creativity is more important than ever. But many companies unwittingly employ managerial practices that kill it. How? By crushing their employees' intrinsic motivation--the strong internal desire to do something based on interests and passions. Managers don't kill creativity on purpose. Yet in the pursuit of productivity, efficiency, and control--all worthy business imperatives--they undermine creativity. It doesn't have to be that way, says Teresa Amabile. Business imperatives can comfortably coexist with creativity. But managers will have to change their thinking first. Specifically, managers will need to understand that creativity has three parts: expertise, the ability to think flexibly and imaginatively, and motivation. Managers can influence the first two, but doing so is costly and slow. It would be far more effective to increase employees' intrinsic motivation. To that end, managers have five levers to pull: the amount of challenge they give employees, the degree of freedom they grant around process, the way they design work groups, the level of encouragement they give, and the nature of organizational support. Take challenge as an example. Intrinsic motivation is high when employees feel challenged but not overwhelmed by their work. The task for managers, therefore, becomes matching people to the right assignments. Consider also freedom. Intrinsic motivation--and thus creativity--soars when managers let people decide how to achieve goals, not what goals to achieve. Managers can make a difference when it comes to employee creativity. The result can be truly innovative companies in which creativity doesn't just survive but actually thrives.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 10185433

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Harv Bus Rev        ISSN: 0017-8012


  16 in total

1.  Transformational and transactional leadership: association with attitudes toward evidence-based practice.

Authors:  Gregory A Aarons
Journal:  Psychiatr Serv       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.084

2.  Competitive science: is competition ruining science?

Authors:  Ferric C Fang; Arturo Casadevall
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 3.441

3.  Peer review and competition in the Art Exhibition Game.

Authors:  Stefano Balietti; Robert L Goldstone; Dirk Helbing
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-07-11       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Wisdom of the Crowds: Crowd-Based Development of a Logo for a Conference Using a Crowdsourcing Contest.

Authors:  Jason J Ong; Jade E Bilardi; Joseph D Tucker
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.830

5.  What Really Motivates Iranian Nurses to Be Creative in Clinical Settings?: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Sara Shahsavari Isfahani; Mohammad Ali Hosseini; Masoud Fallahi Khoshknab; Hamid Peyrovi; Hamid Reza Khanke
Journal:  Glob J Health Sci       Date:  2015-02-24

Review 6.  Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Psychology: An Integrative Review.

Authors:  Ante Glavas
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-02-16

7.  ENED-GEM: A Conceptual Framework Model for Psychological Enjoyment Factors and Learning Mechanisms in Educational Games about the Environment.

Authors:  Kristoffer S Fjællingsdal; Christian A Klöckner
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-06-28

8.  How Radical Is Embodied Creativity? Implications of 4E Approaches for Creativity Research and Teaching.

Authors:  Laura H Malinin
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-10-22

9.  Placebo can enhance creativity.

Authors:  Liron Rozenkrantz; Avraham E Mayo; Tomer Ilan; Yuval Hart; Lior Noy; Uri Alon
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Structural barriers to scientific progress.

Authors:  K Cowtan
Journal:  Acta Crystallogr D Struct Biol       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 7.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.