STRESS VS CREATIVITY

CORPORATE PERSPECTIVE

Anthony Cardona Jnr

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment

Of the requirements of
Master of Arts in Creativity and Innovation

The Edward de Bono Institute

For the Design and Development of Thinking

UNIVERSITY OF MALTA

February, 2010
ABSTRACT

Anthony Cardona Jnr

‘Stress vs. Creativity – A Corporate Perspective’.

World business leaders recognise that creativity is playing an important role in their

survival in today’s globalised economy. These individuals understand that they share

partial responsibility in leading, shaping and directing the way people live and work.

Traditional business models do not meet today’s challenges, but applying innovation

concepts to these models success rate is higher. Yet creative leadership is necessary for

innovation to succeed and all this to happen within an organisation. Despite management

efforts to incubate creativity in their internal procedures, various factors (barriers) to

creativity may be overlooked – stress is one. A degree of stress such as to meet realistic

project deadlines, may highly contribute to creativity. Long term stress on the other hand

disturbs an individual’s cognitive behaviour that is much needed to access creative

thinking processes.

This paper presents findings from a quantitative study conducted in a corporate

environment with the aim to gain further insight in respect to stress and creativity and any

correlations between them. These issues and several related sub-themes are discussed,

and suggestions to improve creativity and stress management are also presented.

Keywords: Stress, Creativity, Correlation, Organisation, Innovation.

ii
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, declare that this work has been done entirely by myself, and under no

circumstances has been copied from any other sources without reference being made to

the work. This dissertation has never been presented to any other educational institution,

nor published in any other means.

____________________________

Chev. Anthony Cardona Jnr

iii
DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost I am very grateful to Ms Shirley Pulis Xerxen, my thesis supervisor,

who greatly supported me at all times. Her wits, sense of humour, attention to detail and

positive attitude makes her a great tutor and friend.

I would like to thank Dr Sandra Dingli who inspired me to take this trip in lateral

thinking and to all my tutors who gave me the opportunity to express myself freely

throughout this Masters Degree programme. It was a unique experience! Personal

gratitude goes to Dr Louise Chircop, Miss Eileen V Muscat, and Miss Shirley Pulis

Xerxen for editing my work.

Thanks to the dear Almighty for blessing me with patience, positive energy and a

fantastic mum, Edwidge, and great friends – Serena, Ivania, Leslie, Marlene, Anabelle

and Nadia amongst others who made my days happier and brighter… Thanks guys!

I thank the dear Lord who has sent me a great friend who has taught me that there is more

to life than just a promotion at work – life itself… Thanks Mr Mark James Healy!

Finally I would like to thank all staff members at the Malta Stock Exchange who

contributed towards this study.

iv
Dedicated to Katerina

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS

vi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ii

AUTHOR’S DECLARATION iii

DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS vi

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES xi

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction 2
1.2 Objective 3
1.3 Scope 4
1.4 Chapter Overview 4
1.5 Working Definitions 6
1.6 Brief history of Malta Stock Exchange 7
1.7 Statistical performance of Malta Stock Exchange 11
1.8 Conclusion 14

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 16
2.2 Creativity not Innovation 17
2.3 Creativity – The Conceptual Framework 19
2.4 Creativity Contribution at Individual, Group &
Organisational Level 22
2.4.1 Individual Creativity 23
2.4.2 Group Creativity 28

vii
 2.4.3 Organisational Creativity 31
2.4.3.1 Organisational Culture 31
2.4.3.2 Organisational Climate 42
2.5 Organisational Barriers & Keys to Creativity 44
2.5.1 Supportive 47
2.5.2 Supervisory Support 48
2.5.3 Work Groups Encouragement 49
2.5.4 Resources 51
2.5.5 Challenging Environment 52
2.5.6 Freedom 53
2.5.7 De-Stress 54
2.6 What is Stress? 54
2.6.1 Stress vs Challenge 57
2.7 Corporate Stress factors and their effects on
Individuals 58
2.8 Stress effects on Corporations and the Economy 60
2.9 Factors causing Stress at Work 63
2.10 Conclusion 68

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 The Research Perspective 72

3.2 Applied Instrument 72
3.2.1 Validity and Reliability 73
3.3 Ethical Issues 74
3.4 Sample 75
3.5 Questionnaire Rationale 75
3.5.1 Creativity 76
3.5.1.1 Leadership 77
3.5.1.2 Creativity within the Organisation 78
3.5.1.3 Organisational Culture 79
3.5.1.4 Goals, Measure and Strategy 80
viii
 3.5.1.5 Staff Development 80
3.5.1.6 Resources promoting Creativity 81
3.5.2 Stress 82
3.5.2.1 Demands 83
3.5.2.2. Control 84
3.5.2.3 Managers’ Support 84
3.5.2.4 Peer Support 85
3.5.2.5 Relationships 85
3.5.2.6 Role 86
3.5.2.7 Change 86
3.6 Data Analysis, Indexing and Coding 87
3.6.1 Indexing 89
3.6.2 Coding 89
3.7 Limitations 90
3.8 Conclusion 91

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Introduction 93
4.2 Distribution of Participants 93
4.3 Creativity at MSE 94
4.3.1 Leadership 95
4.3.2 Creativity within the Organisation 97
4.3.3 Culture 98
4.3.4 Goals, Measures and Strategies 101
4.3.5 Staff Development 103
4.3.6 Resources promoting Creativity 106
4.4 Stressors at the MSE 107
4.4.1 Working Demands 109
4.4.2 Autonomy 111
4.4.3 Managerial Support 112

ix
 4.4.4 Relationships and Peer Support 113
4.4.5 Relationships 114
4.4.6 Role 114
4.4.7 Change 115
4.5 Correlations – Statistical and Graphical
Interpretation 117
4.6 Conclusion 124

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction 127

5.2 Outcomes 127
5.3 Recommendations 130
5.3.1 Time 130
5.3.2 Socialisation 130
5.3.3 Think ‘How to Reward” 131
5.3.4 Get together Sessions 132
5.3.5 Creative Thinking Skills Training 132
5.3.6 Regular Creativity Audits 133
5.3.7 Creativity Networking 133
5.3.8 Management 134
5.4 Managing Organisational Stress 135
5.4.1 Conflict/Gossip 135
5.4.2 Stress Audits 136
5.4.3 Training 136
5.4.4 Policies 136
5.5 Further Study 137
5.5.1 Application of Different Research Methods 137
5.5.2 Larger Sample 138
5.5.3 Inclusion of other Industrial Sectors 138
5.5.4 Conclusion 139

x
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 141
APPENDIX I SIX THINKING HATS 164

APPENDIX II DEFINITION OF STRESS BY

MSE STAFF MEMBERS 167

APPENDIX III QUESTIONNAIRE 171

APPENDIX IV TE HAIHAU INNOVATION

AUDIT PRACTICES 175

APPENDIX V AUTHORITY TO USE MSE PLC

AS SUBJECT FOR STUDY 179

APPENDIX VI AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT

QUESTIONNAIRE DURING OFFICE
WORKING HOURS 181

APPENDIX VII CRITICAL VALUES FOR PEARSON R 183

APPENDIX VIII STATISTICAL EVALUATIONS 185

APPENDIX IX PERCEIVED STRESSORS BY

MSE EMPLOYEES 191

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Number of Holders across all Securities 11

Figure 1.2 Market Capitalisation 2002/08 12
Figure 1.3 Aggregate Turnover 2002/08 13
Figure 2.1 The Creative Thinking Process 20
Figure 2.2 Performance vs. Pressure 56
Figure 3.1 Pearson R Formula 87
Figure 4.1 Mean of Average Scores of each category for Creativity 95
Figure 4.2 Mean of Average Scores of each category for Stress 108
Figure 4.3 Correlation of Mean Responses for Full Sample 118

xi
Figure 4.4 Correlation of Mean Responses for Level 1 Sample 120
Figure 4.5 Correlation of Mean Responses for Level 2 Sample 121
Figure 4.6 Correlation of Mean Reponses for Male Sample 122
Figure 4.7 Correlation of Mean Responses for Female Sample 124

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Individuals Holders across all Securities at Year End 11

Table 1.2 Market Capitalisation in € Millions 12
Table 1.3 Aggregated Trading Turnover in € Millions 13
Table 2.1 Characteristics of Creativity 27
Table 4.1 Respondents Distribution 94
Table 4.2 Distribution of Sample by Gender 94
Table 4.3 Distribution of Sample by Age 94
Table 4.4 Organisational Contributions to Satisfy Needs 103
Table 4.5 Creativity comparison between Levels 107
Table 4.6 Stressors at Work 109
Table 4.7 Mean Values of Full Sample Responses 117
Table 4.8 Mean Values of Level 1 Sample Responses 119
Table 4.9 Mean Values of Level 2 Sample Responses 120
Table 4.10 Mean Values of Male Sample Responses 122
Table 4.11 Mean Values of Female Sample Responses 123

xii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1
1.1 Introduction

The 21st Century has brought about many developments in every sector one may think of,

yet nothing compares to the development that takes place each and every day in the

business sector. Innovational development such as internet technology, which has

revolutionised every aspect of our lives and the persistent demands for faster and larger

outputs through continual innovation have brought about a globalised economy that while

responsible for new opportunities has also resulted in increased threats to the global

market-place – threats that are intensified as global players go to extremes in their

demands for ever bigger profits.

This scenario has brought about an unprecedented impact on the approach of how going

concerns operate. For an organisation to compete in such an environment it is imperative

to fully utilise all of its assets, whether these are financial, human or any other resources.

Creativity is one of these assets that increase in value as time goes by and gives an edge

to those who apply it and becomes the back bone of their competitive advantage in any

given market. Business empires applying the use of creative minds have major market

shares on a global scale, a situation envisaged by Winston Churchill in a speech he gave

at Harvard University in 1943 (Churchill, 1943) where he accentuates that future empires

will be those applying the use of their mind. The hi-tech Google Inc. is one such

example of an empire that believes in exchange of ideas. Its success highly depends on its

innovative business model that reflects in its corporate culture that of promoting sharing

of ideas and opinions comfortably (Google, 2009, ¶. 2). Professor Edward de Bono, the

leading authority in the field of creative thinking and lateral thinking, goes a step further

2
and believes that “creative thinking is directly involved in adding value, in creating value,

and in designing opportunities” (de Bono, 1993, p.71). de Bono has made it his life’s

mission to stress the importance of improving thinking ability through the application of

lateral thinking techniques to improve human cognitive ability. Many business

organisations, irrelevant of their size, have understood the benefits of such ability and are

applying it to their advantage to stimulate innovation in the day to day running of their

business systems. Such impetus is a direct result of a stark reality – globalisation has

given birth to a ferocious monster called competition.

“Staff have to be ‘happy, healthy and here (i.e. at work) in order to deliver efficiency

gains and first rate services. That is the best way to position our organisations to better

deliver core functions.” (Hunt, ¶.1). Yet in the face of a more competitive environment

companies are resorting to dramatic strategies that can bring about challenges to

management and staff members alike. These strategies may include the possibility of

management structure reforms, mergers, takeovers, acquisitions, new technology

application, cost cuttings, lay-offs etc. Should these challenges, due to management

inefficiency or otherwise be perceived as negative in a corporate environment they may

induce emotional disturbances – or as more commonly called, stress!

1.2 Objective

The study will try to determine whether a correlation exists between stress and creativity

and it shall seek to suggest and explore measures that could be used to improve the

situation by stimulating creativity in a corporate perspective.

3
1.3 Scope

The methodology adopted to implement the study is based primarily on desk research,

field research and the compilation and analysis of results. The desk and field research are

intended to compile the background information for the study. Compilation and analysis

of the findings phase derives conclusions from the results and makes recommendations as

deemed appropriate.

“When individuals are faced with a challenging task, they are less likely to perform well

in complex situations,” says Jennifer Graham, a post-doctoral fellow at Ohio State

University’s Institute of Behavioural Medicine Research. (In Douglas, 2006, ¶. 17). Such

understanding is extended to this study which involves a quantitative approach that looks

at two aspects – stress and creativity. Following this, the correlation between them is

considered to identify with Silvia Hartmann’s belief, in her article Stress vs. Creativity,

that “Stress creates a fog of disturbance that traps consciousness inside of itself and the

routes into the various creative flow states are simply lost; and where this becomes really

troublesome is when the BACKGROUND stress is so high that creativity seems to have

forsaken the person altogether.”(Hartmann, ’capitals in original’, 2005, ¶.11) In this case

the person involved is one of the organisation’s main assets – the employee, whether as

an individual, a team member or part and parcel of the whole organisation.

1.4 Chapter Overview

The second chapter looks into the relevant literature on creativity and stress. Definitions

of both topics are identified and the extended literature review will give an in-depth

4
explanation of the various theoretical and practical aspects of these elements and

ultimately the possible correlations, if any, between them. Chapter 3 describes the

methodology of the study conducted, which includes: the research process, population

sampling, instruments applied for the research and also materials used. The profile of the

institution under research, the Malta Stock Exchange plc (MSE), outlined in section 1.6

below indicates that this entity is not a long-established one in comparison with its

counterparts in other European countries. Yet over such a short period of time it has

already gone through a number of significant corporate changes. When the MSE on 1

October 2002 was divested from its regulatory role and exclusivity to provide trading

facilities, it became an operator in the market place, functioning in a fully competitive

environment. Mr Alfred Mallia, former chairman of the MSE, considers this event as the

most important for the structural changes to affect the working of the Exchange since it

commenced operations in 1991 (Mallia, 2002). Structural and operational changes are

necessary for further development but these may induce stress among employees at all

levels throughout the corporate structure. This will be addressed in the field research

aspect of the study. Chapter 4 deals with the compilation and analysis of the results of the

study, which are analysed in Chapter 5. This concluding chapter focuses on

recommendations aimed to support an environment where creativity promotes innovation

in products and services development which guarantees a growing market share on a

larger scale economy.

5
1.5 Working Definitions

For the scope of this study the following terms have been formulated after an analysis of

the literature review.

1. Corporate:

Business sector, going concerns, organisation, business empires/organisations.

2. Malta Stock Exchange plc:

Malta Stock Exchange, from here on forward MSE, Exchange.

3. Securities:

Malta Government Stocks (MGS), Bonds (Corporate Bonds), Equity (Ordinary

Shares) Treasury Bills (T. Bills).

4. Creativity:

The generation of new ideas by approaching problems or existing practices in

innovative or imaginative ways.

5. Stress:

The psychological and physical state that results when perceived demands exceed

an individual's ability to cope with them.

6
1.6 Brief history of Malta Stock Exchange

The MSE effectively came to life when the key provisions of Act XXXIII of 1990 were

promulgated on the 24 January 1991. Then the first Council of the Exchange was formed

and vested with the responsibility for policy making and its implementation. The Bye-

laws, that is the internal rules and regulations of the Exchange, were published in June

1990 and covered all of its functions and operations. The MSE was then the regulatory

authority over the market and its members (i.e. stockbrokers) and the bye-laws of the

MSE had force of law.

A manual, call over system trading commenced on Wednesday 8 January 1992. Trading

sessions were then held on a weekly basis and the only securities traded on the Exchange

floor were the Government stocks. June 1992 is marked in history as the date when the

first equity was listed on the market – this was in respect of share in Bank of Valletta plc.

Then in 1994 the first corporate bond, that of Gasan Finance plc, was issued and listed on

the market. The first collective investment scheme was listed late in 1995. Since the

commencement of its operations, the MSE also operated a central securities depository,

which maintains the register of listed companies.

In 1992 when trading commenced, the listing and trading of securities on the market was

a completely new concept to the Maltese economy. Both prospective issuers and the

public in general had to be informed of the benefits of the services being offered by this

new institution. The Exchange, therefore, launched an on-going educational programme

on a national scale through various media. The Exchange has also established very

7
important bilateral agreements of understanding with various exchanges including the

Irish, the London, the Cairo and Alexandria Stock Exchanges, as well as with the Capital

Markets Board of Turkey, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission and the

Polish Securities Commission. MSE obtained full membership of the world renowned

Federation International des Bourses de Valeurs (FIBV) (now World Federation of

Exchanges), the International Organisation of Securities Commission (IOSCO), the

Federation of European Securities Exchange, the European Corporate Markets Institute,

the European Corporate Governance Institute and the International Securities Services

Association. These are all international standard-setting organisations, membership of

which ensures that the Exchange keeps abreast of all international requirements and

regulations and continues to operate within such parameters. In 1994 the MSE introduced

a “Code of Conduct” intended to provide members of the Exchange with guidelines to

operate in this sector. In the same year the Central Securities Depository and the Clearing

and Settlement Systems were integrated in order to further increase efficiency and cut

down on pre- and post-trading procedures. The MSE was also part of the UK/Maltese

consortium to supply the most appropriate technology and business advisory services to

the Central Securities Depository of Tallinn - Estonia. In 1996 the MSE migrated from

its manual trading sessions once a week to an order-driven, screen based system. This

step had to be taken for various reasons but mainly due to the fact that demand for trading

was on the increase. Daily sessions were introduced in 1998. In 2001 the MSE saw its

first listing on the Alternative Company List, a second tier market catering for companies

who wish to tap the market but who do not have a three year track record in their line of

business. The trading floor was abolished in 2001 and trading became completely remote

8
and screen-based. Members could now deal directly from the offices, leading to greater

efficiency and better service to their clients. The official opening of the new premises of

the MSE on 6 October 2001 was a significant landmark for the institution since it would

be operating from modern and dynamic offices housed in a fully refurbished historic

building within the capital city of Malta.

With effect from 1st October 2002 the Malta Stock Exchange Act 1990 was heavily

emended and renamed to Financial Markets Act. In terms of the new legislation setup,

the Exchange was divested of its regulatory powers and functions with respect to listed

companies and the members of the MSE which were instead transferred to the Malta

Financial Services Authority. As a result of a number of amendments to a number of

other laws, the latter became a single regulator in the financial services industry in Malta.

With the removal of its regulatory responsibilities, the Exchange has become an

‘operator’ in the capital market facing a fully fledged competition.

In 2007 the MSE started to list and trade Money Markets instruments in the form of

Treasury Bills. This resulted in a major development in the Exchange’s security

settlement system as these financial instruments are the first of their kind to be cleared

and settled on the same day as they are traded – all other securities are settled on T+3

(Trading day + 3 days) basis. Settlement, in this case, is the process whereby listed

securities are delivered against payment to buyers. Furthermore it involves the

corresponding payment delivered to the seller of the securities. Settlement is preceded by

trading sessions held on the trading floor of the Exchange which involves entering into

9
contracts of sale and purchase of securities. The settlement date for certain securities is

usually 3 business days after the trade (T+3) was executed. In other circumstances

securities are settled on same day basis. As a result of Malta’s entry into the Eurozone on

1 January 2008, the Exchange became a Direct Member of TARGET2, the pan-eurozone

clearing and settlement system operated by the European Central Bank.

Amendments to the Financial Markets Act in 2007 provided for the transposition of the

Market in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) and the Transparency Directive into

national law. Human and financial resources were dedicated by the MSE to become

compliant with such requirements which related mainly to pre/post trading regulatory

reporting. Further changes to the law in 2007 provided for the corporate re-structuring of

the institution. The Exchange changed from a public entity set up under a specific law

(the Malta Stock Exchange Act as subsequently amended) to a group of companies

wholly owned by Government set up under the Companies Act (Cap. 386 of the Laws of

Malta). The new structure has been designed to provide the Government with the

appropriate platform should it decide to sell the group’s constituent companies in whole

or in part.

The high standards that the MSE has reached in its operations and goodwill enable it to

seek and face new business ventures and challenges. However, such a fast pace of

development may induce stress throughout the institution.

10
 1.7 Statistical performance of Malta Stock Exchange

For information purposes, the statistical performance of the MSE is being presented to

illustrate the steady pace of its growth. All statistics have been obtained from the

statistics section of the official website of the MSE (www.borzamalta.com.mt).

Table 1.1 indicates that the numbers of individuals (investors) who hold some form of

securities (listed on the MSE) have increased over 45% from 1995 to 2008.

Table 1.1: Individual holders across all Securities at year end:

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

No. of
Holders 36,206 37,046 38,965 41,912 41,823 44,722 46,452
Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
No. of
Holders 48,567 50,826 51,157 50,025 50,874 51,887 52,846
NO OF INDIVIDUALS HOLDING SOME FORM OF SECURITY OR ANOTHER

For ease of reference Figure 1.1 represents a graphical interpretation of the data referred

to in Table 1.1.

60,000
NO. OF HOLDERS

50,000
40,000

30,000
20,000
10,000
-
1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Figure 1.1: Number of holders across all securities

11
 Table 1.2 indicates the market capitalisation across all securities listed on the MSE

showing a constant increase from 2002 to 2007 with the exception of 2008. Mr Zammit

Tabona, Chairman of MSE, explains that “Both the capitalisation of the market and the

Malta Stock Exchange Share Index fell considerably during the year, reflecting the

tumbling values of equity”. (Zammit Tabona, 2008:11).

Table 1.2: Market Capitalisation1 in € Millions

Year Equity Bonds MGS T. Bills Total €

2002 1,319 381 2,097 - 3,797
2003 1,467 419 2,366 - 4,252
2004 2,089 434 2,513 - 5,036
2005 3,474 377 2,943 - 6,794
2006 3,416 374 2,890 6,680
2007 3,855 485 2,920 351 7,611
2008 2,567 536 3,256 343 6,702

(MGS: MALTA GOVERNMENT STOCKS, T. BILL: TREASURY BILLS)

For ease of reference Figure 1.2 represents a graphical interpretation of the statistical data

in Table 1.2.

4,500
4,000
EURO (MILLIONS)

3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
-
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Equity Bonds MGS T. Bills

Figure 1.2: Market Capitalisation 2002/08

1
Market Capitalisation is the total Euro value of all listed securities. It is calculated by multiplying the number of security units (listed
on the official list of the MSE) by current market price. This term is often referred to as market cap. For the purposes of this statistical
information prices at year end that are taken into consideration.

12
Table 1.3 indicates the aggregate market turnover across all securities traded on the MSE

trading floor. The trend of this market activity has been on the increase from 2002 to

2008 with an overall performance of over 176%.

Table 1.3: Aggregated Trading Turnover in € Millions

Year Equity Bonds MGS T. Bills Total €

2002 48 24 104 - 177
2003 36 24 112 - 173
2004 75 20 124 - 218
2005 121 17 155 - 293
2006 205 11 158 - 375
2007 65 12 326 54 457
2008 49 26 266 147 488
AGGREGATED TURNOVER PER SECURITY

Figure 1.3 represents a graphical interpretation of the statistical data found in Table 1.2.

350
EUROS (MILLIONS)

300
250
200
150
100
50
-
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
YEAR

Equity Bonds MGS T. Bills

Figure 1.3: Aggregate Turnover 2002/08

13
1.8 Conclusion

The following chapter presents a detailed literature review of stress and creativity, with

particular emphasis on stress and creativity in a corporate environment. The chapter

presents models and theories on creativity and stress. It examines the characteristics of

the creative individual, group and organisation, and proceeds onto the organisation

climate and culture, as well as the barriers and keys to creativity within a corporate

perspective. The chapter also discusses work-related stress, its effect on individuals,

corporations and economy and which perceived factors do cause stress in a working

environment.

14
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

15
2.1 Introduction

This chapter represents an in-depth overview of the theoretical and empirical literature in

relation to creativity in business organisations, and the characteristics of stress within a

working place that may affect the development of a creative environment and/or

employee ability to be creative.

Creativity, more than just a catchphrase, is becoming acknowledged as a dynamic factor

in business success. In corporate annual reports, executive speeches, and advertisements

sooner or later the word creativity will appear. Yet for many, this term is not easy to

understand let alone foster it. To whittle down different definitions of creativity to one

all-encompassing definition is a cumbersome task that may be even impossible.

Psychological studies alone come up with various definitions of creativity. Other experts

complicate matters even further, for example in a publication by Andrei G. Aleinkov,

Sharon Kackmeister and Ron Koenig (2000) various definitions of creativity are given,

some of which being several hundred words long. This does not mean to imply any of

these definitions are wrong, however, as outlined in the previous chapter, this study will

mainly focus on creativity within a corporate context hence the following definition taken

from BNET business dictionary (Business definition for corporate climate, ¶.1) is perhaps

the most pertinent for this study:

‘…Creativity involves reexamining assumptions and reinterpreting facts, ideas,

and past experience. A growing interest in creativity as a source of competitive
advantage has developed in recent years, and creativity is considered important,
not just for the development of new products and services, but also for its role in
organisational decision making and problem solving…’

16
Creativity is popularly associated with art but nowadays it has taken a more pivotal role

that determines success in a vast range of professions such as architecture, engineering,

advertising, business procedures and others. Prof. David C Wilson from Warwick

Business School reaffirms this importance of creativity in business organisations as he

claims that ‘creativity focuses on achieving innovation, competitive advantage and social

benefits’(Wilson, screen.5), factors that enable any kind of business entity to move

forward by providing something different from what is already established out there.

Creativity is the ‘enabling process by which something new comes into existence’

(Amabile in Brazeal & Herbert, 1999:39).

A study by Hills and Shrader (1998, ¶.28) confirms that organisations actively seek a

corporate culture that encourages creativity (number of potential ideas and problem

solutions) since this gives them the edge in identifying business opportunities. Edward

de Bono believes powerful creativity gives more than just an edge to organisations but it

takes them a step further in product differentiation and marketing initiatives (de Bono,

1993) that ultimately stimulates innovation in products and services produced - the key

element that sets these going concerns apart from their main competitors by maintaining

market share, continued growth and keeping shareholders happy.

2.2 Creativity not Innovation

There is widespread confusion between the terms creativity and innovation. It is

important, at the outset, to explicitly distinguish between the two.

17
Creativity is the process of developing and expressing novel ideas (Paulus & Nijstad,

2003) that are likely to be useful (Leonard & Swap, 1999). This process gives the ability

to look at things differently and therefore produces new ideas, different approaches or

actions both by individuals or groups whose creativity is a starting point for innovation

(Amabile, 1996). The aim of developing creative ideas focuses on achieving competitive

advantage and social benefits by enhancing the level of innovation processes within the

organisation. This is also reflected in Bourdieu (1993) in that he considers creativity as a

main ingredient of a field of production.

Innovation, on the other hand, is the ability to make new creative ideas materialise into

viable novelties. 3M describes this ability ‘as an action or implementation which results

in an improvement, a gain, or a profit’ (Livingston, 2008:175). Innovation contributes to

wealth creation in organisations through significant changes in structures - Business

Model Innovation, improvements in the effectiveness and efficiency of core business

processes and functions - Operations Innovation, and creating new significant

differentiated products, services or market strategies - Product Output.

Innovation is not creativity but both of them go hand in hand. From a corporate

perspective – a business entity to prove innovative has to be supported by highly creative

staff members.

18
2.3 Creativity – The Conceptual Framework

In this Section the author will examine the conceptual framework of creativity in the

context of this study in order to facilitate the understanding of creativity in business

organisations and consequently relate findings in this study to existing theories.

In an ever-increasing number of Management articles, newsletters, journals, internet

research etc., one finds what is becoming increasingly obvious, that is, organisations need

to put into place structures and policies that nurture creativity. David J Skyrme, the

managing editor of I3 Update, considers the business culture of the organisation coupled

with climate and the attitude of managers towards creativity as the most crucial

ingredients for success (Skyrme, 1998). These elements have become core subjects in

management schooling according to Oldham & Cummings (1996) in respect to

innovation and accomplishment; two important characteristics of typical creative

organisations. Additionally, according to Martensen (1999), these organisations require

the competencies to react quickly to new market conditions and customer demands, and

indentify the possibilities that come along from constantly looking for creative solutions.

Creative competencies are such that create a valuable, useful product, service, idea,

procedure or process by individuals working together in a complex social system

(Woodman, Sawyer & Griffin, 1993). Today’s world economy is tremendously volatile

and the only stable variant one can rely on is the constant need for change (Harris, 2002),

and for an organisation to succeed or not depends entirely on its knowledge of the art of

renewal (Gardner, 1965). How does an organisation renew itself? The answer lies in the

ability of going through creative cycle/processes at regular intervals and not when the

19
need arises. Being proactive is very important, asking for creative ideas on demand may

result detrimental to the creative process altogether as de Bono (2003) explains that this

demand actually opposes the creative process, a process that involves waiting for

inspiration, mulling things over, messing around, open-ended discussions, incubation… a

process that depends on time to nurture and to define the creative process itself

(Goswami, 1996).

One of the earliest models of creative thinking process was proposed by Graham Wallas

(1926) through four phases as indicated hereunder:

PREPARATION INCUBATION ILLUMINATION VERIFICATION

GRAHAM WALLAS FOUR PHASES OF CREATIVE THINKING PROCESS

Fig. 2.1: The Creative Thinking Process

 Phase 1- PREPARATION

During this phase the preparatory work takes place, the idea is to study and

investigate all the information available from a variety of sources.

 Phase 2 – INCUBATION

Many psychologists believe there is a subconscious mind that works on any problem

one is trying to solve. The incubation phase is that time when an individual does not

actively think about the problem but instead allow the subconscious to take over. To

20
 take advantage of the incubation phase one must let go of the idea and/or sleep on it

letting the brain do its own processing.

 Phase 3 – ILLUMINATION

An idea or solution has flashed into an individual mind after one has stopped thinking

about the problem. This is called illumination; it is that sudden flash of insight, the

bulb that suddenly lights up in one’s mind as if the creative idea bursts forth from its

preconscious processing into conscious awareness. This experience can happen

anywhere and anytime whether one is pushing a trolley at the supermarket or thinking

of entirely something else.

 Phase 4 – VERIFICATION

Throughout this phase, the idea is consciously verified, elaborated and carried out.

Verification occurs when one commences to flesh out the details of an idea. Not all

ideas will be feasible in reality, so at this phase they are seriously considered and if

possible tested. This model if applied in the right environment and structures partially

complies with the requirements of a creative organisation business system. The idea

can be further applied in other management sectors within a corporate firm including

human resources, marketing, public relations etc.

Other authors of creativity literature, such as Baron and Harrington (1981), many a

times organise their flow of thought following Rhodes’ (1961) classification of

creativity, commonly referred to as the four P’s. Each classification has its own

21
 unique attributes but when put together the whole concept of creativity is much easier

to grasp. The four P’s are:

1. Person (this is associated directly to an individual’s ability, attitudes, motivation,

behaviour that contribute to creativity)

2. Product (this refers to the outcome of creative thinking such as publications, work

of arts, software applications etc.)

3. Process (the necessary mental processes one goes through in focusing on the

problem and deriving to a creative solution. Reference is also made to the tools

and techniques used to achieve said solutions)

4. Press (in this category the environment, where creativity takes place, is

considered. And when referring to environment this also includes the social

pressures that may develop or hinder creativity).

Collectively these factors contribute to an output – the Creative Output which Taggar

(2002) indicates derives from the contribution of an individual, group or organisational

processes.

2.4 Creativity Contribution at Individual, Group & Organisational

Level

Marzano (2000) encapsulates the essence of Philips Electronics’ success in its adoption

of human focus and embracing personal and social values as well as new technologies to

22
create new sustainable innovation and business models. This kind of adoption is the core

belief of what will take Philips and similar business entities into a preferable future.

National airlines such as Alitalia (Barry, 2009, ¶.1) due to their static business models

paid a heavy penalty – bankruptcy, while those that applied innovative ideas entered the

market and revolutionised the traveling industry altogether. One case in point is Europe’s

largest low fares airline – Ryanair entering the aviation market in 1998 and today it

employs more than 6,000 staff members and which managed €1,811 million in revenues

in September, 2008 (Ryanair, 2008) – all this taking place during a period when oil price

increase and recession made other airlines close operations or seek urgent sell-offs. Such

cases and other studies provide adequate proof that any organisation needs to be

innovative in order to survive the wave of competition.

According to Carrier, Cossette and Verstraete (1991) business entities require being

creative and innovative to survive. For innovation to flourish, organisations must create,

embrace and promote an environment that fosters creativity across all their structural

levels i.e. at an individual, group and organisational level. The following section will

look into these levels with particular attention to the characteristics of various processes

applied within that can inhibit or facilitate creativity.

2.4.1 Individual Creativity

John W Gardner (1993) in his book ‘How to prevent orgnisational dry rot’ describes the

creative individual as being gifted in seeing the gap between what is and what could be.

23
This maintains the idea that each and every spark (idea) that kicks off a process towards

an innovative product starts from one person, from one mind. In their studies and

experience de Bono (1993) and Nijstad (2000) find that individuals working on their own

produce far more and a wider range of ideas.

Despite the fact that a particular invention seems to be the fruit of a team/group work, the

basis of that invention has its origin in one individual’s thoughts. This is in line with Prof

Winston J Brill beliefs that creativity ought to be active at every level in an organisation.

Yet, he proceeds to identify that only an individual can be creative, can have an idea

(2006, ¶.8). One might argue whether this statement is true. The answer purely depends

on the situation and/or characteristics of the individual. An individual can be creative

because he is motivated (in/extrinsic) to be so and hence makes an extra effort to be

creative. Others may have individualized their own methods how to be creative and

becomes to them to be creative. In other words an individual can be creative or not

creative mainly on how he perceives situations and acts upon them or may totally ignore

them. According to Abraham H Maslow (1954), creativity is not just the remit of genius,

but is instead the universal heritage of every human being. Yet in the Western society a

misconception exists that creativity pertains to a selection of people such as artists,

musicians, writers, etc. This does not augur well on the whole because it hinders the

society to see itself as a potential creative engine in the social and economic environment.

This misconception must be eradicated at all costs in order that each individual becomes

open to the idea of learning being creative and contribute accordingly on various fronts

including at one’s place of work.

24
Is it possible for an individual to learn to become creative? Human instincts were

designed for ultimate survival hence it became a basic human ability for an individual to

draw forth certain patterns of intellectual behaviour when facing difficulties and/or

challenges. The brain’s primary function is to establish routine patterns and make sure the

individual does not deviate from such patterns, making the creative process practically

impossible. The good news is that according to de Bono (1993:31) creative thinking is a

skill that can be learned and practiced just like fishing, cooking or driving. Furthermore

de Bono in his book ‘Serious Creativity’ proposes several techniques of lateral thinking

(provocation, random entry, concept extraction, challenge just to mention a few), their

aim is to assist the mind to deviate from the standard static patterns and seek new ones.

This process gives the brain the opportunity to think differently and can finally come up

with new ideas, alternative solutions. To be able to apply lateral thinking Guilford (1977)

claims that it is necessary to apply appropriate working methodology and identifies two

corresponding paths that one needs to embark on to apply creativity:

1. The Psychological path: such path requires the eradication of inhibitions inclusive of

personal and natural hindrances. The bad news is that age does not help - the average

adult thinks of three to six alternatives for any given situation. The average child

thinks of 60 (Lurie, 2009:86).

2. The Logical path: This implies identifying and adopting the optimum action process

and also properly choosing certain techniques based on intuitions and adapt them to

the specific problem under consideration.

25
Other processes may be identified but this does not mean that the creative person

recognises such processes himself. Weisberg (1993:3) claims that ‘processes often seem

incomprehensible to the creators themselves.’ So the question that arises is whether

creative individuals actually realise that they are following creative processes consciously

when they engage themselves in creative activities. The truth is that each individual is

creative, but some individuals are more creative than others. We can all have very

creative ideas for the simple reason that ‘creative thinking is no different from learning

mathematics or any sport.’ (de Bono, 1993). Creativity, therefore, just like any other skill

can be learnt. Byttebier, CEO of the Belgian COCD (Centre for Creative Thinking),

claims that ‘everybody can think creatively; you can learn how to do it and you can

develop yourself’ (2002: 23, 67).

Putting the above into a more contextual perspective it is important to identify the

characteristics of creative individuals so that it is easier to recognize them and engage

their ability to reap the maximum benefit from their creativity. To begin with Amabile

(1998) has established three essential components of individual creativity these are:

1. Expertise – the knowledge, proficiency, capability in a specific field.

2. Creative thinking – the ability to think ‘out of the box’, see things from different

perspective and to come up with various options.

3. Motivation – the level of intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction deriving from performing

a specific and job that contributes towards an individual to be creative (Wreath,

1998).

26
Other studies have identified additional various qualities found among creative

individuals. Some qualities may be more significant to creativity than others, but for the

scope of this study such characteristics will be broadly categorised under personal traits,

cognitive qualities and practical abilities:

Table 2.1: Characteristics of Creativity

PERSONAL TRAITS

ARTISTIC, INTELLECTUAL, INTUITIVE, HIGHLY MOTIVATED,

RISK TAKER, HUMOR, AUTONOMOUS, OPTIMISTIC, DIVERSITY, PERSISTENCE, PLAYFUL

COGNITIVE QUALITIES

INGENUITY, THINING SKILLS, AMBIGUITY TOLERANCE,

PROBLEM SOLVING, COMPLEXITY TOLERANCE, INQUIRING MIND, MAKING CONNECTIONS

PRACTICAL ABILITIES

TECHNICAL EXPERTISE, INDUSTRIAL EXPERIENCE, INDUSTRIAL KNOWLEDGE, PRODUCT

KNOWLEDGE, SERVICE KNOWLEDGE,

CHARACTERISTICS OF A CREATIVE INDIVIDUAL

(HTTP://WWW.PATHWAYS.CU.EDU.EG/SUBPAGES/TRAINING_COURSES/CREATIVITY/CHAPTER4.HTM#4_4)

The above list is not exhaustive. While combinations of these characteristics determine a

creative individual, this does not imply that these qualities on their own will solve all

creative problems. Jaoui (1991) adds that the main strategy for a creative outcome is the

application of individual practical creativity. This refers to the stage that comprises the

development and the effective use of one’s own capability to come up with original and

viable solutions. At this point the individual creativity may proceed to integrate within a

more collective environment, a group environment such as teamwork where creativity

has to face a more complex structure.

27
2.4.2 Group Creativity

The question is individual or group creativity? Which is the best option to achieve a flow

of valuable creative ideas within a corporate environment? Various literatures contradict

one another to some extend in this respect. Some studies show doubts that creativity

could emanate from individuals who differ in personal traits, while other studies sustain

that it is because of diversity that generation of different ideas could be assembled. In

reality what is causing this challenge is the fact that there seems to be lack of substantial

literature related to group creativity and more is focused on the individual (Leonard &

Swap, 1999), hence the possible reason behind the general feeling that insights stems

only from individuals. As from his own experience de Bono (1993:41) observes that the

individuals are more productive of ideas, both in quantity and range, when working on

their own rather than in a group. Does this suggest working in isolation? The answer is

definitely no, actually in today’s innovative organisations creative ideas are often the

result of social interaction and influence (Montuori & Purser, 1995) and as for isolation -

Bennis (1997) believes that the Lone Ranger, the personification of the individual

problem solver, has died. The alternative, as proposed by Osborn (1963), is to leave

individuals alone seeking creative ideas on a given problem that requires valuable

solution, thereafter generated brainpower may be improved by bringing these individuals

together to connect as a group. According to Stein (1975) this kind of interaction is best

because it gives individuals time to prepare for the group meeting by first reflecting on

their own ideas.

28
Having individuals connecting within a group is not always a smooth ride and problems

commence for various reasons such as:

 Team members can be too different to be able to work together (Fagerstorm, 2006).

 Individuals can be introvert or extrovert and the tendency is that the extrovert type

will take over leaving a small gap if any for those introverts to contribute (Jung,

1961).

 Individuals within a group (team) articulate immediately ideas they think of during

idea generating exercise. If all members of the group start to put forward ideas

randomly in the course of such debate, chaos ensues (Mindtools, 2009).

 Working with and managing diversity means raising awareness of cultural, ethnic and

lifestyle differences (Mor Barak, 2005). This may come across as a challenge for

some societies that do not, for example, accept homosexuals, women or employees of

a certain age.

 Employers or management may resent employees coming up with better ideas than

them (Rees, 1995).

There are ways and means to handle such conflicts mentioned above. Prof. Edward de

Bono came up with one particular method that helps avoid any unwanted collisions. This

system is called the Six Thinking Hats. As explained by de Bono (1985) these are six

metaphorical hats as outlined in Appendix I. The thinker can put one hat on or take one

off to indicate the type of thinking that is being used. This putting on and taking off of

hats is essential for the whole exercise to run smoothly. The hats must never be used to

29
categorise any team member, even though team members may show certain traits such as

leadership. The Six Thinking Hats method makes time and space for creativity to take

place – time and space for diversity to work and in the meantime, Luecke (2003)

believes, it also achieves greater creative output because it brings about a greater sum of

competencies, insights and energy to the joint effort. And according to Luecke several

benefits emerge from this kind of effort including:

 Individual differences create friction that ignites new ideas.

 Diversity in thinking processes and points of views upholds homogenous thinking.

 Diversity in thinking and expertise gives good creative ideas more opportunities to

develop.

For all the above to take place individuals within a group need to associate themselves

with common sentiments such as connection, respect, understanding, tolerance, comfort–

sentiments to provide enough comfortable for an individual to take the initiative and

promote his idea, to take the risk in being creative (Coleman, 1996). Dr Sandra Dingli,

lecturer at the University of Malta believes that if people within a group start sharing

ideas openly it means that a breeding ground for creativity is being nurtured. This line of

thought can be seen during her Critical Thinking lectures where Dr Dingli promotes

openness and trust between the participants that allows/promotes a flow of daring ideas

(Barsoux, 1996) even on delicate issues such as sex, divorce, religions, race amongst

others.

30
In a corporate environment, trust and respect lie at the heart of effective on-going

relationships but this does not imply that the creative process has found its ultimate

convergence toward success but surely a step forward towards a successful creative

organisation.

2.4.3 Organisational Creativity

In today’s knowledge-based organisations, innovation is imperative and there is no

innovation if creativity lacks. Creativity determines the organisation’s ability to succeed

and survive global competition forces. It is widely acknowledged that creativity forms the

core activity of a growing global economy that presents continuous pressures which have

resulted in major changes in respect to how organisational structures are determined.

These pressures exert continuous demand for innovative changes that affect not only the

individuals within an organisation but the organisation itself (Read, 1996). Studies have

focused on the relationship between individual and organisational creativity (Amabile,

1997). Such studies provide relevant material to explore salient factors that influence

creativity from an organisational perspective and which could be observed from the

nature of culture and climate that exist within such entity.

2.4.3.1 Organisational Culture

Despite widespread support for creativity and innovation within an organisation,

including setups of necessary structures and availability of various resources, at the end it

would be the organisational culture that would drive the whole organisation to be creative

in addressing problems and finding innovative solutions. This type of framework requires

31
being the norm rather than the exception for any intended successful organisation.

Similar to software and hardware periodic upgrading, maintaining progressive

momentum in said framework is of great importance for a strong organisational culture

(Pheysey, 1993) that may be ultimately identified as a major contributing factor to the

success of organisational creativity (Johnson, 1996). Organisational culture refers to the

collection of values and norms that are shared by people and groups in an organisation

(Hill and Jones, 2001) which are evident at the highest levels through actions and

decisions taken by top management (Johnson and Scholes, 1984) and entirely reflect in

the modus operandi of an organisation (Irani, 1997).

What makes a strong organisational culture? O’Reilley (1989) describes the norms of an

organisational strong culture by its intensity (that is where all employees within an

organisation are motivated primarily because their values are complementary with those

of the organisation they work for) and crystallisation (referring to the idea of having all

levels within an organisation supporting an idea, such as creativity, with the same

intensity throughout). It is only when these two elements co-exist in synergy that a strong

culture prevails and when this happens it would be very difficult to change the

established culture at that point, therefore getting the right balance the first time is

crucial. If a very strong culture would hinder an organisation to be flexible and fail to

perform in light of changes while the weak cultures would reign more effectively in such

cases (Dension, 1990). Very strong established cultures that do not permit organisations

to be flexible are subject to fail in light of changes. This gives the opportunity to the weak

cultures to reign more effectively in such cases.

32
It has proven somewhat difficult during literature review to identify specific determinants

for the best organisational culture that promotes creativity. Yet Martins and Terblanche

(2003) identified a series of determinants of organisational culture that either support or

hinder creativity and innovation, these determinants are: strategy, structure and support

mechanisms, behaviour that encourages creativity and innovation and communication.

An in-depth review of these determinants will follow.

1. Strategy

This is applicable to the strong correlation that exists or should exist between the

vision of the organisation and the understanding of that vision by the organisation’s

stakeholders (especially the employees). When Bayer AG presented its new mission

statement in 2004 the Chairman of the board of management, Werner Wenning

(2004), reiterated that through the mission statement Bayer wanted to define its future

perspectives, goals, values, behaviour and line of thought to all its stakeholders

especially their employees. Bayer’s mission statement seeks to arouse everyone’s

enthusiasm (stakeholders) to contribute to Bayer’s success. This element of shared

vision is the origin of creativity and innovation (Convey, 1993) therefore it is vitally

important that employees come onboard a platform of understanding and support

their organisation’s vision while seeking to bridge gaps whenever these visions are

not clear or differ from their own. Within the same context employees’

understanding needs to be extended also towards the organisational goals, objectives,

frame of thought and their collective purposefulness. Once these elements are

33
 harmonized between organisation and employees then quality is assured guaranteeing

higher level of creativity and innovation (Hall, 2001).

2. Structure

Various studies as highlighted below suggest that organisational structure designs

play an important role in determining the level of creativity from which the quality of

innovation stems. Structures that facilitate creativity and innovation require a high

degree of flexibility (e.g. job rotation) that will enable such structures to cater for

changes as determined by internal and external factors over time (Duncan, 1976).

Highly innovative organisations in major industrial sectors demonstrate to have flatter

structures, smaller operating division and smaller project teams (Kanter, 1988).

Controlling cultures do not pave way to creativity (Brand, 1989) but freedom,

provided in the form of autonomy, decision making and empowerment to the

employees, does (Amabile, 1996). The individual generates more creative ideas when

this is entrusted with responsibility how to go around in implementing his duties –

projects, assignments etc. (Amabile, 1996). What is the best environment for all this

to happen? This is another important feature of an organisational culture - that it

provides a setting where individuals feel safe to develop their creative ideas without

the risk of being criticised or punished for shortcomings trying out something new

(Anderson, 1992 and Raudsepp, 1983). On the contrary these individuals should be

considered as role models for others to follow, learn from and attain new benchmarks

in providing the right ambience for these thinkers to develop new ways of thinking

(Locke and Kirkpatrick, 1995). Creativity and innovation amplify when participative

34
 structures are highly present, such as devoted and committed employees (Burnside,

1990). An effective team work complements high degree of creativity within an

organisation. But what exactly constitutes an effective team? Various studies suggest

that harmonized diversity is the answer (Mumford, 1997). This is constituted by

work groups reflecting a diversity of skills. These groups would be made up of

individuals who trust and communicate well with one another, who understand each

other’s perspectives and style in implementing their duties are able to solve and/or

make concessions on difference of opinions while feeling comfortable enough to

question new concepts/ideas (Shattow, 1996). The full responsibility in having this

phenomenon taking place rests in the hands of the top authorities (Amabile and

Gryskiewicz, 1989).

3. Supportive mechanisms

A number of support mechanisms are needed to establish the right structures for

creativity to flourish and innovative outputs to succeed. These mechanisms are made

available to employees by organisations that are truly committed towards creativity

(Amabile, 1998) as much as to other day-to-day operational processes. Various

studies suggest quite a number of support mechanisms depending on region, cultural

background, and industry amongst others. In this case core mechanisms that are

relevant to this study will be tackled in this section.

Struggling to cope with work pressure does not augur well to one’s creative thinking

process since there would not be any time for that to happen let alone for

35
experimentation of new ideas. It is necessary that organisations understand what has

been pointed out earlier in the literature that the creative process requires time to

germinate and such time should be allowed and employees are given the green light

to experiment with their ideas and work on their favorite projects (Shattow, 1996).

Flow of ideas, communication, research, sharing of information proves to improve

creativity and one support mechanism that facilitates this process is information

technology. The ease of exposure to new ideas through this medium increases the

idea generation that is already in the making (Parnes and Noller, 1972). Internet has

become a highway of information for those who wish to extend their knowledge on

applied processes and exploiting such facility, creativity and innovation improve

(Khalil, 1996).

There is a long-standing trend that those who succeed, say in exceeding production

benchmarks or selling insurance policies above established quota, are rewarded

financially, such as bonuses. This type of extrinsic reward in itself is not conducive

to creativity since employees may see this as means of being controlled and

ultimately may lose their passion towards their work (Amabile, 1998). What boosts

an individual’s motivation at work is his direct participation and involvement in the

decision-making process, being presented with a challenge on a personal level, being

encouraged to be curious in his working environment and in return such work

environment renders gratification (Amabile, 1990) and be given autonomy and

opportunities for personal and professional development (Amabile and Gryskiewicz,

36
1987). Organisations that value creativity do not only stop at rewarding established,

trusted and fault-free methods but at the same level also reward employees who take

risks, take creative initiatives and generate creative ideas – a mind-set that supports

the entire innovation process (Shattow, 1996). Furthermore this kind of reward will

inspire other employees, both as individuals and as teams, to become either more

creative or to give creativity a go (Tushman and O’Reilly, 1997). Individual

motivation may be destroyed by the organisation’s internal politics; various studies

suggest that it is best this be kept to bare minimum. Attributes such as power struggle,

gossiping, and backbiting, contribute to waive an employee’s attention away from his

main purpose at work that is work itself. These attributes encourage people, who fall

victim to these sentiments, to seek backing and hence cliques are formed and/or

conflicts between individuals prevail (Amabile, 1998). According to Amabile this

kind of situation damages creativity since employees seek motivation outside their

working environment while fear from those with personal agenda reigns – both

situations undermine an individual’s intrinsic motivation, reducing creativity to the

bottom of any priority list.

A support mechanism that specifically promotes creativity is the selection,

engagement and retention of employees. An organisational culture highly depends on

the level of the employees’ background that includes qualifications, experience,

passion and high interest in their job position. In addition to this, one value that is

highly imperative for creativity is diversity. Employees with diverse backgrounds

bring along a vaster portfolio of ideas and procedures that fuel creativity and

37
 innovation (Gardenswartz and Rowe, 1998). It is important that organisations match

individuals’ ability and interest with assignments given. This will enhance a feeling

of wellbeing at work and with it the creative ability of employees (Paolillo and

Brown, 1978) since employees are more keen in carrying out tasks they take pleasure

in. since employees are more keen to creative carrying out tasks they take pleasure in

(Amabile, 1997). If employees lose interest in their work they will divest themselves

from spending time thinking how to perform better.

4. Behaviour

Some organisations establish building blocks that prevent individuals to perform

creatively to their potential hence averting the organisation itself to be innovative.

These blocks are associated with behaviour. There are ways and means how

behaviour is handled within an organisation and depending on this is the survival of

creativity and hereunder these blocks are discussed.

 One of the most common factors that occur in a working environment is conflict.

It is natural that conflicts develop when a number of individuals come together

with different ideas, views, and working experiences. Organisations that put up

with conflict and handle it constructively indicate strong values towards creative

and innovative behaviour (Robbins, 1997). This kind of support includes training

of employees in conflict management while the organisation itself promotes an

open-minded culture towards different thinking styles.

38
 Individuals are reluctant to change despite they claim otherwise. Having

employees supporting change assists the organisation in the process of creativity

(Johnson, 1996). Supporting change means supporting new methods of processes,

improving established methods, establishing long-term visions that take account

of change as a natural process that brings opportunities to move forward

(Tushman and O’Reilly, 1997) and bring along innovation in goods and services

provided.

 Organisations that strive to achieve an innovative market share need to compete

consistently. This competitive attitude starts from within the organisation itself,

from its departments that regard competitiveness highly important for their

achievements (Nÿstrom, 1990). Organisations supporting competitiveness

assimilate creativity through applying internal and external knowledge (Read,

1996), promote healthy discussions when new ideas come up and take full

advantage of conflicts and apply them as an alternative tool to gather more

information, more ideas and new concepts.

 In the 18th century Pope Alexander once said humanum est errare… – it is human

to err… to do mistakes. Organisations that support creativity consider mistakes as

learning curves (Ryan, 1996), new opportunities to achieve new perspectives

(Brodtrick, 1997) and are ready to tolerate errors. Employees gaining this

perspective would feel free to experiment in their working environment since it is

safe from punishment and criticism for possible mistakes committed due to

39
 experimenting and their creative ability would not suffer due to fear (Anderson,

1992).

 Creative organisations understand that supporting ongoing education programmes

for their employees would also mean supporting and facilitating the creativity

process within (Lock and Kirkpatrick, 1995). Providing a learning orientation

environment will drive employees to question current processes and seek better

ones, entice them to be more curious and seek additional information outside their

working environment (e.g. asking suppliers and/or clients). Educational

programmes ultimately assist employees to keep abreast with their skills, acquire

new ones (e.g. creative thinking skills) and knowledge. In return this will

maintain an ongoing learning culture that encourages creativity (Samaha, 1996).

 Another way how entities encourage creativity is by supporting risk-taking

behaviour and encourages it within their walls - this should assist in creative

achievements (Amabile, 1988). What hinders creativity is a controlling

environment where too many management controls are found (e.g. bureaucracy,

complicated structures and slow decision taking process, amongst others). It

would also be improper to encourage employees to be creative as long as this does

not create problems to the organisation - this is establishing pressure and fear that

would hinder creativity processes (Filipczack, 1997). On the other hand it is

understood that organisations are concerned to what extend such risk taking

exercises could go and to minimize these concerns certain factors could be

40
 applied, such as: stating clearly what are the expected results, delegating

responsibility tasks to someone who would monitor ongoing exercises,

encouraging employees that risk taking is a learning experience that could end up

being a successful story and doing mistakes is part and parcel of this process

(Amabile, 1988).

 Considering all the behavioural factors mentioned above there is still one

behavioural drive that needs to be fostered, one impetus that organisations need to

fully support for creativity to be nourished and that is stimulation of idea

generation. This exercise works best when it takes place in a safe environment

where evaluation of ideas is carried out fairly (Amabile, 1995) and negative

criticism is kept at bay at all times. To avoid deviation during this type of

exercises, idea generation must be kept focused on issues relevant to the

development of processes pertaining to the organisation’s aims, goals, and

inspirations (Filipczack, 1997). Every employee within the organisation needs to

understand the norms and values of the organisation, accept them and relate (Kay,

1989), should problems emerge from this then the organisation must determine

the reason behind such difficulty and emend accordingly (e.g. training, change of

rules, rehabilitation programmes) and bring employees’ perspectives and those of

the organisation in equilibrium as much as possible.

41
5. Communication

Communication is defined as "the imparting or interchange of thoughts, opinions, or

information by speech, writing, or signs" (Definition of communication, ¶. 1). When

organisations sustain an environment that encourages open and transparent

communication, creativity can evolve and this is a representation of the culture of

innovation so many organisations hope to achieve (Robbins, 1996). Interchanging of

information gives rise to an open flow of communication where ideas, opinions and

experiences facilitate creativity (Amabile, 1988). Ogranisations that feature open door

policy give space for employees to communicate easily between themselves at

various levels making things/ideas move faster, pending matters are trashed out

immediately, questions are answered promptly … all this is necessary to support

creativity (Samaha, 1996).

2.4.3.2 Organisational Climate

Strongly linked to organisational culture is organisational climate, sometimes also

referred to as corporate climate. The concept of an organisational climate was developed

by Lewin, Lippitt and White (1939) and is defined as the environment created by the

managerial style and attitudes that pervade an organisation (Business definition of

corporate climate, ¶.1). In other words it is the internal psychological environment of a

business entity, the organisation’s practices, the recurring patterns of behaviour,

employees’ attitude and mind-set that characterize life in the organisation (Isaksen &

Ekvall, 2007), elements that contribute to organisational creativity (Isaksen, 1987). It is

the work environment that influences the level and frequency of this creativity.

42
In an organisation the concept of climate can be regarded on two levels, one based on an

individual perception of the working environment and the other is ‘the shared perceptions

of the way things are around here’ (Reichers and Schneider, 1990:.22). Due to a close

proximity in conceptual design, these two levels often overlap and have a combined

affect on the operational processes in terms of communications, problem solving,

decision making and encouraging knowledge - factors that in effect influence

organisational creativity. Isaksen, Ekvall, Lauer & Britz (2001) identify the factors that

highly contribute to a healthier creative climate:

 Challenge - the level of commitment and emotional involvement the employees

display towards their work.

 Freedom - the level of freedom employees are permitted to decide how to get their

job done.

 Idea Time - the time allocated for the employees to think before acting on their job.

 Dynamism - the level of participation in the organisation.

 Idea Support - the level of resources allocated to employees to try new ideas.

 Trust and Openness - the level of freedom people feel to express their opinions.

 Playfulness and Humor - the level of relaxed environment to work in.

 Conflicts - the level of interpersonal conflicts within an organisation.

 Debates - the level of interaction in discussing ‘issues’.

 Risk-taking - failing without guilt.

It takes time and effort to apply meaningfully the above factors in order to promote

creativity within an organisation. But once these are in place and every member within

43
the organisation understands their value, these will become guiding mechanisms which

impact on creativity and the adoption thereof in a systemic manner. Can organisational

climate be quantified? Ahmed (1998) quoted Scheider defining four dimensions of

organisational climate, these are:

 the nature of interpersonal relationships,

 the nature of hierarchy,

 the nature of work and

 the focus of support and rewards.

These dimensions assist in establishing models to survey climate, to identify and measure

those aspects of work place which impact on employees well being including stress,

morale, health and safety (Hart, Griffin, Wearing & Cooper, 1996), absenteeism and

commitment towards the organisation (Dr Rose et al., 2002), employee turnover, job

satisfaction, welfare and above all creativity (Bushell, 2007).

2.5 Organisational Barriers & Keys to Creativity

In a sufficiently conducive working environment the creative process commences when

an employee comes up with a new original idea and is given freedom and scope to

develop it into a practical, profitable reality (Oldham and Cummings, 1996). On the

other hand, an intimidating and inflexible organisation tends to impede an individual’s

free flow of thought and he is, therefore, discouraged from sharing and developing new

ideas (Arad et al., 1997), especially if such ideas encounter subtle rejection (Amabile et

al., 1996). Situations exist where top management realises that creativity and innovation

44
are essential to an organisation’s success but through their actions and systematical

processes they may create barriers to creativity (Dhillon, 2002). In many cases the

creation of barriers to creativity are an unconscious action. The following are some of

the main barriers:

 Judging new ideas: Very often the best ideas are shot down through being judged

(Altier, 1993) and evaluated while these are still in their embryonic state.

 Blame Culture: It does not encourage an individual to be creative if he is going to be

blamed for making mistakes. It makes no sense to be blamed for trying (Anderson et

al., 1992)

 Insecure Management: Management resist or block ideas that are not their own or

which they find could undermine their potential or status within an organisation.

These people mask their fear of change by challenging the idea and then trashing it

(Buggie, 1997).

 Bureaucracy: Too many or too strict policies to abide to, including cost containment,

processes, consistency or efficiency (Oldham and Cunnings, 1996).

 Lack of Funds: Lack of allocation of funds for experimentation (Dhillon, 2002).

 Proof of the Pudding: Strict requirements to demonstrate the value of the idea prior

to having the idea actually prove itself (Dhillon, 2002).

45
 Production: When an individual is working on an idea, he might appear to be day-

dreaming or not being productive. It is during these moments that generation and

experimentation of ideas takes place. Amabile et al. (1996) consider slack time

important for employees to have enough free time to constructively experiment with

ideas not immediately useful from a business point of view.

 Short-term Vision: The insistence of meeting short-term financial goals rather than

investing in the future (Dhillon, 2002). Short-term vision may bring along

intolerance, struggle, impatience – all contribute to disrupt the creativity process

altogether.

 Office Politics: Very often employees are asked by their peers whether their creative

contributions have been acknowledged by management, with the added comment that

the management does not like to be outshone and shown up by their subordinates.

Such comments tend to undermine an employee’s confidence to the point where he

retracts, or indeed does not even put forward some idea that he may have had.

Consequently, some good ideas might fall by the wayside before they are even tried

and tested (Amabile, 1998).

What do Apple, Google, Toyota Motors, General Electric and Microsoft companies have

in common? These companies have made it to the top ranks of the BusinessWeek-Boston

Consulting Group’s list of the World’s Most Innovative Companies (BusinessWeek,

2007). Apple has topped all its competitors for three consecutive years as a result of

46
coming up with innovative products. What makes these companies prosper innovatively?

Well the answer lies in the fact that these organisations take into account all work

environment dimensions that unlock the force of creativity. Amabile et al. (1996)

proposes a model – KEYS. This model assesses perceptions of all the work environment

dimensions that are important for creativity within an organisation and are described in

the following sections:

2.5.1 Supportive

Creative individuals are often seen as being ‘difficult’ to manage but one need to keep in

mind that innovative companies are perceived as being unusual (Thorne & Machray,

2000). Creative persons are alleged considered as ‘complicated’ to understand, they

continuously ask questions even when all seems to be flowing smoothly, they put forward

suggestions that, at first glance, might look unfeasible and they are as recluse as they are

bizarre. Creative persons generate innovative ideas by thinking “out of the box”, that is,

beyond the normal thinking patterns most of us are brought up with or influenced to

adopt. Why is this? Heilman et al’s (2003) studies suggest that creative people

neurologically differ from what is considered as norm and Csikszentmihalyi (1996)

describes this anomaly as complexity. An example of this viewpoint is described by

Mingo (1994) in his book ‘How the Cadillac got Its Fins’ where he claims that beloved

products were developed by hunch, guesswork, and fanaticism and refers to their creators

as eccentric or mad.

An organisation that believes in and nurtures creativity will establish an environment

where the generation of innovative ideas is the philosophy throughout the whole structure

47
of the organisation (Google Zurich, 2008). Such organisations value and encourage

innovation processes both on an individual level and on a teamwork basis. Excessive

unconstructive criticism defeats the idea generating process and as a result many brilliant

ideas end up in ashes (Wong and Pang, 2003). Instead, organisations should provide an

evaluation of and positive feedback or at least, constructive criticism to promote such

processes to their fullest (Amabile and Gryskiewicz, 1989). Organisations should

establish a climate of trust, integrity and sharing of ideas (Amabile et al., 1996) with one

common vision and with common aims to be shared by everyone throughout the

organisation for the benefit of the organisation itself and all its stakeholders. Individuals

who think differently should be rewarded (American Creativity Association, ¶.2) and

encouraged to continue to contribute to make their organisation unique.

2.5.2 Supervisory Support

Providing a supportive environment is a key component for creativity levels to flourish in

an organisation. Those responsible to render such support are required to fill in a role of

facilitators rather than to evaluate any new process against pre established yardsticks. It is

part of their role to provide employees with clear information and intended goals (Bailyn,

1985) that will assist the employees to learn to develop and improve on their

performance.

Communication is also vital for the creativity process to move forward particularly at

times when the economic climate is not that favourable to the continued development and

growth of an organisation. It is in such adverse circumstances that creativity can

contribute greatly to such development and growth. Supervisors should be able to

48
communicate effectively (Kimberley, 1981) how certain decisions within the

organisations are being made. At a most basic level this openness shows respect to the

employees and the willingness to make them part of the decision-making process. On

their part, employees will be more willing to comply with such decisions and will feel

confident enough that they have the support of Management to take certain risks

(Cummings, 1965), risks that promote creativity in processes and procedures.

Good supervisors create a sense of confidence in their subordinates who in return will be

confident enough to put forward their ideas to their superiors. This confidence is

generated because ideas are taken seriously and constructive feedback is given

(Cummings, 1965). Furthermore, employees feels motivated when their efforts in finding

areas for improvement are being appreciated (Deci & Ryan, 1985) by supervisors they

trust, especially trusted those that are qualified and have extensive expertise.

2.5.3 Work Group Encouragement

Diversity within work groups is important and according to Amabile (1999) diversity

fosters creativity; this contributes greatly to the continual generation of new ideas. When

diversity is encouraged debates emerge and various issues are explored from different

point of views. Team effort renders a project an exciting experience that intrinsically

creates motivation that in turn boosts creativity.

Bringing different people from various walks of life – with different work and life skills,

who apply different creative thinking methods and who present an array of cognitive

49
abilities (Amabile, 1983) - will guarantee a strong climate for the generation of new ideas

using the right tools. Such tools include open discussions, sharing of ideas and exploring

contradictory opinions – a gold mine of information for an innovative company.

‘In what areas do most people appear to find life's meaning? We have only
one pragmatic guide: meaning must reside in the things for which people
strive, the goals which they set for themselves, their wants, needs, desires,
and wishes. Even here our criterion is applicable only to those whose lives
are already dedicated to aspirations and ambitions which belong to the
higher levels of human achievement. ... Viewed from the standpoint of
adult education, such personalities seem to want among other things,
intelligence, power, self-expression, freedom, creativity, appreciation,
enjoyment, fellowship. Or, stated in terms of the Greek ideal, they are
searchers after the good life. They want to count for something; they want
their experiences to be vivid and meaningful; they want their talents to be
utilised; they want to know beauty and joy; and they want all of these
realisations of their total personalities to be shared in communities of
fellowship. Briefly they want to improve themselves; this is their realistic
and primary aim. But they want also to change the social order so that vital
personalities will be creating a new environment in which their aspirations
may be properly expressed.’

Eduard C. Lindeman (1926, ¶.13).

2.5.4 Resources

Innovative organisations know exactly the benefits of supporting creative-minded

employees. Through these employees such companies not only adapt to change, but lead

it, leaving their competitors lagging behind. Every employee (individual) has the

potential to be creative but this does not imply that creativity is easily extracted from

50
these individuals at will. Resources are required to assist this process and organisational

commitment in this respect comes in different forms (Sternberg & Lubart, 1995).

Some individuals may require more freedom, time, resources, encouragement and

rewards (Amabile, 1999) and at this point an organisation has to depart from its

traditional routines and defy conformity. Other individuals require more challenging

projects (rather than more mundane routine assignments), more autonomy how to do the

work and need to be respected for such individuality (Amabile, 1999).

Organisations may further assist employees by giving them the opportunity to participate

in lateral thinking courses, to continue with their academic studies at various levels or

simply provide facilities like internet an extensive reference library and coupons to buy

educational literature through online subscriptions.

Team building programmes and social events also provide an appropriate background for

employees to get together (Amabile, 1999) and exercise their creative ability in an

informal environment which may be utilised thereafter in in-house creative generating

idea programmes.

Relaxation facilities may also promote creativity by having people getting together and

relaxing in an environment that provides relaxation areas, games rooms, a well-equipped

canteen etc (Google Zurich, 2008). This might sound excessive or even frivolous to

traditional organisations but a favourable environment needs to be created in which the

human mind becomes playful enough to explore new ideas.

51
2.5.5 Challenging Environment

There are employees that have the knowledge and experience to be able to work out

things effortlessly. When these individuals are presented with projects that are not easily

achievable, they take them on as a challenge (Amabile, 1998). At that point, their minds

start to seek solutions, ideas, research, methodologies – an array of processes that if

systematically supervised by qualified leader/s, are greatly enhanced.

Considering solving problems as a challenge itself motivates and encourages creative

individuals develop even further. Organisations that provide opportunities for individuals

to be challenged may actually be investing in new methods and procedures to operate

more efficiently, to create innovative products and lead the market/s.

At Axium our number one priority is our clients' success. From developing
innovative software solutions to providing maintenance and support, we are
focused on exceptional client service. A significant part of achieving this
goal is to provide a fun and challenging work environment for our
employees. We want our employees to have pride in their job and Axium as
a company because we believe great client service is a direct reflection of
our employees' happiness.

AXIUM (¶.3)
2.5.6 Freedom

In a bureaucratic environment, where most of the time individuals do not have the option

of how to carry out their tasks and achieve their goals, creativity is stifled. It is important

that employees are given space and autonomy over how they work especially if their

goals are clearly defined this enhances creativity (Amabile, 1999). A certain degree of

52
freedom allows the individual to apply most of his knowledge and whatever creative

thinking skills he has attained, whether through experience or training (Amabile, 1999).

Bringing a group of individuals together to develop an idea while giving them autonomy

on how to develop and implement such an idea, one may witness a collective approach

using new/different processes - individual knowledge becomes part of a combined

knowledge, established systematic cognitive skills are replaced by new ones while new

expertise is shared within the group and the end resulting in collective development

(Amabile, 1983).

Freedom also means an individual has space to apply trial and error processes through

which he can review his working methodology, what is lacking and what does not work

(Nickerson, 1999). Finally he can apply necessary changes to achieve his ultimate goal

through innovation. David Allen (2001) the author of ‘Getting things Done’ considers

creativity and freedom as the two sides of the same coin – freedom is to get organised

and getting organised to being creative.

2.5.7 De-Stress

Stress and creativity do not go hand in hand (Hartmann, 2004). While a slight degree of

stress in the short term would induce a person to come up with creative ideas, in the long

term the mind would not be in a position to think freely anymore due to the continuous

pressure being exerted on the physical body.

53
Body and mind are part of one system called the Human Being. If one part fails the other

suffers and the creativity process is undermined. Organisations providing facilities for

relaxing, meditating, day dreaming etc. coupled with stress management training will

encourage an individual to approach creativity in a more relaxed manner since many tend

to experience the natural ‘fear’ consequence when experimenting with such thinking

processes (McNeese, ¶.14).

2.6 What is stress?

On a regular basis various authors fill bookstore shelves with considerable amount of

literature reviews related to stress issues (Cooper & Payne, 1980) bombarding readers

with new studies and conclusions in this regard (Fletcher & Payne, 1980). Responses

given by various employees at the Malta Stock Exchange plc when asked to define stress

(included in Appendix II) highlight that stress is also subjectively perceived by different

minds, different job type or job location. It is not easy to define stress, what is certain

though is the fact that stress is on the increase and is reaching large scale proportions

(Schuler, 1980).

Despite the above, stress boils down to one factor – a defense mechanism. Human beings

are predisposed of a warning system to survive dangerous circumstances that are a threat

to them whether physical or emotional. Freud (1936) describes this ego-defense

mechanism as mental functions that protect the individual from anxiety deriving from

stressful external events. These events may include a negative working environment

54
(Caplan et al., 1975) or even pressures exerted from family responsibility (Bartolome &

Evans, 1979).

The question is what triggers an individual to shift into stress mode? When the brain

senses danger it prepares us for emergency action and kicks off what Ivancevich and

Matteson (1980) refer to as flight or fight stress response. In this scenario the brain

releases hormones through the nervous system such as adrenaline. These hormones bring

along body responses, like a hyperactive heart beat, muscles tensing up, faster breathing

and all senses are heightened preparing the individual to either run away from the threat

or fight it (Mayo Clinic Staff, 2008). This response is meant to support us as it supported

our Stone Age ancestors to survive life-or-death situations on a daily basis. In today’s

world the main stress we go through is psychological rather than physical, yet our body

does not distinguish between the two. Reitz (1987) indicates that individuals in today’s

world psychologically replace the fight or flight responses into a more damaging

behaviour that includes amongst others irritability, anger over insignificant issues,

resignation, forgetfulness, the inability to concentrate and to take decisions.

For the scope of this study stress will be studied within a corporate perspective – the

working environment. Although stress produces negative effects on an individual, as

described above, at the place of work, an element of stress plays a significant role in

determining whether the organisation will achieve higher performance or otherwise.

Without stress we would not make an extra effort to go that further mile (Qubein, 2009)

and achieve more (increase sales or production levels, getting new clients on board, be

55
responsive to market demands, be creative in a marketing campaign, etc) and it is actually

what makes people advance in their careers and make their job interesting, stress can

result in a competitive edge (Marino, 1997). This identifies with French, Kast and

Rosenzweig’s (1985) model that defines an optimum range of stress in terms of its effect

on performance as indicated at point A along the curve shown in the model below. Once

these stress situations are over and the tension recedes then the individual starts to relax.

Expected Performance

B C
PERFORMANCE

Actual Performance

A Exhaustion
D
Stress Point

E
Positive
Pressure

PRESSURE

FRENCH, KAST AND ROSENZWEIG’S PERFORMANCE VS. PRESSURE MODEL (1985)

Fig. 2.2: Performance vs. Pressure

But what happens if the individual is subject to a prolonged exposure to intensive

pressure that becomes a constant factor? French, Kast and Rosenzweig’s model above

indicates that when stress levels exceed optimum levels (point B) this result in a

decreased performance and eventually burnout as indicated at point E along the curve.

Our bodies are definitely not designed to be in a chronic state of tension for a long period

of time. This scenario sets off a multitude of physical and emotional responses that are

56
detrimental to the employee’s well-being (Rosenman and Friedman, 1971) and their

performance, consequently also affecting the health of the corporate entity too.

There are various types of corporate stress factors, for instance Lawless (1991) defines

five most common corporate stressors that an individual can experience, namely rigidity

in performing one’s duties, reduction in fringe benefits, change in the organisation’s

structure (merger, acquisition, etc.), demanding overtime, and staff downsizing. More in

detail in this respect will be discussed in the next chapter.

2.6.1 Stress vs. Challenge

Many confuse job stress with challenge, two different concepts altogether and it is

important to distinguish between these two. Challenge gives an individual the impetus to

learn new skills and master his/her job and when this is met a sense of achievement and

satisfaction takes place (NIOSH). Challenge is an important element for a healthy

working environment but if this turns into a constant battleground where demands and

anxiety, fears and exhaustion prevail, then an open invitation is set for illness, injury and

failure – the various faces of corporate stress.

2.7 Corporate stress factors and their effects on Individuals

Job stress is not limited to employees who need to be physically involved to carry out

their duties such as fire-fighters or storekeepers, or those who are involved in a more

dangerous profession (soldiers at war) or those who are involved in psychologically

demanding careers (psychologists or facilitators taking care of mentally-challenged

patients). Even a manager in a commercial bank or a stockbroker dealing on a stock

57
exchange is subject to job stress. Stress effects everyone some time or another (Hart,

2007) the question is – does an individual recognize stress factors? Is he capable of

identifying the signs and symptoms of job stress? Stress is a difficult concept to envisage

but it is probable that most of us know what it feels like.

Jick and Payne (1980) propose a model that encapsulates three major mechanisms that

identify the stress process an individual goes through trying to meet working environment

demands - these are environmental stressors, the individual in question and short/long

term outcomes.

 Environmental stressors refer to those stressors deriving form the actual physical

conditions at the place of work such as noise, heat, confined spaces, lack of adequate

lighting and fresh air just to mention a few coupled with additional stress that is

exerted by a demanding boss, workmates and/or subordinates. Other types of

stressors may originate totally outside the working environment such as family

matters including marriage, birth, sickness, death and divorce.

 Then there is the individual per se who may be the reason to blame for suffering from

stress. A working environment may be perceived threatening or not depending

entirely on the individual’s perception of his surrounding work environment.

McGrath (1976) refers to this as the degree of correlation between stress and a

person’s perceived inability to deal with the working environment. Perception may be

based on the individual’s abilities, past experiences, self-esteem, needs and other

58
 factors that may have contributed to the person’s frame of mind (Beehr and Newman,

1978) – a frame of mind that incapacitates an individual from managing stress

adequately in time of need.

 Based on the above components outcomes are expected. There are outcomes that are

identifiable with short term stress (tension). A stressed employee might complain of

physical symptoms (head/backaches, muscle tension and stiffness, diarrhea or

constipation, nausea, dizziness, insomnia, chest pain, rapid heart beat, weight gain or

loss, skin eczema/rash/itchiness, loss of sex drive, frequent colds) or might experience

emotional problems (moodiness, agitation, restlessness, short temper, irritability,

impatience, inability to relax, feeling of loneliness, isolation, depression,

unhappiness). Stress symptoms can reflect on a deeper level and accentuate more on

the cognitive side of a person (memory problems, indecisiveness, lack of

concentration and clear thinking, poor judgment, loss of objectivity, negative attitude)

or take a different turn and affect the behaviour of the individual (more/less

eating/sleeping, snapping at colleagues, neglecting responsibilities, consumption of

alcohol and cigarettes, solitude, confinements). While long term stress (illness)

brings along depression, heart disease (Sales, 1969), social and family problems

amongst others. Williams and Huber (1986) provide a comprehensive list of

symptoms deriving from work related stress.

It is important that a balance is reached between the demands of the working environment

and the individual’s ability to meet such demands (Van Harrison, 1978) – this balance

59
will contribute to a healthier working environment in all counts. Hence from a

management point of view one must take into account the importance of individual

characteristics when dealing with stress in a working environment. But what is more

important at this point is that the individual himself recognise job stressors surrounding

him - this will enable him to identify the signs and symptoms and tackle them at an early

stage rather than when it is far too late.

2.8 Stress effects on Corporations and the Economy

Giant steps have been made in the sectors of communication and information technology,

additional factors creating new burdens at the workplace as these have enabled

competition to go global and very fierce across all sectors of business, industry and

economy. Job stress is not a modern trend but it has become an increasing (Schuler,

1980) common and expensive economical problem both for business organisations and

economy at large.

The Health and Safety Executive (2007) reported that in financial terms the estimated

cost of sickness absence to the UK as a whole is around £12 billion a year, and around £4

billion of this has been attributed to the Public Sector. With about 20% of all workers

employed in the public sector - stress is the single largest cause of occupational ill health

in the public sector, accounting for around half of all days lost to work-related ill health.

Ford (2004), InPsych feature writer claims that more workers are making psychological

stress related compensation claims in Australia than ever before, with the national cost of

such claims estimated to be $105.5 million in 2000-2001 (¶.2). Stress Directions (2000)

60
reports that stress is both additive and cumulative in its negative effects on individuals,

organisations and societies. The report continues to claim that experts at the Centers for

Disease Control and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in the US

are dedicated to studying stress as this continues to grow in the workplace. In the US it

has been found that:

 Stress is linked to physical and mental health, as well as decreased willingness to take

on new and creative endeavors.

 Job burnout experienced by 25% to 40% of U.S. workers is blamed on stress.

 More than ever before, employee stress is being recognised as a major drain on

corporate productivity and competitiveness.

 Depression, only one type of stress reaction, is predicted to be the leading

occupational disease of the 21st century, responsible for more days lost than any other

single factor.

 $300 billion, or $7,500 per employee, is spent annually in the U.S. on stress-related

compensation claims, reduced productivity, absenteeism, health insurance costs,

direct medical expenses (nearly 50% higher for workers who report stress), and

employee turnover.

From the above it is quite clear that stress is a costly burden to sustain. From the literature

review no actual cost, in money terms, emerges how much stress related situations cost

on a global scale. Yet it would be easier to quantify such cost through work absenteeism,

sick leave and other measure of lost productivity on a national scale. These components

were taken in consideration by Albrecht (1979) who based a hypothetical situation of an

61
organisation employing a workforce in the region of 2000 and gross sales of around $60

million annually – stress in this case generated the organisation a cost of $3.5 million

annually i.e. 5.9% of sales - a percentage that for many business organisations represents

a higher percentage than profits. Unfortunately there is another cost related to stress that

is irreversible and that is loss of human lives. According to Shostak (1980) in the United

States alone 14,000 individuals lose their lives in industrial accidents and yet this is not

the end of the list. Greenwood and Greenwood (1979) came up with other cost factors in

relation to corporate stress; these comprise of work loss, disability benefits, social

benefits, insurance premiums, legal claims, decrease in production output. It is clear that

by not tackling the effects of stress in the workplace an individual’s state of health may

have a ripple effect on the organisations’ performance and ultimately that of the economy

at large.

Over these last few years awareness in respect to work related stress has received due

attention on national, European Union (EU) and international levels. The European

Commission (EC) carried out various studies and made it a point to address the issue in

various work-related policies. The European Parliament resolution A4-0050/99 (Work-

related stress and industrial relations, 2001, ¶.7) instigates further research in adapting

work to suit an individual’s abilities and needs rather than the other way round. The

resolution also recommends the EC to look further into current legislation and determine

whether work stress and ‘burn-out’ are adequately addressed since current lack of

specific regulations in this regard makes it difficult for automatic right to monetary

compensation for those affected. It is no wonder that the main institutions of the EU are

62
taking ‘job stress’ seriously since this can have a heavy toll on its economical

performance as many corporate entities within the EU member states are reporting

alarming figures in stress related sickness benefits.

2.9 Factors causing Stress at Work

The Health and Safety Executive in the United Kingdom has developed management

standards to assist in minimising work-related stress on employees (Health and Safety

Executive, ¶.5). The main goal of these standards is to reduce the sick days reported

and/or to improve working conditions to ease the effects of a stressful working

environment. These standards are designed to identify types and trends of stress factors,

address them amongst concerned parties (employers, employees and their

representatives) and establish benchmarks by which organisations can measure

performance versus these factors. In this section these standards will guide the author to

categorise findings from literature review and discuss in detail factors that cause stress

within a working environment.

 Work Demands may push a person to exceed his given capacity to sustain a certain

workload for a short period of time, but over a prolonged period such an excessive

work demand may have a counter-productive effect. Setting adequate time frames for

production levels are important but these time frames must be achievable (Bhagat,

1983) otherwise employees will struggle to carry out their work diligently (Zalenznik

et al., 1977). Things get even worse when employees have to face production goals

with insufficient resources (Shirom, 1982) for example slow computers to assist

63
 clients’ enquiries over the phone. Another type of demanding job is one requiring a

high level of concentration in order to arrive to important decisions. In other

circumstances jobs that are repetitive, under-stimulating, with mundane tasks and

which offer no possibility of job rotation may lead motivated skillful and/or trained

employee to boredom, dissatisfaction and depressing moods (Bhagat, 1983). Working

hours can also lead to stress, such as strict and inflexible working schedules, long

and/or unsocial working hours, poorly designed shifts (Reitz, 1986) - all these can

contribute significantly to an unstable social life giving rise to disturbed sleeping

patterns (Apollo Health, 2006) and difficulty in balancing work and family life.

 Levels of Control determine how much a person has a say in how he performs his

duties, meets his job demands and ultimately the general attitude towards the job

itself. A level of autonomy gives an individual increased motivation to contribute

successfully towards the aims of the organisation. It is important that every

individual within an organisation feels that he/she is being appreciated for their input

especially should these individuals need to contribute in a team-working

environment. Unnecessary controls such as strict supervision, scrutiny and lack of

trust brings in a sense of negative feeling which does not reflect an efficient

organisation (Dyer and Chu, 2003). Assigned responsibility should come along with

equal levels of authority (Agarwal, 1982) otherwise the decision-making process

and/or communication channels fall short.

64
 When supportive organisations provide adequate conditions to their employees such

as training/academic sponsorship, provision of opportunities for career development,

comprehensive health policies, adequate performance bonuses, etc., employees feel

more committed towards their organisation. On the other hand, organisations that

suffer from adequate internal structures, having management abuse of authority,

repetitive work patterns, confusing demands, value clashes and unrealistic workloads

– will render a potential employee into a stressful liability (Bhagat, 1983).

Management open door policy is important for an employee to put forward his views,

worries, complaints and suggestions and equally important is constructive feedback

(Frohman and Pascarella, 1990). It is important that supervisors are trained to listen to

their subordinates should these come along with work problems especially when

these problems are still in their initial stages and can be sorted out immediately.

Commendations for innovative ideas or informal congratulations on implementation

of hard work rendered are forms of support that promise additional commitment

towards the organisation (Tushman and O’Reilly, 1997). The level of support

determines the level of stress responses, lack of support signifies that people are more

prone to feel out of control when job demands increase hence they find it stressful to

cope.

 Relationships are complicated in the human realm. Every individual comes along as a

package with his own character, beliefs, understanding… when bringing individuals

together conflicts are likely to arise at one point or another. Conflict with co-workers

or managers is considered as a chronic stress source (Return to Work, ¶.2).

65
 Workmates in principle should be helpful and supportive but can equally be an

element of stress if they do the opposite. As long as these conflicts are resolved there

could be space for creativity to flourish (Martins & Terblanche, 2003). If not, then an

environment where conflict becomes an intensive stress factor is established. This

situation gives rise to situations where individuals become tense and angry towards

themselves, their loved ones (family and friends) and their colleagues, whether

superiors or subordinates and more conflict emerges (Triplett et al., 1999). Prolonged

conflicts put strains on work relationships.

 Role clarity gives direction to an employee, lack of it results in an employee

becoming disoriented and lost. “Lack of role clarity is crippling workforces and

costing businesses more than you may realise” writes Shelley Evans (2006, ¶.3).

Employees need to fully understand their role within an organisation, the

responsibilities pertaining to it and the objectives that their role demands and there is

no-one better other than the organisation itself to facilitate this understanding. Role

ambiguity according to Kahn et al. (2001) is a single or multiple roles that meet head-

on with a prevailing role, this may take place due to lack of clear communication in

respect to job terms of reference or levels of performance expected from employees’

outputs. In other terms role ambiguity takes place when an employee finds himself

performing a role that conflicts with his values or in which he struggles with unsuited

job demands. The greater the role conflict - that may also result from mergers,

acquisitions and restructuring that bring along uncertainty of the future and

employees’ roles within - the higher the chances are that an employee will experience

66
 stress (Arnold and Feldman, 1986). Stress factors deriving from role conflict is when

employees perceive that there is more than one authority within their environment

that are making irreconcilable working demands or that conflicting demands are

being made from the same authority (Kahn, et al., 1964). Arnold and Feldman (1986)

highlight overload and underload as another form of stress related to work. When

referring to overload stress – time pressure and deadlines come to one’s mind

together with the increase of stress that these bring along, stress that will subside only

when the expected outcome has finally developed. Underload stress, on the other

hand, refers to a situation when there is lack of work or variation of it. This type of

stress has been correlated with attitude of apathy (Katz and Kahn, 1978). Both

underload and overload situations can bring along low self-esteem, a stress factor in

its own right.

 Change is what renders an organisation flexible enough to face competition.

According to Charles Darwin “it is not the strongest species that survive, nor the most

intelligent, but the ones who are most responsive to change” (Meggison, 1963). This

is applicable in today’s world more than ever before so that organisations survive the

harsh reality of global competition (Gattorna, 1998). Pressure for change may derive

from various sources such as investors, board of directors, suppliers, clients,

regulatory bodies, policy makers, employees themselves … irrespective where this

pressure is coming from if change is not adequately managed or communicated well

within an organisation it may lead to employees feeling apprehensive and hesitant at

their place of work and under such stressful conditions ‘change’ itself maybe be

67
 doomed to fail (Kotter, 1996). Actions speak for themselves – budget and/or bonus

cuts, stricter budgets controls, and shifts in management authority all indicate that

change is on the way. Responses in preparation to a future change can extend to

various new working conditions including demotions or unexpected promotions,

control on time recording such as the introduction of ‘palm readers’, introduction of

new operations procedures and policies, new technology, frequent changes in

company restructuring within a short span of time – just to mention a few. Change is

all pervasive in our society today due to the widespread instability of modern

lifestyles especially when there is economical turmoil on a global scale. Fear of

change is an emotional response and this might cause the human rational mind to be

driven by this impulse without the person realising it (Russell, 2000).

2.10 Conclusion

Michelangelo once said. ‘The idea is there locked inside. All you have to do is remove

the excess stone’ (Creative Thoughts about Creativity #5, ¶14). Could work-related

stress be the stumbling block to the creative thinking process, an idea generation process

toward developing innovative ideas into tangible profitable products? The literature

reviewed in this chapter clearly indicates the need for an approach where corporate

entities need to take into account all aspects of creative processes (much needed for the

development of innovative products) and work-related stress (the adverse reaction people

have to excessive pressure or other types of demand placed on them at place of work),

(What is work-related Stress?, ¶.2). Such an approach needs to specify clearly the factors

involved in:

68
1. The creative process by understanding creativity first and foremost (framework),

the right establishment of optimal environment for creativity to develop (culture

and climate), establishing benchmarks against which creativity contributions are

measured at all times to ensure optimal creativity at all levels within an

organisation (at individual, group and organisational levels), and finally ensure

smooth paths for creativity to grow (by avoiding barriers and establish strong key

factors to promote creativity).

2. The identification of work-related stress by establishing a common understanding

of what basis stress is and how it affects individuals (symptoms) and its ripple

effect on business organisations and the economy. Furthermore identify factors

that cause stress within a working environment.

Such an approach should take into account the apparently conflicting factors that emanate

when bringing together work-related stress and creative thinking process.

In the next chapter the methodology applied for this research will be discussed in depth.

It includes the research perspective, explanation of applied instruments, and description

of ethical issues, questionnaire rationale, data analysis coding and limitations encountered

during said research.

69
70
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

71
3.1 The Research Perspective

The main aim of this study is to determine whether a correlation exists between stress and

creativity in a corporate environment. Creativity, as indicated in Chapter 2, has been

identified as the first step towards the idea generation process that promotes innovation.

To reach a state in which creativity may evolve, various factors which are conducive or

detrimental to this development need to be taken into account. On the other hand there

are contraindicative factors that affect creativity and in this study the author focuses on

one – stress.

3.2 Applied Instrument

Fixed research design was involved in the study and the instrument used for the data

collection was a questionnaire (see Appendix III) consisting of close-ended questions,

and one open-ended question which gave the opportunity to the sample population to

express their own personal views on stress factors that surround them at work. The

questionnaire is split into two. One part is to identify if the working environment is

conducive for creativity to prevail (the questionnaire will indicate the organisation’s

strengths and weaknesses that may assist in the creativity process), the questions were

based on Te Kaihau Innovation Audit practices, New Zealand (see Appendix IV) and

adapted for creativity audit purposes. The second part identifies if there are any levels of

organisational stress factors within the organisation. This section of the questionnaire is

based on the United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive Management Standards for

identifying and tackling work related stress (Tools and templates, ¶.9)

72
It was decided to make use of questionnaires for a variety of reasons including accuracy

and the efficiency of obtaining a definite number of answers in a short span of time.

Furthermore, questionnaires are relatively quick and easy to code and interpret especially

when close-ended questions are used (Sociological Research Skills: 1). These

questionnaires are aimed to explore sensitive information (such as employees being asked

if they consider alternative employment if the occasion arises) more easily than other

methods (Sociological Research Skills: 2). The questionnaires were both private and

anonymous which meant respondents felt encouraged to answer honestly and truthfully.

The author was aware at all times that employees might be uncomfortable answering

certain questions and made sure that the process was presented as professionally and as

pleasantly as possible at all times. Request for authorisation to use MSE plc as a subject

organisation for this study was submitted to Miss Eileen V Muscat, General Manager of

MSE who granted such authorisation (see Appendix V). The questionnaire was given out

to every employee at the MSE during working hours at the beginning of January 2009

and was returned in sealed anonymous envelopes on the same day. The time taken to fill

in the questionnaire ranged between 7 to 12 minutes.

3.2.1 Validity and Reliability

In order to ensure validity the author did not start with a framework on what the results

he expected the research to yield. The framework emerged during the data collection and

analysis. The questionnaire was designed in such a way as to minimise participant bias to

ensure validity. Before presenting the questionnaire to the actual participants a pilot

questionnaire was presented to two individuals employed in the financial sector who were

73
asked to go through it as if this was an actual exercise and report any anomalies. As a

result it was found that some questions could have been interpreted differently to their

original intended meaning while certain grammar needed attention - necessary action was

taken to amend. The amended questionnaire was presented once again but no further

problems were reported.

Joppe (2000) defines reliability as the extent to which results are consistent over time and an

accurate representation of the total population under study is referred to as reliability and if

the results of a study can be reproduced under a similar methodology, then the research

instrument is considered to be reliable. Following this criteria the element of reliability in

this study stands for the fact that every individual is being asked each and every question

uniformly and for every individual the questions follow the same sequence – facilitating

the process for the author to endeavour to interpret the information by paying attention to

discover any challenging annotations. The questionnaire for this study has been

specifically designed to identify factors pertaining to stress and creativity and this could

be applied for other various industrial environments. Reliability is further enhanced by

adopting questions from the Te Kaihau innovation audit and the United Kingdom Health

and Safety Executive Management Standards.

3.3 Ethical Issues

The MSE granted permission for questionnaires to be carried out during working office

hours (see Appendix VI). During the delivery of questionnaires, the aim of the research

and its implications were fully explained to each and every employee on an individual

74
basis. Confidentiality was guaranteed and adhered to in order to protect employees’

participation in the research. The indexing used is explained later in this chapter.

Approval of the questionnaire was also obtained from the University of Malta Research

Ethics Committee.

3.4 Sample

The sample consisted of all the 40 employees engaged with the MSE as at end January

2009. Out of these, 3 employees opted not to complete the questionnaire. Hence the

results of the survey will be based on the response of 37 respondents. The sample

consisted of 70.3% females and 29.7% males.

3.5 Questionnaire Rationale

The questionnaire starts with preliminaries concerning respondents’ demographics that

include:

i) grade within the organisation (Level 1 from Clerk A to Manager 1 and Level 2
from Manager 2 to CEO);
ii) gender; and
iii) age.

The rest of the questionnaire is designed to reveal the respondents’ perceptions in respect

to concepts that emerged in the literature review, these being stress and creativity. All

questions in the questionnaire were answered using a balanced 5-point Likert scale, with

response ranging from 1 (Completely Agree) to 5 (Completely Disagree)

75
The questionnaire is split into two parts. Questions 1 to 37 pertain to creativity while

questions 38 to 72 reflect questions dealing with stress. It is the correlation between these

two parts that will determine the hypothesis of this study and therefore it will be

considered the correlation of the sample as a whole, including how creativity and stress

correlate between different groups, namely level 1 (from Clerk A to Manager 1), level 2

(from Manager 2 to CEO) and Gender.

3.5.1 Creativity

These two parts of the questionnaire (stress and creativity) are sub-categorised into

sections intentionally to help in identifying the organisation’s strengths and weaknesses

that may assist in the creativity planning process and stress management.

The first part of the questionnaire is made up of questions from one (1) to thirty seven

(37) and relates to how conducive the organisation’s strategies are for creativity to grow

and develop. These questions represent six (6) sections covering six different topics

which were not identified to respondents. These sections refer to topics relative to

creativity as follows:

 Section 1 – Questions 1 to 7 refer to Leadership

 Section 2 – Questions 8 to 12 refer to Creativity within the Organisation

 Section 3 – Questions 13 to 20 refer to Organisational Culture

 Section 4 – Questions 21 to 24 refer to Goals Measure and Strategy

 Section 5 – Questions 25 to 31 refer to Staff Development

 Section 6 – Questions 32 to 37 refer to Resources promoting Creativity

76
3.5.1.1 Leadership (Questions 1 to 7)

1. Operations managers are seen more talking to their staff than staying in
their office
2. Staff finds it easy to express positively and/or negatively regarding new
ideas
3. Managers always find ways to resource good people to progress good
ideas
4. Our organisation publicly rewards the learning and effort that go into
creativity and innovation even when these fail
5. The managers delegate and function more as facilitators rather than
decision makers
6. Managers delegate opportunities fairly amongst subordinates
7. Managers provide continuous feedback to their subordinates how their
qualities will lead/have lead to positive changes

The first seven questions relate to leadership and for creativity to survive within a

working environment calls for a type of leadership that in principle is strong, democratic,

and fully participative in all processes (Nyström, 1979). An effective leadership should

be one that establishes effective management teams that are made up of diversity, believe

in mutual respect, and above all supportive to their subordinates (Amabile and

Gryskiewicz, 1989). Leaders are meant to lead by example even in informal settings,

provide continuous feedback to their employees, sustain an environment where workers

feel free to express their ideas and challenge those of their colleagues’ constructively

without being subjugated or monitored, show genuine interest in the employees’ welfare

and assist employees to develop career and skill wise (Amabile, 1988). Providing a

determined and consistent vision is also another leadership quality skill that supports

creativity, through rewards and fair delegation of work, provides a goal for everyone to

77
achieve, a vision that provides direction, assist as facilitators rather than authoritarians -

guaranteeing a better chance for the organisation to prosper (Locke and Kirkpatrick,

1995)

3.5.1.2 Creativity within the Organisation (Questions 8 to 12)

8. The organisation is receptive to new ideas

9. Creativity, innovation and ideas are emphasized in staff members’
discussions
10. Staff members know where to address their ideas
11. Our organisation undertakes periodic idea generation exercised in order to
stimulate the climate for creativity
12. Our staff say they are always learning new things in our organisation.

The above questions determine the level of creativity residing within an organisation.

Creativity nowadays has become the heart of innovative business organisations and

successful innovative Japanese industries base their success on the continuous flow of

creative ideas and the processes that lay behind this idea generation exercise (Nonaka,

1991). Questions 11 and 12 have been included to examine the factors that Amabile

(1998, 1990) claims are needed to consider when studying creativity in organisations,

namely creative thinking skills (the ability of people approaching problems and finding

solutions) and motivation (mainly intrinsic motivation which includes having alternative

sources in approaching knowledge).

78
3.5.1.3 Organisational Culture (Questions 13 to 20)

13. Our organization’s culture is a major advantage in attracting and retaining

good staff
14. Our organization’s culture encourages all staff to constantly seek and test
better ways of doing things
15. It is easy to challenge the way things are normally done in our
organization
16. We treat our colleagues with respect, admiration and cooperation
17. People are happy working in our organization
18. There is almost no backbiting in our organization
19. We have very few rules that require compliance
20. Knowledge, experience and qualifications are the main ingredients to
move up the ladder in the organisation

Any organisation that expects to be creative requires an established culture that embraces

creative thinking in its deepest level of basic values which are shared by the

organisation’s members and are manifested through actions (Johnson and Scholes, 1984,

Morgan, 1991). For these values to prosper it is necessary that the organisation attracts

and keeps valuable staff members (Question 13), gives them space to challenge

assumptions and established processes (Question 14, 15), provides a harmonious setup

where employees feel part of the establishment as a team where every employee respects

one another and seeks each others’ opinion and enjoys their daily activities at work

(Amabile, 1997). Employees will be most creative when they feel motivated by finding

satisfaction in conducting their work (Amabile – 1990, 1997). Promoting committed

employees (through knowledge, experience and further education) provides necessary

79
challenges for an individual to seek deeper interest in his work and take on board

problems as if their own and wish to solve (Robinson and Stern, 1997).

3.5.1.4 Goals, Measure and Strategy (Questions 21 to 24)

21. Our organisation has a clear strategic vision that staff know and share
22. The company’s mission statement is clear throughout all management
levels
23. Strategic measure are shared often with all staff to assess progress towards
the strategic vision
24. The company is more interested in being reactive than proactive.

If goals, measures and strategies are not clearly defined within an organisation the

probability is that the organisation itself will lack direction, hence not bound to be

innovative in its products whether goods and/or services (Robbins, 1996), this element

will be identified through questions 21 to 23. Organisational goals are an indication of

what an entity intends to achieve and by when. This sense of direction gives impetus to

the creativity process to work and be productive in possible innovative outcomes (Arad et

al., 1997).

3.5.1.5 Staff Development (Questions 25 to 31)

25. Should the occasion arises you would consider alternative employment
26. The company supports your personal development in the organisations
27. Our staff is motivated by the vision of the organisation
28. Most staff meets daily in an informal space such as canteen

80
 29. Informal networking takes place among different departments in the
organisation
30. There is sufficient slack time for people to take time to think and explore
ideas
31. Managers show their appreciation to staff for the efforts, small triumphs
and major accomplishments

Innovative organisations understand the urgency to remain competitive and one way of

doing so is to attract, develop and retain employees. Therefore questions from 25 to 27

will determine such issues. Organisations need to make every effort to bring on board

individuals that are ambitious to learn, be risk-takers and have other various interests

other than work-related matters (Brand, 1998) both in formal and informal settings

(questions 28 to 30) while managers show appreciation for any input made by employees

(question 31).

3.5.1.6 Resources promoting Creativity (Questions 32 to 37)

32. My company provides funds for ‘creative thinking’ courses

33. Team creativity is promoted in my organisation
34. My working environment promotes a creative setting
35. Personal internet access is available in my company
36. Library with variety of books and e-books is available at work
37. Relaxation areas are available in our company

Promoting creativity within a corporate entity requires an investment in resources that

facilitate creativity. Questions 32 to 37 will address what resources, according to Jones

81
and McFadzean (1997), are needed to promote creativity within a working environment

these are:

 adequate working and creative environment (good lighting, working space, fresh air)

 tools (personal computers at work, laptops and libraries)

 training (in creative thinking courses and other skills that may not necessary be work-

related)

 relaxation rooms (where development of new ideas can take place), and

 free time allowed for personal projects and financial grants to support them.

3.5.2 Stress

The second part of the questionnaire is made up of thirty-four (34) questions, from

question thirty-eight (38) to seventy-two (72) and relates to stress. These questions

represent seven (7) sections covering seven different topics which were not identified to

respondents. These sections refer to stressors that may be present in the working

environment, which are:

 Section 7 – Questions 40, 43, 46, 49, 53, 55, 57, 59 refer to Demands

 Section 8 – Questions 39, 47, 52, 56, 62, 67 refer to Control

 Section 9 – Questions 45, 60, 66, 70, 72 refer to Managers’ Support

 Section 10 – Questions 44, 61, 64, 68 refer to Peer Support

 Section 11 – Questions 42, 51, 58, 71 refer to Relationships

 Section 12 – Questions 38, 41, 48, 50, 54 refer to Role

 Section 13 – Questions 63, 65, 69 refer to Change.

82
3.5.2.1 Demands (Questions 40, 43, 46, 49, 53, 55, 57, 59)

40. Different tasks are demanded from me that are hard to combine
43. I have unachievable deadlines
46. I have to work very intensively
49. I have to neglect some tasks because I have too much to do
53. I am unable to take sufficient breaks
55. I am pressured to work long hours
57. I have to work very fast
59. I have unrealistic time pressures

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH, 1999) defines stress

as the negative human response (physical and emotional) that takes place when there is a

mismatch between job demands and the capabilities, resources or needs of the worker.

When this mismatch is experienced the person may experience work-related stress and

some common stressors include:

 Time pressure – striving to meet targets or to complete jobs satisfactorily

 Demanding mental tasks – that require high concentration levels and/or over

prolonged period of time

 Mundane tasks – limiting workers from utilising their full potential and/or repeating

same task in and out

 Emotional jobs – where individuals face emotional, disturbing tasks that require high

emotional input.

 Long working hours – including overtime, long shift jobs or taking work at home.

 Irregular working hours – that may affect sleeping patterns or affect the balance

between work and social life (Orth-Gomer, 1986).

83
3.5.2.2 Control (Questions 39, 47, 52, 56, 62, 67)

39. I can decide when to take a break

47. I have a say in my own work speed
52. I have a choice in deciding how I do my work
56. I have a choice in deciding what I do at work
62. I have some say over the way I work
67. My working time can be flexible

It is important for an individual to feel that he has control over how he performs his

duties, that he has an amount of autonomy. Excessive amount of control, supervision,

and monitoring coupled with lack of authority how a person conducts his duties will

bring along stress response (Jonge, Dormann and Van Vegchel, 2004). It is important for

an individual to feel part of the organisation by having an appropriate level of autonomy

including being part of communication channels when organisational strategies are being

discussed and formed.

3.5.2.3 Managers’ Support (Questions 45, 60, 66, 70, 72)

45. I am given supportive feedback on the work I do

60. I can rely on my line manager to help me out with a work problem
66. I can talk to my line manager about something that has upset or annoyed
me about work
70. I am supported trough emotionally demanding work
72. My line manager encourages me at work (personal development)

Work-related stress could be reduced just by simply having mangers giving feedback,

constructive feedback especially in times of uncertainty (mergers, acquisitions, lay-offs,

84
etc) or just about work problems (French, Kast, and Rosenzweig, 1985). Supporting staff

members is likely to reduce most simple doubts that can become major problems in the

first place. Support can be given through dissemination of information, working side by

side an employee who needs assistance, providing encouragement or praise for any tasks

performed well. These support mechanisms can become future assets for an organisation,

especially when dealing with crises such as cost cuttings etc.

3.5.2.4 Peer Support (Questions 44, 61, 64, 68)

44. If works get difficult, my colleagues will help me

61. I get help and support I need form colleagues
64. I receive the respect at work I deserve from my colleagues
68. My colleagues are willing to listen to my work-related problems

Support at work can also derive from other working colleagues with whom a stressed

individual can share his concerns especially if such individual works in a highly intensive

working environment where he may feel he is not in control. This type of problem

sharing can prove to be a stress release mechanism making it easier for an individual to

cope when things get tougher. (Stress at work – UCL, 2007)

3.5.2.5 Relationships (Questions 42, 51, 58, 71)

42. I am subject to personal harassment in the form of unkind words or

behaviour
51. There is friction or anger between colleagues
58. I am subject to bullying at work
71. Relationships at work are strained

85
Probability of conflict increases when a number of people come together under one roof,

such as a working environment. Conflict, despite being a norm to occur in these

circumstances, could become a stress factor. If it remains unresolved or becomes more

serious it creates strain on relationships between employees. As a result of this,

harassment and bullying may take place too (The Causes of Stress, ¶.8).

3.5.2.6 Role (Questions 38, 41, 48, 50, 54)

38. I am clear what is expected of me at work

41. I know how to go about getting my job done
48. I am clear what my duties and responsibilities are
50. I am clear about the goals and objectives for my department
54. I understand how my work fits into the overall aim of the organisation

An individual may experience stress when his superiors do not clarify job role, job

assignments or responsibilities (Arnold and Feldman, 1986). When this happens

confusion arises and stress persists even further when colleagues expect the individual to

perform as part of the system. This situation usually takes place when starting a new job,

with a new company, or being transferred to another section/department, or experiencing

a thorough organisational restructuring.

3.5.2.7 Change (Questions 63, 65, 69)

63. I have sufficient opportunities to question managers about change at work

65. Staff is always consulted about change at work

86
 69. When changes are made at work, I am clear how they will work out in
practice

One of the most difficult situations an employee has to deal with within an organisation is

change (Bridges, 1995). Change, whether it is procedural, structural, transfer from one

department to another or a new process may have an adverse effect on an employee’s

beliefs and values. These types of changes may cause an individual to experience

physiological instability and anxiety especially when information related to such changes

is not available. The above questions will determine if changes within MSE are being

managed adequately.

3.6 Data Analysis, Indexing and Coding

The quantitative data collected from the responses to the questionnaires was indexed and

all data entered manually onto a Microsoft Office Excel (2003) Sheet, part of the

Microsoft Office Professional Edition 2003 (see Appendix IX). The statistical procedure

of the software for the development of the Pearson r Correlation (or simply the Pearson r)

analysis will be used. The following formula will determine the correlation coefficient

between stress and creativity:

N∑XY – (∑X)( ∑Y)

r = ____________________________

√ (N ∑X2-(∑X)2)(N ∑Y2-(∑Y)2)

Figure 3.1: Pearson R Formula

87
Note: r is the number of respondents; x (creativity) and y (stress) represent array of

values considered for correlation.

To determine whether or not the above calculations have statistical significance, the

‘critical value’ for the Pearson r will be applied by calculating the degrees of freedom

(DF). The DF derives by subtracting 2 from the number of comparisons taken in

consideration for correlation purposes (DF = N – 2).

For example:

a) To calculate the DF of a full sample of 37 respondents.

- DF = 37 – 2 = 35

b) Find DF on the table in Appendix VIII and find the critical value allowed.

- In our case, the nearest DF listed is 35 with a critical value of 0.2746.

c) If the calculated Pearson r result is greater than the critical value from the table,

this implies that our findings have statistical significance. Therefore, one can

assume that the hypothesis represented in the study is true and there is a positive

correlation between the variables in question (example: stress vs. creativity)

d) Critical values for the Pearson R coefficient are estimated at 5% certainty.

For the purpose of information retrieved from data gathered throughout the quantitative

survey the author made use of the Microsoft Office Excel software and proceeded as

follows:

1. Each question grading was recorded and registered

88
2. Sum of grading of each question was recorded
3. Mean of collective individual question was calculated (hence giving immediate
indication which question needs attention)
4. Questions scoring 2.5 and above are considered as ‘Disturbing’.

3.6.1 Indexing

For reference purposes to questionnaires in Chapter 4 (Data Analysis) the following

method will be applied:

 Q 00: Questionnaire corresponding number

 L1: Level 1 (Clerk A to Manager 1)
 L2: Level 2 (Manager 2 to CEO)
 M: Male
 F: Female
 A: Age

Therefore, Q12, L1, M, 26 is the index for Questionnaire number 12, who works within

Level 1 (Clerk A to Manager 1), is male of 26 years of age.

3.6.2 Coding

As indicated earlier in this chapter an open-ended question (What stresses you out at

work?) was included in the questionnaire. This type of question gives the respondents the

possibility to express perceived stressors within their working environment in their own

words. In order to analyse the responses emerging from this question the author will:

1. cluster the stressors variables under common headings and coded as ‘CLUSTER’

89
2. register the number of stressors under the common headings and coded as ‘No of

Complaints’

3. present the number of stressors under one particular cluster in percentage point vis-à-

vis the total number of stressors received and coded as ‘%’

3.7 Limitations

Being an employee myself within the Malta Stock Exchange plc allowed me easy access

to the respondents and a relationship of mutual trust was already established. This,

however, does pose the limitation that as a colleague working closely with the

respondents the data collected might reflect such a relationship. Another limitation of

this study is the fact that data was obtained at a single point in time. To examine the on-

going process of the correlation between stress and creativity it is ideal to collect and

collate survey data at specific time frames (quarterly, biannually basis etc.) without

giving advance warning of the conduct of survey. An additional limitation to take into

consideration is the fact that an individual’s perception (both positive and negative)

within the working environment may be influenced by stress factors external to the

working environment such as family matters. Limitations associated with quantitative

research that is based on small samples is also acknowledged. In this case the sample

represents 92.50% of the population and leaves wide open the possibility of identifying

unforeseen conditions rather than testing hypothesis based on existing theory. The

researcher is aware that the results obtained, based on a small sample (albeit

representative of 37 out of the 40 employees of the MSE) cannot be used to draw

90
generalisation. Gender distribution is another limitation - female employees (66%)

outnumber male employees (34%) therefore there is no balance.

3.8 Conclusion

In the next chapter an in-depth analysis of the data collected is presented. The findings

and results are organised in a way that reflects the aim of this study - that is to illustrate

the correlation between two factors under observation in this study - stress and creativity.

The research is being carried out in a corporate environment where it is possible to

examine various factors that may contribute further to the outcome of the study.

91
 CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

92
4.1 Introduction

This Chapter will deal with graphical and tabular presentation of results together with

analysis of the data gathered from returned questionnaires. Derived results may not be

discussed in the order in which the questions appear in the questionnaire but will be used

when necessary to sustain discussions reflecting topics tackled in the literature review

that ultimately points to the main subject matter the correlation between stress and

creativity. After the analysis of the findings the chapter includes a representation of the

statistics applied.

4.2 Distribution of Participants

The sample size of thirty seven (37) returned questionnaires allows for a confidence level

of 95% and a confidence interval of 2.35 - online sample calculations were possible at

www.surverysystem.com. The organisation under study is a medium sized financial

institution that employs less than fifty individuals. As per table 4.1 the demographics of

the respondents could be summarised as made up of more than 70% females compared to

less than 30% males, over three quarters of employees are in lower management level

that encompass manager 1’s, supervisors and support staff positions. In addition, almost

84% of the respondents are between the ages of 20 to 40 years, while the rest are above

41 years of age.

93
 Table 4.1: Respondents Distribution

Gender Frequency Percent

Male 11 29.7
Female 26 70.3
Total 37 100.0
DISTRIBUTION BY GENDER

Table 4.2: Distribution of Sample by Gender

Level 1 % in All Levels Level 2 Total % in All Levels

Male 7 19 4 11 11
Female 22 59 4 26 11
Total 29 78 8 37 22
DISTRIBUTION BY GENDER IN LEVELS 1& 2

Table 4.3: Distribution of Sample by Age

Frequency Percent
21-30 23 62.16
31-40 8 21.62
41-50 4 10.81
51-60 1 2.70
61-70 1 2.70
Total 37 100.00
DISTRIBUTION BY AGE GROUPS

4.3 Creativity at the MSE

The calculated correlations throughout all levels in the organisation under review (Full

Sample, Level 1, Level 2, and both Genders) indicate positive correlation between stress

and creativity. Data suggests a positive value indicating an increase in stress corresponds

to increase in creativity. Yet correlation does not imply causation; other variables may be

acting on one or both of the related variables and affect them in the same direction.

94
To estimate creativity level, at the MSE, through the 6 categories (leadership, creativity

in the organisation, culture, goals measure and strategy, staff development and resources

promoting creativity) the mean of the total average scores of responses for every category

was calculated and presented graphically in figure 4.1 (for all calculations in Appendix

IX). As indicated in the methodology chapter, average scores exceeding 2.5 is

considered ‘disturbing’. In this case the overall creativity level at the MSE registers an

average score of 3.6 which indicates strong hindering factors to the creativity processes

within the organisation. From the questionnaire responses the following findings will

indicate these factors.

CREATIVITY Overall Category Average Score

Leadership 3.3

Creativity in Organisation 3.7 AVG.

CATEGORY

Culture 3.6 3.6

Goals Measure & Strategy 3.5
Staff Development 3.3

Resources Promoting Creativity 3.9

3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0
AVERAGE SCORE

Figure 4.1: Mean of Average Scores of each category for Creativity

4.3.1 Leadership

From the questionnaire responses it emerges that the Malta Stock Exchange encounters

difficulty to sustain creativity within its structures through current leadership. Leadership

category scores an overall average of 3.3. Having 23 (62%) respondents disagreeing that

95
staff members find it easy to express openly their opinion on new ideas (Q.2) makes this

least disturbing factor in the whole leadership category. While with 36 (97.2%)

respondents perceiving that the organisation does not publicly reward the learning and

effort shown towards creativity (Q.4), makes this disturbing factor the highest concern in

the leadership category. This issue is of concern since as it emerges from the literature

review in chapter 2, rewarding creativity behaviour stimulates the individual’s intrinsic

motivation to a point where s/he will become deeply interested and involved in the work

that brings along motivation (Amabile, 1998). Communicating direction, within an

innovative organisation is conducive to creativity and managers must effectively

communicate it through any available channel (Cook, 1998) – yet over 81% of

respondents feel that MSE’s managers spend more time in their office rather than

communicating with their staff (Q.1). This claim is further sustained by the respondents’

point of views hereunder:

There is lack of communication between the managers and staff (L1, F, 40).

No targets, directions or clear strategy is ever presented by top

management (L1, M, 38).

No job definition (L1, M, 25).

Leaders should possess the ability to constitute effective work groups for effective

creative ideas (Amabile and Gryskiewicz, 1989). At the MSE almost 76% disagree that

managers always find ways to resource good people to progress good ideas (Q.3). This

either indicates there is a lack of good employees within the organisation or the good

employees are not given the chance to participate democratically. In respect to

democracy according to Nyström (1997) a democratic leadership is conducive to

96
creativity, but almost 68% of respondents disagree that managers delegate opportunities

fairly amongst subordinates (Q.6). Good leadership calls for providing feedback to

subordinates in respect of their qualities and how these effect positive changes in the

organisation. This is a focus that emerges in the literature review but fails to emerge in

the MSE where almost 76% of the respondents feel that such feedback is not given (Q.7)

while 67.5% perceive MSE managers delegating and functioning more as decision

makers rather facilitators (Q.5).

4.3.2 Creativity within the Organisation

Creativity determines the organisation’s ability to succeed in today’s global competitive

economy. Has the Malta Stock Exchange the necessary elements to be creative? The

overall responses looked at whether the respondents agreed that the MSE lacks the

potential to be a creative organisation. With an average score of 3.7 on overall responses

in this category it indicates that the MSE lacks such potential. Is the organisation

receptive to new creative ideas? Over 76% of the respondents do not think so (Q.8).

According to de Bono (2004) creativity is a process and not something ready on demand.

Part of this process includes the participation of the creative person in an open flow of

communication encouraging creativity (Rhodes, 1961; Amabile, 1988) a process that is

perceived as not transpiring in staff member’s discussions at the Malta Stock Exchange

by 29 respondents out of 37 (78% of total respondents) (Q.9). Amabile (1988) lists three

requirements to nurture creativity, one of which is creative thinking skills while Hayes

(1988) believes creative ideas come from people, their skills, and their knowledge.

Combining the creative thinking skills and employee’s creative ideas it would suggest

97
that a structure should be in place to cater for this input of creativity for further

development, a structure that employees refer to when they come up with an idea – 28

respondents (76% of total respondents) feel that they do not know where to address their

ideas within the Malta Stock Exchange (Q.10). This may be due to the fact creativity is

not included in the institution’s vision nor strategy a claim that is sustained by the fact

97% of respondents believe that the MSE does not undertake periodic idea generation

exercises to stimulate creativity at all (Q.11). From the literature review it emerges that

the organisation is responsible to provide expertise to nurture creativity – giving

employees the opportunity to develop in industrial, practical and intellectual knowledge –

over 86% of the respondents disagree that MSE staff members claim they are always

learning new things within their working environment (Q.12).

4.3.3 Culture

To establish a creative environment one key challenge is to establish a culture that

attracts, develops and retains all those necessary components vital for creativity itself one

of which is employees (Cook, 1998), the intellectual capital. From the questionnaire

responses 33 respondents (89% of total respondents) do not believe that the

organization’s culture is a major advantage in attracting and retaining good staff (Q.13),

while 75% of respondents perceives the organisation’s culture as one that does not even

encourage staff members to seek better ways of doing things (Q.14) – a perquisite how

creative organisations develops, an organisation that encourages employees to challenge

assumptions or processes (Jones and McFadzean, 1997) - in this case only 40% of

respondents believe that it is easy to challenge the way things are carried out in the MSE

98
the other 60% think otherwise (Q.15). Another important factor in a creative culture is

that employees work as a team, respect one another, and communicate effectively

(Shattow, 1996) – 62% of respondents do not believe that such respect resides in the

organisation (Q.16).

Literature review sustains that gossiping and backbiting distracts employees’ interest and

focus in their work effecting negatively their intrinsic motivation (much needed for

creativity) - over 88% of respondents perceive backbiting is well established amongst

MSE employees (Q.18). These claims are further sustained from respondents’ feedbacks

in respect to what stress them most at work, the following responses were submitted:

Backbiting, Bullying, Jealousy (L1, F, 30)

Resolving disputes among staff members (L2, F, 25)

Colleagues do not show respect. A lot of work has to be done by me

because others do not care about work or lost motivation… but they take
a lot of sick or when they are here they talk all the time.
(L1, F, 28)

Malignant gossip behind other people’s back. Some people get away with
everything and get rewarded, others work hard and deliver and because
they are not trouble makers top management ignore their plight. Relevant
disciplinary action is not applied fairly and sometimes not taken (L2, F,
41)

Useless gossiping which can turn out to be energy-wasting which can be

utilized for other tasks (L2, F, 37)

99
This kind of attitude would definitely put people on alert rather than, to what literature

review sustains, feeling relaxed and safe environment, where creative thinking processes

can take place. Could employees be happy working at MSE? Over 86% of respondents

fell they are not (Q.17). What may counter balance this situation is the possibility of

intrinsic rewards made available to individuals who are equipped with knowledge,

experience and qualifications – factors that support the creativity process (Shattow, 1996)

- 73% of respondents disagree that these factors are the main ingredients to move up the

ladder (Q.20) in the organisation while responses to the open-ended question throw some

more light on this regard:

Management: unfair promotions, double standards, only few are treated

like royalty, no personal development to, especially, those who are
qualified and/or ambitious. (L1, M, 38)

You are not assessed on how much you know but who you know especially
when it comes to promotions (L1, F, 28)

Lack of opportunities (L1, M, 26)

Staff not treated equally (L1, F, 29)

No incentives to staff (L1, M, 25)

MSE does not come across as a happy environment to work in. From questionnaire

responses it transpires that the psychological working environment suffers and other

100
indications imply that the physical environment per se is not that helpful for creative

thinking processes:

Working environment: noisy, stuffed air, lack of sufficient light (L1, M,

38)

The building, too much noisy, no privacy in departments (L1, F, 28)

The environment: The open plan setup does not allow me to concentrate
enough, hearing a lot of voices around, lot of shouting. I am always
ending up with a headache (L1, F, 28)

The work environment – too much noise and the climate in general (L1, F,
30)

Environment: Lack of fresh air, no daylight (L1, F, 29)

Inadequate premises – no windows and natural light (L1, M, 25)

4.3.4 Goals, Measures and Strategies

A thoughtful, common mission statement does serve to unite people. The

purpose of the group does not have to be formalized into a gold framed
statement on every office wall. It just has to be clear and shared, so that
group members have criteria by which to make hourly decisions. What is
important and what isn’t? What kinds of innovation serve the purpose of
the group and what kinds don’t?

(Leonard and Swap, 1999)

101
Organisations contribute considerable amount of resources to establish and proliferate

their mission statements and strategies internally and externally. This promotes and

affirms market share with new products and/or services (Robbins, 1996) externally.

Internally it establishes a common goal/direction that unites every employee within the

organisation and gears them up towards a common goal. Does the MSE have a clear

strategic vision that all staff members know and share? Just over 89% of the respondents

feel they do not have this vision (Q.21). In respect to the company’s mission statement

over 86% of respondents believe that it is not clear throughout all management levels

(Q.22). Cook (1998) proposes that leaders must communicate the strategic measures on

regular basis to employees through any form and means for a common drive toward the

strategic vision, almost 89% of respondents sustain that strategic measures are not shared

often with all staff to assess progress towards the strategic vision (Q.23). At this point

one might ask - If there is a mission statement in place and if there is a strategy in place

why are the majority of the respondents not part of it? The following respondents’

feedbacks may shed some light:

Lack of communication between the managers and staff (L1, F, 40)

No targets, directions or clear strategy is ever presented by top

management (L1, M, 38)

Most managers do not have management skills (L1, F, 29)

No job definition (L1, M, 25)

… Or as 56% of respondents believe the organisation is just not proactive and handles

matters on daily basis (Q.24).

102
4.3.5 Staff Development

In 1943 Maslow published the “Theory of Human Motivation”. According to Maslow

when a lower level of need is satisfied people seek to satisfy the next level of need. One

of those needs is self-actualisation which helms Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs as

indicated in the table 4.4 below:

Table 4.4: Organisational Contributions to Satisfy Needs

Level of Need Rewards Organisational Contributions

SELF-ACTUALISATION Challenging Job,

Growth, Achievement, Opportunities for Creativity,
Advancement, Creativity Achievement in Work,
Promotion

Social Recognition, Job Title,

SELF-ESTEEM Self-respect, Status, Prestige High Status of Job,
Feedback from the Job itself

Work Groups / Teams,

Love, Friendship,
SOCIAL Supervision,
Feelings of Belonging
Professional associations

Health & Safety, Job Security,

SAFETY Security, Stability, Protection
Contract of Employment

PHYSIOLOGICAL Food, Water, Sleep, Sex Pay, Working Conditions

APPLICATION OF MASLOW HIERARCHY OF NEEDS, ¶.5

An organisation that offers staff development opportunities, also provides opportunities

for creativity to its employees. This helps to satisfy an employee’s need of self-

actualisation. Upon reaching this level an employee can contribute highly to the idea-

generation process within an organisation, a factor that Amabile (1990, 1997) considers

as an intrinsic motivation, a state where an employee becomes more involved in his work,

103
more curious, enjoys working. Accounting all these factors together the end result would

be an individual perceiving a sense of challenge at place of work that in itself contributes

to motivation. Staff development at the MSE scores an overall average of 3.3, although it

is one of the least disturbing category within the creativity series still gives thought for

concern. For example over 55% of respondents (which practically represents half MSE

workforce) would consider alternative employment should the occasion arises (Q.25).

One respondent who strongly disagree with such possibility is from level 2 management,

male and of 59 years of age, while 83.3% who disagree of leaving current employment

for an alternative opportunity are all from level 1, females and of average age 29.

Supporting staff development means retaining employees, retaining intellectual capital

after all. From the literature review in chapter 2 it emerges that management must

provide incentives to encourage creativity, incentives that include funds for training, self

developing programmes, free time for developing creative processes, systems and

material support – over 75% of respondents feel that the MSE does not support

employees’ personal development (Q.26) and from the claims listed hereunder it seems

the organisation lacks in supporting even other issues that are valuable for any possible

creative process:

Lack of staff to cope with the daily jobs that have a time frame (L1, F, 40).

Not enough time to concentrate on specific jobs that need certain amount
of concentration (L1, F, 40).

104
 Management does not realise that certain departments have lack of
resources in order to perform good tasks and the best job performance
(L1, F, 40).

Lack of hardworking staff – as a result work is not equally shared and this
gives rise to a lot of pressure (L1, F, 28).

Short-staffing in my department: It also hinders my personal development

in that it does not leave me with enough time to move on to learning
and/or doing new things. (L2, F, 41).

Additional to the above comments almost 73% of respondents disagree that there is

sufficient slack time to think and explore new ideas (Q.30). Employees and departments

need time to think, experiment and interact informally – this encourages social and

technical interaction between thinkers (those who develop ides) and doers (those who

implement ideas) to come together and ultimately will promote creative ideas generation.

Over 80% of the respondents sustain that office networking within the organisation does

not take place (Q.29) while just under 65% believe that networking fails even at staff

level since the possibility for staff members to meet all together on daily basis is not

available (Q.28). An individual may find it difficult, in this case, to satisfy his ‘social’

needs (the feeling of belonging). It is in the human nature to be part of a group. All these

paths lead the individual to feel ungrateful to the circumstances and the organisation itself

especially with almost 73% of respondents perceiving that managers do not show

appreciation towards efforts, triumphs and/or major accomplishments (Q.31). Any type

of thinking processes at this point would be perceived as going to waste and any two way

communication channel would falter as does the possibility of a creative process.

105
4.3.6 Resources promoting Creativity

From the literature review it emerges that organisations committed to promote a creative

environment provide necessary resources to their employees to develop their thinking

skills. They are aware that these skills will distinguish themselves as competitive

advantages at a later stage. Companies that fail to provide necessary training will be

failing their own commitment towards a healthy creative environment. Other resources

needed to promote creativity include promotion of team creativity, supplying alternative

sources of information (internet, books, E-books) and relaxation area where creative

thinking process may take place undisturbed. From returned responses it is indicated that

the MSE fails to sponsor resources necessary to promote creativity, one case in point over

90% of respondents sustain that the organisation does not provide funding for ‘creative

thinking’ courses (Q.32). The literature review clearly indicates that organisations that

want to invest in creativity need to sustain team creativity first and foremost, when

respondents were asked if their organisation promotes team creativity over 86% disagree

that this kind of approach is being promoted (Q.33) as a matter of fact almost 89% of

respondents also believe that their working environment itself does not promote a

creative setting (Q.34). This gives rise to the question whether the top management is

conscious of this lack of creative environment. When creativity clusters averages were

compared between Level 1 (Manager 1’s, Supervisors and Supporting staff) and Level 2

members of staff (Manager 2’s up to top Management) it is evident from the following

table that there is difference in perception clearly indicating that there is a missing link of

common awareness.

106
Table 4.5: Creativity comparison between Levels

Average Ratings Diff. in % Diff. in

Avg. Avg.
CLUSTER Level 1 Level 2 Rating Rating
Leadership 3.46 2.77 0.69 20
Creative Organisation 3.91 2.96 0.95 24
Organisation Culture 3.79 3.05 0.74 20
Goals, Measure and Strategy 3.66 3.19 0.47 13
Staff Development 3.46 2.85 0.61 18
Resources to promote Creativity 4.13 3.15 0.98 24
 DIFFERENCE IN CLUSTER RATING BETWEEN LEVEL 1 AND LEVEL 2.
 THE HIGHER THE AVERAGE RATING DENOTES A HIGHER NEGATIVE PERCEPTION AMONG THE MEMBERS OF THE LEVEL.

Information technology is an important resource for promoting creativity, and

organisations that promote the use of internet to retrieve ideas, improve the chances of

creativity. In the case of MSE it seems that 40% of total respondents have accessibility to

personal internet access availability but that leaves 60% wondering why not them (Q.35).

An alternative to internet for acquiring inspirational ideas would be going back to basics

such as books/E-books coupled with a relaxation area e.g. quiet lounges where one can

sit, relax and let one’s brain wandering till it finds what Pulis Xerxen (2006) calls it,

‘Eureka’ – a sudden burst of inspiration. From the questionnaire it emerges that such

facilities are not available for 95% of the respondents leaving 2 respondents say they do

(Q.36).

4.4 Stressors at the MSE

To estimate stressors level at the MSE through the 7 categories (Demands, control,

manager’s support, peer support, relationships, role and change) the mean of the total

107
average scores of responses for every category was calculate and presented graphically in

figure 4.2 (see all calculations in Appendix IX). This section will also give an overview

of the existing stressors affecting the organisation to what extent through registered

perceptions of the questionnaire respondents. As indicated in the methodology chapter

average scores exceeding 2.5 is considered disturbing. In respect to the MSE an overall

average score of 2.8 is registered. Despite this is slightly above the overall stress levels it

still indicates that there are concerning factors within the categories that need to be

discussed.

STRESS Overall Category Average Score

Demands 3.0
Control 2.7 AVG.
CATEGORY

Manager's Support
Peer Support 2.1
2.6
2.8
Relationships 3.5
Role 2.2
Change 3.5

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

AVERAGE

Figure 4.2: Mean of Average Scores of each category for Stress

As discussed in the methodology section an open-ended question ‘What stresses you out

at work?’ was included in the questionnaire in order to enable respondents to express in

their own opinion what they perceive as work-related stress. Perceived reported stressors

(57 in total) were submitted by 19 respondents out of the eligible 37 - the other 18 opted

108
not to contribute (see Appendix X). Stressors that were considered similar in nature were

categorized under common headings and are presented in the table below:

Table 4.6: Stressors at Work

STRESSORS % OF TOTAL
CLUSTER REPORTED RESPONSES
Working Environment 11 19
Discrimination 11 19
De-motivation 8 14
Conflict 8 14
Lack of Direction 6 11
Time Pressure 4 7
Bad Management 4 7
Bullying 2 4
Gossiping 2 4
Others 1 2
TOTAL 57 100
STRESS RESPONSES

Combining the above responses with those of the questionnaire it is hoped that a clearer

picture, during discussion, will emerge.

4.4.1 Working Demands

The literature review in chapter 2 indicates that work demands may put an individual

under stress if such demands exceed his/her ability to cope (French, Kast and

Rosenzweig’s, 1985). What is the nature of work demands at the MSE? From the

questionnaire responses it emerges that 38% of total respondents find it hard to combine

different tasks that have been demanded from them, meaning that 62% cope well with the

situation (Q.40). Yet from the open-ended question feedback there might be situations

that management does not know about:

109
 Lack of staff: pressure to cope with the daily jobs that have a time frame
(L1, F, 40)

Management does not realise that certain departments have lack of

resources in order to perform good tasks and the best job performance
(L1, F, 40)

…or situations that the management may know about:

Lack of hardworking staff – as a result work is not equally shared and this
gives rise to a lot of pressure. (L1, F, 28)

When it comes to deadlines over 78% of respondents disagree that they have

unachievable ones yet 64% agree that they have to work intensively without neglecting

any other tasks (Q.43). It reflects that work demands at the MSE do not seem to be

excessive to a point of exhaustion, actually for the majority of the employees working

demands are the least of their worries following the claims hereunder:

 when it comes to breaks over 70% feel they take sufficient breaks throughout their
working hours (Q.53)

 over 80% feel that they are not pressured to work long hours (Q.55)

 73% do not feel they have to work very fast (Q.57), and

 almost 92% do not believe they have unrealistic time pressures (Q.59).

110
4.4.2 Autonomy

The literature review in chapter 2 suggests that a level of autonomy gives an individual

increased intrinsic motivation to contribute successfully towards the aims of the

organisation. Strict controls and supervision brings in a sense of negative feeling among

employees who in return would not fully commit themselves towards the well being of

the company. In an intensive working environment, such as that of a Stock Exchange,

time flexibility is important for employees such as when they can have breaks. Control on

breaks is one of those factors that can contribute to stress, not all staff members may

leave their working station at an established time for their rest – a phone call with client,

an important meeting taking long, dealing with a deadline… all require flexibility.

At the MSE 81% of the respondents perceive they can totally decide when to take a break

(Q.39). Autonomy also extends itself to how fast an individual wants to work, at the MSE

almost over 47% of respondents strongly feel they have a say over their own work speed

(Q.47). Autonomy seems more prevalent when it comes to employees having a choice in

deciding how they do their work, only 8.4% disagree they have any choice (Q.52). In

respect to what job one decides to do - 60% feel they have a say (Q.56), while 89%

perceive they have some say over the way they work (Q.62) while 50% of the

respondents claim their working time is flexible (Q.67).

From the above data it transpires that the MSE allows a degree of autonomy to the

majority of its employees, maybe not enough to avoid the ‘disturbing’ level, but enough

111
to give those who have such autonomy to feel empowered and motivated to return to

work.

4.4.3 Managerial Support

In everyday’s working environment problematic situations continuously arise, some are

manageable others require more attention and support. From the questionnaire responses

it emerges that there is a positive general feeling in respect to managerial support within

the MSE.

Managerial support comes in various ways one of which is providing feedback to

subordinates, a process that gives a sense of appreciation, belonging and self-esteem -

50% of the respondents strongly feel that they do get such support (Q.45). Could

employees rely on their line manager’s help when they face work related problems?

Almost 60% of respondents strongly believe they can (Q.60). The literature review states

how important it is that supervisors are well trained to listen to their subordinates, it is

important for an employee to discuss one’s problems when encountering problems at

work. This provides an opportunity to fix factors that may create further stress… and who

is the most qualified person to approach in this case if not the supervisor or line manager?

Just over 62% of the respondents feel that they can talk to their line manager in such

circumstances (Q.60). Perception dramatically changes when it comes to emotional

support, only 27% agree that they are supported trough emotional demanding work

(Q.66). In respect to personal development support it seems that respondents are equally

112
split on this issue - half say that their manager encourages them at work in respect to

personal development while the other half beg to differ (Q.72).

4.4.4 Relationships and Peer Support

Bringing a number of people working together under one roof also means bringing

together different characters, mentality, backgrounds, cultures and other human

characteristics. Literature review sustains that in these cases it is natural to have conflicts,

which themselves are neither good nor bad. It all depends on our attitude towards them.

Conflicts are healthy if these are managed professionally. If not, one can experience

group clustering within the organisation – that is small number of people coming together

to support each other. These people are usually brought together by common matters such

as disputes.

At the MSE, peer support is perceived as strongly established with an overall average

score of 2.07 it is the strongest support when facing stress. Over 75% of the respondents

feel that work colleagues will assist them if work gets difficult (Q.44). Just over 70%

respondents feel that they can rely on help and support from colleagues (Q.61). This kind

of support will counteract other stressful situations that an employee may run into during

his course of duties. Further strong peer support is evident when 80% of respondents

believe that their colleagues are willing to listen to their work-related problems (Q.64),

while 62% of respondents strongly feel that they receive the respect at work they deserve

from their work mates (Q.68).

113
4.4.5 Relationships

Every individual comes along with his own values, beliefs, character… when a number

of individuals are brought together under one roof it is normally expected to have

conflicts. As indicated in the literature review, prolonged conflicts put strain on work

relationships that may result in harassment and bullying. Is the MSE immune to such

strains? The facts are: On a positive note over 89.2% of respondents do not feel being

personally harassed (Q.42) while 86.5% do not feel being subject to bullying at work

(Q.58). On a negative note, just over 70% of respondents believe that there is friction or

anger between colleagues at work (Q.51) and again 70% believe that relationships at

work are strained (Q.71).

4.4.6 Role

An idea that kicks off a process towards an innovative product starts from an individual.

Therefore it is important that an individual is given a clear indication of his role within

the organisation and its operations so he would direct his attention on matters that pertain

to his role and focus on them accordingly. If the individual lacks this role definition it

becomes difficult for him to amalgamate his role with the objectives of organisation. If

clear terms of definition are missing then the individual becomes frustrated and stressed

not knowing where his role stands within the line of operations. Do the employees at the

MSE know their role? This category is one of the strongest categories amongst the others

under the heading stress. The first indication derives from questionnaire responses that

suggest 73% of all respondents feel that they are clear about what is expected from them

(Q.38). Over 89% of the respondents feel that they know how to go about getting their

114
job done (Q.48) while 92% are clear what their duties and responsibilities are. Over 78%

of respondents are clear about the goals and objectives for their department (Q.50) while

94.5% of respondents understand how their work fits into the overall aim of the

organisation (Q.54).

From the above it seems that role ambiguity is monitored at the MSE and the majority of

respondents feel confident that their role is quite clear within the organisation’s structures

hence the lower the role conflict is the lower are the chances that an employee will

experience stress.

4.4.7 Change

Working within an organisation that does not clearly communicate where it is heading is

worrying especially in times of economic turmoil. It can be quite a stressful experience to

those who have financial commitments such as home loans etc. At the time of writing,

thousands in the United States of America have found themselves without jobs or roofs

over their head. This kind of stress unsettles a person emotionally and mentally and

creates a fog of disturbance that blocks the consciousness and the flow of ideas that are

much needed for the creative thinking process. So what type of feedback do MSE

employees get in respect to changes?

The survey clearly indicates that 70% of total respondents do not find sufficient

opportunities to question managers about change at work (Q.63), while 78% feel they are

not consulted about change at work (Q.65). Moreover 80% of total respondents agree that

115
when changes take place at work, they are not clear how these will work out in practice

(Q.69).

A series of tables and graphs representing data applied for Pearson correlation, the

outcome of calculations and explanation of results will be presented in the following

section.

116
4.5 Correlations - Statistical and Graphical Interpretation

Table 4.7: Mean Values of Full Sample Responses

Respondent Stress Creativity X2 Y2 XY

(N) (X) (Y)
L1,F,30 3.34 4.41 11.16 19.45 14.73
L2,M,43 2.83 3.19 8.01 10.18 9.03
L1,F40 2.23 3.92 4.97 15.37 8.74
L1,F,28 3.06 3.76 9.36 14.14 11.51
L1,F,27 2.89 2.64 8.35 6.97 7.63
L2,M,38 3.37 4.30 11.36 18.49 14.49
L2,M,44 3.03 3.62 9.18 13.10 10.97
L1,M,36 2.77 4.19 7.67 17.56 11.61
L1,F,23 2.70 2.78 7.29 7.73 7.51
L1,F,25 2.17 2.95 4.71 8.70 6.40
L1,F,27 2.74 3.59 7.51 12.89 9.84
L1,F,27 2.83 3.65 8.01 13.32 10.33
L1,F,26 3.41 4.84 11.63 23.43 16.50
L1,F,28 3.09 4.24 9.55 17.98 13.10
L1,F,29 2.37 3.56 5.62 12.67 8.44
L1,F,28 2.32 3.86 5.38 14.90 8.96
L1,F,30 2.74 3.59 7.51 12.89 9.84
L1,F,27 3.31 4.00 10.96 16.00 13.24
L1,F,28 3.57 4.05 12.74 16.40 14.46
L1,M,24 2.83 2.72 8.01 7.40 7.70
L1,M,26 3.06 4.00 9.36 16.00 12.24
L1,F,29 3.26 4.46 10.63 19.89 14.54
L1,M,30 2.57 2.73 6.60 7.45 7.02
L1,M,32 2.77 3.62 7.67 13.10 10.03
L1,F,34 2.17 3.22 4.71 10.37 6.99
L1,F,29 3.23 4.57 10.43 20.88 14.76
L1,M,25 3.23 3.86 10.43 14.90 12.47
L1,F,31 3.03 4.06 9.18 16.48 12.30
L2,M,64 2.80 3.03 7.84 9.18 8.48
L1,F,27 3.03 3.35 9.18 11.22 10.15
L1,F,36 3.26 3.41 10.63 11.63 11.12
L1,F,37 2.34 3.38 5.48 11.42 7.91
L2,F,34 1.97 2.78 3.88 7.73 5.48
L2,F,41 1.94 2.94 3.76 8.64 5.70
L2,F,37 2.62 2.66 6.86 7.08 6.97
L2,F,48 1.71 2.62 2.92 6.86 4.48
L2,M,59 2.40 2.97 5.76 8.82 7.13
37 102.99 131.52 294.31 481.23 372.76
THE MEAN OF RESPONSES FOR FULL SAMPLE

117
 Full Sample: Stress and Creativity Correlation

6.00
5.00
CREATIVITY

4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
STRESS

Figure 4.3: Correlation of Mean Responses for Full Sample

Table 4.7 represents the full sample of returned questionnaires, where the mean of

responses for creativity and stress are calculated on individual basis excluding the 0’s

responses (no responses). In this case Pearson r = 0.6518, this demonstrates a positive

correlation between stress and creativity throughout the full sample. Furthermore, with a

Degree of Freedom (DF) = 0.2746 implies that calculations have statistical significance.

The data suggests (across all the range of respondents) that increase in stress corresponds

to an increase in creativity.

118
Table 4.8: Mean Values of Level 1 Sample Responses

Respondent Stress Creativity X2 Y2 XY

(N) (X) (Y)
L1,F,30 3.34 4.41 11.16 19.45 14.73
L1,F,23 2.70 2.78 7.29 7.73 7.51
L1,F,25 2.17 2.95 4.71 8.70 6.40
L1,F,26 3.41 4.84 11.63 23.43 16.50
L1,F,27 2.89 2.64 8.35 6.97 7.63
L1,F,27 2.74 3.59 7.51 12.89 9.84
L1,F,27 2.83 3.65 8.01 13.32 10.33
L1,F,27 3.31 4.00 10.96 16.00 13.24
L1,F,27 3.03 3.35 9.18 11.22 10.15
L1,F,28 3.06 3.76 9.36 14.14 11.51
L1,F,28 3.09 4.24 9.55 17.98 13.10
L1,F,28 2.32 3.86 5.38 14.90 8.96
L1,F,28 3.57 4.05 12.74 16.40 14.46
L1,F,29 2.37 3.56 5.62 12.67 8.44
L1,F,29 3.26 4.46 10.63 19.89 14.54
L1,F,29 3.23 4.57 10.43 20.88 14.76
L1,F,30 2.74 3.59 7.51 12.89 9.84
L1,F,31 3.03 4.06 9.18 16.48 12.30
L1,F,34 2.17 3.22 4.71 10.37 6.99
L1,F,36 3.26 3.41 10.63 11.63 11.12
L1,F,37 2.34 3.38 5.48 11.42 7.91
L1,F40 2.23 3.92 4.97 15.37 8.74
L1,M,24 2.83 2.72 8.01 7.40 7.70
L1,M,25 3.23 3.86 10.43 14.90 12.47
L1,M,26 3.06 4.00 9.36 16.00 12.24
L1,M,30 2.57 2.73 6.60 7.45 7.02
L1,M,32 2.77 3.62 7.67 13.10 10.03
L1,M,36 2.77 4.19 7.67 17.56 11.61
28 80.32 103.41 234.73 391.15 300.03
THE MEAN OF RESPONSES FOR LEVEL 1 SAMPLE (MANAGER 1’S, SUPERVISORS AND CLERKS)

119
 Level 1 Sample: Stress and Creativity Correlation

6.00
5.00
CREATIVITY

4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
STRESS

Figure 4.4: Correlation of Mean Responses for Level 1 Sample

Table 4.8 represents the sample of Level 1 respondents’ questionnaires, where the mean

of responses for creativity and stress of Level 1 Sample (Managers 1, Supervisors and

Clerks) is calculated excluding 0’s responses. Pearson r = 0.5371, this demonstrates a

positive correlation between stress and creativity in Level 1 Sample. With a DF = 0.3233

implies that calculations have statistical significance.

Table 4.9: Mean Values of Level 2 Sample Responses

Respondent Stress Creativity X2 Y2 XY

(N) (X) (Y)
L2,M,43 2.83 3.19 8.01 10.18 9.03
L2,M,38 3.37 4.30 11.36 18.49 14.49
L2,M,44 3.03 3.62 9.18 13.10 10.97
L2,M,64 2.80 3.03 7.84 9.18 8.48
L2,F,34 1.97 2.78 3.88 7.73 5.48
L2,F,41 1.94 2.94 3.76 8.64 5.70
L2,F,37 2.62 2.66 6.86 7.08 6.97
L2,F,48 1.71 2.62 2.92 6.86 4.48
L2,M,59 2.40 2.97 5.76 8.82 7.13
9 22.67 28.11 59.58 90.08 72.73
THE MEAN OF RESPONSES FOR LEVEL 2 SAMPLE (MANAGERS 2’S AND TOP MANAGEMENT)

120
 Level 2 Sample: Stress and Creativity Correlation

5.00

4.00
CREATIVITY

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
STRESS

Figure 4.5: Correlation of Mean Responses for Level 2 Sample

Table 4.9 represents the sample of Level 2 respondents’ questionnaires, where the mean

responses for creativity and stress of Manager 2’s up to Top Management levels are

calculated excluding the 0’s responses. Pearson r for this sample = 0.8079, once again

this demonstrates a positive correlation between stress and creativity in Level 2 Sample.

With a DF = 0.5822 implies that calculation have statistical significance.

121
Table 4.10: Mean Values of Male Sample Responses

Respondent Stress Creativity X2 Y2 XY

(N) (X) (Y)
L2,M,43 2.83 3.19 8.01 10.18 9.03
L2,M,38 3.37 4.30 11.36 18.49 14.49
L2,M,44 3.03 3.62 9.18 13.10 10.97
L1,M,36 2.77 4.19 7.67 17.56 11.61
L1,M,24 2.83 2.72 8.01 7.40 7.70
L1,M,26 3.06 4.00 9.36 16.00 12.24
L1,M,30 2.57 2.73 6.60 7.45 7.02
L1,M,32 2.77 3.62 7.67 13.10 10.03
L1,M,25 3.23 3.86 10.43 14.90 12.47
L2,M,64 2.80 3.03 7.84 9.18 8.48
L2,M,59 2.40 2.97 5.76 8.82 7.13
11 31.66 38.23 91.90 136.18 111.15
THE MEAN OF RESPONSES FOR THE MALE SAMPLE

Male Sample: Stress and Creativity Correlation

5.00

4.00
CREATIVITY

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
STRESS

Figure 4.6: Correlation of Mean Responses for Male Sample

Table 4.10 represents the sample of male respondents’ questionnaires, where the mean

responses for creativity and stress of all male respondents are calculated excluding 0’s

responses. Pearson r = 0.6975, this sustains previous trend of a positive correlation

122
between topics in discussion. The DF = 0.5214 implies that calculation have statistical

significance.

Table 4.11: Mean Values of Female Sample Responses

Respondent Stress Creativity X2 Y2 XY

(N) (X) (Y)
L1,F,30 3.34 4.41 11.16 19.45 14.73
L1,F,23 2.70 2.78 7.29 7.73 7.51
L1,F,25 2.17 2.95 4.71 8.70 6.40
L1,F,26 3.41 4.84 11.63 23.43 16.50
L1,F,27 2.89 2.64 8.35 6.97 7.63
L1,F,27 2.74 3.59 7.51 12.89 9.84
L1,F,27 2.83 3.65 8.01 13.32 10.33
L1,F,27 3.31 4.00 10.96 16.00 13.24
L1,F,27 3.03 3.35 9.18 11.22 10.15
L1,F,28 3.06 3.76 9.36 14.14 11.51
L1,F,28 3.09 4.24 9.55 17.98 13.10
L1,F,28 2.32 3.86 5.38 14.90 8.96
L1,F,28 3.57 4.05 12.74 16.40 14.46
L1,F,29 2.37 3.56 5.62 12.67 8.44
L1,F,29 3.26 4.46 10.63 19.89 14.54
L1,F,29 3.23 4.57 10.43 20.88 14.76
L1,F,30 2.74 3.59 7.51 12.89 9.84
L1,F,31 3.03 4.06 9.18 16.48 12.30
L1,F,34 2.17 3.22 4.71 10.37 6.99
L1,F,36 3.26 3.41 10.63 11.63 11.12
L1,F,37 2.34 3.38 5.48 11.42 7.91
L1,F40 2.23 3.92 4.97 15.37 8.74
L2,F,34 1.97 2.78 3.88 7.73 5.48
L2,F,37 2.62 2.66 6.86 7.08 6.97
L2,F,41 1.94 2.94 3.76 8.64 5.70
L2,F,48 1.71 2.62 2.92 6.86 4.48
26 71.33 93.29 202.41 345.05 261.61
THE MEAN OF RESPONSES FOR THE FEMALE SAMPLE

123
 Female Sample: Stress and Creativity Correlation

6.00
5.00
CREATIVITY

4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
STRESS

Figure 4.7: Correlation of Mean Responses for Female Sample

Table 4.11 represents the sample of female respondents’ questionnaires, were the mean

responses for creativity and stress of all female respondents (engaged with the MSE) are

calculated excluding the 0’s responses. Pearson r = 0.7044 and demonstrates positive

correlation between stress and creativity in the Female sample. The DF at 0.3233 implies

that calculations have statistical significance.

4.6 Conclusion

The results from the questionnaires have indicated that on a conceptual level the MSE

must face a huge number of internal challenges if it were to work towards becoming a

creative oriented organisation. The identified damaging factors to creativity processes at

the MSE not only hold back creativity but repulse any form of attempt to consider the

asset. Furthermore work-related stressors present at the MSE do not pertain to work as

such but are more related to bad management, when management should be primary

source that has to promote creativity within the organisation.

124
The following, concluding chapter summarises the findings presented in this chapter and

suggests recommendation for future research and practice in the field of creativity and

stress.

125
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

126
5.1 Introduction

In this concluding chapter, the main findings that emerge from this study are summarized

and suggestions are made for further studies. Recommendations for action are proposed

to help promote the fostering of creativity and management of stress in corporate entities

that could affect negatively the performance of an organisation. Corporate entities are the

backbone of any country’s economical strength. If the organisations fail to be innovative,

failing to apply the necessary structures within it, to provide creative minds to come up

with innovative products (good/services), organisations fail to exist.

5.2 Outcomes

The outcomes that emerge from the research reveal that Malta Stock Exchange suffers

from inadequate staff (attitude/skills) to progress to an innovative level. This could be

subject to the fact that the organisation does not promote creativity at all; either because

creativity is not on the management’s agenda or management has no idea how to

approach it in the first place due to the fact that the organisation is perceived as a reactive

one rather than being proactive. It is evident from the research that managers need to be

more professional in their role by delegating more to their subordinates and by acting

more as facilitators rather than decision-makers. If this attitude persists it leads to a path

where any type of direction suffers, as a result it may give rise to uncertainty and,

possibly, lack of interest that perpetuates at every operational level. This argument is

sustained by the fact that respondents perceive no direction where the organisation is

heading and feel there are missing links of communication with management.

127
Lack of leadership, strong culture, direction, strategy, communication, managerial skills,
and staff development within the Malta Stock Exchange do not only hinder creativity to
develop but reject the whole concept entirely. Additional evidence that these factors are
missing derives from respondents’ opinions when claiming that they suffer from:

 discrimination

 de-motivation

 conflicts

 backbiting

 lack of direction, and

 bad management

All the above elements totally conflict with the necessary structures needed, as indicated

in the literature review, to nourish creativity within an institution such as the Malta Stock

Exchange.

When it comes to stress levels at the MSE it emerges that these do not pertain to working

demands per se as the following attest from respondents’ feedback:

 employees have a good degree of autonomy

 employees find a medium form of managerial support

 employees command a very strong peer support, and

 employees have an established perception of their role within the organisation

128
Stress issues that clearly emerge from the research are that employees feel stressed due

to:

 work relationships are under great strain

 the lack of communication channels with management, and

 the overall feeling of exclusion from internal processes and decisions pertaining to

them.

Anderson S (2008, ¶.11) in her online article ‘Work stress symptoms and suggestions’

says “When work stress has reached a critical level, or has gone on for too long, it can

begin to have adverse affects which show up in a myriad of ways”. Then she lists the

following ailments:

 Insomnia or the inability to stay asleep through the night

 Uncharacteristic anger and frustration which usually affects relationships and home

life

 Inability to concentrate because the mind is so mired in stress

 Anxiety in periodic attacks, or as a constant

 Depression from the weight of worry and overload

 Development of physical ailments, from headache to ulcers to heart and back

problems

 Substance abuse as a means of self medication to attempt relaxation and calm

 Absenteeism to avoid the stressful overload

129
 Burnout (utter exhaustion that breaks down the mind and body).

Throughout this study the above ailments have not shown consistency or persistency,

therefore it is indicated that levels of stress are contained. Therefore at this point an

employee at the MSE has reached levels of consent to the whole situation and becomes

passive to the whole situation since there is not much that can be done. Some respondents

did mention bad management and in these circumstances there might be a connection.

5.3 Recommendations

5.3.1 Time

Should the Management genuinely wish to establish a creative culture within an

organisation their first investment should be “Time”. Time is required to establish

creativity awareness across the board, from top management to supporting staff. Time is

of essence to teach people what creativity is all about, what can be learned from applying

creativity and how creativity can support an individual both at work and in his private

life. A creative culture demands both the space and time where the thinking process can

take place in order for the mind to develop.

5.3.2 Socialization

Setting up social events during which all staff members, from top management to the

lowest grades, will help to identify where the strengths and weaknesses in

communication lie within an entity. Two types of social events, formal and informal,

130
have an impact on team building. Formal social events can be a way to determine the

team support required to launch projects, establish innovative products or as a continuous

strategy for the organisation to aim high successfully. Informal events can be a way to

bring staff members together (team building events), mend relationship and/or establish

new ones. These types of events greatly enhance the sense of belonging bringing back

staff members’ commitment towards the organisation.

5.3.3 Think ‘How to Reward’

Rewards have intrinsic value for an individual both when these are material awards as

well as psychological ones. The following are valuable rewards that management may

award to employees:

 Thanking an employee for an outstanding job, this shows the company cares about

efforts.

 A thank you letter to congratulate him/her on work and personal achievements is an

even more meaningful appraisal.

 Nominating employees who have shown creativity as champions of ‘creativity

circles’. These circles function similarly to ‘quality circles’ but their main aim is to

promote creativity in the organisation.

 Communication in respect to how the company is doing (profits/losses), what are the

targets the management is aiming for, considered initiatives and the reasons behind

them, inviting the employees to give their input… these will make the employee feel

he is participating in the company’s vision.

131
 During the decision making-process, involve staff members who have knowledge and

expertise by inviting them to give their opinions, suggestions on the way to achieve

certain goals and finally thanking them for their contribution.

 Personal development gives value to an individual. Individuals appreciate

opportunities learn and develop new skills. Training, providing study incentives, and

re-training for new jobs add value to employees and enhance their commitment

towards the company they work for.

 Reaching targets, landing a new client on the list, completion of a project, increase in

sales’ figures – all call for celebrations and why not doing it in an informal and in fun

way? Balloons cake and Champaegn (or even a celebratory drink down at the pub)

break work routines but add enthusiasm for the job.

5.3.4 Get together Sessions

Make it a regular part of the weekly/monthly schedule to hold brainstorming sessions, by

calling all management staff ‘all on deck one at 1300 hours sharp’. This will assist in the

generation of ideas in respect of issues of concern. Staff members feel that they are going

for an attack (going to push forward their ideas) and want to come out as winners (setting

up a course of action to achieve common aim/s). How would they do that? They will

successfully come up with the right ideas.

5.3.5 Creative Thinking Skills Training

Bring employees up-to-date with thinking skills by providing them with specialized

courses on lateral thinking. Workshops will bring out their creative personality; games

132
involved will assist in breaking the ice between management and supporting staff.

Together they will learn how to evaluate situations, perform critical analysis and develop

their communication and writing skills and problem solving skills.

5.3.6 Regular Creativity Audits

Regular creativity audits will assist the organisation to identify those organisational

factors that act as barriers to creativity or what is missing for creativity to evolve.

Regular audits will create benchmarks against which creativity measurements can be

monitored on a regular basis. This will assist management to take necessary actions

when certain factors appear to be failing and which are affecting the performance of the

organisation.

5.3.7 Creativity Networking

Establish contacts with other organisations (companies, institutions, and training centers)

that promote and provide creativity frameworks. This will assist the organisation to setup

internal policies that truly support creativity which is essential to develop innovative

outputs.

There is no doubt that creativity is the most important human resource of

all. Without creativity, there would be no progress, and we would be
forever repeating the same patters.
Edward de Bono (1993)

133
5.3.8 Management

It has been established that management is lacking in its performance when it comes to:

 communication

 equal opportunities for everyone

 distribution of work load

 establishing mission and vision within the organisation

 handling conflicts and gossiping

 staff development

 management skills

It is recommended that a fully-fledged staff audit be carried out and the outcome is

evaluated by an independent professional body that does not include any members of

current management structures.

Depending on the outcome of this audit management follows a reshuffling of

management personnel with prime concern that those who do not hold professional

qualifications be trained and their immediate positions will be demoted until

qualifications are obtained. Qualified personnel that have shown consistency in their job

performance will be positioned in management levels on probation, and if these do

commit and prove qualified for the jobs will be established in their new positions in

senior managerial roles. Additional measures would be appropriate depending on the

outcome of the above mentioned audit.

134
5.4 Managing Organisational Stress

5.4.1 Conflict/Gossip

Internal conflicts and gossip can be detrimental to the company’s operations and external

perception. Employees should steer clear of gossiping as this may sow seeds of doubt,

negative opinions and personal grievances. On the other hand the origins of any conflicts

must be uncovered and understood in order for such issues to be tackled properly.

Management needs specific training to handle these situations first by acknowledging the

fact that it is happening, audit the reasons behind this event and put into effect necessary

actions to prevent this from continuing or from recurring. Individuals who for some

reason or other always end up in conflict with each other should be separated before the

situation worsens. Early intervention in any conflict is the best way to prevent such

conflict from spreading throughout an office or even the whole organisation.

Management needs to promote an environment of open communication by training front

line managers to listen to their subordinates, evaluate certain situations, and act

accordingly. It is important that such communication is handled even-handedly with all

concerned and should remain free of any discrimination or fear of retribution. Gossiping

may take place due to the fact that employees are working in confined and restricted

work space. The organisation needs to adhere to international standards with regards to

the workspace provided and factors such as noise levels must be monitored and

maintained at acceptable levels. Stress counseling may be another factor to consider if

conflicts are on the increase.

135
5.4.2 Stress Audits

Stress audits play an important role to identify those stressors that are affecting the well

being of staff members and therefore of the organisation. Regular audits will then

establish benchmarks to measure any negative changes that need to be tackled.

5.4.3 Training

Management should not wait for stress to manifest itself. Training should be considered

and provided even when stress is not affecting the organisation. Risk management should

be integrated in these training sessions, approaching stress through simulating possible

real stressful situations within an organisation. Training employees in stress management

may actually mean stress be contained at its early stages as employees would be trained

in the know how to identify stress and deal with it before it becomes a major problem.

5.4.4 Policies

Establishing stress management policies and frameworks within an organisation assists

employees to know how and where to address stress affecting them or their immediate

subordinates. These policies should adhere to established stress management institutions

standards to assure that policies are in place for the benefit of the staff members and also

of the going concern.

136
5.5 Further Study

5.5.1 Application of Different Research Methods

Correlation was the research method used for this study. The author recommends

extending qualitative research for same study since this type of method is more likely to

take place in a realistic setting such as working place (Denzin, 1971). Applying this

methodology means that there will more focusing on surrounding activity such for

example the working environment itself. Qualitative methodology is less likely to restrict

classification and collection of data and it is open to focus on the evolving surroundings

while studying the samples on an individual basis, who are seen as an entity with own

attributes that sets him/her apart from the others. The advantages of applying qualitative

research rather than quantitative in this study are:

1. the author obtains more realistic feel of the environment that cannot be felt

through numerical data and statistical analysis,

2. one is not restricted how to collect, analyze and carry out the interpretation of data

collected,

3. the possibility to related with the research subjects,

4. expressive facility based on primary and raw data, and

5. one can see the bigger picture of the whole study which is necessary to have a

wiser and deeper view of topics under review.

137
5.5.2 Larger Sample

For the study a medium sized organisation was chosen (the number of employees are less

than 100). It is recommended that same study will be carried out on larger corporations

that offer the following attributes:

1. larger number of employees

2. different levels of management

3. different age brackets, and

4. equal presentation of gender

Such study will accentuate results with more statistical significance while additional

information may be amassed that could be applied to substantiate statistical results.

5.5.3 Inclusion of other Industrial Sectors

A financial institution, the Malta Stock Exchange, was particularly used for this study. It

would be interesting to see the outcome of such study extended to other:

1. financial institutions (Malta Financial Services Authority, Central Bank,

FinanceMalta etc), and

2. different corporate entities in different industrial sectors.

The aim to extend this study to other entities and sectors is to establish local benchmarks

in respect to creativity and stress.

138
5.5.4 Conclusion

The aim of the study was to highlight concepts concerning stress and creativity, and

whether a correlation exists between the two. Definitions of both topics have been

identified and the extended literature review examined characteristics of stress and

creativity from a corporate perspective.

Creativity is acknowledged as a dynamic factor in the business world. Creativity has

taken a more pivotal role that determines success of innovative corporations since this

determines product differentiation and marketing initiatives (de Bono, 1992) – elements

that set these business organisations apart from their main competitors. Yet in the face of

a more competitive struggle, organisations are resorting to dramatic measures, measures

that may induce stress within their corporate structures that may affect employee’s well-

being.

In establishing whether a correlation exists between stress and creativity the Malta Stock

Exchange plc was used as a backdrop for the research. For data collection a

questionnaire was designed based on Te Kaihau innovation audit standards and the UK

Health and Safety Executive Management standard practices. For data correlation the

application of Pearson R method was applied and the results indicated a positive

correlation between stress and creativity, meaning that an increase in stress corresponds

to an increase in creativity. Yet correlation does not imply causation, therefore other

variables that may have affected the outcome of these results were examined. The final

outcome indicated that neither stress nor creativity levels have reached significant levels

139
to imply any significant theoretical explanation other than creativity within the

organisation lacked any consideration while perceived work-related stressors were due to

bad management rather than work-related demands. This should not be seen as a dire

outcome but rather an opportunity to progress through the introduction of new ways of

thinking – thinking creatively!

140
BIBLIOGRAPHY

141
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Agarwal, R.D. (1982). Organization & Management - Delegation and Decentralization.

Subordinate related Factors, 167.

Ahmed, P.K. (1998). Culture and Climate for Innovation. European Journal of
Innovation Management, 1 (1), 30-43.

Albrecht, K. (1979). Stress and the Manager. Making it work for you. Eaglewood Cliffs,
NY: Prentice-Hall.

Allen, David (2001). Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity. New
York: Viking

Altier, W.J. (1993). A Process for Creativity. Retrieved July 18, 2007:
http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/article_index/articles/1-
50/article22_body.html, ¶.17.

Amabile in Brazeal, D.V. and Herbert, T.T. (1999). The genesis of entrepreneurship.
Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 39.

Amabile, T, M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review,

September/October Issue, 76-87.

Amabile, T. M. (1990). Within You, Without You: The Social Psychology of Creativity,
and Beyond. In Theories of Creativity, edited by Mark A. Runco and Robert S.
Albert. Newbury Park, Calif. Sage.

Amabile, T. M. (1995). Discovering the Unknowable, Managing the Unmanageable. In

Creative Action in Organizations: Ivory Tower Visions and Real World Voices,

142
 edited by Cameron M. Ford and Dennis A. Gioia. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage,
77-81.

Amabile, T. M. (1998) How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review 76 (5), 76-87.

Amabile, T. M. (1998). A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations. In

Research in Organizational Behavior. Vol. 10, edited by Barry M. Staw and L.
L. Cummings. Greenwich, Conn.: J.A.I. Press.

Amabile, T. M. and Gryskiewicz, S.S. (1989). Creativity in R&D Laboratory. Technical

report No. 30, Centre for creativity leadership, NC.

Amabile, T. M., and N. Gryskiewicz. (1989). The Creative Environment Scales: The
Work Environment Inventory. Creativity Research Journal 2, 231-254.

Amabile, T. M., and S. S. Gryskiewicz. (1987) Creativity in the R&D Laboratory.

Report, No. 30, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, N.C.

Amabile, T. M., Collins, M. A., Conti, R., Phillips, M., Picariello, M., Ruscio, J., &
Whitney, D. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to The Psychology of
Creativity. Westview Press, Boulder.

Amabile, T. M., R. Conti, H. Coon, et al. (1996). Assessing the work environment for
creativity. Academy of Management Review 39 (5), 1154–1184.

Amabile, T.M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag
New York Incorporated.

Amabile, T.M. (1990). Within you, without you: the social psychology of creativity and
beyond. In Runco, M.A., and Albert, R.S. (Eds). Theories of Creativity, 61-91.

143
Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press. New York, NY.

Amabile, T.M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organisations: on doing what you live and
loving what you do. California Management Review. Vol. 40, No. 1, 39-58

Amabile, T.M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, Sept/Oct issue,
76-87.

Amabile, T.M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review 76 (5).

Amabile, T.M. (1999). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, September-
October, 1998, 77-87.

Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., Herron, M. (1996), Assessing the work
environment for creativity, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No.5,
1154-84.

American Creativity Association. Recognition of Creativity by the American Creativity

Association. Retrieved May 15, 2008:
http://www.amcreativityassoc.org/awardslist.htm, ¶.2.

Anderson, N. (1992) Management team innovation. Management Decision. Vol. 30,

No.2, 17-21.

Anderson, N., Hardy, G. and West, M. (1992), Management team innovation.

Management Decision, Vol.30, No.2, 17-21.

Anderson, S. (2008). Work stress symptoms and suggestions. Retrieved on October,

2008: http://hubpages.com/hub/Work-Stress-Symptoms-Suggestions

144
Andrei G. Aleinkov, Sharon Kackmeister and Ron Koenig. (2000). ‘Creating Creativity:
101 Definitions’, McKay Press, Midland, Michigan.

Apollo Health (2006). Stress and sleep. Retrieved January 16, 2007:
www.apollolight.com/new_content/circadian%20rhythms_disorders/sleep/stress
_sleep.html

Application of Maslow Hierarchy of Needs. Retrieved May 6, 2007:

http://www.examstutor.com/business/resources/studyroom/people_and_organisa
tions/motivation_theory/3-maslowshierachyofneeds.php, ¶.5

Arad, S., Hanson, M.A. & Schneider, R.J. (1997). A framework for the study of
relationships between organizational characteristics and organizational
innovation. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 31 (1), 42-58.

Arnold, H.J. and Feldman, D.C. (1986). Organizational Behavior. NY: McGraw Hill

Axium. Career Opportunities. Retrieved May 7, 2008:

http://www.axiumae.com/about/careers.aspx, ¶.3.

Bailyn, L. (1985). Autonomy in the industrial R&D laboratory. Human Resource

Management, 24: 129-146.

Barron, F. & Harrington, D. (1981). Creativity Intelligence and personality. Annual

Review of Psychology, 32.

Barry, C. (2009). Alitalia rises from bankruptcy. Retrieved February 12, 2009:
http://www.shanghaidaily.com/sp/article/2009/200901/20090114/article_387953
.htm, ¶.1.

145
Barsoux, J. (1996). Why organisations need humor. European Management Journal. Vol.
14, Issue 5, 500-508.

Bartolome, F., & Evans, P. (1979). Professional lives versus private lives - shifting
patterns of managerial commitment. Organizational Dynamics, Spring, 3-29.

Beehr, T., and Schuler, R. (1978). Job Stress, Employee Health and Organizational
Effectiveness: A Facet Analysis, Model and Literature Review. Personnel
Psychology, 31, 665-669.

Bennis, W & Biederman, P. (1997). Organizing Genius. The Secrets of Creative

Collaboration, 199.

Bhagat, R.S. (1983). Effects of stressful life events on individual performance

effectiveness and work adjustment process within organizational settings: A
research model. Academy of Management Review. 8(4), 660-671.

Bourdieu, Pierre 1993. The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature.
New York: Columbia University Press

Brand, A. (1998). Knowledge management and innovation at 3M. Journal of Knowledge

Management. Vol.2, No. 1, 17-22.

Bridges, W. (1995) Managing Transitions. Nicholas Brealey Publishers, London.

Brill, J. W (2006). What is Creativity? Retrieved February 8, 2007:

http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/comments/2001/prevcomments0601_
body.html, ¶.8.

Brodtrick, O. (1997). Innovation as reconciliation of competing values. Optimum. Vol.

27, No. 2, 1-4.

146
Buggie, D.F. (1997). Overcoming Barriers to Creativity. Retrieved July 18, 2007:
http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/article_index/articles/251-
300/article275_body.html, ¶.15.

Burnside, R.M. (1990). Improving corporate climates for creativity in West, M.A. and
Farr, J.L (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work. Wiley, Chichester, 265-84.

Bushell, H.M. (2007) Quantifying the Key Leadership Behaviours for Creating a
Successful Culture which Empowers Employees and Strengthens Organisational
Performance. Health, Work & Wellness Conference 2007, Toronto, Canada

Business definition for Corporate Climate. Retrieved June 17, 2009:

http://dictionary.bnet.com/definition/corporate+climate.html, ¶.1.

BusinessWeek. (2007). The World's 50 Most Innovative Companies. Retrieved May 19,
2007:
http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/most_innovative/index.asp

Byttebier, I. (2002). Creativiteit Hoe? Zo! Lanoo, Tielt, 23-167.

Caplan, r., Cobb, S., French, J.R.P., Jr., Harrison, R.V., and Pinneau, S., (1975). Job
Demands and Worker health, Cincinnati: NIOSH Research Report.

Carrier, C., Cossette, P., Verstraete, T (1999). Experimental implementation of a new

creative method to support futurology by small business in a strategic
management perspective. In Raffa, M. (Ed.). Proceedings of the 44th Annual
Conference of the International Council for Small Business, Naples, Italy.

Churchill, W. Speech at Harvard University, September 6, 1943, in The Oxford

Dictionary of Quotations (1999), Knowles & Partington, Oxford University
Press, 215

147
Coleman, J. H. (1996). Why employee empowerment is not just a fad. Leadership &
Organisation Development Journal. Vol. 17, Issue. 4, 29-36.

Convey, S.R. (1993). Innovation at four levels. Executive Excellence. Vol. 10, No. 9, 3-5.

Cook, P. (1998). Knowledge management and innovation at 3M. Journal of Knowledge

Management, Vol.2, No.1, 17-22.

Cooper, C., and Payne, R., (1980). Current Concerns in Occupational Stress. NY: John
Wiley.

Creative Thoughts about Creativity #5. Retrieved June 18, 2008:

http://motivationalmagic.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/creative-thoughts-about-
creativity-5/, ¶.14.

Cummings, L.L. (1965). Organizational climates for creativity. Journal of the Academy
of Management, 3, 220-227

de Bono, E. (1985). Six Thinking Hats.

de Bono, E. (1993). Serious Creativity. Competition and Sur/Petition, 21-22

de Bono, E. (1993). Serious Creativity. Group or Individual, 40-41

de Bono, E. (1993). Serious Creativity, Group or Individual, 31

de Bono, E. (2003). Serious Creativity, Group or Individual, 41.

de Bono, E. (2003). Serious Creativity. The uses of creative thinking, 71

Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behaviour. NY, Plenum.

148
Definition of Communication. Retrieved June 17, 2008:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication, ¶.1.

Dension, D. R. (1990). Corporate Culture and Organisational Effectiveness. Wiley &

Sons. New York, NY.

Denzin, N.K. (1971). The logic of naturalistic inquiry. Social Forces, 50, 166-182.

Dhillon, B.S. (2002). Engineering and technology management tools and applications.
Creativity and Innovation, 161.

Douglas, B. How can Tai Chi offer the world a new generation of geniuses, and change
the world for us all? Retrieved May 3, 2008:
http://www.articlesfactory.com/articles/politics/how-can-tai-chi-offer-the-world-
a-new-generation-of-geniuses-and-change-the-world-for-us-all.html

Duncan, R.B. (1976). The ambidextrous Organisation: Designing dual structure for
innovation. The Management of Organisation. New York, North Holland, 167-
188.

Dyer, Jeffrey H. and Wujin Chu (2003). The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing
Transaction Costs and Increasing Information Sharing: Empirical Evidence from
the United States, Japan, and Korea. Organization Science, Volume 14, No. 1,
57-68.
Evans, S. (2006). Inpeople: Role Clarity. Retrieved March 15, 2007:
www.itib.com.au/pdfs/december/dec%20itib%2058.pdf
Fagerstorm, C. D. (2006). Ministry Staff Members. Managing difficult relationship, 235.

Filipczak, B. (1997). It takes all kinds: creativity in the workforce. Training. Vol.34,
No.5, 37.

149
Fletcher, B., and Payne, R., (1980) Stress and Work: A Review and Theoretical
Framework. In Press. Personnel Review.

Ford, S. (2004). Workplace stress: environmental and individual factors. Retrieved

January 12, 2008: http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/stress

French, W.L., Kast, F.E. and Rosenzweig, J.E. (1985). Understanding Human Behaviour
in Organisations. New York: Harper & Row, 707.

Freud A. (1936). The ego and the mechanisms of defense. New York: International
Universities Press.

Frohman, M. and Pascarela, P. (1990). Achieving purpose-driven innovation. Industry

Week, No. 239, March, 20-24.

Gardenswartz, L. and Rowe, A. (1998). Why diversity matters. HR Focus. Vol. 75, No.7,
S1-S3

Gardner, J. W. (1965). How to prevent organisational dry not. Harper's Magazine,

October, 20-26.

Gattorna, J. (1998). Strategic supply chain alignment: best practice in supply chain
management. Prerequisite one – pressure for change, 449

Google Corporate Information (2009). The Google Culture. Retrieved May 15, 2007:
http://www.google.com/corporate/culture.html
Google Zurich. (2008). 15 Awesome and Inspiring Offices. Retrieved December 19,
2009: http://theroxor.com/2009/11/30/15-awesome-and-inspiring-offices/

Goswami, A. (1996). Creativity and te Quantum: A Unified Theory of Creativity,

Creativity Research Journal 9(1), 47-61

150
Greenwood, J.W., Greenwood, J.W. (1979). Managing executive stress: a systems
approach. New York: Wiley

Guilford, J, P. (1977). Way beyond the IQ. Creative Education Foundation.

Hall, B.P. (2001). Values development and learning organisations. Journal of knowledge
management. Vol. 5, No. 1, 19-32.

Harris, P. R. (2002). European Challenge: Developing global organisations. European

Business Review 14(6), 416-420

Hart, A., (2007). Stress in the workplace – how to cope with it. Retrieved June 19, 2008:
http://www.greatmanagement.org/articles/206/1/Stress-in-the-Workplace--How-
to-Cope-with-It/Page1.html

Hart, P.M., Griffin, M.A., Wearing, A.J., & Cooper, C.L. (1996). Manual for the QPASS
Survey. Brisbane: Public Sector Management Commission.

Hartmann, S. (2004). Creativity Article. Stress VS Creativity. Retrieved May 15, 2008:
http://silviahartmann.com/creativity-stress.php, ¶.7.

Hartmann, S. (2005) Stress vs Creativity, Retrieved April 6, 2008 from

http://ezinearticles.com/?Stress-VS-Creativity&id=33190&opt=print

Health and Safety Executive (2007). Improving efficiency and productivity by managing
attendance and work-related stress. Retrieved January 12, 2008:
www.hse.gov.uk/stress/efficiency.pdf

Health and Safety Executive. What are the Management Standards for work related
stress? Retrieved March 18, 2007: http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/standards, ¶.5.

151
Heilman, K. M., Nadeau, S. E., and Beversdorf, D. O. (2003). Creative Innovation:
Possible Brain Mechanisms. Neurocase. Vol. 9, No. 5, 369–379

Hill, C. and Jones, J. (2001). Strategic Management. Houghton Mifflin.

Hills, G. E. & Shrader, R. C. (1998). Successful entrepreneurs’ insights into opportunity

recognition. Retrieved May 14, 2008:
http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/papers98/I/I_A/I_A_text.htm, ¶.28.

Hunt, L. Improving efficiency and productivity by managing attendance and work-related

stress. Retrieved April 4, 2008 from
http://www.vetlife.org.uk/employment_issues/employers/HSE_Managing_stress
_in_workplace.pdf , ¶.1.

Irani, Z. (1997). Improving business performance through developing a corporate

culture. The TQM Magazine. Vol. 9 No. 3, 206-16.

Isaksen, S. G., and Ekvall, G. (2007). Assessing the context for change: A technical
manual for the situational outlook questionnaire. Orchard Park NY.

Isaksen, S.G. (1987). Frontiers of Creativity Research. Beyond the Basics. New York,
Bearly Limited, 370-372.

Isksen, S.G., Lauer, K.J., Ekvall, G. and Britz, A. (2001). Perceptions of the best and
worst climates for creativity: Preliminary validation evidence for the situational
outlook questionnaire. Creativity research journal 13(2), 171-184.

Ivancevich, J.M., Matteson, M.T. (1980), Stress and Work: A Managerial Perspective,
Scott Foreman & Co., Glenview, IL,.

152
Jaoui, H. (1991). Créatifs au quotidien. Outils et méthods, Paris, Editions ‘Hommes et
Perspectives’.

Jick, T., and Payne, R. (1980). Stress at Work. Journal of Management Education. Vol.5,
50-56.

Johnson, G. and Scholes, K. (1984). Exploring Corporate Strategy. Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Johnson, M.M. (1996). Finding creativity in a technical organization. Research

Technology Management. Vol. 3a, No. 5, 9-11.

Jones, G. & McFadzean, S. (1997). How can Reboredo foster creativity in her current
employees and nurture creative individuals who join the company in the future?
Harvard Business Review. Vol. 75, No.5, 50-51.

Jonge, J. de, Dormann, C. and Vergchel, N.Van, (2004). Job demands, job resources and
mental fatigue. Demand Induced Strain Compensation Model, 17(1), 59-79.

Joppe, M. (2000). The Research Process. Retrieved July 18, 2007:

http://www.ryerson.ca/~mjoppe/rp.htm.

Jung, C. (1961) by Boeree, C. Carl Jung 1875 – 1961. Retrieved June 17, 2008:
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/jung.html, ¶.73.
Kahn, R.L., Wolfe, D.M., Quinn, R.P., Snoek, J.D., & Rosenthal, R.A. (1964).
Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity, New York: John
Wiley & Sons.

153
Kanter, R.M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social
conditions for innovation in organisation, in Straw, B.M and Cummings.
Research in Organisational Behaviour – An Annual Series of Analytical Essays
and Critical Reviews. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, 169-211.

Katz, D., and Kahn, R.L. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York,
NY. John Wiley & Sons.

Kay, R. (1989). Managing Creativity in Science and High Tech, Springer-Verlag, New
York. NY.

Khalil, O.M. (1996). Innovative work environments – the role of information technology
and systems. SAM Advanced Management Journal. Vol.61, No.3, 32-36

Kimberley, J.R. (1981). Managerial Innovation. In P.C. Nystrom & W.H. Starbuch
(Eds), Hand-book of organizational design, 84-100.

Kotter, John P. (1996). Leading Change. Boston, Mass. Harvard Business School Press,
187.

Lawless, P. 1991. Employee Burnout: Amerca's Newest Epidemic. Minneapolis, MN:

Northwestern National Life Employee Benefits Division.

Leonard, D.A. and Swap, W. C. (1999). When Sparks Fly – Igniting Creativity in
Groups. Converging on the best options. Harvard Business School Press, Boston,
Massachusettes, 106.

Lewin, K., Lippitt, R. and White, R. (1939) ‘Patterns of aggressive behaviour in

experimentally created “social climates”’, Journal of Social Psychology 10, 271-
99.

154
Lindeman, C.E. (1926). The Meaning of Adult Education. Retrieved May 7, 2008:
http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/research/edu20/quotes.html, ¶.13.

Livingston, B. (2008). How you do what you do: Create Service Excellence That Wins
Clients for Life, 175.

Locke, E. A. and Kirkpatrick, S. A. (1995). Promoting creativity in organisations. In C.

M. Ford & D. A. Gioia (Eds.), Creative action in organizations. Newbury Park,
CA. Sage.

Louis, M.R. (1980). Career Transitions: Variations and Commonalities. Academy of

Management Review 5, 329-340.

Luecke, R. (2003). Managing creativity and innovation. Characteristics of creative

groups, 84.

Lurie, A. (2009). Five Minutes on Monday. Something Creative, 86.

Mallia, A (2002). The Malta Stock Exchange Annual Report 2002,11.

Marino, S. (1997). The stress epidemic. Industry Week, 246, 14.

Martensen, A. (1999). Strategy and planning for innovation management supported by

creative and learning organisations. Volume 16, Issue 9, 878-891.
Martins, E.C. and Terblanche, F. (2003). Building organisational culture that stimulates
creativity and innovation. Behaviour that encourages innovation. European
Journal of Innovation Management, Volume 6, No1, 64-74
Marzano, S. (2000). Internal communication, Philips Design: Eindhoven.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and Personality. Harper Row, New York.

155
Mayo Clinic Staff. (2008). Stress: Win control over the stress in your life. Understanding
the natural stress response. Retrieved February 18, 2008:
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/stress/SR00001/NSECTIONGROUP=2.

McGrath, J. E. (1976). Stress and behavior in organizations. In Handbook of Industrial

and Organizational Psychology. Dunnett, M. D. (ed) Chicago: Rand McNally
College Publishing.

McNeese, P. Creativity Course. Retrieved May 15, 2008:

http://www.planetpsych.com/zSelf_Help/creativitycourse.htm, ¶.14.

Megginson, L. C. (1963). Lessons from Europe for American Business. Southwestern

Social Science Quarterly, 44(1), 3-13.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and

Invention, Harper Perennial:New York, New York, 1996.

Mindtools (2009). Benne and Sheats' Group Roles. Identifying Both Positive and
Negative Group Behavior Roles. Retrieved June 19, 2008:
http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTMM_85.htm, ¶10.

Mingo, J. (1994). How the Cadillac Got Its Fins New York, NY: Harper Business.

Montuori, A,. & Purser, E. (1995). Deconstructing the one genius myth: Toward a
contextual view of creativity. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35, 69-112.

Mor Barak, E, M. (2005). Managing Diversity. Challenge of managing diversity in a

global context. Sage Publications Inc., 2.

Morgan, G. (1991). Images of Organization. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

156
Mumford, M.D. (1997). Thinking creatively at work: organizations influences on creative
problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behaviour. Vol. 31, No. 1, 7-17.

Nickerson, R.S. (1999). Enhancing creativity in R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of

Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.

Nijstad, B.A. (2000). How the Groups Affects the Mind: Effects of Communicating in
Idea Generating Groups. University of Utrecht, 151-2.

NIOSH. Stress at Work. Publication No. 99–101. Retrieved October 10, 2008:
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/99-101/pdfs/99-101.pdf, 6.

Nonaka, I. (1991). The Knowledge-Creating Company. Harvard Business Review 69

(6), 96-104.

Nÿstrom, H. (1990). Organizational innovation, in West M. A. and Farr, J.L (Eds),

Innovation and Creativity at work: Psychological and Organisational Strategies.
Wiley, Chichester, 143-61.

O’Reilly, C.O. (1989). Corporations, culture and commitment: motivation and social
control in large organisations. California Management Review. Summer, 9-25.

Oldham, G. R. and Cummings, A. (1996). Employee Creativity. Personal and Contextual

Factors at Work. The Academy of Management Journal 39(3), 607-637

Orth-Goverm K. (1986). Stressful aspects of shift work. In Occupational Stress. Wolf,

S.G., Jr. and Finestone, A. J. (Eds). Littleton, MA: PSG Publishing, 68-75.

Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative

problem solving. 3rd ed. New York (Scriber)

157
Paolillo, J.G. and Borwn, W.B. (1978. How organizational factors affect R&D
innovation. Research Management, 3, 13.

Parnes, S.J. and Noller, R.B. (1972). Applied creativity – the creative studies project.
Journal of creative behaviour. Vol.6, 164-186.

Paulus, P.B. & Nijstad, B.A. (2003). Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration.
Oxford: Oxford University Press

Pheysey, C. (1993). Organisational Cultures. Types and Transformations. Routledge,

London.

Pulis Xerxen, S. (2006). Perceptions of Teachers in Malta concerning Creativity in

Education. University of Malta. Chapter 4, 67.

Qubein, N. (2009). Positive stress motivates you to take on new challenges. Retrieved
October 8, 2009:
http://media.www.campuschronicle.org/media/storage/paper1319/news/2009/10/
09/StraightTalkWithDrNidoQubein/Positive.Stress.Motivates.You.To.Take.On.
New.Challenges-3798728.shtml.

Raudsepp, E. (1983). Stimulating creative thinking. Machine Design, June 9 Issue, 75-78.

Read, W. (1996). Managing the knowledge-based organisation: five principles every

manager can use. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management. Vol. 8, No.
3, 223-232.

Rees, C. (1995). Employee Relations. Quality Management and HRM in the service
industry. Some case study evidence. Vol. 17, Issue. 3, 99-109.

158
Reichers, A.E., and Schneider, B. (1990) Climate and culture: An evolution of constructs.
In Schneider B. (Ed.) Organisational Climate and Culture. Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, 22.

Reitz, H. J. (1986). Behavior in Organizations. Homewood, Illinois: Irwin, 239.

Return To Work. Predicting stress and strategies for reducing it. Retrieved March 17,
2007: http://www.rtwknowledge.org/article_print.php?article_id=156

Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305-310.

Robbins, S.P. (1996). Organizational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies, Applications.

7th Ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, JN, 1-50.

Robbins, S.P. (1997). Essentials of Organizational Behavior. 5th Edition, Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River. NJ.

Robinson, A.G., and Stern, S. (1997). Corporate Creativity. Berrett, Koehler Publishers,
San Francisco, CA.

Rose, D. M. & Griffin, M. (2002). High performance work systems HR practices and
high involvement: A group level analysis. Academy of Management, Conference
2002, Denver, USA

Rosenman, R., and Friedman, M. (1971). The central nervous system and coronary heart
disease. Hospital Practice 6, 87-97.

Russell, J. (2000). Stress free teaching: A practical guide to tackling stress in teaching,
Lecturing and Tutoring. Occupational Stress.

Ryan, M.J. (1996). Driving out fear. Health-care forum Jounal. Vol.39, No.4, 28-32.

159
Ryanair. (2008). Press release dated 3 November 2008. Retrieved February 12, 2009:
http://www.ryanair.com/site/EN/news.php?yr=08&month=nov&story=fin-en-
031108

Sales, S. (1969). Organizational Role as a Risk Factor in Coronary Disease.

Administrative Science Quarterly 14, 325-336.

Samaha, H.E. (1996). Overcoming the TQM barrier to innovation. HR Magazine. Vol.
41, No. 6, 145-149.

Schuler, R. (1980). Definition and Conceptualization of Stress in Organizations.

Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. April Issue.

Science for a better life. Retrieved June 18, 2007: http://www.bayer.com/en/Bayer-

Mission-Statement.pdfx, 2.

Shattow, M. (1996). Out of the blue. Electric perspectives. Vol.21, No.3, 44-45.

Shirom, A. (1982). What is Organizational Stress? A Facet Analytic Conceptualization

Journal of Occupational Behaviour, Vol. 3, No. 1, 21-37.

Shostak, A. (1980). Blue-Collar Stress. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Pub.

Co, 162.
Skyrme, J. David. (1998). Provide the right climate and support. In I3 UPDATE
No. 17: March 1998, ¶.28. Retrieved July 16, 2008 from
http://www.skyrme.com/updates/u17.htm

Sociological Research Skills. Research Methods. Retrieved on April 14, 2007:

http://www.sociology.org.uk/methodq.pdf

160
Stein, I. (1975) Stimulating Creativity. Volume 4. Group procedures. San Diego, CA
(Academic Press).

Sternberg, R.J. & Lubart, T. (1995). An investment approach to reativity. In S.M.Smith,

T.B.Ward, and R.A. Finke (Eds.) The Cognitive Approach. Cambridge, MIT
Press.

Stress at work – UCL (2007). Retrieved March 18, 2008:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/hr/docs/stress.php

Stress Directions. (2000). Personal Stress Solutions: Stress Statistics. Retrieved January
15, 2008: www.stressdirections.com/personal/about_stress/stress_statistics.html

Taggar, S. (2002). Individual creativity and group ability to utilize creative resources: A
Multilevel Model, Academy of Management Journal 45(2), 315-330

The Causes of Stress. Work Stress. Retrieved June 18, 2008:

http://www.workstress.net/causes.htm

The European Parliament resolution A4-0050/99. Retrieved January 18, 2008: http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:1999:153:SOM:EN:HTML

The Google Culture. Retrieved May 6, 2008 from

http://www.google.com/corporate/culture.html
Thorne, K., Machray, A. (2000). World Class Training, Providing Training Excellence.
Dare To Be Different, 78

Tools and templates. HSE Management Standards Indicator tool. Retrieved May 2, 2007:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/standards/downloads.htm

161
Triplett, R., Mullings, J.L., and Scarborough, K.E. (1999). Examining the effect of work-
home conflict on work-related stress among correctional officers. Journal of
Criminal Justice, Vol.27, 4, 371-385.

Tushman, M.L. and O’Reilly, C.A (1997). Winning through Innovation: A Practical
guide to leading Organizational Change and Renewal. Harvard Business School
Press, Boston. MA.

Van Harrison, R. (1978). Person-Environment Fit and Job Stress. In Cary Cooper and
Roy Payne (Eds.), Stress at Work, NY, 175-205

Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. New York: Harcourt Brace

Weisberg, RW (1993) Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius. New York: W.H. Freeman.

Wenning, W. (2004). Science for a better life. The mission statement of the Bayer group.
Retrieved July 18, 2007: www.bayer.com/en/bayer-mission-statement.pdfx

What is work-related Stress? Retrieved June 18, 2008:

http://www.workstress.net/whatis.htm, ¶.2.

Williams, J.C., and Huber, G.P. (1986). Human Behaviour in Organisations. Cincinnati.
OH: South-Western Publishing.

Wilson, D. ‘Creativity and Management’. Retrieved May 6, 2008:

http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/geographyAndEnvironment/research/Wilson%2
028%20Jun%20presentation.ppt, 5

Wong, C.S. and Pang, W.L. (2003). Barriers to creativity in the hotel industry –
perspective of managers and supervisors. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management. Volume 15, Issue. 1, 29-37

162
Woodman, R. W. Sawyer, J.E. and Griffen, R. W. (1993). Accademy of Management
Review 24, 293-321

Work-related stress and industrial relations (2001). Retrieved July 18, 2007:
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2001/11/study/tn0111109s.htm, ¶.7.

Wreath, S. (1998). Sim Teams: A decision support tool for team innovation management,
M. Applied Science Thesis, National University of Ireland, Galway.

Zaleznik, A, Kets de Vries, M., and Howard, J. (1977). Stress Reaction in Organizations:
Syndromes, Causes and Consequences. Behavioral Science, 22, 151-162.

Zammit Tabona, J. (2008) The Malta Stock Exchange Annual Report 2008, 11.

163
 APPENDIX I

THE SIX THINKING HATS AND

THEIR APPLICATION BY EDWARD DE BONO

164
THE SIX THINKING HATS AND THEIR APPLICATION BY EDWARD DE BONO

White Hat: This covers facts, figures, information, asking questions, and defining
information needs and gaps. "I think we need some white hat thinking at this point..."
means "Let's drop the arguments and proposals and look at the data base."

Red Hat: This covers intuition, feelings and emotions. The red hat allows the thinker to
put forward an intuition without any need to justify it. "Putting on my red hat, I think this
is a terrible proposal." Usually feelings and intuition can only be introduced into a
discussion if they are supported by logic. Usually the feeling is genuine but the logic is
spurious. The red hat gives full permission to a thinker to put forward his or her feelings
on the subject at that moment.

Black Hat: This is the hat of judgment and caution. It is a most valuable hat and the one
we need to use most of the time. The black hat is used to point out why a suggestion does
not fit the facts, the available experience, the system in use, or the policy that is being
followed. The black hat must always be logical.

Yellow Hat: This hat finds reasons why something will work and why it will offer
benefits. It can be used in looking forward to the results of some proposed action. It can
also be used to find something of value in what has already happened.

Green Hat: This is the hat of creativity, alternatives, proposals, what is interesting,
provocations, and changes.

Blue Hat: This is the overview or process control hat. It looks not at the subject itself but
at the thinking about the subject. "Putting on my blue hat, I feel we should do some
greener hat thinking at this point." In technical terms, the blue hat is concerned with
meta-cognition.

An individual can ask another individual to put on or take off a particular color of hat.
For example, if someone is being very negative about an idea, the other person might say:
"That is great black hat thinking, now let's try some yellow hat thinking." In this way a
switch is made immediately and without offense.

An individual can express his or her thoughts under the protection of one or the other
hats. For example, someone might say: "Wearing my red hat, I think that idea is exciting.
I cannot tell you exactly why, but I have that feeling about it." Someone else might
preface a negative input by declaring that some black hat thinking is needed.

An individual can ask a whole group to adopt a hat for a limited period of time. For
example, at a meeting someone might suggest: "What we need here is three minutes of
green hat thinking."

I am not suggesting that in every moment in thinking there is a need to wear one of the
hats. The hats provide an opportunity to switch thinking. In the course of an ordinary

165
discussion someone might say: "Let's have three minutes of black hat thinking here." At
the end of the three minutes, the discussion would resume as before.

Sometimes it is possible to put together a formal sequence of hats in order to think

productively about some matter. The actual order of the sequence will vary with the
situation. For example, with a new matter, the sequence might be: white (to get
information); green (for ideas and proposals); yellow followed by black on each
alternative (to evaluate the alternatives); red (to assess feelings at this point); followed by
blue (to decide what thinking to do next). On the other hand, in discussing a well known
proposal, the sequence might run: red, yellow, black, green (to overcome the negative
points), white, and then blue.

The Six Hats System is not directly a creative technique, but it makes time and space for
creativity. Many people ask me how they can introduce creativity at a particular level if
the whole corporate culture does not encourage creativity. The Six Thinking Hats system
is a specific way of doing this. Once creativity is there as an expectation and a demand,
people will notice that they are not very good at it-and may try to get better.

166
 APPENDIX II

DEFINITION OF STRESS BY MSE EMPLOYEES

167
DEFINITION OF STRESS BY MSE EMPLOYEES:

Stress for me is not being able to cope with situation – when something gets
out of my control! Having said that – it is very rare for me to get stressed
out! I leave that up to my husband!
L1, F, 34

For me stress is something which is very powerful because if one is under

stress everything he or she does is affected by it. Stress is something which
intervenes between you normal routine and puts you into a bad mood. Stress
is not easy to cope with because usually people do not realise that they are
under stress. Symptoms of stress for me are usually headaches, feeling of not
being able to cope with changes that take place, angry inside and also feeling
very nervous. Stress is caused by problems at work or at home and also this
hectic life leads to a lot of stress.
L1, F, 21

Stress can be of both types – physical and mental stress. Stress results when
a person in working under extreme conditions i.e. hard physical work for
long periods of time or in the case of mental stress working / being under
mental pressure and a lot of tension for long periods of time. Being under
such conditions results in stress but not everyone is affected the same. In my
opinion mental stress is more severe than physical stress.
L1, M, 26

When I think of stress, the negative aspect of stress comes to my mind i.e.:

 Panic, anxiety, exams and lot of study- personally these are the only
things which stress me most because you’ll have a lot of work which
needs to be done until certain deadlines. I would prefer to study in a
more flexible and unlimited time and be examined by other means rather

168
 than exams… at work and even when you are studying I prefer to get
involved in teams where everyone would forward his suggestions. Do
this research and where opinions are discussed. I think this is a better
way of how I learn and less stressful and it would be fun for me.
 Very hectic lifestyle/Unrest mind/Lack of sleep
 Annoying sensation trying to do a lot of things very quickly and with a
high probability of getting involved in an accident
 Depression

However there is also good stress which would boost you to get involved in
the things you need to do and work accordingly. It is thus important to
control your stress and find the breakeven point.
L1, F, 27

There is the good stress and the bad one. Stress is needed to some degree in
our daily lives. The important thing is that we know how to control it and
learn to say no to excessive demands. Excessive stress can be very
unhealthy for us so it is important to keep a balance between work and
relaxation. Balance is the secret to a healthy life. Learning means of how to
cope in stressful situations will prove very beneficial for the individual (E.g.
Deep Breathing – during stressful events we tend to breathe very shallow
resulting in extra tension in the body and mind. Deep breathing will help to
reduce stress by increasing the level of oxygen and will help the body to
regain homeostasis).
L1, F, 30

Stress for me is: Working in a section where you’re continuously giving your
effort and not receiving any feedback/consideration.
L1, F, 38

169
For me stress is when I have to answer frustrating clients because lack of
efficiency produced from the section that I work in, not because I or my
other colleagues in the same section do not perform out best but the reason
for the inefficiency it is dependant on other factors for example lack of
human resources to be able to work and undertake the work to be done in the
most resourceful manner. To conclude what makes me stressful is, knowing
that this can be arranged but due to bureaucracy or lack of interest from
others this will not be changed.
L1, F, 26

170
 APPENDIX III

QUESTIONNAIRE

171
 QUESTIONNAIRE:

Please read carefully before you proceed with the questionnaire:

The questionnaire presented is designed to identify how your work meets your
emotional needs and if your work environment promotes a fertile ground for
creativity to develop. These two factors will be investigated and for the scope of this
study it will be determined if a correlation exists.

The questionnaire is optional but you are encouraged to complete it in order to

determine how the general feel at work is concerning your work and the
organisation. This will enable the researcher to identify whether the right conditions
are being met for creativity to emerge and at the same time to identify factors that
hinder creativity, mainly stress, will be also investigated.

This questionnaire is anonymous, therefore no personal information that could

identify you will be asked. But please state which level you pertain to within the
organisation including gender and age. This will assist the study to go further in-
depth when data analysis takes place. Your collaboration is greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Mark Level 1 if your rank is between: Clerk A to Manager 1

Mark Level 2 if your rank is between: Manager 2 to CEO

Level 1
Level 2
Gender (m/f)
Age

The statements are scored from 1 to 5 with 1 being ‘completely agree’ and 5
being ‘completely disagree’. Tick the one which you feel best meets how you
feel.

1 2 3 4 5
1 OPERATIONS MANAGERS ARE SEEN MORE TALKING TO THEIR STAFF THAN STAYING IN THEIR
OFFICE
2 STAFF FIND IT EASY TO EXPRESS POSITIVELY AND/OR NEGATIVELY REGARDING NEW IDEAS
3 MANAGERS ALWAYS FIND WAYS TO RESOURCE GOOD PEOPLE TO PROGRESS GOOD IDEAS
4 OUR ORGANISATION PUBLICLY REWARDS THE LEARNING AND EFFORT THAT GO INTO
CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION EVEN WHEN THESE FAIL
5 THE MANAGERS DELEGATE AND FUNCTION MORE AS FACILITATORS RATHER THAN DECISION
MAKERS
6 MANAGERS DELEGATE OPPORTUNITIES FAIRLY AMONGST SUBORDINATES
7 MANAGERS PROVIDE CONTINUOUS FEEDBACK TO THEIR SUBORDINATES HOW THEIR QUALITIES
WILL LEAD/HAVE LEAD TO POSITIVE CHANGES
8 THE ORGANISATION IS RECEPTIVE TO NEW CREATIVE IDEAS
9 CREATIVITY, INNOVATION AND IDEAS ARE EMPHASIZED IN STAFF MEMBERS’ DISCUSSIONS
10 STAFF MEMBERS KNOW WHERE TO ADDRESS THEIR IDEAS

172
11 OUR ORGANISATION UNDERTAKES PERIODIC IDEA GENERATION EXERCISES IN ORDER TO
STIMULATE THE CLIMATE FOR CREATIVITY
12 OUR STAFF SAY THEY ARE ALWAYS LEARNING NEW THINGS IN OUR ORGANISATION
13 OUR ORGANIZATION’S CULTURE IS A MAJOR ADVANTAGE IN ATTRACTING AND RETAINING
GOOD STAFF
14 OUR ORGANIZATION’S CULTURE ENCOURAGES ALL STAFF TO CONSTANTLY SEEK AND TEST
BETTER WAYS OF DOING THINGS
15 IT IS EASY TO CHALLENGE THE WAY THINGS ARE NORMALLY DONE IN OUR ORGANISATION
16 WE TREAT OUR COLLEAGUES WITH RESPECT, ADMIRATION AND COOPERATION
17 PEOPLE ARE HAPPY WORKING IN OUR ORGANISATION
18 THERE IS ALMOST NO BACKBITING IN OUR ORGANISATION
19 WE HAVE VERY FEW RULES THAT REQUIRE COMPLIANCE
20 KNOWLEDGE, EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS ARE THE MAIN INGREDIENTS TO MOVE UP THE
LADDER IN THE ORGANISATION
21 OUR ORGANISATION HAS A CLEAR STRATEGIC VISION THAT STAFF KNOW AND SHARE
22 THE COMPANY’S MISSION STATEMENT IS CLEAR THROUGHOUT ALL MANAGEMENT LEVELS
23 STRATEGIC MEASURES ARE SHARED OFTEN WITH ALL STAFF TO ASSESS PROGRESS TOWARDS
THE STRATEGIC VISION
24 THE COMPANY IS MORE INTERESTED IN BEING REACTIVE THAN PROACTIVE
25 SHOULD THE OCCASION ARISES YOU WOULD CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYMENT
26 THE COMPANY SUPPORTS YOUR PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE ORGANISATION
27 OUR STAFF ARE MOTIVATED BY THE VISION OF THE ORGANISATION
28 MOST STAFF MEET DAILY IN AN INFORMAL SPACE SUCH AS CANTEEN
29 INFORMAL NETWORKING TAKES PLACE AMONG DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS IN THE
ORGANISATION
30 THERE IS SUFFICIENT SLACK TIME FOR PEOPLE TO TAKE TIME TO THINK AND EXPLORE IDEAS
31 MANAGERS SHOW THEIR APPRECIATION TO STAFF FOR THEIR EFFORTS, SMALL TRIUMPHS AND
MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS.
32 MY COMPANY PROVIDES FUNDS FOR ‘CREATIVE THINKING’ COURSES
33 TEAM CREATIVITY IS PROMOTED IN MY ORGANISATION
34 MY WORKING ENVIRONMENT PROMOTES A CREATIVE SETTING
35 PERSONAL INTERNET ACCESS IS AVAILABLE IN MY COMPANY
36 LIBRARY WITH VARIETY OF BOOKS AND E-BOOKS IS AVAILABLE AT WORK
37 RELAXATION AREAS ARE AVAILABLE IN OUR COMPANY
38 I AM CLEAR WHAT IS EXPECTED OF ME AT WORK
39 I CAN DECIDE WHEN TO TAKE A BREAK
40 DIFFERENT TASKS ARE DEMANDED FROM ME THAT ARE HARD TO COMBINE
41 I KNOW HOW TO GO ABOUT GETTING MY JOB DONE
42 I AM SUBJECT TO PERSONAL HARASSMENT IN THE FORM OF UNKIND WORDS OR BEHAVIOUR
43 I HAVE UNACHIEVABLE DEADLINES
44 IF WORKS GETS DIFFICULT, MY COLLEAGUES WILL HELP ME
45 I AM GIVEN SUPPORTIVE FEEDBACK ON THE WORK I DO
46 I HAVE TO WORK VERY INTENSIVELY
47 I HAVE A SAY IN MY OWN WORK SPEED
48 I AM CLEAR WHAT MY DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ARE
49 I HAVE TO NEGLECT SOME TASKS BECAUSE I HAVE TOO MUCH TO DO
50 I AM CLEAR ABOUT THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR MY DEPARTMENT

173
51 THERE IS FRICTION OR ANGER BETWEEN COLLEAGUES
52 I HAVE A CHOICE IN DECIDING HOW I DO MY WORK
53 I AM UNABLE TO TAKE SUFFICIENT BREAKS
54 I UNDERSTAND HOW MY WORK FITS INTO THE OVERALL AIM OF THE ORGANISATION
55 I AM PRESSURED TO WORK LONG HOURS
56 I HAVE A CHOICE IN DECIDING WHAT I DO AT WORK
57 I HAVE TO WORK VERY FAST
58 I AM SUBJECT TO BULLYING AT WORK
59 I HAVE UNREALISTIC TIME PRESSURES
60 I CAN RELY ON MY LINE MANAGER TO HELP ME OUT WITH A WORK PROBLEM
61 I GET HELP AND SUPPORT I NEED FROM COLLEAGUES
62 I HAVE SOME SAY OVER THE WAY I WORK
63 I HAVE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO QUESTION MANAGERS ABOUT CHANGE AT WORK
64 I RECEIVE THE RESPECT AT WORK I DESERVE FROM MY COLLEAGUES
65 STAFF ARE ALWAYS CONSULTED ABOUT CHANGE AT WORK
66 I CAN TALK TO MY LINE MANAGER ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAS UPSET OR ANNOYED ME ABOUT
WORK
67 MY WORKING TIME CAN BE FLEXIBLE
68 MY COLLEAGUES ARE WILLING TO LISTEN TO YOUR WORK-RELATED PROBLEMS
69 WHEN CHANGES ARE MADE AT WORK, I AM CLEAR HOW THEY WILL WORK OUT IN PRACTICE
70 I AM SUPPORTED THROUGH EMOTIONALLY DEMANDING WORK
71 RELATIONSHIPS AT WORK ARE STRAINED
72 MY LINE MANAGER ENCOURAGES ME AT WORK (PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT)

What stress you out at work?

174
 APPENDIX IV

TE HAIHAU INNOVATION AUDIT PRACTICES

175
 © Te Kaihau – The Windeaters – 2004

Innovation Audit for the Public Sector

Choose all or part of your organisation to assess for innovativeness.

Quite True
Very true
Tick the column that most accurately describes your organisation.

Untrue
Follow the instructions to find the percentage of your innovative
potential being achieved by your organisation.

Leadership
1. Managers spend more time out of their office talking to staff than in their
office
2. Staff often talk about the level of positive, “can do” support for new ideas

3. Managers always find ways to resource good people to progress good

ideas
4. Our organisation publicly celebrates the learning and effort that go into
innovations even when they fail
5. Responsibility, authority and resources for projects is passed to staff –
the manager’s input is to be a buffer with the organisation, a good
sounding board, an enthusiast, and to check on progress.
6. Managers reflect back to people how their qualities will lead to positive
change
Resources
7. The people who are most knowledgeable about the task or challenge
make most of the resource allocation decisions.
8. Our organisation has an internal seed venture capital fund, discretionary
fund or other process that can be used to resource staff to progress
innovative ideas.

Innovation Experience
9. At least 20% of staff have had a significant impact on developing or
adopting an innovation (new to the world, country, sector or organisation)
in the last two years.
10. Our organisation has achieved more innovations (new to the world,
country or sector) than other similar organisations in the last two years.
11. Our staff say they are always learning new things in our organisation

Creativity and Idea Generation

12. Our staff can always suggest many ways to solve problems

13. We prefer to employ people who expand our range of experiences and
perspectives, than narrow specialists.
14. We carefully separate the process of generating ideas and being creative
from making decisions and judgements.
 © Te Kaihau – The Windeaters – 2004

Goals, Measures and Strategy

15. Our organisation has a clear strategic vision that staff know and share

16. Most staff have fewer than six measures that they use to assess the
performance of the organisation and their role in it.
17. Strategic measures are shared often with all staff to assess progress
towards the strategic vision.
18. The strategic measures very closely reflect the true purpose of the
organisation.
19. We are more interested in achieving outcomes than outputs

New Project Development

20. Project champions, whether they are appointed or self selected, are
committed to making their projects happen.
21. We have a clear process for developing new ideas.

22. Once a project has been decided on, it develops rapidly.

23. We are good at pulling together all of the skills and influencers from both
within and without our organisation to develop projects.
24. Project champions get the full support of senior managers at critical
stages in the project.

Staff Management
25. Our staff turnover rate is less than 15% per year.

26. There is no separate HR department.

27. Our staff are motivated by the vision of the organisation.

28. Most staff meet daily in an informal space such as a tearoom.

29. There are rich personal networks that cross department boundaries within
our organisation
30. There are formal 2-way communication pathways for management to
inform staff and staff to inform management at least once a month.
31. There is sufficient slack time for people to take time to think and explore
ideas.
32. Our managers are good at showing their appreciation to staff for their
efforts, small triumphs and major accomplishments.
Bureaucracy
33. Decisions are made rapidly.

34. Front line staff often make decisions that in small ways influence the
strategic direction of the organisation.
35. The organisation’s formal controls and measures are only for those things
that significantly affect the organisation achieving its vision.
 © Te Kaihau – The Windeaters – 2004

36. Staff departments (such as HR, legal, PR, administrative services,

advisory, finance, information systems and audit) act as assistants to, not
overseers of, line departments (who are responsible for achieving the
major goals of the organisation).
37. Current or recent practitioners develop our policy.

38. Accountability is mainly achieved through well-managed human dynamics

rather than written reporting and controls.

Ethics and Values

39. People trust the decisions made by our organisation because of our
reputation for integrity.
40. Staff are guided by the values of the organisation in their daily work.

Organisation Culture
41. Our organisation’s culture is a major advantage in attracting and retaining
good staff.
42. Our organisation’s culture encourages all staff to constantly seek and test
better ways of doing things.
43. It is easy to challenge the way things are normally done in our
organisation
44. We treat our colleagues with respect, admiration and cooperation.

45. People laugh and smile a lot in our organisation.

46. There is almost no backbiting in our organisation.

47. We have very few rules that require compliance.

48. It is more important to make an impact as opportunities arise than to be

consistent.
49. Our staff focus is on the users of our services rather than internally.

Challenging Environment
50. We face a challenging environment that demands innovative solutions.

Count the number of ticks in each column

Multiply the number of ticks by the score and enter in the column below
2 1 0
Total score for each column

Innovation Percentage (Add row above) %

©Deb Gilbertson (2004)

 APPENDIX V

AUTHORITY TO USE

MALTA STOCK EXCHANGE PLC AS SUBJECT FOR THIS STUDY

179
 MALTA STOCK EXCHANGE pI.
Garrison Chapel, Castille Place,
Valletta VLT 1063,
Malta

Tel: +355 21244051

Fax: +356 2569 6316
E-mail : b or za@b or zamalta. com. mt
Website : www .borzamalta.com.mt

Company Registration No: C 42525

25 luly 2008

Tq WHou It l4nx CoryqrRnl

DrssrRTATrorrt - Hn Axrxct*y C*nstlttA

This is to confirm that Mr Anthony Cardona holder of ID Card No. 200386(M) is

authorized to use Malta Stock Exchange plc as the subJect organisation with regards
to his Masters Degree Dissertation "stress vs Creativity: A Corporate Perspective',
and is hereby authorized to use the name of Malta Stock Exchange plc as
appropriate.

,,.'t't'-t/

Eileen V Muscat
General Manager

Mr A Cardona

Licensed bv the Matta Finnnciat seroicurirr'#;Hr!:ro:#:fr:U seroices of a regutated market

 APPENDIX VI

AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT QUESTIONNAIRE

DURING OFFICE WORKING HOURS

181
----- Original Message -----
From: Claire Debono
To: Mr Joe Zammit Tabona ; maguillaumier@borzamalta.com.mt ; Eileen V Muscat ; Simon
Zammit ; rvbaldacchino@borzamalta.com.mt ; alfred sammut ; Martalin Zahra ; Elizabeth Mousu ;
scritien@borzamalta.com.mt ; Therese Amato Cachia ; cazzopardi@borzamalta.com.mt ; Denise
Abela ; Robert Sammut ; Melissa Farrugia ; sciantar@borzamalta.com.mt ;
gcassar@borzamalta.com.mt ; Stephanie Galea ; eaquilina@borzamalta.com.mt ; Caroline
Camilleri ; Marica Farrugia ; ccmangion@borzamalta.com.mt ; Janice Sultana ; Claire Debono ;
mcordina@borzamalta.com.mt ; Joanne Camilleri ; melissa mamo ; Amanda Mizzi ;
icarabott@borzamalta.com.mt ; Berta Magri ; Leslie Farrugia ; Anthony Cardona ; Arabella
Micallef ; mamuscat@borzamalta.com.mt ; Miriam Azzopardi ; jpattard@borzamalta.com.mt ;
Mark Borg Cardona ; Elaine Paris ; Manuel ; claire cassar ; Alexander Pace
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 8:04 AM
Subject: TO ALL STAFF

To All Staff

MBA - Questionnaire

Mr Anthony Cardona, Manager I, is currently completing a dissertation

for an MBA degree and would appreciate some assistance from
colleagues by completing a questionnaire he will be circulating shortly.

Eileen V Muscat
General Manager

182
 APPENDIX VII

CRITICAL VALUES FOR THE PEARSON R

183
CRITICAL VALUES FOR THE PEARSON R CORRELATION COEFFICIENT:

DF (N - 2) CRITICAL VALUE
(5% certainty)

1 .98769
2 .90000
3 .8054
4 .7293
5 .6694
6 .6215
7 .5822
8 .5494
9 .5214
10 .4973
11 .4762
12 .4575
13 .4409
14 .4259
15 .4124
16 .4000
17 .3887
18 .3783
19 .3687
20 .3598
25 .3233
30 .2960
35 .2746
40 .2573
45 .2428
50 .2306
60 .2108
70 .1954
80 .1829
90 .1726
100 .1638

184
 APPENDIX VIII

STATISTICAL EVALUATIONS

185
All Factors
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
1 Operations managers are seen more talking to their staff than staying in their office 1 1 6 15 10 5 3.32 2.6 2.7 16.2 40.5 27.0 13.5
2 staff find it easy to express positively and/or negatively regarding new ideas 1 5 9 10 6 7 3.03 2.6 13.5 24.3 27.0 16.2 18.9
3 Managers always find ways to resource good people to progress good ideas 1 3 6 12 8 8 3.32 2.6 8.1 16.2 32.4 21.6 21.6
4 Our organisation publicly rewards the learning and effort that go into creativity and innovation even when these fail 1 0 1 9 12 15 4.11 2.6 0.0 2.7 24.3 32.4 40.5
5 The managers delegate and function more as facilitators rather than decision makers 1 7 5 11 6 8 3.08 2.6 18.9 13.5 29.7 16.2 21.6
6 Managers delegate opportunities fairly amongst subordinates 1 4 8 13 9 3 2.97 2.6 10.8 21.6 35.1 24.3 8.1
7 Managers provide continuous feedback to their subordinates how their qualities will lead/have lead to positive changes 1 3 6 12 8 8 3.32 2.6 8.1 16.2 32.4 21.6 21.6
8 The organisation is receptive to new creative ideas 4 1 7 8 13 5 3.41 10.5 2.9 20.6 23.5 38.2 14.7
9 Creativity, innovation and ideas are emphasized in staff members' discussions 1 1 7 6 11 12 3.70 2.6 2.7 18.9 16.2 29.7 32.4
10 Staff members know where to address their ideas 1 3 6 11 10 7 3.32 2.6 8.1 16.2 29.7 27.0 18.9
11 Our organisation undertakes periodic idea generation exercised in order to stimulate the climate for creativity 1 0 1 5 16 15 4.22 2.6 0.0 2.7 13.5 43.2 40.5
12 Our staff say they are always learning new things in our organisation 1 0 5 8 11 13 3.86 2.6 0.0 13.5 21.6 29.7 35.1
13 Our organization's culture is a major advantage in attracting and retaining good staff 1 0 4 9 11 13 3.89 2.6 0.0 10.8 24.3 29.7 35.1
14 Our organization's culture encourages all staff to constantly seek and test better ways of doing things 1 2 7 5 16 7 3.51 2.6 5.4 18.9 13.5 43.2 18.9
15 It is easy to challenge the way things are normally done in our organisation 1 0 4 11 10 12 3.81 2.6 0.0 10.8 29.7 27.0 32.4
16 We treat our colleagues with respect, admiration and cooperation 1 3 11 11 8 4 2.97 2.6 8.1 29.7 29.7 21.6 10.8
17 People are happy working in our organisation 1 0 5 12 7 13 3.76 2.6 0.0 13.5 32.4 18.9 35.1
18 There is almost no backbiting in our organisation 3 1 3 7 11 13 3.91 7.9 2.9 8.6 20.0 31.4 37.1
19 We have very few rules that require compliance 2 0 3 17 10 6 3.53 5.3 0.0 8.3 47.2 27.8 16.7
20 Knowledge, experience and qualifications are the main ingredients to move up the ladder in the organisation 1 1 9 7 8 12 3.57 2.6 2.7 24.3 18.9 21.6 32.4
21 Our organisation has a clear strategic vision that staff know and share 1 1 3 11 11 11 3.76 2.6 2.7 8.1 29.7 29.7 29.7
22 the company's mission statement is clear throughout all management levels 1 0 5 6 13 13 3.92 2.6 0.0 13.5 16.2 35.1 35.1
23 Strategic measures are shared often with all staff to assess progress towards the strategic vision 3 0 4 8 14 9 3.80 7.9 0.0 11.4 22.9 40.0 25.7
24 The company is more interested in being reactive than proactive 2 7 9 12 3 5 2.72 5.3 19.4 25.0 33.3 8.3 13.9
25 Should the occasion arises you would consider alternative employment 2 11 5 13 6 1 2.47 5.3 30.6 13.9 36.1 16.7 2.8
26 The company supports your personal development in the organisation 2 0 9 11 10 6 3.36 5.3 0.0 25.0 30.6 27.8 16.7
27 Our staff are motivated by the vision of the organisation 2 0 3 7 10 16 4.08 5.3 0.0 8.3 19.4 27.8 44.4
28 Most staff meet daily in an informal space such as canteen 1 5 8 7 5 12 3.30 2.6 13.5 21.6 18.9 13.5 32.4
29 Informal networking takes place among different departments in the organisation 1 0 11 9 11 6 3.32 2.6 0.0 29.7 24.3 29.7 16.2
30 There is sufficient slack time for people to take time to think and explore ideas 1 2 5 12 8 10 3.51 2.6 5.4 13.5 32.4 21.6 27.0
31 Managers show their appreciation to staff for the efforts, small triumphs and major accomplishments 1 2 8 13 6 8 3.27 2.6 5.4 21.6 35.1 16.2 21.6
32 My company provides funds for 'creative thinking' courses 3 1 2 9 5 18 4.06 7.9 2.9 5.7 25.7 14.3 51.4
33 Team creativity is promoted in my organisation 1 1 4 8 9 15 3.89 2.6 2.7 10.8 21.6 24.3 40.5
34 My working environment promotes a creative setting 2 0 4 12 8 12 3.78 5.3 0.0 11.1 33.3 22.2 33.3
35 Personal internet access is available in my company 1 7 8 10 4 8 2.95 2.6 18.9 21.6 27.0 10.8 21.6
36 Library with variety of books and e-books is available at work 1 1 1 5 6 24 4.38 2.6 2.7 2.7 13.5 16.2 64.9
37 Relaxation areas are available in our company 1 1 1 4 7 24 4.41 2.6 2.7 2.7 10.8 18.9 64.9
38 I am clear what is expected of me at work 1 8 10 9 9 1 2.59 2.6 21.6 27.0 24.3 24.3 2.7
39 I can decide when to take a break 1 8 10 12 3 4 2.59 2.6 21.6 27.0 32.4 8.1 10.8
40 Different tasks are demanded from me that are hard to combine 1 5 9 16 6 1 2.70 2.6 13.5 24.3 43.2 16.2 2.7
41 I know how to go about getting my job done 1 14 19 3 1 0 1.76 2.6 37.8 51.4 8.1 2.7 0.0
42 I am subject to personal harassment in the form of unkind words or behaviour 1 2 2 1 13 19 4.22 2.6 5.4 5.4 2.7 35.1 51.4
43 I have unachievable deadlines 1 3 5 8 10 11 3.57 2.6 8.1 13.5 21.6 27.0 29.7
44 If works get difficult, my colleagues will help me 1 17 11 5 1 3 1.97 2.6 45.9 29.7 13.5 2.7 8.1
45 I am given supportive feedback on the work I do 1 5 13 10 6 3 2.70 2.6 13.5 35.1 27.0 16.2 8.1
46 I have to work very intensively 2 11 12 9 4 0 2.17 5.3 30.6 33.3 25.0 11.1 0.0
47 I have a say in my own work speed 2 5 12 16 2 1 2.50 5.3 13.9 33.3 44.4 5.6 2.8
48 I am clear what my duties and responsibilities are 1 10 16 8 2 1 2.14 2.6 27.0 43.2 21.6 5.4 2.7
49 I have to neglect some tasks because I have too much to do 1 5 8 10 11 3 2.97 2.6 13.5 21.6 27.0 29.7 8.1
50 I am clear about the goals and objectives for my department 1 8 13 8 6 2 2.49 2.6 21.6 35.1 21.6 16.2 5.4
51 There is friction or anger between colleagues 1 7 7 12 5 6 2.89 2.6 18.9 18.9 32.4 13.5 16.2
52 I have a choice in deciding how I do my work 2 6 16 11 2 1 2.33 5.3 16.7 44.4 30.6 5.6 2.8
53 I am unable to take sufficient breaks 1 5 6 11 8 7 3.16 2.6 13.5 16.2 29.7 21.6 18.9
54 I understand how my work fits into the overall aim of the organisation 2 9 14 11 1 1 2.19 5.3 25.0 38.9 30.6 2.8 2.8
55 I am pressured to work long hours 1 1 6 4 12 14 3.86 2.6 2.7 16.2 10.8 32.4 37.8
56 I have a choice in deciding what I do at work 1 1 9 12 7 8 3.32 2.6 2.7 24.3 32.4 18.9 21.6
57 I have to work very fast 1 4 6 19 6 2 2.89 2.6 10.8 16.2 51.4 16.2 5.4
58 I am subject to bullying at work 1 4 1 3 3 26 4.24 2.6 10.8 2.7 8.1 8.1 70.3
59 I have unrealistic time pressures 2 2 1 12 10 11 3.75 5.3 5.6 2.8 33.3 27.8 30.6
60 I can rely on my line manager to help me out with a work problem 1 19 3 8 5 2 2.14 2.6 51.4 8.1 21.6 13.5 5.4
61 I get help and support I need from colleagues 1 19 7 8 1 2 1.92 2.6 51.4 18.9 21.6 2.7 5.4
62 I have some say over the way I work 1 8 16 9 3 1 2.27 2.6 21.6 43.2 24.3 8.1 2.7
63 I have sufficient opportunities to question managers about change at work 1 5 6 10 11 5 3.14 2.6 13.5 16.2 27.0 29.7 13.5
64 I receive the respect at work I deserve from my colleagues 1 12 11 6 5 3 2.35 2.6 32.4 29.7 16.2 13.5 8.1
65 Staff is always consulted about change at work 1 2 6 7 7 15 3.73 2.6 5.4 16.2 18.9 18.9 40.5
66 I can talk to my line manager about something that has upset or annoyed me about work 1 13 10 7 2 5 2.35 2.6 35.1 27.0 18.9 5.4 13.5
67 My working time can be flexible 3 5 8 7 5 10 3.20 7.9 14.3 22.9 20.0 14.3 28.6
68 My colleagues are willing to listen to my work-related problems 1 14 13 6 3 1 2.03 2.6 37.8 35.1 16.2 8.1 2.7
69 When changes are made at work, I am clear how they will work out in practice 1 3 4 11 10 9 3.49 2.6 8.1 10.8 29.7 27.0 24.3
70 I am supported trough emotionally demanding work 1 3 7 14 7 6 3.16 2.6 8.1 18.9 37.8 18.9 16.2
71 Relationships at work are strained 1 7 5 14 10 1 2.81 2.6 18.9 13.5 37.8 27.0 2.7
72 My line manager encourages me at work (personal development) 1 5 14 7 6 5 2.78 2.6 13.5 37.8 18.9 16.2 13.5
94 329 519 680 540 574 3.19 3.4 12.4 19.6 25.8 20.5 21.7

No. of records 38
Questions pertaining to Creativity
Questions pertaining to Stress
* Average of non-zero responses only
** 0 denotes no response, 1 to 5 deontes completely agree to completely disagree
CREATIVITY - Categorised by Factor
LEADERSHIP
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
1 Operations managers are seen more talking to their staff than staying in their office 1 1 6 15 10 5 3.32 2.6 2.7 16.2 40.5 27.0 13.5
2 staff find it easy to express positively and/or negatively regarding new ideas 1 5 9 10 6 7 3.03 2.6 13.5 24.3 27.0 16.2 18.9
3 Managers always find ways to resource good people to progress good ideas 1 3 6 12 8 8 3.32 2.6 8.1 16.2 32.4 21.6 21.6
4 Our organisation publicly rewards the learning and effort that go into creativity and innovation even when these fail 1 0 1 9 12 15 4.11 2.6 0.0 2.7 24.3 32.4 40.5
5 The managers delegate and function more as facilitators rather than decision makers 1 7 5 11 6 8 3.08 2.6 18.9 13.5 29.7 16.2 21.6
6 Managers delegate opportunities fairly amongst subordinates 1 4 8 13 9 3 2.97 2.6 10.8 21.6 35.1 24.3 8.1
7 Managers provide continuous feedback to their subordinates how their qualities will lead/have lead to positive changes 1 3 6 12 8 8 3.32 2.6 8.1 16.2 32.4 21.6 21.6
7 23 41 82 59 54 3.31 2.6 8.9 15.8 31.7 22.8 20.8

CREATIVITY WITHIN THE ORGANISATION

Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
8 The organisation is receptive to new creative ideas 4 1 7 8 13 5 3.41 10.5 2.9 20.6 23.5 38.2 14.7
9 Creativity, innovation and ideas are emphasized in staff members' discussions 1 1 7 6 11 12 3.70 2.6 2.7 18.9 16.2 29.7 32.4
10 Staff members know where to address their ideas 1 3 6 11 10 7 3.32 2.6 8.1 16.2 29.7 27.0 18.9
11 Our organisation undertakes periodic idea generation exercised in order to stimulate the climate for creativity 1 0 1 5 16 15 4.22 2.6 0.0 2.7 13.5 43.2 40.5
12 Our staff say they are always learning new things in our organisation 1 0 5 8 11 13 3.86 2.6 0.0 13.5 21.6 29.7 35.1
8 5 26 38 61 52 3.70 4.2 2.8 14.4 20.9 33.6 28.3

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
13 Our organization's culture is a major advantage in attracting and retaining good staff 1 0 4 9 11 13 3.89 2.6 0.0 10.8 24.3 29.7 35.1
14 Our organization's culture encourages all staff to constantly seek and test better ways of doing things 1 2 7 5 16 7 3.51 2.6 5.4 18.9 13.5 43.2 18.9
15 It is easy to challenge the way things are normally done in our organisation 1 0 4 11 10 12 3.81 2.6 0.0 10.8 29.7 27.0 32.4
16 We treat our colleagues with respect, admiration and cooperation 1 3 11 11 8 4 2.97 2.6 8.1 29.7 29.7 21.6 10.8
17 People are happy working in our organisation 1 0 5 12 7 13 3.76 2.6 0.0 13.5 32.4 18.9 35.1
18 There is almost no backbiting in our organisation 3 1 3 7 11 13 3.91 7.9 2.9 8.6 20.0 31.4 37.1
19 We have very few rules that require compliance 2 0 3 17 10 6 3.53 5.3 0.0 8.3 47.2 27.8 16.7
20 Knowledge, experience and qualifications are the main ingredients to move up the ladder in the organisation 1 1 9 7 8 12 3.57 2.6 2.7 24.3 18.9 21.6 32.4
11 7 46 79 81 80 3.62 3.6 2.4 15.6 27.0 27.7 27.3

GOALS MEASURE AND STRATEGY

Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
21 Our organisation has a clear strategic vision that staff know and share 1 1 3 11 11 11 3.76 2.6 2.7 8.1 29.7 29.7 29.7
22 the company's mission statement is clear throughout all management levels 1 0 5 6 13 13 3.92 2.6 0.0 13.5 16.2 35.1 35.1
23 Strategic measures are shared often with all staff to assess progress towards the strategic vision 3 0 4 8 14 9 3.80 7.9 0.0 11.4 22.9 40.0 25.7
24 The company is more interested in being reactive than proactive 2 7 9 12 3 5 2.72 5.3 19.4 25.0 33.3 8.3 13.9
7 8 21 37 41 38 3.55 4.6 5.5 14.5 25.5 28.3 26.1

STAFF DEVELOPMENT
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
25 Should the occasion arises you would consider alternative employment 2 11 5 13 6 1 2.47 5.3 30.6 13.9 36.1 16.7 2.8
26 The company supports your personal development in the organisation 2 0 9 11 10 6 3.36 5.3 0.0 25.0 30.6 27.8 16.7
27 Our staff are motivated by the vision of the organisation 2 0 3 7 10 16 4.08 5.3 0.0 8.3 19.4 27.8 44.4
28 Most staff meet daily in an informal space such as canteen 1 5 8 7 5 12 3.30 2.6 13.5 21.6 18.9 13.5 32.4
29 Informal networking takes place among different departments in the organisation 1 0 11 9 11 6 3.32 2.6 0.0 29.7 24.3 29.7 16.2
30 There is sufficient slack time for people to take time to think and explore ideas 1 2 5 12 8 10 3.51 2.6 5.4 13.5 32.4 21.6 27.0
31 Managers show their appreciation to staff for the efforts, small triumphs and major accomplishments 1 2 8 13 6 8 3.27 2.6 5.4 21.6 35.1 16.2 21.6
10 20 49 72 56 59 3.33 3.8 7.8 19.1 28.1 21.9 23.0

RESOURCES PROMOTING CREATIVITY

Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
32 My company provides funds for 'creative thinking' courses 3 1 2 9 5 18 4.06 7.9 2.9 5.7 25.7 14.3 51.4
33 Team creativity is promoted in my organisation 1 1 4 8 9 15 3.89 2.6 2.7 10.8 21.6 24.3 40.5
34 My working environment promotes a creative setting 2 0 4 12 8 12 3.78 5.3 0.0 11.1 33.3 22.2 33.3
35 Personal internet access is available in my company 1 7 8 10 4 8 2.95 2.6 18.9 21.6 27.0 10.8 21.6
36 Library with variety of books and e-books is available at work 1 1 1 5 6 24 4.38 2.6 2.7 2.7 13.5 16.2 64.9
37 Relaxation areas are available in our company 1 1 1 4 7 24 4.41 2.6 2.7 2.7 10.8 18.9 64.9
9 11 20 48 39 101 3.91 3.9 5.0 9.1 22.0 17.8 46.1
STRESS - Categorised by Factor
DEMANDS
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
40 Different tasks are demanded from me that are hard to combine 1 5 9 16 6 1 2.70 2.6 13.5 24.3 43.2 16.2 2.7
43 I have unachievable deadlines 1 3 5 8 10 11 3.57 2.6 8.1 13.5 21.6 27.0 29.7
46 I have to work very intensively 2 11 12 9 4 0 2.17 5.3 30.6 33.3 25.0 11.1 0.0
49 I have to neglect some tasks because I have too much to do 1 5 8 10 11 3 2.97 2.6 13.5 21.6 27.0 29.7 8.1
53 I am unable to take sufficient breaks 1 5 6 11 8 7 3.16 2.6 13.5 16.2 29.7 21.6 18.9
55 I am pressured to work long hours 1 1 6 4 12 14 3.86 2.6 2.7 16.2 10.8 32.4 37.8
57 I have to work very fast 1 4 6 19 6 2 2.89 2.6 10.8 16.2 51.4 16.2 5.4
59 I have unrealistic time pressures 2 2 1 12 10 11 3.75 5.3 5.6 2.8 33.3 27.8 30.6
10 36 53 89 67 49 3.13 3.3 12.3 18.0 30.3 22.8 16.7

CONTROL
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
39 I can decide when to take a break 1 8 10 12 3 4 2.59 2.6 21.6 27.0 32.4 8.1 10.8
47 I have a say in my own work speed 2 5 12 16 2 1 2.50 5.3 13.9 33.3 44.4 5.6 2.8
52 I have a choice in deciding how I do my work 2 6 16 11 2 1 2.33 5.3 16.7 44.4 30.6 5.6 2.8
56 I have a choice in deciding what I do at work 1 1 9 12 7 8 3.32 2.6 2.7 24.3 32.4 18.9 21.6
62 I have some say over the way I work 1 8 16 9 3 1 2.27 2.6 21.6 43.2 24.3 8.1 2.7
67 My working time can be flexible 3 5 8 7 5 10 3.20 7.9 14.3 22.9 20.0 14.3 28.6
10 33 71 67 22 25 2.70 4.4 15.1 32.5 30.7 10.1 11.5

MANAGER'S SUPPORT
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
45 I am given supportive feedback on the work I do 1 5 13 10 6 3 2.70 2.6 13.5 35.1 27.0 16.2 8.1
60 I can rely on my line manager to help me out with a work problem 1 19 3 8 5 2 2.14 2.6 51.4 8.1 21.6 13.5 5.4
66 I can talk to my line manager about something that has upset or annoyed me about work 1 13 10 7 2 5 2.35 2.6 35.1 27.0 18.9 5.4 13.5
70 I am supported trough emotionally demanding work 1 3 7 14 7 6 3.16 2.6 8.1 18.9 37.8 18.9 16.2
72 My line manager encourages me at work (personal development) 1 5 14 7 6 5 2.78 2.6 13.5 37.8 18.9 16.2 13.5
5 45 47 46 26 21 2.63 2.6 24.3 25.4 24.9 14.1 11.4

PEER SUPPORT
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
44 If works get difficult, my colleagues will help me 1 17 11 5 1 3 1.97 2.6 45.9 29.7 13.5 2.7 8.1
61 I get help and support I need from colleagues 1 19 7 8 1 2 1.92 2.6 51.4 18.9 21.6 2.7 5.4
64 I receive the respect at work I deserve from my colleagues 1 12 11 6 5 3 2.35 2.6 32.4 29.7 16.2 13.5 8.1
68 My colleagues are willing to listen to my work-related problems 1 14 13 6 3 1 2.03 2.6 37.8 35.1 16.2 8.1 2.7
4 62 42 25 10 9 2.07 2.6 41.9 28.4 16.9 6.8 6.1

RELATIONSHIPS
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
42 I am subject to personal harassment in the form of unkind words or behaviour 1 2 2 1 13 19 4.22 2.6 5.4 5.4 2.7 35.1 51.4
51 There is friction or anger between colleagues 1 7 7 12 5 6 2.89 2.6 18.9 18.9 32.4 13.5 16.2
58 I am subject to bullying at work 1 4 1 3 3 26 4.24 2.6 10.8 2.7 8.1 8.1 70.3
71 Relationships at work are strained 1 7 5 14 10 1 2.81 2.6 18.9 13.5 37.8 27.0 2.7
4 20 15 30 31 52 3.54 2.6 13.5 10.1 20.3 20.9 35.1

ROLE
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
38 I am clear what is expected of me at work 1 8 10 9 9 1 2.59 2.6 21.6 27.0 24.3 24.3 2.7
41 I know how to go about getting my job done 1 14 19 3 1 0 1.76 2.6 37.8 51.4 8.1 2.7 0.0
48 I am clear what my duties and responsibilities are 1 10 16 8 2 1 2.14 2.6 27.0 43.2 21.6 5.4 2.7
50 I am clear about the goals and objectives for my department 1 8 13 8 6 2 2.49 2.6 21.6 35.1 21.6 16.2 5.4
54 I understand how my work fits into the overall aim of the organisation 2 9 14 11 1 1 2.19 5.3 25.0 38.9 30.6 2.8 2.8
6 49 72 39 19 5 2.23 3.2 26.6 39.1 21.2 10.3 2.7

CHANGE
Question Response Counts ** % Non- % Response Counts (excl. non-respondents)
No. Text 0s 1s 2s 3s 4s 5s Avg* Respondents 1 2 3 4 5
63 I have sufficient opportunities to question managers about change at work 1 5 6 10 11 5 3.14 2.6 13.5 16.2 27.0 29.7 13.5
65 Staff is always consulted about change at work 1 2 6 7 7 15 3.73 2.6 5.4 16.2 18.9 18.9 40.5
69 When changes are made at work, I am clear how they will work out in practice 1 3 4 11 10 9 3.49 2.6 8.1 10.8 29.7 27.0 24.3
3 10 16 28 28 29 3.45 2.6 9.0 14.4 25.2 25.2 26.1
 QUESTIONS RESPONSES BY RATING
Question Total Response Responses
Number Score Count Avg* 0's 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's
1 123 37 3.32 1 1 6 15 10 5
2 112 37 3.03 1 5 9 10 6 7
3 123 37 3.32 1 3 6 12 8 8
4 152 37 4.11 1 0 1 9 12 15
5 114 37 3.08 1 7 5 11 6 8
6 110 37 2.97 1 4 8 13 9 3
7 123 37 3.32 1 3 6 12 8 8
8 116 34 3.41 4 1 7 8 13 5
9 137 37 3.70 1 1 7 6 11 12
10 123 37 3.32 1 3 6 11 10 7
11 156 37 4.22 1 0 1 5 16 15
12 143 37 3.86 1 0 5 8 11 13
13 144 37 3.89 1 0 4 9 11 13
14 130 37 3.51 1 2 7 5 16 7
15 141 37 3.81 1 0 4 11 10 12
16 110 37 2.97 1 3 11 11 8 4
17 139 37 3.76 1 0 5 12 7 13
18 137 35 3.91 3 1 3 7 11 13
19 127 36 3.53 2 0 3 17 10 6
20 132 37 3.57 1 1 9 7 8 12
21 139 37 3.76 1 1 3 11 11 11
22 145 37 3.92 1 0 5 6 13 13
23 133 35 3.80 3 0 4 8 14 9
24 98 36 2.72 2 7 9 12 3 5
25 89 36 2.47 2 11 5 13 6 1
26 121 36 3.36 2 0 9 11 10 6
27 147 36 4.08 2 0 3 7 10 16
28 122 37 3.30 1 5 8 7 5 12
29 123 37 3.32 1 0 11 9 11 6
30 130 37 3.51 1 2 5 12 8 10
31 121 37 3.27 1 2 8 13 6 8
32 142 35 4.06 3 1 2 9 5 18
33 144 37 3.89 1 1 4 8 9 15
34 136 36 3.78 2 0 4 12 8 12
35 109 37 2.95 1 7 8 10 4 8
36 162 37 4.38 1 1 1 5 6 24
37 163 37 4.41 1 1 1 4 7 24
38 96 37 2.59 1 8 10 9 9 1
39 96 37 2.59 1 8 10 12 3 4
40 100 37 2.70 1 5 9 16 6 1
41 65 37 1.76 1 14 19 3 1 0
42 156 37 4.22 1 2 2 1 13 19
43 132 37 3.57 1 3 5 8 10 11
44 73 37 1.97 1 17 11 5 1 3
45 100 37 2.70 1 5 13 10 6 3
46 78 36 2.17 2 11 12 9 4 0
47 90 36 2.50 2 5 12 16 2 1
48 79 37 2.14 1 10 16 8 2 1
49 110 37 2.97 1 5 8 10 11 3
50 92 37 2.49 1 8 13 8 6 2
51 107 37 2.89 1 7 7 12 5 6
52 84 36 2.33 2 6 16 11 2 1
53 117 37 3.16 1 5 6 11 8 7
54 79 36 2.19 2 9 14 11 1 1
55 143 37 3.86 1 1 6 4 12 14
56 123 37 3.32 1 1 9 12 7 8
57 107 37 2.89 1 4 6 19 6 2
58 157 37 4.24 1 4 1 3 3 26
59 135 36 3.75 2 2 1 12 10 11
60 79 37 2.14 1 19 3 8 5 2
61 71 37 1.92 1 19 7 8 1 2
62 84 37 2.27 1 8 16 9 3 1
63 116 37 3.14 1 5 6 10 11 5
64 87 37 2.35 1 12 11 6 5 3
65 138 37 3.73 1 2 6 7 7 15
66 87 37 2.35 1 13 10 7 2 5
67 112 35 3.20 3 5 8 7 5 10
68 75 37 2.03 1 14 13 6 3 1
69 129 37 3.49 1 3 4 11 10 9
70 117 37 3.16 1 3 7 14 7 6
71 104 37 2.81 1 7 5 14 10 1
72 103 37 2.78 1 5 14 7 6 5
 STRESS & CREATIVITY OVERALL CATEGORIES AVERAGE SCORES

Stress Quantitative Data Creativity Quantitative Data

Question Count Total Average Question Count Total Average
Demands 293 889 3.0 Leadership 259 857 3.3
40 37 100 2.7 1 37 123 3.3
43 37 132 3.6 2 37 112 3.0
46 36 78 2.2 3 37 123 3.3
49 37 110 3.0 4 37 152 4.1
53 36 84 2.3 5 37 114 3.1
55 37 143 3.9 6 37 110 3.0
57 37 107 2.9 7 37 123 3.3
59 36 135 3.8 Creativity withing the Org. 182 675 3.7
Control 218 589 2.7 8 34 116 3.4
39 37 96 2.6 9 37 137 3.7
47 36 90 2.5 10 37 123 3.3
52 36 84 2.3 11 37 156 4.2
56 37 123 3.3 12 37 143 3.9
62 37 84 2.3 Organisational Culture 293 1060 3.6
67 35 112 3.2 13 37 144 3.9
Manager's Support 185 486 2.6 14 37 130 3.5
45 37 100 2.7 15 37 141 3.8
60 37 79 2.1 16 37 110 3.0
66 37 87 2.4 17 37 139 3.8
70 37 117 3.2 18 35 137 3.9
72 37 103 2.8 19 36 127 3.5
Peer Support 148 306 2.1 20 37 132 3.6
44 37 73 2.0 Goals Measure and Strategy 145 515 3.5
61 37 71 1.9 21 37 139 3.8
64 37 87 2.4 22 37 145 3.9
68 37 75 2.0 23 35 133 3.8
Relationships 148 524 3.5 24 36 98 2.7
42 37 156 4.2 Staff Development 256 853 3.3
51 37 107 2.9 25 36 89 2.5
58 37 157 4.2 26 36 121 3.4
71 37 104 2.8 27 36 147 4.1
Role 184 411 2.2 28 37 122 3.3
38 37 96 2.6 29 37 123 3.3
41 37 65 1.8 30 37 130 3.5
48 37 79 2.1 31 37 121 3.3
50 37 92 2.5 Resources promoting Creativity 219 856 3.9
54 36 79 2.2 32 35 142 4.1
Change 111 383 3.5 33 37 144 3.9
63 37 116 3.1 34 36 136 3.8
65 37 138 3.7 35 37 109 2.9
69 37 129 3.5 36 37 162 4.4
Overall Avg Score for Stress 2.8 37 37 163 4.4
Overall Avg Score for Creativity 3.6
 APPENDIX IX

PERCEIVED STRESSORS BY

MALTA STOCK EXCHANGE EMPLOYEES

191
PERCEIVED STRESSORS BY MALTA STOCK EXCHANGE EMPLOYEES:

 My colleagues (some of them)

 Back biting
 No clear indications
 Bullying
 Jealousy
L1, F, 30

 Lack of staff: pressure to cope with the daily jobs that have a time frame
 Lack of communication between the managers and staff
 Not enough time to concentrate on specific jobs that need certain amount of
concentration
 Not all staff are treated in the same manner
 Management does not realise that certain departments have lack of resources
in order to perform good tasks and the best job performance
L1, F, 40

 Working environment: noisy, stuffed air, lack of sufficient light

 Management: unfair promotions, double standards, only few are treated like
royalty, no personal development to, especially, those who are qualified
and/or ambitious
 Bullying should one sound opinion
 Top management lack management qualifications/skills
 No targets, directions or clear strategy is ever presented by top management
 Institution’s future is bleak
L1, M, 38

 Resolving disputes among staff members

L2, M, 44

 Unachievable deadlines
F2, F, 25

 Stress mainly in the form of environment stress, very hard to concentrate and
lack of privacy
L1, F, 27

 Not enough motivation, I need to be motivated in order to do always better

 You are not assessed on how much you know (Qualifications: this de-
motivates me, and so makes me more stressed) but who you know especially
when it comes to promotions
 The building, too much noisy, no privacy in the departments
 Central heating (environmental stress)
L1, F, 28

192
 I think there is discrimination towards those working reduced hours
L1, F, 29

 The environment: the ‘open plan’ setup doesn’t allow me to concentrate

enough, hearing a lot of voices around, lot of shouting… I am always ending
up with a headache
 Colleagues: do not show respect. A lot of work has to be done by me because
others do not care about work or lost motivation… I do not know but they
take a lot of sick or when they are here they talk all the time
 Lack of hardworking staff – as a result work is not equally shred and this
gives rise to a lot of pressure
L1, F, 28

 The work environment – too much noise and the climate in general
 Uncertainly
L1, F, 30

 Discrimination between full times and part timers

 Discrimination towards pregnant woman
 Environment: lack of fresh air, no daylight, nasty odours
 No motivation at all
L1, F, 28

 De-motivation
 Bad working environment
 Lack of opportunities
L1, M, 26

 Environment: lack of fresh air, no daylight

 No motivation
 Discrimination (full timers vs reduced hours)
 Comfort food
L1, F, 29

 Different projects having different deadlines falling within the same month
 Staff not cooperating and not able to meet their deadlines
L1, M, 30

 Staff are not treated equally

 Most managers do not have management skills
 Lack of privacy in offices
 Inadequate premises – no windows and natural light
 No motivation
L1, F, 29

 There is not professional planning in our work

193
  No incentives to staff
 No job definition
 Department are mixed up
 De-motivation of staff
 Short-staffing in my department: it also hinders my personal development in
that it does not leave me with enough time to move on to learning and/or
doing new things
L1, F, 37

 Malignant gossip behind other people’s back

 Some people get away with everything and get rewarded, others work hard
and deliver and because they are not trouble makers top management ignore
their plight
 Relevant disciplinary action is not applied fairly and sometimes not taken
L2, F, 41

 Useless gossiping which can turn out to be energy-wasting which can be

utilized for other tasks
L2, F, 37

Note: 19 Respondents participated out of 37 (i.e. 51% response rate)

194