Introduction
In this article, there is a reflection on creativity in work, which will affect the productivity of employees. The author is Sandra Ohly, a professor of business psychology and a doctor of philosophy. The article’s main point is that creativity is important for everyone, especially for organizations that work with clients. Over time, customer requirements only increase while organizations remain with the same conditions and services, which is why creativity is needed (Ohly, 2018). In turn, a creative approach to their work is required not only for artists but for everyone. For example, a marketer is tasked with developing a new campaign, or a nurse needs to change her work schedule due to patient inconveniences (Ohly, 2018). Both need to show their creativity in identifying problems and solving them.
Discussion
Further, an article has found that in scientific creativity, employees must see the problem that has arisen, identify external causes, and generate ideas about how to solve it and which solution is the most optimal and correct. The article also mentions how employers can support the creativity of their workers. First of all, people need motivation (Ohly, 2018). Accordingly, employers must provide remuneration for employees to be motivated to solve the problem. However, there is a fact that after the cancellation of the reward, a person’s motivation decreases.
Conclusion
To conclude, the key to productive work and solutions to situational problems is a positive emotion on the part of employees because people with a good attitude take a more creative approach to their work. In working organizations with a high level of autonomy, an individual can freely express creativity, which, in turn, positively affects work productivity (Ohly, 2018). As stated in the article, the tasks are accepted as a problem for people with high self-efficacy, whereas people with lower self-efficacy perceive them as a burden.
References
Ohly, S. (2018). Promoting creativity at work–implications for scientific creativity. European Review, 26(S1), S91-S99.