Get Motivated!
Creative Leadership and Problem Solving | Online Exercise # 3
Have you ever worked on a project for hours, perhaps days, in a row without noticing the passing of time, feeling hungry, or getting sleepy? Well, that’s called creative flow, and if you’ve had this experience, it probably means you loved the task, challenged your abilities, and were highly motivated to excel.
This week’s exercise identifies and shares intrinsic motivations. Our first goal is to reflect upon the connection between intrinsic motivation and your industry. Research indicates intrinsic motivation is a perquisite for creativity and innovation; so, understanding what you love and what challenges motivate you are essential skills for innovators.
In addition, the exercise introduces some simple questions you can ask collaborators and colleagues to determine their intrinsic motivations. The insights help decide what tasks to assign to each teammate and how, as a leader, you can help them be as creative and successful as possible. As Amabile’s research demonstrates, leaders can most effectively boost creativity by facilitating intrinsically rewarding experiences for teammates.
Finally, the exercise will provide the opportunity to further connect with classmates. It’ll be a lot of fun finding out why everyone came to Sheridan, and to learn about a variety of creative industries.
Provide short answers to the list of questions. Your answers should be brief but detailed enough so that anyone can understand and appreciate them. Assume that your reader knows absolutely nothing about you or your industry. Copy the prompts into your post and write your brief responses under each question. Your discussion should be a minimum of 200 words.
1. What brought you to Sheridan College?
2. Introduce your industry. What do you love most about your industry?
3. What aspects of your work or training do you do just for fun? Or, what type of ‘work’ do you complete for its pure enjoyment?
4. If you weren’t already in your industry and/or studying at Sheridan, what would you do for fun and joy?
5. Assuming you had unlimited time and resources, what would you do that you can’t do now.
After posting your responses, read your colleagues’ posts and provide 2 affirmative comments to two different posts.
This online exercise is worth 5% of your final grade. Later, you’ll have the opportunity to revise and further reflect upon the exercise via the Portfolio.
For this submission, the online exercise will be evaluated via degree of completion by answering ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the following statements:
1. The post answered all five questions.
2. The post met the minimum 200-word length criteria.
3. The post provided enough context about the author’s industry so that people from other areas of practice could understand and appreciate the discussion.
4. The author provided affirmative comments on two other posts created by classmates.

Design by Dr. Brandon McFarlane 2021
Keep doing what you’re doing.
Or, if you want to spark innovation,
rethink how you motivate, reward,
and assign work to people.
W H E N I CONSIDER all the or-
ganizations I have studied and worked with over the past
22 years, there can be no doubt: creativity gets killed
much more often than it gets supported. For the most
part, this isn’t because managers bave a vendetta against
creativity. On tbe contrary, most believe in the value of
new and useful ideas. However, creativity is undermined
unintentionally every day in work environments that
were established-for entirely good reasons-to maximize
business imperatives such as coordination, productivity,
and control.
Managers cannot be expected to ignore business impera-
tives, of course. But in working toward these imperatives,
tbey may be inadvertently designing organizations tbat sys-
tematically crusb creativity. My research shows that it is
possible to develop the best of both worlds: organizations in
Teresa M. Amabile is the M.B.A. Class of 1954 Professor of Business
Administration and senior associate dean for research at the Harvard
Business School in Boston, Massachusetts.
which business imperatives are attended to and
creativity flourishes. Building such organizations,
however, requires us to understand precisely what
kinds of managerial practices foster creativity-and
which kill it.
What Is Business Creativity?
We tend to associate creativity with the arts and to
think of it as the expression of highly original ideas.
Think of how Pablo Picasso reinvented the conven-
tions of painting or how William Faulkner rede-
fined fiction. In business, originality isn’t enough.
To he creative, an idea must also he appropriate-
useful and actionable. It must somehow influence
the way business gets done-hy improving a prod-
uct, for instance, or hy opening up a new way to ap-
proach a process.
The associations made between creativity and
artistic originality often lead to confusion about the
appropriate place of creativity in business organi-
zations. In seminars, I’ve asked managers if there
is any place they don’t want creativity in their com-
panies. About 80% of the time, they answer, “Ac-
counting.” Creativity, they seem to believe, be-
longs just in marketing and R&JD. But creativity
can benefit every function of an organization.
Think of activity-based accounting. It was an in-
vention-an accounting invention-and its impact
on business has been positive and profound.
Along with fearing creativity in the accounting
department-or really, in any unit that involves
systematic processes or legal regulations – many
managers also hold a rather narrow view of the cre-
ative process. To them, creativity refers to the way
people think-how inventively they approach prob-
lems, for instance. Indeed, thinking imaginatively
is one part of creativity, but two others are also es-
sential: expertise and motivation.
Expertise encompasses everything that a person
knows and can do in the broad domain of his or her
work. Take, for example, a scientist at a pharma-
ceutical company who is charged with developing a
blood-clotting drug for hemophiliacs. Her expertise
includes her basic talent for thinking scientifically
as well as all the knowledge and technical abilities
Within every individual, creativity is a function of three components: expertise, creative-thinking skills,
and motivation. Can managers influence these coniponents? The answer is an emphatic yes-for better
or for worse – through workplace practices and conditions.
Expertise is, in a word,
procedural, and intellectual.
Creative-thinking skiiis
determine how flexibly
and imaginatively people
approach problems. Do
their solutions upend the
status quo? Do they perse-
vere through dry spells?
Not all motivation is created equal. An inner passion to solve
the problem at hand leads to solutions far more creative than
do external rewards,such as money.This component-called
intrinsic motivation-is the one that can be most immediately
influenced by the work environment.
78 HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW September-October 1998
that she has in the fields of medicine, chemistry, bi-
ology, and biochemistry. It doesn’t matter how she
acquired this expertise, whether through formal ed-
ucation, practical experience, or interaction with
other professionals. Regardless, her expertise con-
stitutes what the Nobel laureate, economist, and
psychologist Herb Simon calls her “network of pos-
sible wanderings,” the intellectual space that she
uses to explore and solve problems. The larger this
space, the better.
Creative thinking, as noted above, refers to how
people approach problems and solutions-their ca-
pacity to put existing ideas together in
new combinations. The skill itself de-
pends quite a bit on personality as
well as on how a person thinks and
works. The pharmaceutical scientist,
for example, will be more creative if
her personality is such that she feels
comfortable disagreeing with others-
that is, if she naturally tries out solu-
tions that depart from the status quo. Her creativity
will be enhanced further if she habitually turns
problems upside down and combines knowledge
from seemingly disparate fields. For example, she
might look to botany to help find solutions to the
hemophilia problem, using lessons from the vascu-
lar systems of plants to spark insights about bleed-
ing in humans.
As for work style, the scientist will be more likely
to achieve creative success if she perseveres through
a difficult problem. Indeed, plodding through long
dry spells of tedious experimentation increases the
probability of truly creative breakthroughs. So, too,
does a work style that uses “incubation,” the ahil-
ity to set aside difficult problems temporarily, work
on something else, and then retixrn later with a fresh
Expertise and creative thinking are an individ-
ual’s raw materials-his or her natural resources,
if you will. But a third factor-motivation-deter-
mines what people will actually do. The scientist
can bave outstanding educational credentials and
a great facility in generating new perspectives to old
problems. But if she lacks the motivation to do a
particular job, she simply won’t do it; her expertise
and creative thinking will cither go untapped or be
applied to something else.
My research has repeatedly demonstrated, how-
ever, that all forms of motivation do not have the
same impact on creativity. In fact, it shows tbat
there are two types of motivation – extrinsic and in-
trinsic, the latter being far more essential for cre-
ativity. But let’s explore extrinsic first, because it is
often at the root of creativity problems in business.
Extrinsic motivation comes from outside a per-
son – whether the motivation is a carrot or a stick. If
the scientist’s boss promises to reward her finan-
cially should the blood-clotting project succeed, or
if he threatens to fire her should it fail, she will cer-
tainly be motivated to find a solution. But this sort
of motivation “makes” the scientist do her job in
order to get something desirable or avoid some-
thing painful.
Obviously, the most common extrinsic motiva-
tor managers use is money, which doesn’t necessar-
ily stop people from being creative. But in many sit-
Money doesn’t necessarily stop
people from being creative, but in
many situations, it doesn’t help.
uations, it doesn’t help either, especially when it
leads people to feel that they are being bribed or
controlled. More important, money by itself doesn’t
make employees passionate about their jobs. A
cash reward can’t magically prompt people to find
their work interesting if in their hearts they feel it
is dull.
But passion and interest-a person’s internal de-
sire to do something-are what intrinsic motiva-
tion is all about. For instance, the scientist in our
example would be intrinsically motivated if her
work on the blood-clotting drug was sparked by an
intense interest in hemophilia, a personal sense of
challenge, or a drive to crack a problem that no one
else has been able to solve. When people are intrin-
sically motivated, they engage in their work for the
challenge and enjoyment of it. The work itself is
motivating. In fact, in our creativity research, my
students, colleagues, and I have found so much evi-
dence in favor of intrinsic motivation that we have
articulated what we call the Intrinsic Motivation
Principle of Creativity: people will be most creative
when they feel motivated primarily by the interest,
satisfaction, and challenge of the work itself-and
not by external pressures. (For more on the differ-
ences between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation,
see the insert “The Creativity Maze.”)
Managing Creativity
Managers can influence all three components of
creativity: expertise, creative-thinking skills, and
motivation. But the fact is that the first two are
more difficult and time consuming to influence
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW September-October 1998 n
To understand tbe differences between extrin-
sic and intrinsic motivation, imagine a business
problem as a maze.
One person migbt be motivated to make it
tbrougb the maze as quickly and safely as possi-
ble in order to get a tangible reward, such as
m o n e y – t b e same way a mouse would rush
through for a piece of cheese. This person would
look for the simplest, most straightforward
patb and then take it. In fact, if he is in a real
rush to get tbat reward, he might just take the
most beaten path and solve the problem exactly
as it has been solved before.
That approach, based on extrinsic motivation,
will indeed get bim out of the maze. But the so-
lution that arises from tbe process is likely to be
unimaginative. It won’t provide new insights
about the nature of the problem or reveal new
ways of looking at it. The rote solution probably
won’t move the business forward.
Another person migbt have a different ap-
proach to the maze. She might actually find the
process of wandering around tbe different
paths – the challenge and exploration itself – fun
and intriguing. No doubt, this journey will take
longer and include mistakes, because any
maze-any truly complex problem-has many
more dead ends tban exits. But when tbe intrin-
sically motivated person finally does find a way
out of the m a z e – a solution-it very likely will
be more interesting tban the rote algorithm. It
will be more creative.
There is abundant evidence of strong intrin-
sic motivation in tbe stories of widely recog-
nized creative people. When asked what makes
the difference between creative scientists and
tbose wbo are less creative, tbe Nobel-prize-
winning physicist Arthur Scbawlow said, “The
labor-of-love aspect is important. The most
successful scientists often are not tbe most tal-
ented, but tbe ones who are just impelled by cu-
riosity. They’ve got to know what the answer
is.” Albert Einstein talked about intrinsic moti-
vation as “the enjoyment of seeing and search-
ing.” The novelist John Irving, in discussing tbe
very long bours be put into bis writing, said,
“Tbe unspoken factor is love. The reason I can
work so bard at my writing is that it’s not work
for me.” And Michael lordan, perhaps the most
creative basketball player ever, bad a “love of
tbe game” clause inserted into his contract; be
insisted that be be free to play pick-up basket-
ball games any time he wished.
Creative people are rarely superstars like
Michael lordan. Indeed, most of the creative
work done in the business world today gets
done by people wbose names will never be
recorded in history books. They are people with
expertise, good creative-thinking skills, and
high levels of intrinsic motivation. And just as
important, they work in organizations where
managers consciously build environments that
support tbese characteristics instead of destroy-
ing them.
than motivation. Yes, regular scientific seminars
and professional conferences will undoubtedly add
to the scientist’s expertise in hemophilia and related
fields. And training in brainstorming, problem
solving, and so-called lateral thinking might give
her some new tools to use in tackling the job. But
the time and money involved in broadening her
knowledge and expanding her creative-thinking
skills would be great. By contrast, our research has
shown that intrinsic motivation ean be increased
considerably by even subtle changes in an organiza-
tion’s environment. That is not to say that man-
agers should give up on improving expertise and
creative-thinking skills. But when it conies to
pulling levers, they should know that those that
affect intrinsic motivation will yield more imme-
diate results.
More specifically, then, what managerial prac-
tices affect creativity? They fall into six general cat-
egories: challenge, freedom, resources, work-group
features, supervisory encouragement, and organiza-
tional support. These categories have emerged from
more than two decades of research focused primar-
ily on one question: What are the links hetween
work environment and creativity? We bave used
three methodologies: experiments, interviews, and
surveys. While controlled experiments allowed us
to identify causal links, the interviews and surveys
gave us insight into the richness and complexity of
creativity within business organizations. We have
80 HARVARD BUSiNESS REVIEW September-October 1998
Studied dozens of companies and, within those,
hundreds of individuals and teams. In each research
initiative, our goal has been to identify which man-
agerial practices are definitively linked to positive
creative outcomes and which are not.
For instance, in one project, we interviewed
dozens of employees from a wide variety of compa-
nies and industries and asked them to describe in
detail the most and least creative events in their ca-
reers. We then closely studied the
transcripts of those interviews, not-
ing the managerial practices – or other
patterns-that appeared repeatedly
in the successful creativity stories
and, conversely, in those that were
unsuccessful. Our research has also
heen bolstered by a quantitative sur-
vey instrument called KEYS. Taken
by employees at any level of an orga-
nization, KEYS consists of 78 ques-
tions used to assess various work-
place conditions, such as the level of
support for creativity from top-level
managers or the organization’s ap-
proach to evaluation.
Taking the six categories that have
emerged from our research in turn,
let’s explore what managers can do
to enhance creativity-and what of-
ten happens instead. Again, it is im-
portant to note that creativity-killing
practices are seldom the work of lone
managers. Such practices usually are
systemic-so widespread that they
are rarely questioned.
Challenge. Of all the things man-
agers can do to stimulate creativity,
perhaps the most efficacious is the
deceptively simple task of matching
people with the right assignments.
Managers can match people with
jobs that play to their expertise and
their skills in creative thinking, and
ignite intrinsic motivation. Perfect
matches stretch employees’ abili-
ties. The amount of stretch, how-
ever, is crucial: not so little that they feel bored hut
not so much that they feel overwhelmed and threat-
ened by a loss of control. ••
Making a good match requires that managers
possess rich and detailed information about their
employees and the available assignments. Such in-
formation is often difficult and time consuming to
gather. Perhaps that’s why good matches are so
rarely made. In fact, one of the most common ways
managers kill creativity is by not trying to obtain
the information necessary to make good connec-
tions between people and jobs. Instead, something
of a shotgun wedding occurs. The most eligible em-
ployee is wed to the most eligible – that is, the most
urgent and open- assignment. Often, the results are
predictably unsatisfactory for all involved.
Freedom. When it comes to granting freedom, the
key to creativity is giving people autonomy con-
Creativity thrives when managers let people decide how to climb a
mountain; they needn’t, however, let employees choose wbich one.
cerning the means-that is, concerning process-
but not necessarily the ends. People will be more
creative, in other words, if you give them freedom
to decide how to climb a particular mountain. You
needn’t let them choose which mountain to climb.
In fact, clearly specified strategic goals often en-
hance people’s creativity.
I’m not making the case that managers should
leave their subordinates entirely out of goal- or
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW September-October 1998 81
agenda-setting discussions. But they should under-
stand that inclusion in those discussions will not
necessarily enhance creative output and certainly
will not be sufficient to do so. It is far more impor-
tant that whoever sets the goals also makes them
clear to the organization and that these goals re-
main stable for a meaningful period of time. It is dif-
ficult, if not impossible, to work creatively toward
a target if it keeps moving.
Autonomy around process fosters creativity be-
cause giving people freedom in how they approach
their work heightens their intrinsic motivation and
Deciding how much time and
money to give to a team or project
is a judgment call that can either
support or kill creativity.
sense of ownership. Freedom ahout process also al-
lows people to approach problems in ways that
make the most of their expertise and their creative-
thinking skills. The task may end up being a stretch
for them, hut they can use their strengths to meet
the challenge.
How do executives mismanage freedom? There
are two common ways. First, managers tend to
change goals frequently or fail to define them clearly.
Employees may have freedom around process, but
if they don’t know where they are headed, such
freedom is pointless. And second, some managers
fall short on this dimension hy granting autonomy
in name only. They claim that employees are “em-
powered” to explore the maze as they search for so-
lutions hut, in fact, the process is proscribed. Em-
ployees diverge at their own risk.
Resources. The two main resources that affect
creativity are time and money. Managers need to
allot these resources carefully. Like matching people
with the right assignments, deciding how much
time and money to give to a team or project is a so-
phisticated judgment call that can either support or
kill creativity.
Consider time. Under some circumstances, time
pressure can heighten creativity. Say, for instance,
that a competitor is ahout to launch a great product
at a lower price than your offering or that society
faces a serious problem and desperately needs a so-
lution-such as an AIDS vaccine. In such situa-
tions, both the time crunch and the importance of
the work legitimately make people feel that they
must rush. Indeed, cases like these would he apt to
increase intrinsic motivation by increasing the
sense of challenge.
Organizations routinely kill creativity with fake
deadlines or impossibly tight ones. The former cre-
ate distrust and the latter cause burnout. In either
case, people feel overcontroUed and unfulfilled-
which invariably damages motivation. Moreover,
creativity often takes time. It can be slow going to
explore new concepts, put together unique solu-
tions, and wander through the maze. Managers who
do not allow time for exploration or do not sched-
ule in incubation periods are unwit-
tingly standing in the way of the cre-
ative process.
When it comes to project resources,
again managers must make a fit. They
must determine the funding, people,
and other resources that a team legiti-
mately needs to complete an assign-
ment – and they must know how much
the organization can legitimately af-
ford to allocate to the assignment.
Then they must strike a compromise. Interestingly,
adding more resources above a “threshold of suffi-
ciency” does not boost creativity. Below that thresh-
old, however, a restriction of resources can dampen
creativity. Unfortunately, many managers don’t
realize this and therefore often make another mis-
take. They keep resources tight, which pushes peo-
ple to channel their creativity into finding additional
resources, not in actually developing new products
or services.
Another resource that is misunderstood when it
comes to creativity is physical space. It is almost
conventional wisdom that creative teams need
open, comfortable offices. Such an atmosphere
won’t hurt creativity, and it may even help, but it is
not nearly as important as other managerial initia-
tives that influence creativity. Indeed, a problem
we have seen time and time again is managers pay-
ing attention to creating the “right” physical space
at the expense of more high-impact actions, such
as matching people to the right assignments and
granting freedom around work processes.
Work-Group Features. If you want to build teams
that come up with creative ideas, you must pay
careful attention to the design of such teams. That
is, you must create mutually supportive groups
witb a diversity of perspectives and backgrounds.
Why? Because when teams comprise people with
various intellectual foundations and approaches to
work – that is, different expertise and creative think-
ing styles-ideas often combine and combust in ex-
citing and usefxil ways.
82 HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW September-October 1998
Diversity, however, is only a starting point. Man-
agers must also make sure that the teams they put
together have three other features. First, the mem-
bers must share excitement over the team’s goal.
Second, members must display a willingness to
help their teammates through difficult periods and
setbacks. And third, every member must recognize
the unique knowledge and perspective that other
members bring to the table. These factors enhance
not only intrinsic motivation but also expertise and
creative-thinking skills.
Again, creating such teams requires managers to
have a deep understanding of their people. They
must be able to assess them not just for their
knowledge but for their attitudes about potential
fellow team members and the collaborative pro-
cess, for their problem-solving styles, and for their
motivational hot buttons. Putting together a team
with just the right chemistry-just the right level of
diversity and supportiveness-can be difficult, but
our research shows how powerful it can be.
It follows, then, that one common way managers
kill creativity is hy assembling homogeneous teams.
The lure to do so is great. Homogeneous teams of-
ten reach “solutions” more quickly and with less
friction along the way. These teams often report
high morale, too. But homogeneous teams do little
to enhance expertise and creative thinking. Every-
one comes to the table with a similar mind-set.
They leave with the same.
Supervisory Encouragement. Most managers are
extremely busy. They are under pressure for results.
It is therefore easy for them to let praise for creative
efforts-not just creative successes but unsuccess-
ful efforts, too-fall by the way-
side. One very simple step man-
agers can take to foster creativity
is to not let that happen.
The connection to intrinsic
motivation here is clear. Certain- , . , r i •
ly, people can find their work t i m e ^ c o n s u m m g k y e r s or evaluation.
interesting or exciting without ^ “^
a cheering section – for some pe-
riod of time. But to sustain such passion, most peo-
ple need to feel as if their work matters to the orga-
nization or to some important group of people.
Otherwise, they might as well do their work at
home and for their own personal gain.
Managers in successful, creative organizations
rarely offer specific extrinsic rewards for particular
outcomes. However, they freely and generously
recognize creative work by individuals and teams –
often before the ultimate commercial impact of
those efforts is known. By contrast, managers who
kill creativity do so either by failing to acknowl-
edge innovative efforts or by greeting them with
skepticism. In many companies, for instance, new
ideas are met not with open minds but with time-
consuming layers of evaluation – or even with
harsh criticism. When someone suggests a new
product or process, senior managers take weeks to
respond. Or they put that person through an excru-
ciating critique.
Not every new idea is worthy of consideration, of
course, but in many organizations, managers hahit-
ually demonstrate a reaction that damages creativ-
ity. They look for reasons to not use a new idea in-
stead of searching for reasons to explore it further.
An interesting psychological dynamic underlies
this phenomenon. Our research shows that people
believe that they will appear smarter to their bosses
if they are more critical-and it often works. In
many organizations, it is professionally rewarding
to react critically to new ideas.
Unfortunately, this sort of negativity bias can
have severe consequences for the creativity of those
heing evaluated. How? First, a culture of evaluation
leads people to focus on the external rewards and
punishments associated with their output, thus in-
creasing the presence of extrinsic motivation and
its potentially negative effects on intrinsic motiva-
tion. Second, such a culture creates a climate of
fear, which again undermines intrinsic motivation.
Finally, negativity also shows up in how man-
agers treat people whose ideas don’t pan out: often,
they are terminated or otherwise warehoused with-
in the organization. Of course, ultimately, ideas do
need to work; remember that creative ideas in busi-
ness must be new and useful. The dilemma is that
In many companies, new ideas are
met not with open minds but with
you can’t possibly know beforehand which ideas
will pan out. Furthermore, dead ends can some-
times he very enlightening. In many husiness situa-
tions, knowing what doesn’t work can he as useful
as knowing what does. But if people do not perceive
any “failure value” for projects that ultimately do
not achieve commercial success, they’ll become
less and less likely to experiment, explore, and con-
nect with their work on a personal level. Their in-
trinsic motivation will evaporate.
Supervisory encouragement comes in other forms
besides rewards and punishment. Another way
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW September-October 1998 83
managers can support creativity is to serve as role
models, persevering through tough prohlems as
well as encouraging collaboration and communica-
tion within the team. Such hehavior enhances all
three components of the creative process, and it has
the added virtue of heing a high-impact practice
that a single manager can take on his or her own. It
is better still when all managers in an organization
serve as role models for the attitudes and behaviors
that encourage and nurture creativity.
Organizational Support. Encouragement from
supervisors certainly fosters creativity, hut creativ-
ity is truly enhanced when the entire organization
supports it. Such support is the job of an organiza-
tion’s leaders, who must put in place appropriate
systems or procedures and emphasize values that
make it clear that creative efforts are a top priority.
For example, creativity-supporting organizations
consistently reward creativity, but they avoid using
money to “bribe” people to come up with innova-
tive ideas. Because monetary rewards make people
feel as if they are heing controlled, such a tactic
probably won’t work. At the same time, not provid-
ing sufficient recognition and rewards for creativity
can spawn negative feelings within an organiza-
tion. People can feel used, or at the least under-
appreciated, for their creative efforts. And it is rare
to find the energy and passion of intrinsic motiva-
tion coupled with resentment.
Most important, an organization’s leaders can
support creativity by mandating information shar-
ing and collaboration and by ensuring that political
problems do not fester. Information sharing and
collaboration support all three components of cre-
ativity. Take expertise. The more often people ex-
change ideas and data by working together, the
more knowledge they will have. The same dynamic
can be said for creative tbinking. In fact, one way
to enhance the creative thinking of employees is to
expose them to various approaches to problem solv-
ing. With the exception of hardened misanthropes,
information sharing and collaboration heighten
peoples’ enjoyment of work and thus their intrinsic
Whether or not you are seeking to enhance cre-
ativity, it is prohably never a good idea to let politi-
cal problems fester in an organizational setting.
Infighting, politicking, and gossip are particularly
damaging to creativity because they take peoples’
attention away from work. That sense of mutual
purpose and excitement so central to intrinsic mo-
tivation invariahly lessens when people are cliquish
or at war with one another. Indeed, our research
suggests that intrinsic motivation increases when
people are aware that those around them are excited
by their jobs. When political problems abound, peo-
ple feel that their work is threatened by others’

Why Choose Us

  • 100% non-plagiarized Papers
  • 24/7 /365 Service Available
  • Affordable Prices
  • Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
  • Will complete your papers in 6 hours
  • On-time Delivery
  • Money-back and Privacy guarantees
  • Unlimited Amendments upon request
  • Satisfaction guarantee

How it Works

  • Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
  • Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
  • Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
  • Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
  • From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.