Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment


Establishing a proper level of organizational creativity at the workplace is a pertinent issue for numerous United States companies. A substantial body of research investigating the importance of creativity levels in the working environment suggests that prompting the employees to use creative approaches and innovative strategies is beneficial for their performance. In addition, as high creativity outputs have been connected to increased motivation levels and job satisfaction, firms are advised to utilize techniques to facilitate creativity (Cai et al., 2020).

However, with the introduction of technological devices and Artificial Intelligence practices into the workers’ daily routine, novel methods are required to effectively sustain creativity levels. This paper focuses on two scholarly articles exploring the topic of digital advances and organizational creativity, highlighting the main conclusions and criticizing the works’ contributions to the research area.

Workplace Creativity and the Digital Era

Cai et al. (2020) present a thorough review of the current evidence on this topic in the article “Optimizing employee creativity in the digital era: Uncovering the interactional effects of abilities, motivations, and opportunities”. The work was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health and located using the Google Scholar academic search system, which provides full access to the publication’s text. The article provides an overview of the empirical findings on the factors that foster employee creativity, incorporating the obtained knowledge into a comprehensive theoretical framework of organizational behavior (Cai et al., 2020).

Through extensive literature search and meticulous organization of the uncovered information, the authors propose a new approach to the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity (AMO) theory and illustrate that workplace motivational aspect significantly influence the development of employee creativity.

The primary argument presented by Cai et al. supports the importance of Information and Computer Technologies (ICT) in maintaining an appropriate level of organizational creativity. By relying on the results of empirical research, the scholars conclude that ICT might act as a factor in promoting workplace creativity and innovation through various interaction patterns. As such, employees who more frequently interact with digital tools and novel electronic devices are more likely to manifest higher levels of creativity (Cai et al., 2020). Considering that ICT approaches to enhancing creativity outputs have shown considerable success, Cai et al. claim that these practices should be integrated by employers struggling with creative performance.

Another conclusion drawn by Cai et al. is related to motivation and its influence on the workers’ creativity. According to scholars, the motivation to improve personal performance greatly depends on contextual factors that facilitate intrinsic motivation (Cai et al., 2020). Organizations that implement such motivation-enhancing practices as rewards, inspiring leadership, and goal satisfaction can positively impact the employees’ engagement in creative behavior, compelling them to approach the existent problems from a more innovative perspective (Cai et al., 2020).

In addition, the authors highlight the effects of opportunity and ability-oriented factors, arguing that providing the employees with extra possibilities for growth and skill development substantially elevates creativity expression levels. Overall, each of the three AMO components is considered a vital addition to workplace practices, which should be incorporated to improve creativity outputs.

The examination of two interaction models allows Cai et al. to present the third vital point regarding organizational creativity. The scholars outline a different approach to person-environment interaction, suggesting that activities that enhance ability, motivation, and the opportunity should be appropriately integrated into the working atmosphere. As employees consistently interact with numerous contextual factors, the level of adaptation to the workplace environment plays a crucial role in maintaining a high level of creativity (Cai et al., 2020).

Cai et al. argue that the contextual factors of ability, motivation, and opportunity combine and multiply given the right level of employee interaction, resulting in a heightened expression of creativity (Cai et al., 2020). As such, employers should make sure that the workers are aware of the incentives that aim at improving their professional skills, engagement, and possibilities, as well as capable of successfully utilizing these practices.

From my perspective, the present article is a valuable contribution to the framework of creativity enhancement in the workplace, which might positively influence future research in this area. The authors clearly outline the scope of their research and provide an extensive overview of the AMO theory, suggesting how it can be efficiently implemented both in empirical studies and in the working environment. In addition, Cai et al. base their conclusions on a substantial body of scholarly evidence, which is significant for the findings’ credibility.

However, some of the suggestions and discussion points made by the scholars remain unclear. For instance, although the authors define the importance of ICT and include it as a crucial aspect of maintaining creativity in the workplace, very little information and research findings are presented on this topic. As such, Cai et al. only scarcely mention ICT and the specific details regarding its implementation. In this regard, presenting a more comprehensive examination would be highly beneficial for supporting the claims regarding ICT’s distinct qualities.

Artificial Intelligence Capability and Workplace Creativity

The significance of artificial intelligence (AI) in establishing a creativity-inducing working atmosphere is explored by Mikalef and Gupta. The article “Artificial intelligence capability: Conceptualization, measurement calibration, and empirical study on its impact on organizational creativity and firm performance” tackle the issues related to the use of AI in businesses and its impact on creativity. The work was published in the Information and Management Journal and located through the Google Scholar platform.

The scholars present an experimental evaluation of AI resources and practices that could be implemented in organizations, offering an evidence-based and empirical examination of the current trends in AI utilization, focusing on business corporations (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021). Furthermore, Mikalef and Gupta question how AI might enhance the creativity flow of the personnel, suggesting strategies to improve innovation and testing the proposed connection empirically.

The first conclusion stressed by the scholars refers to the theoretical value of AI and its potential for the workplace. Through resource-based theory (RBT), Mikalef and Gupta establish three resource categories necessary for integrating AI in the working environment: tangible resources, human skills, and intangible resources. The authors highlight the primary items that constitute each of the categories according to the literature and expert insights, leading to a list of eight resources that allow incorporating AI practices in the working environment (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021).

The tangible resources consist of data, technology, and basic resources; human skills include the personnel’s technical and business capabilities; intangible resources involve departmental cooperation, the potential for organizational adjustments, and risk inclinations (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021). As the presence of AI can positively influence the workers’ creativity, the authors conclude that the outlined categories are essential for proper AI workplace integration.

The next point developed by the article’s authors is related to the assessment instrument created during the study. Mikalef and Gupta introduce the AI capability concept based on the RBT framework, distinguishing its aspects and necessary measures for its proper evaluation. Each of the aforementioned category items represents a subdimension of the AI capability concept, and its integration into the workplace can be ascertained using the AI capability instrument (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021). For instance, by examining how the company utilizes the employees’ technical skills, it becomes possible to define the AI capability level and suggest methods to improve current possibilities for the workers (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021). This consideration is especially valuable for the companies that experience difficulties maintaining creativity levels using traditional techniques, as the outlined approach introduces a novel strategy based on AI implementation.

After that, Mikalef and Gupta support their statements regarding the AI’s impact on creativity levels, performing an empirical investigation based on organizational data. According to the analysis results, the scholars claim that AI levels are connected with the creativity organizational performance indicator, positively affecting the workers’ creative capabilities (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021). As such, it is claimed that the employees occupied in firms that maintain a high level of AI capability are more likely to demonstrate increased levels of creativity outputs and suggest more innovative solutions (Mikalef & Gupta, 2021).

In addition, heightened creativity and AI capability degrees also contribute to elevated work performance, enhancing the workers’ engagement in professional advances and improving the company’s growth potential. Considering this evidence, the authors suggest that utilizing AI practices in the working environment is crucial for the company’s technical advancement and for maintaining an inspirational and productive atmosphere.

I believe that the discussed article is a perfect example of highly organized and advanced scientific research. The authors first establish the theoretical basis for the future study, clearly defining each of the introduced concept’s elements and evaluating its credibility, which is necessary for conducting a high-quality investigation. After that, an analysis of actual organizational data is performed, further supporting the concept’s viability and its connection with the organizational creativity indicator. In this regard, the study is remarkably significant for future explorations in this area, establishing a framework for examining the connections between AI and creativity aspects in the workplace.

However, it is essential to note that the corporations involved in the research were only involved in the business practices, suggesting that the current model might not be as efficient under different organizational circumstances. In addition, the scholars did not address the challenges of establishing a sufficient level of AI in the working environment, which is vital for understanding the factors impeding AI implementation. Considering these details, additional research will be needed to support the validity of the AI capability construct, measures, and creation of connections.


To conclude, two articles investigating the connections between creativity outputs and digital advances have been discussed in this paper, arguing that the chosen works may contribute to future studies in this area. Both of the publications positively assess the technological devices’ impact on organizational creativity, proposing that techniques integrating digital and AI practices in the working environment are highly beneficial for the workers’ creativity levels.

While the first article focuses on the AMO theory and its components’ combination and multiplication, the second paper draws on the RBT framework to suggest an AI capability concept and its evaluation measures. Overall, although the works have some analysis and generalization disadvantages, they can be highly useful for company executives and researchers working in the sphere of organizational creativity and digital technologies.


Cai, W., Khapova, S., Bossink, B., Lysova, E., & Yuan, J. (2020). Optimizing employee creativity in the digital era: Uncovering the interactional effects of abilities, motivations, and opportunities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3). Web.

Mikalef, P., & Gupta, M. (2021). Artificial intelligence capability: Conceptualization, measurement calibration, and empirical study on its impact on organizational creativity and firm performance. Information & Management, 58(3). Web.

Cite this paper

Select style


BusinessEssay. (2022, December 8). Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment. Retrieved from


BusinessEssay. (2022, December 8). Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment.

Work Cited

"Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment." BusinessEssay, 8 Dec. 2022,


BusinessEssay. (2022) 'Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment'. 8 December.


BusinessEssay. 2022. "Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment." December 8, 2022.

1. BusinessEssay. "Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment." December 8, 2022.


BusinessEssay. "Maintaining Organizational Creativity in the Working Environment." December 8, 2022.