The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Roulin, N., Bangerter, A., & Yerly, E. (2011). The uniqueness effect in selection interviews. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(1), 43-47.

Job interviews are the age-old, strategy based, “survival of the fittest” in the business world. Now more than ever, people are entering the job market with university degrees, which can often make most job applicants appear to be the same. Because of this, many applicants seek to distinguish themselves by providing unique answers to interview questions.

The important question, however, is whether or not it is beneficial (or even appropriate) to “stand out from the crowd” in a job interview? Do the conventional or unconventional applicants receive job offers?

The Uniqueness Effect Defined

In selection situations, job applicants know that they are not only being judged by absolute qualities (ex. Educational background), but also by their relative qualities, such as their perceived quality in comparison to other applicants. This awareness causes many applicants to create a uniqueness effect.

In this context, the uniqueness effect is the effect of an applicant’s distinctive characteristics or answers on recruiters’ evaluations and decisions in the selection process. Similarly to the  previous rules of thumb that have told applicants to focus on differentiating their resumes from the many other resumes in the stack, in order to get the interview, that same notion is essentially used as a strategy during the interview.

The Value of Standing Out

Applicants who provide unique answers get better evaluations and are chosen more often than applicants providing common answers. When an applicant’s uniqueness is positive, such that it creates a particular social image, they are likely to receive prestige, aid, and love from others.

Providing unique responses was especially helpful in non-creative fields, like accounting, as opposed to creative fields, like marketing. One explanation for this could be that interviewers may have higher expectations for receiving unique answers from applicants who are seeking positions in creative fields than for those applicants who are seeking positions in non-creative fields.

Practical Implications

The benefits of providing unique answers to interview questions are clear. Job applicants who give unique answers receive both higher evaluations and a higher probability of getting the job offer, especially in non-creative jobs.

One important thing to note is that interviewers may be influenced by the uniqueness of the answers, regardless of the applicant’s true abilities. Therefore, it is important for job recruiters to assess whether or not they are prone to being swayed by the uniqueness effect, and for organizations to institute selection procedures that do account for a job applicant’s true ability, despite their uniqueness.

Interpretation by:

Kandace Waddy

DeGarmo Group

The following a summary of the research and practice implications from: Van Iddekinge, C.H., Campbell, J.P., and Putka, D.J. (2011). Reconsidering vocational interests for personnel selection: The validity of an interest-based selection test in relation to job knowledge, job performance, and continuance intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 13-33.

Personality assessments are often used to help identify the applicants who are likely to succeed in a perspective job.  However, they are not the only solution available to help select an applicant that will be successful in the available position. Vocational interests may also serve as strong predictors of a job applicant’s future job performance, job knowledge, and intentions to continue with an organization.

Whether it is reading books on a specific topic, attending certain sporting or musical events, or spending time doing yard work, individuals tend to have strong preferences for activities that they find interesting. Although we may not often stop to consider it, our interests have a significant influence over the approach we take towards an activity, as well as how we choose to spend our time on various tasks. This same principle, that we are motivated to do activities we find interesting, also impacts the way employees act in the workplace.

Vocational Interests Defined

Vocational Interests (“VI’s), or interests specific to the workplace, can be thought of as having three important characteristics:

• Contextually-Grounded:  VI’s are embedded in the work context, and focus on the types of activities and work-environment that an individual prefers
• Stable over time: Just like personality and work values, an employee’s VI’s remain relatively consistent over time.
• Influential over behavior: Employees are more motivated to complete tasks that they find interesting, and are more likely to seek opportunities to increase their knowledge and skill levels if they find a topic interesting.

Points to Clarify

VI assessments have not generated as much hype as personality assessments in HR literature, in part because some of the information available is not correct. A few of the questions commonly associated with VI’s include:

Are VI assessments effective predictors in employee selection?

Yes – Vocational interests have been shown to predict employees’ intentions to stay with the organization, interpersonal knowledge, technical knowledge, and other important job-related outcomes.  Like all assessment methods, these results can vary.

Why have I heard that VI assessments don’t really predict job performance?

The answer may be very obvious – Some vocational interest surveys are, in fact, poor predictors of job performance.  This is because they were designed for another purpose.   For example, the Strong Interest Inventory is designed to guide individuals in finding a career that fits their interests, not to differentiate between high and low performers within that career. To effectively use VI assessments in employee selection, you must select an instrument that is designed for that specific purpose.

I thought most job applicants only applied for jobs that they found interesting?

Although people do tend to want jobs that align with their interests, this option is not always feasible. The decision to apply for employment is based upon a multitude of factors, such as the state of the economy, compensation rates for a job, location of a job, the applicant’s education level and prior experience, present or future rewards that a job may offer, etc.  These, and other factors, may supersede an individual’s desire to match his or her interests with the sought-after job.

How are applicants’ VI scores related back to the job?

Not all VI assessments are the same, but one common way is to organize and score the applicants’ interests by grouping their ratings of the various work activities into six categories of interests, known as Holland’s RIASEC model. These six categories of interests are as follows:

• Realistic – Practical, hands-on activities (i.e. Carpenters, Electricians, Athletic Trainers)
• Investigative – Scholastic, intellectual, and/or scientific activities (i.e. Pilots, Chemists, Police Detectives)
• Artistic – Creative and expressive activities (i.e. Interior Designers, Editors, Photographers)
• Social – Teaching, caring, and helping activities (i.e. Flight Attendants, Tour Guides, Concierges)
• Enterprising – Persuasive and leadership-oriented activities (i.e. First-Line Supervisors, PR Managers, Head Chefs)
• Conventional – Routine and well-ordered activities (i.e. Bank Teller, Accountants, Pharmacists)

HR managers or employers must have an idea of the work context prior to assessing applicants, so that the correct interests are focused upon during employee selection.

Practical Applications of VI Assessments

Vocational Interests should not be thought of as a reason to throw away personality assessments in selection.  Instead, they should be viewed as an option that offers you something unique to consider in the selection process. Unlike predictors such as cognitive ability, the validity of using VI scores in selection depends on the extent to which interests are reflected in the performance requirements of a job.  In jobs where this relationship is strong, VI assessments can help HR managers to select candidates that will actually enjoy their work and perform it well, have motivation to learn about their job, and stay with the company.

Interpretation by:

Kelly Whalen

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Podsakoff, N.P., Whiting, S.W., Podsakoff, P.M., & Mishra, P. (2011). Effects of organizational citizenship behaviors on selection decisions in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 310-326.

Organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) is thought to be one of the many factors that influence managers as they make selection decisions based upon job interviews. OCB is the behavior of an employee which may not be a part of the job role, but supports the work environment at large by supporting fellow employees and the organization as a whole. Applicants who display OCB during job interviews are less likely to voluntarily quit, are likely to be more productive, and are likely to be more efficient than their coworkers.  Questions that attempt to gauge OCB can be included in the job interview to help with selection decisions.

Types of OCB

The interview situation gives managers an opportunity to ask questions that tap into the applicant’s potential for future OCB while on the job; however, they should be aware that certain behaviors during the interview may influence their decision process.  Specifically, three aspects of OCB are influential in selection decisions and will be discussed further: helping behavior, voice behavior, and organizational loyalty behavior.

• Helping behavior.  This involves voluntarily helping others with work-related problems or helping to prevent them.
• Voice behavior.  This involves expression of constructive challenge intended to improve a situation within an organization.
• Organizational loyalty behavior. This involves the manifestation and evidence of employee commitment.

OCB and Interviewer Perceptions

Manager’s and interviewer’s expectations of a possible future employee (including perceptions of competence, overall evaluations, and salary recommendations) can be influenced by each of these three factors.  The more helping behavior, voice behavior, and organizational loyalty behavior an interviewee displays during an interview, the higher the perceptions of competence, overall evaluations, and salary recommendations will be.

Practical Implications

Those who make the selection decisions after an interview should not hesitate to look for these displays of OCB during the interview, because, as noted above, they can predict many positive outcomes for the organization.  Interviewers should be aware that the information gathered on OBCs in the interview should be taken cautiously though.  This is because not all OCBs are behaviors that affect the organization’s bottom line.  If the behaviors do not benefit the organization, but the interviewer allows this display to influence his or her decision, it may not lead to the best decision for the organization.

The aspects of OCB that are going to be relevant for an organization and be important to performance differ across organizations and jobs because every organization and job has different needs when it comes to this type of supportive behaviors.  Interviewers should be trained in advance so that they know what behavior it is that the organization is looking for.  Specifically, which OCBs are important to the bottom line and which are not.  Useful information can be obtained from the display of OCBs as long as the interviewer knows what to look for.

Interpretation by:

Ashley Niemczyk

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Harrison, S.H., Sluss, D.M., & Ashforth, B.E. (2011). Curiosity adapted the cat: The role of trait curiosity in newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 211-220.

Most employees do not stay at the same job their entire career. As such, managers often find themselves overseeing the adaptations that employees make when starting a new job.  Newcomer adaptation, the time during which a new employee is trying to adapt to an organization, is influenced by the employee’s level of curiosity.  Curiosity is defined as the desire for new information that leads to inquisitive and exploratory behaviors.  Individuals who are curious like to explore and experiment to draw on a variety of experiences to make sense of one’s situation.  As a manager, by knowing about a newcomer’s type of curiosity, you can do more to ensure retention.

Types of Curiosity

Two types of curiosity, specific and diversive, have been linked to adaptive behaviors in employees which will be explained further.

• Specific curiosity: Experienced as motivation to seek a new distinct piece of information in narrow and direct ways. An employee with specific curiosity might enjoy refining and extending information that already exists.
• Diversive curiosity: Experienced as a desire to explore that can be satisfied by a diverse range of data in broad and indirect ways. An employee with diversive curiosity might enjoy coming up with novel approaches to reach maximum performance levels.

How is Curiosity Related to Adaptation on the Job?

Specific and diversive curiosity are each related to different actions of a newcomer on the job.  First, a newcomer who exhibits the narrowly focused, specific curiosity, is more likely to actively seek information to fill in the gaps in his or her knowledge.  Second, a newcomer with the broadly based diversive style of curiosity is more likely to positively frame the workplace.  This means that while they are adapting, they are prone to view situations in a positive light.  This positive framing of a situation improves motivation for doing a job which also improves performance on the job.  The motivation an employee feels on the job will increase the retention rate.  If an employee is not curious and does not feel excited about the job they are performing, they are more likely to leave the organization.

Curiosity motivates newcomer adaptation and the different forms of curiosity spark and speed up adaptive behaviors.  Newcomers will explore in different ways.  Specifically, those with specific curiosity will look for details and distinct cues while those with diversive curiosity will look for new ways of framing a situation.

Practical Implications

This information can prove useful because individuals are likely to be a “newcomer” to different organizations multiple times in their lives, so every organization and manager will inevitably be dealing with newcomers.  More specifically, it is important to learn more about how individuals adapt in new situations, as it is increasingly becoming the responsibility of the newcomer who may not know how to handle it.  An educated manager may be able to provide the guidance necessary for adaptation.

Given the relationship between adaptation and curiosity, managers should look into ways to spark this curiosity.  This curiosity, as discussed above, leads to motivation which is related to lower employee turnover for the organization.

Interpretation by:

Ashley Niemczyk

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Ployhart, R.E., Van Iddekinge, C.H., Mackenzie, W.I. (2011). Acquiring and developing human capital in service contexts: the interconnectedness of human capital resources. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 353-368.

The phrases “human capital” and “human capital resources” have become buzz words that have gained popularity among HR professionals and researchers. You may wonder, what exactly is human capital, and why should you care?

Defining Human Capital

Human capital, or the combined knowledge, skills, and abilities of a group of people, is often thought of at the unit level.  A unit is simply a general term for any collection of employees that are all working towards a common purpose.  In some organizations, a unit can be a department or team.  For others, it may be the entire organization.  Human capital resources can be considered as either generic or unit-specific.

• Generic Human Capital – Resources that can be transferable across different jobs or organizations (i.e. an employee’s general cognitive ability, personality factors, etc.).
• Unit-Specific Human Capital – Resources that are non-transferable and are only applicable to a specific unit (i.e. knowledge of a department’s unique filing system, the ability to understand an organization’s jargon, etc ).

Human capital is dynamic, which means it is constantly fluctuating over time.  Factors such as constantly improving technology, employee turnovers, organizational climate, and others may lead to differing degrees of importance for the human capital resources that an organization has. With that in mind, should organizations value one type of human capital resource over the other? The answer to that question varies, but understanding the interconnectedness of the two levels may help.

Generic vs. Unit-Specific Human Capital

Imagine that your department needed to transition to a new coding and filing system. After receiving training in this new system employees should possess the unit-specific human capital resources that allow for higher job performance (i.e. they understand the new system, and can use it efficiently).  This higher performance then leads to better outcomes for the department and company as a whole.

Managers should be careful to not overlook the role that generic human capital resources play in the example above. Generic human capital resources are needed prior to adding unit-specific human capital resources.Without them, employees would lack the necessary skills and abilities that allowed for the development of this new skill-set. Therefore, generic human capital resources are often the knowledge, skills, and abilities that an employee can use to master unit-specific human capital resources that are uniquely valued within an organization.

In other words, the employees in the previous example would need to possess enough cognitive ability to understand the new system, before they would be able to master it and increase their productivity.

This connection means that both generic and unit-specific human capital resources are linked to increased job performance, which may lead to increased effectiveness for the unit or organization.

Practical Applications

The interrelated nature of generic and unit-specific human capital means that managers should be aware of both levels of resources.  An increase of generic human capital resources means that, at a future date, there will be an increase at the unit-specific resource level.  A careful balance of investing in the future flow of job performance (i.e. hiring new employees to bolster the generic resources) and investing in the present job performance levels (i.e. internally promoting employees to utilize organizationally-specific knowledge) may help an organization maintain an advantage over its competitors.

Interpretation by:

Kelly Whalen

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Tierney, P., & Farmer, S.M. (2011). Creative self-efficacy development and creative performance over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 277-293.

Employee creativity is a critical component of an organization’s ability to be innovative. This creativity, also known as creative performance, refers to an employee’s ability to generate novel and practical ideas or solutions. One effective way that supervisors can increase creative performance is by enhancing their employees’ belief in their own ability to be creative. This belief in one’s own ability to generate creative ideas or solutions is called creative self-efficacy.

Factors Influencing Creative Self-Efficacy

Listed below are two broad factors that play a role in increasing creative self-efficacy in employees.

• Perceived Creativity Expectations. This refers to the degree to which an employee perceives expectations for creative performance from their supervisor. If employees believe that their supervisors have high creative expectations of them, then they are more likely to have high creative self-efficacy. This relationship exists because when employees know that their supervisors believe in their creative abilities, employees strive to meet those creative expectations and, in turn, gain more confidence in their creative abilities over time.
• Formal Job Creativity Requirements. This refers to the degree to which a job requires the employee to create novel solutions to problems that they encounter on the job. Unlike perceived creativity expectations, when a job’s formal creativity requirements are increased, employees experience a decrease in creative self-efficacy. This relationship may exist because greater formal job demands, in general, tend to lessen an employee’s feelings of self-efficacy as well as his overall job performance.

Why is it Important to Promote Creative Self-Efficacy?

It is important to promote creative self-efficacy in employees because increases in creative self-efficacy are related to increases in creative performance. Hence, supervisors should strive to increase creative self-efficacy in their employees by using the factors described above because creative self-efficacy gives employees the confidence they need to be creative problem-solvers.

Practical Implications

To some degree, organizations can shape creative self-efficacy and creative performance in their employees. Jobs vary greatly in how much creativity they require. For jobs that require a great deal of creativity, supervisors should be provided with leadership training on how to increase creative self-efficacy in their employees.

Supervisors should be mindful when adding more creativity requirements into their employees’ jobs because these additional formal demands can decrease employees’ confidence in their ability to be creative problem-solvers. When additional creativity requirements must be added, supervisors should also provide employees with additional training in creativity skill development in order to meet these new job requirements.

Interpretation by:

Mackenzi Harmon

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Kaplan, S., Bradley, J. C., Luchman, J. N., & Haynes, D. (2009). On the role of positive and negative affectivity in job performance: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 162-176.

People are predisposed to experiencing certain levels of approach-related arousal emotions and avoidance-related arousal emotions which influence different aspects of their job performance. Approach-related arousal is generally associated with feelings such as happiness, elation, or feeling energetic. Avoidance-related arousal is generally associated with feelings involving negative emotions. These predispositions, which are called positive affect and negative affect, are different from the emotions a person will experience in reaction to specific events in that affect shows stability across time and even situations. It is important to realize that positive affect and negative affect are not opposite ends of a continuum – one can have high levels of one but not the other, or can have high or low levels of both types at the same time.

Examples of different affect profiles include:

• A person who experiences anxiety or fear (high on both levels). This profile is high in positive affect because anxiety arouses a person to be alert, but it is also high in negative affect because it makes a person want to escape from something.
• A person who feels very relaxed, laid-back (low on both levels). Such a person isn’t experiencing particularly high positive or negative arousal.
• A person who is bored (high in negative affect, low in positive affect). This profile indicates someone who is unenergetic and experiencing negative arousal.
• A person who is cheerful and energetic (high in positive affect, low in negative affect). Such a person isn’t experiencing negative feelings but is experiencing a high level of positive arousal.

Emotions and Performance

Recent evidence provides a clearer understanding of the role of dispositional emotions in work performance. Specifically:

• Positive emotions are related to increased task performance ratings by supervisors
• Negative emotions are related to decreased task performance ratings by supervisors
• Positive affect is associated with increases in organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) – i.e., work behaviors that are helpful but not required of one’s position, like volunteering for overtime or assisting a coworker
• Negative affect is associated with decreases in OCBs
• Negative affect is associated with increases in withdrawal and counterproductive workplace behaviors (CWBs) – e.g., theft, absenteeism, abuse, sabotage, etc.
• Negative affect is associated with increased occupational injury

Explaining these Associations

Evidence indicates that the relationships between positive and negative affect and the dimensions of job performance may be mediated by the factors fairness, job satisfaction, and stress. Mediation refers to a factor being a reason why one variable (e.g., emotion) influences another variable (e.g., performance). That is, emotions are thought to influence one or more of these three factors, which then affect performance, in the following ways:

• Perceived fairness is a significant mediator between positive affect and task performance and OCBs
• Perceived fairness is a significant mediator between negative affect and task performance, OCBs, CWBs, and withdrawal
• Job satisfaction is a significant mediator between both positive affect and negative affect and OCBs
• Job satisfaction is a significant mediator between negative affect and withdrawal
• Job stress mediates the association between positive affect and task performance/OCBs
• Job stress mediates the associations between negative affect and CWBs/withdrawal

Affect and Personality

Evidence also indicates that positive and negative affect, which exhibit high associations with the personality traits extraversion and neuroticism respectively, are not redundant with those traits in predicting task performance. Positive and negative affect predict task performance even after extraversion and neuroticism have been accounted for.

Implications for Practice

These results clearly indicate that emotional predispositions are important factors in predicting success in different performance categories ranging from productive behavior to destructive behavior. Suggestions for capitalizing on this knowledge to maximize organizational performance include:

• Screen and hire applicants in part based on their dispositional affect, especially for occupations that are inherently stressful.
• Introduce stress management resources for employees. Examples include employee assistance programs (EAPs) and gym membership information.
• Take steps to increase employee perceptions of fair treatment at work. This can be done by following standard procedures for everyone, letting employees have some input or “voice” when appropriate, or providing sufficient information about why certain workplace decisions have been made.
• Strive to reduce a negative work climate while also striving to create a positive work environment. This can involve reducing personal conflicts in the organization and promoting cooperation among employees.

Recent evidence is much clearer about the roles that positive and negative affect play in employee performance. Employers should consider these emotional dispositions when making decisions about how to increase or maintain worker performance in their organizations.

Interpretation by:

Donnie Johnson

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Colbert, A. E., & Witt, L. A. (2009). The role of goal-focused leadership in enabling the expression of conscientiousness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 790-796.

Conscientiousness is a trait that affects job performance across almost all occupations. This is not surprising, as highly conscientious people tend to be very focused, orderly, planful, diligent, hard working and loyal, all characteristics that are valuable for success in most jobs.

The conscientiousness of job applicants is often assessed using interviews or personality tests during the selection process. However, recent research indicates that selecting the most conscientious applicants does not necessarily mean they will be highly effective performers. Two important factors must also be considered: (1) leadership and (2) how it interacts with a person’s level of conscientiousness to influence job performance.  In other words, conscientiousness often must be enabled by organizational leaders.

Goal-Focused Leadership

The work environment is significantly shaped by supervisors’ leadership behaviors. Supervisors demonstrate goal-focused leadership when they communicate to their subordinates the valued goals of the organization.

Goal-focused leadership influences the extent to which conscientious behavior is expressed in the workplace. Effective goal-focused leaders provide cues that shape expectations about work behavior. Workers higher in conscientiousness pick up on conscientiousness-valued cues provided by leaders, which allow them to express their natural personality tendencies toward achievement striving, diligence, planning, persistence, etc. On the other hand, people who are low in conscientiousness (i.e., more impulsive, less persistent, less detail-oriented) may not pick up on the same cues as well as their more conscientious coworkers.

Highly conscientious workers tend to receive higher performance ratings than low conscientious workers when goal-focused leadership is present. However, when goal-focused leadership is not present, employees low and high in conscientiousness tend to receive similar, average performance ratings.

Goal Congruence: Leadership-Person Interaction

One of the factors that partially explains why goal-focused leadership results in more conscientious employees receiving superior performance ratings is the effect of that type of leadership on aligning the goals of employees with the goals of their organization. Conscientious employees pay attention to the goal-focused messages delivered by their supervisors and act in accordance with them. Such goal matching does not appear to occur with less conscientious employees. As with performance, when goal-focused leadership is low, levels of employee-organization goal matching are similar for both low-level and high-level conscientiousness employees.

Practical Implications

Considering the above points, some recommendations can be drawn for best implementing these findings in the workplace:

• Measure applicant conscientiousness as part of the hiring process. Although conscientiousness by itself may not be enough to increase performance, instituting greater goal-focused leadership can result in more productive outcomes if the employees being lead are more conscientious.  One of the best ways to measure conscientiousness is with reliable, validated personality inventories that were developed to assess that trait.
• Promote a goal-focused leadership style among supervisors/managers. Supervisors should be encouraged to communicate goals that are clear, specific, concise, realistic, and aligned with the performance needs of the organization.
• As part of goal-focused leadership, ensure that employees’ work goals are consistent with those of the organization.  Use employee surveys, focus groups, or even just informal discussion to assess to what extent goal-focused leaders are getting their messages across to workers.

It should be acknowledged that, while not true in all cases, in many instances a lack of clear goals may leave many employees confused over their roles and expectations. Clearly communicating valued goals can enable conscientious employees to act on their work-related dispositional tendencies, which allows them do what they do best.

Interpretation by:

Don Johnson

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from: Kluemper, D. H., Little, L. M., & DeGroot, T. (2009). State or trait: Effects of state optimism on job-related outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 209-231.

Surviving the various burdens of one’s work and personal lives can be difficult for anyone, not even counting the “Great Recession” of the last two years which has been so stressful for so many people. Morale of employees ranging from CEOs to interns has dropped precipitously in line with the fall in consumer confidence and rising unemployment. However, seeing the “bright side of things” and having hope for the future can relate to meaningful positive outcomes at a personal and an organizational level. These outcomes include:

• Reduced distress
• Reduced burnout
• Greater affective commitment
• Greater job satisfaction

Optimism even seems to play a role in increasing performance. The good news is that these positive effects are not limited just to those individuals who have optimistic personalities. Rather, the effects appear to be greatest when people experience more situational, day-to-day type optimism.

Optimistic Thinking

Optimistic people tend to demonstrate a thinking process that attributes their successes and achievements to their own personal, consistent behavior. They also attribute set-backs or failures to transient causes that can be changed in the future. Pessimists, on the other hand, tend to think that good outcomes in their life are random events that are out of their control, while bad outcomes are the result of an inherent personal defect.

How people attribute cause to successes and failures is important for a variety of mental and emotional reasons, but it is also significant for how people approach challenges: those who believe they have the power to “make good things happen” are more likely to put in greater effort to accomplish their goals.

Optimism exists at both a trait level and a state level. Traits are personality-related, as they are generally stable over time and influence thoughts, feelings, and behavior across a variety of situations. States are generally short-term and often influenced by context.

Thus trait optimists tend to frequently look for the positives in things and do so in many different domains of their lives. People who experience state optimism look on the bright side in more specific and short-term situations, for instance with personal relationships or with their jobs. Thus, people who are generally optimists can at times be pessimistic, and vice-versa.

Optimism and Work Outcomes

Optimism, state and trait, has been linked to experiencing less negative outcomes, such as symptoms of psychological distress and burnout. Burnout includes feelings of emotional exhaustion, emotional/personal detachment, and loss of confidence in one’s abilities.

Beyond an association with a reduction in troublesome outcomes, optimism has been demonstrated to predict greater affective commitment to one’s organization. Thus, more optimistic people may want to remain with their organizations more than less optimistic people do. Further, more optimistic people tend to enjoy greater job satisfaction. Finally, some evidence indicates that higher optimism is related to increased task performance.

A key finding is that state optimism emerges as a consistently significant predictor of these outcomes, while trait optimism does not consistently predict them. These results have been found using techniques designed to isolate the specific contribution of state versus trait optimism. Also, the results for state optimism were found regardless of a person’s predisposition to positive and negative affectivity.

Implications for Practice

Based on these results, we at the DeGarmo Group offer the following advice.

• Because the evidence indicates state optimism is more of a driver of important work outcomes than trait optimism, it may be more important to focus on developing work and organizational contexts that promote optimistic thinking rather than trying to select generally optimistic individuals as employees.
• Strive to incorporate positive thinking and personal efficacy into the work climate and culture.
• Emphasize that employees and managers can achieve success through persistence and that set-backs are temporary and can be overcome. Work to remove barriers to success that result in set-backs, such as poor communication, deficient knowledge and skills, or unproductive organizational strategies.
• Finally, promote hope in the organization by encouraging forward-looking thinking that focuses on building belief in a better, more desirable future.

Interpretation by:

Donnie Johnson

DeGarmo Group

The following is a summary of the research and practice implications from:

Creative thinking is valued across occupations and industries. Even in the most simple of jobs, creative ideas are necessary to solve novel problems that arise. For some occupations, creativity is a bona fide requirement. Creativity is also crucial for organizational growth and long-term success as companies must develop new ideas to stay competitive within their respective industries. When ideas and products can be easily mimicked by competitors, an organization’s best bet is to distinguish itself by consistently presenting fresh and original work. So how can organizations increase the level of creativity in their workforces? Evidence shows that creativity can be increased by influencing moods and emotions of employees. Before going into how emotions affect creativity, though, creativity should first be defined.

How is Creativity Defined?

Creativity involves:

• The number of ideas someone can generate (called fluency)
• The uniqueness of the ideas (i.e., originality)

Having a strong command of one of these dimensions does not mean someone will be particularly effective at the other. For example, a person can be fluent and produce many ideas, none of which are particularly original, while another person may only come up with a few ideas which are all highly unique. On the other hand, there are those people who are able to come up with many ideas, several of which are very original.

The Influence of Emotions

Moods and emotions are known to influence creativity, although in a more complicated way than people may realize. Conventional thought holds that to boost creativity, positive moods and emotions should be increased while negative moods and emotions should be decreased.

However, beyond being positive or negative, affective states can also be characterized as activating or deactivating. Activating states increase arousal while deactivating states decrease arousal. This distinction appears to affect creativity levels.

Specifically, activating emotions increase creative behavior while deactivating emotions do not. The table below categorizes different emotions depending on whether they are positive or negative and activating or deactivating:

Emotions under the “activating” column are more likely to increase creativity while emotions under the “deactivating” column are more likely to decrease creativity.

Paths to Creativity

Both positive and negative activating emotions lead to increased creativity, but they do so in different ways. Happiness and excitement increase a person’s cognitive flexibility, which can increase both fluency and originality. Cognitive flexibility involves creating ideas that span several different categories or perspectives. Negative activating emotions such as fear may increase persistence and focus, which can lead to more creative ideas but at a cost of longer time spent on trying to be creative.

Implications for Practice

These results suggest that a workplace climate that promotes activating emotions may lead to increased creativity. Some steps that can be taken to promote these types of emotions include:

• Increase employee engagement and satisfaction at work by such actions as giving employees more voice in procedures and making jobs feel meaningful to them.
• Promote trusting and cooperative work relationships through teamwork, mentoring, and developing a positive workplace culture.
• Utilize negative activating emotions when necessary by promoting persistent effort to meet difficult organizational and work goals.
• Encourage a sense of urgency to promote excitement by emphasizing the immediate nature of and energy required for completing a project.
• Reduce organizational constraints that can discourage employees, such as inadequate communication, unnecessary paperwork, or overly restrictive procedures that interfere with work and motivation.
• Aim for increasing positive rather than negative activating emotional states when creative ideas are needed quickly.

In work situations when fear, anxiety, or even anger are normal emotional reactions (e.g., during a recession or when facing an impending deadline), experiencing some level of negative activating emotions is not necessarily detrimental. Feelings of fear can help focus thoughts on coming up with creative solutions when needed.

There are different ways that emotions affect how one comes up with creative ideas. Which emotions to encourage at a particular time will depend on the nature of the work and the context in which creativity is needed.

Interpretation by:

Don Johnson

DeGarmo Group