In a world where rapid change and disruption are the norm, creativity has become an essential capability, not only for individual employees but also for organizations striving to innovate, compete, and survive (Janssen, 2000). Yet, creativity does not occur in a vacuum. It is deeply influenced by how people perceive their work environment, what organizational psychologists call the psychological climate (Schneider et al., 2017).
My co-authored study explores this relationship within service firms in a transitional economy. Specifically, we investigate how elements of psychological climate, including freedom, support for ideas, time, playfulness, debates, and workplace diversity, shape employee creativity and, ultimately, innovation.
This topic matters because transitional economies often operate under different cultural, economic, and structural conditions compared with mature innovation hubs. Understanding what fosters creativity in these contexts can enhance both academic theory and practical management strategies.
What Is Psychological Climate and Why It Matters
Psychological climate refers to individuals’ perceptions of policies, practices, and procedures that shape daily work experiences. A positive climate signals trust, autonomy, and support for unconventional thinking, conditions that have repeatedly been linked with creative output (Baer & Frese, 2003).
In innovation research, scholars recognize that climate can either enable or constrain creative behavior (Amabile et al., 1996). Organizations that cultivate supportive psychological climates typically see greater idea generation, experimentation, and risk-taking, core ingredients for innovative performance (Grant & Berry, 2011).
Yet most empirical studies have focused on firms in Western or high-income contexts. Our research fills an important gap by examining these dynamics in a transitional economy, characterized by evolving institutions, resource constraints, and cultural norms that may affect how employees interpret workplace signals.
Research Goals and Questions
We examined whether psychological climate factors predict employee creativity. Our key research questions were:
-
Which elements of psychological climate are most strongly linked with creative thinking?
-
How do perceptions of workplace freedom and support influence innovation?
-
Do diverse and playful environments stimulate creative efforts in transitional service organizations?
Using a quantitative survey design, we collected data from 160 employees working in small and medium-sized service firms in Erbil, Iraq. Study measures included validated scales for psychological climate dimensions and individual creative thinking (Amabile et al., 1996). Statistical analyses, particularly regression models, were used to examine how climate factors predicted creativity.
Key Findings
1. Freedom and Resource Support Facilitate Creativity
Employees who perceived high levels of autonomy, freedom to act, and support for ideas reported significantly higher creative thinking. This aligns with Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), which highlights autonomy as a core motivator for creativity.
2. Time and Playfulness Boost Divergent Thinking
We found that employees who experienced dedicated time to think and experiment, coupled with a playful and exploratory environment, displayed more idea generation than those in rigid, task-oriented settings. Playfulness reduces fear of failure and increases cognitive flexibility.
3. Constructive Debates Enhance Innovation
Workplaces that encouraged healthy debate and discussion were correlated with higher creativity. This supports previous work showing that conflict, when managed constructively, can expand perspectives (De Dreu, 2006).
4. Diversity Enriches Creative Output
Workplace diversity, whether demographic or cognitive, was positively associated with creative thinking. This complements social-psychological research demonstrating that diverse teams outperform homogeneous ones in idea generation and problem solving (Hoever et al., 2012).
Why These Results Matter
For Managers
-
Cultivate autonomy: Empower employees to make decisions about their work.
-
Allocate time for ideation: Encourage time not just for tasks but for thinking and experimentation.
-
Promote psychological safety: Leaders should foster open debate and tolerate differences in opinion.
-
Leverage diversity: Diverse perspectives fuel creative insights.
These actions don’t require large budgets but do require mindful leadership and supportive practices.
Challenges and Learning From the Field
Conducting field research in a transitional context posed several challenges:
-
Cultural Context: Employees were sometimes hesitant to express opinions that contradict organizational norms, impacting survey candor.
-
Organizational Constraints: Many service firms lacked formal systems for idea management, requiring careful adaptation of measurement tools.
-
Sampling Barriers: Limited digital record keeping made random sampling more time-consuming than anticipated.
However, these challenges strengthened our appreciation for context-specific dynamics of workplace climate and creativity.
Future Directions for Research
While our study provides new insights, several avenues merit further exploration:
-
Longitudinal research: How do climate perceptions and creativity evolve over time?
-
Cross-country comparisons: Do similar patterns hold in other transitional economies?
-
Digital transformation: With remote and hybrid work growing, how might psychological climate manifest virtually?
Creativity is not merely an individual trait; it is shaped by the environments in which individuals work. Our study underscores that psychological climate plays a crucial role in stimulating creative thinking and, by extension, innovation in service organizations within transitional economies.
By empowering employees, supporting debate, and fostering diversity and playfulness, organizations can unlock the creative potential that drives innovation.
References
Amabile, T. M., & Conti, R. (1999). Changes in the work environment for creativity during downsizing. Academy of Management journal, 42(6), 630-640.
Baer, M., & Frese, M. (2003). Innovation is not enough: Climates for initiative and psychological safety, process innovations, and firm performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 24(1), 45-68.
De Dreu, C. K. (2006). When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams. Journal of Management, 32(1), 83-107.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of management journal, 54(1), 73-96.
Hoever, I. J., Van Knippenberg, D., Van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity's potential. Journal of applied psychology, 97(5), 982.
Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and organizational psychology, 73(3), 287-302.
Salim, B., & Khorsheed, K. A. (2025). The role of psychological climate factors in stimulating creativity through workplace innovation in the service sector of a transitional economy. Discover Psychology, 5(1), 154.