Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559

Motivators to creativity in the hotel industry—perspectivesof managers and supervisors

Simon Wonga,*, Loretta Pangb

aDepartment of Hotel & Tourism Management, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Room GH 807, 8th Floor, H core, Hong KongbAdministration & Programme Movielink (Hong Kong) Limited, 4th Floor, Stanhope House, 734 King’s Road, North Point, Hong Kong

Received 15 November 2002; accepted 20 December 2002

Abstract

Organizations are required to be creative and innovative to the extent that their environment is unpredictable, unstable or

threatening. This research aims to identify the job-related motivators to creativity as perceived by managers and supervisors in the

hotel industry. Two pilot tests using individual in-depth interview and dichotomous selection test were conducted to identify possible

motivators. In order to ensure no misunderstanding about the instrument, hotel professionals’ comments were sought about the

construction of the questionnaire. Based on the result of the first pilot study, 27 job-related motivators to creativity were identified

and finally 18 statements were developed through the respondents’ selection in the second pilot study. Factor analysis of principal

components analysis with a varimax rotation was conducted and five dimensions of motivators were identified. Listed in descending

order of mean value showing the employees’ perception of level of importance, the dimensions were: (1) training and development;

(2) support and motivation from the top; (3) open policy; (4) recognition; and (5) autonomy and flexibility. Recommendations on

how to enhance hotel employees’ creativity are suggested. They are: (1) budget allocation for employees’ training and development

program; (2) management initiatives to support and motivate the employees; (3) detailed and transparent communication and

interaction between management and employees; (4) recognize and praise employees when creative ideas are given; and (5) involve

employees’ participation in planning and decision-making.

r 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Creativity; Motivators; Hotel industry; Managers; Supervisors

1. Introduction

Creativity is important in the 21st century. From aglobal and historic perspective, creativity and innova-tion have been essential for human progress andprofound global change. For instance, as early as the19th century, Edison Alva initiated far-reaching influ-ences upon the world owing to his creativity, imagina-tion and structured trials. His contributions to electricaland communication devices including the incandescentlamp, phonograph and microphone affected signifi-cantly the lives of human beings. Therefore, creativityis one of the important elements that should not beneglected in a scientific, sound business framework.

In today’s business environment, an essential elementto an organization’s success is adaptability and theability to manage the speed of change which in turnrequires creativity and innovation (Carr & Johansson,1995). Creativity and its support of innovation are vitalfor long-term corporate success. Firms that deliver thesame products and services in the same way will notlong survive, especially in the growing global economy,which continually emphasizes creativity (Gautschi,2001). Therefore, executives responsible for hotelplanning, operations and management must be morecreative and innovative than ever before as thehotel industry continues to experience problems in aworld recently relegated to exogenous shocks such asfoot and mouth in the UK, September 11 2001, theBali bombings plus the more normal competitivestructures of new destinations and new assetscompeting for business. In the hotel industry, thetangible forms of organizational creative outcomes

ARTICLE IN PRESS

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +852-2766-6364; fax: +852-2362-

9362.

E-mail addresses: hmsimon@polyu.edu.hk (S. Wong),

loretta@movielink-hk.com (L. Pang).

0261-5177/03/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00004-9

include product innovations, continuous improvementand improved customer services.

Previous research has examined the influence oforganizational factors on individual creativity (Amabile,1988, 1996b), environmental stimulants and obstacles tocreativity (Amabile, 1997) and work environment forcreativity (Amabile & Gryskiewicz, 1989; Amabile,1996a). These studies have emphasized those environ-mental qualities that promote or inhibit creativity.However, environmental qualities are not sufficient;the abilities and wishes of employees to perform is also afactor. Thus, the link between motivation and individualcreativity, though often neglected in research and inpractice, is seemingly important. Relatively subtlechanges in the work environment can make possiblesubstantial increases in individual creativity (Amabile,1988). Identifying those motivators that enhance crea-tivity may be a prerequisite to improving the existingsituation in the hotel industry.

This research is located in Hong Kong, where theconfirmation of the opening of Disneyland in HongKong in 2005 provides some impetus to the importanceof creativity and imagination in the future developmentof the hospitality industry. In today’s rapidly changingbusiness climate, organizational success is more depen-dent than ever on creativity and innovation. Tapping thewellspring of employee creativity is a hallmark atDisney, and the primary driver behind its continuedsuccess. In the newest program offered by the DisneyInstitute, employees will gain insight into ways they candevelop and foster a creative culture. The program helpsto stimulate the creative resources of the humanresources and to inspire employees to ‘‘dream it anddo it’’ (McSorley, 2002).

Motivation is the component of individual creativeperformance that has been mostly neglected by creativ-ity researchers, theorists and practitioners. Yet, in someways, this may be the most important component. Whenhiring personnel and assigning personnel to tasks, it isimportant to look for not only skills, but also intrinsicmotivation (Amabile, 1988). Therefore, it is valuable toknow the motivators for creativity in a work environ-ment and how hospitality organizations can enhanceand make use of employees’ creativity to sustainbusiness survival in the current competitive environ-ment. Research on creativity is a natural extension ofearlier research on employee motivation. The samecontextual variables that foster intrinsic motivation arealso associated with creative performance, so organiza-tions can simultaneously influence motivation andcreative performance in an effective way (Ambrose &Kulik, 1999). Nevertheless, in spite of growing concernabout creativity, no previous research has been done,and no journal publications are available that discussthe dimensions of motivators towards creativity inthe hotel industry. This research will investigate the

perception of managers and supervisors working in thehotel industry. In other words, the problem statement is‘‘What are the job-related motivators stimulatingemployees’ creativity and how they can be enhanced tohelp the hoteliers?’’

2. Literature review

According to previous research, intrinsic motivationis important, beneficial and crucial for creativity(Amabile, 1983; Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Torrance,1987). The power of intrinsic motivation is so strongthat simply thinking about intrinsic reasons for doing atask may be sufficient to boost creativity for that activity(Greer & Levine, 1991). Highly creative people havebeen described as being totally absorbed in and devotedto their work (MacKinnon, 1962). Besides, people whoare identified as more intrinsically motivated towardtheir work have consistently been found to producework rated as highly creative (Amabile, Hill, Hennessey,& Tighe, 1994). In reviewing the literature, the WorkEnvironment Inventory (WEI) developed by Amabileand Gryskiewicz (1989) is a classic that sets a yardstick.They identified eight scales describing environmentalstimulants to creativity. They are: (1) freedom; (2)challenge; (3) resources; (4) supervisor; (5) co-workers;(6) recognition; (7) unity and cooperation; and (8)creativity supports. The Amabile and Gryskiewicz(1987) research study on content analysis reviewed ninequalities of environments that served to promotecreativity including: (1) freedom; (2) good projectmanagement; (3) sufficient resources; (4) encourage-ment; (5) various organizational characteristics; (6)recognition; (7) sufficient time; (8) challenge and (9)pressure.

Most probably, people with different backgrounds orcultures will show differences about the need for andexpression of creativity and may be motivated to becreative by different environmental stimulants. Since noprevious research has been undertaken in the hotelindustry in Hong Kong, this study sought to examinewhether the same stimulants are found in the Chinesepopulation and what are the main motivators hotelmanagement need to consider.

3. Methodology

The research commenced by having individual in-depth interviews with 20 hotel professionals by con-venience sampling. Open-ended questions were used toidentify possible determinants of motivation and crea-tivity. After the interviews, 27 areas were identified asmotivators. In order to eliminate and validate reliability,a dichotomous selection test was used to ask another

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559552

pilot test group comprising 20 hotel professionals tochoose either ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ to the named itemsaccording to whether they thought those areas weremotivators. Eighteen statements were accepted by over50 percent of the respondents, and these formed thebasis of research instrument in the next stages of theresearch.

In order to check the appropriateness of the instru-ment developed, ten hotel supervisors were asked tocomment on the 18 statements in order to check whetherany misunderstanding of the original meanings hadoccurred. Several English words were amended to makethe statements clearer and to explicitly measure only onething at a time. After the corrections, a Chinesetranslation was made and Back Translation fromChinese to English was done to confirm its accuracy.A bilingual version of the questionnaire with Englishand Chinese wording was thus produced. To furtherensure the validity of the instrument, another group often hotel supervisors was asked to comment on thewhole questionnaire. Comments were received onimproving the presentation of the statements and severalChinese words were changed. A final instrument wasdeveloped with 18 statements measuring motivators andseven statements asking demographic data. A Likertscale ranging from ‘‘1’’ as ‘‘Strongly Disagree’’ and ‘‘5’’as ‘‘Strongly Agree’’ was used to measure the respon-dents’ level of agreement to the named motivators.

4. Findings and discussion

A total of 288 valid responses were received in 2001.Factor analysis was conducted in order to discover theunderlying dimensions that existed in the Chineseculture about motivators to creativity. Mean distribu-tion and factor analysis were used in this research. Thefindings will hopefully be used to improve employees’creativity by enhancing the motivators, and, at thesame time, recommending feasible methods to fulfillthis objective in the hospitality industry. This researchcan help hoteliers understand the situation in orderto increase competitive advantage in a turbulentenvironment.

4.1. Profile of respondents

Around 60 percent of the respondents were male and40 percent were female. The majority, around 57percent, of the respondents fell within the age range of26–35. Around 50 percent of the total respondentsreceived secondary education and the other 50 percentgraduated from Vocational Institutes or Universities oreven obtained Post-graduate degrees. Over 85 percent ofthem had worked in the hotel industry for more than 3years, which is similar to the actual situation in the

Hong Kong hotel industry since employees shouldnormally pass through the rank and file levels forseveral years before they are able to achieve a super-visory level position. With regard to the workingexperiences abroad in the hotel industry, only 22 percentof the respondents had worked abroad before (SeeTable 1).

4.2. Factor analysis

The overall mean value of all 18 job-related motiva-tors to creativity was 3.91 and the standard deviationwas 0.47. This implied that most of the respondentsagreed on these statements. Then, the 18 statementswere factor analyzed by using Principal ComponentsAnalysis with Varimax Rotation to determine theunderlying dimensions. Prior to factor analysis, theKaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 1

Profile of respondents (N ¼ 288)

Demographic variables Description Valid

percentage (%)

Gender Male 60.1

Female 39.9

Age 25 or below 13.2

26–30 28.5

31–35 28.1

36 or above 30.2

Academic

Qualification

Secondary or below 49.7

Vocational Institute 19.1

University or above 31.3

Working Department Accounting 9.4

Engineering 5.2

F&B Service & Kitchen 34.3

Front Office 16.3

Housekeeping 17.4

Human Resources 4.2

Sales & Marketing 8.3

Others (Purchasing,

Security & EDP)

4.9

Level in Organization Managerial grade or

above

41.0

supervisory 59.0

Year(s) of service in

the hotel industry

o3 years 13.5

>3 years–o5 years 15.3

>5 years–o10 years 32.6

>10 years 38.5

Worked abroad Yes 21.9

No 78.1

Hotel grade High-tariff A 24.7

High-tariff B 33.0

Medium-tariff 42.4

S. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559 553

Adequacy and the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericitywere pursued to test the fitness of the data. TheKMO was 0.865. The Bartlett’s Test of Sphericitywas found to be 1843.777, with significance lower than0.000. Both statistical data supported the use of factoranalysis for these items. Besides, ‘‘Eigenvalue/Latentroot’’ and Scree Plot were applied as the criteriafor selecting the right number of factors (Hair,Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998; Kim & Mueller,1994; Noursis, 1994).

Initially, all 18 statements were loaded to form fivedimensions on motivators. In order to validate theinternal reliability of the statements in the factorsidentified, an internal reliability test was conducted.Statement 17 ‘‘Interesting Work’’ was originally loadedinto Factor 1 with a marginal factor loading of 0.50.However, the reliability alpha was found to be greaterfrom 0.75 to 0.76 if statement 17 was deleted. Therefore,statement 17 of ‘‘Interesting Work’’ was deleted fromFactor 1. By the same token, statement 18 ‘‘Freedom’’with a factor loading of 0.52 was deleted from Factor 3since the alpha rose from 0.72 to 0.77 if the item wasdeleted. Statement 8 ‘‘Challenging Work’’ with a factorloading of 0.64 was also deleted from Factor 4 because

the alpha rose from 0.70 to 0.73 following the deletion ofthe item.

Therefore, after deleting three statements including (1)Statement 8—challenging work (factor loading=0.64); (2)statement 17—interesting work (factor loading=0.50);and (3) statement 18—freedom (factor loading=0.52),15 statements were left. The five identified factors(See Table 2) were:

Factor 1 Open Policy (alpha=0.76)Factor 2 Support and Motivation from the Top

(alpha=0.78)Factor 3 Recognition (alpha=0.77)Factor 4 Training and Development (alpha=0.73)Factor 5 Autonomy and Flexibility (alpha=0.54)

4.2.1. Factor 1: open policy

Three statements were loaded into this factor withalpha at 0.76, with an overall mean value of 3.97. ‘‘Openculture in the organization’’ meant the managementwould adopt processes transparent to all, whichnaturally brought about interaction and communicationamong management and employees. Interaction andcommunication would be top-down, bottom-up and

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 2

Factor analysis with varimax rotation and reliability analysis of the job-related motivators to creativity from the perception of the supervisory

employees in Hong Kong hotel industry (N ¼ 288)

Attributes Mean Factor loading

Community Factor &overall Mean

Eigen Value % of variance Cummulative variance

Interaction and communication 3.99 0.77 0.68

New knowledge acquisition 4.02 0.73 0.65

Open culture in organization 3.89 0.65 0.59

5.88 32.64 32.64 0.76

Management welcome to accept opinions 4.00 0.78 0.77

Management support 4.21 0.70 0.67

Supported by immediate supervisor 4.14 0.64 0.62

Intrinsic motivation 4.17 0.52 0.56

1.99 11.07 43.71 0.78

Tangible incentives 3.83 0.87 0.78

Tangible rewards 3.63 0.86 0.76

Opportunities for promotion 4.17 0.53 0.58

Factor 3Recognition

3.881.34 7.42 51.13 0.77

Opportunities for development 4.16 0.73 0.69

Training provided 4.14 0.70 0.64

Factor 4Training andDevelopment

4.14

1.06 5.88 57.01 0.73

Tolerance of mistakes 3.49 0.67 0.61

Empowerment 3.80 0.65 0.54

Self involvement 3.66 0.53 0.48

Factor 5Autonomy

andFlexibility

3.65

1.00 5.58 62.59 0.54

Cronbach Alpha

Factor 1Open Policy

3.97

Factor 2Support andMotivation

from the Top 4.12

Remarks:

(1) The overall mean value of the 15 statements, after deleting from internal reliability test, was 3.95, with standard deviation 0.48.

(2) Statement ‘‘Interesting Work’’ was originally loaded into Factor 1 with factor loading 0.50. However, this statement was not selected because the

internal alpha was rose up from 0.75 to 0.76 if the item was deleted.

(3) Statement ‘‘Freedom’’ was originally loaded into Factor 3 with factor loading 0.52. However, this statement was not selected since the internal

alpha was rose up from 0.72 to 0.77 if the item was deleted.

(4) Statement ‘‘Challenging Work’’ was originally loaded into Factor 4 with factor loading 0.64. However, this statement was not selected because the

internal alpha was rose up from 0.70 to 0.73 if the item was deleted.

S. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559554

across various departments. Employees were encour-aged to acquire new knowledge in order to maintainsurvival in a turbulent situation. They would bemotivated to be more creative if the organizationencouraged interaction and communication and allowedthem to acquire new or novel ideas (Amabile &Gryskiewicz, 1989). This factor was labeled as ‘‘OpenPolicy’’.

4.2.2. Factor 2: support and motivation from the top

Four statements were loaded into this factor with areliability alpha of 0.78 and a mean value of 4.12. Allthese four statements clearly showed the main frame-work of this dimension. Two statements of managementsupport and support by an immediate supervisor statethat simply the support from the top was important andserved as one of the more important job-relatedmotivators. This reflected a view that when supportwas received from the management, risks associatedwith creative action were acceptable. Employees werethen motivated to think of creative ideas or solutions inorder to solve problems. As Deci and Ryan (1985)stated, ‘‘When supervisors are supportive, they showconcern for employees’ feelings and needs, encouragethem to voice their own concerns, provide positive,chiefly informational feedback, and facilitate employeeskill development’’. These actions on the part of asupervisor were expected to promote employees’ feelingsof self-determination and personal initiative at work,which should then boost levels of interest in workactivities and enhance creative achievement.

Additionally, two statements about managementwelcoming opinions and the importance of intrinsicmotivation fulfilled the second part of this factor labeledas ‘‘motivation from the top’’. Employees wish to fulfillesteem needs and severe a state of self-actualizationduring the routine duties (Amabile, 1987; Maslow, 1959,1968). Therefore, this factor was labeled as ‘‘Supportand Motivation from the Top’’.

4.2.3. Factor 3: recognition

In Factor 3, there were three statements loadedtogether with a reliability alpha of 0.77. The overallmean value was 3.88. All three items represent recogni-tion of the efforts and achievements of employees.Tangible incentives, tangible rewards and opportunitiesfor promotion all acted as means to recognize employeeefforts in tangible ways. The employees could easilyobtain a signal that management was satisfied withtheir performance. ‘‘Fair, constructive feedback onwork, leading to appropriate recognition and rewardof good efforts; an atmosphere where employees’interests as well as their skills are recognized’’ (Amabile& Gryskiewicz, 1989). As there were three posi-tively loaded values in this grouping, and allreflected various ways to praise and recognize the

performance of the employees, this factor was labeledas ‘‘Recognition’’.

4.2.4. Factor 4: training and development

Only two statements were loaded into this factor witha reliability alpha of 0.73. Factor 4 attained the highestmean value of 4.14 amongst all the five identifiedfactors. These two statements had a common character-istic that opportunities for training and developmentwere used to better equip hotel employees and theirchances for future success. The process of stimulatingcreativity and innovation was fundamentally based onbuilding the intellectual capital within the organizationthat would yield the competencies and capabilities forimproved performance. In this respect, the notion of alearning organization and the core activities of training:needs identification, setting objectives, designing anddelivering content, getting feedback and evaluating,when taken together meant that training itself has acrucial role (Roffe, 1999).

4.2.5. Factor 5: autonomy and flexibility

Three statements were loaded into this factor withalpha reliability at 0.54. This factor had the lowest meanvalue of 3.65. That employees were empowered to makedecision and took initiative to participate in the job taskof the organization meant they had a certain degree ofautonomy to perform the duties. Creativity andinnovation are nurtured by cultures that are driven bystrong, shared values. Employees need to feel empow-ered to offer creative thinking. They need to know thatall ideas would be heard and respected with promptaction. This increased self-confidence and nurturedone’s ability to think creatively and openly (DeSalvo,1999).

Besides, management acceptance and tolerance ofmistakes happening on tasks done allow employees tohave flexibility to complete the task required, and to tryvarious new methods to fulfill the goals. Therefore, thisfactor was named as ‘‘Autonomy and Flexibility’’.Although this factor just achieved a mean value of3.65, it was still on the positive, rather than neutral pointof the scale. Notwithstanding, it identified clearly thenature of Chinese traditional value that people were notmuch concerned about autonomy. Most of the employeeswanted to have some procedures and guidelines to do thejob, rather than empowerment to make the final decisionon their own responsibilities.

4.3. Ranking of factors

After analyzing the overall mean value of fivedimensions on motivators, the ranking was listed indescending order of mean value ranging from ‘‘1’’ as‘‘Strongly Disagree’’ and ‘‘5’’ as ‘‘Strongly Agree’’. Ingeneral, the hotel managers and supervisors agreed that

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559 555

the five derived factors were motivators to creativity,but in different degrees of agreement. (Please refer toTable 3).

Amongst all these five factors, the hotel managers andsupervisors agreed Factor 4 ‘‘Training and Develop-ment’’ was the most important factor that could mostmotivate staff to be creative, having a mean value of4.14, representing a strong inclination that they requiredthe company to provide relevant training for staff andmanagement and they would be motivated to be morecreative when opportunities for further advancementand development were made. It should be possible toteach or train many aspects of creative thinking in muchthe same ways as educating to read and to do arithmeticcalculations (Vernon, 1989). Moreover, there is a strongcurrent trend in this direction. Many writers such asTorrance (1965), De Bono (1970) and Parnes (1963)believed that the curriculum should include extensivetraining in a variety of divergent thinking tasks from theearliest school years, and that these should improve anall-around capacity to show imaginative, flexible think-ing, leading to creative problem solving. It followed thateducation and training must also change to meet thedemands of a culture in which innovation becomes theuniversal norm (Garavan & Deegan, 1995).

In second place was Factor 2 ‘‘Support and Motiva-tion from the Top’’ with a mean value of 4.12, whichimplied employees really agreed that support andmotivation from the top management and immediatesupervisor were very important. If they received supportand encouragement, they would be more willing toengage in creative thinking to fulfill the job tasks. Asstated in previous research by Lloyd (1996), animportant aspect when considering the introduction ofany program to enhance employees’ creativity ismanagement support and commitment at the highestlevel, without which any policy was doomed to failure.

Thirdly, Factor 1 ‘‘Open Policy’’ was placed in themiddle position among the five factors with a meanvalue of 3.97. Employees were motivated to be morecreative if the organization had an open culture (Cook,

1998). They would be more willing to communicate witheach other, keen on solving problems with creative ideasand acquire new knowledge habitually. Nowadays,leaders in business and government worldwide knowthat solutions to pressing economic, social and politicalproblems lie not in yesterday’s thinking and behavior,but in entirely new ways of seeing, perceiving andbehaving. Learning and creativity always had to do withsomething new and were inseparable components of anysuccessful enterprise. By the same token, learning wasalso defined as the act or process of acquiring knowledgeor skill (White, 1994). Therefore, it was shown that acompany open policy allowed employees to acquire newknowledge and interact with each other in order toenhance their creativity.

The fourth factor was Factor 3, ‘‘Recognition’’, witha mean value of 3.88, which meant that employeesagreed that they were motivated to be more creative ifrecognition on work done was given. As stated by Lloyd(1996), respect and dignity that should be afforded toeveryone within the organization, and an appropriatereward or recognition structure could overcome fearsand prejudices that abound within the organization.Besides, as supported by recent research of Eisenbergerand Selbst (1994), it demonstrated a clear enhancementof creativity that rewards could increase creativity aslong as the reward was not overly salient. Employeeswho were given reward as a kind of ‘‘bonus’’ for taskengagement without explicitly entering into a contractwith the experimenter to do the task in order to receivethe reward actually displayed higher levels of creativitythan non-rewarded employees (Amabile, Hennessey, &Grossman, 1986).

Lastly, Factor 5, ‘‘Autonomy and Flexibility’’, wasloaded as the least important factor among the five witha mean of 3.65 and standard deviation of 0.63. Althoughthis factor was listed as the last, the mean value laybetween neutral to agree, but with an inclination ‘‘toagree’’. Within the ‘‘empowered approach’’ now beingadopted in organizations, more authority is beingdevolved to line managers (Lloyd, 1996). Besides, asNabi (1979) also concluded, the creative person demon-strated and required autonomy and independence.Notwithstanding, this result clearly reflected a truththat current Chinese culture was not concerned overmuch with autonomy. Traditionally, Chinese peoplewould like to have guidelines on task fulfilment and evenconfess to being wrong rather than asking managementto tolerate mistakes.

5. Recommendations

Although visitor arrivals in Hong Kong haveincreased tremendously in the year 2000 and attained anew record topping 13 million for the first time, the

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Table 3

Ranking of the factors of job-related motivators to creativity from the

perception of the supervisory employees in Hong Kong hotel industry

Factors Meana Standard

deviation

Ranking

Training and development 4.14 0.70 1

Support and motivation from

the top

4.12 0.62 2

Open policy 3.97 0.65 3

Recognition 3.88 0.77 4

Autonomy and flexibility 3.65 0.63 5

aMean value on a five-point Likert scale was used, where ‘‘1’’

indicated ‘‘Strongly Disagree’’ and ‘‘5’’ indicated ‘‘Strongly Agree’’.

S. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559556

hotel business still requires improvement to benefitproportionally from these increases in visitor numbers.The average stay of the tourists has been reduced.Besides, the percentage of the tourists from China hasincreased tremendously and accounts for 30 percent oftotal visitor arrivals, but their average spending in hotelaccommodation and food and beverage expenses arecomparatively lower than tourists from USA, Europeand Japan, etc. Therefore, if a hotel wants to maintain aunique position in such a competitive environment inHong Kong, it is important for the hotel management toimprove employees’ performance by stimulating themotivators to creativity.

Pursuant to the results of this research, severalnotable recommendations might be worthy for con-templation by the hotel management. They include thefollowing:

(1) Budget allocation for employees’ training anddevelopment program in order to enhance theircreativity and develop them into the valuable assetsof the company.

(2) Management initiation to give support and providemotivation for employees.

(3) Open communication and interaction betweenmanagement and the employees in order to have aclear and well-defined concept of the companyvision and mission.

(4) Recognize and praise employees when creative ideasare given regardless of success or not.

(5) Involve employees’ participation in planning anddecision-making in order to have their commitmentto the organization.

Findings obtained from this research indicated thatemployees agreed the dimension of training and devel-opment was an important motivator to creativity with amean value of 4.14. Intuitively, organizations recognizethe importance of training employees in creativity skills,such as lateral thinking, mind-mapping techniques, andcreative problem solving, to enhance creativity inorganizations. In practice, while creativity skills areimportant, management should not neglect the role oftechnical or operational skills (as referred by Amabile,1988) on domain-relevant skills in the creative process.Creativity skills without the necessary technical compe-tence will not help individuals or groups to arrive atcreative solutions to job-related problems. Moreover, toimprove creativity in an organization, there is a need forhuman relations training and leadership training. It isimportant that these programs make managers andsupervisors more aware of how they hinder creativityand what they can do positively to enhance creativity intheir organizations. They should be trained to be goodcoaches so that they can effectively impart technical ordomain-relevant skills to their subordinates (Tan, 1998).Therefore, in whatever means, training and development

are important motivators to creativity. Budgets shouldbe allocated for different training and developmentprograms in order to enhance employees’ creativity.

Secondly, leadership practices can strongly influencehow subordinates behave in organizations. Hence, it isimportant that management leads in a style that issupportive of creativity. Employees need support suchas resources, authority, time and information from theorganization which is creative. For example, 3M is wellknown for supporting the creative efforts of theiremployees by allowing them to devote up to 15min oftheir time to any pet projects (Leob, 1995). Therefore, itis suggested that management should initiate suchpolicies to support and motivate employees.

At the organizational level, culture forms the founda-tion for nurturing creativity. There must be trust,respect for individual differences and open communica-tion to support creativity. When trust is lacking, peoplewill not dare to take risks. Respect for individualdifferences enables individuals to share different per-spectives and explore alternative ways of doingthings. These are behaviors that may lead to creativeoutcomes. Open communication is important becauseideas and information are the life-blood of creativity.When communication is blocked, there will be noexchange of ideas or information within the organiza-tion, thus stifling creativity (Tan, 1998). Therefore, it isimportant for management to provide a clear and well-defined direction to employees, and to make sure everyemployee knows the company vision and mission.Sometimes, organizations are not creative simplybecause employees do not know how to be creativeand do not know what the company wants to achieve.Managers may not know how to lead and motivateemployees to contribute creatively towards the organi-zational goals and objectives. Notwithstanding, it isrecommended that every employee knows the companyvision, mission and companies possess a clear concepton communication and interaction between manage-ment and employees.

Fourth, every one in the organization should knowthat constant feedback is important to ensure successfulimplementation of the interventions designed to enhancecreativity. Once employees are able to receive somerewards or incentives from the company, they will feelrecognized and be more willing to provide ideas. Ifsomething recommended is not successful or unableto be performed, but the employee is still praisedor received some compliments from the top, theywill be more willing to continue their creative thin-king and try again next time. Therefore, it is veryimportant to give feedback, recognition and praise tothe employees even though the suggestions may not beimplemented.

Finally, employees are encouraged to be involvedwhole-heartedly in the daily operation. Management

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559 557

should empower them to make decisions, allowing themto make mistakes during the planning process and thedecision-making process, but also providing correctivemeasures to ensure such mistakes are not repeated in thefuture. Mistakes are opportunities for learning.

6. Conclusion

Some of these findings concur with previous researchon job-related motivators. All agree that training anddevelopment, support and motivation from the top,recognition and open policy were important motivatorshelping to foster supervisory employees’ creativity.However, hotel employees under the influence of theChinese culture did not perceive motivators such asfreedom and challenge, as being important. Accordingto the analysis, both statements of ‘‘Freedom’’ and‘‘Challenging Work’’ were deleted because they did notload together with other statements. Moreover, themean value of the statement ‘‘Freedom’’ was 3.35, whichwas the lowest score among all motivators. Employeesworking in a Chinese culture context may not perceivethe importance of freedom, as tradition is to provideinstructions and guidelines on assigned tasks. Challengemay be good for some employees, but it may also havenegative influences on those employees who want tohave a stable working environment.

Further study is needed to include all levels ofemployees such as management, supervisory and opera-tional. Besides, perspective of owners and hotel guestsshould also be considered and more research exploringChinese culture and attitudes towards creativity isrecommended since most of the operational and super-visory employees are Chinese in the hotel industry inHong Kong. Nevertheless, the visionary insight shouldbe addressed if hotels are to survive in a fast-changingenvironment by fostering their competitive advantagesthrough the enhancement of creativity.

Finally, with reference to Chinese culture, compara-tive research between Chinese staff in different locationslike the People’s Republic of China, Taiwan, HongKong, Singapore and perhaps Malaysia might revealinteresting differences.

References

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York:

Springer-Verlag.

Amabile, T. M. (1987). The motivation to be creative. Frontiers of

creativity research: Beyond the basics. NY: Buffalo (pp. 223–253).

Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in

organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123–167.

Amabile, T. M. (1996a). Creativity in context: Update to the social

psychology of creativity. USA: Westview Press Inc.

Amabile, T. M. (1996b). Unlimited genius. Success, 43(7), 36–37.

Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On

doing what you love and loving what you do. California Manage-

ment Review, 40(1), 39–58.

Amabile, T. M., & Gryskiewicz, N. (1989). The creative environment

scales: The work environment inventory. Creativity Research

Journal, 2, 231–254.

Amabile, T. M., Gryskiewicz, S. S. (1987). Creativity in the R&D

Laboratory. Technical Report No. 30, Greensbora, NC: Centre for

Creative Leadership.

Amabile, T. M., Hennessey, B. A., & Grossman, B. S. (1986). Social

influences on creativity: The effects of contracted for reward.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 14–23.

Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, A. A., & Tighe, E. (1994). The

work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic

motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 66, 950–967.

Ambrose, M. L., & Kulik, C. T. (1999). Old friends, new faces:

Motivation research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3),

231–292.

Carr, D. K., & Johansson, H. J. (1995). Best practices in re-engineering.

NY: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Cook, P. (1998). The creativity advantage—is your organization

the leader of the pack? Industrial and Commercial Training, 30(5),

179–184.

De Bono, E. (1970). Lateral thinking. New York: Harper & Row.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-

determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

DeSalvo, T. (1999). Unleash the creativity in your organization. HR

Magazine, June, 154–164.

Eisenberger, R., & Selbst, M. (1994). Does reward increase or

decrease creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

66, 1116–1127.

Garavan, T. N., & Deegan, J. (1995). Discontinuous change

in organizations—using training and development interventions

to develop creativity. Industrial and Commercial Training, 27(11),

18–25.

Gautschi, T. (2001). Invest in creativity. Design News, June 18, 56(2),

135.

Greer, M., & Levine, E. (1991). Enhancing creative performance in

college students. Journal of Creativity Behavior, 25, 250–255.

Hair, J. E., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998).

Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Kim, J. O., Mueller, C. (1994). Factor analysis: statistical methods and

practical issues. In S. L. Michael (Ed.), Factor analysis and related

techniques, Vol. 5 (pp. 75–155). California: Sage Publications.

Leob, M. (1995). Ten commandments for managing creative people.

Fortune, January 16, 135–136.

Lloyd, G. C. (1996). Thinking beyond the box. Health Manpower

Management, 22(5), 37–39.

MacKinnon, D. W. (1962). The nature and nurture of creative talent.

American Psychologist, 17, 484–495.

Maslow, A. (1959). Creativity in self-actualising people. In H. A.

Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation (pp. 83–95). New

York: Harper.

Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van

Nostrand.

McSorley, D. (2002). A different kind of gateway: Disney Institute.

Sally’s place (available at: http://sallys-place.com/travel/n america/

eus disney.htm) (2002/11/25).

Nabi, K. S. (1979). Personality and self: The creativity discussion.

Indian Psychological Review, 18, 5–8.

Noursis, M. J. (1994). SPSS Professional Statistics 6.1, Chicago:

SPSS Inc.

Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal

and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal,

39(3), 607–634.

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559558

Parnes, S. J. (1963). Education and creativity. Teachers College

Record, 64, 331–339.

Roffe, I. M. (1999). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A

review of the implications for training and development. Journal of

European Industrial Training, 23(4), 224–237.

Tan, G. (1998). Managing creativity in organizations: A total system

approach. Creativity and Innovation Management, 7(1), 23–31.

Torrance, E. P. (1965). Rewarding creative behavior. NJ, Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Torrance, E. P. (1987). Future career image as a predictor of creative

achievement in the 22-year longitudinal study. Psychological

Reports, 60, 574.

Vernon, P. E. (1989). The nature-nurture problem in creativity. In J. A.

Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook

of creativity—perspectives on individual differences (pp. 93–110).

New York: Plenum Press.

White, M. G. (1994). Creativity and the learning culture. The Learning

Organization, 1(1), 4–5.

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. Wong, L. Pang / Tourism Management 24 (2003) 551–559 559