ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman

Exploring the relationship between employee creativity and job-related

motivators in the Hong Kong hotel industry
Simon Chak-keung Wonga,, Adele Ladkinb
a
School of Hotel & Tourism Management, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Core H Room GH807, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR
b
International Centre for Tourism & Hospitality Research, School of Services Management, Bournemouth University,
Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow, Poole, Dorset BH12 5BB, UK

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to determine if there is any relationship between employee creativity and job-related motivators, using a
case study of hotel employees in Hong Kong. From a sample of 983 employees, canonical correlation indicated there is a relationship
between creativity and job-related motivators. Furthermore, the risk-taking dimension under creativity was found to be more correlated
to the intrinsic job-related motivators. Intrinsic job-related motivators which include opportunity for advancement and development,
loyalty to employees, appreciation and praise of work done, feelings of being involved, sympathetic help with personal problems and
interesting work, are found to encourage the hotel employees’ risk-taking behavior. A ‘‘See-Saw’’ model is presented to show the
relationship between the two opposing sides: intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators versus creativity and risk-taking factors.
r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Employee creativity; Job-related motivators; Hotel employees; Hong Kong

1. Introduction between motivation, gender, educational background and

Hong Kong is world-renowned for its first class hotels
with high service orientation (Kivela and Go, 1996). With
the increased global competition and a focus on quality
products and excellence in service, there is a need for hotels
to be innovative in their approach to improving service
delivery. Based on the assumption that motivated staff
will provide higher levels of customer care, developing
employee creativity is seen as a possible way forward for
motivating employees in the industry. The assumption is
that a creative person should be self-motivated to work
hard if his/her expected motivators (intrinsic or extrinsic)
are satisfied.
Creativity emerged as an area of research in the 1950s
with the seminal work of Guilford (1950), with further
significant research developments taking place from 1990
onwards. Issues such as investigating the relationship
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: hmsimon@polyu.edu.hk,
hmsimon@inet.polyu.edu.hk (S.C.-k. Wong),
aladkin@bournemouth.ac.uk (A. Ladkin).
creative outputs were explored. This placed creativity
research firmly in the field of Psychology and the Arts
(Sternberg and Lubart, 1999) as quoted in Sternberg
(1999). The importance of studying creativity and its
relationship to other factors receives attention from many
scholars.
One primary reason for the lack of research into
creativity in the hospitality industry is that creativity is
usually associated with artistic industries such as film
making, drama, painting, music composing, fiction writing,
poetry, etc. Historically, hospitality was simply concerned
with providing accommodation and food for travelers.
Emphasis was placed on the operational routine work of
how hotels satisfy travelers for accommodation and food
needs. However, the research conducted by Wong and
Pang (2003a, b) indicates that creative ideas generate
business benefits to the hotel industry, and increasingly
hospitality is seen as more than fulfilling basic needs and
focuses on the wider customer experience.
A further dimension to creativity research relates to
culture. Taking Hofstede’s (1980) four cross cultural
dimensions, the Chinese culture is named as collectivism,

0278-4319/$ - see front matter r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.01.001
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
high power distance, strong uncertainty avoidance and
medium masculinity. In the Western context, previous
research has been conducted to discover individuals’,
creativity (Amabile, 1985). However, recently, the study
of creativity has been applied within oriental cultures (Lau
et al., 2004a). Lau et al. (2004b) summarize the study of
creativity in the East and West into areas: (1) culture and
its influence in creativity; (2) education and development
about creativity; and (3) creativity in practice. Rudowicz
(2004) studies creativity among Chinese people and Leung
et al. (2004) compare creativity and innovation between
east and western societies. Puccio and Gonzalez (2004)
investigate how to nurture creative thinking using western
approaches with the concerns on eastern issues. Cheng
(2004) discusses how to progress from the traditional
concept in creativity education within the Chinese society.
To expand further research into creativity, the research
objectives for this paper are: to explore the creativity levels
of HK hotel employees in terms of the risk taking
and creativity dimensions, to ascertain the importance of
intrinsic versus extrinsic job motivators, and to test for a
relationship between creativity and job-related motivators
in broad terms and by different job levels. Finally, the
research comments on the relevance of creativity in the
Chinese cultural setting.
This study will be useful to the local hotel industry by
contributing towards what managers understand regarding
the motivations of hotel employees, and hence to consider
human resources strategies that help to retain quality staff.
In addition, there is presently a research gap regarding the
role of motivation in the creative process. Creativity has
been widely researched from many different perspectives
and angles and the present research aims to advance the
understanding of the relationship between the hotel
employee creativity level and job-related motivators.
2. Creativity and motivation
The subject areas of both creativity and motivation
provide a wealth of research in their own right. However,
the aspect that is specifically relevant for this research is the
relationship between creativity and motivation. Much of
the previous research focuses on the relationship by
exploring both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators (EM).
The componential model of creativity (Amabile, 1983a,
1996a) suggested three separate components of creativity:
domain-relevant skills, creativity-relevant processes, and
intrinsic task motivation. Collins and Amabile (1999)
argued that these components should be interactive with
each other instead of considering each one alone. As
suggested by Amabile (1983a, 1996a), creativity will be
highest in the area where three components share their
greatest overlap. In other words, people should be more
creative within their ‘‘creativity intersection.’’ Identification
of this intersection is crucial in enhancing creativity. Yet,
individual differences because of personality and cultural
differences make this ‘‘intersection’’ subject to variation.
427
Amabile (1996b) suggested four balance factors to
manage creativity in organizations; and these are:
(1) goal-setting—loose vs. tight control on overall goal
set; (2) evaluation—frequent, work-focused evaluation and
feedback; (3) reward—creativity will be fostered when
employees know that reward and recognition will follow
from creative efforts; (4) pressure—realistic sense of
urgency and suitable competitive pressure may be good
for creativity. Florida and Goodnight (2005) illustrate the
three successful strategies adopted by the Statistical
Analysis System (SAS Institute) in America for maximizing
creativity. SAS, being the largest privately held software
company, developed three strategies: (1) help employees to
do their best work—provide mental stimulation while
eliminate distraction; (2) make all managers responsible for
sparking creativity—ensure all managers to have hands-on
work and allow mistakes; and (3) engage customers as
creative partners—acts on customer complaints and
suggestions. These strategies have resulted in SAS achiev-
ing an employee turnover rate between 3% and 5%, and it
achieved a 98% subscription renewal rate, plus 28 straight
years of revenue growth. Creativity assists economic
growth, and Florida (2004) urged the need to keep the
creative capital—creative thinkers whose ideas can turn
into valuable products and services, and finally benefit and
defend the country’s economy.
Previous studies exploring the link between motivation
and creativity identified the relevance of intrinsic motiva-
tion (IM) (Amabile, 1983a), the need for order (Barron,
1988), the need for achievement (McClelland, 1962), and
other motives. According to Hennessy and Amabile (1988,
p. 13), the definition of intrinsic and EM are: ‘‘persons who
engage in activities because of their own interest or
personal sense of satisfaction and fulfilment are intrinsi-
cally motivated, whereas persons who engage in activities
to achieve some goal external to task engagement are
extrinsically motivated.’’ Intrinsic rewards such as achieve-
ment of one’s potential have often been viewed as most
important to creators (Hennessy and Amabile, 1988;
Amabile, 1983a). People who perform a task for an
extrinsic reward are found to be less creative than others
who receive no reward (Amabile et al., 1986). This echoes
an earlier study conducted by Amabile (1985) that extrinsic
goals such as money and job advancement, on the
contrary, induced writers to produce less creative poems
than the control group who were the creative writers.
Contemporary models of intrinsic and EM have been
developed over time. For example, Sternberg and Lubart’s
(1991) developed a concept of the importance of task-
focused motivation for creativity (supported by Amabile,
1985 and Amabile et al., 1986). Sternberg (1999) discovered
the relationship between high level creativity and the
individual’s personal involvement, and searched for IM
and skills in hiring personnel. Amabile (1988) explored
personnel to tasks, discovering that social factors in the
work environment can influence intrinsic and EM and
as a consequence, this can also influence creativity.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
428 S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
Csikszentmihalyi (1991), however, possessed an alternative
view of motivation relevant to creativity. He believed that
creative people simply are motivated by a single propensity
to enjoy interaction with challenging tasks. Collins and
Amabile (1999) have produced a comprehensive account of
the relationship between intrinsic and EM with creativity,
in particular the creative products. They supported Deci
and Ryan (1985), where they refined EM into two facets:
control and information.
The conceptualization of IM and self-determination
(Deci and Ryan, 1985) further supports the importance
of IM in human psychology. When an individual feels both
self-determined and competent in their work, IM will arise
(Deci, 1975). Self-determination theory derived by Deci
and Ryan (2002) comprises of four mini theories. Two of
the four theories investigate motivation with the other
factors. Cognitive evaluation theory explores the effects of
social contexts on IM. Organismic integration theory
reveals the concept of internationalization to the develop-
ment of EM. The other two theories—causality orienta-
tions theory and basic needs theory—address individual’s
differences in people’s tendencies toward self-determined
behavior and basic needs in relation to life goals and daily
behaviors, respectively.
Amabile (1993) suggests that certain types of EM can
combine with synergistic IM and lead to high levels of
employee satisfaction and performance (Amabile, 1993).
The proposed two mechanisms for these combinations
are named as ‘‘extrinsic in service of intrinsics’’ and
‘‘motivation-work-cycle match’’. Any extrinsic factors that
support an individual’s sense of competence without
undermining one’s sense of self-determination should
positively contribute to IM—synergistic EM. Amabile
(1993) proposes a model of motivational synergy—
a combination of intrinsic and EM. Synergistic EM will
not undermine feelings of self-determination but will
increase autonomy in intrinsically interesting tasks, while
nonsynergistic EM will lead individuals to feel controlled
by external forces and will detract IM. Nevertheless, this is
the breakthrough argument of including EM (in particular,
the synergistic EM) in promoting creativity alongside IM.
According to previous research, IM is very important,
beneficial and crucial to creativity (Amabile, 1983a;
Csikszentmihalyi, 1991; Maslow, 1943; Oldham and
Cummings, 1996). The power of IM is so strong that
simply thinking about intrinsic reasons for doing a task
may be sufficient to boost creativity on that activity (Greer
and Levine, 1991), especially for those who have an
ongoing involvement in the target domain (Amabile,
1996a). Highly creative people possess an intense commit-
ment to their work, manifested as a fascination with a set
of problems that sustains their work over a period of
years (Gruber, 1986) and energized by challenging tasks
(Oldham and Cummings, 1996), a sign of high IM. Besides,
people who are identified as more intrinsically motivated
towards their work have consistently been found to
produce work rated as more highly creative (Amabile
et al., 1994). The development of the Work Preference
Inventory (WPI) (Amabile et al., 1994) to assess individual
differences in intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orienta-
tions successfully identified two primary scales (i.e. intrinsic
and extrinsic). Each scale is subdivided into two secondary
scales. For IM, challenge and enjoyment are the secondary
scales; and for EM, outward and compensation are the
secondary scales.
On the other hand, extrinsic constraints would reduce
intrinsic interest in a task and lead to lower levels of
creativity. As Amabile (1983b) suggested, extrinsic motives
could cause people to divide their attention between
extrinsic goals and the task at hand. People who are
primarily extrinsically motivated to find a solution may
rely on more conventional, less creative exits from the maze
because they are not involved enough in the task to
search for more novel exits. The concept of ‘‘overjustifica-
tion effect’’ from self-attribution literature suggests that
‘‘people will attribute causality for their behavior to the
external cause and discount any plausible internal cause—
namely, IM’’ (Deci and Ryan, 1985, p. 201). An inverse
relationship is found between external constraints and that
of individual’s IM (Amabile, 1996a).
Amabile (1993) outlines the crucial role of IM in crea-
tivity where people seek interest, enjoyment and personal
challenge from their work. IM were found to occur more
often in the high-creativity events than in the low-creativity
events (Amabile and Gryskiewicz, 1987). Amabile further
explored the impacts of environmental factors in relation
to creativity. The Work Environment Inventory (WEI)
developed by Amabile and Gryskiewicz (1989) is seminal
research which sets a benchmark for the similar research in
creativity. WEI focuses on those factors in the work
environment that are most likely to influence the expres-
sion and development of creative ideas. Eight scales
describing environmental stimulants to creativity were
identified: (1) freedom; (2) challenge; (3) resources;
(4) supervisor; (5) co-workers; (6) recognition; (7) unity
and co-operation; and (8) creativity support. In the content
analysis of the research study by Amabile and Gryskiewicz
(1989), they also reviewed nine qualities of environments
that served to promote creativity including: (1) freedom;
(2) good project management; (3) sufficient resources;
(4) encouragement; (5) various organizational character-
istics; (6) recognition; (7) sufficient time; (8) challenge; and
(9) pressure. Most probably, people with different back-
grounds or cultures will have differences in their values of
creativity and they may be motivated to be creative by
different environmental stimulants. Similarly, there are
another nine ‘‘environmental obstacles’’ that inhibit crea-
tivity. They are: (1) weak organizational characteristics,
e.g. inappropriate reward system; (2) lack of freedom;
(3) organizational disinterest; (4) poor project manage-
ment; (5) inappropriate evaluation; (6) insufficient re-
sources; (7) time pressure; (8) overemphasis on the status
quo; and (9) competition: interpersonal or intergroup
competition which fostering a self-defensive attitude.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
WEI was developed into a 78-item questionnaire instru-
ment called: ‘‘KEYS’’: Assessing the Climate for Creativ-
ity’’ (Amabile, 1995; Amabile et al., 1996). Within the 10
scales of this instrument, six assess environmental stimu-
lants, two assess environmental obstacles, and two assess
work outcomes—creativity and productivity.
3. Theoretical framework
In order to test the relationship between creativity
and job-related motivators among the Hong Kong hotel
employees, a theoretical framework is proposed (see Fig. 1).
The theoretical framework incorporates two measures,
Byrd’s creativity inventory to measure creativity, and
Kovach’s job-related motivators to measure motivation.
The framework takes the form of a schematic diagram,
which is taken to operate like a weight balancing scale. The
scale is balanced with the creative level on the left and job-
related motivators on the right. The middle of the scale is a
triangular pyramid shape, representing a typical organiza-
tional structure in the Hong Kong hotel industry. The staff
structure is another dimension of the research, which
investigates any differences in the relationship according to
different job levels between, top executives, middle managers
and frontline employees.
The creativity inventory has two dimensions, a risk
taking factor and a creativity factor. Byrd’s (1970, 1971)
statements (he called norms) for the Creatrix Inventory
(C&RT) instrument were originally developed from a
sample of over 500 employees representing seven organiza-
tions. Kovach’s job-related motivators derived from a
study involving industrial workers in United States and
identified 10 job-related factors which are considered as
important to motivate employees on their jobs (Kovach,
1980, 1987). These 10 factors are, to a great extent, similar
Creativity
(Byrd Creatrix
Inventory)
• Risk-taking (RT)
• Creativity (C)
Top
Managerial
Staff
Middle Supervisors
Operational Staff
Fig. 1. Theoretical framework of the relationship between creativity and job-related motivators in the Hong Kong hotel industry.
429
to those identified in Herzberg’s two-factor theory. The
motivators suggested by Herzberg are similar to the
intrinsic factors suggested by Kovach, while the hygiene
factors are similar to the extrinsic factors suggested by
Kovach. The 10 job-related motivators are classified into
intrinsic (six aspects) and extrinsic (four aspects) by
Kovach. Other research has supported these findings, for
example Austin (1994) argued that intrinsic factors had a
more influential role in motivating employees. Lee-Ross
(1995) supported the concept of ‘‘internal work motiva-
tion’’ which had similar meaning to IM in that the more the
effort expended by workers on their jobs, the more
motivated they would become.
Kovach’s 10 job-related motivators were repeatedly
adopted by several researchers including Charles and
Marshal (1992), Darder (1994), and Simons and Enz
(1995) to investigate the motivation of employees in other
industries. In Charles and Marshal’s study (1992), 255
Caribbean hotel employees rated ‘‘good wages’’ and ‘‘good
working conditions’’ as first and second top priorities.
Simons and Enz (1995) supported this finding with their
survey of 278 hotel employees in 12 different hotels located
throughout the United States and Canada. These hospi-
tality workers ranked ‘‘good wages’’, ‘‘job security’’ and
‘‘opportunities for advancement and development’’ as the
top three most important factors. These findings echoed
the concept of Theory M (Money) postulated by Weaver
(1988), who suggested that direct cash rewards are power-
ful and can eliminate the source of worker turnover.
Siu et al. (1997) conducted a survey using Kovach’s 10
job-related motivators to investigate what motivates Hong
Kong hotel employees. Further research by Wong et al.
(1999) discovered a similar ranking by Hong Kong hotel
employees with US hospitality workers though they were
different from the US industrial workers in 1946 and 1986.
Motivation
(Kovach’s 10 job-related motivators)
Intrinsic Extrinsic
Motivators (IM) Motivators (EM)
• Appreciation and • Job security
praise of work • Good wages
done • Good working
• Feeling of being conditions
involved • Tactful
• Sympathetic help disciplining
with personal
problems
• Interesting work
• Opportunities for
advancement and
development
• Loyalty to
employees
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
430 S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
Hong Kong hotel employees ranked ‘‘opportunities for
advancement/development’’, ‘‘loyalty to employees’’ and
‘‘good wages’’ as the top three most important elements
in motivation. The result was quite similar to the US
counterparts with ‘‘good wages’’ as the first priority. ‘‘Job
security’’ as second and ‘‘opportunities for advancement/
development’’ as the third. It is interesting to discover that
Hong Kong employees demand ‘‘loyalty to employees’’.
This factor does not mean the same loyalty definition as
employee towards company. The explanation here is that
hotel employees expect the company to respect their
contribution and should take care their needs and wants.
Hong Kong hotel employees expect respectful and equal
treatment by paying loyalty to them when they show
organizational commitment in return.
The study by Siu et al. (1997) also questioned if there are
any differences for hotel employees’ choice of job-related
motivators when they are working in different departments
in a hotel. The findings reveal that employees working in
various departments had little variations in rankings of
their motivational choice. For example, public relations
employees demanded good wages, interesting work and
good working conditions as their top three most important
motivators. Front office and sales and marketing staff
ranked ‘‘appreciation for work done’’ as their third
important motivator. Nevertheless, the overall ranking
indicates a high tendency to rank four factors as top
motivators. They were: ‘‘opportunities for advancement/
development’’, ‘‘loyalty to employees’’, ‘‘good wages’’ and
‘‘good working conditions’’.
Wong et al. (1999) conducted ANOVA analysis to test
for any differences among different level of positions
towards the 10 job-related motivators. Three areas were
found. Firstly, ‘‘job security’’ was considered more impor-
tant by hotel managers than by general staff. Secondly,
managers rated higher comparatively than supervisors and
general staff in terms of ‘‘feeling of being involved’’.
Thirdly, managers scored higher (mean was 4.34 among all
10 job-related motivators) than supervisors and general
staff in terms of ‘‘opportunities for advancement and
development’’.
Wong et al. (1999) after testing Kovach’s 10 job-related
motivators on Hong Kong hotel employees discovered that
they are both valid and reliable and can be applied to the
Hong Kong environment and Chinese culture. Therefore,
these 10 job-related motivators are now adopted to be the
instrument in this study as the measuring instrument of
motivation of the hotel employees in Hong Kong.
4. Methods
The research used a questionnaire for the data collection,
the development of which took place in a number of stages.
Before the pilot test, the 10 elements based on past
literature were used to ask a group of 19 hotel employees
using the semantic differential exercise to decide whether
each element shown represents creativity. The 10 elements
were: sensitivity to problem, ideational fluency, flexibility
of set, ideational novelty, synthesizing ability, analyzing
ability, reorganizing or re-defining ability, span of idea-
tional structure, evaluation ability and risk taking.
Respondents were asked to choose either ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’
or ‘‘?’’ to each element shown whether each is considered as
creativity element. The four elements got the higher score
are: ideational novelty—‘‘17 yes’’, risk-taking—‘‘16 yes’’,
synthesis ability—‘‘16 yes’’ and sensitivity to problems—
‘‘15 yes’’. These findings matched the classification by
Byrd’s (1971) creatrix inventory which has two dimensions:
a risk-taking factor and a creativity factor.
4.1. First pilot test
In order to test the applicability of the creativity index
for Chinese people, 111 hotel employees who studied part-
time higher diploma in School of Hotel & Tourism
Management were surveyed. Using cluster analysis, it was
found that the eight typology of creativity suggested by
Byrd (1971) were valid for Chinese people. Byrd’s eight
orientations used the x-axis as creativity scale and the
y-axis as risk-taking scale. Cluster analysis revealed that
people with certain scales in the risk-taking factor (y-axis)
co-ordinated with creativity factor (x-axis). The eight
dimensions created were compared with the original
suggestions by Byrd’s (1970) creatrix inventory, and it
was found that they matched each other. Originally, the
authors suspected that the Chinese may be conservative
and not inclined to take risk, and the scale developed
by Byrd may imply western respondents’ preference
only. Nevertheless, the locations of the domains created
were very similar to Byrd’s as a whole. The typology of
creativity styles were: reproducer, modifier, challenger,
practicalizer, innovator, synthesizer, dreamer and planner.
With this evidence, Byrd’s model of creatrix inventory was
adopted to be the measuring instrument in this study.
4.2. Second pilot test
A second pilot test was conducted to test the validity of
these 56 statements to see whether it was applicable to
Chinese people and to reduce the redundant statements in
the risk-taking and creativity factors. Factor analysis was
conducted to test the validity and internal reliability of
creativity dimensions. As shown in Table 1, there were a
total of 15 statements that emerged in the risk-taking
dimension through factor analysis. Further analysis was
conducted in order to test the internal cohesive power of
each statement in the each derived factor. The criteria for
deleting any group with less than 0.6 alpha was adopted,
as an alpha of less than 0.6 indicates a weak cohesion.
After the alpha internal reliability test, 11 statements
remained. In this pilot test, the Factor 4 and Factor 5 of the
risk-taking dimension were deleted. Therefore, the total
number of statements was reduced to 11 statements with
three sub-factors.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437 431

Table 1
Factor analysis to test the validity of Byrd’s Creatrix Inventory—first pilot test (N ¼ 111)

No. Statement Factor loading Alpha reliability test

Risk-taking dimension
Factor 1: Self esteem (6 statements) 0.85
S11 I trust my ability to size up a situation 0.742
S12 I have an innate capacity to cope with life 0.701
S17 I enjoy detachment and privacy 0.728
S18 I am assertive and positive 0.679
S19 I am able to risk being myself 0.776
S23 I feel certain and secure in my relationships with others 0.600
Factor 2: Life style (3 statements) 0.62
S6 It is possible for me to live the way I want 0.600
S10 I live in terms of my wants, likes, dislikes and values 0.644
S14 I will risk a friendship in order to say or do what I believe is right 0.722
Factor 3: Self-perceptions on weakness (2 statements) 0.64
S4 I accept my weakness 0.859
S24 I can accept my mistakes 0.732
Factor 4: Relationship with others (2 statements) 0.41
S1 I can put off tomorrow that I ought to do today 0.635
S8 In dealing with others, I believe in saying what I feel 0.600
Factor 5: Emotion and moral (2 statements) 0.26
S22 Sometimes I feel so angry I want to hurt others 0.857
S27 Honesty is not always the best policy 0.681
Creativity dimension
Factor 1: Personality attributes (10 statements) 0.9667
S41 What other considers chaos does not bother me 0.986
S48 I am very complex, even to myself 0.982
S49 Most people regard me as inconsistent 0.985
S50 I prefer extreme disorder to extreme order 0.743
S51 New situations challenge me more than frighten me 0.937
S52 I am rarely completely understood 0.707
S53 I become bored rapidly. 0.983
S54 I do not like being supervised 0.970
S55 Often I am more persistent than others are 0.737
S56 My work is my creation 0.980

Factor 2: Thinking style (2 statements) 0.57

S29 Daydreaming is a useful activity 0.737
S30 I often have sexual fantasy 0.736
Factor 3: Self-perceptions (2 statements) 0.78
S44 Inventors contribute more than political leaders do 0.95
S47 I am really different from everyone else 0.845
Factor 4: Situational factors (2 statements) 0.56
S36 I believe ‘‘Nothing ventured, nothing gained’’ 0.838
S40 I am an above-average person 0.733
Factor 5: Viewing on ideas (2 statements) 0.49
S36 I often see a humorous side when others do not 0.600
S40 My ideas are usually better than the ideas of others 0.817
Factor 6: Attitude towards new ideas (2 statements) 0.45
S31 Being creative is the greatest human attribute 0.699
S32 I like new ways better than tires and true ways 0.685

In order to reduce statements with stronger cohesiveness by factor analysis, statements with factor loading higher or equal to 0.6 were only taken. Other
statements with factor loading less than 0.6 were not chosen into the final questionnaire.
Statements in bold indicated not chosen for the final questionnaire as weak cohesiveness after the internal reliability test.

In the creativity dimension, originally 20 statements were Factor 1, three statements were deleted because the alpha
loaded in the creativity factor. The internal reliability test value increased after their deletion. S50: ‘‘I prefer extreme
revealed several statements that should be taken out. For disorder to extreme order’’ (alpha increase to 0.9725),
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
432 S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
S52: ‘‘I am rarely completely understood’’ (alpha increase
to 0.9725) and S55: ‘‘Often I am more persistent than
others are’’ (alpha increase to 0.9724).
Originally, in Factor 2, S30: ‘‘I often have sexual
fantasy.’’ was stated here. However, sexual fantasy is not
‘‘accepted’’ in Chinese culture; therefore, it was changed to
just fantasy. However, the statement is also similar to the
statement of ‘‘daydreaming’’. Therefore, this factor also
became redundant and was deleted. Furthermore, in the
Chinese culture, asking things related to ‘‘sex’’ creates a
very negative image on the whole survey and many
respondents asked whether they could ignore this question
in the pilot test. Based on all these reasons, this statement
was deleted in consideration for all respondents. As for
Factor 5 and Factor 6, the alpha reliability tests reveal
weak cohesion (both alpha lower than 0.5), therefore they
were also deleted. After this housekeeping work, 12
statements remain for this creativity factor.
The authors suspected that Chinese people may feel the
same for both the statements: ‘‘I accept my weakness’’ and
‘‘I can accept my mistakes’’. This is due to the fact that
both statements could imply the Chinese humble tradition
to accept personal weakness. The authors also suspected
that the respondents may value both statements equally by
treating them as one thing. In addition, they were both
located in the risk-taking dimension. Therefore, the
authors combined these two statements and made it
into one ‘‘I can accept my weakness and mistakes’’.
Therefore, a total of 22 statements were derived for second
pilot test.
4.3. Third pilot test
A third pilot test with sample of 178 hotel employees
(studying BA conversion degree in Hotel & Tourism
Management) was conducted in order to validate whether
the derived 22 statements were valid to measure the
creativity levels of employees. Internal alpha reliability test
found out that both dimensions: risk-taking (alpha ¼
0.817) and creativity (alpha ¼ 0.671) are valid. One
statement: ‘‘I can accept my weakness or mistakes’’ is
now divided into two statements: ‘‘I can accept my
weakness’’ and ‘‘I can accept my mistakes’’. Finally, a
total of 23 statements measuring creativity were adopted as
the measuring instrument for this research.
With regard to job-related motivators, Kovach (1980)
questionnaire was adopted. Internal reliability test found
the 10 statements were accepted with two dimensions: IM
(alpha ¼ 0.753) and EM (alpha ¼ 0.749). Both alpha
figures exceed 0.5 and prove that they are internal reliable.
Thus, 10 statements measuring job-related motivators were
adopted for this survey.
The final questionnaire was developed with Section 1
measuring Kovach’s 10 job-related motivators asking
respondents to identify their preference with a Likert
Scale from 1 to 9, where ‘‘1’ indicated ‘‘Least Important’’
and ‘‘9’’: as ‘‘Most Important’’. Section 2 measures
creativity (Byrd’s 23 statements) by asking respondents to
identify their agreement using Likert scale with ‘‘1’’
indicates ‘‘completely disagree’’ and ‘‘9’’ as ‘‘completely
agree’’.
Section 3 measures demographic variables; gender, age
group, highest education completed, working department,
job level, total working experience, work abroad or not and
number of jobs worked before in the past 10 years—totally
eight areas were collected. The statement was translated
into Chinese using the back translation method. Finally, a
bilingual version of questionnaire was developed for this
research. A total of 12 months were dedicated to develop
this final research instrument.
4.4. Sampling
The target sample for the research was hotel employees.
In order to provide an appropriate sample, stratified quota
sampling was adopted by using two strata:
(1) Hotel grade (following the grading system by the Hong
Kong Tourists Association, now renamed as Hong
Kong Tourism Board), i.e. High Tariff A (45.89%,
High Tariff B (39.06%) and Medium Tariff (15.05%).
(2) Job levels (managerial, supervisory and general staff),
i.e. 15% managerial grade, 25% supervisory grade and
60% general staff referencing from Vocational Training
Council (1995) manpower statistic.
4.5. Data collection and analysis
The data was collected using a postal questionnaire, sent
to hotel employees. For High Tariff A hotels, 10 out of 18
hotels received 50 questionnaires. With the assistance of
human resources/personnel managers, 15% were sent to
managers, 25% to supervisors and 60% to general staff.
For High Tariff B hotels, 13 out of 26 hotels received 30
questionnaires. With the assistance of human resources/
personnel managers, 15% was sent to managers, 25% to
supervisors and 60% to general staff. For Medium Tariff
hotels, 22 out of 22 hotels received 15 questionnaires. With
the assistance of human resources/personnel managers,
15% was sent to managers, 25% to supervisors and 60% to
general staff. Data collection took over 5 months to
complete.
A total of 1545 questionnaires were sent out with 1265
returned. After housekeeping work and deletion of all
invalid questionnaires, a total of 983 valid questionnaires
were used to conduct the data analysis, giving the valid
response rate of 63.62%.
The data collected was analyzed using SPSS with mean
distribution of creativity and job-related motivators.
Canonical correlation analysis was adopted to test for
any relationship between creativity and job-related moti-
vators among the hotel employees. Six months were
devoted to conduct the data analysis in this research.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437 433

5. Research findings and job-related motivators. According to Stevens (2002),

5.1. Profile of respondents
58.6% of the respondents were male and 41.4% were
female. The age groups were evenly distributed with 26.8%
of the sample under 25 years old, 24.2% between 26 and
30, 22.9% between 31 and 35, and above 36 is 26.1%. Most
hotel employees are educated with secondary level or below
(61.8%). 20.6% were managers, 31.4% were supervisors
and 48% were general staff. Although these figures are not
the same as the manpower statistics, they are close to the
real situation. The majority of employees worked with
more than 10 years experience (44.2%) while only 4.8%
worked less than 1 year. Most people worked 2 (21.1%) or
3 (24.1%) jobs before in the past 10 years. More employees
from High Tariff A (53.2%) responded to this survey than
High Tariff B (24.4%) and Medium Tariff (22.4).
5.2. Creativity level of hotel employees in Hong Kong
The overall mean for the risk-taking dimension was 6.41
(S.D. ¼ 0.94) and the creativity dimension was 5.434
(S.D. ¼ 1.02). The statement: ‘‘I trust my ability to size
up a situation’’ scored the highest mean (7.07) in the risk-
taking dimension. The statement: ‘‘Nothing ventured,
nothing gained’’ scored the highest mean (6.23) among
all statements in the creativity dimension. The internal
reliability tests revealed that both dimensions had strong
reliability with risk-taking dimension alpha ¼ 0.78 and
creativity dimension alpha ¼ 0.74.
These results illustrate that hotel employees agree more
on the risk-taking attitude than the creativity dimension.
All mean values scored higher than the average value of 5
which can be interpreted as hotel employees have creative
attitude in their minds.
the ratio of at least 20 times as many cases as variables in
the analysis is needed so that the first canonical correlation
can be correctly interpreted in addition to reducing
the risk of Type II error. In another words, 33 items
(23 creativity+10 job-related motivators ¼ 33 multiplied
by 20 ¼ 660 will be the minimum requirement. The sample
size for this survey was 983 and thus can yield significant
correlation results. The canonical correlation r was found
to be 0.311 with significance level at 0.000. Table 2
illustrates the overall canonical correlation analysis be-
tween creativity and job-related motivators. Function 1
was selected using the guideline of redundancy indexes
greater than 1.5% (Hair et al., 1995).
Canonical loadings discovered that in both factors
(creativity and job-related motivators), their variables are
highly correlated, i.e. creativity (r ¼ 0.634) and risk-taking
(r ¼ 0.979). Similarly, IM (r ¼ 1.000) and EM (r ¼ 0.715)
are highly correlated. Canonical cross-loading analysis
found out that risk-taking factor (r ¼ 0.304) and IM
(r ¼ 0.311) are correlated among these two dimensions
(please see Table 3). In other words, if employees are given
more IM, they may like to take more risk and thus be more
creative in their workplace.
The next stage was to investigate whether the different
levels of job exert influence on the relationship between
creativity and job-related motivators. The three job levels:
managerial, supervisory and general staff nature of work
was take out to test their canonical correlations. All three
levels were found with high significance levels (po0.000).
Transformed Z (Fischer) values were calculated to see any
significant difference appeared between these levels of jobs.
Table 2
Overall results of canonical correlation analysis between creativity and
job-related motivators in the Hong Kong hotel industry

5.3. Job-related motivators of hotel employees in Hong Function 1 Function 2

Kong Variate number
Canonical correlation 0.311 0.069
The overall mean of the IM dimension was 7.209 Eigenvalue 0.096 0.0047
(S.D. ¼ 1.14) and EM dimension was 7.387 (S.D. ¼ 1.021). Wilk’s lambda 0.899 0.995
The item: ‘‘opportunity for advancement and development’’ F-value (chi square) 104.414 4.722
Significance (po) 0.000 0.030
scored the highest mean (7.45) in the IM dimension. The
item: ‘‘good wages’’ scored the highest mean (7.69) among all Variance traced (%)
statements in the EM dimension. The internal reliability tests Job-related motivators 75.6 24.4
Cumulative (%) 75.6 100.0
revealed that both dimensions had strong reliability with IM Creativity 68.0 32.0
dimension alpha ¼ 0.82 and EM dimension alpha ¼ 0.81. Cumulative (%) 68.0 100.0
The results indicate that hotel employees scored similarly
Redundancy (%)
in their preferences of both intrinsic and EM. Nevertheless, Job-related motivators 6.6 0.2
‘‘good wages’’ was still highly valued by hotel employees. Cumulative (%) 6.6 6.8
Creativity 7.3 0.1
5.4. Relationship between creativity and job-related Cumulative (%) 7.3 7.4
motivators
Canonical function 1 is selected for further analysis since both redundancy
indexes of job-related motivators and creativity dimensions are greater
The canonical correlation test was conducted in order to than 1.5% and significance level at 0.000, while function 2 has less
test for any significant relationship between the creativity redundancy index (0.1%).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
434 S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437

Table 4 illustrates that managerial grade employees scored sits on the left side and the other sits on the right side of a
highest canonical correlation index of 0.444, which was long bar. The bar is balanced at the center. Creativity is
higher than supervisor (r ¼ 0.308) and general staff represented by the player that sits on the left, and job-
(r ¼ 0.249). related motivators are the player that sits on the right side.
This reveals that managerial grade employees were Both players affect each other by exerting pressure down
found to be highly cohesive in the relationship creativity on their own side. Both creativity and motivation can be
and job-related motivators. This may be due to the fact either dependent or independent variables. They, in fact,
that managerial grade employees have the greater power can change the height of the opposite player when they
and authority to exercise their creative potential. Whereas each put pressure downwards at each of the ends.
general staff and supervisors may be involve in daily The See-Saw model was suggested by Stephenson et al.
routine work, and they are less stimulated by intrinsic and (1974, pp. 1a and 1b) to reveal ‘‘the relationship between
EM. This result suggests that management could consider organizational effectiveness and creativity. The model
using more intrinsic or EM for managers so that creative distinguishes between variables that have a generally
ideas and projects can be generated. increasing or decreasing effect on both creativity and
productivity; and variables that have a differential effect in
6. Discussion and conclusion the sense that they increase creativity at the expenses of
productivity, or vice versa.’’ The See-Saw was also a
6.1. See-Saw model stimulant for Laennec to create develop the stethoscope
(the tool to listen to heartbeats) by observing two boys
The results indicate that there is a relationship between playing with a See-Saw in an unconventional way, by one
creativity and job-related motivators for Hong Kong hotel hitting one side with a stone and the other can listen with
employees. This relationship can be illustrated using a his ear pressed close the other end of the See-Saw (Proctor,
conceptual ‘‘See-Saw’’ model. ‘‘See-Saw’’ is a common 1991).
game found in children’s playgrounds, where one player Nonetheless, the ‘‘See-Saw’’ model presented here
focuses on the relationship between creativity and job-
related motivators. This is different from the inverse
Table 3 relationship as suggested by Stephenson et al. (1974). In
Canonical loadings and cross loadings on creativity and job-related this study, the relationship can be metaphored using the
motivators in the Hong Kong hotel industry
‘‘See-Saw’’ concept. Like playing See-Saw, both sides can
Variables Canonical loadings Canonical cross-loading exert pressure (by pushing downwards) and making the
of Function 1 of Function 1 opposite side to move upward.
As shown in Fig. 2, on the left side of the See-Saw lies the
Creativity variables set
Creativity 0.634a 0.197
creativity factor with two dimensions: creativity (C) and
Risk-taking 0.979a 0.304b risk-taking (RT). On the right side of the See-Saw lies the
two dimensions of job-related motivators: intrinsic moti-
Job-related motivators set
Intrinsic motivators 1.000a 0.311b
vators (IM) and extrinsic motivators (EM). These variables
Extrinsic 0.715a 0.223 sit in different positions on the See-Saw rod. This concept
motivators is based on physics’ leveling of forces. When there is a pivot
a
point in the middle, if one side exert downward force, the
Variables with relation over 0.40 in canonical loadings are accepted for
correlation explanation within the same set.
other side will move upward. The findings of this research
b
Variables with relation over 0.30 in canonical cross-loadings are support that the risk-taking dimension sits further on the
accepted for cross-loading correlation between two sets. left side of the See-Saw than the creativity dimension.

Table 4
Canonical correlation (r) among three work levels over the relationship between job-related motivators and creativity and test of significant difference
among canonical correlation indexes

Level N r Significance level N3 Z (Fischer) (N3)Z (N3)Z2

Managerial 202 0.444 0.000 199 0.4772 94.9632 45.3166

Supervisory 309 0.308 0.000 306 0.3183 97.4103 31.0090
General staff 472 0.249 0.000 469 0.2543 119.2885 30.3406
Total 983 974 311.6620 106.6663
Chi-square statistic 6.9402
Chi-square (0.05, 2) 5.9915
p-value 0.0311*
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
Level of Work – Manager
(longer see-saw rod)
RT C EM
Where: RT = Risk-taking
C = Creativity
EM = Extrinsic Motivator
IM = Intrinsic Motivators
Fig. 2. Diagram illustrating the impact of level of work over the relationship between creativity and job-related motivators in the Hong Kong hotel
industry.
While the IM sit further on the right side of the See-Saw
than the EM.
Based on the physics concept of leveling, the farther the
object placed on the extreme side of the see saw rod, the
more movement it will generate to the opposite side. For
example, as illustrated in Fig. 2, IM exerts more power
than EM when it pushes down the See-Saw rod, which will
move up the left side (creativity side). In another words, IM
generates bigger upward movement than EM in moving the
creativity side.
IM enables the dedication required to master any
creative pursuit. Marks (1989) further supplemented that
‘‘IM enables persistence, self-direction, and independence
from external rewards and reinforcements—or their
absence’’ (p. 208). This research discovered a similar result,
and supports their views that IM exert a heavier influence
on the creative levels than creative performance.
For managerial grade staff, the longer See-Saw rod is
present and thus the relationship between creativity and
job-related motivators is higher than general staff (shortest
See-Saw rod). In comparison, managerial grade staff has
the longest rod (as r ¼ 0.444), following with supervisory
grade (r ¼ 0.308) and the shortest rod is general staff
(r ¼ 0.249). It also indicates little effort is needed on both
ends if we want to move the See-Saw for the managerial
grade hotel employees. Whereas for the general staff, the
See-Saw rod is shorter, which means greater effort must be
enforced on either side before the See-Saw can be moved.
Of course, we must assume that other factors remain
constant in this See-Saw model. Nevertheless, it is an
easy to understand model representing the relationship
between creativity and job-related motivators by different
levels of jobs.
Therefore, intrinsic job-related motivators (Kovach,
1980), which include opportunity for advancement and
development, loyalty to employees, how the company
treats employees, appreciation and praise of work done,
feelings of being involved, sympathetic help with personal
435
Level of Work – General Staff
(shorter see-saw rod)
IM RT C EM IM
problems and interesting work, are found to encourage the
hotel employees’ risk-taking behavior.
6.2. Conclusions
Finally, correlations were found between creativity and
job-related motivators of Chinese hotel employees. Hote-
liers or management may use this finding to further
stimulate employees’ creativity by providing more intrinsic
and EM. Six suggestions are recommended:
 Culture—creating a macro culture by education, culti-
vate a ‘‘creative’’ environment, set stimulating policies
and programmes and train the employees to be creative.
 Commitment—top management commitment, top-down
approach.
 Congratulating success—reward and recognize good
ideas and performances. Promoting the advantages of
being creative and setting trends and stimulating rules
for people to follow.
 Courage—risk-taking, allow mistakes, trial and error.
 Change—accept new things and ideas.
 Communication—intra- and intercommunications,
allowing exchange of ideas and recognize publicly.
This over time might become a competitive advantage
for the hotel industry. Hotels, which develop long-term
plans incorporating creativity may project a better prospect
for both the company and the employees.
7. Limitations and future research direction
This research possesses several limitations. Byrd’s
instrument for measuring creativity is a self-reporting
typed questionnaire and perception of creativity may be
purely from an individual and may lack an objective
evaluation from others such as supervisors or managers.
Nevertheless, Byrd’s questionnaire can identify individual
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
436 S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
preference of creative thinking. The current study did not
measure the other individual (self-efficacy, trait competi-
tiveness, extra-role performance, quitting intention, etc.)
and organizational (supervisory support, work facilitation,
etc.) determinants and consequences of creativity and job-
related motivators. The study investigated only a miniature
section of the vast knowledge about creativity. Another
concern falls into the argument of ‘‘traits vs. state’’ in
investigation of the study. Amabile (1993) discusses
instruments that usually measure traits—level of creativity
(Byrd’s creativity index) and motivation (Kovach’s
job-related motivators). However, most theories and
literature come from Social Psychology of Creativity,
which conceptualizes creativity and motivation as situa-
tion-dependent and fleeing states. Psychometric appro-
aches to the study of human creativity may be more
appropriate (Plucker and Renzulli, 1999). Individual
differences (Hackman and Oldham, 1976; Deci and Ryan,
1985) affect the inclination towards intrinsic and EM by a
person. Amabile et al. (1994) through the WPI successfully
identified the trait-like constructs of both intrinsic and EM.
Amabile (1993, pp. 190–191) suggested that ‘‘both IM and
EM can appear a temporary state form (affected by
environment) and a more stable personality trait from
(relatively consistent) across time and across situations’’.
Therefore, the limitation of assuming the employees
possess a stable trait form in the same hotel working
environment (assuming other social environmental factors
are intact) must be documented. This limitation must be
cautiously noted in interpretation of the results and
implication to the industry.
Further to the present study, future research could be
conducted in investigating the relationship between crea-
tivity and leadership styles, creativity and different learning
styles, and creativity and organizational climate. Other
relationships between creativity and emotional quotient or
job satisfaction are the possible research areas relevant to
both academics and management.
References
Amabile, T.M., 1983a. Social psychology of creativity: a componential
conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45,
357–376.
Amabile, T.M., 1983b. The Social Psychology of Creativity. Springer,
New York.
Amabile, T.M., 1985. Motivation and creativity: effects of motivational
orientation on creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 48, 393–399.
Amabile, T.M., 1988. A model of creativity and innovation in organiza-
tions. In: Staw, B.N.M., Cummings, L.L. (Eds.), Research in
Organizational Behaviour, vol. 10. JAL Press, Greenwich, CT,
pp. 123–167.
Amabile, T.M., 1993. Motivational synergy: toward new conceptualiza-
tions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human
Resource Management Review 3 (3), 185–201.
Amabile, T.M., 1995. KEYS: Assessing the Climate for Creativity. Center
for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC.
Amabile, T.M., 1996a. Creativity in Context. Westview Press Inc., A
Division of Harper Collins Publishers Inc.
Amabile, T.M., 1996b. Managing for Creativity. Harvard Business School
Publishing, vol. 9-396-271, pp. 1–13.
Amabile, T.M., Gryskiewicz, N.D., 1987. Creativity in the R and D
laboratory. Technical Report No. 30. Centre for Creative Leadership,
Greensboro, NC.
Amabile, T.M., Gryskiewicz, N.D., 1989. The creative environment scales:
work environment inventory. Creativity Research Journal 2, 231–253.
Amabile, T.M., Hennessy, B.A., Grossman, B.S., 1986. Social influence on
creativity: the effects of contracted-for reward. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 50 (1), 14–23.
Amabile, T.M., Hill, K.G., Hennessey, B.A., Tighe, E.M., 1994. The work
preference inventory: assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational
orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66 (5),
950–967.
Amabile, T.A., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., Herron, M., 1996.
Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal 39 (5), 1154–1184.
Austin, N.K., 1994. Motivating employees without pay or promotions.
Working Women 19 (11), 17–18.
Barron, F., 1988. Putting creativity to work. In: Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), The
Nature of Creativity. Cambridge University Press, pp. 76–98.
Byrd, R.E., 1970. Self-actualisation through creative risk taking: a new
laboratory model. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, New York
University.
Byrd, R.E., 1971. The Creatrix Inventory (C&RT). Pfeiffer and Company
Limited.
Charles, K.R., Marshal, L.H., 1992. Motivational preferences of
Caribbean hotel workers: an exploratory study. International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management 4 (3), 25–29.
Cheng, Vivian M.Y., 2004. Progress from traditional to creativity
education in Chinese societies. In: Lau, S., Hui, Anna N.N., Ng,
Grace Y.C. (Eds.), Creativity: When East Meets West. World Scientific
Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., pp. 137–168.
Collins, M., Amabile, T.M., 1999. Motivation and creativity. In:
Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University
Press, pp. 297–312.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1991. Commentary on article: an investment theory
of creativity by Robert J. Sternberg and Todd I. Lubart. Human
Development 34, 32–34.
Darder, R., 1994. Six steps to creating a positive motivational
working environment. International Gaming and Wagering Business
15, 17–18.
Deci, E.L., 1975. Intrinsic Motivation. Plenum Press, New York.
Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determina-
tion in Human Behavior. Plenum Press, New York.
Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., 2002. Handbook of Self-Determination Research.
The University of Rochester Press, USA.
Florida, R., 2004. America’s looming creativity crisis. Harvard Business
Review, October 2004, Product no. R0410 H, pp. 1–9.
Florida, R., Goodnight, J., 2005. Managing for creativity. Harvard
Business Review, July–August 2005, Reprint R0507L, pp. 1–9.
Greer, M., Levine, E., 1991. Enhancing creative performance in college
students. Journal of Creative Behaviour 25, 250–255.
Gruber, H., 1986. The self-construction of the extraordinary. In:
Sternberg, R.E., Davidson, J.E. (Eds.), Conception of Giftedness.
Cambridge University Press, pp. 247–263.
Guilford, J.P., 1950. Creativity. American Psychologist 5, 444–454.
Hackman, J.R., Oldham, G.R., 1976. Motivation through the design
of work. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16,
250–279.
Hair Jr., J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., Black, W.C., 1995.
Multivariate data analysis with readings, Fourth Ed. Prentice Hall
International Edition.
Hennessy, B.A., Amabile, T.M., 1988. The conditions of creativity. In:
Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary
Psychological Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, pp. 11–38.
Hofstede, G., 1980. Culture’s Consequences—International Differences in
Work-Related Values. Sage Publications Ltd.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.C.-k. Wong, A. Ladkin / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 426–437
Kivela, J., Go, F., 1996. Total quality management transfer: a case of
Hong Kong hotels. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 34 (1),
63–76.
Kovach, K.A., 1980. Why motivational theories don’t work, S.A.M.
Advanced Management Journal (Spring), 56–57.
Kovach, K.A., 1987. What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors
give different answers. Business Horizons 30 (5), 58–65.
Lau, S., Hui, A.N.N., Ng, G.Y.C. (Eds.), 2004a. Creativity: When East
Meets West. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Lau, Sing, Hui, Anna N.N., Ng, Grace Y.C., 2004b. Creativity: a meeting
between the East and the West. In: Lau, S., Hui, A.N.N., Ng, G.Y.C.
(Eds.), Creativity: When East Meets West. World Scientific Publishing
Co. Pte. Ltd, pp. 1–8.
Lee-Ross, D., 1995. Attitudes and work motivation of subgroups of seasonal
hotel workers. The Services Industries Journal 15 (3), 285–313.
Leung, K., Au, Al, Leung, B.W.C., 2004. Creativity and innovation:
east–west comparisons with an emphasis on Chinese societies. In: Lau,
S., Hui, Anna N.N., Ng, Grace Y.C. (Eds.), Creativity: When East
Meets West. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, pp. 113–136.
Marks, T., 1989. Creativity inside out. From theory to practice. Creativity
Research Journal 2, 204–221.
Maslow, A.H., 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological
Review 50 (4), 370–396.
McClelland, D.C., 1962. Business drive and national achievement.
Harvard Business Review 40 (July–August), 99–112.
Oldham, G.R., Cummings, A., 1996. Employee creativity: personal and
contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal 39 (3),
607–634.
Plucker, J.A., Renzulli, J.S., 1999. Psychometric approaches to the study
of human creativity. In: Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity.
Part II. Cambridge University Press, pp. 35–61 (Chapter 3).
Proctor, R.A., 1991. The importance of creativity in the management field.
British Journal of Management 2, 223–230.
Puccio, Gerald J., Gonzalez, D.W., 2004. Nurturing creative thinking:
western approaches and eastern issues. In: Lau, S., Hui, A.N.N., Ng,
G.Y.C. (Eds.), Creativity: When East Meets West. World Scientific
Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., pp. 393–428.
437
Rudowicz, E., 2004. Creativity among Chinese people: beyond western
perspective. In: Lau, S., Hui, A.N.N., Ng, G.Y.C. (Eds.), Creativity:
When East Meets West. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.,
pp. 55–86.
Simons, T., Enz, C.A., 1995. Motivating hotel employees. The
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 36 (1),
20–27.
Siu, V., Tsang, N., Wong, S., 1997. What motivates Hong Kong hotel
employees. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly.
October issue 38 (5), 44–49.
Stephenson, R.W., Kaiser, H.F., Erickson, C.E., 1974. The implications of
a ‘‘See-Saw’’ model of organizational effectiveness. Technical Report,
January 1974, American Institutes for Research, AD-773 951,
pp. 1–41.
Sternberg, R.J., 1999. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University
Press.
Sternberg, R.J., Lubart, T.I., 1991. Creating creative minds. Phi Delta
Kappan 72, 608–614.
Sternberg, R.J., Lubart, T.I., 1999. The concepts of creativity: prospects
and paradigms. In: Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), The Handbook of Creativity.
Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–15.
Stevens, J., 2002. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences,
fourth ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Vocational Training Council, Hotel, 1995. 1995 Manpower Survey
Report. Hotel Catering and Tourism Training Board.
Weaver, T., 1988. Theory of M: motivating with money. Cornell HRA
Quarterly 29 (3), 40–45.
Wong, C.K.S., Pang, L., 2003a. Barriers to creativity in the hotel
industry—perspectives from supervisor and managerial employees.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 15
(1), 29–37.
Wong, C.K.S., Pang, L., 2003b. Motivators to creativity in the Hong
Kong hotel industry. Tourism Management 24 (5), 551–559.
Wong, C.K.S., Siu, V., Tsang, N., 1999. The impact of demographic
factors on Hong Kong Hotel employees’ choice of job-related
motivators. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management 11 (5), 230–241.