VIETNAM GENERAL CONFEDERATION OF LABOUR

TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

NATTHAWUT YODCHAI

CREATIVE MINDSET,
INNOVATION CAPABILITY AND
ENTREPRENEURIAL SUCCESS: A
CASE STUDY OF THAI
ENTREPRENEURS IN TOURISM
INDUSTRY

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION
MAJOR
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

HO CHI MINH CITY, YEAR 2022

 i

VIETNAM GENERAL CONFEDERATION OF LABOUR

TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

NATTHAWUT YODCHAI

CREATIVE MINDSET, INNOVATION

CAPABILITY AND
ENTREPRENEURIAL SUCCESS: A
CASE STUDY OF THAI
ENTREPRENEURS IN TOURISM
INDUSTRY

DOCTORAL DISSERTATION
MAJOR
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

HO CHI MINH CITY, YEAR 2022

 ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly, I would like to express my special appreciation and thanks to my advisor,

Associate Professor Pham Thi Minh Ly, and Dr. Lobel Trong Thuy Tran (Co-Advisor)
for the continuous support of my Ph.D study and related research and for their patience,
motivation, and immense knowledge.

I would like to thank Ton Duc Thang University for its generous financial
support of my PhD studies. I would like to thank all the lecturers and staff in the Faculty
of Business Administration, Ton Duc Thang University, especially Mr. Huang Tuan
Nhat, for his great and full support. I also wish to thank Ms. Tran Thanh Truc, my lovely
Vietnamese friend, who always supports and encourages me.

Last but not least, I would like to thank my mother, Ms. Yanitha Rajchakom and
my Thai friends for supporting me spiritually throughout writing this thesis and my life
in general.

Ho Chi Minh City, day month year

Author

Natthawut Yodchai
 iii

This dissertation was carried out at Ton Duc Thang University.

Advisor: Associate Professor Pham Thi Minh Ly
Dr. Lobel Trong Thuy Tran (Co-Advisor)

This dissertation is defended at the Doctoral Dissertation Examination Committee was

hold at Ton Duc Thang University on / / pursuant to Decision 1683/QĐ-TĐT on 24 /
06 / 2022

Members of the Doctoral Dissertation Examination Committee:

1. Prof. Vo Xuan Vinh, Ph.D Chairman
2. Prof. Wann Yih Wu, Ph.D Examiner 1
3. Assoc.Prof. Bui Thi Thanh, Ph.D Examiner 2
4. Assoc.Prof. Phan Dinh Nguyen, Ph.D Member
5. Nguyen Thi Thanh Thuy, Ph.D Member
6. Nguyen Thi Huyen Tran, Ph.D Member
7. Phung Minh Tuan, Ph.D Secretary

Confirmation of the Chairman of the Doctoral Dissertation Examination Committee and

the Dean of the faculty after receiving the modified dissertation (if any).

CHAIRMAN DEAN OF FACULTY

…………………………. ………………………………
 iv

DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP

I hereby declare that this dissertation was carried out by myself under the
guidance and supervision of Associate Professor Pham Thi Minh Ly and Dr. Lobel
Trong Thuy Tran (Co-Advisor); and that the work contained and the results in it are
true by author and have not violated research ethics. The data and figures presented
in this dissertation are for analysis, comments, and evaluations from various
resources by my own work and have been duly acknowledged in the reference part.

In addition, other comments, reviews and data used by other authors, and
organizations have been acknowledged, and explicitly cited.

I will take full responsibility for any fraud detected in my dissertation.

Ton Duc Thang University is unrelated to any copyright infringement caused on
my work (if any).

Ho Chi Minh City, day month year

Author

Natthawut Yodchai
 v

CREATIVE MINDSET, INNOVATION CAPABILITY

AND ENTREPRENEURIAL SUCCESS: A CASE
STUDY OF THAI ENTREPRENEURS IN TOURISM
INDUSTRY

ABSTRACT

This study applies the style of a series of papers in the field of creative mindset,
innovation capability, and entrepreneurship success, which mainly consists of the two
studies.
The aim of Study 1 was to examine the comprehensive framework and ground
the conceptualize of a creative mindset model and innovation capability to build
business success. The Study 1 applied a meta-analysis method by using the
Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) program. By means of a meta-analysis of 58
studies (n = 22,427). The results suggest that a growth mindset is positively related to
creative self-efficacy, which can influence creative performance and innovation
capability, while a fixed mindset has negative effects. More importantly, creative
performance and innovation capability can contribute to business success. Thus, these
results establish the role of creative mindsets in enhancing business success. All results
are supported by meta-analysis; therefore, this study provides scholars and practitioners
the necessary evidence for making statistical inferences on creativity-based model and
enhancing business success and will help researchers and practitioners use this model
in conducting further studies especially, empirical research.
To improve the results of the prior study and create a narrative view of creative
mindset and innovation capability. Study 2 adopted implicit theory and investigated the
effect of a creative mindset on entrepreneurial success in the context of Thailand’s
tourism businesses through innovation capability, using a partial least squares (PLS)
analytical technique and a questionnaire protocol with a total of 176 Thai business
owners. The results from Study 2 found that entrepreneurs with a growth mindset may
reflect and drive entrepreneurial success either directly or indirectly through innovation
 vi

capability. The fixed mindset had no significant impact on entrepreneurial success;

however, it might indirectly drive their success through innovation capability. The
findings of this study can help entrepreneurs increase managerial effectiveness.
Accordingly, this study provides more insight into the probable causation of how
creative mindset and innovation capability engage in affecting tourism entrepreneurs’
success. As so, this study contributes a framework to help entrepreneurs’ creativity and
performance in achieving their business goals.

KEYWORDS: Business success, Creative mindset, Creative self-efficacy, Creativity,

Empirical research approaches, Entrepreneurial success, Implicit theory, Innovation
capability, Meta-Analysis, Thai tourism
 vii

TƯ DUY SÁNG TẠO, NĂNG LỰC ĐỔI MỚI VÀ THÀNH

CÔNG KINH DOANH: TÌNH HUỐNG NGIÊN CỨU CỦA
DOANH NHÂN THÁI LAN TRONG NGÀNH DU LỊCH

TÓM TẮT

Luận văn này bao gồm hai nghiên cứu độc lập, áp dụng phong cách của một loạt
báo cáo khoa học trong lĩnh vực tư duy sáng tạo, năng lực đổi mới, và sự thành công
trong khởi nghiệp.
Mục đích của nghiên cứu thứ nhất là để nghiên cứu một khung toàn diện và tạo
cơ sở cho việc hình thành khái niệm về mô hình tư duy sáng tạo và năng lực đổi mới để
kiến tạo thành công trong kinh doanh. Nghiên cứu thứ nhất áp dụng phương pháp phân
tích tổng hợp bằng cách sử dụng chương trình Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA)
trong việc phân tích tổng hợp 58 nghiên cứu (n=22,427). Kết quả của nghiên cứu thứ
nhất cho thấy tư duy phát triển có liên quan tích cực với hiệu quả tự sáng tạo, điều này
có thể ảnh hưởng tới hiệu suất sáng tạo và năng lực đổi mới, trong khi tư duy cố định
có tác động tiêu cực lên những điều này. Quan trọng hơn nữa, hiệu suất sáng tạo đóng
góp nhiều vào sự thành công của doanh nghiệp hơn là năng lực đổi mới. Vì vậy, những
kết quả này xác lập vai trò của tư duy sáng tạo trong việc nâng cao thành công của
doanh nghiệp. Do đó, nghiên cứu này cung cấp cho các học giả và những người thực
hành các chứng cứ cần thiết để đưa ra các kết luận thống kê dựa trên mô hình sáng tạo
và nâng cao sự thành công của doanh nghiệp.
Trong nghiên cứu thứ hai, tác giả sử dụng lý thuyết ngầm và nghiên cứu sự ảnh
hưởng của tư duy sáng tạo lên sự thành công trong việc khởi nghiệp trong ngữ cảnh của
Thái Lan. Nghiên cứu thứ hai tìm ra rằng những nhà khởi nghiệp sở hữu tự duy phát
triển có thể phản ánh và thúc đẩy sự thành công của việc khởi nghiệp một cách trực tiếp
hay gián tiếp thông qua năng lực đổi mới. Tư duy cố định không có tác động đáng kể
tới sự thành công của việc khởi nghiệp. Tuy vậy, nó có thể gián tiếp thúc đẩy sự thành
công thông qua năng lực đổi mới. Kết quả của nghiên cứu này có thể giúp các nhà khởi
 viii

nghiệp tăng hiệu quả quản lý. Theo đó, nghiên cứu này cung cấp hiểu biết sâu về nguyên
nhân của cách mà tư duy sáng tạo và năng lực đổi mới góp phần ảnh hưởng đến sự
thành công của các nhà khởi nghiệp trong lĩnh vực du lịch. Do đó, nghiên cứu này đóng
góp một nền tảng để giúp các nhà khởi nghiệp trong việc sáng tạo và tăng hiệu suất để
đạt được các mục tiêu trong kinh doanh của họ.

TỪ KHÓA: thành công của doanh nghiệp, tư duy sáng tạo, hiệu quả tự sáng tạo, sự
sáng tạo, cách tiếp cận nghiên cứu thực nghiệm, sự thành công của khởi nghiệp, lý
thuyết ngầm, khả năng đổi mới, phân tích tổng hợp, nền du lịch Thái Lan.
 ix

CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ xii

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... xiii

ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ xiv

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................1

1.1. Problem Statement .......................................................................................... 1

1.2. Motivation ........................................................................................................ 3
1.3. Research Proposes ........................................................................................... 5
1.4. Objective ........................................................................................................... 5
1.5. Data ................................................................................................................... 6
1.6. Methodology ..................................................................................................... 6
1.7. Research findings ............................................................................................. 7
1.8. Contributions ................................................................................................... 8
1.9. Organization of the study ............................................................................... 9

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW ON CREATIVE MINDSET, INNOVATION

CAPABILITY, ENTREPRENEURIAL SUCCESS AND THAILAND TOURISM .11

2.1. Implicit Theory .............................................................................................. 11

2.2. Creative mindset ............................................................................................ 13
2.2.1 Fixed mindset .............................................................................................. 13
2.2.2 Growth mindset ........................................................................................... 14
2.3. Innovation capability ..................................................................................... 16
2.4. Entrepreneurial success ................................................................................ 20
2.5. Thailand tourism ........................................................................................... 21

CHAPTER 3: STUDY 1: A META ANALYSIS ...........................................................26

3.1. Hypothesis development ............................................................................... 27

3.1.1. The relation between growth mindset and creative self-efficacy .............. 27
3.1.2. The relation between fixed mindset and creative self-efficacy .................. 28
3.1.3. The relation between creative self-efficacy and creative performance ..... 28
3.1.4. The relation between creative self-efficacy and innovation capability ..... 29
 x

3.1.5. The relation between creative performance and innovation capability .... 30
3.1.6. The relation between creative performance and business success............ 31
3.1.7. The relation between innovation capability and business success ............ 32
3.3. Methods .......................................................................................................... 32
3.3.1. Research design ......................................................................................... 32
3.3.1.1. Meta-Analysis ......................................................................................... 33
3.3.1.2. The important of Meta-Analysis ............................................................. 34
3.3.2. Selection of Studies .................................................................................... 38
3.3.3. Analytical technique .................................................................................. 40

CHAPTER 4: STUDY 2: AN EMPIRICAL APPROACHES .....................................42

4.2. Hypothesis development ............................................................................... 43

4.3. Methods .......................................................................................................... 47
4.3.1 Measures ..................................................................................................... 47
4.3.2 Survey design .............................................................................................. 47
4.3.3 Data collection ............................................................................................ 48
4.3.4 Common Method Bias (CMB) .................................................................... 50
4.3.5 Analytical technique ................................................................................... 51

CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS .....................................................52

5.1. Study 1: A meta-analysis............................................................................... 52

5.1.1. Results ........................................................................................................ 52
5.2. Study 2: An empirical approach .................................................................. 62
5.2.1. Measurement model ................................................................................... 62
5.2.2. Structural results........................................................................................ 64

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION........................................................................................68

6.1. Study 1: A meta-analysis............................................................................... 68

6.1.1. Theoretical Implications ............................................................................ 68
6.1.2. Managerial Implications ........................................................................... 71
6.1.3. Limitations ................................................................................................. 73
6.2. Study 2: An empirical approach .................................................................. 74
6.2.1. Theoretical implications ............................................................................ 74
 xi

6.2.2. Practical implications ................................................................................ 76

6.2.3. Limitations and future research................................................................. 81

LIST OF PUBLISHED PAPERS BY AUTHOR ..........................................................83

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................84

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................... civ

 xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Number and revenue of domestice travellers ...................................... 22

Figure 2.2: Number and revenue of international arrivals ..................................... 23

Figure 3: Research framework (Study 1) ............................................................... 33

Figure 4: Research framework (Study 2) ............................................................... 42

Figure 5: Research model results ........................................................................... 66

 xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Relationship between innovation capability and business sector ........ 18

Table 3.1: Meta-analysis and research fields ......................................................... 33

Table 3.2: Information of scientific database ......................................................... 36

Table 3.3: Relevant of combination keywords ....................................................... 39

Table 4 : Demographic characteristics ................................................................ 49

Table 5.1: Studies used in meta-analysis ................................................................ 53

Table 5.2: Meta-analysis results ............................................................................. 61

Table 5.3: Construct measurement ......................................................................... 62

Table 5.4: Discriminant validity ............................................................................. 64

Table 5.5: Hypothesis testing results ...................................................................... 67

 xiv

ABBREVIATIONS

AVE Average Variance Extracted

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
CMA Comprehensive Meta-Analysis
CMB Common Method Bias
CP Creative Performance
CR Composite Reliability
CSE Creative Self-Efficacy
EBSI Entity Belief System of Intelligence
FM Fixed Mindset
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GM Growth Mindset
HTMT Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio
IBSI Incremental Belief System of Intelligence
IC Innovation Capability
IPT Implicit Theory
LCI Lower 95% Confidence Interval
NTIC Non-Technical Innovation Capability
OI Objective Indicators
PLS Partial Least Square
SI Subjective Indicators
TIC Technical Innovation Capability
VIF Variance Inflation Factor
WOM Word of Mouth
UCI Upper 95% Confidence Interval
 1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Problem Statement

Creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship are acknowledged as vital
components for cultivating an entrepreneurial culture (Edwards-Schachter et al., 2015).
To effectively build and improve their organizations, entrepreneurs must embrace a
creative mindset, which is a key characteristic of their individuality (Tang et al., 2016).
The creative mindset serves as a vital source of organic growth and revitalization,
ultimately leading to increased market and revenue growth (Staniewski & Awruk,
2018). As such, a strong contextual orientation toward creativity and innovation is
critical for entrepreneurs to uncover new business opportunities.
Innovation capability (IC) can be considered as technical innovation and
managerial innovation, which are the main innovation capabilities and activities of any
organization (Maldonado-Guzmán et al., 2019). Existing tourism industry research
shows that ensuring growth and sustainability in the tourism sector also relies on
innovation and the development of new services (Cem et al., 2019). In this situation,
innovation capability is something connected to business processes that firms may use
to establish and retain competitive advantage. Many creative and innovative businesses
(e.g., Apple, Amazon) have placed a high priority on the development of innovation
capabilities in order to achieve firm performance (Wang & Dass, 2017), or even big
retail companies are still focusing on the possibility of innovation such as Smart Labels
and Unique Identifiers (Foroudi et al., 2016).
Jaiswal and Dhar (2015) established a link between innovation capability and
creativity, however, there is still a need to further study the relationship of creative
mindset on entrepreneurial success. Additionally, non-technical innovation has not been
explored in detail and requires further examination (Kafetzopoulos & Psomas, 2016).
Existing research on entrepreneurial success has primarily focused on the business and
firm level, leaving business practitioners without explicit guidance on the definition and
impact of a creative mindset on innovation capability and entrepreneurial success
(Angel et al., 2018). In addition, the findings of previous studies (Divisekera & Nguyen,
2018; Puente‐Diaz & Cavazos‐Arroyo, 2017) has primarily concentrated on direct
 2

effects and has been carried out in developed economies. Therefore, to address these
gaps, the author has developed a creative mindset model specifically for the tourism
industry in Thailand.
Tourism has become an increasingly important source of income for Thailand.
The country is known for its stunning beaches, vibrant culture, delicious food, and
affordable prices, making it a popular destination for tourists from all over the world.
Furthermore, Thailand’s tourism industry is considered one of the highest income
industries for Thailand, and both international tourists and domestic travelers are enjoy
exploring various destinations in Thailand (Leelawat et al., 2022).
In 2019, Thailand was in the eighth position globally in the number of
international tourist arrivals. Moreover, Thailand’s tourism industry, particularly its
SMEs created around 36 million jobs and several business opportunities in the country
between 2014 and 2019 (Aditya, 2022). The SMEs are the foundation of tourism
development, and through them, both tour operators and tourism service providers
construct a vast network that aids in the widespread distribution of tourism’s economic
gains (Srinamphon et al., 2022).
There is a great interest in published articles that have extensively focused on
creativity in connection to the performance of entrepreneurs and its implementation in
the tourism sector. However, the most relevant ones are focused in developed countries
such as Germany (Tang et al., 2016), the United States (Sipe, 2016), and Australia
(Divisekera & Nguyen, 2018). In addition, creativity and innovation can be crucial for
achieving sustainable competitive advantage. According to Sutapa et al., (2017),
investigating the correlation between creativity and innovation remains an intriguing
area of study (Sutapa et al., 2017).
In this study, the author faced the problem of the research questions being
substantially different in terms of business and entrepreneurial success contexts. Views
on business discipline must be grounded in a conceptual framework, whereas the issue
of entrepreneurial success necessitates a process-oriented approach. Then, a single
research method could not accommodate both views. Therefore, the author conducts
multiple methods studies in order to explore the creative mindset, innovation capability,
and entrepreneurial success of Thai entrepreneurs in the tourism industry.
 3

To begin with, the author uses the meta-analysis method to ground the
comprehensive framework and examine the conceptualization of the creative mindset
model and innovation capability in order to build up business success (Study 1).
Meta-analysis is a statistical technique used in research to combine and analyze
data from multiple studies (Vetter et al., 2013) including educational, social, medical
sciences, and business (Cheung, 2015). It is a valuable tool for summarizing research
findings and identifying patterns and relationships across studies. In business, meta-
analysis has been utilized to inform practice and improve business performance. In the
context of creative mindset and innovation capability, Study 1 aims to provide a
comprehensive model of their relationship with business success, including creative
self-efficacy, creative performance, and innovation capability. However, it is important
to note that some dimensions such as innovation capability may overlap or be
multifaceted.
Building on the findings of Study 1, the author presents a narrative model of a
creative mindset with implications for entrepreneurial success in the context of
Thailand’s tourism industry in Study 2. The literature on tourism and entrepreneurship
emphasizes the importance of evaluating creativity and innovation in order to enhance
tourism businesses (Ateljevic & Page, 2017). The author also examines the mediating
role of innovation capability in the relationship between a creative mindset and
entrepreneurial success, as depicted in the hypothesized relationships.

1.2. Motivation
The term of “creative mindset” pertains to one’s perspective on the characteristics
of creativity, particularly the viewpoint on fixed or growth mindsets regarding abilities,
motivations, and personality traits (Karwowski, 2014). Creative mindset has been
associated with beliefs, goals, and behaviors, resulting in a seemingly dichotomous
motivation pattern (Yu & McLellan, 2020). Furthermore, they are associated with
psychopathology, goals, and self-perception (Schroder et al., 2019).
In the age of technology and innovation, there is a strong need for entrepreneurs to
tackle strategic and operational practices, challenging them to search for new ideas and
engage in innovation in order to achieve business goals and objectives. In so doing, a
 4

creative mindset plays a key role in adopting new ideas for the firm’s development and
refinement process (Tang et al., 2016). Degraff and DeGraff (2020) also posit that a
creative mindset makes a chance or opportunity for innovation in daily life and always
drives us to look for that potential and opportunity to innovate. Previous research has
found that most studies linking creative mindset to creativity literature, such as Royston
and Reiter‐Palmon (2019), education, such as Paek and Sumners (2019), Vongkulluksn
et al. (2021), and social, personal and clinical psychology field, such as Schroder et al.
(2019). However, there is a lack of research that has explored the connection to
innovation and business fields.
Creative mindset defined as a set of beliefs about nature of creativity, and the
creativity factor is fundamental for new venture competitiveness and entrepreneurial
creativity can be demonstrated in organization and firms (Khedhaouria et al., 2015).
Entrepreneurs with creativity reflect on their employee performance by delivering
creative and innovative directions. As we know, creativity has long been at the heart of
human endeavor and is recognised as a key strength in building competitive advantage
through innovation (Bouty & Gomez, 2013). Moreover, creativity plays a crucial role
in entrepreneurial processes as it enables the discovery of novel business opportunities,
ultimately contributing to organizational success. Fleck and Asmuth (2021) argue that
creativity is complex in nature, forming four elements such as fluency, originality,
elaboration, and flexibility relating to creativity activity and an important role in the
entrepreneurial process.
Innovation is a crucial factor in achieving success in the business world, and
creativity plays a pivotal role in driving innovation by generating valuable ideas and
translating them into effective action (Ferreira et al., 2020). However, despite its
importance, there is a lack of research examining the relationship between creativity
and innovation, as pointed out (Stojcic et al., 2018). While some studies have
highlighted the impact of a creative mindset on creative achievement and effort, this
literature is often overlooked (Hass et al., 2016; Karwowski, 2014; O’Connor et al.,
2013). Additionally, there is a dearth of research investigating the link between
creativity, innovation, and business success (Bouty & Gomez, 2013). Nevertheless,
recognizing the relationship between creativity and innovation can provide a
 5

competitive advantage for companies striving for success.

1.3. Research Proposes

In this study, the author develops a study of creative mindset, innovation
capability, and its implication for success. The aims of this study are twofold: firstly, to
investigate the concept of creative mindset, innovation capability in the business
contexts, and secondly, to explore the relationship between creative mindset, innovation
capability, and entrepreneurial success among Thai entrepreneurs in the tourism
industry. The purpose of using multiple methods or more than one method is to develop
and offer the potential for deeper understandings of the creative mindset in business
context and entrepreneurial success discipline. Therefore this study consists of two main
studies.
1. Study 1 uses a meta-analysis to conceptualize a comprehensive framework of
creative mindset, innovation capability, and its implication for business success.
2. Study 2 is a development of the results from Study 1. The study 2 aimed to
provide a narrative view of creative mindset, innovation capability, and entrepreneurial
success in the context of Thailand’s tourism businesses, using an empirical research
approach based on the PLS technique.

1.4. Objective
This research employs a multiple method approach consisting of two separate
studies (Study 1 and Study 2) to investigate the design of a creative mindset, innovation
capability, and entrepreneurial success in the context of Thailand’s tourism businesses.
Study 1 employs a meta-analysis technique using the Comprehensive Meta-
Analysis program (CMA) to explore the relationship between innovation capability and
business success, as well as to ground the comprehensive framework and examine the
conceptualization of the creative mindset model. The study investigates the relationship
between creative mindset and business success, which includes creative self-efficacy,
creative performance, and innovation capability.
In Study 2, the author makes a further development from the results of Study 1.
The author uses PLS as an empirical research approach technique and aims to provide
 6

a narrative view of a model of a creative mindset, innovation capability, and business

success by investigating entrepreneurial success in the context of Thailand’s tourism
businesses which includes creative mindset (fixed and growth mindset), innovation
capability (technical and non-technical innovation capability) and entrepreneurial
success.

1.5. Data
In Study 1, a meta-analysis method was employed, which involved collecting 58
relevant studies from journals covered in the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus
databases. The total sample size for the study was 22,427, with varying sample sizes for
each hypothesis, ranging from 1,915 samples to 6,840 samples. The studies were
conducted between 2002 and 2020.
On the other hand, Study 2 utilized an empirical research approach, where
participants were recruited using convenience sampling. The final sample comprised
176 entrepreneurs who had been in the tour and travel business for at least one year,
held a travel agency business license from the Department of Tourism in Thailand, and
completed a structured questionnaire.

1.6. Methodology
The author employed a multi-method approach in this study to investigate a
research topic. The use of multiple methods allowed for a more comprehensive
understanding of the creative mindset within the business context, particularly in the
entrepreneurial success context. First, the author conducted a meta-analysis to set a
comprehensive framework and ground the conceptualize of a creative mindset model
and innovation capability in order to build business success. Then, the author
participated in a sample collection to validate the results further by focusing in
entrepreneurial success discipline.
Meta-analysis is a systematic and efficient approach to synthesizing a large body
of literature objectively. By integrating results from various studies, it helps to uncover
cumulative knowledge and general principles. In this study, a meta-analysis will be
conducted to identify relevant empirical studies from diverse scientific databases. The
 7

data will be collected from electronic sources various including management,

marketing, psychology, social science, business, technology, and innovation
management. This technique is a powerful research summary method for summarizing
research findings across studies. It is also helpful in identifying and exploring sources
of bias, quantifying differences between studies, and distinguishing genuine
heterogeneity from bias, especially in dimensions such as innovation capability, which
may be multiple.
The Study 1 will be the quantitative meta-analysis of creative mindset and
business success. Themes from this meta-analysis results will be developed into
empirical research about entrepreneurial success in Study 2.
The Study 2 is a development from Study 1, and focuses on a narrative view of
the results of Study 1. This Study 2 applies a quantitative method and is carried out by
a questionnaire survey. By means of the PLS technique, the author has modelled the
indirect and direct effects of creative mindset, innovation capability, and entrepreneurial
success in the tourism businesses in Thailand.

1.7. Research findings

The research topic in this study was approached using a multimethod design,
which involves the use of two or more independent studies to address research questions,
hypotheses, or a program (Martha et al., 2007). Then, each study is planned and
conducted separately to answer specific sub-questions. The results of Study 1 reveal
that all hypotheses are supported, with a positive correlation between growth mindset
and creative self-efficacy and a negative correlation between fixed mindset and creative
self-efficacy. Additionally, creative self-efficacy has a positive correlation with both
creative performance and innovation capability. Furthermore, creative performance is
positively correlated with both innovation capability and business success, while
innovation capability is positively correlated with business success. Consequently, the
results of Study 1 can serve as a conceptual framework for creative mindset, innovation
capability, and business success in a business context.
In Study 2, based on these findings, the author concluded that entrepreneurs with
a growth mindset might reflect and drive entrepreneurial success either directly or
 8

indirectly through innovation capability. The fixed mindset does not have impact or
significantly impact on entrepreneurial success. Nevertheless, it may be able to drive
their success indirectly through its innovation capability. Accordingly, the findings
highlight the importance of focusing on growth mindset and innovation capability as
part of entrepreneurial success.

1.8. Contributions
The objective is to examine creative mindset, innovation capability, and
entrepreneurial success in the context of Thai entrepreneurs in the tourism industry,
which is mainly composed of two studies. Study 1 provides a comprehensive model of
the creative mindset based on implicit theory in business success by Meta-analysis.
Then, Study 2 is a narrative review by empirical research approach, which provides a
model of a creative mindset, innovation capability, and entrepreneurship success in the
context of Thailand’s tourism businesses. Thus, the dissertation generally adds several
contributions to its field.
In Study 1, all results are supported by meta-analysis, revealing that meta-
analysis techniques can be applied to the business sector. This study will help
researchers and practitioners use this model in conducting further studies, especially
empirical research. The results of Study 1 will aid business management in the process
of developing, implementing, and measuring strategies for their firm’s performance or
activities.
The results of Study 2 reveal a model of creative mindset for achieving
entrepreneurial success. This study offers a deeper understanding of how the creative
mindset and innovation capability contribute to the success of tourism entrepreneurs.
The application of the creative mindset model is grounded in the implicit theory, which
can be utilized to assess research models based on creativity and innovation within a
business context. The implications of the findings from this study can be useful in
assessing the efficacy of these models in fostering business success.
In addition, previous studies have investigated the creative mindset. However,
there are very few studies that examine the creative mindset that drives innovation
capability, especially in the context of entrepreneurial success in the tourism industry.
 9

This study addresses this gap in existing literature by giving an understanding of the
creative mindset in a business context. Empirical evidence presented here establishes a
correlation between a creative mindset and innovation capability, shedding light on the
role of successful entrepreneurs. The results underscore the significance of prioritizing
the development of growth mindset and innovation capability in entrepreneurial
pursuits.
In the tourism industry, tourism has a significant impact on the economy for
future growth, but there is a need for more empirical research and quantitative analysis.
Thus, a study of tourism entrepreneurs can provide the tourism business with various
and insightful information. Furthermore, there is a great interest in published articles
that have extensively focused on creativity in connection to the performance of
entrepreneurs and its implementation in the tourism sector. However, the most relevant
are focused in developed countries. Therefore, the findings of this study will help the
development of tourism in developing countries, especially in Thailand.

1.9. Organization of the study

In Chapter 1, the study will start with the introduction, where the problem
statement will be presented. Accordingly, the author will explain the problem statement,
motivation, and information from the two studies, which are Study 1 and Study 2, and
include the organization of the study.
In Chapter 2, the author reviews the overview literature of implicit theory,
creative mindset, innovation capability, entrepreneurial success, and Thailand tourism.
In Chapter 3, the author provides and outlines of Study 1, which includes the
study hypothesis development, methods, including applied techniques and procedures
undertaken. This study will present a meta-analysis including research design, selection
of studies, and analytical technique.
In Chapter 4, the author provides the outlines of Study 2, which includes
hypothesis development, methods, including applied techniques and procedures
undertaken. This study will present an empirical research approach technique, that
includes survey design, data collection, and analytical technique.
In Chapter 5, the author provides and outlines the data analysis and results of
 10

Study 1 and Study 2.

In Chapter 6, the author indicates the conclusion of Study 1 and Study 2.
Theoretical contribution and practical implications, and limitations of this study are also
presented.
 11

CHAPTER 2: OVERVIEW ON CREATIVE MINDSET, INNOVATION

CAPABILITY, ENTREPRENEURIAL SUCCESS AND THAILAND TOURISM

2.1. Implicit Theory

Creativity can be explained as either an explicit theory or an implicit theory. An
implicit theory of creativity is the construction of laypeople regarding their belief
systems about creativity (Chan & Chan, 1999). The implicit theory of creativity is
related to the understanding and perception of creativity aspects such as what is
creativity, who is creative, etc. (Li et al., 2021).
Implicit theory consists of two systems of an individual mindset; one is an entity
mindset and the other one is an incremental mindset. According to entity mindset, the
ability could be referred that creativity is fixed, failure is innate, criticism is negative,
and it is unchangeable. While an incremental mindset could be referred to the dynamics,
seeing failure as an opportunity, taking criticism as constructive, and being beneficial
to future creative activities and creative success (Karwowski & Brzeski, 2017) .
Implicit theory holds important consequences for motivation, attributions,
achievement goals, and academic performance. In existing literature and documents, it
is posited that the implicit theory is an enduring source that can explain behavior and
creativity (Puente-Díaz & Cavazos-Arroyo, 2017). Research on implicit theories
focuses on what people believes and the nature of human attributes. The entity theorist
believes that human characteristics are fixed, whereas the incremental theorist believes
that human characteristics are trainable and can be developed (Carr et al., 2012).
However, some studies referred to others’ conceptions of the creative person, but some
studies concerned creative mindset (Li et al., 2021).
Puente-Díaz and Cavazos-Arroyo (2017) highlighted that the concept of entity
belief is associated with the notion of a fixed intelligence, while the incremental belief
is linked to the dynamic and malleable nature of intelligence, particularly in the context
of creative activities and creative achievements. In other words, the entity belief
framework perceives intelligence as static and unchangeable, whereas the incremental
belief framework views intelligence as flexible and adaptable. As a result, incremental
belief-based individual has a positive affect as a consequence with the effectiveness in
 12

solving insightful tasks while entity mindset acts as a negative predictor.

Following Hass and Burke (2016), the implicit theory offers a visual perception
of creative achievement, and the implicit theory also leads an individual or people to
produce a superior performance, or even create superior creative tasks and solutions.
Additionally, when evaluating new business proposals, venture capitalists depend on
their personal implicit beliefs or theories regarding the qualities that a promising
business should possess (Riquelme & Watson, 2002). Generally, managers with
incremental beliefs would exert better performance in a range of work and social tasks.
Previous studies have suggested an implicit theory in a business context. For
example, Rai and Lin (2019) recommend that financial institution marketers aim to
instill implicit self-theories of personality (an incremental mindset) in their commercials
in order to encourage positive appraisals of risky investments. Montford et al. (2019),
found the likelihood of taking risks is lower among entity theorists when the potential
for financial loss is apparent. Allan et al. (2022), found implicit self-theories can shape
individuals’ perceptions of emerging social robots intended for everyday use.
The implicit mindset also plays a critical role in tourism-related innovation.
According to Fong et al. (2018), their implicit theory, individuals who adhere to
incremental theories of intelligence exhibit lower risk perceptions and more positive
attitudes towards using mobile apps for hotel reservations. As a result, their implicit
theory predicts a greater likelihood of continuing to use apps for hotel bookings,
employing the concept of information technology continuance. According to Ly et al.
(2021), based on positive prior experiences and perceived value for money, a majority
of homestay guests who adhere to entity theories of intelligence are likely to use
homestays again. These studies demonstrate the potential of implicit theory in
grounding business, particularly in tourism contexts. Therefore, this study generates
fresh insights for the existing literature on the utilization of implicit theory by expanding
the range of its application to include a framework for a creative mindset in the context
of achieving business success.
Runco (1999) notes that implicit theories enable us to assess creative behavior
even if we lack a precise definition of creativity. Implicit theories of creativity are more
easily shared than formal definitions of the concept, and understanding them can aid in
 13

both the planning and evaluation of efforts to promote creativity (Lim & Plucker, 2001).
However, some studies referred this with others’ conceptions of the creative person, but
some studies concerned creative mindset (Li et al., 2021).

2.2. Creative mindset

Creative mindset can be explained as a product of nature and connected with the
talent and ability of people, thus dominating people’s achievement and intelligence
(Dweck, 2009). According to Yu & McLellan (2020), individuals tend to have either a
fixed or growth mindset about their abilities. Those with a fixed mindset (or an entity
theory), believe that their ability is a fixed trait. On the other hand, those with a growth
mindset (an incremental theory), view their ability as a flexible quality that can be
developed and improved over time. A creative mindset represents a specific form of
implicit theory, which concerns a person’s own creative capabilities and involves
explanations for their own personal traits (Hass et al., 2016). A person’s implicit theory
about fixed (or entity mindset) where the ability to be creative is set and unchangeable,
or growth (or incremental mindset) where creative ability can be nurtured (Pretz &
Nelson, 2017).

2.2.1 Fixed mindset

According to Yu & McLellan, (2020), individuals with a fixed mindset belief
their ability as a fixed trait and may perceive effort in a negative light. Such individuals
may believe that there is little room for improvement in their creative skills and, as a
result, may not invest additional effort in developing them (Puente-Díaz & Cavazos-
Arroyo, 2017). Those with a fixed mindset tend to attribute their task achievements to
their inherent intelligence, rather than their ability to develop their thinking by putting
more effort into practice. As a result, they are less likely to exert additional effort when
faced with challenging tasks or risks (Dweck, 2006). In a fixed mindset, people believe
that their qualities, including intelligence, personality and moral character, are fixed
(Dweck, 2009). Fixed mindset can be related with a negative forecasting, solving
insight problems (Karwowski, 2014) and creative behavior (Tang et al., 2016).
However, Murphy and Dweck (2016) found managers in the business context to
 14

prioritize their personal and professional reputation, seek compliments, and focus on
performance goals, ultimately turning people off. Previous studies have demonstrated
the significance of researching fixed mindsets. For example;
Hass et al. (2016), found fixed mindset had less and negative influence on
creative identity and also on self-efficacy. Puente‐Diaz and Cavazos‐Arroyo (2017),
show that a latent class analysis, which considers different levels of fixed and growth
mindsets, is expected to reveal varying degrees of personal creative identity and
likelihood of engaging in social comparison. Steele et al. (2018), found no significant
correlation between fixed creative mindsets and idea evaluation self-efficacy. The result
from Rai and Lin (2019) study show that those with a fixed mindset, also known as
entity theorists, tend to prefer investments with lower levels of risk.

2.2.2 Growth mindset

A growth mindset, also known as an incremental theory, and people who possess
a growth mindset hold the belief that their skills and intellect can be cultivated through
persistent effort and commitment (Yu & McLellan, 2020). People with a growth
mindset believe in their intelligence’s development and are more inclined to persevere
and participate in effortful behavior when faced with new, difficult activities, including
seeing their abilities as changeable through learning, learning from failure or success
(Dweck, 2006). Those who hold a growth mindset are related to their initial talents,
aptitudes, interests, and temperaments such as motivation for learning behavior
(Vongkulluksn et al., 2021), learning approach goals (Burnette et al., 2013). In terms of
an organization, managers with a growth mindset are seeking learning goals and
focusing on competence and seeing effort as the path to mastery, such as seeing
feedback as constructive and seeing failures as an opportunity to grow (Murphy &
Dweck, 2016).
Some examples of relevant studies on growth mindset include researches such as
Hass et al. (2016) found the impact of creative identity and self-efficacy was moderated
by the presence of a growth mindset. Pretz and Nelson (2017) posited that there was a
positive correlation between having a growth mindset and being rated as creative, as
well as exhibiting creative performance. Rai and Lin (2019) mentioned that consumers
 15

who believe in the malleability of personality traits (i.e., incremental theorists) tend to
prefer investments with higher levels of risk. Tenemaza Kramaley and Wishart (2020)
suggested that chess players who exhibit a growth mindset were found to have longer
study sessions and be more focused and serious during competitions. Overall, these
studies suggest that adopting a growth mindset can lead to improved performance and
academic achievement, and that the beliefs and attitude.

According to the implicit theory, an individual’s fixed mindset is characterized

by an entity belief, while a growth mindset is associated with an incremental belief.
Those with a fixed mindset believe that their personal attributes, such as creativity or
intelligence, are unchangeable, whereas a growth mindset recognizes that effective
strategies can lead to personal development (Burnette et al., 2020).
Karwowski and Brzeski (2017) suggest that fixed and growth mindsets are two
ends of a single continuum, but they are negatively correlated. However, due to the
complexity of nature’ s creativity, Karwowski (2014) found that the correlation between
both mindsets was weak, assuming their association independence. As a result,
individuals can hold both fixed and growth mindsets because creative mindsets are
about beliefs, and if beliefs are perceived as changeable, then people of all levels of
ability can hold both, but as time passes, individuals with a growth mindset tend to
perform better than individuals with a fixed mindset. From the perspective of tourism
human resources, entrepreneurial human capital is associated with business and is more
probable to disclose an opportunity and be successful. Entrepreneurs typically embody
vision, creativity, and innovation, which are key factors contributing to superior
business or firm performance (Kallmuenzer et al., 2021). In the tourism industry,
creativity can be transformed into innovation through the adoption of new technologies,
allowing businesses to enhance their operations and adapt to changing environmental
conditions (Divisekera & Nguyen, 2018).
From a business perspective, the presence of creative mindsets holds significant
implications for business education. Individuals with a high level of creative mindset
tend to approach and complete tasks more effectively (Qin et al., 2020). Such a mindset
helps individuals build their creative personal identity, creative self-efficacy (also
 16

referred to as creative self-concept) (Royston & Reiter‐Palmon, 2019), and problem-

solving capabilities, which are essential for competitiveness in an entrepreneurial
context (Fleck & Asmuth, 2021).

2.3. Innovation capability

Many researchers have given the definition of innovation capability. According
to Ngo and O'cass (2013), innovation capability is a complex concept that consists of
multiple facets. They propose that there are two main types of innovation: technical and
non-technical. Technical innovation involves the development of new services, service
operations, and technologies. Non-technical innovation, on the other hand,
encompasses innovations in managerial practices, market strategies, and marketing
tactics.
Saunila (2014) proposed a more comprehensive framework for innovation
capability, which comprises seven distinct aspects. These include participatory
leadership culture, which refers to the organizational environment that fosters
innovation and leadership development. Ideation and organizing structures are also
crucial, as they provide the necessary structures and systems for generating, developing,
and implementing innovative ideas. Work climate and well-being are vital for employee
satisfaction and creating a positive environment for innovation, collaboration, and
values. Know-how development involves utilizing employee skills and knowledge, as
well as improving them. Regeneration refers to an organization’s ability to learn from
past experiences and use them to create new innovations. External knowledge is also
essential, as it involves leveraging external networks and knowledge to enhance
organizational innovation capability. Lastly, individual activity concerns the individual
innovation capability and activity of employees.
Taherparvar et al. (2014) proposed that innovation capability can be evaluated
based on two critical dimensions. First, innovation speed refers to the time elapsed
between the initial development and the ultimate commercialization of new services,
technologies, equipment deployment, and problem-solving initiatives. Second,
innovation quality is determined by how well the launched products and services meet
the needs and expectations of customers, which reflects the novelty, creativity, and
 17

effectiveness of new ideas, services, processes, technologies, equipment, and problem-

solving approaches.
Oura et al. (2016) defined innovation capability as a construct consisting of seven
dimensions: research and development capacity (e.g., new technologies, product
development), marketing capacity (e.g., marketing tools, new pricing methods, new
sales channels), manufacturing capacity (e.g., quality of product manufacturing or
production, advanced technologies in manufacturing or production), learning capacity
(technological trends, new skills or technologies), organizational capacity (e.g., a
flexible organizational structure, new management techniques), resource exploitation
capacity (e.g., a continuous flow of financial resources), and strategic capacity (e.g.,
strategy formulation, connection between innovation and value).
Weber and Heidenreich (2018) put forth a framework for evaluating a firm’s
innovation capabilities, which includes five sub-dimensions. These sub-dimensions are
as follows: 1) Innovation portfolio management, 2) Innovation process management, 3)
Innovation culture, 4) Internal learning, and 5) External learning.
Maldonado-Guzmán et al. (2019) proposed that innovation capability can be
viewed in terms of two main categories: technical innovation and managerial
innovation. Technical innovation pertains to the development of new products and
processes, while managerial innovation involves new approaches to marketing and
management. These two types of innovation capabilities are critical activities that
organizations engage in to stay competitive and enhance their overall performance.
Therefore, innovation capability can be referred to a company's capacity to
utilize the inventive potential of its workforce by establishing conducive settings for the
cultivation of knowledge and ideas, and the successful execution of innovative
strategies aimed at improving business processes.
Additionally, the innovation capability increases the ability to organize or
carrying out an action that may develop and allow the implementation of successful in
terms of innovation context. Importantly, a wide variety of research topics in the
relationship between innovation capability and firm performance were supported. Such
as, Calantone et al. (2002); Maldonado-Guzmán et al. (2019); Taherparvar et al. (2014);
Wang and Dass (2017); Yang et al. (2009). Moreover, innovation capability has a
 18

significant influence on different business factors such as sales performance

(Kafetzopoulos & Psomas, 2015), financial and operational performance (Saunila,
2014), business performance (Taherparvar et al., 2014), export performance (Oura et
al., 2016), and firm success (Weber & Heidenreich, 2018). Table 2.1 illustrates how
innovation capability is linked to different sectors of firms or businesses.

Table 2.1. Relationship between innovation capability and business sector.

Author(s) Examine Study field
Kafetzopoulos and The correlation between a Manufacturing firms
Psomas (2015) company’s ability to innovate and
the quality of its products, as well
as its operational and financial
performance.
Su et al. (2018) The link between a company's IT manufacturing
innovation capacity, its perceived companies
need for innovation, and its
overall organizational
performance.
Ferreira et al. (2020) The association between a Small and medium-
company's innovation capability size enterprises
and its ability to gain a (SMEs)
competitive edge and achieve
overall business success.
Shafi (2020) The connection between a Handicraft micro firms
company’s innovation capacity
and its level of collaboration with
other firms, and how this impacts
its overall performance.
Lam et al. (2021) Collaboration between High-tech firms
organizational cultures
 19

knowledge management and

innovation capabilities within an
open innovation environment
Source: created by author

Extensive literature indicating that entrepreneurship plays a critical role in

driving economic development, particularly when entrepreneurs effectively leverage
innovative technologies to enhance productivity and performance among their
employees (Ferreira et al., 2019). In the hospitality section, it is essential for firms to
keep up with periodic innovation and make innovation capability a core competence
(Wang & Dass, 2017). As a result, hospitality businesses have a wealth of options for
enhancing services and customer experiences through innovation (Pascual-Fernández
et al., 2020). To put it another way, innovation is a key strategy for long-term success
in the hospitality industry (Ouyang et al., 2021).
The current entrepreneurship literature on tourism highlights the importance of
innovation capability, which facilitates the generation of new ideas, novel processes,
and creative solutions that can lead to the development of new products, services, and
technological processes (Kallmuenzer et al. 2019). Interestingly, entrepreneurs are often
seen as innovators who make use of corporate resources to produce innovative products
and services that capitalize on market opportunities and enhance their business
performance (Farmaki et al., 2020).
It’s widely accepted that there is a pressing need for greater quantitative evidence
of innovation in tourism. In order to attain and maintain a company's performance, the
ambition to develop an innovation capability will establish the essential organizational
culture and learning. Non-technical and technical innovation capability are regarded as
being part of the same innovation capacity.
In the first place, technical innovation capability (TIC) refers to the ability to
generate new ideas and knowledge to develop new services, service operations, and
technologies (Ngo & O'cass, 2013). Secondly, non-technical innovation capability
(NTIC) is characterized by a company’s attributes that support its managerial, market,
and marketing activities, including managerial, market, and marketing innovations
 20

(Ngo & O'cass, 2013). Non-technical innovation capability can be described as the
application of new ideas to enhance organizational structures, systems, and processes.
Therefore, firms must consider both technical innovation capability and non-technical
innovation capability to benefit the organization and remain competitive in the
marketplace (Kafetzopoulos & Psomas, 2016).

2.4. Entrepreneurial success

Entrepreneurs are the leaders of their enterprises because they can readily
transfer or distribute resources between entrepreneurial situations (Powell & Eddleston,
2013). Entrepreneurs are recognised as individuals who make independent business
decisions and contributions related to managing a business (Tajeddini et al., 2017).
Entrepreneurs may take on various roles and duties to fulfil and perform tasks such as
conceptualising business visions and processes, planning and implementing business
operations (Przepiorka, 2017). Therefore, an entrepreneur is an individual or person
who organizes and operates a business (or businesses) by using their own decisions and
contributions to manage and fulfil a business.
The process of contributing to those business processes is known as
entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is an opportunity to seek business activities through
the promotion of economic development both by the individuals, governments, and
society (Ramadani et al., 2015). Entrepreneurship is a characteristic of managers and
business owners who develop innovations to apply to the uncertainty of the environment
(González‐Benito et al., 2009).
Entrepreneur strategy and successful entrepreneurs have been the subject of
extensive research studies. Many researches have given various definition of success
for individual entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurial success is the career success of an
entrepreneur that is related to work-related outcomes that entrepreneurs have
accumulated (Lau et al., 2007). Entrepreneurial success was measured in terms of
business and in comparison to competitors (Przepiorka, 2017). Entrepreneurial success
is an assessment of the achievements of entrepreneurs, measured by economic and
entrepreneurial satisfaction with experience. In several research, different measures of
success were employed to assess entrepreneurial success. For example, Entrepreneurial
 21

success was evaluated through economic indicators and assessments of how satisfied
individuals were with their entrepreneurial experience (Powell & Eddleston, 2013).
Entrepreneurs in different sectors may judge their career success in different
ways. Entrepreneurial success is used to refer to a company or entrepreneur. Fisher et
al. (2014) found that entrepreneurial success can be used to refer to a firm/company or
an individual entrepreneur, and the success criteria can be determined in terms of
objective and subjective. The present study adopted the concept of entrepreneurial
success as defined by Staniewski and Awruk (2018), encompassing both subjective and
objective indicators. Regarding subjective indicators, they pertain to the degree of
contentment experienced in connection with the progress of the business, the client base
size, the quality of employee performance, the competitiveness of the organization, and
the achievement of predetermined business development objectives. On the other hand,
an objective indicator can be defined as specific outcomes such as meeting profit
targets, having a registered business address, employing staff, creating job
opportunities, sustaining financial stability, providing employee benefits, and
establishing lasting relationships with clients.

2.5. Thailand tourism

The tourism industry is playing an essential role and expanding significantly,
leading to rapid growth and substantial economic growth. The contribution of travel and
tourism makes the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) economy grows
11% of region’s gross domestic product (GDP). By 2025, the GDP contribution of
ASEAN tourism could be increased from 12% to 15%, demonstrating the growing
importance of tourism, especially in Thailand, where tourism contributes to significant
employment in their economies (ASEAN, 2015).
Tourism is an economic contributor to Thailand’s tourism industry, which is
strongly recognized for its naturally well-endowed, hospitality, infrastructure, and
variety of attractions. Thailand’s appeal as a travel destination is not limited to foreign
tourists; locals also take pleasure in exploring their own country. For example, Bangkok
as the capital city, Chiang Mai in the north and Phuket in the south are also well-known
tourist hotspots within Thailand (Leelawat et al., 2022). The number of domestic
 22

travellers reached 167 million people in 2019, bringing in 1,084 million THB of revenue
(see Figure 2.1). Moreover, the number of international arrivals is much higher and
increasing year by year, with 39.8 million tourist bringing 1,933 million THB (see
Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.1. Number and revenue of domestic travellers.

Source: Ministry of tourism and sport
https://www.mots.go.th/more_news_new.php?cid=527
Exchange rate 1 US$ = 32.31 Baht
 23

Figure 2.2. Number and revenue of international arrivals.

Source: Ministry of tourism and sport
https://www.mots.go.th/more_news_new.php?cid=527
Exchange rate 1 US$ = 32.31 Baht

In 2013, the third industrial revolution (Industrial 3.0) has changed to the fourth
industrial revolution (Industry 4.0), where the concept represents the current trend and
importance of technology such as IoT or the Internet of Things (Xu et al., 2018). The
German Federal Government first introduced Industry 4.0, which was well-accepted
both in the academic and industrial sectors, and it spread from Europe to America and
Asia, including the United States, United Kingdom, Taiwan, and Japan (Oztemel &
Gursev, 2020). Thailand is also moving toward industrial 4.0. The concept of Industry
4.0 has emerged in Thailand’s economic agenda as called Thailand 4.0 (Schmidt, 2019).
The economic model of Thailand 4.0, or the Thai version of Industry 4.0, is based on
creativity and innovation (Jones & Pimdee, 2017). In so doing, as Thailand undergoes
a transition towards a digital economy, entrepreneurs in the tourism industry must
prioritize the cultivation and ongoing support of creativity and technological
innovation. Moreover, it is highly imperative for entrepreneurs in Thailand to
acknowledge the importance of nurturing a creative mindset in order to bring their
 24

businesses to fruition. This strategy is crucial for achieving their business objectives
and contributing to the transition of Thailand’s economic landscape towards Thailand
4.0.
Tourism holds immense significance for Thailand’s economy, as evident from
the huge revenue it generates. In 2018, Thailand welcomed 38.3 million foreign tourists,
constituting approximately 16% of GDP. The tourism sector is replete with numerous
SMEs that cater to the needs of tourists, thus contributing significantly to job creation,
poverty reduction, and the production of local products like souvenirs and services.
SMEs form the backbone of tourism development, and through their network, tour
operators and tourism service providers can distribute economic benefits widely
(Srinamphon et al.2022).
In 2019, the nation welcomed 40 million tourists, with accommodation (28%),
shopping (24%), and food and beverages (21%) being the leading expenditure
categories for inbound visitors. Furthermore, between 2014 and 2019, the tourism sector
in Thailand created approximately 36 million jobs and numerous business opportunities
in the country. Unfortunately, the outbreak of the pandemic and the resulting limitations
have exerted a considerable influence on Thailand’s economy, particularly the tourism
sector, which witnessed a drastic drop in international travel within a year. In 2021,
there was a significant drop in the number of passengers on international flights to
Thailand, with a 95% decrease compared to 2020. Moreover, the decline was even more
pronounced when compared to 2019. (Aditya, 2022).
In addition, recent studies have acknowledged and endorsed the connection
between creativity and innovation. However, most relevant are focused in developed
countries such as Germany (Tang et al., 2016), the United States (Sipe, 2016), Australia
(Divisekera & Nguyen, 2018). Therefore, it is crucial to conduct research in emerging
economies, particularly in Southeast Asian countries like Thailand, where a deficiency
in knowledge and incentives for innovation is apparent (Chen, 2018), to obtain further
quantitative evidence and empirical research. Furthermore, Divisekera and Nguyen
(2018) highlighted the need for increased empirical research and quantitative evidence
in tourism innovation, given the rapid expansion of the tourist industry in the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (Wong et al., 2011). Despite this,
 25

there is lack empirical support (Sipe, 2016). Hence, the author plans to compare the
results of creative mindset, innovation capability and entrepreneurial success with case
study of entrepreneurs in tourism industry of Thailand.
 26

CHAPTER 3: STUDY 1: A META ANALYSIS

The concept of a creative mindset can be attributed to both nature and a person’s
inherent talent and abilities. It exerts a strong influence over an individual's
accomplishments and intellect (Dweck, 2009). Individuals who possess a fixed mindset
tend to view their abilities as a fixed trait and may interpret efforts as having a negative
connotation. Individuals who have a growth mindset believe in the development of their
intelligence and are more likely to persist and engage in effortful behavior. They view
their abilities as malleable through learning, and are able to learn from both failures and
successes (Dweck, 2006).
According to Steele et al. (2018), creative self-efficacy is a major concept studied
and linked to mindsets, and it is a crucial predictor of creative accomplishment and
performance. Creative self-efficacy has been identified as one of the most significant
drivers of individuals, as it can convince them that they possess the capability to be
creative. When individuals believe in their creative abilities, they tend to have greater
confidence in their ability to succeed in creative tasks (Malik et al., 2015). Steele et al.
(2018) support this notion by suggesting that creative self-efficacy influences creativity
and creative output.
As demonstrated in a previous study (Chen & Zhang, 2019; Richter et al., 2012),
creative self-efficacy is widely regarded as a key driver of creativity and is seen as an
important factor in promoting creative performance. Furthermore, according to Tierney
& Farmer ( 2002), the study revealed that an increase in employees' confidence in their
creative abilities was associated with their identification with a creative position and
their supervisor's expectations for creativity. It is considered a critical mechanism that
links creative mindset with creative performance (Royston & Reiter‐Palmon, 2019).
While creative self-efficacy is associated with creative performance levels, the
significance of this relationship has not received sufficient attention in research
(Christensen-Salem et al., 2020).
Being able to exhibit creativity has been recognized as a crucial trait for
obtaining a competitive edge via innovation (Ferreira et al., 2020). Creativity, according
to Fleck & Asmuth (2021), leads to fluency, originality, and elaboration in the
 27

production of product concepts, which plays a significant part in the entrepreneurial

process. Furthermore, Kallmuenzer et al. (2021) discovered that entrepreneurs are
always surrounded by vision, creativity, and innovativeness, all of which help them
operate their businesses more efficiently. The relationship between creativity activity
and innovation has been widely recognized and studied in recent years (Chaubey et al.,
2019; Tai & Mai, 2016; Valaei et al., 2017). Consequently, a growing number of
industrial management and technology research is centered on inventive strategies to
attain a competitive advantages and capitalize on worldwide environmental changes
(Sleuwaegen & Boiardi, 2014).

3.1. Hypothesis development

3.1.1. The relation between growth mindset and creative self-efficacy
Mindsets refer to the collection of beliefs one holds about the fixed or flexible
nature of personal qualities, such as intelligence. While some individuals perceive
certain qualities as unchangeable traits, others view them as flexible traits that can be
developed through learning (Mrazek et al., 2018). In this study, creative mindset refers
to a person’s implicit theory about fixed (or entity mindset) where ability to be creative
is set and unchangeable, or growth (or incremental mindset) where creative ability can
be nurtured (Pretz & Nelson, 2017). A growth mindset, known as incremental implicit
theory, holds the belief that creative ability or the notion that creativity can be developed
and improved over time (Haase et al., 2018). Moreover, a growth mindset has greater
academic and career interest and strengthens entrepreneurial self-efficacy, which will
predict career development (Burnette et al., 2020).
The growth mindset associated creative self-efficacy. Several studies have
examined how growth mindsets relate to creative self-efficacy and performance. For
example, university students (Hass et al., 2016), college business students (Puente‐Diaz
& Cavazos‐Arroyo, 2017), undergraduate students (Royston & Reiter‐Palmon, 2019),
and elementary school students (Vongkulluksn et al., 2021). Moreover, a growth
mindset has greater academic and career interest and strengthens entrepreneurial self-
efficacy, which will predict career development (Burnette et al., 2020). Therefore:
H1a: Growth mindset has a significant positive effect on creative self-efficacy.
 28

3.1.2. The relation between fixed mindset and creative self-efficacy

Individuals with a growth mindset towards intelligence perceive high levels of
effort to enhance their ability. Conversely, those with a fixed mindset towards
intelligence interpret effort as a sign that they have reached the limits of their ability to
memorize new information (Mrazek et al., 2018). According to this view, there is
limited potential for improvement in one’s creativity and creative skills.
An individual with a fixed mindset tends to believe that their accomplishments
are a result of their innate intelligence rather than their ability to develop their skills
through persistent effort. As a result, they may be less inclined to exert extra effort when
faced with difficult tasks or take risks since they fear that failure would undermine their
identity as a naturally intelligent person (Dweck, 2006).
Previous studies were supported that a fixed mindset has negative implication
for self-efficacy such as Steele et al. (2018). Referring to Paek and Sumners (2019), a
fixed mindset has negative effect on teacher self-efficacy and is not empirically
supported in the context of educators in the US and internationally. Hass et al. (2016)
emphasized that a fixed mindset has a moderately negative related to a growth mindset,
suggesting that while individuals endorse a growth mindset, they will not endorse a
fixed mindset. Therefore, the belief that creativity cannot be improved leads to the
expectation that a fixed mindset is unrelated to creative self-efficacy.
H1b: A fixed mindset has a significant negative effect on creative self-efficacy.

3.1.3. The relation between creative self-efficacy and creative performance

The term “creative self-efficacy” has been introduced to refer to a personal
conviction in one’s capability to generate creative results. Additionally, creative self-
efficacy plays a significant role in stimulating the creative behavior of employees.
Individuals with a creative disposition possess confidence in their ability to attain
innovative outcomes (Teng et al., 2019).
Thundiyil et al. (2016) posited that the person who feels that they have the ability
to be creative will reflect on their creative performance. Furthermore, Malik et al.
(2015) suggested that individuals with high levels of creative self-efficacy tend to
possess a strong belief in their ability, which increases their expectations of success and
 29

consequently improves their performance in creative tasks. By the way, people with low
creative self-efficacy often lack confidence in their creative abilities, which can result
in lower performance in creative tasks.
An interest in creative self-efficacy develops gradually and is engaged as the
most salient antecedents in creative contexts; such as, creative self-efficacy and
employee creativity (He et al., 2020), creative performance of employees and
supervisors (Christensen-Salem et al., 2020). In addition, previous studies have
explored various research fields related to creative self-efficacy. For instance,
resilience, firm innovation, and industrial experience in the context of the restaurant
industry in Australia (Hallak et al., 2018), and employee innovation behavior in
international tourist hotels in Taiwan (Teng et al., 2019). Thus, creative self-efficacy
significantly enhances creative performance by gathering relevant factors (i.e., self, task
performance, and social context), which in turn is associated with enhanced creative
activity (Christensen-Salem et al., 2020).
H2a: Creative self-efficacy has a significant positive effect on creative performance.

3.1.4. The relation between creative self-efficacy and innovation capability

Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s conviction in their capacity to attain
desired outcomes through their own actions (Stolz et al., 2022). This is a fundamental
factor or influencer which engages in particular behaviors such as effort of employees,
level of persistence of employees etc. (Christensen-Salem et al., 2020). Individuals who
possess creative self-efficacy exhibit greater confidence in utilizing their abilities to
generate innovative ideas, which often leads to significant outcomes (Choi et al., 2021).
For example, the relationship between innovative behavior and creative personality as
well as psychological empowerment in the hospitality industry is moderated by the
significant mediating role of creative self-efficacy (Teng et al., 2019).
Neumeyer et al. (2018) found that entrepreneurs who have a strong sense of self-
efficacy are more likely to overcome obstacles in the process of innovation and are more
confident about achieving self-concordant goals, which encourages the modification
and reinforcement of self-efficacy as a result. On the other hand, individuals with low
self-efficacy tend to doubt their ability to innovate, which often leads them to avoid
 30

problems or even give up, especially when they are emotionally exhausted.
In addition, research has demonstrated the significant impact of creative self-
efficacy on innovative behavior. Studies have explored various fields, such as in
employees (Orth & Volmer, 2017), in innovative work behavior among nurses (Afsar
& Masood, 2018), and on firm innovation in the restaurant industry (Hallak et al.,
2018). These findings suggest that individuals with high levels of creative self-efficacy
are more likely to engage in satisfying innovation activities.
H2b: Creative self-efficacy has a significant positive effect on innovation capability.

3.1.5. The relation between creative performance and innovation capability

Individual creativity and novel ideas are referred to creative performance, which
also includes taking risks, changing one’s habits of thought and behavior, and starting
new trends (Tønnessen et al., 2021). Creativity and innovation can manifest at various
levels, such as individual, group, or organizational. In a work setting, they refer to the
process, results, and outputs of endeavors aimed at uncovering and implementing novel
and enhanced approaches to achieving objectives. The creative stage of this process
refers to the development of ideas and inventions, as well as the latter stages of
transforming an idea into a better method, activity, or product (Anderson et al., 2014).
Given the changing global environment, creativity has emerged as a crucial
factor, and an expanding group of experts in industrial management and technology
acknowledge the significance of leveraging creative opportunities to attain a
competitive edge (Sleuwaegen & Boiardi, 2014). In the work area, creative performance
refers to an individual employee’s creativity and includes novel ideas, products,
services, or procedures that are important for the organization (Tønnessen et al., 2021).
Ferreira et al. (2020) posit that creativity is started by an individual or team thinking
and developing that idea into practice. Tønnessen et al. (2021) argued that creativity
and innovation have become important things and are critical to firm and business
success.
Creativity is a key component of business success (Ferreira et al., 2020).
Nonetheless, few research have examined the connection between creativity and
innovative capacity. However, the interest in an individual creativity and innovation has
 31

increased gradually, as we can see in many studies such as a positive influence between
creativity and organizational innovation capability in different organization categories
of multinational corporations (Tai & Mai, 2016), a positive influence on individual
creativity and the innovation process in UK firms (Stojcic et al., 2018), and a positive
impact of creativity on innovation capabilities in Portuguese SMEs (Ferreira et al.,
2020).
H3a: Creative performance has a significant positive effect on innovation capability.

3.1.6. The relation between creative performance and business success

Creativity is a highly valued construct which is of crucial importance to challenging
the old to a new venture (Tønnessen et al., 2021). The creativity is a fundamental
component that plays a vital role in promoting entrepreneurial endeavors and generating
novel business prospects (Castillo-Vergara et al., 2018). Creativity can be defined as a
thinking process containing novelty and utility as two components, which bring about
creative outcomes (Pesout & Nietfeld, 2021). Individuals and firms can leverage their
resources and advantages into market opportunities by utilizing their creativity, which
is a critical ability (Sleuwaegen & Boiardi, 2014). As a result, the creativity involves
generating ideas, while the innovation involves putting those ideas into action to
enhance procedures, practices, or products.
Given the interest in creativity ability, it can be measured through creative
performance (Pesout & Nietfeld, 2021). Creative performance is the result of complex
interplay between individual and contextual elements, which can be beneficial to both
individuals and organizations (Tønnessen et al., 2021). In organizations, creativity is
essential for new venture competitiveness in organizations, and entrepreneurial
creativity can be demonstrated in organizations and firms (Khedhaouria et al., 2015).
Creative performance has been linked to business performance, and this relationship
has been supported in previous studies. For example, employee creativity that fosters
organisational dynamic in the public sectors (Al-Asfoura et al., 2020).
H3b: Creative performance has a significant positive effect on business success.
 32

3.1.7. The relation between innovation capability and business success

Innovation capability is an essential ability to accept and apply external
information in order to transform it into new knowledge (Foroudi et al., 2016). Many
creative and innovative businesses (for instance, Apple and Amazon) have placed a high
priority on the development of innovation capabilities in order to achieve firm
performance (Wang & Dass, 2017). Regarding the retail industry, retailers all over the
world, including those in Europe, are aware of the potential and utilizing innovations
like Smart Labels and Unique Identifiers, NFC payments, etc. (Foroudi et al., 2016). In
the context of small businesses, there exists a relationship between innovation capability
and firm performance (Saunila, 2020).
Innovation capability is a crucial factor in fostering firm growth, enhancing
performance, and creating sustainable competitive advantages. The impact of
innovation capability is evident across various business factors, as demonstrated in
studies such as those conducted in Finnish small and medium-sized enterprises on
financial performance (Saunila, 2014), and in Greek manufacturing companies on sales
performance (Kafetzopoulos & Psomas, 2015).
H4: Innovation capability has a significant positive effect on business success.

3.3. Methods
3.3.1. Research design
Study 1 introduces a research model that comprises five essential elements:
creative mindset, creative self-efficacy, creative performance, innovation capability,
and business success. The proposed connections among these variables are illustrated
in Figure 3.
 33

Figure 3. Research Framework (Study 1)

Source: created by author

3.3.1.1. Meta-Analysis
Meta-analysis is a popular statistical tool for synthesizing research findings in
various fields such as the educational, social, medical, and business sciences (Cheung,
2015),and including in psychology, medicine, education. Moreover, in business, meta-
analysis has been used to improve organizational performance, including reducing
absenteeism and counterproductive behavior, and evaluating employee training
programs (Rosenblad, 2009). Table 3.1 shows the Meta-Analysis and research field.

Table 1.1. Meta-Analysis and research fields

Research field Author(s) Journal Examine
Consumer Pham et al. (2019) The Journal of examines multiple
behavior Social Sciences antecedents of
Research customer participation
such as firm factor,
customer factors
, and social factor
Psychology Oshio et al. (2018) Personality and Psychological
Individual resilience and ego-
Differences resiliency and Big Five
personality traits
 34

Burnette et al. Clinical Growth Mindsets and

(2020) Psychology psychological distress
Review
Medical Billeter et al. British Journal of metabolic surgery and
(2018) Surgery medical treatment for
microvascular
complications
Education Sisk et al. (2018) Psychological The important of
science growth mind-sets to
academic achievement
Castro and Education and Online learning courses
Tumibay (2021) Information and learning outcomes
Technologies
Criminology Pratt et al. (2014) Criminology Self-control and
victimization
Source: created by author

3.3.1.2. The important of Meta-Analysis

During the mid-1980s to late 1990s, researchers in many fields shifted from
using narrative reviews to systematic reviews and meta-analysis due to the inherent
subjectivity and lack of transparency in narrow reviews. The reviewers of the narrative
did not furnish an explanation of the methodology they employed to combine
information and arrive at their findings (Rosenblad, 2009).
Meta-analysis can help to identify and explore sources of bias, quantify
differences between studies, and distinguish genuine heterogeneity from bias. By
integrating existing evidence through a systematic and rigorous approach, meta-analysis
provides an accurate and efficient summary estimate (Tatsioni & Ioannidis, 2017).
In order to carry out a meta-analysis, researchers begin by formulating an
empirically testable research question based on existing published studies. These
studies should provide enough information to enable the computation of the effect size
and other essential components required for the meta-analysis (Cheung, 2015).
 35

This study sought to utilize meta-analysis as a reliable and effective means of

summarizing and integrating a vast quantity of literature, thereby revealing cumulative
insights and fundamental principles. The author conducted a search across a variety of
scientific databases, including Emerald, Google Scholar, JSTOR, ProQuest,
ScienceDirect, and Wiley (For example, Wu, 2019; Wu & Anridho, 2016; Wu et al.,
2020). Table 3.2 shows the information from the scientific databases.
 36

Table 3.2. Information from the scientific databases.

Database Information Source
Emerald Emerald publishing, established in 1967, is a provider of more than 2,500 books and over 300 Emerald (n.d.)
journals aimed at advancing research and practice in business, management, and various
applied fields such as education, health and social care, and engineering. Emerald is an active
member of the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (GRLI) and contributes to
worldwide education and research through awards and research grants. The organization
partners with several institutions and organizations, such as the Academy of Management, the
American Library Association (ALA) etc. to promote the development of global information
and knowledge.
Google Google Scholar is an indexes academic literature across various publishing and disciplinary GoogleScholar
Scholar formats, such as articles, books, dissertations, and more. It provides access to a vast collection (n.d.)
of academic literature from professional and academic publishers, online archives,
universities, and other sources, making it easier to search for academic literature and explore
related works, citations, authors, and publications.
JSTOR JSTOR is an online library that caters to the needs of scholars, researchers, and students by JSTOR (n.d.)
offering a vast collection of academic content. JSTOR is an invaluable resource for those
seeking in-depth knowledge. The content on the platform comes from a diverse range of
sources, with almost 1,200 publishers contributing from over 57 countries worldwide.
 37

ProQuest ProQuest is a company that offers a diverse portfolio of assets, including content, technologies, ProQuest (n.d.)
and enterprise-level solutions, aimed at facilitating research outcomes and increasing
efficiency. Its extensive database comprises 90,000 reliable sources, spanning six centuries
and containing over 6 billion digital pages. ProQuest's services enable clients to organize their
data in a user-friendly manner, making it easily accessible and discoverable for students,
scholars, and information seekers alike.
ScienceDirect ScienceDirect is an online platform that offers peer-reviewed journal article database that Elsevier (n.d.)
encompasses a wide range of research fields, including science medical research materials
accessible through subscription-based services.
ScienceDirect offers interdisciplinary content that facilitates research and discovery.
Wiley Wiley Online Library is a comprehensive resource for online journals, books, and resources in Wiley (n.d.)
various fields such as life, health, society, and physical science. With an extensive collection
of multidisciplinary resources, Wiley enables researchers to easily discover and access journal.
articles, books, and references, removing research roadblocks and providing a platform for
knowledge dissemination.

Source: created by author

 38

3.3.2. Selection of Studies

In order to select relevant studies for the meta-analysis, the author conducted a
search of various sources including Emerald, Google Scholar, JSTOR, ProQuest,
ScienceDirect, and Wiley for publications dating back to 2020 or earlier. This study
used a combination of keywords to identify relationships among the research constructs
or relevant journals. The search terms are following the main literature reviews.
For creative mindset, the author searches for studies related to creative mindset,
including their beliefs about abilities, motivations, and personality traits. Karwowski
(2014) defines creative mindset as either a fixed (entity) mindset or a growth (malleable,
incremental) mindset. According to Hass et al. (2016), a creative mindset is a specific
type of implicit theory focused on explanations for one’s own traits. Therefore,
keywords used by the author include creative mindset, fixed mindset, entity mindset,
growth mindset, malleable mindset, incremental mindset, and implicit theory.
For creative self-efficacy, the author integrated the domains of creativity and
self-efficacy (Steele et al., 2018), and used keywords such as creative self-efficacy and
self-efficacy to search relevant literature.
For creative performance, creative performance encompasses individual
creativity, characterized by risk-taking, adopting novel approaches to thinking and
doing, and initiating change (Tønnessen et al., 2021). The generation of creative ideas
is also recognized as a key driver of innovation (Sarooghi et al., 2015). To capture
relevant literature, the author utilizes keywords such as creative performance, individual
creativity, creativity, and creative idea.
To examine innovation capability, Ngo and O'cass (2013) proposed two types:
technical innovation capability and non-technical innovation capability, while
Taherparvar et al. (2014) identified innovation speed and innovation quality as crucial
dimensions of innovation capability. Consequently, the author employs keywords such
as technical innovation capability, non-technical innovation capability, firm innovation
capability, innovation speed, innovation quality, etc.
For innovation capability, for example, Ngo and O'cass (2013) proposed two
types: technical innovation capability and non-technical innovation capability, while
Taherparvar et al. (2014) identified innovation speed and innovation quality as crucial
 39

dimensions of innovation capability. Consequently, the author employs keywords such

as technical innovation capability, non-technical innovation capability, firm innovation
capability, innovation speed, innovation quality, etc.
For business success, for example, Ngo and O'cass (2013) defined firm
performance as a measurement of business success, Saunila (2014) defined firm
performance in SME success contexts, and divided firm performance into financial
performance than operational performance, etc. Therefore, the author uses keyword as
business success, firm performance, financial performance, operational performance
career success, entrepreneurial success, SME success etc. Table 3.3. shown the relevant
of combination keywords.

Table 3.3. Relevant of combination keywords.

Dimension Related keyword Source
Creative mindset Creative mindset Puente-Díaz and Cavazos-
Arroyo (2017)
Fixed mindset and growth Karwowski (2014)
mindset
Implicit theory Hass et al. (2016)
Creative self- Creative self-efficacy Steele et al. (2018)
efficacy
Self-efficacy Vongkulluksn et al. (2021)
Creative Creative performance Malik et al. (2015)
performance
Creative ideas Sarooghi et al. (2015)
Creativity Ma et al. (2013)
Creative behavior Strickland and Towler (2011)
Innovation Technical innovations Ngo and O'cass (2013)
capability capability and Non-technical
innovations capability
Employee innovative Newman et al. (2018)
 40

Innovative activities Slåtten (2014)

Business success Business success
Career success
Entrepreneurial success
Business performance
Firm performance
Financial performance
Job performance
Career achievement
Przepiorka (2017)
Chen et al. (2015)
Staniewski and Awruk (2018)
Powell and Eddleston (2013)
Hallak et al. (2018)
Saunila (2014)
Ismail et al. (2019)
Chen et al. (2018)
Source: created by author

3.3.3. Analytical technique

The analysis of data will focus on several key variables, including author name,
publication year, journal name, sample size, statistical measurement of each variable,
and effect sizes. To ensure sufficient information for conducting meta-analysis, Cheung
(2015), recommends that published studies should provide necessary details to calculate
effect size and other important components. In this study, two criteria for inclusion are
utilized: (1) correlational studies must report the correlation coefficient (r) or
standardized regression (beta) coefficient, and (2) studies must provide related statistics
(t-test, p-value) for the relationship between variables. These statistics can be converted
into effect size (r) and Fisher Z effect will be applied using comprehensive meta-
analysis (CMA) software.
The utilization of CMA software has significantly improved the efficiency and
convenience of data entry, calculation, and output. In this study, the random-effects
model will be employed, which will be assessed by the Q statistic and consistency
across studies (Martin, 2008). As Byron and Khazanchi (2010) suggest that the
correlation coefficient (r) is easier to interpret and is commonly used as a criterion in
meta-analytical reviews, this study will also use it for further analysis.
The correlation coefficient r is a statistical measure that quantifies the strength
and direction of the relationship between two variables. The value of r ranges from -1
to +1, where -1 represents a perfect negative correlation, +1 represents a perfect positive
 41

correlation, and 0 indicates no correlation. Typically, a correlation coefficient of at least

+0.5 or -0.5 is considered a strong relationship among most statisticians (Sisk et al.,
2018).
Additionally, Lipsey and Wilson (2001) proposed categorizing effect sizes (r) as
small (r < 0.1), medium (r = 0.25), or large (r > 0.40) based on their magnitude.
Confidence intervals were then calculated and analyzed, with the acceptance or
rejection of hypotheses based on a 95 percent confidence interval. The Q-statistic was
also utilized to examine the homogeneity of the effect size distribution. This test
assumes that all effect sizes estimate the same population and is distributed as a Chi-
square with the degree of freedom = n-1, where n is the number of studies. If the Q
value is higher than the Chi-square, the null hypothesis of homogeneity is accepted,
indicating that variability across effect sizes does not exceed the expectation based on
sampling. Conversely, if the null hypothesis is rejected, heterogeneity between the
variances exists and differences in effect size may be attributed to factors other than
sampling.
However, while the Q statistic can test the presence of heterogeneity, it does not
indicate its extent. To quantify the degree of heterogeneity, the I-Square (I2) index has
been proposed and can also be used to test the heterogeneity hypothesis if a confidence
interval is calculated. The I-Square (I2) has been found to reflect differences in the
degree of heterogeneity between two groups of studies, describing the percentage of
variability in effect estimates due to heterogeneity rather than chance. An I-Square of
over 50% (I2 > 50%) may indicate substantial heterogeneity. In this study, random-
effects meta-analyses were conducted with 95% confidence intervals, and both Q and
I2 statistics were used to assess heterogeneity across the studies (Higgins et al., 2019).
 42

CHAPTER 4: STUDY 2: AN EMPIRICAL APPROACHES

Existing literature on entrepreneurship in the tourism industry suggests that

visionary, innovative, and creative entrepreneurs are often responsible for enhancing
organizational efficiency. Entrepreneurship plays a vital role in the social and economic
development, stimulating growth in the production of goods and services, driving the
expansion of the service sector, and generating new employment opportunities
(Sandybayev, 2019). The study also suggested that leaders who adopt an entrepreneurial
mindset tend to derive greater benefits from this leadership style, which can
significantly enhance and improve their organization’s overall performance.
Furthermore, executives or top managers must possess creative skills that align with
entrepreneurial innovation to assist their firms in maintaining and enhancing their
performance (Taheri et al., 2019).
The concept of implicit theory is relevant to comprehending how laypeople
perceive and understand creativity within the context of entrepreneurship. It aids in
understanding the fundamental mechanisms of entrepreneurial creativity and facilitates
critical assessment when executing and evaluating innovative ideas (Guo et al., 2019).
Therefore, this study proposes to develop creative mindsets related to innovation
capability, and business, particularly in entrepreneurial success (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. Research framework (Study 2)

Source: created by author
 43

4.2. Hypothesis development

As previously described, the creativity-based implicit theory consists of two
belief system of intelligence. First, an entity belief system regarding intelligence is one
where intelligence is seen as a static trait. Second, an incremental belief system views
intelligence as something that can be developed and improved over time. Individuals
who hold an incremental belief system tend to approach tasks with greater effectiveness
and resilience, while those who hold an entity mindset are more likely to be negatively
affected by obstacles and setbacks.
Creative mindset is defined as an important factor for entrepreneurs.
Entrepreneurs who possess a creative mindset are considered crucial for business
success as they can convert their imaginative ideas into innovative solutions, leading to
increased benefits in the marketplace. Nonetheless, the connection between a creative
mindset and entrepreneurial success requires further clarification. Therefore, the author
has formulated hypotheses in the subsequent section to explore the role of innovation
capability in mediating the relationship between creative mindset and entrepreneurial
success at the component level in the following section.

Mediating effect of technical innovation capability (TIC). Innovation is defined

as the incorporation of new ideas and applications into a new product/process in
business practice, which can be used in service industries, including the tourism
industry (Divisekera & Nguyen, 2018). Today’s tourism business has seen an increase
in the use of technology to drive changes or trends, allowing early adopters to reap
economic benefits (Sipe, 2016). Technical innovation capability refers to the
implementation or creation of technology, including products, marketing, and services,
then transfers this new knowledge to an organization (Lin et al., 2010). As an example,
companies can achieve higher revenue by engaging in product innovation, which
involves creating differentiation and entering new markets (Divisekera & Nguyen,
2018). Horng et al. (2015) discovered that creative processes such as idea generation
can have an impact on individuals, influencing the creative output of products.
Hass and Burke (2016) suggest that adopting a growth mindset in accordance
with the implicit theory can promote creative activities and lead to future creative
 44

achievements, which can ultimately impact technology. In tourism industry, a tourist

can significantly impact their holiday choices and encourages them to embrace
challenges and explore new experiences (Japutra & Hossain, 2021). The integration of
a growth mindset and innovation in the hospitality industry generates exceptional
experiences for guests by involving them, employees, and experiential offerings (Sipe,
2016). In addition, the use of machine learning systems in the tourism industry has great
potential for advancing the sector by providing valuable insights into future demand,
identifying emerging trends, and helping businesses make more informed decisions to
enhance the tourist experience (Parvez, 2020). Hence:
H1a. Technical innovation capability mediates the effect of growth mindset on
entrepreneurial success.

Innovation serves as a critical tool for entrepreneurs seeking to discover new

opportunities and bring their ideas to fruition. By embracing novel approaches,
businesses can drive sustained growth and ensure long-term viability (Divisekera &
Nguyen, 2018). In the tourism industry, where word of mouth (WOM) and community
recommendations hold great sway, companies must strive to provide tourists with
memorable experiences that leave them satisfied (Gurel et al., 2010). Creative mindset
is often shaped by cultural influences and has significant social and economic
implications. Fixed mindsets are typically more prevalent in individualistic societies
Furthermore, a fixed mindset is more common in cultures and societies that prioritize
individualism (Tang et al., 2016), and the implicit theory’s definition of intellectual
ability can impact behavioral performance and goal orientation.
Yu & McLellan (2020) suggested that growth and fixed mindset are associated
to effort, achievement goals, and behavior. However, there is no consistent empirical
evidence linking a fixed mindset to entrepreneurial success in existing theoretical
frameworks on technical innovation capability. on the other hand, Gurel et al. (2010)
discovered a positive correlation between innovativeness and entrepreneurial intention.
Additionally, innovation capability offers valuable insights for researchers and small
businesses seeking to enhance their innovation capabilities and drive growth and
success in an increasingly competitive market (Saunila, 2020). Hence:
 45

H1b. Technical innovation capability mediates the effect of fixed mindset on

entrepreneurial success.

Mediating effect of non-technical innovation capability (NTIC). In a highly

competitive and global economy, innovation is commonly viewed as the key factor for
achieving peak success. Embracing an innovation-driven approach provides valuable
insight into the future opportunities (Rajapathirana & Hui, 2018).
Understanding the impact of innovation on a firm’s competitiveness requires
taking into account non-technical innovation capability. Such capability helps firms
maintain competitive advantages both within the organization and the market (Camisón
& Villar-López, 2011) leading to increased sales (Divisekera & Nguyen, 2018). In the
tourism industry, creativity has emerged as a critical component of development
(Richards, 2014). The incremental belief system of intelligence generates future
creative activities. In other words, a growth mindset, which fosters future creative
activities, is essential for innovation in this sector. In the new business environment,
innovation capability has a powerful and noteworthy influence on activities related to
product development, marketing, and overall organizational innovation (Rajapathirana
& Hui, 2018). In tourism contexts, tourism being a crucial economic indicator for many
countries (Ghalia & Fidrmuc, 2018) and innovation capability has an impact on both
product and process innovation, which consequently affects the performance of
marketing activities (Sari, 2019). Therefore:
H2a. Non-technical innovation capability mediates the effect of growth mindset on
entrepreneurial success.

An entrepreneur’s success is closely related to their level of belief in themselves

(Staniewski & Awruk, 2018). The implicit theory suggests that individuals who believe
intelligence is a fixed trait, known as entity theorists (Puente-Díaz & Cavazos-Arroyo,
2017) are less likely to improve their skills and tend to become disengaged from tasks,
leading to negative outcomes, and often struggle to achieve positive results (Tang et al.,
2016).
Individuals who do not believe that creativity can be enhanced are unlikely to
 46

drive innovation through creative destruction. In the tourism industry, this mechanism
of destruction involves the introduction of new products, markets, sources of supply,
and market structures (Divisekera & Nguyen, 2018). Karwowski (2014) discovered that
there were no distinctions in creative problem-solving ability between individuals with
fixed mindsets and those with growth mindsets. Individuals who hold a strong fixed
mindset tend to embrace achievement goals that rely on external benchmarks such as
perceived performance or exerted effort to evaluate their competence in settings that
prioritize creativity. In addition, individuals who possess a fixed mindset set
performance goals for themselves and are driven to continually demonstrate their
abilities to others (Kouzes & Posner, 2019). Therefore:
H2b. Non-technical innovation capability mediates the effect of fixed mindset on
entrepreneurial success.

Furthermore, a creative mindset defined as an individual’s capacity to generate

innovative and valuable ideas to achieve potential outcomes (Tang et al., 2016). This
mindset inspires entrepreneurial pursuits since it encompasses both self-evaluation and
social construction to cultivate and enhance self-competence in developing and
executing novel ideas (Tantawy et al., 2021). Studies have found that growth and fixed
mindsets are associated with different beliefs, goals, and behaviors related to effort,
creating a dichotomy in motivation (Yu & McLellan, 2020).
Research indicates that entrepreneurs with a growth creative mindset are more
likely to tackle complex and challenging tasks, while those with a fixed creative mindset
tend to avoid from such tasks (Karwowski & Brzeski, 2017). For example, research
conducted by Yu & McLellan (2020), the research has shown a systematic correlation
between fixed and growth mindsets, and beliefs surrounding effort, achievement goals,
and behaviors. Hence:
H3a. Fixed mindset has a significant positive effect on entrepreneurial success.
H3b. Growth mindset has a significant positive effect on entrepreneurial success.
 47

4.3. Methods
4.3.1 Measures
In the first place, the author measured creative mindset using the scales
Karwowski (2014) developed. At its component level, growth mindset (GM) and fixed
mindset (FM) were each contain with five items. As previous stated, mindset scales are
scarce in the context of creativity; thus, the use of these scales aids in effectively
measuring the constructs, providing potentially interesting insights, understanding and
cultivating a favorable creative mindset with critical guidelines for both academicians
(i.e., educators and counselor) and practitioners (i.e., manager).
Secondly, the author measured innovation capability using the scales Ngo and
O'cass (2013), including technical innovation capability (TIC) and non-technical
innovation capability (NTIC) to construct innovation capability. More specifically,
Technical innovation capability (TIC) contains four items. Then, five items to measure
non-technical innovation capability (NTIC). The selected scales provide not only
technical and non-technical in innovation capability context, but also includes an
objective and subjective scale which benefits for applying firm performance in both
financial and non-financial indicators.
Finally, the author uses the scale from Staniewski and Awruk (2018), including
subjective and objective scales, to construct entrepreneurial success. The subjective
indicators contain 5 items, and the objective indicators contain 7 indicators. This scale
is an initial research tool with respect to entrepreneurial success. The development
based on the psychometric parameters and experimental approach provides a high
reliability and correlation measure and quantifier of the theoretical accuracy. Therefore,
this scale was confirmed as good and useful for measuring entrepreneurial success.

4.3.2 Survey design

This study is a series of studies following a multi-method approach to address a
research topic. The author first lays the conceptual framework of the creative mindset
and business success context in Study 1. Then, Study 2 requires a confirmatory and
process view of creative mindset, innovation capability, and entrepreneurial success in
the Thai tourism context.
 48

In Study 2, the author developed a survey questionnaire based on constructed

items and gather data from tourism company owners in Thailand. Then, a professor and
two academic experts with specialized knowledge in psychology, hospitality and
tourism, and marketing disciplines reviewed the survey items for clarity and readability.
As the survey was conducted in Thailand, the questionnaire was translated from English
to Thai. After that, an academic expert in psychology, a tour business firm manager,
and a recognized authority in psychology reviewed the items to ensure the consistency
of the construct subject
Prior to the study, a group of 24 tour and travel company owners were given a
pretest, which comprised of a questionnaire consisting of 31 questions. The responses
were measured on a 7-point Likert scale, where 1 denoted “strongly disagree” and 7
represented “strongly agree”. The questionnaire was further reconsidered and refined
on the basis of the respondents’ comments. For example, the reliability of the pretest
ranging from 0.749 to 0.945 indicated acceptance for 25 items. However, six items
(GM3, FM1, NTIC3, SI4, OI1, and OI4) were removed from the survey as they had
received weak scores. As a result, the author made revisions and finalized the instrument
for further examination. The study’s sample comprises 176 tour and travel companies
located in Thailand due to the fastest growth, and few given empirical evidences (Sipe,
2016). Tourism holds a significant place in Thailand’s economy, particularly because
it contributes to a substantial number of jobs in the country (ASEAN, 2015). This
industry is also a significant source of revenue for Thailand, as evidenced by the
substantial economic benefits it generates (Srinamphon et al., 2022).

4.3.3 Data collection

The sample in this study were owners of the tourism companies, who have been
in the tour and travel business or experience for at least one year and have received the
travel agency business license from the Department of Tourism, Thailand, and were
evaluated using a structured questionnaire. Using information obtained from 181
tourism companies by a convenience sampling method. However, in the reporting stage,
five surveyed questionnaires were excluded because of incomplete data, yielding 176
valid questionnaires.
 49

The participants in this study were the owners of the tourism companies based
in Thailand with several reasons. First, the aim of the study is to gain insights into the
pathway to entrepreneurial success within Thailand’s tourism industry. Second,
business owners have the authority to set the direction, standards, and best practices of
their business. Accordingly, tourism company owners play a crucial strategic role in the
operation and profitability of their businesses, possessing knowledge and experience
gained from their business practices. They exhibit resilience, adaptability, make
strategic decisions, and navigate political and financial obstacles to provide valuable
insights on strategy and management practices. This allows for a better understanding
and implementation of effective management practices.
Table 4 displays that a higher percentage of the respondents were female
(65.3%). The majority of participants fell within the age range of under 30 years old
(35.2%) and 31-40 years old (34.7%). Regarding education, the majority of participants
(64.8%) held a bachelor's degree. Furthermore, most participants had work experience
ranging from 3-7 years (25.6%) and 13-20 years (21.6%). Furthermore, the major of
company type was single owner (44.3%) and the type of tour operation was mostly
outbound (39.2%) and area (30.7%). Finally, the results showed that the business age
ranged from 5-10 years (29.5%) and number of employees was mostly 10 and under.

Table 4. Demographic characteristics

Characteristic Category Frequency %
Gender Male 61 34.7
Female 115 65.3

Age Under 30 years 62 35.2

31-40 years 61 34.7
41-50 years 31 17.6
51-60 years 17 9.7
Over 60 years 5 2.8

Education Below bachelor degree 41 23.3

Bachelor degree 114 64.8
Master degree 20 11.4
Doctoral degree and 1 0.6
postdoc
 50

Work experience Under 3 years 35 19.9

3- 7 years 45 25.6
8-12years 34 19.3
13-20 years 38 21.6
Over 20 years 24 13.6

Type of company Single owner 78 44.3

Partnership 24 13.6
Company 65 36.9
Public company 9 5.1

Type of tour operation Area 54 30.7

Domestic 40 22.7
Inbound 13 7.4
Outbound 69 39.2

Business age Under 5 years 33 18.8

5- 10 years 52 29.5
11-15years 39 22.2
16-20 years 16 9.1
Over 20 years 36 20.5

Number of employees 10 and under 99 56.3

11-20 30 17.0
21-50 29 16.5
Over 50 18 10.2
Source: created by author

4.3.4 Common Method Bias (CMB)

Common method bias (CMB) is a commonly found issue in studies where data
for both independent and dependent variables are gathered from a single individual in
the same measurement context, utilizing comparable item characteristics and item
context. It is also a frequently observed occurrence in research that relies on self-
reported measures. When utilizing partial least squares structural equation modeling
(PLS-SEM), this bias can be defined as a phenomenon caused by the measurement
method used in the study rather than the interconnectivity between the study’s latent
variables. An instance of this bias could occur when a researcher’s instructions for a
questionnaire administered during data collection influences respondents’ answers in a
similar direction, resulting in indicators sharing some common variation (Kock, 2021).
In this study, to ascertain whether common method bias is a potential concern,
 51

the authors employed Harman’s one-factor test, which is a frequently utilized technique
(Fuller et al., 2016). The results revealed that the first (and largest) factor explained
37.80% of the variance. Then, the total variance explained by a single factor is less than
50%, it indicates that common method bias is not a significant issue in this study.

4.3.5 Analytical technique

The author employed a PLS technique to test the research model, which enabled
the optimization of the measurement model, fitting the theory exploration, and
representation of both formative and reflective latent constructs (Hair Jr et al., 2021).
PLS, or Partial Least Squares, is a technique commonly known as PLS structural
equation modeling (PLS-SEM) or PLS path modeling, and is an excellent approach for
estimating structural equation models (Sarstedt & Cheah, 2019). The PLS technique is
a powerful statistical method that enables researchers to examine relationships between
sets of variables, identify crucial pathways containing these variables, and play a critical
role in various business fields (Hair Jr et al., 2021).
To test the hypotheses, the researchers utilized SmartPLS3.0, a software
application for PLS-SEM. The first version of SmartPLS, SmartPLS2.0, was launched
in 2005 as a software package to perform PLS-SEM analyses, which was highly
influential in the user community due to its ease of use, simplicity to run standard PLS-
SEM analyses, and most importantly, its free availability. Over the course of 15 years,
the software has undergone several improvements to enhance usability and professional
support, resulting in the release of SmartPLS 3.0, which is now a commercial software
(Sarstedt & Cheah, 2019).
 52

CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

5.1. Study 1: A meta-analysis

5.1.1. Results
The author searched for 167 studies as maybe and suitable by using Emerald,
Google Scholar, JSTOR, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and Wiley sources. The author
finally used 58 studies from journals, which were indexed on the Web of Science and
Scopus databases in the period of 2002–2020.
The sample sizes for each hypothesis range from 1,915 samples to 6,840 samples
from the years 2002 to 2020, totaling 22,427 sample sizes. The meta-analysis assessed
previous research studies that measured the study hypotheses presented (see Table 5.1).
 53

Table 5.1. Studies used in meta-analysis.

Author(s) Year Journal Studies
GM-CSE FM-CSE CSE-CP CSE-IC CP-IC CP-BS IC-BS
Abdullah et al. 2017 Sustainable Yes
Akman & Yilmaz 2008 International Journal of Yes
Innovation Management
Benedek et al. 2019 Journal of Creative Behavior Yes
Calantone et al. 2002 Industrial Marketing Yes
Management
Chang et al. 2019 Thinking Skills and Yes
Creativity
Chaubey & Sahoo 2019 International Journal of Yes
Innovation Science
Chaubey et al. 2019 Journal of Strategy and Yes Yes Yes
Management
Chen & Zhang 2019 Current Psychology Yes
Chen et al. 2018 Journal of Enterprising Yes
Communities: People and
Places in the Global Economy
 54

Author(s) Year Journal Studies

GM-CSE FM-CSE CSE-CP CSE-IC CP-IC CP-BS IC-BS
Chuang et al. 2010 World Academy of Science, Yes
Engineering and Technology
Dadfar et al. 2013 Total Quality Management Yes
& Business Excellence
Dayan et al. 2013 Creativity and Innovation Yes
Management
Ferreira et al. 2020 Technovation Yes Yes Yes
Ghafoor et al. 2011 African Journal of Business Yes
Management
Gong et al. 2009 Academy of Management Yes
Journal
Grawe et al. 2009 International Journal of Yes
Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management
Hallak et al. 2018 Journal of Retailing and Yes Yes
Consumer Services
 55

Author(s) Year Journal Studies

GM-CSE FM-CSE CSE-CP CSE-IC CP-IC CP-BS IC-BS
Hass et al. 2016 Psychology of Aesthetics, Yes Yes Yes
Creativity, and the Arts
Hu & Zhao 2016 Social Behavior and Yes
Personality
Hur et al. 2016 Journal of Services Marketing Yes
Imran et al. 2018 Journal of Organizational Yes
Change Management
Ismail et al. 2019 International Journal of Yes
Productivity and Performance
Management
Jaiswal & Dhar 2015 Management Decision Yes
Jaussi et al. 2007 Creativity Research Journal Yes
Ji-Eun 2019 The Journal of Asian Finance, Yes
Economics and Business
Karwowski 2014 Psychology of Aesthetics, Yes Yes Yes
Creativity, and the Arts
 56

Author(s) Year Journal Studies

GM-CSE FM-CSE CSE-CP CSE-IC CP-IC CP-BS IC-BS
Keskin 2006 European Journal of
Innovation Management
Khedhaouria et al. 2015 Small Business Economic Yes Yes
Ma et al. 2013 Social Behavior and Yes
Personality
Malik et al. 2015 Journal of Organizational Yes
Behavior
Mathisen & 2009 International Journal of Yes
Bronnick Educational Research
Michael et al. 2011 Journal of Creative Behavior Yes
Mielniczuk & 2018 Journal of Creative Behavior Yes
Laguna
Newman et al. 2018 Journal of Business Research Yes
O’Cass & Sok 2014 International Small Business Yes
Journal
Odoom & Mensah 2019 Management Research Yes
Review
 57

Author(s) Year Journal Studies

GM-CSE FM-CSE CSE-CP CSE-IC CP-IC CP-BS IC-BS
Oura et al. 2016 International Business Review Yes
Pretz & Nelson 2017 The creative self Yes Yes
Puente-Díaz & 2017 Thinking Skills and Yes Yes
Cavazos-Arroyo Creativity
Puente-Díaz 2016 The Journal of Psychology Yes
Ramanathan et al. 2018 Omega Yes
Rego et al. 2012 European Journal of Work Yes
and Organizational
Psychology
Royston & Reiter‐ 2019 Journal of Creative Behavior Yes Yes
Palmon
Schoen 2015 Journal of Organizational Yes
Behavior
Shin et al. 2015 Career Development Yes
International
Slåtten et al. 2011 International Journal of Yes
Quality and Service Sciences
 58

Author(s) Year Journal Studies

GM-CSE FM-CSE CSE-CP CSE-IC CP-IC CP-BS IC-BS
Slåtten 2014 International Journal of Yes
Quality and Service Sciences
Steele et al. 2018 Personality and Individual Yes
Differences
Strickland & 2011 Canadian Journal of Administrative Yes
Sciences/Revue canadienne des
Towler
sciences de l’administration

Tai & Mai 2016 International Journal of Yes

Organizational Analysis
Teng et al. 2019 Journal of Creative Behavior Yes
Thundiyil et al. 2016 Chinese Management Studies Yes
Wang & Dass 2017 Journal of Business Research Yes
Wang & Tsai 2014 Service Business Yes
Wang et al. 2014 Tourism Management Yes
Weber & Heidenreich 2018 Long Range Planning Yes
Yang et al. 2009 International Journal of Yes
Production Economics
Source: created by author
 59

In Table 5.2, the author present the results of a meta-analysis examining the
relationship between growth mindset, fixed mindset, creative self-efficacy, creative
performance, innovation capability, and business success. The analysis utilized the
mean value of correlation coefficients reported in previous studies. Effect size (r) was
calculated according to Lipsey and Wilson (2001) guidelines, where r < 0.10 represents
a small effect size, r = 0.25 represents a medium effect size, and r > 0.40 represents a
large effect size. The author also used the I2 statistic, as described by Higgins et al.
(2019), to assess heterogeneity. I2 values of 0% to 40% suggest that heterogeneity might
not be important, 30% to 60% suggest moderate heterogeneity, 50% to 90% suggest
substantial heterogeneity, and 75% to 100% indicate considerable heterogeneity.
In terms of creative mindset, the findings reveal that growth mindset has a
positive impact on creative self-efficacy. This association is characterized by a medium-
large effect size (r = 0.367). The Q-value for the relationship between growth mindset
and creative self-efficacy is 34.463, which exceeds the Chi-square value (2 = 22.458),
indicating significant heterogeneity (p < 0.000). Furthermore, the I-Square value
indicates considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 82.590). These results are further supported
by a 95% confidence interval that includes non-zero values. Hence, H1a is supported.
According to fixed mindset, the results demonstrate that fixed mindset has a
negative impact on creative self-efficacy. This relationship is characterized by a small
effect size (r = -0.042). The Q-value for the association between fixed mindset and
creative self-efficacy is 15.919, which exceeds the Chi-square value (2 = 14.067),
indicating significant heterogeneity (p < 0.026). Additionally, the I-Square value
suggests that there may be substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 56.029) in this study. These
findings are further supported by a 95% confidence interval that contains non-zero
values. Therefore, H1b is supported.
In terms of creative self-efficacy, the findings indicate that creative self-efficacy
has a positive influence on both creative performance and innovation capability. The
relationship between creative self-efficacy and creative performance is characterized by
a large effect size (r = 0.440). The Q-value for the association between creative self-
efficacy and creative performance is 646.879, which exceeds the Chi-square value (2
= 51.179), indicating significant heterogeneity (p < 0.000). Furthermore, the I-Square
 60

value suggests considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 96.290). Thus, H2a is confirmed.

Similarly, the association between creative self-efficacy and innovation
capability is also characterized by a large effect size (r = 0.451). The Q-value for the
relationship between creative self-efficacy and innovation capability is 119.674, which
exceeds the Chi-square value (2 = 26.125), indicating significant heterogeneity (p <
0.000). Moreover, the I-Square value indicates considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 93.315).
These findings are further supported by a 95% confidence interval that includes non-
zero values. Therefore, H2b is supported.
Regarding creative performance, the study found that it positively impacts on
innovation capability, with a large effect size (r = 0.686). The Q-value of the
relationship between creative performance and innovation capability was 17.646,
higher than the Chi-square value (2 = 16.750), indicating significant heterogeneity (p
< 0.000). In addition, the I-Square suggested substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 71.666).
This result was supported by a 95% confidence interval with non-zero values, thus
supporting H3a. Furthermore, the study found that creative performance also positively
impacts on business success, with a large effect size (r = 0.431). The Q-value of the
relationship between creative performance and business success was 223.853, higher
than the Chi-square value (2 = 29.588), indicating significant heterogeneity (p <
0.000). The I-Square explained considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 95.533), and this result
was also supported by a 95% confidence interval with non-zero values, therefore
supporting H2c.
In terms of innovation capability, the findings indicate that there is a positive
relationship between innovation capability and business success. The effect size
between these variables is large (r = 0.426). The Q-value of innovation capability and
business success is 228.695, which is higher than the Chi-square value (2 = 34.528),
indicating significant heterogeneity (p < 0.000). Additionally, the I-Square explained
considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 94.316). These results are further supported by a 95%
confidence interval with non-zero values. Therefore, the hypothesis H4 is supported,
indicating that innovation capability is positively associated with business success.
 61

Table 5.2. Meta-analysis results.

Hypothesis Variables k Total Effect size & 95% Heterogeneity

confidence interval
Independent Dependent Studies n r LCI UCI p-value Chi- Q-value I-
square squared
H1a GM CSE 7 1915 0.367 0.266 0.461 0.000 22.458 34.463 82.590
H1b FM CSE 8 2212 -0.042 -0.018 0.024 0.026 14.067 15.919 56.029
H2a CSE CP 25 6840 0.440 0.333 0.535 0.000 51.179 646.879 96.290
H2b CSE IC 9 2320 0.451 0.315 0.569 0.000 26.125 119.674 93.315
H3a CP IC 6 1859 0.686 0.635 0.731 0.003 16.750 17.646 71.666
H3b CP BS 11 2490 0.431 0.265 0.572 0.000 29.588 223.853 95.533
H4 IC BS 14 4791 0.426 0.310 0.529 0.000 34.528 228.695 94.316
Note: GM=Growth mindset, FM=Fixed mindset, CSE=Creative self-efficacy, CP=Creative performance, IC=Innovation capability, BS
= business success, LCI= Lower 95% Confidence Interval, UCI = Upper 95% confidence interval
Source: created by author
 62

5.2. Study 2: An empirical approach

5.2.1. Measurement model
The author assessed the measurement model through factor loadings, average
variance extracted (AVE), and composite reliability (CR) (Benitez et al., 2020). As
shown in Table 5.3, all of the factor loadings for this measurement model are significant
in the predicted directions (0.7,0.5 and 0.7 respectively). Moreover, the maximum VIF
values or variance inflation factor was below 5. Given these findings, multicollinearity
was not a concern. The square root of the AVE as shown in Table 5.3 was higher than
that of others’ correlations. Additionally, the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of
each construct was lower than .90, thus exerting satisfactory discriminant validity (Hair
et al., 2019) (refer to Table 5.4).
Table 5.3. Construct measurement.
Constructs items Loadings t-value
Growth mindset (CR=0.912, AVE=0.722)
GM1 Everyone can create something great at some point if 0.846 33.643
given appropriate conditions.
GM2 Everyone can develop their creative abilities up to a 0.824 27.353
certain level.
GM3 Practice makes perfect—perseverance and hard work
are the best ways to develop and expand one’s
capabilities. (Deleted item)
GM4 Rome was not built in a day—creativity requires 0.911 61.106
effort and work, and these two are more important
than talent.
GM5 It does not matter what creativity level one has—you 0.815 27.486
can always increase it.
Karwowski (2014)

Fixed mindset (CR=0.849, AVE=0.586)

FM1 You either are creative or you are not-even trying
very hard you cannot change much. (Deleted item)
FM2 You have to be born a creator—without innate talent 0.708 5.575
you can only be a scribbler.
FM3 Creativity can be developed, but one either is or is 0.738 8.650
not a truly creative person.
FM4 Some people are creative, others are not—and no 0.719 5.351
practice can change it.
FM5 A truly creative talent is innate and constant 0.884 15.296
throughout one’s entire life.
Karwowski (2014)
 63

Technical innovation capability (CR=0.933, AVE=0.778)

TIC1 Our business uses knowledge to engage in technical 0.873 44.069
innovations (e.g., new service, service operations and
technology) much better than major competitors.
TIC2 Our business uses skills to engage in technical 0.888 46.088
innovations (e.g., new service, service operations and
technology) much better than major competitors.
TIC3 Service innovations of our business are much better 0.892 50.406
than major competitors.
TIC4 Service operations and technology of our business 0.875 40.180
are much better than major competitors.
Ngo and O'cass (2013)

Non-technical innovation capability (CR=0.877, AVE=0.641)

NTIC1 Our business uses knowledge to engage in non- 0.725 11.706
technical innovation (e.g., managerial, market,
marketing) much better than major competitors.
NTIC2 Our business uses skills to engage in non-technical 0.764 12.797
innovation (e.g., managerial, market, marketing)
much better than major competitors.
NTIC3 Managerial innovations of our business are much
better than major competitors. (Deleted item)
NTIC4 Market innovations of our business are much better 0.838 31.424
than major competitors.
NTIC5 Marketing innovations of our business are much 0.867 41.163
better than major competitors.
Ngo and O'cass (2013)

Subjective indicators (CR=0.934, AVE=0.780)

SI1 I am satisfied with the way my business developed. 0.895 53.668
SI2 I am satisfied with the number of clients in my 0.878 35.713
business.
SI3 I am satisfied with the outcome of tasks performed 0.878 43.863
by employees.
SI4 I am satisfied with the competitiveness of the
company. (Deleted item)
SI5 I am satisfied with the attainment of established 0.882 43.190
business development goals.
Staniewski and Awruk (2018)

Objective indicators (CR=0.921, AVE=0.699)

OI1 I am satisfied with my company profit. (Deleted
item)
OI2 I am satisfied that my company already has a 0.845 30.078
registered office.
 64

OI3 I am satisfied having employees in my company. 0.829 30.876

OI4 I am satisfied with the job positions my company
created. (Deleted item)
OI5 I am satisfied that my company has maintained 0.825 26.665
financial liquidity.
OI6 I am satisfied that my company offers benefits to 0.827 19.496
employees (e.g., laptop).
OI7 I am satisfied with my company maintaining long- 0.854 39.220
term cooperation with clients (e.g., longer than one
year).
Staniewski and Awruk (2018)
Source: created by author

Table 5.4. Discriminant validity

Highest
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
HTMT
1. Growth mindset 5.413 1.150 0.850
2. Fixed mindset 4.183 1.274 0.019 0.765 0.206
3. TIC 5.099 1.077 0.542 0.277 0.882 0.604
4. NTIC 4.789 1.054 0.439 0.253 0.612 0.801 0.700
5. SI 4.970 1.200 0.408 0.126 0.449 0.624 0.883 0.698
6. OI 5.390 1.062 0.645 0.062 0.573 0.552 0.661 0.836 0.733
Notes: Bold values on the diagonal represent the square root of AVE, while the other
matrix entries represent the correlations, SI = Subjective Indicators, OI = Objective
Indicators.
Source: created by author

5.2.2. Structural results

As shown in Figure 5, the model explains 36.20% of the variance in TIC, 25.50%
of that in NTIC, and 56.40% of the variance in entrepreneurial success. Hypotheses H1a
and H1b in Table 5.5 suggested that TIC was significantly influenced by growth
mindset (β= 0.536, p < 0.01, Model 1; β = 0.543, p < 0.01, Model 2), fixed mindset (β
= 0.268, p < 0.01, Model 1; β = 0.266, p < 0.01, Model 2), respectively. Accordingly,
TIC appeared to positively relate to entrepreneurial success (β = .0152, p < 0.10, Model
1; β = 0.197, p < 0.05, Model 2). Therefore, TIC is a full mediator between growth
mindset, fixed mindset, and entrepreneurial success.
Next, hypotheses H2a and H2b supported that NTIC was an output of growth
mindset (β = 0.433, p < 0.01, Model 1; β = 0.439, p < 0.01, Model 2) as well as fixed
 65

mindset (β = 0.248, p < 0.01, Model 1; β = 0.254, p < 0.01, Model 2) respectively. The
relationship between NTIC and entrepreneurial success was also positive and
significant (β =0.409, p < 0.01, Model 1; β = 0.395, p < 0.01, Model 2). Given the
analysis NTIC appeared to act as a mediator between growth mindset, fixed mindset
and entrepreneurial success.
The author found that a fixed mindset did not affect entrepreneurial success
(H3a: β = -0.053, p > 0.05, Model 1; β = -0.066, p > 0.05, Model 2). Then, H3a is not
supported. However, the growth mindset positively associates with entrepreneurial
success (β = 0.338, p < 0.01, Model 1; β = 0.317, p < 0.01, Model 2). H3b is supported.
In addition, there is a strong convergence in the findings on growth mindset that
is positively associated with entrepreneurial success while a fixed mindset appears not
to have a direct effect on entrepreneurial success. This indicates that only a growth
mindset has a significant effect on entrepreneurial success. Furthermore, the findings
for the controlling construct personal profile indicate that only gender (𝛽 = 0.181, p <
0.05) and education (𝛽 = 0.136, p < 0.10) had a significant effect on growth mindset,
while not supporting its effects on fixed mindset. Thus, gender and education are
necessary for creating with regard to growth mindset. In addition, company profile
demonstrated a significant negative effect of the type of company on entrepreneurial
success (𝛽 = -0.136, p < 0.05). In this case, it is required for entrepreneurs to emphasize
the type of company when running a business.
 66

Figure 5. Research model results

Source: created by author
 67

Table 5.5. Hypothesis testing results

Model 1 Model 2
TIC NTIC Entrepreneurial GM FM TIC NTIC Entrepreneurial
success success
Control variables
Gender 0.181** 0.085
Age 0.105 -0.029
Education 0.136* 0.020
Work experience 0.128 -0.136
Type of company -0.136**
Type of tour operation -0.051
Business age 0.067
Number of employees 0.093

Independent variables
Growth mindset (GM) 0.536*** 0.433*** 0.338*** 0.543*** 0.439*** 0.317***
Fixed mindset (FM) 0.268*** 0.248*** -0.053 0.266*** 0.254*** -0.066

Mediating variables
Technical innovation capability (TIC) 0.152* 0.197**
Non-technical innovation capability (NTIC) 0.409*** 0.395***

Model statistics
𝑅2 36.50% 25.30% 54.30% 36.20% 25.50% 56.40%
Notes: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01
Source: created by author
 68

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION

6.1. Study 1: A meta-analysis

Based on the results of this meta-analysis, having a growth mindset is positively
linked to creative self-efficacy, while a fixed mindset has a negative impact. Creative self-
efficacy, in turn, has a positive correlation with both creative performance and innovation
capability. Furthermore, creative performance is positively associated with both innovation
capability and business success. Similarly, innovation capability has a positive relationship
with business success. However, creative performance has a greater impact on business
success than innovation capability.

6.1.1. Theoretical Implications

Using the implicit theory as a starting point, this study then proceeds to apply the
implicit theory to creative and innovation framework, and further in the business success
context. As suggested by Puente-Díaz and Cavazos-Arroyo (2017), implicit theory gives
people a central role in understanding their thoughts and beliefs, which will shape their
behavior by motivating and implementing performance.
According to Hass and Burke (2016), the implicit theory provides a visual perception
of creative achievement, and it also leads individuals or groups to produce superior
performance or even create superior creative tasks and solutions. Additionally, implicit
theory plays a vital role in developing businesses where a combination of knowledge and
skill informed by experience informs goals and technology, which are intimately related to
innovation capability. Generally, managers with incremental beliefs would exert a better
performance in a range of work and social tasks.
In terms of business and tourism contexts, previous studies have suggested implicit
theory in business contexts and tourism-based innovation, such as financial decision (Rai &
Lin, 2019), including hotel reservations (Fong et al., 2018), homestay accommodations, and
other forms of lodging (Ly et al., 2021). This study offers new perspectives on the use of
implicit theory by applying it to a model of creative mindset within the context of business
 69

success. As a result, it contributes fresh insights to the existing literature on the application
of implicit theory.
Second, meta-analysis is regarded as a statistical method that combines quantitative
results from diverse empirical research studies (Sarooghi et al., 2015). We might expect that
the meta-analysis will be incorporated into the creative and innovation framework, which
will benefit to business success. In accordance with Kirca and Yaprak (2010), who suggest
that meta-analysis is an appropriate and useful research technique in terms of marketing,
management, and international business.
Third, creative self-efficacy is positively associated with a growth mindset, whereas
a fixed mindset is negatively associated, as demonstrated in Karwowski (2014), as well as
in the study of Royston and Reiter‐Palmon (2019). Those studies are clearly explained and
have proved that a growth mindset has an effective in terms of improvement on creative
self-efficacy. Then, this in response does have ability to affect creative performance and
innovation capability. Accordingly, firms and organizations should create an environment
that encourages the creative mindset in order to take advantage of this advantage.
Specifically, a leader or manager who is aware of the concept of growth mindset can
motivate creative activities (such as creative tasks and solutions), resulting in enhanced
creative ability.
On the contrary, the findings indicate that a fixed mindset has a negative impact on
creative self-efficacy. Previous studies by Hass et al. (2016) and Royston and Reiter‐Palmon
(2019) did not find a significant correlation between the fixed mindset factor and self-
efficacy factor. A fixed mindset can result in helpless learning strategies, leading to a
decrease in self-efficacy, which is expected. Thus, individuals who possess a fixed mindset
tend to exhibit lower levels of creative self-efficacy and have less influence on their
creativity and innovation capabilities.
Fourth, there is a positive correlation between creative self-efficacy and creative
performance, which previous studies have suggested (Christensen-Salem et al., 2020;
Tierney & Farmer, 2002). Creative self-efficacy has gotten expanded consideration as it a
significant role in creative outcomes, like creative productivity, achievement, and
 70

performance (McKay et al., 2018; Royston & Reiter‐Palmon, 2019; Tierney & Farmer,
2002). Consequently, creative self-efficacy also has positive associate with innovation
capability, and it was in accordance with the study of Afsar and Masood (2018) and Hallak
et al. (2018). Individuals with creative self-efficacy possess the confidence in their
knowledge and abilities to generate and execute innovative ideas (Jiang & Gu, 2017).
Higher levels of creative self-efficacy are associated with improved creative performance
and innovation capability. Therefore, it is important for firms and business leaders to
recognize creative self-efficacy as a fundamental characteristic rather than just a desired
outcome of creativity and innovation (Puente-Díaz & Cavazos-Arroyo, 2017).
Consequently, innovation capability is significantly influenced by creative
performance, as well as in earlier researches (Ferreira et al., 2020; Tønnessen et al., 2021;
Valaei et al., 2017). Creativity is the source of an idea where the innovation is the key to
implement to the action. Therefore, the quality of creative performance might be affected
by innovation capability as well.
The present study found that business success is positively influenced by creative
performance and innovation capability, which is consistent with previous research
conducted on various domains such as individuals and organizations, creative industries,
employee performance, and organisational dynamics. In addition, the findings that
innovation capability has a positive relationship with business success have been
investigated as an aspect of firm performance (Ferreira et al., 2020). Therefore, both creative
performance and innovation capability can be considered as robust predictors of success in
the workplace and organizations.
While both creativity and innovation capability have a positive influence on business
success, creative performance is deemed more significant. Creativity and innovation drive
for the progress and the ability of organizations to sustain competitive advantage. The
creativity involves generating ideas, while the innovation involves putting those ideas into
action to enhance procedures, practices, or products. Hence, creativity is essential in driving
the innovation process, which in turn generates new business opportunities. As such,
creativity is a vital component of the overall innovative process.
 71

6.1.2. Managerial Implications

The creative mindset suggests that a growth mindset has a positive correlation with
creative self-efficacy. The findings indicate that a growth mindset can enhance our
comprehension of an inherently creative mindset, leading to favorable outcomes. As a result,
the evolving view of the creative mindset may consider strategies for developing creative
self-efficacy.Therefore, companies and organizations should consider a process that
incorporates an administration, including the development of a growth mindset procedure
(such as creating a workplace environment that will support the development of creativity),
and using constructive feedback to improve and emphasize the advancement in creative self-
efficacy.
However, in terms of a fixed mindset, the results indicate that having a fixed mindset
has a significant negative impact on one’s creative self-efficacy. Therefore, firms and
organizations should understand the difference between fixed and growth mindset people,
and try to enables fixed mindset people to learn and reinforce new skills and abilities by
company procedure or program (for example, minimizing negative self-talk, reward system,
creative activity and environment etc.) in order to promote or shift from fixed mindset to
growth mindset.
Creative self-efficacy has a positive correlation on creative performance. Newman et
al. (2018) and Tai and Mai (2016) suggest that a leader’s creative self-efficacy has an impact
on employee creativity. This study also found a positive relationship between creative self-
efficacy and innovation capability, consistent Jiang and Gu (2017).
Therefore, organizations can derive benefits by integrating a standard creative self-
efficacy assessment, such as the one proposed by Hass et al. (2016) into their recruitment
process to identify potential candidates with management-level roles who can drive and
encourage creative motivation among employees. Consequently, the author recommends
that organizations adopt certain items from the creative self-efficacy test proposed by Hass
et al. (2016) to guide the creative process within the organization. Human resource managers
and firms should give careful consideration to utilizing more precise personality
assessments or other practical tools to recognize creative personality traits. In addition, firms
 72

and organizations should think about the role model program by selecting high creative self-
efficacy managers or hire people with highly creative personalities and work methods in
order to engage in a creative environment and encourage employee self-efficacy.
Employees' creative behavior should be developed through the addition of training
programs and courses.
The current study adds to the existing literature on innovation capability by
demonstrating that there is a significant positive impact of creative performance on
innovation capability. As innovation is increasingly dispersed globally (Ferreira et al.,
2020), firms and organizations should have confidence in the ability of innovation to
achieve assigned performance targets. If an organization wants to become an effective
innovator, it should prioritize creativity as its first competency. More subtly, firms and
organizations should encourage their employees to participate in appropriate creative
programs (e.g., creativity training programs) that generate creativity, which can enhance the
innovation capability of the individual and organizational functioning. The creative program
can be learnt from a variety of sources and many companies are focused on creativity that
firms and organizations can adapt to suit their employees (e.g., Zappos, ServiceNow,
Quantcast, Tesla, Squarespace, Workday, or Clover).
Furthermore, this study shows how creativity and innovation affect business. The
findings of the current study indicate a significant positive impact of both creative
performance and innovation capability on business success. Creativity provides new ideas,
whereas innovation capability turns useful ideas into action or results-oriented business
processes. Fostering creativity and innovation within firms and organizations can facilitate
the exploration and exploitation of innovative ideas, ultimately contributing to business
success. For example, promote and supportive working atmosphere, which empowers staff
to make decisions, offer suggestions, and manage issues and challenges largely
independently. The sustainability and renewal of a firm’s performance can be achieved
through fostering creativity and innovation within the organization, which can be
accomplished by promoting a company culture and implementing policies that support these
values.
 73

Overall, a growth mindset and creative self-efficacy are critical for business success.
Therefore, a growing understanding of creative mindsets may lead to the exploration of
strategies aimed at enhancing not only creativity and innovation capability, but also creative
self-efficacy. Such efforts can contribute to improving overall performance in the workplace
and organization. The author would suggest practitioners and researchers to work towards
creating an ideal environment that fosters creative mindsets and ultimately leads to
improved creative ability. They can do so by taking into account the different variables and
relationships identified in the study. Particularly, Dweck (2006) contends that people have
distinct genetic characteristics that manifest in a variety of temperaments and aptitudes.
Interestingly, individual effort, experience, and training can help develop these factors. As
a result, the author strongly recommend that businesses and organizations integrate mindset
and self-efficacy considerations into their human resource systems, such as training
programs, to encourage all employees to engage in creative endeavor.

6.1.3. Limitations
This study has several limitations that demand further investigation.
First, this study extensively reviewed relevant literature through correlational
studies. However, future research should aim to differentiate between correlational and
causal relationships. Furthermore, future research should investigate the mediator or
moderator relationship, which will provide us a better understanding of a complex
correlational or causal relationship and a more insightful contribution.
Second, although meta-analysis is a statistical technique that synthesizes quantitative
performance from various empirical research studies, inconsistent empirical findings may
make it difficult to comprehend or report the results. Future empirical research is thus
required. In terms of innovation capability, there are various types and definitions of
innovation capability, which can cause difficulty in distinguishing. It should be defined the
most appropriate dimensions and descriptions before being applied to practice in the future
study.
Third, mindsets are socially relevant and are shaped by cultural contexts, as
 74

evidenced in the literature (Delany et al., 2019). As a consequence, related factors (such as
culture and social) must be further synthesized in order to produce meaningful results in the
future.
In terms of fixed mindset, as we know from the results, fixed mindset has a negative
relationship with creative self-efficacy. However, previous literature in different contexts
still show an important fixed mindset. Then, the authors acknowledge the significance of
fixed mindset in the business context and therefore suggest that future research should focus
more on understanding the role of fixed mindset in various contexts.

6.2. Study 2: An empirical approach

The results of study 2 show that entrepreneurs with a growth mindset might reflect
and drive entrepreneurial success either directly or indirectly through innovation capability.
The fixed mindset does not have impact or significantly impact on entrepreneurial success.
Nevertheless, it may be able to drive their success indirectly through innovation capability.
Accordingly, the findings highlight the importance of focusing on growth mindset and
innovation capability as part of entrepreneurial success. Based on these findings, the
proposed relationship appears to be positively mediated by innovation capability.

6.2.1. Theoretical implications

To begin, the author utilized the implicit theory to enhance the research-based
framework for creativity by examining the elements of a creative mindset and innovation
capability for achieving entrepreneurial success (Karwowski, 2014; Ngo & O'cass, 2013;
Staniewski & Awruk, 2018). The findings were coherent with previous studies, which have
suggested implicit theory in a tourism context, such as the use of apps in homestay
accommodation (Ly et al., 2021). The results of our study suggest that the application of
implicit theory can be utilized to assess research models based on creativity and innovation
in the tourism sector. Furthermore, the author has expanded upon the concept of implicit
theory by investigating the underlying factors that contribute to entrepreneurial success.
Second, the author’s findings suggest that the relationship between growth mindset,
 75

fixed mindset, and entrepreneurial success is mediated by technical innovation capability.

This is in accordance with Hass and Burke (2016), who suggested that a growth mindset
can promote creative activities and then impact technology, while a fixed mindset is
associated with other approaches to achieving goal. At the same time, non-technical
innovation capability also mediates the relationship between growth and fixed mindset and
entrepreneurial success as well. From previous studies, growth mindset is related to learning
approach goals (Burnette et al., 2013), and fixed mindset relates to desired goals and
competence (Puente-Díaz & Cavazos-Arroyo, 2017), which will create opportunities in
organizational management and marketing and performance. In a previous study,
Divisekera and Nguyen (2018) also posited that non-technical innovation capability relates
to sales and performance. Therefore, these findings suggest that a creative mindset plays a
crucial role in fostering innovation capability, which in turn contributes to the success of
entrepreneurship. According to Ngo and O'cass (2013), the existing literature has focused
on technical innovation rather than non-technical innovation in improving a firm’s ability
to attain better performance.
Our findings, based on implicit theory, support the notion that a creative mindset is
a major focal driver of innovation capability for enhancing entrepreneurial success in the
tourism business. This is in line with Alford and Duan (2018) and Anning-Dorson and
Nyamekye (2020), who posit that innovation capability is critical for hospitality firms to
gain competitive advantages. Innovation is a crucial source in driving and enhancing the
customer, establishing new market prospects, and increasing business profits from a
competitive standpoint (Horng et al., 2018). In addition, innovation capability has a
significant influence on different business factors such as sales performance (Kafetzopoulos
& Psomas, 2015), performance (Taherparvar et al., 2014), and firm success (Weber &
Heidenreich, 2018).
Third, according to the creative mindset component, a fixed mindset had no direct
impact on entrepreneurial success, which is contrary to Burnette et al., (2020), who argue
that fixed mindset demonstrates competence and avoids mistakes. In contrast, the growth
mindset has a notable influence on entrepreneurial success. Earlier research indicated that
 76

creativity generates organizational innovations, which lead to improved firm performance

and enable hospitality firms to operate globally (Ouyang et al., 2021). Pascual-Fernández et
al. (2020) also contended that creativity helps strengthen the provision of greater value by
adopting service innovation and proper responsiveness. Hence, our findings imply that
possessing a growth mindset is advantageous in attaining entrepreneurial success.
Our study contributes to the empirical context by employing a creative mindset,
measured using formative variables of growth mindset and fixed mindset, to facilitate
innovation capability. This approach is suitable for the PLS analytical technique used to
estimate the empirical estimation model (Benitez et al., 2020). Furthermore, our model
includes mediating and controlling effects, providing intervention conditions that promote
entrepreneurial success while minimizing common method variance and improving
managerial effectiveness (Palmatier, 2016). Hence, future researchers in tourism should
explore our empirical setting, including moderating variables, in greater detail.

6.2.2. Practical implications

First, the association between a creative mindset and entrepreneurial success appears
to be mediated by innovation capability (both technical and non-technical innovation
capability).
A creative mindset is a source of creativity and drives success through innovation.
Every aspect of an organization can benefit from creativity, as is well recognized, and it has
had a good and significant impact on business. Procter & Gamble is one example (P&G).
The number of new products introduced by P&G over the past few years has drastically
decreased. To foster creativity, the company established Corporate New Ventures or CNV,
a small cross-functional team that exhibits many creative behaviors. In the three years since
its inception, CNV has successfully handed over 11 projects to the business sectors for
execution, leading to great accomplishments for the company (Amabile, n.a.).
Entrepreneurs should strive to enhance their innovation capability by actively
pursuing, committing to, and improving it in order to enhance their organizational
performance (Anning-Dorson & Nyamekye, 2020). Through technical innovation
 77

capability, entrepreneurs in the tourism industry should identify and seize innovative
opportunities before competitors do. Entrepreneurs need to exert themselves in applying
their knowledge and skills towards the development of new services, service operations,
and technological acquisitions. In terms of non-technical innovation capability,
entrepreneurs need to understand how crucial non-technical innovation is for fostering
organizational and marketing innovation. Entrepreneurs should concentrate on managerial
or marketing operations strategically to cultivate their firm’s related innovation in
management, market entry, and marketing.
Foroudi et al. (2016) study suggests that retailers worldwide, including Europe,
recognize the potential benefits that innovation can offer in the retail setting such as Smart
Labels. Therefore, entrepreneurs should study and apply those innovations appropriately to
organizations. For example, NFC payments (stands for Near Field Communication), is a
technology that permits users to securely send and receive data over a short distance using
their phones. NFC payments such as Google pay or Apple pay, are becoming a preferred
payment option for consumers (Gundaniya, n.a.).
Entrepreneurs should encourage and establish innovation activities in their
workplaces that can enhance their innovation capabilities, both technical and non-technical,
and foster support for innovation by networking openly and sharing information with other
entrepreneurs. This can be achieved by cultivating a culture that promotes employee
engagement and trust, experimentation, adaptation, and learning.
Apple Inc. is one of the most prominent examples. Apple Inc. has been successful in
part because of its management's efforts to view the company as a living system with
dynamic innovation dynamics based on its employees' creative minds. (Khan et al., 2015).
For example, Apple Inc. has established an understanding process in which leaders seek
information, opinions, and ideas from sources other than their usual areas of expertise. This
includes, but is not limited to, customer feedback, cleric criticism, and external responses
by competitive enterprises. Internally, leaders demonstrate their cooperation and
collaborative abilities by encouraging employees at all levels to participate in
communication, brainstorming, idea sharing, and decision-making. Significantly, Apple
 78

Inc. sees its employees as either a larger entity that makes up the company they work for or
as human beings with a common imaginative goal.
Additionally, Sipe (2016) discovered that at the business unit level of a hospital
marketplace, senior managers have influence and are responsible for change and innovation.
As a result, entrepreneurs can apply the context issues of this study to the tourism business.
For instance, create methods that are methodical for learning about employees' interests and
passions, encourage managers to balance business and emotion in their leadership styles,
etc. However, the context characteristics may be appropriated differently depending on the
nature of the organization.
The case study from an innovative company like 3M Corporation is one of an
interestingly innovative culture principle. 3M Corporation has always prioritized individual
initiative and innovation over top-down managerial control. The 3M Corporation has a 15%
culture that encourages staff members to actively explore and pursue new ideas that interest
them during work hours. Therefore, entrepreneurs should provide more significant support
to innovation activities to effectively improve organizational success.
Second, having a relative growth mindset can result in more significant
entrepreneurial achievements, which aligns with previous studies (Desai et al., 2020;
Ouyang et al., 2021). Therefore, entrepreneurs should pay attention to those studies, and
apply the content appropriately to their organizations. For example, the study of Desai et al.
(2020) addressed and looked at the effect of mindsets on people's propensity for
opportunistic financial reporting. The study contends that prevailing corporate and
economic pressures serve as a primary motivator of opportunistic financial reporting.
Therefore, entrepreneurs can apply business and economic conditions to drive their success.
Furthermore, the study recommended further research to find additional psychological
factors that can predict such behaviors. Then, entrepreneurs should use content such as
reward and punishment to put some pressure on both entrepreneurs and employees.
Therefore, entrepreneurs should look into appropriate conditions that will help them expand
their growth mindset, such as creative environments, creative activities and creative practice
programs.
 79

A growth mindset is essential at work and in everyday life, as we can see from many
organizations. For example, parents, instructors, and students at Fiske Elementary School
are all encouraged to adopt a growth mindset. In order to empower and motivate pupils and
alter the culture of the school, teachers changed their behaviors and language after learning
the growth mindset. Fiske Elementary's growth percentile increased to 75% in just two
years, which is significantly higher than the state's 50%. Similar to this, Telenor Group, a
top telecom provider in the Nordics and Asia with around 172 million members and NOK
110 billion in annual sales in 2021, adopted a growth mindset, surpassed the competition,
and flourished (Theodotou, 2022).
Huge ideas have flourished as a result of companies like 3M, Google, and others
giving their employees the freedom and time to be creative and take risks. Many companies
and organizations are also focusing on improving the creative culture, such as The Virgin
Group is famous for its culture of innovation and creativity. They are open for employees
to submit ideas via a forum, and some have been implemented every year (Guardian, 2016).
Leaders and employees of Telenor Group completed the online course Growth Mindset.
Companies hold the view that there is an increase in creativity, learning, and innovation
when leaders support a growth mindset and create a setting where staff members feel safe
to fail and make mistakes (Sande, 2017). This will enable them to integrate creative skills
into the pragmatic execution of business strategies.
Entrepreneurs can play a significant role in improving corporate performance by
engaging in activities such as monitoring and planning. There are various entrepreneurial
issues that can be addressed using both subjective and objective indicators. To address
subjective aspects, entrepreneurs should focus on improving business development,
increasing the number of clients, improving employee performance, enhancing company
competitiveness, and achieving established business development goals (Staniewski &
Awruk, 2018). Additionally, entrepreneurs should also pay attention to objective
characteristics, such as company policies and regulations, employee compensation systems,
and market performance.
Third, this study indicates a positive correlation between gender and growth mindset.
 80

Creativity is associated with genetic endowment and is influenced by biology and the
environment (Baer & Kaufman, 2008). Individuals hold diverse views on the nature of
creativity and personal traits (Karwowski, 2014). Creativity necessitates a decision, and
different genders make different choices (Khare, 2011; Tran et al., 2019). The tourism
industry presents numerous opportunities for both genders, but it is also highly gendered.
Achieving gender equality is crucial to the advancement of tourism as gender plays a
significant role in shaping tourism processes and practices (Pritchard, 2014). In the tourism
sector, female entrepreneurial characteristics have been shown to be linked to
entrepreneurial success (Tajeddini et al., 2017) However, due to the existence of
differentiated and unequal social values, a gender hierarchy is often imposed on women and
men.
Based on the findings that a growth mindset is positively influenced by gender,
entrepreneurs should examine gender differences and educate themselves to better
recognize and develop gender-specific traits and skills. For example, they could provide
clear instructions on gender differences and establish a positive connection with gender
identity. The author recommends that the tourism business sector should prioritize gender
equality, particularly in developing countries where cultural stereotypes or gender hierarchy
may be more prevalent.
A big company like 3M also suggested in McKnight’s basic rule of management that
delegating responsibility and encouraging men and women to take initiative are becoming
increasingly important. It takes a lot of patience to do this. If the men and women we entrust
with power and responsibility are honorable individuals, they will aspire to carry out their
duties in a distinctive manner (Becher, 2016).
Furthermore, the results also suggest a relationship between education and growth
mindset. According to Castillo-Vergara et al. (2018), Education is one of the most
influential variables influencing creative capacity, and it can either restrict or enhance
creativity. Education plays a crucial role in fostering a growth mindset, especially in the
field of business by enhancing business acumen, education can contribute to improving the
economy. The author suggests that entrepreneurs should contemplate pursuing higher
 81

education or, at the very least, take part in creativity training programs. In terms of
organization, entrepreneurs should focus more on the diversity of education perspectives,
such as hiring people with different education backgrounds. In addition, entrepreneurs
should allocate more educational resources towards cultivating and developing their growth
mindset. The author suggests entrepreneurs spend more resources to education, such as
supporting the use of assessment to enhance learning or making educational partnerships.
Entrepreneurs ought to set up innovation initiatives in their workplace to boost their
innovation capabilities and promote encouragement for innovation activities (both technical
and non-technical) by openly networking and sharing information with other entrepreneurs.
Gender and educational diversity are essential for economic prosperity. Interestingly,
diversity has also been critical in fostering the creative and innovative environment that has
resulted in many big companies, such as Apple Inc. Apple Inc. leaders have assured that
their company has created a culture that promotes the establishment of a suitable
environment for diversity to thrive. Apple Inc. has been able to draw and benefit from the
various forms of creativity that arise from its employees because of this diversity, which has
increased the efficiency of the overall operation of the firm (IvyPanda, 2021).
Finally, there is a negative correlation between the type of company and
entrepreneurial success. Therefore, the author suggests that entrepreneurs should explore
unexplored areas where a negative relative type of company is used to assess entrepreneurial
success. This approach would be better suited for capturing the developmental elements of
the creative mindset and entrepreneurial success, thereby achieving this objective.

6.2.3. Limitations and future research

In terms of sample size, this study was conducted on the tourism industry as a single
industry. In addition, this study assessed only the Thai entrepreneurs in Thai tourism
companies. As a result, the author anticipates that more studies in specific or different
industries, as well as cross-national studies such as comparisons of developed countries,
developing or emerging countries, and least developed countries, will be conducted in the
future, so that the findings can add more value to business, including practitioners and
 82

researchers.
Moreover, Harman’s single-factor test findings suggest that common method bias is
unlikely to be a significant problem in this study. Nonetheless, the study’s small sample size
(176 entrepreneurs) may have an impact on the current results. To enhance accuracy and
yield more favorable empirical findings, future studies should aim to gather a larger and
more representative sample.
This study was assessed sample by surveyed questionnaires. However, the author
expects that future research may incorporate secondary information like financial and sales
figures, which would improve the measurement of entrepreneurial success.
 83

LIST OF PUBLISHED PAPERS BY AUTHOR

1. Yodchai, N., Ly, P. T. M., & Tran, L. T. T. (2021). When Creative Mindset Helps
Entrepreneurial Innovation in Tourism: An Examination on Demographics. ABAC
Journal, 41(4), 108-125.

2. Yodchai, N., Ly, P.T.M. and Tran, L.T.T. (2022), How the creative mindset affects
entrepreneurial success in the tourism sector: the mediating role of innovation
capability, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(1),
279-298.

3. Yodchai, N., Ly, P. T. M., & Tran, L. T. T. (2022). Co-creating creative self-efficacy
to build creative performance and innovation capability for business success: a meta-
analysis. Creativity Studies, 15(1), 74–88.
 84

REFERENCES
Aditya, A. (2022). Reimagining Tourism in Thailand After Pandemic. Retrieved from
https://startupinthailand.com/?p=3160
Afsar, B., & Masood, M. (2018). Transformational leadership, creative self-efficacy, trust
in supervisor, uncertainty avoidance, and innovative work behavior of nurses. The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 54(1), 36-61.
Al-Asfoura, A., Rajasekarb, J., & Al Mashrafic, A. (2020). Fostering Organisational
Dynamic by Promoting Creativity of Employees in the Public Sector. International
Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(7), 150-172.
Alford, P., & Duan, Y. (2018). Understanding collaborative innovation from a dynamic
capabilities perspective. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 30(6), 2396-2416.
Allan, D., Vonasch, A. J., & Bartneck, C. (2022). “I Have to Praise You Like I Should?”
The Effects of Implicit Self-Theories and Robot-Delivered Praise on Evaluations of
a Social Robot. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1-12.
Amabile, T. M. (n.a.). How to Kill Creativity. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/1998/09/how-to-kill-creativity
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations:
A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework.
Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333.
Angel, P., Jenkins, A., & Stephens, A. (2018). Understanding entrepreneurial success: A
phenomenographic approach. International Small Business Journal, 36(6), 611-
636.
Anning-Dorson, T., & Nyamekye, M. B. (2020). Be flexible: turning innovativeness into
competitive advantage in hospitality firms. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 32(2), 605-624.
ASEAN. (2015). ASEAN tourism strategic plan 2016-2025. Retrieved from
https://www.asean.org/storage/2012/05/ATSP-2016-2025.pdf
Ateljevic, J., & Page, S. J. (2017). Tourism and entrepreneurship: Routledge.
 85

Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2008). Gender differences in creativity. The Journal of
Creative Behavior, 42(2), 75-105.
Becher, J. (2016). McKnight's Management Methodology. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sap/2016/02/29/mcknights-management-
methodology/?sh=6e12fc67243a
Benitez, J., Henseler, J., Castillo, A., & Schuberth, F. (2020). How to perform and report
an impactful analysis using partial least squares: Guidelines for confirmatory and
explanatory IS research. Information & Management, 57(2), 103168.
Billeter, A., Scheurlen, K., Probst, P., Eichel, S., Nickel, F., Kopf, S., . . . Müller-Stich, B.
(2018). Meta-analysis of metabolic surgery versus medical treatment for
microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Journal of
British Surgery, 105(3), 168-181.
Bouty, I., & Gomez, M.-L. (2013). Creativity in haute cuisine: Strategic knowledge and
practice in gourmet kitchens. Journal of culinary science & technology, 11(1), 80-
95.
Burnette, J. L., Knouse, L. E., Vavra, D. T., O'Boyle, E., & Brooks, M. A. (2020). Growth
Mindsets and psychological distress: A meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review,
77, 101816.
Burnette, J. L., O’boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013).
Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation.
Psychological bulletin, 139(3), 655.
Burnette, J. L., Pollack, J. M., Forsyth, R. B., Hoyt, C. L., Babij, A. D., Thomas, F. N., &
Coy, A. E. (2020). A Growth Mindset Intervention: Enhancing Students’
Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy and Career Development. Entrepreneurship Theory
and Practice, 44(5), 878-908.
Byron, K., & Khazanchi, S. (2010). When and how rewards increase creative
performance: A theoretically-derived meta-analysis. Paper presented at the
Academy of Management Proceedings.
 86

Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation
capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(6), 515-
524.
Camisón, C., & Villar-López, A. (2011). Non-technical innovation: organizational
memory and learning capabilities as antecedent factors with effects on sustained
competitive advantage. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1294-1304.
Carr, P. B., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Implicit theories shape intergroup relations
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 45, pp. 127-165): Elsevier.
Castillo-Vergara, M., Galleguillos, N. B., Cuello, L. J., Alvarez-Marin, A., & Acuña-
Opazo, C. (2018). Does socioeconomic status influence student creativity?
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 29, 142-152.
Castro, M. D. B., & Tumibay, G. M. (2021). A literature review: efficacy of online
learning courses for higher education institution using meta-analysis. Education
and Information Technologies, 26(2), 1367-1385.
Cem, I. Ş. I. K., KÜÇÜKALTAN, E. G., Sedat, T., AKOĞUL, E., UYRUN, A.,
HAJİYEVA, T., ... & BAYRAKTAROĞLU, E. (2019). Tourism and innovation: A
literature review. Journal of Ekonomi, 1(2), 98-154.
Chan, D. W., & Chan, L.-K. (1999). Implicit theories of creativity: Teachers' perception of
student characteristics in Hong Kong. Creativity Research Journal, 12(3), 185-195.
Chaubey, A., & Sahoo, C. K. (2019). Enhancing organizational innovation in Indian
automobile industry. International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 82-101.
Chaubey, A., Sahoo, C. K., & Khatri, N. (2019). Relationship of transformational
leadership with employee creativity and organizational innovation: A study of
mediating and moderating influences. Journal of Strategy and Management, 12(1),
61-82.
Chen, L.-C. (2018). Developing technologies or learning institutions? Exploring the role
of hackathons for developing innovation capability in emerging economies: the
case of Taiwan. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 26(2), 202-221.
 87

Chen, M.-H., Chang, Y.-Y., & Lo, Y.-H. (2015). Creativity cognitive style, conflict, and
career success for creative entrepreneurs. Journal of Business research, 68(4), 906-
910.
Chen, M.-H., Chang, Y.-Y., & Pan, J.-Y. (2018). Typology of creative entrepreneurs and
entrepreneurial success. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places
in the Global Economy, 12(5), 632-656.
Chen, Y., & Zhang, L. (2019). Be creative as proactive? The impact of creative self-
efficacy on employee creativity: A proactive perspective. Current Psychology,
38(2), 589-598.
Cheung, M. W.-L. (2015). Meta-analysis: A structural equation modeling approach: John
Wiley & Sons.
Choi, S. B., Ullah, S., & Kang, S.-W. (2021). Proactive Personality and Creative
Performance: Mediating Roles of Creative Self-Efficacy and Moderated Mediation
Role of Psychological Safety. Sustainability, 13(22), 12517.
Christensen-Salem, A., Walumbwa, F. O., Hsu, C. I.-C., Misati, E., Babalola, M. T., &
Kim, K. (2020). Unmasking the creative self-efficacy–creative performance
relationship: the roles of thriving at work, perceived work significance, and task
interdependence. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-
27.
Degraff, J., & DeGraff, S. (2020). The Creative Mindset: Mastering the Six Skills that
Empower Innovation: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Delany, D., Cheung, R., Takahashi, Y., & Cheung, C. (2019). Adolescents’ Implicit
Theories of a Creative Person: A Longitudinal Investigation in Three Countries.
Creativity Research Journal, 31(1), 52-61.
Desai, N., Jain, S. P., Jain, S., & Tripathy, A. (2020). The impact of implicit theories of
personality malleability on opportunistic financial reporting. Journal of Business
research, 116, 258-265.
Divisekera, S., & Nguyen, V. K. (2018). Determinants of innovation in tourism evidence
from Australia. Tourism Management, 67, 157-167.
 88

Do, T. T. P., & Luu, D. T. (2020). Origins and consequences of intrapreneurship with
behaviour-based approach among employees in the hospitality industry.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(12), 3949-
3969.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success Random House. New York,
NY.
Dweck, C. S. (2009). Mindsets: Developing talent through a growth mindset. Olympic
Coach, 21(1), 4-7.
Edwards-Schachter, M., García-Granero, A., Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M., Quesada-Pineda,
H., & Amara, N. (2015). Disentangling competences: Interrelationships on
creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. Thinking skills and creativity, 16, 27-
39.
Elsevier. (n.d.). About ScienceDirect. Retrieved from
https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/sciencedirect/content
Emerald. (n.d.). About Emerald Publishing. Retrieved from
https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/about
Farmaki, A., Altinay, L., Christou, P., & Kenebayeva, A. (2020). Religion and
entrepreneurship in hospitality and tourism. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 32(1), 148-172.
Ferreira, J., Coelho, A., & Moutinho, L. (2020). Dynamic capabilities, creativity and
innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm
performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Technovation, 92-
93, 102061.
Ferreira, J. J., Fernandes, C. I., & Kraus, S. (2019). Entrepreneurship research: mapping
intellectual structures and research trends. Review of Managerial Science, 13(1),
181-205.
Fisher, R., Maritz, A., & Lobo, A. (2014). Evaluating entrepreneurs’ perception of
success: Development of a measurement scale. International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.
 89

Fleck, E., & Asmuth, J. (2021). Building Capacity for Creativity: Rediscovering the Inner
“Superhero” as a Mechanism for Developing a Creative Mindset for
Entrepreneurial Problem-Solving. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy,
4(1), 82-95.
Fong, L. H. N., Chan, I. C. C., Law, R., & Ly, T. P. (2018). The mechanism that links the
implicit theories of intelligence and continuance of information technology:
Evidence from the use of mobile apps to make hotel reservations Information and
communication technologies in tourism 2018 (pp. 323-335): Springer.
Foroudi, P., Jin, Z., Gupta, S., Melewar, T., & Foroudi, M. M. (2016). Influence of
innovation capability and customer experience on reputation and loyalty. Journal of
Business research, 69(11), 4882-4889.
Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). Common
methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business research,
69(8), 3192-3198.
Ghalia, T., & Fidrmuc, J. (2018). The curse of tourism? Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, 42(6), 979-996.
González‐Benito, Ó., González‐Benito, J., & Muñoz‐Gallego, P. A. (2009). Role of
entrepreneurship and market orientation in firms' success. European Journal of
Marketing, 43(3/4), 500-522
GoogleScholar. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://scholar.google.com/intl/th/scholar/about.html
Guardian, T. (2016). Is Google's model of the creative workplace the future of the office?
Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/careers/2016/feb/11/is-googles-
model-of-the-creative-workplace-the-future-of-the-office
Gundaniya, N. (n.a.). All you need to know about NFC payments. Retrieved from
https://www.digipay.guru/blog/all-you-need-to-know-about-nfc-payments/
Guo, J., Ge, Y., & Pang, W. (2019). The underlying cognitive mechanisms of the rater
effect in creativity assessment: The mediating role of perceived semantic distance.
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100572.
 90

Gurel, E., Altinay, L., & Daniele, R. (2010). Tourism students’ entrepreneurial intentions.
Annals of tourism research, 37(3), 646-669.
Haase, J., Hoff, E. V., Hanel, P. H., & Innes-Ker, Å. (2018). A meta-analysis of the
relation between creative self-efficacy and different creativity measurements.
Creativity Research Journal, 30(1), 1-16.
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to
report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review.
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial
least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): Sage publications.
Hallak, R., Assaker, G., O’Connor, P., & Lee, C. (2018). Firm performance in the upscale
restaurant sector: The effects of resilience, creative self-efficacy, innovation and
industry experience. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 40, 229-240.
Hass, R. W., & Burke, S. (2016). Implicit theories of creativity are differentially
categorized by perspective and exemplar domain. Thinking Skills and Creativity,
19, 219-231.
Hass, R. W., Katz-Buonincontro, J., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2016). Disentangling creative
mindsets from creative self-efficacy and creative identity: Do people hold fixed and
growth theories of creativity? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
10(4), 436-446.
He, P., Zhou, Q., Zhao, H., Jiang, C., & Wu, Y. J. (2020). Compulsory citizenship
behavior and employee creativity: creative self-efficacy as a mediator and negative
affect as a moderator. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1640.
Higgins, J. P., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A.
(2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: John Wiley &
Sons.
Horng, J.-S., Liu, C.-H. S., Chou, S.-F., Tsai, C.-Y., & Hu, D.-C. (2018). Developing a
sustainable service innovation framework for the hospitality industry. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1), 455-474.
 91

Horng, J.-S., Tsai, C.-Y., Liu, C.-H., & Chung, D. Y.-C. (2015). Measuring Employee's
Creativity: A new theoretical model and empirical study for tourism industry. Asia
Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 20(12), 1353-1373.
Hu, B., & Zhao, Y. (2016). Creative self-efficacy mediates the relationship between
knowledge sharing and employee innovation. Social Behavior and Personality: an
international journal, 44(5), 815-826.
Ismail, H. N., Iqbal, A., & Nasr, L. (2019). Employee engagement and job performance in
Lebanon: the mediating role of creativity. International Journal of Productivity and
Performance Management, 68(3), 506-523.
IvyPanda. (2021). Apple Company’s Creativity and Innovation Coursework. Retrieved
from https://ivypanda.com/essays/apple-companys-creativity-and-innovation/
Jaiswal, N. K., & Dhar, R. L. (2015). Transformational leadership, innovation climate,
creative self-efficacy and employee creativity: A multilevel study. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, 30-41.
Japutra, A., & Hossain, M. I. (2021). Tourists’ mindsets and choice of adventurous
holiday activities. Current Issues in Tourism, 24(15), 2078-2087.
Jiang, W., & Gu, Q. (2017). Leader creativity expectations motivate employee creativity: a
moderated mediation examination. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 28(5), 724-749.
Jones, C., & Pimdee, P. (2017). Innovative ideas: Thailand 4.0 and the fourth industrial
revolution. Asian International Journal of Social Sciences, 17(1), 4-35.
JSTOR. (n.d.). About JSTOR. Retrieved from https://about.jstor.org/
Kafetzopoulos, D., & Psomas, E. (2015). The impact of innovation capability on the
performance of manufacturing companies: The Greek case. Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, 26(1), 104-130.
Kafetzopoulos, D., & Psomas, E. (2016). Organisational learning, non-technical
innovation and customer satisfaction of SMEs. International Journal of Innovation
Management, 20(03), 1650041.
 92

Kallmuenzer, A., Baptista, R., Kraus, S., Ribeiro, A. S., Cheng, C.-F., & Westhead, P.
(2021). Entrepreneurs' human capital resources and tourism firm sales growth: A
fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Tourism Management Perspectives, 38,
100801.
Kallmuenzer, A., Kraus, S., Peters, M., Steiner, J., & Cheng, C.-F. (2019).
Entrepreneurship in tourism firms: A mixed-methods analysis of performance
driver configurations. Tourism Management, 74, 319-330.
Karwowski, M. (2014). Creative mindsets: Measurement, correlates, consequences.
Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(1), 62-70.
Karwowski, M., & Brzeski, A. (2017). Chapter 21 - Creative Mindsets: Prospects and
Challenges. In M. Karwowski & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Creative Self (pp. 367-
383). San Diego: Academic Press.
Khan, U. A., Alam, M. N., & Alam, S. (2015). A critical analysis of internal and external
environment of Apple Inc. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and
Management, 3(6), 955-961.
Khare, A. (2011). Mall shopping behaviour of Indian small town consumers. Journal of
retailing and consumer services, 18(1), 110-118.
Khedhaouria, A., Gurău, C., & Torrès, O. (2015). Creativity, self-efficacy, and small-firm
performance: the mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Small Business
Economics, 44(3), 485-504.
Kirca, A. H., & Yaprak, A. (2010). The use of meta-analysis in international business
research: Its current status and suggestions for better practice. International
Business Review, 19(3), 306-314.
Kock, N. (2021). Harman’s single factor test in PLS-SEM: Checking for common method
bias. Data Analysis Perspectives Journal, 2(2), 1-6.
Kouzes, T. K., & Posner, B. Z. (2019). Influence of managers’ mindset on leadership
behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
Lam, L., Nguyen, P., Le, N., & Tran, K. (2021). The relation among organizational
culture, knowledge management, and innovation capability: Its implication for
 93

open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and

Complexity, 7(1), 66.
Lau, V. P., Shaffer, M. A., & Au, K. (2007). Entrepreneurial career success from a
Chinese perspective: conceptualization, operationalization, and validation. Journal
of International Business Studies, 38(1), 126-146.
Leelawat, N., Jariyapongpaiboon, S., Promjun, A., Boonyarak, S., Saengtabtim, K.,
Laosunthara, A., ... & Tang, J. (2022). Twitter data sentiment analysis of tourism in
Thailand during the COVID-19 pandemic using machine learning. Heliyon, 8(10),
e10894.
Li, P., Zhang, Z. S., Zhang, Y., Zhang, J., Nunez, M., & Shi, J. (2021). From Implicit
Theories to Creative Achievements: The Mediating Role of Creativity Motivation
in the Relationship between Stereotypes, Growth Mindset, and Creative
Achievement. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(1), 199-214.
Lim, W., & Plucker, J. A. (2001). Creativity through a lens of social responsibility:
Implicit theories of creativity with Korean samples. The Journal of Creative
Behavior, 35(2), 115-130.
Lin, R. J., Chen, R. H., & Chiu, K. K. S. (2010). Customer relationship management and
innovation capability: an empirical study. industrial Management & data Systems.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Applied social research methods series. Practical
meta-analysis, 49th edn. Sage Publications, London.
Ly, T. P., Leung, D., & Fong, L. H. N. (2021). Repeated stay in homestay
accommodation: an implicit self-theory perspective. Tourism Recreation Research,
1-14.
Ma, Y., Cheng, W., Ribbens, B. A., & Zhou, J. (2013). Linking ethical leadership to
employee creativity: Knowledge sharing and self-efficacy as mediators. Social
Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 41(9), 1409-1419.
Maldonado-Guzmán, G., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Pinzón-Castro, S. Y., & Kumar, V. (2019).
Innovation Capabilities and Performance: Are they truly linked in SMEs?
International Journal of Innovation Science, 11(1), 48-62.
 94

Malik, M. A. R., Butt, A. N., & Choi, J. N. (2015). Rewards and employee creative
performance: Moderating effects of creative self‐efficacy, reward importance, and
locus of control. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 59-74.
Martha, D., Sousa, V. D., & Mendes, I. A. C. (2007). An overview of research designs
relevant to nursing: Part 3: Mixed and multiple methods. Revista latino-americana
de enfermagem, 15, 1046-1049.
Martin, C. M. (2008). A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between emotional
intelligence and leadership effectiveness: East Carolina University.
McKay, A. S., Lovelace, J. B., & Howard, M. C. (2018). The Heart of Innovation:
Antecedents and Consequences of Creative Self-Efficacy in Organizations.
Individual Creativity in the Workplace (pp. 223-244): Elsevier.
Montford, W. J., Leary, R. B., & Nagel, D. M. (2019). The impact of implicit self-theories
and loss salience on financial risk. Journal of Business research, 99, 1-11.
Mrazek, A. J., Ihm, E. D., Molden, D. C., Mrazek, M. D., Zedelius, C. M., & Schooler, J.
W. (2018). Expanding minds: Growth mindsets of self-regulation and the
influences on effort and perseverance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
79, 164-180.
Murphy, M. C., & Dweck, C. S. (2010). A culture of genius: How an organization’s lay
theory shapes people’s cognition, affect, and behavior. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 283-296.
Murphy, M. C., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Mindsets shape consumer behavior. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 26(1), 127-136.
Neumeyer, X., Santos, S. C., Caetano, A., & Kalbfleisch, P. (2019). Entrepreneurship
ecosystems and women entrepreneurs: A social capital and network approach.
Small Business Economics, 53(2), 475-489.
Newman, A., Herman, H., Schwarz, G., & Nielsen, I. (2018). The effects of employees'
creative self-efficacy on innovative behavior: The role of entrepreneurial
leadership. Journal of Business research, 89, 1-9.
 95

Ngo, L. V., & O'cass, A. (2013). Innovation and business success: The mediating role of
customer participation. Journal of Business research, 66(8), 1134-1142.
O’Connor, A. J., Nemeth, C. J., & Akutsu, S. (2013). Consequences of beliefs about the
malleability of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 25(2), 155-162.
Orth, M., & Volmer, J. (2017). Daily within-person effects of job autonomy and work
engagement on innovative behaviour: The cross-level moderating role of creative
self-efficacy. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 26(4), 601-
612.
Oshio, A., Taku, K., Hirano, M., & Saeed, G. (2018). Resilience and Big Five personality
traits: A meta-analysis. Personality and individual differences, 127, 54-60.
Oura, M. M., Zilber, S. N., & Lopes, E. L. (2016). Innovation capacity, international
experience and export performance of SMEs in Brazil. International Business
Review, 25(4), 921-932.
Ouyang, X., Liu, Z., & Gui, C. (2021). Creativity in the hospitality and tourism industry: a
meta-analysis. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print).
Oztemel, E., & Gursev, S. (2020). Literature review of Industry 4.0 and related
technologies. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 31(1), 127-182.
Paek, S. H., & Sumners, S. E. (2019). The indirect effect of teachers’ creative mindsets on
teaching creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(3), 298-311.
Palmatier, R. W. (2016). Improving publishing success at JAMS: contribution and
positioning. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(6), 655-659.
Parvez, M. O. (2020). Use of machine learning technology for tourist and organizational
services: high-tech innovation in the hospitality industry. Journal of Tourism
Futures, 7(2), 240-244.
Pascual-Fernández, P., Santos-Vijande, M. L., & López-Sánchez, J. Á. (2020). Harnessing
innovation success in hotels: the interplay among key drivers of new service
performance. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
32(9), 2757-2776.
 96

Pesout, O., & Nietfeld, J. (2021). How creative am I?: Examining judgments and
predictors of creative performance. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40, 100836.
Peters, M., Pfurtscheller, A., Wong, K., & Kraus, S. (2010). The influence of
entrepreneurial branding on entrepreneurial/growth orientations: an empirical study
in the Austrian tourism industry. International Journal of Business Research, 10(2),
28-29.
Pham, T.-H., Wu, W.-Y., & Nguyen, P.-T. (2019). A Perspective of Service-Dominant
Logic on Customer Participation: A Meta-Analysis Approach. The Journal of
Social Sciences Research, 5(2), 551-558.
Powell, G. N., & Eddleston, K. A. (2013). Linking family-to-business enrichment and
support to entrepreneurial success: do female and male entrepreneurs experience
different outcomes? Journal of Business Venturing, 28(2), 261-280.
Pratt, T. C., Turanovic, J. J., Fox, K. A., & Wright, K. A. (2014). Self‐control and
victimization: A meta‐analysis. Criminology, 52(1), 87-116.
Pretz, J. E., & Nelson, D. (2017). Creativity is influenced by domain, creative self-
efficacy, mindset, self-efficacy, and self-esteem The creative self (pp. 155-170):
Elsevier.
Pritchard, A. (2014). Gender and feminist perspectives in tourism research. The Wiley
Blackwell companion to tourism, 314-324.
ProQuest. (n.d.). About ProQuest. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/about/who-
we-are.html
Przepiorka, A. M. (2017). Psychological determinants of entrepreneurial success and life-
satisfaction. Current Psychology, 36(2), 304-315. doi:10.1007/s12144-016-9419-1
Puente-Díaz, R., & Cavazos-Arroyo, J. (2017). The influence of creative mindsets on
achievement goals, enjoyment, creative self-efficacy and performance among
business students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 24, 1-11.
Puente‐Diaz, R., & Cavazos‐Arroyo, J. (2017). Creative mindsets and their affective and
social consequences: A latent class approach. The Journal of Creative Behavior.
 97

Qin, X., Dust, S. B., DiRenzo, M. S., & Wang, S. (2020). Negative creativity in leader-
follower relations: A daily investigation of leaders’ creative mindset, moral
disengagement, and abusive supervision. Journal of Business and Psychology,
35(5), 665-682.
Rai, D., & Lin, C.-W. W. (2019). The influence of implicit self-theories on consumer
financial decision making. Journal of Business research, 95, 316-325.
Rajapathirana, R. J., & Hui, Y. (2018). Relationship between innovation capability,
innovation type, and firm performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 3(1),
44-55.
Ramadani, V., Dana, L.-P., Ratten, V., & Tahiri, S. (2015). The context of Islamic
entrepreneurship and business: concept, principles and perspectives. International
Journal of Business and Globalisation, 15(3), 244-261.
Richards, G. (2014). Creativity and tourism in the city. Current issues in Tourism, 17(2),
119-144.
Richter, A. W., Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., & Baer, M. (2012). Creative self-efficacy
and individual creativity in team contexts: Cross-level interactions with team
informational resources. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1282-1290.
Riquelme, H., & Watson, J. (2002). Do venture capitalists' implicit theories on new
business success/failure have empirical validity?. International Small Business
Journal, 20(4), 395-420.
Rosenblad, A. (2009). Introduction to Meta‐Analysis by Michael Borenstein, Larry V.
Hedges, Julian PT Higgins, Hannah R. Rothstein: Wiley Online Library.
Royston, R., & Reiter‐Palmon, R. (2019). Creative self‐efficacy as mediator between
creative mindsets and creative problem‐solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior,
53(4), 472-481.
SAGE. (n.d.). Company Information. Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/en-
us/nam/company-information
 98

Sande,S.K. (2021). New world record: Telenor employees write e-learning history.
Retrieved from https://www.telenor.com/media/newsroom/press-releases/new-
world-record-telenor-employees-write-e-learning-history/
Sandybayev, A. (2019). Impact of effective entrepreneurial leadership style on
organizational performance: Critical review. International Journal of Economics
and Management, 1(1), 47-55.
Sari, Y., Mahrinasari, M., Ayi, A., & Marselina, M. A. R. S. E. L. I. N. A. (2019). Model
of improving tourism industry performance through innovation capability. Journal
of Environmental Management and Tourism, 10(4 (36)), 852-863.
Sarooghi, H., Libaers, D., & Burkemper, A. (2015). Examining the relationship between
creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and
environmental factors. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 714-731.
Sarstedt, M., & Cheah, J.-H. (2019). Partial least squares structural equation modeling
using SmartPLS: a software review: Springer.
Saunila, M. (2020). Innovation capability in SMEs: A systematic review of the literature.
Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5(4), 260-265.
Saunila, M., Ukko, J., & Rantanen, H. (2014). Does innovation capability really matter for
the profitability of SMEs? Knowledge and Process Management, 21(2), 134-142.
Schmidt, K. (2019). Are Leaders in Thailand Prepared for Thailand 4.0? International
Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, 5(6), 340-350.
Schroder, H. S., Callahan, C. P., Gornik, A. E., & Moser, J. S. (2019). The fixed mindset
of anxiety predicts future distress: A longitudinal study. Behavior Therapy, 50(4),
710-717.
Shafi, M. (2020). Sustainable development of micro firms: examining the effects of
cooperation on handicraft firm's performance through innovation capability.
International Journal of Emerging Markets.
Sipe, L. J. (2016). How do senior managers influence experience innovation? Insights
from a hospitality marketplace. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
54, 75-83.
 99

Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what
extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic
achievement? Two meta-analyses. Psychological science, 29(4), 549-571.
Slåtten, T. (2014). Determinants and effects of employee’s creative self-efficacy on
innovative activities. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 6(4),
326-347.
Sleuwaegen, L., & Boiardi, P. (2014). Creativity and regional innovation: Evidence from
EU regions. Research Policy, 43(9), 1508-1522.
Srinamphon, P., Chernbumroong, S., & Tippayawong, K. Y. (2022). The Effect of Small
Particulate Matter on Tourism and Related SMEs in Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Sustainability, 14(13), 8147.
Staniewski, M. W., & Awruk, K. (2018). Questionnaire of entrepreneurial success —
Report on the initial stage of method construction. Journal of Business Research,
88, 437-442.
Steele, L. M., Johnson, G., & Medeiros, K. E. (2018). Looking beyond the generation of
creative ideas: Confidence in evaluating ideas predicts creative outcomes.
Personality and individual differences, 125, 21-29.
Stolz, R. C., Blackmon, A. T., Engerman, K., Tonge, L., & McKayle, C. A. (2022). Poised
for creativity: Benefits of exposing undergraduate students to creative problem-
solving to moderate change in creative self-efficacy and academic achievement.
Journal of Creativity, 32(2), 100024.
Stojcic, N., Hashi, I., & Orlic, E. (2018). Creativity, innovation effectiveness and
productive efficiency in the UK. European Journal of Innovation Management,
21(4), 564-580.
Strickland, S., & Towler, A. (2011). Correlates of creative behaviour: The role of
leadership and personal factors. Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences/Revue canadienne des sciences de l'administration, 28(1), 41-51.
 100

Sutapa, S., Mulyana, M., & Wasitowati, W. (2017). The role of market orientation,
creativity and innovation in creating competitive advantages and creative industry
performance. JDM (Jurnal Dinamika Manajemen), 8(2), 152-166.
Taheri, B., Bititci, U., Gannon, M. J., & Cordina, R. (2019). Investigating the influence of
performance measurement on learning, entrepreneurial orientation and performance
in turbulent markets. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 31(3), 1224-1246.
Taherparvar, N., Esmaeilpour, R., & Dostar, M. (2014). Customer knowledge
management, innovation capability and business performance: a case study of the
banking industry. Journal of knowledge management, 18(3), 591-610.
Tai, H. T., & Mai, N. Q. (2016). Proactive personality, organizational context, employee
creativity and innovative capability: Evidence from MNCs and domestic
corporations. International journal of organizational analysis, 24(3), 370-389.
Tajeddini, K., Ratten, V., & Denisa, M. (2017). Female tourism entrepreneurs in Bali,
Indonesia. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 52-58.
Tang, M., Werner, C., & Karwowski, M. (2016). Differences in creative mindset between
Germany and Poland: The mediating effect of individualism and collectivism.
Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 31-40.
Tantawy, M., Herbert, K., McNally, J. J., Mengel, T., Piperopoulos, P., & Foord, D.
(2021). Bringing creativity back to entrepreneurship education: Creative self-
efficacy, creative process engagement, and entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of
Business Venturing Insights, 15, e00239.
Tatsioni, A., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2017). Meta-analysis.
Tenemaza Kramaley, D., & Wishart, J. (2020). Can fixed versus growth mindset theories
of intelligence and chess ability, together with deliberate practice, improve our
understanding of expert performance? Gifted Education International, 36(1), 3-16.
Teng, C. C., Hu, C. M., & Chang, J. H. (2019). Triggering Creative Self‐Efficacy to
Increase Employee Innovation Behavior in the Hospitality Workplace. The Journal
of Creative Behavior, 0(0), 1-14.
 101

Theodotou, M. (2022). eLearning Skills 2030: Developing A Growth Mindset. Retrieved

from https://elearningindustry.com/elearning-skills-2030-developing-a-growth-
mindset
Thundiyil, T. G., Chiaburu, D. S., Li, N., & Wagner, D. T. (2016). Joint effects of creative
self-efficacy, positive and negative affect on creative performance. Chinese
Management Studies, 10(4), 726-745.
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and
relationship to creative performance. Academy of management Journal, 45(6),
1137-1148.
Tønnessen, Ø., Dhir, A., & Flåten, B.-T. (2021). Digital knowledge sharing and creative
performance: Work from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, 170, 120866.
Tran, L. T. T., Ly, P. T. M., & Le, L. T. (2019). Hotel choice: A closer look at
demographics and online ratings. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
82, 13-21.
Valaei, N., Rezaei, S., & Emami, M. (2017). Explorative learning strategy and its impact
on creativity and innovation: an empirical investigation among ICT-SMEs.
Business Process Management Journal, 23(5), 957-983.
Vetter, D., Ruecker, G., & Storch, I. (2013). Meta‐analysis: A need for well‐defined usage
in ecology and conservation biology. Ecosphere, 4(6), 1-24.
Vongkulluksn, V. W., Matewos, A. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2021). Growth mindset
development in design-based makerspace: A longitudinal study. The Journal of
Educational Research, 114(2), 139-154.
Wang, X., & Dass, M. (2017). Building innovation capability: The role of top
management innovativeness and relative-exploration orientation. Journal of
Business research, 76, 127-135.
Weber, B., & Heidenreich, S. (2018). When and with whom to cooperate? Investigating
effects of cooperation stage and type on innovation capabilities and success. Long
Range Planning, 51(2), 334-350.
 102

Wiley. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/library-info

Wong, E. P., Mistilis, N., & Dwyer, L. (2011). A model of Asean collaboration in tourism.
Annals of tourism research, 38(3), 882-899.
Wu, W.-Y. (2019). The antecedents and consequences of psychological capital: A meta-
analytic approach. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
Wu, W.-Y., & Anridho, N. (2016). The antecedents of brand loyalty: A meta-analysis
study. International Journal of Services and Standards, 11(3), 242-260.
Wu, W.-Y., Do, T.-Y., Nguyen, P.-T., Anridho, N., & Vu, M.-Q. (2020). An integrated
framework of customer-based brand equity and theory of planned behavior: A
meta-analysis approach. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business,
7(8), 371-381.
Xu, L. D., Xu, E. L., & Li, L. (2018). Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends.
International Journal of Production Research, 56(8), 2941-2962.
Yang, C.-C., Marlow, P. B., & Lu, C.-S. (2009). Assessing resources, logistics service
capabilities, innovation capabilities and the performance of container shipping
services in Taiwan. International Journal of Production Economics, 122(1), 4-20.
Yu, J., & McLellan, R. (2020). Same mindset, different goals and motivational
frameworks: Profiles of mindset-based meaning systems. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 62, 101901.
103
 civ

APPENDIX
Results of study 1: Creative mindset, innovation capability and entrepreneurial
success: A meta-analysis

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between growth mindset and
creative self-efficacy
 cv

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between fixed mindset and
creative self-efficacy
 cvi

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between creative self-efficacy

and creative performance
 cvii

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between creative self-efficacy

and innovation capability
 cviii

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between creative performance

and innovation capability.
 cix

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between creative performance

and business success.
 cx

The findings of the meta-analysis on the relationship between innovation capability

and business success.
 cxi

Results of study 2: Creative mindset, innovation capability and entrepreneurial

success: An empirical approach

Reliability of Growth Mindset (GM)

 cxii

Reliability of Fixed Mindset (FM)

 cxiii

Reliability of Technical Innovation Capability (TIC)

 cxiv

Reliability of Non-Technical Innovation Capability (NTIC)

 cxv

Reliability of Subjective Indicator (SI)

 cxvi

Reliability of Objective Indicator (SI)

 cxvii

Demographic characteristics
cxviii
 cxix

Multicollinearity
 cxx

Measurement model
cxxi
 cxxii

Structural results (Model 1)

cxxiii
 cxxiv

Structural results (Model 2)

cxxv
cxxvi
 cxxvii

Questionnaire (English)
cxxviii
cxxix
cxxx
 cxxxi

Questionnaire (Thai)
cxxxii
cxxxiii
cxxxiv
cxxxv