The impact of an accelerated digitalization on innovation and creativity : Investigating the effects of an accelerated digitalization due to the outbreak of COVID-19 on individuals’ innovative and creative working abilities.

The impact of an accelerated digitalization on

innovation and creativity

- Investigating the effects of an accelerated digitalization due to

the outbreak of COVID-19 on individuals’innovative and

creative working abilities.

THESIS WITHIN: Business and Administration NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15 ETCS

PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Bachelor program International Management AUTHORS: Elsa Jacobsson and Alva Hildell

Bachelor thesis in business administration

Title: The impact of an accelerated digitalization on innovation and creativity: An

Exploratory Study of the impact of an accelerated digitalization due to COVID-19 on individuals’ innovative and creative working abilities.

Authors: Elsa Jacobsson and Alva Hildell Eriksson Tutor: Jasna Pocek

Date: 2021-05-23

Key terms: Digitalization, Accelerated Digitalization, COVID-19, Drivers of

Creativity, Drivers of Innovation, Working Abilities.

Abstract

Background: Due to the spread of COVID-19, there has been an acceleration in the

digitalization which has impacted the working life of many individuals. People have been forced to work remotely and on a daily basis use more advanced digital tools, resulting in an enormous change in the work environment. These major changes in the work environments have affected people working in product and service development firms in various ways. With the main existing literature focusing on the organizational level, a gap in literature was identified on how an accelerated digitalization impacts the individuals working in companies.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate how the accelerated digitalization

due to COVID-19 has impacted people working in service or product development firms in regard to their innovative and creative working abilities.

Method: A qualitative method with an inductive approach was conducted using

semi-structured interviews with ten relevant participants who are working in product or service development firms across Sweden.

Conclusion: The findings suggests that individuals working in product or service

developing firms have slightly similar drivers of both innovation and creativity. The analyzation of the findings conveyed that an accelerated digitalization seemed to have a more positive impact on both workers’ attitude towards digitalization and innovative and creative working abilities. Whereas an accelerated digitalization due to COVID-19, was established to have a more negative effect on creativity but not on innovation. Moreover, the findings are synchronized into a framework portraying in detail how the innovative and creative abilities of individuals working in product and/or service

developing firms have been impacted by an accelerated digitalization due to COVID-19, and how the key elements has been affected.

Acknowledgements

Firstly, the authors would like to express a huge gratitude to their tutor Jasna Pocek for her persistent and honest encouragement, inputs and belief in the authors along the way. The work would not have been the same without the guidance from the tutor.

Secondly, the authors would like to thank all the participants in the interviews for giving us the opportunity to interview them, even during this hard time considering the

circumstances. The foundation of this thesis would not have been the same without the participants.

Lastly, the authors would like to thank all the lecturers for their effort in making this possible during this hard time. We have appreciated all workshops and lecturers on this subject since it has been highly helpful throughout this process.

May 23, 2021 Alva Hildell Eriksson

Table of content

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW METHOD ... 7

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW ... 8

2.2.1 INNOVATION ... 8

2.2.2 INDIVIDUAL INNOVATION IN ORGANIZATIONS ... 9

2.2.3 DRIVERS OF INNOVATION ... 10

Internal Drivers of Innovation ... 10

External Drivers of Innovation ... 11

2.2.4 THEORY OF INDIVIDUAL DRIVERS OF INNOVATION ... 12

2.2.5 CREATIVITY ... 13

Drivers of creativity ... 14

2.2.6 DIGITALIZATION ... 16

3 METHODOLOGY & METHOD ... 19

3.1 METHODOLOGY ... 19 3.1.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY ... 19 3.1.2 RESEARCH DESIGN ... 20 3.1.3 RESEARCH APPROACH ... 21 3.2 METHOD ... 21 3.2.1 PRIMARY DATA ... 21 Selected Sample ... 22 3.2.2 SAMPLING APPROACH ... 23 3.2.3 INTERVIEW GUIDE ... 24 3.2.4 DATA ANALYSIS ... 24 3.3 ETHICS ... 26

3.3.1 ANONYMITY &CONFIDENTIALITY ... 26

3.3.2 CREDIBILITY ... 26

3.3.3 TRANSFERABILITY ... 27

3.3.5 CONFIRMABILITY ... 29

4 EMPIRICAL FINDINGS ... 30

4.1 DRIVERS OF CREATIVITY ... 31

4.2 DRIVERS OF INNOVATION ... 33

4.3 ATTITUDES TOWARDS ACCELERATED DIGITALIZATION ... 35

4.4 WORKING ABILITIES ... 37

4.5 THE FUTURE OF DIGITALIZATION ... 39

5 ANALYSIS ... 42

5.1 DRIVERS OF CREATIVITY ... 43

5.2 DRIVERS OF INNOVATION ... 44

5.3 ATTITUDES OF ACCELERATED DIGITALIZATION ... 45

5.4 WORKING ABILITIES ... 47 5.5 FUTURE OF DIGITALIZATION ... 48 5.6 FINAL ANALYSIS ... 49 6 CONCLUSION ... 51 7 DISCUSSION ... 53 7.1 CONTRIBUTIONS ... 53 7.2 LIMITATIONS ... 54 7.3 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS ... 55 7.4 FUTURE RESEARCH ... 56 8 REFERENCES ... 57 9 APPENDIX ... 69 9.1 INTERVIEW GUIDE ... 69 9.2 CONSENT FORM ... 71 9.3 ADDITIONAL QUOTES ... 73

1

Introduction

This chapter gives the reader a detailed background and problem discussion of the accelerated digitalization, followed by the purpose of this study. Further, the introduction is concluded with the research questions which this study aims to answer. Lastly, the key delimitations and essential definitions are provided in order for the reader to understand the concepts throughout this study.

1.1 Background

With the ongoing pandemic spreading around the world breaking out in January 2020 (WHO, 2021), named COVID-19, the demand and use of technology has never been as excessive as it is today (McKinsey, 2020). Precisely, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the world’s digitalization by an average of 6 years (Twilio, 2020). Since this is a relatively new phenomenon, Annika Steiber (2012) argues that future research should investigate the individuals’ ability to adapt to a rapid change in technology and society, leaving a clear research gap within this area. This is further supported by Anderson et al. (2014) who argues that there is a need of investigation in explaining how environmental factors can affect and facilitate individuals’ innovation and creativity within organizations. The increased digitalization has impacted businesses and individuals in their way of operating in multiple ways (Rachinger et al., 2019). Furthermore, individuals along with businesses has been required to adapt, develop and find new strategies in the new business environment in order to stay competitive

(McKinsey, 2020).

As for all countries, the work sector in Sweden has been dramatically affected by the current pandemic (Swedish work environment authority, 2020). Many people have been recommended to work from home in order to decrease the spread of the COVID-19 virus. Following the Swedish guidelines of social distancing (WHO, 2021), individuals are challenged with major changes in normal work practices and processes, for example working remotely ("Coronavirus: How the world of work may change forever", 2021). Furthermore, this has changed individuals’ business environments, strategies and social encounters (WHO, 2021). According to research by McKinsey (2020), the customers and individuals have moved drastically towards online channels where the companies have adapted and responded. For example, some CEO’s have now already made an

announcement that they will let their employees work from home even post the pandemic, including for example Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook (Kelly, 2020). On top of that, the digitalization has influenced individuals’ flexibility and relationship with customers and organizations’ business models (Rachinger et al., 2019). Along with this, it has put pressure on businesses and individuals to be able to follow the rapid digitalization in order to explore the new given business opportunities and to stay competitive and innovative (Rachinger et al., 2019).

The pandemic has forced businesses to find new ways to survive and alternative ways for strategic paths, which in term impacts the working processes and abilities of individuals (Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020). Additionally, COVID-19 has also affected innovation by opening up for different business opportunities to endure the crisis (Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020).

1.2 Problem Discussion

Due to the acceleration of digitalization during the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals’ business environment, strategies and social encounters has rapidly changed (WHO, 2021). Paulus & Dzindolet (2008) argues that innovation cannot occur without people working in companies and that their innovation process is strongly influenced by the current social context. Sweden is a trade-oriented country and therefore expertise and innovation are a high focus from the individual itself (The Swedish Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications, 2015). As the outbreak of COVID-19 has transformed the work environment across thousands of companies, this leaves questions regarding how it has affected the people working in product and service development firms. Moreover, since the pandemic is a relatively new phenomenon and still an ongoing process breaking out in the beginning of 2020 (WHO, 2021), the impact it has on the Swedish workforce and individuals themselves cannot be ignored.

Furthermore, the increase in digitalization has affected individuals’ ways of operating, societal changes and freedom (United Nations, 2021). Paulus & Dzindolet (2008)

for people who are working in product and service development companies since the physical and social interaction plays an essential part in the innovation and creativity process. Thus, due to the social distancing and increased use of technology, issues and concerns arises concerning the impacts these factors might have on individuals working in companies. Currently, most existing research in terms of innovation and creativity focuses on the impact it has on an organizational level (Oldham & Cummings, 1996 & Yaan, 2005). However, there is a need to further investigate how individuals’

perceptions and certain working abilities are affected by a rapid accelerated

digitalization (Cai et al., 2020). Given the large number of individuals that COVID-19 has impacted, this study aims to find how major societal and technology changes affects individuals’ working abilities in terms of innovation and creativity.

1.3 Purpose

In the view of the problem discussion, the purpose of this study is to explore the impact of an accelerated digitalization, mainly due to the outbreak of COVID-19, on the innovative and creative abilities of people working in product and service developing companies in Sweden. Moreover, existing research contributes mainly to knowledge concerning the impact of innovation on an organizational and business model level (Oldham & Cummings, 1996; Yaan, 2005). Therefore, the aim of this research is to fill this gap and develop a theory that will contribute to the understanding of how an accelerated digitalization impacts people working in companies in terms of their innovation and creativity abilities.

This is of importance since the rise of digitalization has forced individuals to work, communicate and develop new strategies much differently (WHO, 2021). Thus,

questioning the ability of people working in companies to still contribute to the Swedish workforce to the same extent as prior COVID-19. This research will contribute to a better understanding of how digitalization impacts the innovation and creativity abilities of people working in companies within the sector of established, product and service developing firms in Sweden. This in order to understand how established firms could in the future utilize an accelerated digitalization to keep its employees as innovative and creative as possible. According to Baporikar (2015), innovation has become one of the

most important areas in any business as it is required in order for a company to stay competitive in todays’ society. If the objective of firms is to achieve innovation in order to gain competitive advantage, one need to fully comprehend the primary factors

driving and affecting it (Kammerlander et al., 2015; De Clercq & Belausteguigoitia, 2015). Therefore, this research will investigate the phenomenon further in order to see how a major involuntary change in the society, increasing digitalization and changing business environment, can impact crucial aspects of individuals’ working abilities. Furthermore, the drivers of innovation and creativity will be examined of people working in product and service developing firms in order to evaluate their similarities and differences. In addition to this, their varying characteristics will also be observed and considered in order to discover the potential influence they may or may not have. Previous research has suggested that innovation is found to be nurtured by certain individuals’ characteristics (Standing et al., 2016), whereas creativity in almost all research is suggested to stimulate innovation (Amabile et al., 1996). Thus, the role of both innovation and creativity, even during time of crisis, has been seen to play an important role for individuals and businesses to succeed (Andrew et al., 2009). There are research concerning the impact of increased technology on organizations and business models, as well as how this leads to an innovative company (Caputo et al., 2021). Although, there is currently little research conducted concerning the impact on the innovation and creativity abilities of individuals working in companies (Oldham & Cummings; 1996 & Yaan, 2005). Therefore, to which extent a changing environment impacts these individual working abilities is still unexplored, leaving a clear research gap to be further investigated.

1.4 Research Question

In align with the purpose of the research combined with the investigated problem

through the literature review, the authors have constructed two research questions which the study will aim to answer. Thus, creating two separate research questions will clarify the understanding of the investigated topic and in that way make it easier for the reader

RQ 1: How is the current digitalization impacting people working in companies in terms of innovation and creativity?

RQ 2: How is COVID-19 impacting people working in companies in terms of innovation and creativity?

1.5 Delimitations

The delimitations of this research includes areas such as the choice of participants, geographical scope and time frame. Therefore, after reflecting and evaluating what to include within this scope of the research, the major important factors to consider were found to be budget, overall time and geographical aspects. Since the research is

conducted in Sweden over a time period of less than five months, the authors decided to narrow down the geographical area to individuals working in companies located in Sweden. This in order for the authors to be able to conduct the interviews in a efficient and effective manner, due to the current circumstances of COVID-19. Furthermore, to conduct this research the authors chose to focus on the perspective and abilities of individuals working in product or service development firms, excluding the perspectives of the companies as well as their overall objectives or motivations. Even though this is a significant aspect, it was chosen to be left out of this research since the aim is to

particularly explore the impact on individuals’ work abilities.

1.6 Definitions

Established product/service development firms: An established firm is described as

an organization which has been in the market for a long time and is recognizable of the public ("Established firm definition | Reverso", 2021). According to ("What Is Product Development?", 2021) a product/service development firm is an organization which brings a new product or idea to the market following by the product’s entire building process.

Digitalization: “Digitalization is the use of digital technologies to change a business

moving to a digital business” ("Definition of Digitalization - Gartner Information Technology Glossary", 2021)

Covid-19: “The coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic is the defining global health crisis of

our time and the greatest challenge we have faced since world war two”. The virus has now spread to every continent around the globe ("Coronavirus disease COVID-19 pandemic | UNDP", 2021).

2

Frame of References

The frame of reference starts with the literature review method which describes how the relevant literature were collected. The purpose of this part is to introduce the reader to existing literature and theories conducted by other researchers in relation to the purpose of this study. In this section, the authors explore previously evaluated literature in order for the reader to gain a better understanding of the key drivers of innovation and creativity and how they are linked together as well as how they are linked to technology. Other relevant literature about innovation, creativity, digitalization, and product/service developing firms are also be provided.

2.1 Literature review method

The collection of information and data is required to carry out any type of research (Fink, 2014). A systematic approach was used to conduct the literature review as it ensured a credible data analysis and generated results that are more transparent and precise in its process (Booth et al., 2016). A systematic approach utilizes existing and normalized methods to determine and critically evaluate relevant research (Fink, 2014). The approach involves a critical way of searching for studies and research related to the chosen topic, giving the reader a clear and detail understanding of what was done to identify and select relevant literature (Cooper et al., 2018). Additionally, using a systematic approach decreases the chances of bias in the review process and allows the authors to work more efficiently (Booth et al., 2016).

A literature review is described as when previous research and literature is collected and summarized from existing studies and articles relevant to the chosen topic (Knopf, 2006). The literature and studies used in a literature review are retrieved from publications, journals and appropriate databases which are generally located using proper academic platforms (Knopf, 2006). In this research, most literature was gathered from publications such as peer-reviewed articles, journals and books using databases such as Google Schoolar, JU Primo and Research Gate. In addition to this, some references found in peer-reviewed articles were used to correctly reference to the original publisher of certain theories. When selecting journals and articles they were first compared to the ABS-list in order to achieve as high quality and reliability as possible. Existing literature is substantial for this research as it contributed with

significant knowledge when formulating the interview questions, including general guidance for the interviews as well as which areas to go more in-depth (Knopf, 2006). Some of the keywords used when searching for literature relevant to this research were

innovation, drivers of innovation, innovation in organizations, product/service

development firms, creativity, drivers of creativity, technology, digitalization and digital transformation. Around 97 articles were reviewed as a result of this research.

Reviewing previous literature relevant to the topic of this thesis provided the authors with necessary information and a more detailed understanding of the chosen topic.

2.2 Literature review 2.2.1 Innovation

The term innovation can be defined as “the generation, acceptance, and implementation of new ideas, processes, products, or services'' (Thompson, 1965). Today, there are multiple definitions of innovation as it is a huge topic that has been viewed from a various number of different perspectives in previous literature (Schumpeter, 1939; De Brentani, 2001 & Baporikra, 2015). Whilst each definition has a unique perspective and meaning, this makes them applicable in different contexts. Schumpeter (1939), being one of the first economist to explore the theory of innovation, described innovation as the “process of industrial mutation, that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one”. In later years, Amabile (1996) further defined innovation as a “successful implementation of creative ideas within an organization”.

To clarify the concept of innovation in regard to this research paper, the term will be interpreted as “the innovation occurring in the processes of making or delivering products and services, including intangibles” (Baporikra, 2015). This suggests that innovation in organizations can occur within the product and/or service development process as well, and not only be referred to as the development of new ideas and products itself. Moreover, innovation in organizations may be seen as a contribution to businesses’ overall performance (De Brentani, 2001). De Brentani (2001) states that

competitive market. This is further supported by Kammerlander et al., (2015) and De Clercq & Belausteguigoitia, (2015) who explains that organizations need innovation due to constant changes in market trends, globalization, new technologies and product diversity. Corresponding to Baregheh et al. (2009) who emphasizes the importance of innovation due to “dynamics of the business environment such as technology and market shifts”. This does to some extent follow the path of Schumpeter (1934) who in earlier years concluded that if a business or an individual aims to make any sort of profit, innovation is necessary. Consequently, innovation was argued to be a necessary driver of competitiveness (Porter & Stern, 1999).

Innovation within businesses was further explored and identified to be a primary mechanism for individuals to survive and elevate in a competitive society (Brouwer, 1991). It has even been argued that if innovation does not exist, it is close to impossible for companies to succeed (Schumpeter, 1942). Moreover, changes and transformations within an economy was suggested to be the essential elements for innovation as well as organizational endurance (Schumpeter, 1942). In recent years, individual’s ability to efficiently manage the flow of specialized expertise and knowledge has been seen to impact the level of innovation (McCraw & Audretsch, 2008). This is further suggested due to todays’ highly competitive global business environment where individuals working in companies have the capability for higher-level competence and learning (Carayannis & Ziemnowicz, 2007). In contrast to this, innovation has also been identified to be the destruction of existing structures and arrangements (Schumpeter, 1942). Thus, putting emphasizes on the fact that innovation influence every economic level in a society and if not handled effectively it can instead create deprivation (Schumpeter, 1942).

2.2.2 Individual Innovation in organizations

One common theme among several of the definitions of innovation include that they incorporate a description of an individual’s capability to generate new ideas and their ability to follow up on them (Souitaris, 2002). This goes in line with Tidd et al. (1997) definition of innovation, describing it as “a process of turning opportunities into practical use”. Whereas individual innovation refers individual’s ability to implement

and exploit creative, new ideas, procedures and products (Pratoom & Savatsomboon, 2012). Innovation in organizations can be found on three different levels in a company within management teams, departments and individuals (Baporikra, 2015). Each level is influenced by a selection of different factors, where innovation of individuals has been found to be greatly impacted by the social context (Amabile, 1983).

Individual innovation has been found to be the foundation for high performance in organizations as it nurtures success in the long term and improves a businesses’ overall competitiveness (Carmeli et al., 2006; Schilling, 2008; Smith, 2002). According to research by Heye (2006), Schilling (2008) and Diliello & Houghton (2006), individual innovation is the result of creativity and self-leadership of individuals. Suggesting that both creativity and self-leadership play important roles in achieving individual

innovation (Diliello & Houghton, 2006; Amabile, 2000). In contrast to this, Kalyar (2011) found evidence that self-leadership does not directly influence innovation. In addition to this, Anderson et al. (2004) argues that creativity alone does not develop or sufficiently encourage innovation. Thus, individuals need to obtain a certain level of self-control that allows them to thrive and succeed when faced with the challenges of creativity (Shalley & Gilson, 2004). Further supported by Cremeli et al. (2006) who determined the inner power to be self-leadership and therefore is an essential quality for individuals to obtain in order to achieve individual innovation.

2.2.3 Drivers of Innovation

Over the last decades, a various number of factors which encourage and drive individuals and organizations to innovate has been identified by researchers (Khali, 2000). In order to provide a better understanding of what drives innovation, the drivers of innovation can be divided into internal and external driving forces (Chen et al., 2013).

Internal Drivers of Innovation

Internal driving forces can be defined as the factors reflecting the characteristics of companies and the decisions made by firms, including internal business objectives such

international markets, hire remarkably skilled workers or simply the nature of business innovation (Chen et al., 2013).

Furthermore, individual characteristics play a significant role in a worker’s ability to innovate within a business (Standing et al. 2016). A workforce with strong management skills has been identified to be one of the main internal drivers for successful

innovation. This includes innovation at the frontier level of new technology

development and the adoption of existing technology, since both requires individuals to develop and adapt to new complex digital techniques (Nelson & Phelps, 1966).

Other internal factors that have been found to foster a company’s innovation process includes technology strategy, teamwork, management and delegation (Major & Cordey-hayes, 2000; Kaufmann & Tödtling, 2002). This was partly questioned in a study which discovered that teamwork is not regarded as significantly important for large firms when directly examining the drivers of innovation (Koc & Ceylan, 2005; Damanpour & Gopalakrishnan, 1998; Linton, 2000).

According to Lindberg (1992) and Linton (2000), in order for an innovation process to succeed, the involvement of workers from different internal functional areas are

required. Meaning that innovation is somewhat driven by the combination of ideas from various departments since it provides different perspectives. This is consistent with Green & Aiman-Smith (2004) who discovered that large-scale developments become more successful when a group of individuals can extend themselves into a variety of perspectives within the organization.

External Drivers of Innovation

External driving forces are those external factors that are beyond the control of

managers, shaping the general business environments which companies operate in and ultimately promotes innovation (Chen et al., 2017). This includes external factors such as market competition, technology development, consumer demand or government interventions (Chen et al., 2017). The external environment that an organisation

operates in has been seen to have a significant impact on innovation. Thus, individual’s ability to innovate is sensitive to the quality of the business environment they are

operating in. In addition to this, the constant improvement of new technology strongly encourages enterprises to reach successful innovations. With the development of new technology, individuals along with organisations are able to quicker adapt and

understand broader areas, such as unknown changes in consumers demand (Chen et al., 2017). Furthermore, Billing (2020) argues that innovative firms are more adaptable to external threats and crisis, such as COVID-19.

In addition to this, according to Van Knippenberg et al. (2004), innovation in theory is generally facilitated by being exposed to diverse perspectives. Specifically, as

individuals integrate and unite diverse perspectives, they increase the ability and knowledge to generate new ideas and bring on a higher level of elaboration of task-relevant information (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004). Thus, this can be identified as an external driver of innovation since it involves new perspectives or inspirations of individuals outside of the organization, for example their market competitors.

2.2.4 Theory of individual drivers of innovation

(Figure1). This model integrates previously discussed research on drivers for innovation by combining various perspectives by recognized authors.

In line with Da Silvia & Davis (2011) and other researchers, Standing et al., (2016) states that individuals’ characteristics play a key role in the ability to innovate (Figure 1). These certain characteristics includes personality traits, fearless of failure,

preferences towards collaboration and network, confidence and self-reflection (Standing et al., 2016). Moreover, Cerinšek & Dolinšek (2009) suggests that the underlying

characteristics influencing individual’s ability to innovate includes flexibility,

ambitiousness and curiosity. Cerinšek & Dolinšek (2009) further argues that personality traits can be explored as elements that gives purpose and directions for each and every individual.

Moreover, to contribute to individuals’ innovation capabilities within organizations, the integration between coworkers, managers and the working environment plays an

essential role (Standing et al., 2016). This can be challenging due to the fact that several components need to be taken into consideration and managed in an effective way in order to encourage innovation (Standing et al., 2016).

Major & Cordey-hayes (2000) and Kaufmann & Tödtling (2002) along with Van Knippenberg et al., (2004) suggested that teamwork tend to encourage innovation, which is clearly integrated and developed upon in the model (Figure 1)(Standing et al., 2016). Standing et al., (2016) found that in order for innovation to flourish within teams, the access to technology, knowledge and education must be given by the organization.

2.2.5 Creativity

In long-standing research, Guilford (1959) defined creativity broadly as problem solving containing four basic steps: problem recognition, idea generation, idea evaluation and solution validation. This was later developed by researchers who

explored four key factors into the concept of creativity. Thus, four key factors which are critical within the success of efforts to nurture creativity in individuals working in companies (Rhodes 1961 & Barron 1969). Rhodes (1961) referred to these as the 4Ps;

person, process, press, and product. Firstly, person defined as the individual characteristics, process as the cognitive style, press as the business environment in which creativity occur, and lastly product as the result or solution (Rhodes 1961). In addition to the early research on creativity (Guilford, 1959; Rhodes, 1961; Barron, 1969), Amabile (1983) presented one of the first analysis of the social context of creativity. Different from previous research, Amabile (1983) published a model of creativity where she integrated the social context and determined motivation as one of the major factors within creativity (Amabile, 1983).

In addition to this, certain qualities of individuals have been widely recognized to promote creativity (Amabile, 1996 & Guilford 1959). Some among these qualities are curiosity, self-motivation, social skills, risk-orientation, flexibility and commitment (Guliford, 1959). Sternberg et al. (1996) stated that “creativity is as much an attitude toward life as a matter of ability”, suggesting that individual’s attitude plays an important role in the actual ability to be creative (Sternberg et al., 1996). This is proposed as adults’ creative potential is constantly suppressed by the high-level

intellectual society (Sternberg et al., 1996). In line with a previous research (Amabile & Gryskiewicz, 1987), stating that certain qualities of environments promote creativity. Some of those environmental qualities include freedom, good project management, sufficient resources, recognition, encouragement, various organizational characteristics, and challenge (Amabile & Gryskiewicz, 1989).

Drivers of creativity

In later years, extensive research on creativity has been conducted elaborating on these early suggestions, including both research exploring the concept of creativity but also what drivers it (Amar & Januj 2008). In order to gain a better understanding of which factors influences and drives creativity, Amabile (1996) generated a further developed componential model (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Componential model of drivers of creativity (Amabile 1996)

The model (Figure 2) includes four essential factors impacting creativity: thinking skills, expertise, motivations, and environment (Amabile, 1996). Emphasizing the importance of the business environment as it has a large effect on creativity. Thus, it impacts not only creativity itself but also the three prime components generating creativity: expertise, creative thinking skills and task motivation. Examining these different drivers of creativity can be significant for individuals and businesses in order to raise consciousness and stay innovative (Amabile, 1996). These are important aspects for any organization in order to keep up with competitiveness in a tough market.

In addition to this, creativity has been identified to be encouraged and inspired by the concept of brainstorming (Paulus & Brown, 2007). Brainstorming is defined as “a cognitive activity” (Paulus & Brown, 2007) in which individuals “generate ideas by using their long-term memory” for relevant topics or issues to connect to the problem being investigated (Paulus & Brown, 2007). In addition to this, brainstorming has been found to some extent drive creativity in group work.

To conclude, the drivers of creativity are found to be several. One driver that can be seen to impact all levels of organizations including individuals, business models and strategies is the environment in which they operate in (Amabile, 1996). Moreover, a working environment which supports brainstorming and individuals’ opinions has been seen to encourage creativity (Paulus & Brown, 2007). In addition to this, certain

individual drivers of creativity (Guliford, 1959). Where level of motivation can be influenced by personal interest and ambition, but also other external factors such as competitors or changes in the environment.

2.2.6 Digitalization

Vallo et al. (2020) describes digitalization as ”technical, organizational, and social changes occasioned by the ongoing integration of digital technologies into professional and private life.” Whereas Parviainen et al. (2017) defines digitalization as the process of changing existing products or services into digital new forms. Moreover, Parviainen et al. (2017) states that digitalization can be seen as the major trend effecting changes in the society and business environment, both in the long term and short term. On top of this, Martinez (2019) argues that along with the present digital era, various challenges and opportunities occurs which causes an increase in the need to implement digital solutions into businesses.

According to Parviainen et al. (2017) digitalization can be referred to as a change in various levels within the organization. These steps include the process level,

organizational level, business level and society level. The impact of these steps on the way of operating and habits for individuals are major, for instance operational processes and the implementation of digital capabilities that are based on collaborations and interaction between workers (Parviainen et al., 2017).

Furthermore, collaboration has always been a necessary part of human

life. However, with the new digital era, including internet and the use of mobile device, this has brought a new layer of opportunities and challenges on this matter (Riemer et al., 2019). On top of this, to be able to collaborate online without the physical contact is not effortless since it requires new and more complex competences from

every individual (Riemer et al., 2019). Riemer et al. (2019) further argues that along with digitalization, there are more pressure on individual’s ability for activities and projects, where the pressure on individual’s innovation process has become stronger in terms of developing new digital gatherings.

However, due to the increase in the digital networks and digitalization, the strength of competition around the world has increased during the last years (Ignat, 2017). Ignat (2017) further argues that for some companies, it is hard keep their competitive advantage due to the rapid expansion of digitalization and networking. Therefore, the economic results for organizations are highly depending on individuals’ innovation capability. To conclude, the innovative abilities of people who are working in companies are not only an important factor for organizations to succeed, but also essential for the business (Ignat, 2017).

According to previous research (Oldham & Da Silva, 2015), digitalization and the use of technologies provides individuals with access to new information and knowledge. Therefore, digitalization has been seen to have a positive effect on individuals’ creativity abilities through the diversity and variety of sources provided as well as the simplified access to it (Oldham & Da Silva, 2015). On the other hand, Oldham & Da Silva (2015) also suggests that digitalization and the use of technology can produce an overload of information for individuals which instead can lead to a decrease in the creative process. Furthermore, Waldfogel (2021) argues that the changes in

digitalization and technology have decreased the need for physical investments into new products. This in terms enables workers to bring new products to the market developed from individuals’ creative side and projects (Waldfogel, 2021).

Agostini et al. (2019) argues that digital technologies can spread ideas faster which has resulted in employees becoming more aware and focused on the innovation, creativity and communicative aspect within an organization. Thus, requiring improvements, higher competences and new learnings from the individuals. Therefore, digitalization and the impact on people working in companies requires professional development in the early stage of the digitalization process in order to succeed (Agostini et al., 2019). In line with this, the effect of digitalization requires the people working in companies to be able to find a good working solution in order to cooperate, establish social connections and communicate in the digital area (Agostini et al., 2019). However, Manyika et al. (2015) argues that individuals and companies that uses digital tools and take advantage of the digitalization is automatically increasing their operational efficiency, innovation capabilities and a higher productivity in the workforce.

To conclude, in order for the authors to answer the research question, a literature review based on the concept of innovation and creativity along with the drivers for people working in companies in terms of innovation and creativity was needed to be addressed. Furthermore, in order to answer the research question based on the accelerated

digitalization, a literature review including previous research concerning digitalization and the effect of digitalization on individuals was also required. However, previous research was found to be mainly focusing on the impact on innovation and creativity upon an organizational level (Oldham & Cummings, 1996 and Yaan, 2005). There has also been previous research concerning the effects of an increased use of technology and and the effect on firms’ business models (Caputo et al., 2021). Additionally, COVID-19 is a relatively new phenomenon and an ongoing process, which leaves a clear gap for the authors to fill due to that it has not yet been possible to make any long-term predictions of the outcomes from the pandemic. Therefore, there is currently limited research concerning the effect on people working in companies and their working abilities.

3

Methodology & Method

The following section will describe the selection of methodology and method of the conducted research. This includes explaining the chosen methodological philosophy, design and approach, followed by the appropriate data collection and analysis. To conclude this section, the fundamental principles of the research quality and ethics will be presented and clarified.

3.1 Methodology

3.1.1 Research Philosophy

In general, the research philosophies determine the research design of a study (Collis & Hussey, 2014). A research philosophy refers to a system of beliefs and assumptions regarding how data and knowledge about a certain topic is collected and analysed (Collis & Hussey, 2014). These certain types of beliefs held by the authors tend to lead to the establishment of a particular paradigm (Creswell, 1994). Thus, the two most commonly used paradigms for research philosophy are positivism and interpretivism (Collis & Hussey, 2014). Positivism is a philosophy with a rather objective and scientific worldview, in contrast to interpretivism which views the world in more subjective and constructivist way (Collis & Hussey, 2014).

To determine which of the two is more suitable for this research, it is essential to explore the philosophical assumptions that lay the foundation of the paradigms:

epistemology, ontology or axiological values (Bryman, 2008). Considerably, this

research can be primarily based on an interpretivism philosophy as it is a qualitative research with an inductive approach (Collis & Hussey, 2014). In addition to this, this research is interpretivism as it takes a subjectivism stand since the researchers believes that knowledge is based on the perception and perspectives of the interviewees (Collis & Hussey, 2014). Following this philosophy, the authors are aware that the results of the study are biased (Saunders et al., 2007). Moreover, with the aim of the study being to explore the impact of an accelerated digitalization through workers’ perceptions and connections to the topic, an interpretivist philosophy was most appropriate. Thus, it allowed the authors to explore the participants’ various perspectives of accelerated digitalization in relation to the purpose and problem of the research (Saunders et al., 2007).

3.1.2 Research Design

For this study, a clear research design is essential to answer the research question. The research design signifies the overall strategy of the study, including the rational and logical way chosen to effectively address the research problem (De Vaus, 2001). In order to closely examine workers within the product and service developing industry, a qualitative research approach was chosen. In contrast to a quantitative research which collects and analyzes numerical data (Babbie & Earl, 2010), a qualitative research approach is more suitable to examine complex phenomenon and their primary causes (Creswell, 1994). The approach is more descriptive which allowed the researchers to analyze processes, meanings and understandings gained from the interviewees’ responses (Creswell, 1994). In addition to this, it enabled the authors to use these responses to generate a more detailed and in-depth understanding of underlying motivations and drivers (Creswell, 1994).

Moreover, an exploratory research design was chosen for this study. An exploratory study is suitable due to that the existing literature on the subject is limited. According to Saunders et al. (2009), an exploratory study is a valuable approach when the author aims to find explanations of an unexplored and undefined phenomena along with

outcomes of a problem. However, in order to conduct an exploratory approach, there are ways of collecting data and methods that need to be considered. These specific methods include research of existing literature and conducting interviews from focus groups or interviewees that are seen as experts in the exploring subject (Saunders et al., 2009). An exploratory study is considered to be obliging when conducting a qualitative research method which the authors is pursuing to complete (Saunders et al., 2009). Moreover, when conducting an exploratory study, the authors must be aware that the direction of the result might be different and new insights about the subject may occur (Saunders et al., 2009).

In addition to this, the research design was inspired by the grounded theory. According to Saunders et al., (2009) a grounded theory design is helpful when the authors aim to explain patterns and build a theory based upon an unexplored phenomenon (Saunders et

future research to see how the accelerated digitalization due to COVID-19 has impacted people working in companies in terms of their innovation and creativity abilities.

3.1.3 Research Approach

In this research, an inductive approach was chosen for analysis of the qualitative data. An inductive approach aims at developing a theory, which was more applicable than carrying out a deductive approach that aims to test an already existing theory (Perry & Jensen, 2001). An inductive research approach was chosen as it is used to explain a certain phenomenon by searching for themes and patterns from observations (Bernard, 2011). One of the purposes of using an inductive approach is to identify clear

connections between the research intentions and the findings from the explored data (Thomas, 2006). In regard to this research paper, an inductive approach enabled the authors to begin with detailed observations of how COVID-19 and an increased digitalization has impacted workers and move towards more abstract generalizations and ideas concerning the subject (Neuman, 2003). Furthermore, since the aim of this study is to explore how an accelerated digitalization impacts individuals working in companies, using an inductive research approach will be beneficial due to its flexibility and ability to build a framework (Lodico et al., 2010). Moreover, it will generate the possibility for the authors to provide meaning and understanding from a set of

observations, and in that order identify patterns and themes in order to provide a theory (Saunders et al., 2012).

3.2 Method

3.2.1 Primary Data

To collect the primary data for this research, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a total of ten participants (see table 1). Semi-structured interviews can be described as the process of having a list of unsolved questions and observations where the authors may change the interview questions from interview to interview (Saunders et al., 2009). Semi-structured interviews were chosen as it allowed the researchers to prepare open questions in advance, with guidance from the literature review in order to help monitor the conversation in the right direction (Saunders et al., 2009). Moreover, it gave the authors the possibility to control the process and keep the respondents in line with the subject (Bernard, 1988). At the same time as it gave the participants time to open up and

respond with more in-depth information in regard to the aim of the study (Bernard, 1988).

The interview questions were open-ended questions, enabling the researchers to guide the interviews and go out of script if necessary (Saunders et al., 2009). Thus, if any of the questions were perceived as unclear, the authors were able to adjust the question to the person and their understanding (Saunders et al., 2009). Conducting one-to-one, semi-structured interviews provided the authors with deep and detailed responses and rich qualitative data. The open-ended questions were asked from the two topics in the interview guide (see appendix 9.1): innovation & creativity, digitalization & COVID-19. In order to make the participants feel as comfortable as possible, they were given the choice to answer the questions in either English or Swedish. By doing this, the

participants were able to give more detailed answers since they felt confident and comfortable in the surroundings and spoken language. Although, all questions were asked in English by the researchers in order to avoid any misinterpretations and confusions that might have occurred in a translation.

Furthermore, the semi-structured interviews were conducted over Microsoft Teams, Zoom, the phone or face-to-face. The aim was to conduct as many interviews as possible with video or face-to-face since it allowed the researchers to identify body language and other non-verbal signs. In total, eight out of ten interviews were carried out with video or face-to-face. In addition to this, all primary data was collected by both note-taking and audio-recording the interviews. Combining knowledge from the

literature review and interviews enabled the authors to develop an in-depth qualitative design suitable for this study (Saunders et al., 2009).

Selected Sample

Table 1 is an overview of the participants taking part in the interviews for this qualitative study. The table shows the participant’s work position, duration of the interview, location of the interview as well as what type of interview. The age range of the participants were 24-60 years old, and all the participants are working within

Table 1: Participants Interviewed

3.2.2 Sampling Approach

The individuals participating in the semi-structured interviews were selected from established product and service developing companies located in Sweden. The choice of interviewing individuals from only product and service developing firms was done in order to only include individuals working in industries where creativity and innovation are important aspects in the everyday work life.

In relation to this research paper, established companies were defined as businesses that have been in the market for more than five years, including companies such as Volvo, Ericsson and Vattenfall. This was significant to the research as it ensured that the companies had been in the market before the outbreak of COVID-19. Thus, they had established working styles and strategies prior to COVID-19 and thereafter been forced to change several ways of their daily working routines.

In order to select the participants, a purposive sampling approach was used. Thus, using a purposive sampling method allowed the researchers to start out with a certain area and perspective that they wish to examine and, in that way, seek out appropriate participants who met all the criteria of those perspectives (Kelly, 2010; Mason, 2002; Robinson 2014). Moreover, a purposive sampling method enabled the authors to combine a number of non-probability sampling techniques as it relied on their judgements when it came to selecting the relevant participants (Sharma, 2017). Where non-probability sampling methods refers to when all people do not have an equivalent probability of

being selected for the sample (Saunders & Lewis, 2012).In addition to this, using a purposive sampling method improved the rigidity of the study as well as the

trustworthiness of the findings (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Hence, it increased the depth rather than range of the understanding as the selected sample is relatively small but purposively selected (Palinkas et al., 2015). A more in-depth understanding was achieved since the approach endorsed the authors to select participants that were most likely to generate appropriate and valuable information in regard to the purpose of this research (Kelly, 2010).

3.2.3 Interview Guide

An interview guide was generated in order for the authors to attain a consistency in their interviews (Appendix 9.1). In regard to the purpose of this research, the interview guide was divided into three sections: Personal Questions, Innovation & Creativity and

Digitalization & COVID-19. This was conducted in order to achieve a greater

understanding of the respondents’ perspective and perceptions. Thus, the innovation and creativity questions were more general, whereas the questions concerning digitalization and COVID-19 were focused more towards their working environment and abilities.

3.2.4 Data Analysis

In this study, a thematic analysis was used to analyze the primary data following the structure from the Gioia method (Gioia et al., 2014). A thematic analysis refers to the process of recognizing and analyzing patterns within qualitative data to be able to determine common themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The objective of using a thematic analysis in this study was to generate a qualitative data analysis of high quality. To follow the inductive research approach, the aim was to systematically transform the findings from the interviews into a summary of key codes and themes in order to later develop and present a conceptual model (Erlingsson & Brysiewicz, 2017). Therefore, the gioia method was used when building the data structure (Figure 3). Initially

identifying the first order codes from patterns overlapping in the interviews, then group them into second order categories in order to finally establish the relevant themes. The themes identified in this study are the headings throughout the findings and analysis

inductive approach as it gave them an overview of the data collected (Gioia et al., 2014), making it easier to follow the grounded theory and develop an accurate theory. A thematic analysis was most suitable for this research since the semi-structured

interviews addressed questions regarding peoples’ views and opinions to the chosen and investigated topic (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The process of a thematic analysis involved generating codes, categories, and themes generated from patterns in the interviews, specifically by identifying underlying systems of meanings (Taylor & Ussher, 2001). Moreover, the systematic steps in the thematic analysis were the following:

In the first step of the thematic analysis, the authors became familiar with the data. In order to do this the researchers individually listened to the recorded interviews and then carefully transcribed each interview at a time. After transcribing the interviews, the authors read and re-read the transcriptions as well as taking individual notes of the data. During the next step, the authors conducted a systematic coding of the data. This was done by finding overlapping patterns in the transcribed data collected from the

interviews. In the third step, the authors created categories that was initially taken from the first order codes which were developed from the patterns and quotes in the collected data. Afterwards, the authors conducted themes based on the discovered categories. According to Braun & Clarke (2006), the development of coding and themes are always guided by the research questions of the study. However, the authors took validity and reliability of the themes into consideration. Meaning that the themes were overlooked and edited until the authors felt satisfied with each one. This was done in order to address the research questions and gather only the most relevant data to present in the findings section (Braun & Clarke 2006). After overlooking the themes of the data collected, names were developed for each one. Moreover, the developed themes were used as guideline for the findings section below. In the last step of the thematic analysis the authors reported and described the data collected in a systematical way following the layout of the interview guide (Appendix 9.1). This in order for the authors to be able to answer the research questions in a clear and structured way for the reader to gain a better understanding of the subject.

3.3 Ethics

The researchers’ aim is to collect a high amount of rich qualitative information in order to conduct the study and answer the research questions. To ensure that the data collected from the interviews and previous research are with high quality, some ethical aspects were needed to take into consideration. These includes Anonymity & Confidentiality, Credibility, Transferability, Dependability and Confirmability which will be discussed in the following paragraphs:

3.3.1 Anonymity & Confidentiality

The ethical aspects of anonymity and confidentiality needs to be considered when conducting a qualitative study (Allen, 2017). These are the ethical practices which protects the privacy of the participants when collecting the data. In order to follow these ethical aspects, the researchers made sure that the participants felt comfortable during the whole interview. Before the interview began, the participants signed a form (Appendix 9.2) and the researchers explained that the data collected will be anonymously written in the study. By letting the participants read this form, the

interviews were conducted in open and honest environments free from judgements and counterarguments. This includes possible other companies or colleagues mentioned in the interview. This is due to that it is important that the participants are not identifiable with the study and therefore contains anonymous (Allen, 2017). The authors also made sure to explain that the recording will be kept only on the researchers’ private phones and computers, inaccessible to other people than the researchers themselves.

3.3.2 Credibility

According to Shenton (2004), the importance of ensuring the credibility of a research is one of the most vital ethical factors needed for consideration in order to establish trustworthiness of the research. In particular, credibility of the study concerns the issue about whether the findings of the study are accurate to the reality or not (Shenton, 2004).

sources of data collected to conclude the understanding of the subject. Regarding this study, the triangulation procedure was used in several ways. Firstly, in order to conduct the study as trustworthy as possible, an examination was conducted of previous research in order to frame the relevant literature that are discussed and presented in the literature review (Clowdhury, 2015). Second, a comparison of the interviews was made by people working in different companies, which therefore have different viewpoints of the

subject (Cohen & Crabtree, 2006).

Due to the ongoing pandemic, the authors aimed to gather participants that they know of directly or indirectly but still following the purposive sampling method. This was done in order for the participants to feel as secure as possible, especially for the participants where the interviews were conducted face-to-face. Saunders et al. (2009) argues that by using the existing contacts, the level of credibility may be higher. This is due to the trusted intentions from the researchers by knowing them beforehand (Saunders et al., 2009).

3.3.3 Transferability

Transferability can be described as the process of choosing relevant participants that can in some way represent the whole population and a generalization of the context.

Researchers and readers can therefore make connections between the data collected and the entire population’s behaviors and practices (Given, 2008). A high degree of

transferability implies that the result of the given research can be connected and transferred to other given context, which lies above the scope of the study (Given, 2008).

Concerning this study, the authors aimed to conduct the interviews with participants closely linked to the aim of the study. In particular, people who are working in

companies that produces either services or products where innovation and creativity has important roles. This for the authors to be able to ensure that the findings are closely related to a generalization that can be utilized by the larger context and potentially even the entire population (Given, 2008).

Furthermore, the authors have carefully showed the reader step by step of how this study was conducted. This in order for the reader to determine themself about

transferability. However, there are cultural and geographically aspects that needs to be considered when discussing transferability. Since this study aims to draw conclusions about how people who are working in product and service development firms in Sweden are affected by digitalization in terms of innovation and creativity, the result might not be transferable into other cultures or geographical places for this reason (Given, 2008).

3.3.4 Dependability

In a qualitative research, dependability is important to establish in order to obtain trustworthiness (Sandelowski, 1986). Dependability is defined as the consistency and reliability of the findings (Polit et al. 2006 & Streubert, 2007). Thus, it determines to which degree the outcomes of a study would be consistent if repeated or replicated in a similar environment and with similar participants (Guba, 1981). Dependability can be achieved by obtaining the research process in systematic, attentive, and

well-documented way.

In this research, the following steps were taken to accomplish a high level of dependability. Firstly, by audio-recording all interviews and afterwards carefully

transcribe them, the authors primarily increased the dependability of the study (Shenton, 2004). After this step, the data was further interpreted individually by both authors and then triangulated through discussing the findings with each other, and if necessary, also the participants. In addition to this, the researchers made sure to be consistent with a reflexivity journal, where reflexivity is defined as a “self-assessment of subjectivity” (Shenton, 2004 & Streubert, 2007). By doing this, the authors reduced potential

personal bias. Following this, transparency and liquidity of the research procedures was increased which in order increased the dependability of the research (Guba, 1981 & Malterud, 2001).

3.3.5 Confirmability

When the areas of credibility, transferability, and dependability are all accomplished, confirmability is secured (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). Confirmability includes ensuring that the authors’ explanations and findings are distinctly acquired from the gathered data (Tobin & Begley, 2004). Thus, it is essential for any research to clearly illustrate how the researchers have come to their conclusions and interpretations (Tobin & Begley, 2004). In this research, the authors made sure to thoroughly and in-detail explain each step and procedure taken in order to accomplish this. This is important for any

investigation as other researchers and professors needs to be able to reproduce the results (Lincoln & Guba, 1989).

Moreover, in order to be able to replicate the results of a research, it is vital that the findings are the outcome of an independent work that does not involve conscious or unintentional bias (Lincoln & Guba, 1989). By asking open-ended questions in the semi-structured interviews, allowing the respondents to answer freely, any guidance or personal bias from the researchers was avoided (Lincoln & Guba, 1989). This was further followed by the authors confirming certain aspects with the participants in order to steer away from potential interpretation bias as well as to ensure that no conclusions were based on the author’s opinions. Furthermore, by pursuing the following three components of audio-recording, triangulation, and systematic journaling, confirmability is achieved (Bowen, 2009). In order to sustain confirmability for this research, the researchers implemented these three components in a systematical way.

4

Empirical Findings

In the following section, the empirical findings produced from ten semi-structured interviews will be presented and later formed into a conceptual framework in the analysis section. The chapter is divided into five themes and each participant is referred to as “participant #” followed by a given number in order to obtain the anonymity of each respondent and make it easier for the reader to follow.

Based on the data collected in the interviews, the following paragraphs will be divided into five established themes (Figure 3). The themes emerged by grouping the second order categories which were created from the first order codes identified from patterns in the interviews (Figure 3). The authors concluded these three levels of: themes, second order categories and first order codes (Figure 3), after carefully familiarizing, re-reading and evaluating the transcribed interviews. To clarify this, the themes are clearly

presented in Figure 3 below together with the first order codes and second order categories. Moreover, the themes explored are; Drivers of creativity, Drivers of

Innovation, Attitutes towards accelerated digitalization, Working abilities and Future of digitalization.

1st _{order codes 2}nd _{order categories Themes}

Firstly, it is essential to mention that most respondents somehow combined creativity and innovation with each other (Appendix 9.3). Specifically, most of the respondents perceived creativity as a result or vital part of innovation, being an essential element to obtain in order to be innovative (Appendix 9.3). This was established in order to lay the foundation of the topic and gain a better perspective of the participants’ current

understanding of innovation and creativity.

4.1 Drivers of Creativity

Drawing from the identified patterns in the interviews, the first order codes were constructed creating three second order categories with regards to the explored theme “drivers of creativity”. The second order categories identified included “Colleagues”,

“Curiosity” and “Result-oriented” (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Coding structure of drivers of creativity

Colleagues could be identified as a category as all interviewees argued that people and

communication with co-workers are important factors that drives their creativity. This in order to brainstorm their ideas with other people to be more creative and motivated to come up with new ideas. Furthermore, they argued that social skills and the ability to be open-minded are important factors to contain in order to be creative. For example, Participant #6 clearly explained the importance of brainstorming as:

“As soon as I get the chance to brainstorm my ideas with someone else, I

get more creative and motivated”

Further, Participant #6 similarly reasoned:

“Some personal characteristics that are positive towards this is that I am

open-minded, social, thinking loud and not afraid of coming up with bad ideas. The ideas might be stupid but you have yo think loud and big”.

In addition to this, there were participants which were not align with the others’ perceptions connected to the drivers and motivations of creativity. Based on their perceptions, they were instead drawing conclusions based on their previous experiences and interests as well as connected them to their personal lifes. On this matter, a pattern found was the interest for the industry and finding inspiration from others. This was clearly expressed by Participant #8:

“I would say that my interest for this working industry is the biggest

driving force, for example it would be much harder for me to develop dishwashing machines instead of beauty products”.

Likewise, Participant #10 stated:

“What drives me is what I myself think is fun and exciting to see. A lot

comes from my own interests. For example, I am looking a lot into Pinterest and for example thinking about what I have seen and experienced while I have been out traveling.”

Together with this, some of the participants argued that being curious and thinking outside the box are two other factors that drives their creativity abilities. For example, Participant #7 connected curiosity with thinking outside the box by expressing:

“If I see another company doing something cool, then we can do it a bit

cooler if we do it in another way. This makes me think outside the box. This characteristic drives me, since I see everything as a competition”.

Additionally, suggested by Participant #2 who argued:

“My creativity is probably driven by my curiosity and also my enjoyment of actually being in that position. I have always enjoyed working in groups and trying to form solutions together.”

Another pattern taken from the interviews included the interest of providing high value for the customers. This together with motivation established the last category of drivers of creativity which is result-oriented. For instance, this was argued by