TVE-MILI 18 020
Master’s Thesis 30 credits
June 2018
Developing Innovative Thinking
in an IT company
Case Study
Daniela Mieko Aragaki
Elvita Tomina
Master Programme in Industrial Management and Innovation
2
Abstract
Developing Innovative Thinking in an IT company
Daniela Mieko Aragaki and Elvita Tomina
Innovation is most commonly associated with the process of implementing useful ideas to create value-added products, services and processes in an organization. However, creativity comes first as a fundamental part of the innovation process and essentially a precondition for innovation. Therefore, this thesis will look into the IT company, Visma Enterprise, more specifically their Latvian division, and investigate how they can promote creativity within their organization.
The aim of the study is to determine what type of activities and factors would support creativity and innovation in Visma Enterprise.
In order to evaluate the current situation at Visma Enterprise authors used Ekvall Situational Outlook Questionnaire and found that employees have lack of motivation and that they have problems with communication between teams. To improve the current situation authors suggested that by organizing activities like hackathons to train employees, guide them through the process and show them what is expected from them and how it can be achieved.
Keywords: Innovation; Creativity; Idea Generation; Creative Climate; Visma
Enterprise
Supervisor: Arturs Ernstreits Subject reader: Sofia Wagrell Examiner: David Sköld TVE-MILI 18 020
Printed by: Uppsala Universitet
Faculty of Science and Technology
3
Popular summary
Innovation is essential for companies to stay competitive and successful. However, without creativity as idea generation it is impossible to generate and implement new and useful products or value adding services. Therefore, this thesis will seek to investigate how employees can become more creative. And the aim of the study is to determine what type of activities and other factors would support creativity that in the long run can lead to innovation in Visma Enterprise Latvia. In order to achieve it, the authors used three methods Amabile (1996), Ekvall (1996) and Martins and Terblanche (2003) to evaluate existing organizational culture and thus answering to the first research question: Which are the factors in the existing organizational culture that play a major role in influencing creativity and innovation? By identifying missing parts of creative climate the authors will be able to suggest possible improvements and thus answering the second research question: How creativity and innovation can be fostered in the organization.
4
Acknowledgements
We would first like to thank our subject reader Sofia Wagrell of Uppsala University. Her continuous support, enthusiasm, patience and extensive knowledge were highly appreciated and contributed to the development and writing of this thesis. We are gratefully indebted to her for her very valuable comments on this thesis. We also thank our classmates that took part in the seminars over the development of this thesis, with their comments that contributed to enrich this work.
We would also like to thank our supervisor Arturs Ernstreits and Director of Development Valerija Makijenko for allowing us to conduct this thesis at Visma Enterprise, as well as all engineers that volunteered to the interviews.
Finally, we would like to express our profound gratitude to our families and partners for providing us with support and encouragement throughout the development of this thesis. This accomplishment would not have been possible without them.
Throughout this thesis, the authors have always strived to work together and discuss the outcomes of this work and next steps, although we had faced many communication challenges due to time zone differences.
5
Table of Contents
Popular summary 3 Acknowledgements 4 1. Introduction 7 1.1 Background 71.2 About the company 9
1.3 Problem description 9
1.4 Research objective 10
2. Theoretical framework 12
2.1 Creativity and Innovation 12
2.1.1 Creativity 12
2.1.2 Innovation 13
2.2 Factors that influence creativity and innovation 13
2.3 Analytical framework 18
2.3.1 Strategy 18
2.3.2 Structure 18
2.3.3 Support mechanisms 19
2.3.4 Behavior that encourages innovation 20
2.3.5 Communication 21 2.3.6 Motivation 21 3. Methodology 22 3.1 Research strategy 22 3.1.1 Research approach 22 3.1.2 Research method 23 3.2 Research design 23 3.3 Data collection 25 3.3.1 Sample selection 25
3.3.2 Interviews with engineers 26
3.3.3 Interview with the manager 27
6
3.7 Limitations 30
4. Empirical Data 31
4.1 Vision, mission and values 31
4.2 Structure 31
4.3 Current innovation-supporting methods 32
4.4 Employee opinions of possible improvements for Visma 34
4.5 Employees generating new ideas 34
4.6 Most innovative experience for employees at Visma 36
4.7 Factors which hinder innovation 37
4.8 Employee communication 38
4.9 Innovation and measurements of it 38
4.10 Mistakes and attitude towards mistakes from the employee side 38
4.11 Answers from the questionnaire 39
4.12 Lack of motivation 44
5. Analysis 46
5.1 Strategy 46
5.2 Structure 46
5.3 Support mechanisms 47
5.4 Behaviour that encourages innovation 48
5.5 Communication 49
5.6 Motivation 50
6. Conclusions 52
6.1 Conclusion from the case study 52
6.2 Managerial implications for enhancing creativity at Visma 53
6.3 Theoretical implications 54
6.4 Future research and consideration 55
References 56
Appendix 63
Table 1: Ekvall's 9 dimensions 14
Table 2: Visma Latvia companies 30
Table 3: Results of dimensions ranking 41
Figure 1: Determinants of organizational culture 16
Figure 2: Organizational structure of Visma Enterprise Latvia 31
Figure 3: Results of dimension ranking 42
7
1. Introduction
The introductory chapter presents the background, describes the problem and the company which is chosen for the thesis. Furthermore, the chapter also explains the purpose, state the research question.
1.1 Background
Over the past few decades, innovations have become more central to companies in order to remain competitive in the market (Anderson, Potočnik and Zhou, 2014; Lewis and Moultrie, 2005; Naser, Sajad and Maryam, 2017; Teece, Pisano and Shuen, 2016). Engel et al. (2016) illustrates the key role of innovations stating that:
“Today, more than half of the executives anticipate that their organizations will lose one-fifth or more in revenues within five years as a result of disruptive innovation if they do not change the ways they operate.” (Engel et al., 2016, p.4)
Innovations depend on many different factors in order to be successful (Mathisen and Einarsen, 2004; Oskarsson, 2003). Nevertheless, this thesis will focus on the very first step of the innovation process, namely creativity (Amabile, 1997; Naser, Sajad and Maryam, 2017; Yusuf, 2009).
Creativity has then been found to have a positive impact on many different areas above innovation, the other way around, there are factors in the organization that can affect creativity. The social environment is one such factor, that decisively affect the creative behavior (Westwood and Low, 2003).
8
Previous researches in the field of IT have been evaluating the effects on creativity and innovation of only a few determinants. Weiner (2015), for instance, evaluates only the organizational climate to identify opportunities of improvement. Magadley and Birdi (2009) focus on how the implementation of supporting mechanisms can aid companies to enhance creativity and innovation, while. With the claim that Visma is an innovative company, the authors expect to contribute with newer evidence that might add up to update and complement the existing frameworks and benchmarks which have been created more than 20 years ago.
Creativity is crucial for organizational success (Epetimehin, 2011) and therefore creativity has been studied by many researchers stressing the importance of creativity and suitable climate for it (e.g., Amabile & Gryskiewicz, 1989; Anderson, De Dreu, & Nijstad, 2004; West, 2002). Researchers have developed methods for creativity (e.g., Amabile, 1988; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009) created new by updating existing ones (e.g., Cooper, 2000; Lapierre & Giroux, 2003). In this case study the authors applied existing methods to improve creativity in an IT company. In the thesis the authors contribute to the academic field by using older, well established methods such as Amabile (1996), Ekvall (1996), Martins and Terblanche (2003). By using those methods, the authors test them in real life and challenge their suitability to modern environment.
As far as the authors know there is no research who investigate how to improve creativity in an IT company and tried to apply existing or self-created methods. However, many previous studies have looked into similar problems. Lapierre & Giroux (2003) studied the ways in which creativity is fostered in high tech organizations. Cooper (2000) attempted to better understand creativity during IT requirements and logical design phases, at which time reengineering can be devised. Chen, Chang & Chang (2015) investigated employee creativity in technology companies toward an individual-context fit perspective. Soriano de Alencar and Bruno-Faria (2011) investigated characteristics of on organizational environment which stimulate and inhibit creativity and Dewett (2003) explored ways that IT might influence creativity in organizations.
9
The first section provides the reader with a background of the company, along with the purpose and research questions. Section 2 contains the theoretical framework, followed by the method in section 3, where we provide a concise explanation of the scientific methods applied. Then, chapter 4 presents the empirical data gathered in this thesis and last, section 5 presents the analysis, while section 6 finalize the thesis with the conclusion and some managerial implications for the company.
1.2 About the company
Visma Group is a leading Nordic business IT company that is present in 12 countries in Northern Europe, offering a portfolio of IT software and solutions. With a history that dates back to 1996, Visma was founded in Oslo, Norway, as the result of a merger of 3 companies, MultiSoft, SpecTec and Dovre Informations Systems.
Since then the company experienced a relevant growth and became the Northern Europe's leading provider of business software. As of today, the Visma Group comprises of five software business areas which are aligned with their strategic position in important segments, namely: SBM, Enterprise, Retail, Custom Solutions and IT & Hosting (Visma portal).
This study focuses on Visma's Latvian division, where Visma entered the market in 2014 through the acquisition of SIA FMS, one of the largest Latvian IT companies (market share of more than 30%), enabling them to expand their growth to the Baltic countries. Currently, with over 200 employees in Latvia, the company have employees within a range of different competencies, for example, programmers, project managers, analysts and consultants. Their service portfolio can be summarized by three major areas: ERP Horizon, BI Solutions and system integration (Visma n.d.).
Visma's structure in Latvia comprises of 3 companies: Visma Enterprise, Visma Labs and Visma Consultation. This study is commissioned by one of these areas, Visma Enterprise.
1.3 Problem description
10
study will look into the IT company, Visma Enterprise, more specifically their Latvian division, and investigate how they can promote creativity within their organization.
Management wants to promote creativity in order to generate new ideas which would aid problem-solving, self-organizing and in the end improve employee performance and work results. The management at Visma Enterprise sees creativity as a tool for engineers to become more independent and they also believe that it promotes work speed, a better working atmosphere and higher results. At the same time academic research points to creativity as a central factor in the generation of novel ideas, given that it from this theoretical perspective represents the first step of an innovation process, hence idea generation (McAdam and McClelland, 2002).
According to Visma's management, engineers occasionally struggle with being dynamic and flexible - engineers fulfill tasks and tackle problems in the same way, adapting the new situations to well-known and established practices, approaches and technologies that may not be the most efficient. Although the employees want to be creative and have tried to “think outside the box”, it did not bring desired results because the problem was solved in the same way as all previous problems.
Currently, Visma allows employees to take one day per month for self-improvement and environment development through the Your Development Day, or YDD (Yabba Dabba Doo). Employees can spend those days to come up with new ideas and run experiments, for example, when an employee has an idea of how to make a certain work procedure easier, he or she takes the day of their regular everyday duties and try to develop the new idea.
Unfortunately, only 10% of employees use development days without encouragement from the management side and 50% of employees take the development days if the opportunity has been reminded regularly and events which promote it are organized.
1.4 Research objective
11
influences creativity and innovation. The aim is specified through the following research questions:
● Which are the factors in the existing organizational culture that play a major role in influencing creativity and innovation?
12
2. Theoretical framework
This section presents the theoretical framework that will be used in this thesis. We introduce this chapter defining both concepts, creativity and innovation, followed by a description of how creativity and innovation are related and why creativity is therefore an important topic of study. Then we describe how the organizational environment influences creativity according to academia, and lastly, we explain how the theories may help us conduct this thesis.
2.1 Creativity and Innovation
Section 2.1 introduces the reader with the concepts of creativity and innovation.
2.1.1 Creativity
Cambridge University Press (2018) states that creativity is “the ability to produce original and unusual ideas, or to make something new or imaginative”. Several researchers have studied creativity and its process (Amabile, 1988; Stein, 1974). Its concept has been of great interest not only within academia, but also within the general public, psychologists and philosophers as well (Wreen, 2015).
Focusing on organizational settings, creativity is said to be an individual and cultural phenomenon that allows individuals to transform possibilities into realities (Tan, 2007), in a creative process which starts in the human mind (Amar & Junej, 2008).
The individual creativity is a function of an individual's domain-relevant skills1,
creativity-relevant skills2 and intrinsic task motivation (Amabile, 1988). It can be facilitated through
factors such as personality (Schilpzand et al., 2011), gender, education, background and age (Jehn, 1999) previous task-related experience (Gino et al., 2009) knowledge, skills and abilities (Janssen et al., 2004; Majchrzak et al., 2012) and norms and values (Bechtold et al., 2010).
In the context of this study, the authors will assume the definition of creativity that has been adopted by Schilling (2010) as “the ability to produce work that is useful and novel”, a quite similar to the definition found in the Cambridge dictionary. By "useful", Schilling (2010)
13
defines it as the possible outcomes of creativity in an organizational environment, which may contribute somehow to the performance of an organization, while "novel" are those ideas that are new and unique to the organization in question (Schilling, 2010).
2.1.2 Innovation
According to Cambridge University Press (2018), innovation can be “a new idea or method, or the use of new ideas and methods” or “the development of new products, designs or ideas”.
The concept of innovation within academia is quite diverse. According to Kanter (1983), innovation is “the process of bringing any new, problem-solving idea into use”, “the generation, acceptance and implementation of new ideas, processes, products or services”. Damanpour (1996), defines innovation as being a mean for changing organizations, and such means can be new products or services, new process technology, new organization structure or systems, and plans and programs pertaining to organization members. West and Anderson (1996) defined innovation as “the effective application of processes and products new to the organization and designed to benefit it and its stakeholders”.
For the purpose of this thesis, the definition of innovation adopted comes from Baregheh, Rowley and Sambrook (2009) as “the process whereby organizations transform ideas into
new/improved products, service or processes, in order to advance, compete and differentiate themselves successfully in their marketplace” (Baregheh, Rowley and Sambrook, 2009,
p.1334).
2.2 Factors that influence creativity and innovation
14
A review of scientific literature shows that there are a number of attributes that may support or hinder creativity. These theories (Amabile et al., 1996; Anderson and West, 1998; Ekvall, 1996) have both differences and similarities regarding which factors are presented. Nonetheless, they all stress the importance of organizational climate and culture in influencing creativity (Ali Taha et al., 2016; Mumford et al., 1997).
Organizational climate is a set of shared views in the organization, the observed and recurring patterns of behavior, attitudes and feelings that characterize life in an organization (Ekvall, 1996). Organizational culture instead refers to these broader normative structures that shape people's assumptions about appropriate or desirable behavior (Mumford, et al., 1997).
The authors have identified and studied three theoretical frameworks that are relevant to the development of this thesis. Those theories had determined the key factors that influence creativity, through different perspectives.
Amabile (1988) developed the model of individual creativity where she identified three main factors that influence creativity. These three components are intrinsic motivation to do the task, skills in the task domain and skill in creative thinking (Amabile, 1988).
Intrinsic motivation to do the task comprises of two elements: the individual’s baseline attitude towards a task and the individual’s perception of his reasons for undertaking the task in a given instance (Amabile, 1988). Skills in the task domain comprises the set of cognitive pathways for solving a given problem or doing a given task. It includes personal qualities such as expertise in the specific area, brilliance, familiarity with and factual knowledge of the domain in question such as facts and principles (Amabile, 1988). Skills in creative thinking include a cognitive style favorable to taking new perspectives on problems, working style conducive to persistent, energetic pursuit of work (Amabile, 1988).
15
Table 1: Ekvall's 9 dimensions Dimension Description
Challenge A high degree of challenge motivates employees and increases their commitment to their jobs. They find joy and meaningfulness in their work, and the climate is dynamic, electric, and inspiring.
In a low degree of challenge, people are not engaged. Employees feel alienated and are apathetic. They lack interest in their work and interpersonal interactions are dull and listless.
Playfulness and humor
A relaxed atmosphere where laughter occurs characterizes a high degree of playfulness and humor. Employees have fun at work and perceive the climate as easy-going and light-hearted.
A low degree of playfulness occurs when the atmosphere is stiff, gloomy, and cumbrous. The climate is serious. The company considers jokes and laughter improper and intolerable.
Freedom In a climate with much freedom, people have autonomy and necessary tools to define much of their work. Employees are proactive and acquire and share information about their work.
In the opposite climate, people work within strict guidelines and roles. Employees carry out their work in prescribed ways with little room to redefine their tasks.
16
Idea time In an organization with a high degree of idea-time, companies allow discussion and suggestions not included in the task assignment. People have opportunities to take the time to explore and develop new ideas.
In an organization with a low degree of idea-time, every minute is booked and specified, making thinking outside the instructions and planned routines impossible.
Idea support In a climate with a high degree of idea support, bosses, peers and subordinates receive ideas and suggestions in an attentive and professional way. They listen to each other and encourage initiatives, creating a constructive and positive atmosphere. In a climate with a low degree of idea support, the opposite occurs. It prevails an automatic “no” to new ideas and suggestions. People raise obstacles and find faults to respond no to new ideas.
Trust and openness
In an organization with a high degree of trust, individuals can count on each other for professional and personal support. They have a sincere respect and are genuinely open and frank with one another.
In an organization with a low degree of trust, employees find it extremely difficult to openly communicate with each other. They closely guard themselves, their plans, and their ideas because they are suspicious of each other.
Debate In a climate with a high degree of debate, many voices are heard and people are often seen discussing opposing opinions and sharing different perspectives.
In a climate with a low degree of debate, people follow authoritarian patterns without questioning them.
Conflict When conflict is high, groups and individuals dislike and may even hate each other, with personal differences yielding gossip. Employees act immaturely, and climate is full of plots, traps and power struggles.
17
The third selected framework belongs to Martins and Terblanche (2003), who developed a framework where they have identified and grouped the determinants of organizational culture that influence creativity and innovation into five categories: Strategy, structure, support mechanisms, behavior that encourages innovation, communication (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Determinants of organizational culture
18
2.3 Analytical framework
As previously mentioned, the selected theories have both similarities and distinctions, with characteristics that may overlap. To get a comprehensive understanding of the current supporting and hindering factors of creativity and innovation at Visma, the authors have decided to utilize a framework developed by Martins and Terblanche (2003) to investigate the organizational culture of Visma Enterprise. As the organizational climate is also important for understanding creativity and innovation, the authors will also investigate the environment according to the 9 dimensions of Ekvall, whilst also including the motivational aspect as one key element to be analyzed.
Below the authors describes the determinants created by Martins and Terblanche (2003), which have also been adapted to include components from other theorists (Amabile, 1996; Ekvall, 1996) that are believed to be relevant to our thesis.
2.3.1 Strategy
The strategy of an organization determines its orientation to creativity and innovation. It can be inferred from its vision, mission and goals. In a strategy that supports creativity, companies promote the development and implementation of new products and services (Martins & Terblanche, 2003).
Vision and mission are focused in the future and are customer- and market-oriented. Therefore, their priorities and values promote creative behavior (Martins & Terblanche, 2003). Team and organizational goals are clear when vision is high, with goals being perceived as attainable and employees committed to them (Hülsheger et al., 2009).
2.3.2 Structure
19
Organizational cultures with a balanced combination of autonomy and collaboration are more likely to be creative (Mumford, 2000).
Team composition may also influence team creativity (Hansen & Levine, 2009; Hülsheger et al., 2009). Internal strife, conservatism and rigid, formal management structures within the organization will impede creativity (Kimberley, 1981; Kimberley & Evanisko, 1981))
2.3.3 Support mechanisms
The existence of support mechanisms creates an environment that promotes creativity. Among them are rewards and recognition, availability of resources such as time and information technology (Martins & Terblanche, 2003), people with necessary expertise, funds allocated to the work, material resources and training (Amabile 1997). Amabile (1988) refers to support mechanisms as "resources" in her studies.
In an organization that promotes creativity employees are allowed to have time to think and experiment (Shattow, 1996). Individuals might utilize different resources to generate and develop ideas, thus their availability might aid them during the creativity process (Amabile, 1996).
Rewards and recognition are important because they can inspire people to be more creative (Tushman & O'Reilly, 1997). When a certain behavior is rewarded, as a creative one, such behavior will become the general, dominant way of behaving (Arad et al., 1997). Besides being rewarded for creativity, Martins and Terblanche (2003) claim that employees should also be awarded for risk-taking, experimenting and generating ideas.
20
2.3.4 Behavior that encourages innovation
Values and norms reflect the organizational behavior and may support or hinder creativity. Encouragement of new ideas and tolerance to mistakes, risk-taking and support for change, for instance, influence creativity and innovation positively (Martins & Terblanche, 2003).
Risk-taking is associated with creativity (Martins & Terblanche, 2003). It is important however to find a balance to the degree of which risk-taking is allowed in an organization (Martins & Terblanche, 2003). People need to take strong initiates even when the outcome is unknown (Ekvall, 1996; Isaksen, 1995; Isaksen, et al., 2001). In an organization with too many management controls people won't take risks (Judge et al., 1997), as they might feel hesitant and cautious (Ekvall, 1996; Isaksen, et al., 2001), thus, hindering creativity.
How mistakes are handled in organizations can also affect how people feel free to act creatively (Martins & Terblanche, 2003). Therefore, tolerance of mistakes influence the organization and promotes creativity (Martins & Terblanche, 2003).
Conflict of ideas, perceptions and ways in which information is processed and evaluated are seen as an important factor which helps to foster creativity (Martins & Terblanche, 2003) if there is a tolerance to conflict and conflict is handled constructively (Judge et al., 1997; Martins & Terblanche, 2003; Mumford et al., 1997; Robbins, 1996). Martins and Terblanche (2003) state that understanding different individual thinking styles and training personnel in constructive confrontation generates a culture supportive of creativity and innovation.
21
2.3.5 Communication
How communication is structured also influences creativity. An open and transparent communication, where people feel safe and comfortable to exchange and discuss ideas influence innovation positively (Martins & Terblanche, 2003).
Good communication skills also enable, foster, and create the understanding and trust necessary to encourage individuals to follow a leader (Bonito et al., 2008). Communication process affects team members' decisions about whether or not to participate and share information making (Bonito et al., 2008). An effective communication also increases team cooperation (Dube & Marnewick, 2016).
Individuals have different communication styles, values, and priorities. They may sometimes identify less with other individuals and team members, feeling less comfortable to express divergent opinions (DiTomaso et al., 2009).
2.3.6 Motivation
Motivation is one of the most important components of creative behavior, according to Amabile (1988). It is motivation which will determine how much the individual will actually engage in being creative (Amabile 1988). A high degree of proper motivation can make up for deficiency of domain-relevant skills or creativity-relevant skills (Amabile, 1988).
Motivation can be intrinsic or extrinsic. In intrinsic motivation, individuals present interest and involvement in the work, by curiosity, enjoyment or challenge (Amabile 1997). Intrinsic motivation is a state generated by an individuals' reaction to intrinsic properties of a task and not by extrinsic factors (Amabile 1983). In extrinsic motivation, individuals are driven by the desire to attain some goal that is apart from the work itself (Amabile 1997).
22
3. Methodology
This section discusses the approach chosen to understand, analyze and solve the problem handed in by Visma Enterprise. The intention here is to give the reader enough information about how this thesis was conducted, altogether, enable her to make an estimate of the reliability and validity of the method we chose (Saunders et al., 2009).
3.1 Research strategy
This section presents the strategy adopted by the author to develop this thesis.
3.1.1 Research approach
The approach that the authors have decided to utilize in this thesis is the abductive approach. An abductive approach is the combination of inductive and deductive approaches. In a deductive approach, researchers develop first a theory and hypothesis, followed by a research strategy which is designed to test the hypothesis (Saunders, et al., 2009). In an inductive approach, researchers collect data, and a theory is developed as a result of the data analysis (Saunders, et al., 2009).
A combined approach allows investigating the problem with more flexibility, by going back and forth between theory and data whilst developing a new, or modifying the existing theory (Awuzie & McDermott, 2017; Blaikie, 2009; Bryman, 2012; Dubois & Gadde, 2002; Saunders et al., 2012). There is a criticism within academia over the choice of inductive or deductive approach (Saunders, et al., 2009). The followers of induction argue that deduction does not permit alternative explanations of an ongoing event, being thus a very rigid methodology (Saunders, et al., 2009). He also expresses that researches using an inductive approach are likely to focus on the context in which the events are taking place. Deductive research can be quicker to complete, despite the time spent with planning, while inductive may take longer as ideas are generated gradually, and there is also the risk that no useful data pattern and theory will emerge (Saunders et al., 2009).
23
closer to the answers they wish to obtain, while also minimizing the risks that may exist due to the time frame limitation of this thesis (Saunders et al., 2009).
3.1.2 Research method
The purpose of this research, as already stated, is to understand the current environment in an IT organization regarding creativity and innovation and provide recommendations of how they can enhance and foster these subjects in their daily routine. In doing so requires an understanding of the thoughts and interpretation of the individuals who are active in Visma, by gathering information about the current situation whose diagnostics can provide insights on the best ways to promote creativity and innovation according to academia and theory chosen and applied.
The authors have therefore decided to make use of qualitative methods, due to its ability of enabling a better understanding of the social world and behavioral patterns (Hammersley, 2013), which is reinforced by Bryman & Bell (2011), who expressed that a qualitative study aims to understand a topic through the perspective of those being studied, and Eriksson & Kovalainen (2008), who stated that qualitative methods can provide a rich and clarified frame of empirical data essential for understanding the uniqueness of a situation.
Moreover, a qualitative methodology is concerned with settings and people holistically, meaning that people and settings are not reduced to variables, but are viewed as a whole, otherwise the authors could lose sight of the human side of social life (Taylor et al., 2016), which is not the purpose of this thesis.
3.2 Research design
24
The authors agreed that the most suitable design able to answer the research questions established at section 1 is a case study. The research question proposed by the authors originates from a single organizational issue which will be analyzed and dealt in-depth.
A case-study design, according to Brewerton & Millward (2001), "involves the description of an ongoing event in relation to a particular outcome of interest over a fixed time in the 'here-and-now'". It also emphasizes on a full contextual analysis of fewer situations and their interrelations (Cooper & Schindler, 2014). Such arguments (Brewerton & Millward, 2001; Cooper & Schindler, 2014) are in line with the objective of this research, which lies in understanding what activities are important to foster creativity and innovation in an IT company.
In order to obtain answers to our research questions, the authors intend to make use of questions starting with "how", "what", "why" and "when". A case study design has a considerable ability to generate answers to the "how", "why" and "what" questions (Saunders et al., 2009). Answering such questions will provide handy information beneficial for gaining visions to develop new explanations for why creativity is important for innovation (Blumberg et al., 2011; Bryman & Bell, 2011).
To sum up, the strength of a case study is in its ability to study the research project in depth and within its real-life context. This further makes a case study design particularly suitable for exploring and explaining what activities and factors will promote creativity and innovative thinking and behavior.
Nevertheless, the choice of a case-study design has both positive and negative aspects that need to be taken into account in this thesis.
25
A case-study strategy can be a very worthwhile way of exploring the existing theory (Saunders et al., 2009). In addition, a well-constructed case-study strategy can enable the authors to challenge an existing theory and also provide a source of new research questions. (Saunders et al., 2009).
3.3 Data collection
This thesis utilizes qualitative methods to obtain a deep understanding of the events and environment at Visma, by answering to questions starting with "how", "what", "why" and "when", as already mentioned before in this thesis.
The data collection technique which will be used here is called triangulation, a technique recommended for when a researcher is performing a case-study (Saunders et al., 2009). Triangulation is the use of different data collection techniques in order to ensure that the data are telling you what you think they are telling you (Saunders et al., 2009).
The main source of data will be collected through interviews with different members of Visma Enterprise. Besides the interviews, the authors aim to collect and utilize additional internal information provided by the participants, as well as data contained at Visma annual report and online portal. Such additional internal and external data will consist of information about the company in Latvia, its origins, specific strategy, surveys on internal climate and follow-ups with the participants to request more information and clarification and therefore ensure the correct understanding of interviews.
3.3.1 Sample selection
Visma Enterprise is an IT company whose employees work in cross-functional teams. Visma Enterprise comprises of five development teams. From each development team, one individual was chosen for an interview. We have also conducted interviews with the management at Visma.
26
Moreover, the authors believe that parameters such as age, experience, gender and others are not relevant for this task since the aim is to understand which dimensions need the most work in order to make Visma Enterprise employees creative.
3.3.2 Interviews with engineers
The individuals that took part in this thesis were engineers. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews at Visma Enterprise facilities. We held face-to-face meetings whenever possible, with interviews held via Skype when the other choice wasn’t possible.
Qualitative methods such as semi-structured interviews can provide a rich and illuminating body of empirical data essential for understanding the uniqueness of a situation (Eriksson and Kovalainen, 2008). They are also beneficial as they provide more flexibility to discuss a topic in details compared with structured interviews. A semi-structured form is useful for maintaining a clear path and structure throughout the entire phase of data collection. It also gives the interviewer more opportunity to place more questions when he feels the need to do so. Semi-structured interviews are therefore the most suitable method for collecting data in research (Blumberg et al., 2011).
All respondents were anonymous and a list of them with basic information about the interviews can be seen in the Appendix 2. Interviews were held in their native language, if possible face-to-face. Permission to record the interviews were requested. Those actions were taken to minimize misunderstandings, for instance, miscommunication regarding language barrier or non-direct interaction as talking through a phone. The employees also had the opportunity to refuse recording if they felt uncomfortable with it.
27
The questionnaire was used only as an indicator of the current situation. Authors did not consider it as a quantitative method since only five people were asked to answer the questionnaire. Moreover, the most important and relevant part was to understand why they rated as they did.
In addition to the semi-structured interviews, information was also collected through emails, information from company reports and presentations, webpage. These additional pieces of information provided useful insight into the organizational climate and the attitudes and behavioral patterns of its individual members.
3.3.3 Interview with the manager
A second round of interviews have been conducted since the results from the interviews with engineers showed surprisingly good results- none of the 9 creative climate dimensions were reported at a critical level - the lowest average rate was 3,8 out of 5 points.
The interviewed was the manager of the respondents A, B, C, D and E. She was chosen because she was considered to be the most knowledgeable about her teams and most suitable for judgment of team creativeness. Information about the interview can be seen in Appendix 2.
3.4 Data analysis
The strategy of analysis that will be used in the thesis is analytic induction. This strategy is one of the most cited approaches, and it is also often described as an iterative method (Bryman & Bell, 2011).
28
3.5 Ethical issues
A number of ethical considerations were taken into account during the conduction of this research. Ethical issues cannot be ignored (Bryman & Bell, 2011), and to ensure the researchers covered the main ethical issues that may arise in business research, four main areas were carefully taken into account: harm to participants, lack of informed consent, invasion of privacy and deception (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Diener & Crandall, 1978).
The authors believe that they have done everything according to ethical principles. Respondents did not have any physical harm. Questions were formulated in a manner to avoid harm to respondents’ self-esteem, it was avoided to use unknown terminology. Interviews were not considered as a situation which causes stress and it was not observed during interviews. It is also believed that participating in the interviews did not harm to respondent career prospects or future employment.
The respondents were informed about the aim of the interview and asked for their permission to record the interview. Theoretically, they had the possibility to refuse to participate. However, the presence of the management of Visma could cause the feeling that it was not an option.
It is also believed that there was no harm did to their privacy. Questions did not include any personal aspects and the only personal information that was asked was their profession. Other personal information they had revealed during the interview was on their own choice.
During the interview, neither the information nor observation about the thesis was not considered in any way deception.
3.6 Credibility
29
3.6.1 Validity
Internal validity reflects the degree of a causal conclusion constitutes the extent to which a study reduces bias (Bryman and Nilsson, 2011). In order to reduce the bias of the authors and interpretations of the data collection, all interviews which were conducted during the thesis were recorded. Also, the authors have tried to be as neutral as possible when it comes to interpretations of the empirical data.
Case study has been critiqued for lowering validity (Hamel, 1993). Therefore, the case study approach usually involves data collection from multiple sources in order to develop a thorough understanding of the case (Stake, 1995). In the thesis, multiple methods of collecting data have been used as a way of increasing the internal validity of the thesis.
External validity measures whether a general conclusion can be drawn from the study being conducted (Bryman and Nilsson, 2011). However, only one company has been investigated and therefore the external validity can be assumed as relatively low. In order to increase it, more studies in different organizations need to be conducted.
3.6.2 Reliability
Reliability answers the question of whether the result of a study is repeatable (Bryman and Bell, 2011). However, the research design for the thesis is case study and it has been critiqued for lowering the reliability of the results (Hamel, 1993). To increase the reliability of the thesis the authors used multiple methods and data sources - semi-structured interviews, a ranking system and the company's internal Employee Net Promoter Score results to gain a comprehensive understanding of the creative organizational climate.
3.6.3 Generalization
30
(Saunders et al., 2009), and propose solutions from proven researches that aid them in their journey for creativity and innovation. Hence, if someone seeks for an external validation of this research, this might be an additional source to which one will look at and try to generalize.
3.7 Limitations
31
4. Empirical Data
This section presents the data collected through semi-structured interviews, website and internal relevant documentation, as well as a ranking system regarding organizational structure, the current situation of Visma Enterprise and factors which foster and hinder innovation.
4.1 Vision, mission and values
The company's vision consists of "providing IT solutions that keep customers one step ahead of the competition". Moreover, they have a customer-oriented mindset where they state that they are on the market to "Promote competitiveness and contribute to the creation of growth and effectiveness for their customers" by cultivating respect, reliability, innovation, competence and team spirit, as core values, offering cutting-edge-world -class solutions for business process integration and automation (Visma n.d.).
4.2 Structure
Visma's structure in Latvia comprises of 3 companies. A short description of these companies activities are found below (Table 2):
Table 2: Visma Latvia companies Company Description
Visma Enterprise IT services focused on Visma Horizon product. The company develops, implements and advises users on its ERP, and also on BI solutions Visma Labs Provides high value-added services in the fields of development,
analytics and support processes
Visma Consulting Offers system integration solutions and tailor-made IT system development for both public and private companies
32
The organizational structure of Visma Enterprise is hierarchical, in total it has 5 levels in the hierarchy (Respondent F). In Figure 2 can be seen organizational structure of Visma Enterprise Latvia but hierarchically it is continuing in Visma Enterprise Norway.
Figure 2: Organizational structure of Visma Enterprise Latvia
Visma has physical teams but the opportunity to work remotely is being offered to employees as well.
Every team has their working area of a programme. Teams are built so that every team can maintain their area and they have required specialists e.g. analyst, quality assurance specialist, architect etc. It also can be said that employees work in cross-functional teams (Respondent D).
4.3 Current innovation-supporting methods
Innovation and creativity is not a completely new terminology for Visma Enterprise. The management of Visma Enterprise has been trying to encourage engineers and foster innovation. Activities like conferences, meetups and previously mentioned Your Development Days (YDD) is considered as innovation supportive (Respondent F). Employees also believe in another type of personal development and these opportunities are considered equal to YDD in terms of improving innovation (Respondent C). The employees of Visma has participated in
Managing director Product management R&D R&D teams Sales and Marketing Marketing Project sales Dealer support & maintenance sales Sales and marketing support Project management Project team BI consulting services BI consulting team ERP consulting services Accounting Payroll and HRM Utilities Support Experts Finances and Administration Finance Accounting Facility maintenance Legal HR
33
conferences as spectators and as speakers. Furthermore, team members are encouraged to participate in conferences as spectators and as speakers (Respondent C). As well employees have watched online conferences together. In addition, speakers are also invited to present different topics for the employees of Visma personally.
Another appreciated opportunity from employee view is different trainings (Respondent D). The management of Visma educates engineers by telling them ongoing trends of innovation, try to be a role-model by behaving as they consider the desired behavior. Managers even pay attention to details like correct terminology, for example, call people engineers, not employees (Respondent F). Engineers also appreciate that their manager thought them to say “no” and how much it helped to maintain control over the workload (Respondent C).
“The most of creativity comes from the Big Visma [meaning: from Norway]. They try to implement the latest trends, methods and everything that is modern” (Respondent B - authors
translation). However, another point of view is that Visma in Latvia and Visma in Norway are two completely different things because Visma Norway cares only about numbers- fever mistakes and bigger profit (Respondent C).
YDD is considered as an innovative mechanism from the management point of view and also from engineering. YDD fosters innovation in the company in such a way that it promotes thinking "outside the box", it allows to spend time and try to solve the problems which are never prioritized or find solution to set of problems instead of each problem solve separately, also it gives chance to try to automate something (Respondent E). However, despite all positive things YDD is used rarely - only 10% of employees use development days without encouragement from the management side and 50% of the employees take the development days if the opportunity has been reminded regularly and organized events who promote it (Respondent F). As reasons why YDD is not used so often are mentioned different things e.g. programmers feel like wasting their work day if code is not been written, nothing has been programmed (Respondent C) or an engineer just cannot be forced if he or she does not want to participate (Respondent D).
34 things then it is conditionally forced thing, it is not motivated by themselves” (Respondent D -
authors translation).
4.4 Employee opinions of possible improvements for Visma
Employees are struggling with generating suggestion of possible improvements towards fostering innovation at Visma although they believe that “there is always a place for
improvements” (Respondent C - authors translation).
Only Respondent B had an idea of improvements for Visma.
“One of the things which could be improved is that new ideas are more required from employees. First what can be improved, then how and then let those who want to participate do that- make workshops and develop ideas into actions. Many talented and skilled people work for Visma, just the right balance between innovation and daily tasks need to be found”
(Respondent B - authors translation).
Furthermore, Respondent A believes that Visma Enterprise fosters creativity but employees need to take care of the situation and use opportunities, new ideas already come and need to come from employees themselves. Engineers cannot be restricted, they have great ideas just need to let express themselves (Respondent A).
“Many great and wise people work for Visma and only the right approach is needed and in a few months they can open as you would never imagine, they are able to come up with new and great ideas. Only work, a lot of work, is needed because in every person there is something creative, the question whether you can see it and highlight it” (Respondent C - authors translation).
Respondent B believes that Visma cannot only innovate, it has 1000 (approximate number) of clients and it is essential to maintain their products. Furthermore, those clients sometimes may not be open for innovative new things. However, Respondent B express that Visma goes the right way- balancing existing clients and innovation.
4.5 Employees generating new ideas
35 “Previously [when wasn't product owner] it was unclear how creative actually this process is. It takes a lot of creativity to combine together client needs with possible solutions, then try to visualize them and change what is needed [...] Also testers have creative work- think of possible ways how to break a code” (Respondent C - authors translation).
Regarding expressing ideas to colleagues or manager Respondents have positive experience (Respondent B and E). Respondent B have worked at Visma only for 3 months and he used his previous experience to suggest ways how to improve Visma, mostly regarding employee motivation. According to Respondent B ideas has been taken well but it takes time to implement the changes.
“If an employee comes with new and great ideas than the ideas are heard and implemented, of course, unless there are crucial work to do” (Respondent B - authors translation).
Respondent B also mentioned a great experience regarding generating new ideas and implementing them-
“recently a new quality assurance specialist, in other words, tester, was hired and he suggested to completely change the way how code is tested. New suggested solution has only advantages but it required time in the beginning to implement and educate programmers. It changed completely the way how the new features are tested and took a lot of work but still engineers are enthusiastic” (Respondent B - authors translation).
Furthermore, it is important that engineers engage in brainstorming and express their opinion. Since every person is responsible for a specific task then this person also will understand every situation the best and will be able to offer the best possible solutions (Respondent D).
No less important that engineers feel safe to express new ideas and Respondent E stated that he feels safe to share ideas, to get feedback and in error situation the most important is to understand why something is not working.
Nevertheless, new ideas need to be expressed carefully to programmers. Ideas need to be properly formulated, for instance, people sometimes say “I need a red button here” while they mean that it must express that there is an error. More experienced programmers may understand the request but some programmers can refuse to do the task (Respondent A).
36
decision because then it will not be accepted. New ideas need to be presented to others and left the possibility to discuss and adapt the idea. Secondly, Respondent C sometimes instead of asking and discussing ideas tries to implement them, of course, if it does not influence other teams. Sometimes it may take a year to implement the new idea but after implementation team members see that it was a good change.
4.6 Most innovative experience for employees at Visma
Respondents consider that they already are doing creative work and each of them have experience which they consider innovative. As most innovative products, features or experiences Respondents mentioned mostly cases which changed existing products completely or which was risky to do.
One of their experiences- for product Horizon was added a feature which gave clients opportunity to choose numbers in a completely different way, with a sliding method. It was risky to add that feature and engineers were not sure that computer will recognize that numbers are changing because of automatization process. It was innovative because it was challenging and new for the product (Respondent A).
Respondent D as most innovative experience remembered creating internet shop where client once in a week or two weeks came and participated in meetings. For the first time they used Agile method (it happened 4 years ago) and it was very interesting and dynamic process for both- client and the team.
Already mentioned testing system is considered as the most innovative experience for Responder B as it changed code testing method completely and made everything only better (Respondent B).
37
Respondent C was satisfied with two solutions which his team achieved by working with it day by day, brainstorming and generating ideas. It could be considered as innovative since it was a brave decision (Respondent C). Before these solutions, Visma already had a solution but it did not work completely. And most pleasant part after introducing new solutions was receiving good feedback from colleagues. Furthermore, clients did not have questions or problems which was great (Respondent C).
4.7 Factors which hinder innovation
In order to understand how to improve creativity, it is also important to identify factors which hinders creativity in a current situation.
Respondent B argues that nothing hinders innovation at Visma but at the same time not enough conditions are made to innovate. “It would be suggestable to encourage employees more to
think, to create, do more outside everyday duties and spend time regularly to think about what could be improved” (Respondent B - authors translation).
Respondent A also agrees that in Visma itself there is nothing that interferes with creativity. However, the biggest product Horizon is about 25 years old and that is the reason why a lot of innovation cannot be done with it, it is hard to add newest technologies or change something completely. The good news is that Visma created a new product HoP where employees can express themselves (Respondent A).
Horizon as a product is already stabile and new features are added mostly because of a client request. In the same time product HoP is made with the newest technologies, using cloud and that is the place where to be innovative (Respondent B).
Respondent C about the situation at Visma states “The biggest problem and obstacle which
hinders innovation is people themselves. It is in human nature to resist to changes, they are afraid to change but if people learn to change, to adapt then they outgrow their limits”
38
4.8 Employee communication
Communication within teams is good (Respondent A, C and F) except team which is merged recently (Respondent D). Relationship and communication within teams are good because big changes were introduced and main focus was on teamwork not collaboration with other teams. Teams had to learn how to work together, how to communicate and balance everything. In a result, engineers associate themselves with their team. "If I wanted to make some changes, for example, move one person to another team then high resistance was from teams. They even voted with "0" in Employee Net Promoter Score survey because of that. I explained to them that they cannot restrict themselves and we are all one big team- Visma. We sit together, we are like one big team” (Respondent F - authors translation).
4.9 Innovation and measurements of it
Innovation is not measured at Visma (Respondent A, B, C, D and E). Furthermore, innovation itself cannot be measured (Respondent C) it only can be measured through innovation connected activities (Respondent D). Respondent D believes that innovation may be measured by measuring the new additions to products but it still will not help to determine whether an organization is innovative or not.
However, only Respondent B believes that innovation should be measured because of those people who want to innovate. Innovation needs to be measured because it could help an organization to maintain satisfaction level for employees and stay competitive. Nevertheless, activities which are measured also are the ones who gets done (Respondent B).
4.10 Mistakes and attitude towards mistakes from the employee
side
39
Nevertheless, mistakes are normal also at Visma, the important part is not to spend too much time on correcting them (Respondent B). It is important to understand why the problem occurred so it will not happen again and managers think the same way (Respondent E). Prioritizing is the main tool how Visma starts to deal with problem situations and errors (Respondent A, B, C, D and E).
4.11 Answers from the questionnaire
One of the two highest ranked dimensions is “challenge”. Respondents rated it in average 4,6 out of 5 where 5 stands for “people are energized by the work of the team and show a strong willingness to offer discretionary effort due to their commitment and energy”.
However, there is still place for improvements in this dimension. “I put 4 because not
everybody is 100% motivated, it does not apply to everyone but there are cases when people could do better and saved 5 for situations where there is nothing that could be better"
(Respondent D - authors translation).
Respondent A has a similar opinion: “People are actively involved in teamwork, but from time
to time it is necessary to remind or to push them to work in a team. But if everything is organized, then there is no problem and people enjoy it” (Respondent A - authors translation).
Furthermore, employees do their job because they like it, they care about what they do (Respondent B and E) and get positive energy from their colleagues (Respondent E).
The same rating as dimension “challenge” got dimension “idea support” - 4,6 points out of 5. Missing part in idea support is initiative because there are situations where someone needs to ask others for their opinion (Respondent D) and sometimes automatically negative attitude is given: ”We have many different ideas. Often, we say "no" first and only after a while realize
that the idea was very good” (Respondent A - authors translation). However, initiative is supported by management side just need to be ready to get back criticism about your idea, opinion but not about people themselves (Respondent E).
40 workshop where artists can draw whatever they want” (Respondent B - authors translation).
However, employees have the opportunity to express how they want to work and how they are the most efficient (Respondent A).
Dimension “trust” was rated 4,4 out of 5.
“Our team is quite new. A year before 2 teams where emerged and we are still learning how to communicate and work with each other and what each of us are capable of. We are still in synchronization process- looking for the best way how to work together and that is why there is not 5. But we do it well, we communicate well, do not interpret each other wrongly. But some things could be improved- we do not things as we talked sometimes, sometimes not everything is told to another person. It does not bring a big negative impact but it needs to be improved”
(Respondent D - authors translation).
In the same time, other teams are quite frankly talking about what they think both - work-related and not working work-related matters (Respondent A and C). However, communication within teams is great but teams are struggling with communication with other teams. (Respondent C).
Dimension “idea time” was rated 4 points out of 5. Employees have many compulsory daily tasks and not so much time left for new ideas and implementation of them (Respondent A). Respondent D connected idea time with the opportunity to take a day, for example, for reading, self-improvements, exploring some fields deeper (not referring to YYD).
"I put 3 because people not always use them, it is more like self-motivating thing because at the moment when you are in some kind of routine then there is no time for exploring new things. If there is a work in which you must to explore new things then it is conditionally forced thing, it is not motivated by themselves” (Respondent D - authors translation).
41
Or as Respondent F states “that is the trick you say that everything is allowed but the work
needs to be done” (Respondent F - authors translation).
Dimension "humor" was rated 4,4 out of 5. Team members share good jokes with others and they have a good atmosphere (Respondent A). Because of the team emerging and the new team is still synchronizing humor is not rated as the maximum (Respondent D). Respondent E just states "With humor, everything is great at Visma" (Respondent E - authors translation).
Dimension “conflicts” was rated 4 out of 5. Team members treat each other with respect to different conflict situations and try to justify their opinion in a controlled way (Respondent A). Colleagues do not gossip about each other or talk behind their back but sometimes there are heightened emotions (Respondent E).
Dimension "debate" was rated 4,2 out of 5. Sometimes there are situations where a person chooses to be silent and not say anything but usually, employees discuss and talk to each other (Respondent A). Sometimes ideas do not come so easily and as much as they would like and someone has to ask others for ideas. In the same time, they have different views and ideas and they discuss them (Respondent D). Respondent E believes that employees can easily share their ideas with teammates without automatically getting "no" as an answer but in the same time Respondent A believes that there is always a possibility to get this automatic "no".
Dimension "risk-taking" was rated 3,8 out of 5. This rating was given because not everyone wants to take risks. And those who often take risks are less than those who do not want to (Respondent A and C) or take the risk without telling it to others (Respondent E). However, not all of the Respondents rated risk-taking lower than other dimensions. "I have an opinion there is no unsolvable problems or undoable things. In our team, we do not consider problems as problems in a meaning that it is something from which need to be afraid. We solve problems, we do not avoid them. We have such a mindset that we just do things, solve problems. It is more like a mindset that we do not need to be afraid of problems but need to solve them and in this process, you can learn new things, discover new lessons" (Respondent D - authors translation).
42
dimension- challenge and idea support which got 4,6 out of 5 points. Meantime, risk-taking is the lowest dimension with 3,8 out of 5 points. Results are shown also in a graph, see Figure 3.
43
Figure 3: Results of dimension ranking
Visma Enterprise every quarter of a year sends out a survey (Employee Net Promoter Score) to understand the level of their employee satisfaction. Results can be seen in Figure 4 and also these results approve that employees are satisfied with their work environment since 76 % of respondents rated Visma Enterprise with 9-10, 24 % with 7-8 and no one rated Visma below 7, which is a new achievement (Respondent F). Factors employees were complaining are salary, the temperature in the office, a noise from coffee maker. One of them complained that does not feel appreciated and his potential is not fully used.
44
4.12 Lack of motivation
Motivation is not a dimension which was included in the Ekvalls model. Although engineers were not asked about motivation, they mentioned it as an obstacle and Responder F agrees that motivation is the missing part from employee side. Respondent C believes that Visma does everything to foster innovation but
“The biggest problem is people themselves. When they have some kind of an inner block or unwillingness to overcome outside obstacles. When you have this creativity you will show it, reveal it. When you are pressured with, for example, deadlines then people do not want to open, which we don’t have at Visma. I believe that everybody has this creativeness just need to find it and work with it” (Respondent C - authors translation).
Talking about idea support Respondent D mentioned that "What is missing is initiative because
there are situations where you need to ask people for their opinion, that is an obstacle which needs to be dealt with" (Respondent D - authors translation).
When engineers were asked for the reasons why they rated each dimension as they did they mentioned lack of motivation. Respondent D about idea time "Because not everybody is 100%
motivated, not everybody but there are cases when people could do better"
Respondent A about risk-taking “not everyone wants to take risks and those who take the risk
often are less than those who do not”.
As well employees are well aware of all possibilities and benefits from them but when they were asked whether they participate answers are mostly negative. Respondent A and C haven't lately used YDD, Responders D team definitely does not participate in every YDD. Respondent D enthusiastically tells the author about the opportunity to use a day for exploring their field deeper but confesses that he has not used it.
Responder D reasons why he has not used Visma offered opportunities lately
