Quality of Life and Creativity Performance Amidst the Pandemic: Evidence From Thailand and Bangladesh

Abstract

This study investigates COVID-19’s impact on quality of life (COVID-19 QoL) via its effect on employee creativity performance in Thailand and Bangladesh, drawing on Terror Management Theory. Data were collected from 491 full-time employees (Thailand: 208; Bangladesh: 283). A positive relationship was found between the creative environment and employee’s creativity performance (β = .308, p < .01). In addition, COVID-19 QoL exerted a negative moderating effect on the relationship between the creative environment and employee’s creativity performance (β = −.092, p < .05), but this effect varied between Thailand and Bangladesh. In Bangladesh, COVID-19 QoL amplified the negative impact on creativity performance, whereas in Thailand, no such effect was found; instead, it was positively related to creativity. Thailand’s collectivist and feminine orientation transforms existential threat into positive creative engagement, while Bangladesh’s hierarchical and masculine orientation channels it into conformity and inhibition, explaining the divergent outcomes between the two nations. These findings highlight how cultivating a creative environment can enhance creativity performance, while also emphasizing the importance of considering employees’ quality of life and cultural context during crises.

Plain Language Summary

How COVID-19 Affected People’s Quality of Life and Creativity in Thailand and Bangladesh

This study looks at how a creative work environment can influence employees’ creativity, and whether the quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic weakened this connection. Researchers collected survey responses from full-time employees in Thailand and Bangladesh using online platforms. The results show that employees working in a creative environment tend to perform more creatively. However, the pandemic’s negative impact on quality of life affected this relationship differently in each country. The study also uses Terror Management Theory to explain how people’s awareness of death, ways of coping, and cultural background shape their creativity and well-being during challenging times. In practice, organizations can support creativity by building an encouraging environment where employees feel inspired to share and develop new ideas, even in difficult circumstances.

Keywords

COVID-19 QoL creative environment creativity performance pandemic terror management theory

Introduction

The global COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reshaped organizational development, presenting a complex array of challenges and opportunities that directly affect how individuals in the workforce perceive and experience their quality of life (Alyzza, 2023). In response to this unprecedented crisis, organizations worldwide have been forced to reevaluate their traditional approaches, navigating uncertainties and swiftly adapting to the new norms (Xiao et al., 2021). This shift underscores the importance of supportive infrastructures that enable both virtual and physical creative work (Pakos et al., 2021).

While remote work has introduced greater flexibility that can enhance creativity, it has also blurred the boundaries between work and personal life, thereby challenging work–life balance (Almazrouei et al., 2025). Organizations must go beyond immediate operational concerns, as 70% of employees in 60 countries have faced anxiety, stress, and depression due to the pandemic, reducing well-being quality and labor productivity (Varma et al., 2021). From an economic perspective, the pandemic created dilemmas, such as job losses, income reduction, and financial instability (Thukral, 2021). This underscores the multifaceted nature of the challenges organizations face in navigating the lasting effects of the pandemic on both employee well-being and economic stability.

While employee creativity has received extensive attention in organizational psychology, limited research has examined how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected employees’ quality of life (QoL) and, in turn, their capacity for creative thinking and problem-solving. Existing studies on COVID-19 QoL, and work-related outcomes have primarily concentrated on Western economies, leaving developing Asian contexts underexplored. Furthermore, human resource manangement (HRM) strategies exhibit significant variation when examined within a cross-national context. However, previous research on cross-country comparative HRM has predominantly focused on developed countries, resulting in an underrepresentation of the majority of less developed Asian countries (Cooke et al., 2017). This omission is critical, as countries differ in terms of their cultural values, economic structures, and policy responses, which may shape how employees experience and respond to existential threats.

This study focuses on Thailand and Bangladesh, seeking to capture cross-cultural contrasts in how individuals’ quality of life (QoL) relates to creativity performance in the post-COVID-19 context. Thailand represents a more service-oriented and tourism-driven economy with a feminine, collectivist, and high humane-orientation culture, emphasizing social harmony, emotional balance, and well-being (Fukushige et al., 2019; The Culture Factor Group, 2023). Conversely, Bangladesh exhibits a more masculine and hierarchical culture (Ondekova et al., 2025), where economic resilience relies heavily on manufacturing sectors (Thomas, 2022) and where job security and survival concerns were heightened during the pandemic (Imran & Ahmed, 2020).

In terms of creative context, the Global Innovation Index 2025 reported that Thailand ranked 45th out of 139, overall, and 39th for creative output whereas Bangladesh was 106th overall and 86th for creative output. Given this context, there are significant cross-cultural differences between Thailand and Bangladesh. In terms of creativity contexts, Thailand obtained a rank of 32nd, while Bangladesh secured a rank of 86th, also according to the Global Innovation Index 2025. Consequently, the correlation between the global creativity index and entrepreneurship in Thailand is stronger compared to that in Bangladesh, suggesting that Thailand is more likely to experience higher levels of new industry creation, as well as broader economic expansion and development compared with Bangladesh (World Intellectual Property Organization, 2025).

These two developing Asian economies differ significantly in terms of cultural orientation and socio-economic foundation. By situating creativity research in these distinct contexts, we extend the application of Terror Management Theory (TMT) beyond Western settings, offering a deeper understanding of how mortality salience and diminished QoL interact with workplace environments to influence creativity performance.

In this study, we explore how COVID-19 QoL affects the relationship between creative environment and employee’s creativity performance. We first study the direct impact of creative environment on creativity performance. Then we examine whether COVID-19 QoL negatively moderates this proposed relationship. The research framework is grounded in TMT, which offers an understanding of the psychological implications of the pandemic, providing insights into how mortality salience, coping mechanisms, and cultural factors intersect with creativity performance and quality of life in the organizational context.

Theoretical Background and Hypotheses

Cross-Cultural Context

National culture has emerged as a powerful determinant in elucidating variations in creativity and innovation across different countries (Sarooghi et al., 2015). When considering creativity from a cross-cultural perspective, it becomes clear that the culture, society, and beliefs of a particular culture all have an impact on its level of creativity (Jaskyte et al., 2020).

According to Hofstede’s national culture model, Thailand is classified as a “feminine society,” which emphasizes values such as cooperation, care for others, and quality of life over competitiveness and achievement (Fukushige et al., 2019; Hofstede et al., 2010). The cultural characteristics of sympathy for the underdog and a focus on collective well-being are deeply rooted in various societies, influencing communication styles and social interactions. Thailand is a pragmatic culture (The Culture Factor Group, 2023) meaning people believe that truth depends very much on situation, context, and time, and they are able to adapt traditions easily to changing conditions.

Thailand’s culture exhibits a higher score for the Indulgence dimension, reflecting a societal inclination toward enjoying life and having fun. This cultural trait is intertwined with the country’s Buddhist traditions, which emphasize prosocial behaviors and community cohesion (Jory, 2021). Individuals in indulgent cultures tend to prioritize pleasure and leisure, often leading to choices that favor vice over virtue, such as unhealthy snack consumption (Heydari et al., 2025). This dimension reflects a society that prioritizes enjoyment, leisure, and the fulfillment of desires, impacting both individual behaviors and broader cultural practices.

In contrast, Bangladesh is characterized as a masculine society, where hegemonic masculinity plays a significant role in shaping gender dynamics (Ondekova et al., 2025). This cultural orientation fosters a more competitive environment where success is defined by individual performance and visible accomplishments. Work is often viewed as a means to financial gain, and the clear division of gender roles may be more pronounced. The concept of masculinity in Bangladesh is deeply intertwined with societal expectations that emphasize achievement, assertiveness, and material rewards (Khan et al., 2022). This competitive drive shapes a “tougher” cultural milieu where ambition and strength are highly valued.

Bangladesh is identified as a restraint society, where cultural norms prioritize immediate outcomes (Nurunnabi, 2017). The Restraint dimension is defined by a belief that the satisfaction of desires needs to be controlled and regulated by strict social norms (Xenitidou & Edmonds, 2014). This mindset leads to a more cynical outlook and a perception that enjoyment and leisure are socially inappropriate. As a result, individuals in restrained cultures may feel their personal behaviors are constrained by social pressure and exhibit a more cautious and conservative approach to life.

Terror Management Theory

Terror management theory (TMT) is a psychological theory, which exploring how individuals deal with the awareness of their mortality and the fear of death, creating existential anxiety (Cui et al., 2020) arising from the realization that death is inevitable and that human life is inherently fragile (Kwon & Park, 2022). To manage this terror, individuals develop psychological defense mechanisms that provide a buffer against existential fears (Pyszczynski et al., 2021). TMT provides insights into how existential concerns, particularly mortality salience, influence psychological defense mechanisms (Cox et al., 2021).

In terms of COVID-19 QoL, TMT plays a key role by arguing that increased mortality salience causes people to look for meaning and purpose (Vail III et al., 2012). This pursuit of significance extends to organizational environments, where employees face uncertainties. The role of TMT in influencing the creative environment within organizations has become an important point in shedding light on how individuals can exercise their creativity in the face of existential fear (Cui et al., 2020). This investigation advances our understanding of the complex interaction between TMT, quality of life, and the collective creativity performance of employees navigating the current pandemic.

This research extends our understanding of coping mechanisms by analyzing the impact of TMT on creativity dynamics within organizations during the pandemic. Individuals driven by existential concerns may use creativity not only as a means of personal expression but also as a mechanism to support a positive organizational landscape. This threefold exploration illuminates the multifaceted role of TMT, offering valuable insights into how the theory manifests in both individual well-being and the broader creative endeavors of employees amid the complex realities of an ongoing global crisis.

Creative Environment and Creativity Performance

As humans evolved, the demands of the environment promoted the development of intellectual abilities, resulting in enhanced self-reflection within a symbolic framework. In the modern workplace, creativity is critical for success in many roles; however, creative workers often face challenges related to their identity and work environment, which can influence their professional recognition and career longevity (Dailey & Devlin, 2025). Individuals who excelled in adapting to and prospering within the cultural environment of ideas, values, rules, and deities were more likely to play a significant role in shaping the continued evolution of the human brain (Kwon & Park, 2022).

Many researchers have studied the impact of social and psychological factors on creativity. For instance, social support has been found to have a positive effect on the quantity of creativity performance among employees (Hashim et al., 2022), while cultural and psychosocial factors have been shown to promote creativity (Jaskyte et al., 2020). In response to COVID-19, TMT involves acknowledging that people’s efforts to adapt to changes in important areas of their lives, such as education, business, and health, can help them maintain their self-esteem amidst this time of uncertainty. Consequently, this adaptive response can serve as a significant resource for addressing thoughts related to mortality (Kwon & Park, 2022). In the context of COVID-19, when people are faced with the management of death-related worries, environmentally relevant circumstances may be especially impactful (Vail III et al., 2012).

The term “creative environment” refers to the factors in the work environment that influence the expression and development of creative ideas in general. The work environment, including organizational culture, leadership, and structure, has been consistently identified as critical in fostering creativity (Jaskyte et al., 2020; Sarwar et al., 2025). This suggests that if everyone in a community or organization works to encourage creativity, they can gradually create an environment that fosters creativity. Hence:

Hypothesis 1: A creative environment is positively related to employees’ creativity performance during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moderating Role of COVID-19 QoL

COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the creative environment in the workplace, affecting both the quality of life and the overall dynamics of creative teams (Galanti et al., 2021). This COVID-19 pandemic has led to higher mortality rates as people become more aware of their risk of illness and death (Shaukat et al., 2024). This heightened mortality salience can lead to increased anxiety and fear, which can affect professionals and the creative tasks they perform (Cui et al., 2020). Anxiety, pressure, and uncertainty related to health, job security, and overall uncertainty during the COVID-19 pandemic may impair the ability to fully engage in creativity and innovation (Qin et al., 2021). As such, TMT suggests that individuals rely on cultural attitudes that provide meaning, purpose, and a sense of immortality to manage existential anxiety (Pyszczynski et al., 2021). However, the pandemic has disrupted these worldviews, challenging previously held assumptions about safety, security, and the future. This disruption can lead to a sense of existential crisis, impacting the quality of life of creative workers and potentially reducing their motivation and creative output.

Many organizations turned to remote work to ensure employees were safe during the worst stages of the pandemic (Xiao et al., 2021). While remote working offers flexibility and does not require commuting, it also poses challenges to productivity and engagement (Galanti et al., 2021). A lack of face-to-face interaction and limited social interaction can impact the emotional well-being of creative professionals, which can affect their quality of life (Carnevale & Hatak, 2020). Moreover, pandemic restrictions and safety measures could have reduced quality of work and created frustration among creative professionals, which may affect their quality of life.

In an organization context, collaboration and teamwork are fundamental to the creative process, playing a crucial role in enhancing team innovation performance, and organizations often rely on work teams to generate and cultivate creative solutions that provide them with a competitive advantage (Rosso, 2014). COVID-19 disrupted these collaborative dynamics, making it challenging to engage in spontaneous brainstorming sessions, group critiques, or co-creation activities. A study by Qin et al. (2021) posited that discussing the COVID-19 crisis among team members had a detrimental effect, as it leads to a decrease in overall team creativity.

The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak forced many businesses to implement personal protection measures, and many employees were advised to work from home. This phenomenon resulted in an extreme increase in employees’ usage of remote work systems, such as the internet and social media. These virtual communication tools may partially address this issue, but cannot fully replicate the energy and synergy of in-person collaboration, potentially affecting the quality of life of creative professionals. The pandemic brought uncertainty and anxiety, both personally and professionally. Fear of job security, economic instability, and concerns about health and safety can have a profound impact on an individual’s quality of life (Thukral, 2021). These stressors can reduce focus, motivation, and overall creative output, leading to a decline in satisfaction and fulfillment in the creative workplace.

Moreover, TMT suggests that individuals rely on cultural worldviews to manage existential anxiety. However, the pandemic has disrupted these worldviews by challenging assumptions of safety, stability, and predictability (Pyszczynski et al., 2021). The resulting uncertainty and loss of familiar structures can diminish employees’ sense of meaning and purpose, negatively impacting their quality of life and potentially stifling their creative abilities. The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly increased mortality salience by highlighting the fragility of life (Cox et al., 2021). The constant reminders of death, news about fatalities, and personal experiences with the virus can increase existential anxiety among individuals (Cui et al., 2020). This heightened anxiety can affect their cognitive processing and creativity. The fear of contracting the virus, social isolation, financial difficulties, and concerns about the future have led to increased stress, anxiety, and depression for many individuals (Cox et al., 2021). Amidst the COVID-19 outbreak, the widespread negative mood is poised to significantly impact people’s mental health. The public is likely to experience fluctuations in emotional states, affecting their ability to control creativity consistently. The pandemic has brought about economic uncertainty, leading to layoffs, furloughs, and job insecurity. Employees facing the risk of unemployment or reduced work hours may experience decreased motivation and engagement in their work (Thukral, 2021). Job insecurity can limit the willingness to take risks and experiment, thus hindering creativity in job performance.

Hypothesis 2: During the COVID-19 pandemic, overall quality of life negatively moderates the relationship between a creative environment and employees’ creativity performance.

Methods

Measures

This study developed a survey questionnaire based on constructed items. Questionnaires, a very useful survey tool (Galanti et al., 2021; Qin et al., 2021), offer a cost-effective method for reaching a large number of respondents, making them an efficient means of gathering information (Haris et al., 2025).

To measure the creative environment, we extracted four items from the work of Amabile and Gryskiewicz (1989). The original scale was designed for employee creativity in workplace settings, and is significantly related to creativity within the organization, being widely used in organizational psychology and management studies across industries (Dailey & Devlin, 2025). Then, employee creativity was measured using five items adapted from Tierney et al. (1999). The scale has demonstrated good reliability and validity, aligning with self-reported creative performance in work settings. This approach allows for the reliable examination of employee creativity while being applicable cultural nuances in Asian organizational settings such as Liu and Gao (2025).

Similarly, COVID-19 quality of life (QoL) was measured with four items shortened and adapted from COVID-19–Impact on Quality of Life by Repišti et al. (2020) for the current study. The COVID-19 QoL is a reliable and valid scale which can be used to explore the impact of COVID-19 on quality of life. This scale also applicable in diverse contexts including Asian settings, as shown in Palit et al. (2022). The details of the research constructs and their items are provided in Table 2. All items are of the five-point Likert type (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree).

Measurement items were adapted from existing validated scales. To ensure relevance and brevity, instructors and managers reviewed the items, and some items were removed to reduce the length of the questionnaire and minimize survey fatique (Jeong et al., 2023). The final English version was forward-translated into Thai and Bangla by bilingual professionals. Translations were then reviewed by local managers and staff in both countries for clarity and cultural appropriateness. A pilot test was then conducted in both countries to assess the reliability of the translated instruments, and the Cronbach’s alpha range was .605 to .860, meeting the acceptable level suggested by Izah et al. (2023).

Control Variable

This study included questionnaire items to assess gender, age, education, and work position to control employee creativity. Hora et al. (2022) posited that gender is associated with creative performance. In line with Tang et al. (2020), age and education can inhibit or stimulate employee creativity. Regarding work position, Liu et al. (2020) found that leader behavior can predict creativity performance of employee. In addition, we also found differences between the public and private sectors in organization or human resource management (Vanhala & Stavrou, 2013). Therefore, we employed organization type as a control variable for the creative environment.

Sample and Data Collection

This study employed an online questionnaire as the primary data collection method. The target population consisted of full-time employees in Thailand and Bangladesh, representing two developing Asian economies with distinct cultural and socio-economic contexts, which constitute an unknown population. To maximize accessibility and reach a diverse pool of respondents, convenience and snowball sampling techniques were adopted. These methods are particularly suitable in business and management research, given the limited access to organizational sources and the need for rapid data collection, which helped to enhance the relevance and quality of the data (Memon et al., 2025). Additionally, snowball sampling is especially appropriate when studying populations that are not easily accessible, such as those sharing specific experiences like those of the post-pandemic workplace (Naderifar et al., 2017). The survey link was disseminated through multiple digital platforms, including Facebook, Line, WhatsApp, Twitter, and email networks.

The study employed a cross-sectional survey design, with data collected from 491 full-time employees. Respondents are from both the public and private sector with a wide range of occupational categories including commercial, construction, financial, and service businesses. The diverse range of industry representation enhances the generalizability and applicability of findings to a broader context. Specifically, participants were assured of anonymity and confidentiality, and no personally identifying information was collected. The principles of informed consent, data confidentiality, and voluntary participation were strictly before starting the survey.

In terms of Thailand distribution, a total of 208 valid responses resulted in a response rate of 74.28%. A similar process was used to enlist participants in Bangladesh. A total of 283 valid responses resulted in a commendable response rate of 76.69%. These response rates indicated a high level of commitment and willingness to participate in the study among respondents in both countries.

As seen in Table 1, the sample represented diverse demographic characteristics. The gender distribution differed by country, with a higher proportion of males in Bangladesh (73.1%) and a more balanced distribution in Thailand (49.0% male, 51.0% female). In terms of age, most Bangladeshi respondents were 20 to 30 years old (68.2%), whereas Thai respondents were older on average, with 45.2% aged 31 to 40 and 30.3% aged 41 to 50. Educational backgrounds were predominantly at the bachelor’s level (61.8% Bangladesh, 73.6% Thailand), and most of respondent are from employees position (64.3% Bangladesh, 72.6% Thailand). In addition, the majority of participants worked in the private sector (92.2% Bangladesh, 80.3% Thailand).

Table 1.

Respondent Characteristics.

	Overall (N = 491)		Bangladesh (n = 283)		Thailand (n = 208)
Variable	N	%	N	%	N	%
Gender
Male	309	62.9	207	73.1	102	49.0
Female	182	37.1	76	26.9	106	51.0
Age
20–30 years	237	48.3	193	68.2	44	21.2
31–40 years	169	34.4	75	26.5	94	45.2
41–50 years	76	15.5	13	4.6	63	30.3
Above 50 years	9	1.8	2	0.7	7	3.4
Education
Below bachelor’s degree	22	4.5	13	4.6	9	4.3
Bachelor’s degree	328	66.8	175	61.8	153	73.6
Master’s degree	134	27.3	92	32.5	42	20.2
Higher than a master’s degree	7	1.4	3	1.1	4	1.9
Position
Management level	20	4.1	14	4.9	6	2.9
Leader level	138	28.1	87	30.7	51	24.5
Employee level	333	67.8	182	64.3	151	72.6
Organization type
Public	63	12.8	22	7.8	41	19.7
Private	428	87.2	261	92.2	167	80.3

Analysis and Results

Analytical Approach

Data analysis was conducted using PLS-SEM with SmartPLS 4.0, which is suitable for complex models and for modeling formative and reflective constructs. PLS was chosen for its ability to extend theory and test mediating and moderating effects (Hair et al., 2019). The analysis proceeded in three main stages: measurement model, structural model, and moderation analysis. To test the moderating effect, interaction terms were created using the two-stage approach, and path significance was assessed using bootstrap statistics with 5,000 resamples according to Hair et al. (2022).

Measurement Model

We first assessed the measurement model through factor loadings, average variance extracted (AVE), and composite reliability (CR). As shown in Table 2, the AVE values met the acceptable threshold of 0.50, indicating that the constructs explain a substantial proportion of the observed variances and support their convergent validity. In addition, the CR values ranged from 0.80 to 0.86, which is considered satisfactory to good, indicating that the constructs exhibit high internal consistency and reliability (Hair et al., 2019). In addition, loadings between 0.44 and 0.90 were retained when conceptually justified and when their inclusion improved the CR and AVE of the construct (Hair et al., 2017).

Table 2.

Construct Measurement.

Construct items		Loadings	t Value	AVE	CR	Cronbach’s alpha
Creative environment (CE)				0.55	0.83	.72
				0.61	0.86	.79
				0.50	0.80	.67
CE1	I feel challenged by the work I am currently doing.	0.65	13.95
		0.73	13.28
		0.63	8.93
CE2	My supervisor sets goals appropriately.	0.69	18.72
		0.72	16.02
		0.68	10.97
CE3	People are recognized for their creative work in this organization.	0.80	29.52
		0.82	20.25
		0.77	15.56
CE4	New ideas are encouraged in this organization.	0.80	30.82
		0.86	33.46
		0.74	14.81
Creativity performance (CP)				0.51	0.84	.75
				0.50	0.83	.76
				0.52	0.85	.77
CP1	I demonstrate originality in my work.	0.72	23.38
		0.75	18.94
		0.73	19.07
CP2	I try out new ideas and approach to problems.	0.75	26.87
		0.70	12.30
		0.78	25.95
CP3	I identify opportunities for new approaches to problems products/processes.	0.80	37.13
		0.77	18.00
		0.78	28.12
CP4	I generate novel, but operable work-related ideas.	0.60	12.25
		0.71	12.65
		0.62	9.42
CP5	I generate ideas revolutionary to my field.	0.67	18.80
		0.61	8.28
		0.70	15.54
COVID-19 QoL (CV)				0.55	0.83	.75
				0.60	0.85	.78
				0.51	0.80	.71
CV1	I think my quality of life is lower than before.	0.59	5.10
		0.80	7.45
		0.59	5.67
CV2	I think my physical health may deteriorate.	0.64	6.57
		0.44	2.36
		0.54	4.46
CV3	I feel more depressed than before.	0.87	22.64
		0.90	8.55
		0.83	23.68
CV4	I think my mental health has deteriorated.	0.84	20.15
		0.86	8.22
		0.83	24.27

Note. The upper number is for the overall sample (N = 491), the middle is for the Thailand sample (n = 208), and the lower is for the Bangladesh sample (n = 283).

Considering multicollinearity, the maximum VIF values for the overall model (Overall = 1.77) and for each country separately (Thailand = 2.32, Bangladesh = 1.67) were below the threshold of five, indicating that multicollinearity was not a concern (Hair et al., 2019). Furthermore, to address the issue of common method bias, we checked if all VIF values in the inner model were below 3.3, by which it can be interpreted that common method bias is unlikely to be a substantive concern in this study, as suggested by Kock (2015). Additionally, as this study relies on self-reported or self-administered data, we employed Harman’s one-factor test to assess the possibility of common method bias. Based on the results, the overall variance for a single factor in the dataset was below the common threshold of 50% (23.317% in Bangladesh and 22.811% in Thailand), indicating that common method bias did not exist in the dataset (Fuller et al., 2016).

In summary, a comprehensive analysis of the measurement model in this study, including factor loadings, AVE, CR, VIF values, and common method bias, demonstrates the model’s reliability, validity, and robustness. Furthermore, as shown in Table 3, the square root of the AVE for each construct was higher than that of the correlations with other constructs, indicating satisfactory discriminant validity. Additionally, the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of each construct was lower than .90, thus exerting satisfactory discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2019).

Table 3.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix.

Variables	M	SD	1.CE	2.CV	3.CP	HTMT
1. Creative environment (CE)	3.68	0.77	.74
	3.68	0.81	.78
	3.68	0.74	.71
2. COVID-19 (CV)	3.56	0.92	−.08	.74		.12
	3.36	0.95	.09	.77		.14
	3.71	0.87	−.23	.71		.28
3. Creativity performance (CP)	3.44	0.75	.36	−.21	.71	.46
	3.71	0.65	.40	.21	.71	.50
	3.24	0.75	.35	−.42	.72	.49

Note. Bold values on the diagonal represent the square root of AVE, while the other matrix entries represent the correlations. HTMT represents the highest value of Heterotrait–monotrait ratio. The upper number is for the overall sample (N = 491), the middle is for the Thailand sample (n = 208), and the lower is for the Bangladesh sample (n = 283).

To address the issue of model fit, this study was assessed using the standard root mean square (SRMR) criterion. SRMR is similar to RMSEA and should be less than 0.09 for a good model fit (Fan et al., 2016). For the overall sample, the model exhibited a set of values as follows; X² = 465.59, NFI = 0.77, and SRMR = 0.07. For Thailand, the set of values was X² = 275.78, NFI = 0.75, and SRMR = 0.07 while Bangladesh, it was X² = 362.84, NFI = 0.68, and SRMR = 0.08. These results appeared to satisfy the model fit.

Structural Results

The results presented in Table 4 demonstrate the extent to which the model explains variance in creativity performance, both overall and within the specific countries of Thailand and Bangladesh. The model accounted for 21.6% of the variance in creativity performance, with Thailand contributing 20.4% and Bangladesh contributing 29.7%. These findings indicate that the proposed model has a moderate level of explanatory power in understanding creativity performance.

Table 4.

Hypothesis Testing Results.

	Overall		Thailand		Bangladesh
Variables and Models	Model 1	Model 2	Model 1	Model 2	Model 1	Model 2
Independent variable
CE → CP	0.343**	0.308**	0.397**	0.384**	0.367**	0.231**
Moderator variable
COVID 19 QoL → CP		−0.134**		0.188*		−0.273**
Interaction effect
COVID 19 QoL × CE → CP		−0.092*		0.000		−0.160**
Control variables
Business sector → CE	0.126	0.126	0.047	0.046	0.289	0.289
Gender → CP	−0.082	−0.084	−0.159	−0.097	−0.131	−0.090
Age → CE	0.271**	0.256**	0.068	0.008	0.183*	0.162*
Education → CP	−0.041	−0.044	−0.042	−0.042	−0.003	−0.010
Position → CP	0.042	0.046	0.008	−0.021	−0.007	−0.012
Model statistics
R²	18.3%	21.6%	17.2%	20.4%	17.3%	29.7%
R² change		3.3%		3.2%		12.4%
Effect size (f²)		0.04		0.04		0.18

Note. f ² = Effect size (≥0.02 ); Overall sample (N = 491), Thailand sample (n = 208), and Bangladesh sample (n = 283); CE = Creative environment; CP = Creativity performance.

p < .05, **p < .01.

Regarding the specific hypotheses, H1 received support as there was a significant positive relationship between the creative environment and creativity performance (β = .308, p < .01). This relationship was consistent in both the Thailand and Bangladesh samples, indicating a strong convergence of findings (β = .384, p < .01 and β = .231, p < .01, respectively). These results suggest that organizations should focus on creating a supportive and stimulating work environment to enhance creativity performance.

Moving on to H2, which stated that COVID-19 QoL negatively moderates the relationship between creative environment and creativity performance, this was supported (β = −.092, p < .05). Notably, the Bangladesh sample strongly supported H2 (β = −.160, p < .01). In addition, the results indicated a negative relationship between COVID-19 QoL and creativity performance both overall, and for the Bangladesh sample (β = −.134, p < .01, and β = −.273, p < .01, respectively), suggesting that the pandemic has had a detrimental effect on creativity performance in that context.

Conversely, there was no significant moderation effect in the Thai sample. However, it showed a positive, significant relationship (β = .188, p < .05), indicating that in Thailand, employees may have responded to the challenges posed by COVID-19 QoL with increased creativity. These findings highlight the importance of considering cultural and contextual factors when examining the effects of external disruptions on creativity performance. Additionally, the controlling construct analysis revealed that only the age variable had a significant effect on creativity performance for the overall and for Bangladesh samples (β = .256, p < .01, and β = .162, p < .05, respectively). These results suggest that organizations should pay attention to employees’ age as a factor in fostering creativity development.

The structural model explained 18.3% of the variance in the dependent variable for the overall sample (Model 1), which increased to 21.6% after including the moderator (Model 2). In Thailand, the explained variance increased from 17.2% to 20.4%, while in Bangladesh, it increased from 17.3% to 29.7%. According to Hair et al. (2019), these R² values represent weak explanatory power. Regarding effect sizes (f²), the moderator contributed a small effect (f² = 0.04) on both the overall and Thai samples, and a medium effect (f² = 0.18) on the Bangladeshi sample (see Table 4).

In summary, the findings support the positive influence of the creative environment on creativity performance, highlight the varying effects of COVID-19 QoL on the creative environment and creativity performance across Thailand and Bangladesh, and emphasizing the significance of employees’ age in fostering creativity. These results provide valuable insights for organizations seeking to enhance creativity performance in the face of disruptions such as COVID-19 QoL, while also recognizing the importance of cultural and contextual factors in shaping creative outcomes.

Discussion

This study explores the correlation between the creative environment and creativity performance in cross-cultural contexts, specifically focusing on Thailand and Bangladesh during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the ongoing impact of COVID-19 and the potential for future health-related challenges, organizations must adapt and develop strategies to address unforeseen circumstances to ensure their survival and optimize employee performance.

This study examined the moderating role of COVID-19 QoL in terms of the relationship between creative environment and creative performance. The finding that COVID-19-related quality of life negatively impacts creative performance is consistent with the idea that existential threats, such as a global pandemic, increase individuals’ existential anxiety. However, there was no significant moderation effect in the Thai sample, while the Bangladeshi sample had a significant negative moderation effect. The findings of this research will provide valuable insights and guidance on how organizations can adjust and enhance their environments to foster creativity, thereby promoting the creative potential of their employees.

Theoretical Implications

The study makes several important theoretical contributions to the literature.

First, a significant positive relationship was established between creative environment and creativity performance, which is consistent with previous research (Jaskyte et al., 2020; Yeh & Huan, 2017) that emphasizes the importance of a supportive and safe work environment for fostering creativity. A creative environment serves as a mechanism for managing existential concerns by providing individuals with a sense of meaning and purpose. The impact of the environment is often considered a variable that can influence creative performance (Cui et al., 2020). This finding extends the literature by linking the creative environment and creativity to TMT, highlighting the role of the creative environment in mitigating existential anxieties.

Second, TMT explains that awareness of death drives people to adhere to cultural worldviews, enhance self-esteem, and maintain close relationships to reduce existential anxiety (Pyszczynski et al., 2021). These cultural worldviews and anxiety-buffering systems provide personal meaning, security, and value, which guide individuals toward meaning-making or self-protective behaviors, depending on their cultural context. Thus, TMT underpins this theoretical by explaining how mortality salience interacts with cultural values to shape creative performance.

Third, by integrating TMT, this study suggests that creative environments enable individuals to cope with existential threats in different cultural contexts. According to TMT, reminders of mortality trigger either meaning-making behaviors or defensive conformity, depending on cultural worldviews.

In Thailand, where cultural values emphasize happiness, emotional balance, and self-expression, mortality awareness may activate meaning-seeking and symbolic self-affirmation through creative behavior, resulting in a positive QoL and creativity relation. In addition, with its feminine and cooperative culture, a supportive creative environment is consistent with the values of social support, resources, and freedom necessary for creativity to flourish, as identified in previous research such as Yeh and Huan (2017).

In Bangladesh, a culture characterized by competitiveness and patriarchy, with strict norms and rigid rules, a creative environment may provide an avenue for individuals to cope with existential concerns and foster creativity. Bangladesh’s cultural orientation toward conformity, hierarchy, and collective security channels mortality concerns into norm adherence and risk aversion, reducing creative behavior under stress, leading to a negative relationship. From a theoretical perspective, these findings highlight how cultural dimensions shape the QoL and creativity link under existential stress in the two nations.

This study highlights the age variable as an important factor related to creative performance. In the context of COVID-19 QoL, younger individuals who have less control over the pandemic situation may experience increased existential anxiety. However, within the framework of TMT, collaboration between age groups in organizations operating in creative environments may provide opportunities for learning and development in creativity. This finding highlights the importance of intergenerational collaboration and its potential impact on creative performance, particularly during times of crisis.

In summary, this study provides theoretical implications that help us understand the relationship between creative environment and creative performance, the influence of COVID-19 QoL on creativity in different cultural contexts and the role of age diversity in promoting creativity within a TMT framework. These theoretical insights enhance the existing literature and offer valuable perspectives for future research in the field of organization studies and human resource management.

Practical Implications

In Thailand, which is characterized by a feminine, collectivist, and harmony-oriented culture, people value social support, quality of life, and emotional balance. These values can limit risk-taking and frank expression, which are typically important for creativity. Thai cultural values foster resilience and encourage cooperative responses under stress. During crises, individuals often engage in creative and collaborative behaviors rather than competition. Organizations can further strengthen creativity by fostering supportive, participative, and emotionally balanced work environments that align with local cultural values. In addition, a sense of community plays a vital role in supporting individual well-being, which can act as a buffer against stress and foster creative resilience.

In Bangladesh, where the study found a negative moderating effect of COVID-19 QoL on creative environments and creative performance, organizations should prioritize addressing the impact of the pandemic on employees’ quality of life. Leadership plays a crucial role in shaping performance, creativity, and strategic direction in the Bangladeshi context. The country has high power distance and strong uncertainty avoidance, often leading employees to prioritize social order and conformity, limiting their ability to express themselves creatively under pressure. Therefore, leaders must understand the factors that influence the creative environment and performance in addition to providing guidance, psychological support, and opportunities for experimentation. To mitigate the impacts and maintain a creative environment, organizations should take proactive measures to support employee well-being, such as providing resources for physical and mental health support, promoting work-life balance, and introducing interventions that promote psychological safety and inclusive communication.

Furthermore, this study would suggest the importance of adopting context-sensitive strategies in organizational communication, such as applying the Discourse Historical Approach (Clarke et al., 2012; Skov et al., 2023) in order to interpret how meaning and strategy evolve through dialogue which can help us better understand how meaning is constructed across different contextual levels.

Limitations and Future Research

Future research can benefit from this study by addressing several issues.

First, future research should expand on the findings of this study by considering both stimulating and inhibiting factors in assessing and enhancing the creative environment across all organizational functions. While this study focused on scales related to environmental stimuli, a comprehensive understanding of the creative environment requires an exploration of all factors that impact organizational creativity.

Second, as the study utilized a cross-sectional design, causal relationships cannot provide definitive explanations. The findings should, therefore, be interpreted as associations rather than causal effects. Future research could employ longitudinal or mixed-methods designs to capture the evolving pandemic effects.

Third, to broaden the scope of cross-cultural analysis, future research could incorporate developed Asian countries or Western contexts for richer cross-cultural insights. Including both developing and developed contexts would enable more meaningful comparisons and provide deeper insights into how cultural differences shape the creative environment and creativity performance.

Fourth, this study relied on convenience and snowball sampling which are non-probability methods which could result in self-selection bias and limited generalizability in Thailand and Bangladesh. This non-random selection process limits the external validity of the findings, meaning they may not be fully generalizable to the broader population. While we included respondents from diverse sectors to reduce this risk, future research should employ probability sampling or longitudinal designs to enhance representativeness and external validity. Morover, while the measurement scales were adapted from validated sources, the item reduction process may have affected content validity, as not all original items were retained. Future research should consider a more comprehensive validation process, including confirmatory factor analysis and expert consensus across both cultures.

Last, these results suggest that while the proposed model provides statistically significant insights, its explanatory power remains weak. The small-to-medium effect sizes further indicate that other unexamined factors may influence the creative environment and creativity performance. Therefore, the findings should be interpreted with caution, and future research is encouraged to integrate additional predictors and contextual moderators to strengthen explanatory power.

Overall, addressing these limitations and exploring these avenues for future research will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the creative environment and creativity performance, as well as their interaction within different organizational and cultural contexts.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Lobel Trong Thuy Tran for your invaluable guidance and insightful suggestions throughout this research, and Mr. Shabuz Hossain of the Dhaka Metro Rail Project, Larsen & Toubro Limited, Bangladesh, for his assistance with data collection and during our time in Bangladesh.

Author Note

All the authors read and approved the final version of this manuscript.

ORCID iDs

Natthawut Yodchai

Veenarat Akaraputinat

Patcharin Chaisurin

Ethical Considerations

No ethical clearance certificate is applicable for this present study.

Author Contributions

Natthawut Yodchai: Conceptualization, Methodology, Results analysis, Writing Original Manuscript. Veenarat Akaraputinat: Writing Review & Editing. Patcharin Chaisurin: Writing Review & Editing.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be available as per request.

References

Almazrouei

Alvarez-Torres

F. J.

Schiuma

Lopez-Torres

G. C.

(2025). The digital creative organisation: Are work–life balance, remote working and management support impacting in the creativity? Measuring Business Excellence, 29(4), 734–760. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-10-2024-0177

Alyzza

(2023). Stress and quality of life of the employees of Saint Joseph Institute of Technology in the post-covid 19 situation. SJIT Faculty Research Journal, 12(1), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32963.41765

Amabile

T. M.

Gryskiewicz

N. D.

(1989). The creative environment scales: Work environment inventory. Creativity Research Journal, 2(4), 231–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400418909534321

Carnevale

J. B.

Hatak

(2020). Employee adjustment and well-being in the era of COVID-19: Implications for human resource management. Journal of Business Research, 116, 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.037

Clarke

Kwon

Wodak

(2012). A context-sensitive approach to analysing talk in strategy meetings. British Journal of Management, 23(4), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00759.x

Cooke

F. L.

Veen

Wood

(2017). What do we know about cross-country comparative studies in HRM? A critical review of literature in the period of 2000-2014. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), 196–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1245671

Cox

C. R.

Swets

J. A.

Gully

Xiao

Yraguen

(2021). Death concerns, benefit-finding, and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648609

Cui

Y.-X.

Zhou

Zhai

H.-K.

Bai

B.-R.

Y.-M.

(2020). Benevolent creativity buffers anxiety aroused by mortality salience: Terror management in COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.601027

Dailey

S. L.

Devlin

M. B.

(2025). Got creatives?: The role of identity and workplace environment in retaining creative professionals. International Journal of Business Communication, 0(0), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884251350274

10.

Fan

Chen

Shirkey

John

S. R.

Park

Shao

(2016). Applications of structural equation modeling (SEM) in ecological studies: An updated review. Ecological Processes, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-016-0063-3

11.

Fukushige

Aryupong

Phijaranakul

(2019). Moderating effects of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions on relationship between AEWOM and FEWOM in Thailand. ABAC Journal, 39(2), 1–22.

12.

Fuller

C. M.

Simmering

M. J.

Atinc

Babin

B. J.

(2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008

13.

Galanti

Guidetti

Mazzei

Zappalà

Toscano

(2021). Work from home during the COVID-19 outbreak: The impact on employees’ remote work productivity, engagement, and stress. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(7), e426–e432. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000002236

14.

Hair

J. F.

Hult

G. T. M.

Ringle

C. M.

Sarstedt

(2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

15.

Hair

J. F.

Jr. Hult

G. T. M.

Ringle

C. M.

Sarstedt

(2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage.

16.

Hair

J. F.

Risher

J. J.

Sarstedt

Ringle

C. M.

(2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

17.

Haris

Ahmad

M. A.

Hussain

Sarwar

Zafar

Khan

M. B.

(2025). Stimulating online purchase intentions through digitalization: Intermediation of perceptions and electronic word of mouth in fashion e-commerce. Journal of Asian Development Studies, 14(1), 1520–1538. https://doi.org/10.62345/jads.2025.14.1.120

18.

Hashim

A. M.

Aris

S. R. S.

Fook

C. Y.

(2022). Assessing gender differences in creative self-efficacy, creative ability and creative environment dimensions among lower secondary school students in Selangor, Malaysia. Asian Journal of University Education (AJUE), 18(4), 879–892. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v18i4.19993

19.

Heydari

Laroche

Paulin

Richard

M. O.

(2025). Cultural drivers of vice–virtue preferences: The role of justification and trait self-control. Psychology & Marketing, 42(12), 3176–3189. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.70032

20.

Hofstede

G. J.

Minkov

(2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

21.

Hora

Badura

K. L.

Lemoine

G. J.

Grijalva

(2022). A meta-analytic examination of the gender difference in creative performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 1926–1950. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000999

22.

Imran

M. A.

Ahmed

(2020). Job insecurity in private education sector considering COVID-19 pandemic: Bangladesh panorama. American International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 2(2), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.46545/aijbms.v2i2.245

23.

Izah

S. C.

Sylva

Hait

(2023). Cronbach’s alpha: A cornerstone in ensuring reliability and validity in environmental health assessment. ES Energy & Environment, 23, Article 1057. https://doi.org/10.30919/esee1057

24.

Jaskyte

Butkevičienė

Danusevičienė

Jurkuvienė

(2020). Employees’ attitudes and values toward creativity, work environment, and job satisfaction in human service employees. Creativity Research Journal, 32(4), 394–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2020.1821160

25.

Jeong

Aggarwal

Robinson

Kumar

Spearot

Park

D. S.

(2023). Exhaustive or exhausting? Evidence on respondent fatigue in long surveys. Journal of Development Economics, 161, Article 102992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2022.102992

26.

Jory

(2021). A history of manners and civility in Thailand. Cambridge University Press.

27.

Khan

Hussain

Rahman

M. M.

(2022). Pathways to the studies on men and masculinities in Bangladesh. HUMANISMA: Journal of Gender Studies, 6(2), 144–165. https://doi.org/10.30983/humanisme.v6i2.5573

28.

Kock

(2015). “Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach”, International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101

29.

Kwon

Park

(2022). Understanding user responses to the COVID-19 pandemic on Twitter from a terror management theory perspective: Cultural differences among the US, UK and India. Computers in Human Behavior, 128(13), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107087

30.

Liu

Gao

(2025). The impact of work gamification on Chinese employee creativity: A moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1494789

31.

Liu

Zhu

Liu

(2020). The influence of leader empowerment behaviour on employee creativity. Management Decision, 58(12), 2681–2703. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-02-2019-0281

32.

Memon

M. A.

Thurasamy

Ting

Cheah

J.-H.

(2025). Convenience sampling: A review and guidelines for quantitative research. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.47263/JASEM.9(2)01

33.

Naderifar

Goli

Ghaljaie

(2017). Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research. Strides in Development of Medical Education, 14(3), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670

34.

Nurunnabi

(2017). The myth of tax evasion in south Asia: The case of a lower-middle income economy. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 20, 85–133. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1041-706020170000020005

35.

Ondekova

McCarthy

Power

(2025). Deconstructing cardboard Muslim man: Masculinity continuum and women’s economic empowerment in Bangladesh. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 60(4), 2387–2402. https://doi.org/10.1177/00219096231215722

36.

Palit

Yang

Khan

M. A. S.

Hasan

M. J.

(2022). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of Rohingya refugees with pre-existing health problems in Bangladesh. Conflict and Health, 16(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13031-022-00443-3

37.

Pakos

Walter

Rücker

Voigt

K. I.

(2021). The leap into the new normal in creative work: A qualitative study of the impact of COVID-19 on work practices in industrial companies. European Journal of Business and Management, 13(10), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.7176/EJBM/13-10-01

38.

Pyszczynski

Lockett

Greenberg

Solomon

(2021). Terror management theory and the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 61(2), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167820959488

39.

Qin

Yam

K. C.

Chen

Dong

(2021). Talking about COVID-19 is positively associated with team cultural tightness: Implications for team deviance and creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(4), 530–541. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000918

40.

Repišti

Jovanović

Kuzman

M. R.

Medved

Jerotić

Ribic

Majstorović

Simoska

S. M.

Novotni

Milutinovic

Stoilkovska

B. B.

Radojičić

Ristić

Zebić

Pemovska

Russo

(2020). How to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on quality of life: COV19-QoL–the development, reliability and validity of a new scale. Global Psychiatry Archives, 3(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.2478/gp-2020-0016

41.

Rosso

B. D.

(2014). Creativity and constraints: Exploring the role of constraints in the creative processes of research and development teams. Organization Studies, 35(4), 551–585. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840613517600

42.

Sarooghi

Libaers

Burkemper

(2015). Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 714–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.12.003

43.

Sarwar

Baig

Rahi

Sattar

(2025). Fostering green behavior in the workplace: The role of ethical climate, motivation states, and environmental knowledge. Sustainability, 17(9), Article 4083. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17094083

44.

Shaukat

M. Z.

Yousaf

S. U.

Sarwar

Sattar

(2024). Thriving in turmoil: Unraveling the interplay of resources, resilience, and performance among SMEs in times of economic vulnerability. Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), 13(2), 164–173. https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00312

45.

Skov

M. B.

Bjerregaard

Hansen

J. R.

(2023). Orchestrating ongoing interaction flows of strategy formation in and between meetings. Strategic Organization, 21(3), 651–682. https://doi.org/10.1177/14761270221127881

46.

Tang

Naumann

S. E.

Xing

(2020). Perceived work uncertainty and creativity during the covid-19 pandemic: The roles of Zhongyong and creative self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.596232

47.

The Culture Factor Group. (2023). Country comparison tool. https://www.theculturefactor.com/country-comparison-tool

48.

Thomas

(2022). Manufacturing growth and structural transformation: The case of Bangladesh 1 (pp. 25–51). Routledge eBooks.

49.

Thukral

(2021). COVID-19: Small and medium enterprises challenges and responses with creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Strategic Change, 30(2), 153–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2399

50.

Tierney

Farmer

S. M.

Graen

G. B.

(1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 591–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x

51.

Vail III

K. E.

Juhl

Arndt

Vess

Routledge

Rutjens

B. T

. (2012). When death is good for life: Considering the positive trajectories of terror management. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(4), 303–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312440046

52.

Vanhala

Stavrou

(2013). Human resource management practices and the HRM-performance link in public and private sector organizations in three Western societal clusters. Baltic Journal of Management, 8(4), 416–437. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-12-2012-0115

53.

Varma

Junge

Meaklim

Jackson

M. L.

(2021). Younger people are more vulnerable to stress, anxiety and depression during COVID-19 pandemic: A global cross-sectional survey. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 109, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.110236

54.

World Intellectual Property Organization. (2025). Global innovation index 2025: Innovation at a crossroads – Charting the future. https://www.wipo.int/web-publications/global-innovation-index-2025/assets/80937/global-innovation-index-2025-en.pdf

55.

Xenitidou

Edmonds

(Eds.). (2014). The conundrum of social norms. In The complexity of social norms (pp. 1–8). Springer International Publishing.

56.

Xiao

Becerik-Gerber

Lucas

Roll

S. C.

(2021). Impacts of working from home during COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental well-being of office workstation users. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(3), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000002097

57.

Yeh

S.-S.

Huan

T.-C.

(2017). Assessing the impact of work environment factors on employee creative performance of fine-dining restaurants. Tourism Management, 58, 119–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.006