{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013902681231380337, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004965243296921549, 'mean_word_length': 5.951724137931034, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
To Routinize or Not to Routinize? Employee Task Routinization, Situational Motivation, and Creativity

We addressed previous mixed findings regarding the effects of task routinization on employee creativity. We proposed that task routinization is not a single dimensional construct but that it has 2 dimensions, namely, content and process, which have different motivation and performance
 implications. Participants were 240 employees from various industries in South Korea. Results of structural equation modeling analyses confirmed that task content routinization had a negative effect on employee creativity by causing amotivation and reducing intrinsic motivation. By contrast,
 task process routinization enhanced employee creativity by increasing intrinsic motivation. Our findings clarify the effects of task routinization on employee creativity by identifying the 2 dimensions that lead to different situational motivation and creativity results, and we discuss the
 implications of these findings.