Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Literature review demonstrates curiosity acts as a productive inefficiency in workplaces, indicating that strategic resource budgeting yields long-term innovation.
Curiosity is increasingly recognized as consequential for work outcomes including achievement and creativity. Unlike related constructs such as growth mindset and openness, curiosity involves active deviation from familiar paths, inviting workers to slow down, ask additional questions, and entertain multiple possibilities when speed and closure are typically prized. This review positions curiosity as a productive inefficiency, which reflects a force that prolongs decision-making and consumes resources in the short term while enabling vitality, agility, and potential breakthrough solutions over the long term. We review evidence on multidimensional models of curiosity, examine costs and benefits, explore the emerging literature on leader curiosity and curiosity's upward influence, and address assessment advances. We conclude with practical recommendations alongside a future research agenda emphasizing temporal dynamics and interventions. Throughout, we argue that managing curiosity effectively requires treating it as a strategic tool to be budgeted rather than a universal good to be maximized.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kashdan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: