Not all innovative thinking is linked to positive attitudes.

Yet positive attitudes on average contribute more and are more desirable

You are also of course not suggesting or recommending negative attitudes..? and that is it. Why not?

(Q) How - in what ways - do character contribute to and have constructive outcomes and consequence?

for example, character allows constructive thought..

(A) As my friend Dennis Mazur earlier implied, a person's character may be good or bad, and the outcome as well, may be good or bad. It's quite an open question!

- A good character person can do a bad thing.

- A bad character person can do a good thing.

Also, mostly. in judging a character, humans are generally biased. Have a look at this interesting article related to bias of humans:

https://www.verywellmind.com/cognitive-biases-distort-thinking-2794763

I have a problem with the whole characterization of character. It is a very vague concept. I studied Theoretical Physics, and Mathematics and it was during this study that I came upon the works of Bertrand Russell. He believed that mathematics could be completely reduced to logic. Of course Kurt Godel, later proved him wrong. During my studies of Logic, I also became interested in Lewis Carol, and his writings on British Society. I later went into Law School, thinking that they actually "argued" in the way that Logicians argued. Turns out that thousands of years ago, during the rise of Rome, that an interesting trick was developed to "fix" the outcomes of hearings and trials. Aristotle had understood this centuries before. If you fix the outcome and deduce backward, you have a story that sounds like an argument, but it is not. Take the truth table for "OR", T OR T is T, T OR F is T, F OR T is T, F OR F is F. So if I start from a conclusion of T, what was the argument that led to it? Unfortunately Character is the same sort of beast. I start by accusing someone of "Bad" Character, and I find a story that leads to it. The story can't be true in a Logical sense, only in a statistical sense. It may be that something led to bad character, but then time changed and now the character is "Good", so perhaps the same story led to "Good" Character. Theories like these are in Physics as well. The "Big Bang" is one of them. At each instant the outcome is different (because time allows other things to have happened since the last conclusion), yet somehow the "Big Bang" now leads to this new conclusion. Unless you clearly have a very simple story that has only a few bodies and a conservation law (only one or two), you can't take these stories to be anything more than stories. Logic itself is only about deducing future events, and when you have a great theory it deduces them very precisely. Logic doesn't allow you to deduce the past, as time simply does not work that way, it is a many-to-one transformation, whose outcome is constantly changing, and usually changing from things the you did not know about (think of the light cone, and those things that existed but whose signal just got to you, and in the future an infinite number of signals will arrive as well). So in Conclusion, Character, and theories about it is just a superstition.

M. Sohaib Ali Siddiqui your examples are the exeption:

- A good character person can do a bad thing.

- A bad character person can do a good thing.

if someone with good character does bad most of the time, he can likely not be considered to have good character

Richard Kriske do you think of yourself as a person with good or bad character?

Yes, i agree.

Further thought to your question makes me think that character is an inherent trait, its ingrained in a person. So one thing is for sure, that the consequence or outcome can be easily predicted. An 'honest' person, say may fail one time but will have a 99% predictive outcome.

definitely worthwhile considering more.

another elementary example may be that good character can lend to charisma, and this can positively impact outcomes. very simple proposition. not at all the required exhaustive inquiry.