Creativity And Innovation In Organizations (PSMAB8)
Summary
Extensive Summary of all 25 articles
32 views 0 purchase
Course
Creativity And Innovation In Organizations (PSMAB8)
Institution
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG)
This summary captures al the required readings for Creativity and Innovation in Organizations and consists of a total of 213 pages.
As this summary is so extensive, it is not needed to also read the articles themselves to get a good grade for the exam. I am confident this suffices as people have ...
Master Work, Organisation And Personnel Psychology
Creativity And Innovation In Organizations (PSMAB8)
All documents for this subject (3)
Seller
Follow
sophieakkerman
Content preview
Creativity & Innovation in Organizations
Week 1
Literature
Artikel 1.1: What is this ‘creativity’ thing anyway? Basic concepts & historical overview
CREATIVITY Guilford
Beginning area which psychologist did not really consider yet => relatively new field, no empirical
answers
Plans for research on creativity & results of some thinking: hypotheses based on surveys
Implications of the problems of creativity in vocational & educational practices
SOME DEFINITIONS & QUESTIONS
Narrow sense: creativity: abilities that are most characteristic of creative people => creative abilities
determine whether the individual has the power to exhibit creative behavior to a noteworthy degree =>
whether/not the individual who has the requisite abilities will produce results of a creative nature:
depends on their motivational & temperamental traits
Psychologist: problem is as broad as the qualities that contribute significantly to creative productivity
=> psychologist’s problem: that of creative personality
Defining personality & other concepts preparatory to an investigation: prefer definitions of an
operational type => individual’s personality: unique pattern of traits which are relatively enduring
ways where persons differ from one another
Psychologist: particularly interested in those traits that are manifested in performance: behavior traits:
come under the broad categories of: aptitudes, interests, attitudes & temperamental qualities
Aptitude: ordinarily mean a person’s readiness to learn to do certain types of things => no necessary
implication in this statement as to the source of the degree of readiness => could be due to hereditary
determination/through environmental determination => usually due to the interaction between the two
Interest: person’s inclination/urge to engage in some type of activity
Attitude: tendency to favor/not to favor (shown objectively by approach-withdrawal behavior) some
type of object/situation
Temperamental qualities: person’s general emotional disposition: optimism, moodiness, self-
confidence/nervousness
Creative personality: matter of those patterns of traits that are characteristic of creative persons
Creative pattern: manifest in creative behavior: includes activities like: inventing, designing,
contriving, composing & planning => people who exhibit these types of behavior to a marked degree:
creative
Certain aspects of creative genius that have aroused questions in those who research those topic
Why is creative productivity a relatively infrequent phenomenon: only about two in a million have
become really distinguished, why do so many geniuses spring from parents who are themselves very
far from distinguished, why is there so little apparent correlation between education & creative
productiveness, why do we not produce a larger number of creative geniuses than we do, under,
modern educational practices => questions for thought & investigation
More immediate & more explorable problem: double one: how can we discover creative promise in
our children & our youth & how can we promote the development of creative personalities
NEGLECT OF THE STUDY OF CREATIVITY
Neglect of this subject by psychologist => very evident but: extent less evident => 121.000 titles listed
in the past 23 years: 186 wrote about creativity => topics included: creativity, imagination, originality,
thinking & tests => less than two tenths of one percent of the books & articles in the Abstracts bear
directly on this subject => few advance the understanding/control of creative activity very much
Textbooks on general psychology: only two have devoted separate chapters to the subject during the
same period
Two conclusions: subject of creative thinking has been hardly touched at all & imagination as well
May believe: subject of creative genius has not been as badly neglected since it is believed to be
largely a matter of intelligence & IQ => this subject: no neglect: but: creativity & creative productivity
extend well beyond the domain of intelligence
Another reason for the neglect: the difficulty of the problems themselves => practical criterion of
creativity: difficult to establish since creative acts of an unquestioned order of excellence are
extremely hard => like a criterion for accident proneness which requires actual occurrence of
,1
accidents: this accidental nature of many discoveries & inventions: recognized => partly due to the
inequality of stimulus/opportunity: largely a function of the environment rather than of individuals
If: environmental occasions were equal: there would still be great difference in creative productivity
among individuals
There are greater possibilities of observing individual differences in creative performance if we revise
our standards: accept examples of lower degrees of distinction: such instances: more numerous => if:
can detect & accept certain acts of lower degrees of excellence as creative: other difficulties
Creative people differ considerably in performance from time to time => speak of rhythms of
creativity => any criterion & any tests of creativity would show considerable error variance due to
function fluctuation => reliabilities of tests of creative abilities & of creative criteria will be generally
low => ways of meeting such difficulties: should not allow them to force us to neglect the domain
Another reason for the oversight of problems of creativity: methodological one => tests designed to
measure intelligence have fallen into certain stereotypes patterns under the demands for objectivity &
scoring convenience
Difficult to measure some creative abilities by means of anything but completion tests of some kind
=> to provide the creator with the finished product as in a multiple-choice item: may prevent them
from showing their own creation => multiple choice/other objectively scorable types of test items can
be used but: the aim for easily objectifiable testing & scoring has directed us away from the attempt to
measure some of the most precious qualities of individuals & to ignore those qualities
Another reason for the neglect of the problems of creativity can be found in certain emphases we have
given to the investigations of learning: much learning research was done with lower animals with no
signs of creativity & learning theory has been generally formulated to cover those phenomena that are
easiest to order in logical schema => learning theorists have had considerable difficulty with the
behavior known as insight to which creative behavior shows much relationship
Right to say that a creative act is an instance of learning for it represents a change in behavior that is
due to stimulation &/response => comprehensive learning theory must consider insight & creative
activity
THE SOCIAL IMPORTANCE OF CREATIVITY
General recognition of the importance of the aim for knowledge about creative disposition
Recent evidence of the general interest in discovery & development of creative talent
Large industries that employ many research scientists & engineers have held serious meeting & have
had symposia written about the subject
Much questioning into the reasons why graduates from the same institutions of higher learning with
high scholastic records & strong recommendations differ so widely in the output of new ideas
Enormous economic value of new ideas is generally recognized => one scientist/engineer discovers a
new principle/develops a new process that revolutionizes an industry & dozens of others do a passable
job on the routine tasks assigned to them
Many branches of the government are among the largest employers of scientific & technical personnel
=> want to know how to recognize the individuals who have inventive potentialities
Most common complaint concerning college graduates: they can do assigned tasks with a show of
proficiency in the techniques they have learned: much too helpless when called upon to solve a
problem where new paths are demanded
Industry & governmental agencies: looking for leaders: require: good judgment, planning ability &
inspiring vision => must discover leaders with imagination & vision/must develop those qualities &
find out educational procedures which could promote those qualities
New thinking machines: can be made to take over much of men’s thinking & routine thinking of many
industries will be eventually done without the employment of human brains => told that this will entail
an industrial revolution that will make the first industrial revolution insignificant: the first: made
man’s muscles relatively useless second one: expected to make man’s brain relatively useless
Several implications in these possibilities that bear upon the importance of creative thinking
In the first place: would be necessary to develop an economic order where enough employment &
wage earning would still be available => would require creative thinking of an unusual order & speed
Second place: eventually about the only economic value of brains left would be in the creative
thinking of which they are capable
Presumably: would still be need for human brains to operate the machines & to invent better ones
SOME GENERAL THEORIES OF THE NATURE OF CREATIVITY
,2
Layman’s idea that the creative person is peculiarly gifted with a certain quality that ordinary people
do not have => this conception: can be dismissed by psychologists by common consent => general
psychological conviction: all individuals possess to some degree all abilities except for pathologies =>
creative acts can be expected no matter how feeble/how infrequent of almost all individuals
Important consideration: concept of continuity: whatever the nature of creative talent may be: those
persons who are recognized as creative just have more of what all of us have => principle of continuity
makes the investigation of creativity in people who are not necessarily distinguished possible
The conception that creativity is bound up with intelligence has many followers among psychologist
Creative acts are expected from those of high IQ & not low IQ => the term genius was developed to
describe people who distinguish themselves due to creative productivity: has been adopted to describe
the child with exceptionally high IQ => many: regard this as unfortunate but: custom has prevailed
Much evidence of substantial, positive correlation between IQ as measured by an intelligence test &
certain creative talent but: extent of the correlations is unknown: work of Terman & associates: best
source of evidence of these correlations but: evidence: indecisive => found: distinguished men of
history generally had high estimated IQ’s: not certain that indicators in the form of creative behavior
have not entered those estimations: would be much more crucial to know what the same individuals
would have done on intelligence tests when they were children => Terman’s study of the thousand
children of exceptionally high IQ’s who have now reached maturity does not throw much light on this
theory => among the group: plenty of indication of superior educational attainment & superior
vocations & social adjustment: but: seems to be yet little promise of a genius although the members of
the group have reached the age level that has been recognized as the most creative years => writers on
that study recognize this fact & account for it based on the extreme rarity of individuals of the caliber
of those geniuses => hoped: further follow up studies will give due attention to criteria of a more
specifically creative character
Nature of intelligence tests: many doubts concerning their coverage of creative abilities but: from the
time of Binet to the present: the main practical criterion used in the validation of intellect has been
achievement in school: for children: means largely achievement in reading & arithmetic => this fact:
generally determined the nature of intelligence tests => operationally: intelligence has been the
ability/complex of abilities to master reading & arithmetic & similar subjects => these subjects are not
conspicuously demanding of creative talent
Examination of the content of intelligence tests reveals very little that is of an obviously creative
nature: Binet: included a few items of this character in his scale since he regarded creative imagination
as one of the important higher mental functions that should be included & revisions of the scale have
kept such items but: only a small minority & group tests of intelligence: generally left out such items
Third general theory about creativity is a theory of the entire personality including intelligence
Personality: unique pattern of traits & traits is a matter of individual differences => thousands of
observable traits => the scientific urge for rational order & for economy in the description of persons
directs us to look for a small number of descriptive categories
In describing mental abilities: this economy drive has been grossly overdone when we limit ourselves
to the single concept of intelligence
The term intelligence has by no means achieved logical/operational invariance & does not satisfy the
demand for rational order
Do not need the thousands of descriptive terms since: much interrelated positively & negatively
By intercorrelation procedures: possible to determine the threads of consistency that run throughout
the categories describing abilities, interests & temperament variables
Factorial conception of personality: from this point of view: personality is conceived geometrically as
a hypersphere of n dimensions: each dimension being a dependable, convenient reference
variable/concept: if the idea of applying this type of description to a living, breathing individual is
distasteful remember: geometric picture: just a conceptual model designed to encompass the multitude
of observable facts & to do it in a rational, communicable & economical manner
With this frame of reference: many of the findings & issues become clarified
The reason that different intelligence tests do not intercorrelate perfectly, even when errors of
measurement have been considered is that each test emphasizes a different pattern of primary abilities
If the correlations between intelligence test scores & many types of creative performance are only
moderate & low it is because the primary abilities represented in those tests are not all important for
, 3
creative behavior & also since some of the primary abilities important for creative behaviors are not
represented in the test
Safe to say that the typical intelligence test measures to a significant degree not more than a half dozen
of intellectual factors => more intellectual factors than that => some of the abilities contributing to
creative success are probably non-intellectual: some are perceptual & some of the factors most crucial
to creative performance have not yet been discovered on any type of test => must look beyond the
boundaries of the IQ if wanting to explore the domain of creativity
DEVELOPMENT OF CREATIVITY
Much can be done to encourage the development of creativity => may be by strengthening of the
functions involved/better utilization of what resources the individual possesses/both => knowledge of
the functions is important
Often heard: due to mass-education methods the development of creative personality is discouraged
=> child: under pressure to conform for the sake of economy & satisfying prescribed standards
Philosophers: thought about the problem: state that the unfolding of a creative personality is a highly
individual matter which stresses uniqueness & shuns conformity => the unfolding of the individuals
like their own inclinations is generally frowned upon
The emphasis upon the memorizing of facts sets the wrong goal for the student => unclear how serious
this is => very little experimental evidence that is decisive & such evidence is difficult to obtain
One survey found: a person with engineering/scientific training had only half the probability of
making an invention compared to others => inventor should be defined as someone who does not take
their education too seriously => results of the survey: actual situation: creative individuals either do
not seek higher education in engineering/science/that kind of education has negative transfer effects
regarding inventiveness
Teachers: main objective: teach students how to think: means thinking constructively => success in
this objective: should be much evidence of creativeness in the product: opinion of author: teach some
students to think but only to the extent to which we can think => difficult since only vague ideas about
the nature of thinking => little actual knowledge of what specific steps should be taken to teach
student to think
Methods: shotgun methods: like intelligence tests are shotgun tests: teachers: pride themselves on
teaching students to think but: examinations are almost entirely a matter of knowledge of facts => also
important since every creative person requires some previous experience & facts => learning facts
should still be part of the educational system => must keep the educational objectives straight:
recognize where facts are important & where not: the kinds of examinations we give: must set the
objectives for the students no matter what objectives may have been stated => example: teacher tried
to encourage originality in his students => graded the paper in terms of amount of originality => one
student copied everything he said & got an A for having an original paper
Before: making substantial improvement in teaching students to think: must make some changes in the
conceptions of the process of learning
Ancient faculty psychology taught: mental faculties grow strong by exercising those faculties =>
experiments on practice in memorizing show that exercises in memorizing are not necessarily
followed by improvement of memory in general, same goes for exercises in perceptual discriminations
Research by Thorndike & others found that the study of courses in high school curricula did not
necessarily result in a general improvement in intellect but: increases in test scores could be attributed
to learning of a more specific nature => learning consists of the development of specific habits & only
very similar skills will be affected favorably by the learning process
Newer findings concerning primary abilities: the problems of formal discipline take on new meaning
& many experiments on the transfer of training must be reexamined & repeated with revised
conditions
But: justifiable to reject the concepts of a general memory power, a general perceptual discrimination
power & rejection of the concept of a single power called intellect => these findings: in harmony with
factorial theory
The other alternative to the idea of formal discipline is not necessarily a theory of specific learning
from specific practice
Evidence of transfer effects => experiments should determine whether the instances of positive, zero
& negative transfer effects conform in a meaningful way to the outlines of the primary abilities
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller sophieakkerman. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $8.70. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
