Beyond business

The first thing that Charlie Brown learnt when someone set up a rival lemonade-stand is that once he lost his monopoly-status and this simple ‘thirst-quencher’ became a commodity, creativity and innovation were now critical to his business’s future survival. From this week’s readings it’s clear that what’s being experienced within the Scandinavian design industry or any similar business clusters – whether it’s ski equipment manufacturers in the Italian Alps, PC components designers in California’s Silicon Valley or aeroplane parts manufacturers around the giant Airbus plant in Toulouse France –  is the ultimate evolution of the lemonade-stand principle. (Power, D. 2009)

 The idea behind clusters is basically beneficial. For example, the hundreds of firms started by ex-Microsoft employees in Redmond, Seattle all helped to cross-pollen each other with new ideas. (Hinkel, M. May 7^th 2008) In other words, having like firms operating within close proximity to create concentration density can provide important critical mass when it comes to buying power, knowledge transfer or access to an all-important skill-base. (Power, D. 2009) However, results from the study of Stockholm design services referred to in Dominic Power’s presentation: Creativity and innovation in the Scandinavian Design Industry suggests that when it comes to creativity and innovation, competition is much more critical than collaboration. (Power, D. 2009) Even though these firms did work together, the study revealed little to no interest in formal collaboration or formally sharing much of the work they did together. There was however, considerable evidence to suggest that the drive to be creative and innovative was underpinned by the competitive dynamics of a rapidly changing and growing industry.

 I think the message from this study is clear. While agglomeration can help an industry-base develop, but expecting companies to share their IP in the process of bringing new products to the market is delusional at best. In other words, no company is going to compromise the elements of its business that make up its competitive advantage. But that said, the know-how within individual firms does get spread throughout an industry simply by hiring and firing – people going to work for their competitors. (Power, D. 2009) And given that this happens in every industry sector, it’s hardly surprising that Power indentifies networks of friends and contacts as the most important form of interaction within any cluster. I think the warning for any company within today’s knowledge industry is simply: Overlook the power of social or business networks like Facebook or MySpace at your peril. For the companies operating within a cluster, social networks represent both threat and opportunity. On the one hand, they can tributary to career development of staff, but at another level they could help that talent-pool plot their next career move. Considering the speed at which an idea or concept can be ripped off today and electronically communicated around the world in nanoseconds, I think one of the key challenges confronting today’s businesses is staff retention. So maybe they need to spend more time creatively and innovatively preventing the source of their competitive edge – namely their key talent – from walking out the door.

This is an example of creative thinking within business. Creative thinking with Edward De Bono, the founder of the six thinking hat system. 

References

• Power, D. (2009) Creativity and innovation in the Scandinavian design industry. Designed in Stockholm. Creativity, Innovation and the cultural economy (pp. 200-216). (Eds. Andy C. Pratt Paul Jeffcut). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis
• Hinkel, M. (May 7^th 2008) Microsoft Ex-Pats Developing Open Source Software Outside of Redmond. Retrieved from: http://socializedsoftware.com/2008/05/07/microsoft-ex-pats-developing-open-source-software-outside-of-redmond/
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMbAaU3lxAU  

Read Full Post »

Creative communication

In 1969 when NASA launched Apollo 11 it was a much simpler time for Australia. Back then there was a greater collective consciousness because there was only one TV channel. So watching Neil Armstrong take those first steps on the moon was an experience shared by millions of Australians. Fast forward 41 years and it could be said that society today is a much more diverse cultural environment through the growth of creative communication. Social networks like Facebook have redefined the way people interact. It has diluted as sense of community, which is no longer limited by geography. This has facilitated greater cross-cultural diversity and in so doing has enhanced creativity, through the creation of a global community where people are able to interact with others in many different countries instantly. (Borrup, T. 2006) However, how does this redefine communication? The creation of social networks such as Facebook is evidence of creative thought that has been shaped by multiple cultural influences.

  Communication has become an effortless task as people can communicate overseas in real time. Samuel Hutington and Lawerence Harrison explains that culture can be defined as the values, attitudes and beliefs, orientations and underlying assumptions that exist among people. (Hutington, S. & Harrison, L. 2000) However, with this new form of communication, it could be said that there may be less effort put into a community because the line between community and a global culture has blurred. Perhaps with new technology there has been a shift in community values or maybe community values have been overtaken by the growth of a global cultural community. For example, YouTube is not limited to any culture; it is a free space for interaction from politicians to comedians. It has created a type of neutral culture zone that allows communication from different cultures to bloom.

Defining art within culture depends on the background, traditions and values of the community. But creative leaders within today’s digital frontier are continuing to push the envelope on where innovation starts and finishes. (Borrup, T. 2006) For example, the rise of the anti-hero within mainstream culture throws up valuable questions over what it really means to be creative. So whether it’s in the arts, the sciences, business, sport, politics or education, it could be said that there is now a fine-line between the misfit and the genius. Where the two collide, culture is continually being questioned, and reinterpreted.

 So in today’s world where everyone can have at very least, 15 minutes of fame, the concept of culture has taken on a new dynamic. Where will all this end? The implications for entertainment, and education, not to mention where and how we live work are huge. When Pink Floyd mused the immortal lyric ‘we don’t need no education, we don’t need no thought control ’they were clearly onto something big. Does a world where a peer group is less about physicality and more to do with shared experience give us any clues as to where the sense of community as we once knew it, is heading?

References

• Borrup, T. (2006) The creative community builders handbook: How to transform communities using local assets, art, and culture (pp. 3-30). Minnesota: Fieldstone Alliance.
• Hutington, S. & Harrison, L.  (2000) Culture Matters: How values shape human progress. New York: Basic Books.

Read Full Post »

Thinking beyond the limit

The Great Dictator (1940) staring Charlie Chaplin

From the very moment a baby is born it learns by mimicking its mum and dad so it’s difficult to argue against the idea that creative inspiration doesn’t come via analogical thinking. (Davis, G. A. 2004) Without wanting to belittle the subject, it is a self-fulfilling theory, and could be more crudely summarized as little more than monkey see – monkey do. I think the real point is that our real ability once we’ve become adults to evolve beyond shared experience.

If it’s true that man can’t draw from beyond his or her consciousness, then I think the whole concept of analogical thinking becomes highly contextual. It’s long been regarded as a time-honoured truism that whatever man can dream he can bring into being. (Davis, G. A. 2004)

I think society is drawing on analogical thinking to push social norms to new levels of acceptability, and the rights for guys to marry and/or adopt kid’s serves as an example. Film-making are drawing a lot of creative inspiration from these and other policies that promise to challenge the human condition, levels of acceptability and morality. (Davis, G. A. 2004)

It could be argued that everything that’s playing out in society has happened before. But if there is literally nothing new under the sun, will history go on repeating itself, and is man incapable of learning from his mistakes? Maybe this is the ultimate irony behind all analogical thinking. (Davis, G. A. 2004)

So who’s learning from who, and who was more important Einstein or his teacher? Similarly, who inspired Elvis, the Beatles or Lady Ga Ga for that matter? It’s no different when it comes to classical music, with Claude Debussy, often lauded as the father of modern music, criticized by his peers for flagrantly ripping off the greatest classical composers of all time.

I think it’s when analogy is used to mimic that it’s at its most powerful. We’ve seen this on the silver screen since Chaplin so cunningly belittled Hitler in his movie The Great Dictator(1940)  More contemporary examples of analogical thinking portrayed successfully within movies include Steven Spielberg’s Jaws(1975) and Jurassic Park(1993), and Larry and Andy Wachowskis Matrix(1999) where individuals are confronted with great moral dilemmas.

A famous philosopher once concluded that men and women evolve into adulthood only to spend the rest of their lives trying to recreate who they were when they were 12 years old. (Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1996) Assuming this is even remotely true the implications for analogical thinking and its impact on innovative thinking are huge. It begs the question, does all truly innovative thinking stem from child-like thoughts, and is that stunted by the norms and conventions that adults feel obliged to conform to. 

References

Davis, G. A. (2004) Creative inspiration through analogical thinking, Creativity is forever (pp. 145-170) (5th Ed.) USA: Kendell/Hunt.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). The Flow of Creativity. Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention (pp. 107-126). New York: HarperCollins

The great dictator(1940)[Digital image] Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Great_Dictator.jpg

 

Read Full Post »

Jackson and creative thinking

Albert Einstein once wrote the immortal ditty that a thought that causing a problem was incapable of providing a solution to it.(Florida, R. 2005) I think the rise of new frontiers of creative talent, like Ireland, Finland, Canada, Sweden, Australia – and Peter Jackson’s innovative enclave in New Zealand bare testimony to this notion. Jackson’s ability to cobble together new clusters of creativity is in part a reflection of the way that new thought paradigms have been granted the licence to incubate and flourish the further away they are from the constraints and conventions of major traditional markets. (Pryor, I. 2003)

It’s also partly a decoupling from convention that’s been accelerated by a growing army of highly educated ‘next-gen’ writers and film-makers whose unique priorities, and highly individual moral compass are creating different sources of creative inspiration. (Florida, R. 2005)

This also suggests that markets like the US – traditionally regarded as the mother-ship of modern film-making – have become a victim of its own maturity, the by-product of which is creativity that’s struggling to draw inspiration from outside of its own ex

Peter Jackson on set

perience. Rather than this being a limiting factor, it is in fact been the reason that Jacksons creative ideas are taking his projects to new heights.

In other words, as Stanford University economist Paul Romer has long argued, when it comes to advances in human thinking – as in film-making – necessity is the mother of invention. (Florida, R. 2005)  I think film-makers like Jackson clearly ware this with pride when striving to creatively reinterpret film-making technology.  (Florida, R. 2005)  Had Jackson not thought outside the box, and dared to question industry conventions in the construction of films like Lord of the Rings and King Kong, he would never have been able to push film-making technology to new heights of innovation. (Pryor, I. 2003)

Jackson’s success should also be a permanent reminder that creative classes in the 21^st century are no longer confined within national boundaries. It’s true, the United States may have lead in the era of high-tech industry. But the money now being invested in higher education worldwide to produce creative people to churn out movies using cutting-edge technology means film-making will become increasingly less US-centric.

Even 15 years it would have been unthinkable for young talented industry professionals to contemplate leaving the US in pursuit of creative excellence in film-making elsewhere. The alacrity with creative talent from around the world is flocking to New Zealand to work alongside Jackson suggests that the new ‘creative class’ is truly global.

We’ve only scratched the surface of what globalisation means for future film-making. In my view, it’s going to challenge film-makers to make movies for global markets and no longer primarily for an American box-office.  

As a film student in Perth I’m excited by the de-Americanisation of popular culture. I’m also encouraged by the globalisation of talent, and the present reality that modern film-making is truly no respecter of distance, race, creed, colour or sexual orientation. We’re all in this together.

Referencing

Florida, R. (2005). The flight of the creative class: The new global competition for talent (pp. 1-4; 25-49). New York: HarperCollins.

Pryor, I. (2003) Peter Jackson- From prince of splatter to lord of the rings. New York, St. Martin’s Press

Peter Jackson (n.d) [Digital Image] Retrieved 7 October from http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,83676,00.html

Read Full Post »

The essence of creative flow

I find it very natural to do what I love, because I choose to do what makes me happy. However after week sixes notes I began to think of how my creativity is a source that some people use more than others.  The notion that money won’t bring happiness has been an incentive in my creative process, thus what I am able to produce is reflective on how I perceive the world rather than how someone wants me to see it. The flow of creativity in this week’s lecture was described as something someone has to naturally acquire in their personality.

The notion that some people are naturally more talented creatively is explained in the readings as the result of how someone is brought up.  Children are wholly creative, they have no real sense of consequences or the foreseen risk, and so they are able to express and use their imagination to create their own world. (Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1996) Maybe to activate “creative flow” we have to resort back to a child-like state of mind? But is that a step backward?

 I think children naturally do things they enjoy, compared to an Adult who will do things because they have to. The motivation is different, for a child it might be for the experience or the recognition of their parents, however an Adults action might be for the betterment of their family. And so this notion of creating because it makes you happy, is resorting back to the foundation of an individual’s connection to their main source of creativity. Going back without limitations, whether it is physical or mental to allow the flow of creativity which would be effortless because it would be a natural process.

When someone is doing something they love doing the task may become effortless, as it becomes an experience rather than a job. The balance between creating with unlimited possibilities versus the seeming limitations of skills, can seem like a constant contradiction. However there must be a reasonable amount of realism in the creative person to foresee their abilities to complete their creative ambitions. (Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1996) However in comparison, it could be said that having a limitation of skill would stunt pure creativity because the purely creative ideas would not always be  realistically achievable. This limitation thus would conclude that there are many ways to interpret the balance between challenges and skills, but the important thing is that there is room to find out which one the creator wants to pursue. 

References

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). The Flow of Creativity. Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention (pp. 107-126). New York: HarperCollins

Girl and Father (2009)[Digital image] Retrieved September 8, 2010, from  http://www.girl.com.au/fresh-milk-photography-competition-winner.htm

Read Full Post »

Creativity and Inception

After watching Christopher Nolan’s film  Inception (2010), my opinion towards the theory of creativity had been seriously challenged. Inception plays with the idea that Creativity comes from a person’s subconscious that is accessed through dreams. Within the film, the characters are able to enter the dreams of others around them and plant ideas into their subconscious.

The theory of Inception could then be that creativity is an illusion because it is regurgitated information that has been stored within the subconscious and thus affects on what an individual produces. (Itzkoff 2010) This theory is similar to Lawrence Kubie’s theory of creativity, he believed in a state of pre-consciousness. Where the conscious and the subconscious meet to a point where information from the subconscious can be used in a space of consciousness.  (Davis, G. A. 2004)

However Burrhus F. Skinner theory of creativity is also another example of a possible connection to inception. Burrhus F. Skinner believed that there is no such thing as creativity. He argued that creativity was nothing more than information being reproduced in a different way. He believed that context was the reason why people created, because they reproduced what they have experienced. (Davis, G. A. 2004) I myself found Inception (2010) very interesting, as it made me question my perception of reality. And I was really pleased to discover that Nolan the director had recreated the moving rooms in real life. 

The rooms that lose gravity and form were not completely created through a green screen. Actual buildings were made to tilt and move to create the scenes. (Itzkoff  2010) I think that this level of creativity is wonderful to see because to me it shows how there are no limitations to the imagination.

“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” (Einstein 1878-1955) 

Albert Einstein was on to something, just on the fact that he was able to create the almost unimaginable. He is a kind reminder of how creativity is not limited to the classic artist. However the pull between pure creativity and context can be a constant battle.

Is something creative if it is a representation of context?  Some could say “yes it is because it is a unique creative expression of the life experience” however some could argue “no because the foundation is not an original idea”. 

References

Itzkoff, D. (2010 June 30) “The Man Behind the Dreamscape”. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/movies/04inception.html

Davis, G. A. (2004). Definitions and Theories. Creativity is forever (pp. 58-73). (5th Ed.). USA: Kendell/Hunt.

Read Full Post »