Personal Creativity - Essay Example

? Personal Creativity Reflective Essay INTRODUCTION Creativity is an essential part of human life. It’s what makes us different from other creatures; the ability to think differently, come up with new innovative thoughts and ways of doing things. It is the reason birds still build their homes in the same way they did centuries ago, while we have progressed from caves to skyscrapers. It is creativity that gives meaning to our lives and it is during the process of creation that we feel life in its highest, most enjoyable form i.e. we feel happy and fulfilled at not only being connected to the highest being of the universe but also being able to benefit the existing universe as a result. But what exactly is Creativity? Is it found in a special class of human beings or is it a quality we all posses? Some definitions of ‘creativity’ explain that the idea behind the term is the conceiving of a new idea.’ “The word creativity is a noun naming a phenomenon in which a person communicates a new concept (which is the product). Mental activity (or mental process) is implicit in the definition.” (Rhodes, n.d.). ‘Creativity involves being imaginative, going beyond the obvious, being aware of one’s own unconventionality, being original in some way.” (Craft, 2000) “Creativity is the act of turning new and imaginative ideas into reality. Creativity involves two processes: thinking, then producing.” (Naiman, 2011) Contrary to common belief, we are all involved in various acts of creativity without realizing it. Without creativity, not only would our lives be empty, it may even be a continuous downward spiral as life needs creative input. At every step of our lives we have to do something new to change for the better. It can be as simple as trying out a new route to work in order to create a shortcut and save time. Or taking the risk of adding an extra ingredient to enhance the taste of something you’re cooking. Creativity is not accepting things just as they are, but in order to improve them, striving for new ideas. Thus creativity is present in all of us at some level and it comes to use when there is some problem to be solved. According to Nomura Institute of Japan, we are presently living in the era of Creativity, where constant innovation is required for us to be able to survive (Naiman, 2011). This statement proves itself as we take a look around and see how the economy and the competitiveness surrounded by it have resulted in a need for change in all fields of work. Followed by the Agricultural, the Industrial and then the Informational age (Naiman, 2011), the age of Creativity looks for the New and the most Efficient. In this age anything, even a light bulb that produces less than it is given as an input, will be thrown out of the race and only the fittest will survive. Therefore every field of knowledge has increased pressure on research to keep up, and thus we see a faster pace of development. Along with the quantity we also have much better quality. With economic and environmental sustainability in mind, more responsible technology, education, designs and services are produced in all areas of life. In spite of what I’ve said about the everyday nature of creativity, when it comes to the working environment, where there is competition, not everyone stands at the same level. There are the original genius’s who seem to make everything work in ways so simple they surprise us. Then there are others who have followed every rule, have stuck to routines that ensure maximum productive time and yet they’re work, although detailed and complete fails to bring to attention anything new, thus lacks creativity. This can be very commonly observed in creative fields such as art and design of which I am a part and have worked through various types of creative processes. People who are more creative in nature than others usually have a certain type of personality i.e. they have certain traits that distinguish them from others. The first characteristic is that they never think like ordinary people; their points of view are often very unique and their thoughts are very unconventional (Heerwagen, 2002). They are curious and they enjoy taking risks, experiencing the unexplored and are sensitive to the happenings around them, (Craft, 2001).They are committed to their work (Craft, 2001) i.e. they love their work and usually only do what they love doing. (Heerwagen, 2002) “Creativity involves breaking out of established patterns in order to look at things in a different way.” Edwar de Bono. (Anon., n.d.) (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997)defines the contrasting behavior of creative people i.e. their solitude and social interactions, their humbleness and pride, their physical activity and their laziness and peacefulness (Csikszentmihalyi, 2011), and in doing so identifies that a creative person is in fact in touch with his inner self, his soul. Such contrasting traits reflect that creativity does not require discipline; it requires an inner passion that keeps the originality flowing ensuring dedicated attention. (Flora, 2008) The essential force behind a creative personality however is his tendency to explore the new, experiment and thus create some new knowledge or idea. He is not content with what is already known. “Creativity can be described as letting go of certainties.”Gail Sheehy. (Anon., n.d.) An experience of five years in the design field has taught me many things including the attitude needed to ensure the flow of unique, innovative and inspiring ideas. Even though it may seem, creativity is something God-gifted and cannot be acquired, this is not entirely true. Although there are certain traits of a creative personality, these can be developed in any individual. A study at Exeter University has concluded that “The notion that geniuses such as Shakespeare, Picasso and Mozart were `gifted’ is a myth” (Naiman, 2011) EXPERIENCE To explain the philosophy and psychology that goes into creative designing, I would like to illustrate the example of a class exercise, part of my curriculum, which involved creative inputs from students working as a team to solve the socio-economic and environmental problems of a neighborhood in the city. It was an exercise of creative problem solving in which we first acquired background knowledge about the neighborhood and did an in depth analysis of the stakeholders involved, of the organizations influencing the activities in the area and the factors effecting the environment and socio-economic profile of the place. The analysis determined what problems each of the groups involved in the activities carried out around the neighborhood faced. This led to in initial session of brainstorming in which we came up with the ideal situation in which all stakeholders would be satisfied and there would be a minimum conflict of their interests. A vague list of ideas was produced as a result. We then went through case studies of similar localities in other places to evaluate solutions to the problems and analyzed impacts of each solution. This helped short listing the initial ideas we had had into more elaborative visions that explained what we intended to change about the neighborhood and for what cause. Following this idea generation process was the detailing of our proposals to ensure their practicality and presentation. These methods encourage students to make use of existing knowledge to come up with innovative ideas related to the problems in the context. They make use of Csikszentmihalyi’s Systems Model, which defines creativity as a resultant of the interaction between an existing domain of expertise, a field of experts and a person. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997) This particular type of creativity, encouraged in the students, is related to as Pro-c Creativity which, different from the genius level Big-C creativity and the everyday little-c creativity aims at an incremental growth of the domain it works in (Kaufma & Beghetto, 2009), by building on existing ideas rather than re-establishing the foundations of the domain. The Propulsion theory is important here which explains the different types of creative contributions on the basis of their effect on the field they are contributing to. (Sternberg, 2006) Since this particular field of design, involving problem solving at the city level, where different systems are integrated in an inseparable way, is on that I have a particular eagerness for; it was obvious to my group members that I would probably contribute the greatest share in the input and would be a better manager and team leader. This goes to show that having a genuine interest accompanied by background knowledge on the subject, voluntarily acquired because of the interest, helps in the generation of enthusiasm and motivation which helps develops further skills required for the process of creation. This theory relates to Amabile’s Componential Model of Creativity, which assesses creativity on the basis of and individual’s Domain-relevant skill, creativity relevant skill and motivation. (Kaufman, 2009) Thus the creative input I was assigned to contribute was not limited to the idea generation for the problems of the locality we were dealing with. It also included the task of producing the best out of our team of temperamentally diverse members. This responsibility initially scared me and may have affected my creative ability. At first I made mistakes and suffered the consequences; however my enthusiasm and dedication to the work we were assigned did not falter. I learnt that emotional attachment to work is much more effective than any other motivator as it keeps one going even in the toughest of circumstances. “…creativity requires passion and commitment.” Rollo May, The Courage to Create. (Naiman, 2011) Another thing about creativity I learned through the experience is the dynamics of creativity in a group. The first and foremost was the recognition of talents. April Donovan in her article ‘7 Things a Creative Team Needs to be Great’ assigns the first place to talent, however she has focused on the ability to attract great talent to a team as the winning scheme, (Donovan, 2012) I would contradict based on my experience. Every individual is equipped with a multitude of talents, but these are often colored by a difference of working styles. To be able to utilize these efficiently the management of the team has to work with each member and assign work in accordance with their interests and abilities. Encouragement also makes a big difference and instills enthusiasm in the team. The one thing that guarantees that your mind is on the right track for producing innovative ideas is the eradication of the fear of failing. An essential aspect of creativity is not being afraid to fail. Edwin Land. (Anon., n.d.) Such has also been proved in a research conducted by Teresa Ambile, Head of Entrepreneurial Management Unit at Harvard Business School. Through this research, in which she recorded the work experiences of people in creative fields, Amabile pointed out that creativity is related to satisfaction and happiness, and it doesn’t seem to work in environments where various fears are dominating. She has listed some of the fears associated with downsizing in companies, unhealthy competition, time pressure and the affect of performance on pays. (Breen, 2004). Creativity, as stated earlier ensures dedicated attention to the task at hand; however, when fear and anxiety occupies the mind, the ability to think differently, in an explorative way, diminishes. (Heerwagen, 2002)The flow of creativity suddenly disrupts when pessimism enters the brain, and the opposite happens when results are positive or encouragement is received i.e the creation process seems almost automatic. (Lewis, 2005) NATURE OF CREATIVITY Looking back at the whole process in which the passion for innovation was ignited among the participants, we can see how creativity works as a process. It involved, in accordance with Torrance’s theory; “the process of sensing a problem, searching for possible solutions, drawing hypotheses, testing and evaluating, and communicating the results to others.” (Craft, 2001) This model of creative process is defined as Creative Problem Solving (CPS). Another such model named Productive Thinking Model defines the creative process in six steps. 1. What is going on? 2. What’s success? 3. What’s the Question? 4. Generate Answers 5. Forge the Solution 6. Align Resources. (Lewis, 2005) This model includes the initial analysis of the neighborhood in question and the ideal situation that should be in the neighborhood. Thus our exercise was based on a combination of the two models Creative Problem Solving and Productive Thinking. Mel Rhodes in his research paper titled ‘Analysis of Creativity’ talks about the key to the secret nature of creativity: 1. A human mind grasping the elements of a subject 2. of prolonged thinking about the part and their relationship to each other and to the whole 3. of sustained effort in working over the synthesis so that it can be embodied or articulated competently. (Rhodes, n.d.) The above analysis explains how the creative process we were involved led to practical and applicable results rather than just utopian concepts. We had been trained in the subject earlier giving us background knowledge into the factors that went into formation of an urban context, then through the analysis we understood how each part of the system worked with the other parts and how all the parts fitted together. This helped us find where the problem lies. After the initial brainstorming we strived to make the ideas workable in the context and to represent the idea in the best possible way. Another model, the Geneplore Model of creativity, explains the final stages of the exercise in which the initially conceived ideas where evaluated till perfection. This model is based on two phases; the generative when the notion of an idea is conceived, and the explorative when the idea is explored. (Kaufman, 2009) In the psychological perspective, this creative exercise triggered two sorts of mental processes. The first one, defined as Divergent thinking or Lateral thinking, took place in the brainstorming sessions we had as a group. This exercise ensures opening up of the mind to a flow of ideas (Heerwagen, 2002) that are unique and probably unheard of before. By the end of the session we shortlist the really original ones and use them as a basis of our vision. The Divergent thinking had to be followed by the Convergent thinking phase, where we critique our own ideas by trying to fit them in the context they have been applied, to solve the problem at hand. This led to the appearance of many flaws in the initial proposals, which were corrected by another brainstorming or Lateral thinking exercise. According to Cape, these thinking processes can also be divided into three overlapping phases, which may involve ‘backward- forward’ approach. These are ‘free-expression’, ‘imaginative/associative thinking’ and ‘critical thinking’. Thus the process of devising creative solutions for an existing context required flexibility, the ability to think out of the box and the turn those unique ideas into practical inputs at a community level. CONCLUSION Creativity is a characteristic that ensures that we live life like it is mean to be lived, to explore the tangible and intangible and share novelty with others. Nature itself inspires us to create like it creates, be original in every new creation and make every contribution of the human mind meaningful. It encourages enthusiasm and passion, something to strive for. It gives us the pleasure of achievement, the thrill of being aware, of accessing wisdom right from its source. “It brings to our awareness what was previously hidden and points to new life. The experience is one of heightened consciousness-ecstasy.” —Rollo May, The Courage to Create (Naiman, 2011) Creativity exercises the human mind to produce a ‘novelty’ from what is already known. To generate a new concept that helps better understand the old ones or which helps understands the creativity Nature. The processes that lead to creative solutions involve exploiting the existing knowledge the human mind possesses and producing it to fit into an entirely different concept. Works Cited Anon., 2011. Creativity and Innovation Techniques. [Online] Available at: http://www.mycoted.com/Category:Creativity_Techniques [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Anon., n.d. Creativity Quotes. [Online] Available at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/creativity.html [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Attento, A., 2012. Expand Your Viewpoint with Creativity. [Online] Available at: http://creativityforlife.com/2012/02/20/expand-your-viewpoint-with-creativity/ [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Breen, B., 2004. The 6 Myths Of Creativity. [Online] Available at: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/89/creativity.html?page=0%2C0 [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Craft, A., 2001. An Analysis of Reasearch and Literature on Creativity in Education, s.l.: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. Craft, A., 2001. Creativity in Education. London: s.n. Craft, P. A., n.d. [Online] Available at: http:/www.tactyc.org.uk/pdfs/Reflection-crafr.pdf [Accessed 27 April 2012]. Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1997. Creativity; flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper. Csikszentmihalyi, M., 2011. The Creative Personality. [Online] Available at: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199607/the-creative-personality [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Donovan, A., 2012. 7 Things a Creative Team Needs to be Great. [Online] Available at: http://www.fuelyourcreativity.com/7-things-a-creative-team-needs-to-be-great/ [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Flora, C., 2008. Everyday Creativity. [Online] Available at: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200910/everyday-creativity?page=2 [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Fogli, H., 2012. Convergent or Divergent Thinking?. [Online] Available at: http://creativityforlife.com/2012/02/06/convergent-or-divergent-thinking/ [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Heerwagen, J. H., 2002. Creativity, s.l.: s.n. Hussain, S., 1988. Creativity, Concept and Findings. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Kaufma, J. C. & Beghetto, R. A., 2009. Beyond Big and Little: The Four C Model of Creativity. Washington DC: Washington DC Educationl Pub Foundation. Kaufman, J. C., 2009. Creativity 101. New York: NY: Springer Pub. Lewis, T., 2005. Creativity—A Framework for the Design/Problem. Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 17 (No.1). Michalko, M., 1998. Cracking Creativity: The Secrets of Creative Genius. Berkeley: Calif: Ten Speed Press. Naiman, L., 2011. What is Creativity?. [Online] Available at: http://www.creativityatwork.com/what-is-creativity/ [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Papajohn, T., 2012. Break An Egg For Creativity. [Online] Available at: http://creativityforlife.com/2012/02/22/break-an-egg-for-creativity/ [Accessed 24 April 2012]. Rhodes, M., n.d. Analysis of Creativity, s.l.: s.n. Robinson, K., 2010. Out of Our Minds; Learning to be Creative. s.l.:John Wiley & Sons, Limited. Stenberg, R. J., 2003. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sternberg, R. J., 2006. The Nature od Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18(No.1), pp. 87-98. Sternberg, R. J. & Kaufman, J. C., 2006. The International Handbook of Creativity. Campbridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More