When we think of creativity as just another line-item in the long checklist of marketable credentials, we temper its power and make genuinely creative thinking more difficult to attain. The purpose of creativity is not to make us better employees, but to make the world a more expressive and innovative place.
Mycoted is a company dedicated to improving Creativity and Innovation for solving problems worldwide, with that in mind, we provide a central repository for Creativity and Innovation on the Internet as a summary of tools, techniques, mind exercises, puzzles, book reviews etc, that is open to all - and can be written by all.
Creativity drives innovation and entrepreneurship. It's the essential skill that leads to new and more efficient solutions to old problems. In theory, creativity is widely praised and desired. But, in reality, creative solutions are often met with pushback, sometimes even open hostility.
So how can you use social rejection to your creative advantage?
Divergent thinking – more than a mere tool – is a technique very commonly used on creative activities because it allows us to expand our brains a little bit, by looking for new opportunities and ways of getting things done.
Bernard Ryefield's insight:
more precisely, divergent thinking is a mode of thinking process, aided by techniques
Managers need to realise that creativity doesn't respond to orders. James Allen outlines why management's role in the corporate creative process is an oxymoron: creativity can't be managed, it can only be encouraged
The researcher Elizabeth Stannard Gromisch differentiated between creativity and intelligence, citing creativity to represent what is called divergent thinking. The quality of divergent thinking is a characteristic that does not convey a value judgment; this type of thinking simply differs from the norm. Divergent thinking corresponds more with creativity than it does with intelligence.
Gromisch asserts that creative people who are divergent thinkers filter out less information from the environment than less creative people. Thus creative people have more information available to them, allowing them to formulate solutions and ideas that are different, or divergent, and which may also be insightful.
Perhaps mental experience follows a similar pattern, in that cognitive material in the schizophrenic is similarly not completely screened out. The schizophrenic may be deluged with excessive cognitive material, especially as this relates to the experience of auditory hallucinations.
When we shared this image from the @buffer Twitter account recently, it got me thinking. The Tweet resulted in over 1,000 retweets, which somehow was an indication that a lot of people seemed to agree with this statement.
In the United States we are raised to appreciate the accomplishments of inventors and thinkers—creative people whose ideas have transformed our world. We celebrate the famously imaginative, the greatest artists and innovators from Van Gogh to Steve Jobs. Viewing the world creatively is supposed to be an asset, even a virtue. Online job boards burst with ads recruiting “idea people” and “out of the box” thinkers. We are taught that our own creativity will be celebrated as well, and that if we have good ideas, we will succeed.
It’s all a lie. This is the thing about creativity that is rarely acknowledged: Most people don’t actually like it. Studies confirm what many creative people have suspected all along: People are biased against creative thinking, despite all of their insistence otherwise.
Ah, ideas. Who doesn’t want more great ideas? I know I do.
I usually think about ideas as being magical and hard to produce. I expect them to just show up without me cultivating them, and I often get frustrated when they don’t show up when I need them.
The good news is that it turns out cultivating ideas is a process, and one that we can practice to produce more (and hopefully better) ideas. On the other hand, often times great ideas can also just come to us whilst in the shower or in another relaxing environment.
First, let’s look at the science of the creative process.
Anecdotal literature suggests that creative people sometimes use bodily movement to help overcome mental blocks and lack of inspiration. Several studies have shown that physical exercise may sometimes enhance creative thinking, but the evidence is still inconclusive. In this study we investigated whether creativity in convergent- and divergent-thinking tasks is affected by acute moderate and intense physical exercise in athletes (n = 48) and non-athletes (n = 48). Exercise interfered with divergent thinking in both groups. The impact on convergent thinking, the task that presumably required more cognitive control, depended on the training level: while in non-athletes performance was significantly impaired by exercise, athletes showed a benefit that approached significance. The findings suggest that acute exercise may affect both, divergent and convergent thinking. In particular, it seems to affect control-hungry tasks through exercise-induced “ego-depletion,” which however is less pronounced in individuals with higher levels of physical fitness, presumably because of the automatization of movement control, fitness-related neuroenergetic benefits, or both.
Bernard Ryefield's insight:
work-out is best fitted for athletes in respect of creativity; others should probably have a regular and moderate exercise
Users of the AHP first decompose their decision problem into a hierarchy of more easily comprehended sub-problems, each of which can be analyzed independently. The elements of the hierarchy can relate to any aspect of the decision problem-tangible or intangible, carefully measured or roughly estimated, well or poorly understood-anything at all that applies to the decision at hand.