CREATIVITY IN ORGANIZATIONS

Creativity in Organizations

Creativity in Organizations

Introduction

Creativity means the development, creation, and functioning of a new process, service, or product with the objective of progressing effectiveness, competitive advantage, or efficiency. Innovation can affect services, products, managerial processes, manufacturing processes, or the organizational design. It is correlated with creativity, and engages making new thoughts and setting them into actuality through research, new product development, and invention. Leaders have tremendous control over the first part of the creativity process: encouraging new ideas (or not discouraging new ideas). The second part of creativity—high-grading and stick-handling a new idea into action—is the most challenging of all. This paper provides a Critical Review on the articles by Chen (2012), Mcwhinney (1993) and Rickards & De Cock (2012). It also reviews the information given in the articles and links them to other Different Articles and to my personal thoughts about Creativity in Organizations.

Discussion

A study of the importance of creativity in US consultancy firms found that the ability to create memorable campaigns was ranked as one of the highest of abilities by some of the leading practitioners in the USA. The study also looked at the strategies firms employ to ensure creativity thrives in their respective environments. The research identified a range of techniques most commonly used by some of the USA's leading consultancies to build distinctive campaigns. Techniques included brainstorming, Edward De Bono's Six Hats and Tony Buzan's Mind Mapping and visualization. Taking the most widely used technique to explain more, brainstorming is designed to develop as many ideas as possible in a short period of time. (West 2000, 45)

McWhinney (1993) believes that all creative people have different kinds of thoughts and ways of working. He gives details on this topic in the research article “All creative people are not alike”. He advocates that people with creativity do not act in a comparable style. Some other researchers like Manimala (1996) also examined significant dissimilarities between business leaders. By studying how people with creative skills work and live, though, may assist us in having an understanding about philosophy of creativity. Additionally, managers could employ this understanding into inspiring inventiveness within administrations. (Mcwhinney, 1993)

On the other hand, Rickards and deCock (2003) examined the broad study on brainstorming and ended up with a conclusion that brainstorming is rather unsuccessful, in terms of problem solving as a minimum. Frequently, people who perform on their own produce better and more proposals than brainstorming groupings. (Rickards 2012, 96)

Rickards and deCock (2003) frequently describe this in terms of social loafing. Although they agree to the fact that there are some other advantages of brainstorming (for instance, team building) which validate the usage of brainstorming groups, although it is not the finest method to discover premium answers to troubles. Findings of Rickards and deCock (2003) are also consistent with the above mentioned study of PR consultancy firms that the brainstorming session should usually involve no fewer than four people and no more than 12 and continue for no less than 01 ...