Creativity background

Creativity theories

Defining creativity is uncreative as a definition, because it is already limiting a concept in a few words. Besides, the term creativity is one of those words that encompasses so many meanings in current usage that it becomes ambiguous. Starting from these considerations, let us try to explore the meaning of the word creativity.

Creativity has been widely studied for a long time, and many definitions have been proposed. Since it is a complex and multidimensional concept, its understanding is constantly changing according to the socio-cultural environment around us (Runco, 2014). The definitions of creativity evolve and fluctuate over time. When defining Creativity, it is essential to consider the cultural and socio-economic context. In fact, with human evolution, the manifestation of creative actions affects more and more new fields, always fluctuating, adapting and re-calibrating its definition. The interactive map "25 years of Creativity Research" (Williams et al. 2016) shows how the research focus has been put on Creativity during the last 25 years.

Definitions range from simple, e.g., “the ability to make new things or think of new ideas” or “the ability to break traditional patterns” to the complex: “Creativity is the interaction among aptitude, process, and environment by which an individual or group produces a perceptible product that is both novel and useful as defined within a social context” (Pluker et al. 2004). Some researchers proposed an element of surprise while others thought that creative things should be ‘worthwhile’ Runco and Jaeger, 2012). To create common ground for comparable research, many researchers such as Guilford, De Bono, Runco etc. have agreed on certain standards: Creativity should be defined in terms of originality as well as usefulness (AbAdzi et al. 2014).

Poincaré (1924) considered creativity as the ability to recognize the usefulness of new configurations of existing elements. He considered creativity as a skill that is based on the ability to "disconnect" and reconnect existing elements of knowledge to each other, by association, according to schemes never used before. The first reference to the multiphase structure of the creative process to solve mathematical problems belongs to him.

Wallas (1926, 2014), inspired by Poicarè’s work, spoke about creativity in terms of creative process and provided a configuration in four mental phases: preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification. This classification was the starting point to define new models (Corazza and Agnoli, 2015, Dubberly and Sanders, 2006, Tassoul and Buijs, 2011) to better describe process phases.

J.P. Guilford published "Creativity" (1950), where, alongside convergent - vertical (logical - deductive) thinking, which had characterised scientific research in the past, he identified divergent or lateral thinking that was less bound to rigid schemes and capable of producing multiple alternatives.

Edward De Bono, a creativity scientist, coined the term “lateral thinking” in the 1960s to contrast it with the other form of thinking he called 'vertical' (De Bono, 1994). If we face a problem using a rational approach we achieve correct results, but traditional logic models always limit these results. When we require different and innovative solutions, we have to change the reasoning scheme and see things from a different perspective. We have to abandon vertical thinking, the one based on logic deduction, to embrace the creativity of lateral thinking (De Bono, 1990). De Bono identifies four critical factors associated with lateral thinking: (1) recognize dominant ideas that polarize perception of a problem, (2) searching for different ways of looking at things, (3) relaxation of rigid control of thinking, and (4) use of chance to encourage other ideas.

Alex Osborn noted two distinct kinds of thinking are essential to being creative. His Creative problem solving (CPS) asks indeed to separate "divergent" and "convergent" thinking. Divergent thinking is the process of generating lots of potential solutions and possibilities, otherwise known as brainstorming. And convergent thinking involves evaluating those options and choosing the most promising one. Often, a combination of the two develops new ideas or solutions.

Runco intended creativity as an ability to discover something new, adapt the available knowledge purposefully, and solve the problems originally, flexibly, and effectively (Runco 2012). This definition treats creativity as a skill while also paying attention to the mechanisms that occur within the creative act.

Corazza formulated a dynamic definition of creativity that states: “Creativity requires potential originality and effectiveness” (Corazza 2018), shifting the focus more on the creative process and on active engagement rather than on the creative achievement itself. In creativity, as in many other areas of positive human activities, active engagement has a very important value in itself, even without achievement and/or recognition of success.

Following the definition provided by Amabile (2013), Creativity is in fact the production of new ideas (unique compared to others available in the company) that are useful (if they have the potential to create value in the company). These ideas, in terms of products, services, and processes, become innovation once they are adopted, integrated and shared by the company and by the community.

But before moving through some definitions of creativity connected to design and innovation, reflect and ask yourself why it is essential to learn how to be creative and know what creativity is.

The future of the economy and society is becoming more and more influenced by creativity and the ability to produce ideas, knowledge and innovations. This ability has always been important, but in the last twenty years has literally exploded. When one starts from the idea that creativity is what underpins innovation, not as a single event, but as a systematic approach, knowing and stimulating creative propensities become strategic in the project planning framework.

Besides contributing to self-fulfilment, creativity is one of the primary sources of innovation, which is recognised as one of the main driving forces behind sustainable economic development (Bessant, Whyte and Neely, 2005). Creativity is the basis of innovation (West, 2002). They are complementary, and we can say that creativity is not only the source of the innovative process, not just an input for innovation, but it is the environment where the innovative process can easily develop (Shani and Divyapriya, 2011).

Creativity is the context and the reference frame where innovation can develop in a sort of humus and rich soil to be fostered and spread (Swann and Birke, 2005). It is thus a primary source of innovation, and companies that want to increase their competitiveness in the market must exploit the creative potential of their resources. It has become necessary to place the human creative impulse at the centre of change, as the sole agent able to effectively and efficiently intervene in problem-solution, capable of providing a company with the flexibility and openness necessary to achieve a competitive advantage (Canina, Anselmi and Bruno, 2020).

Creativity and creative thought, together with Design, become an important driving force for innovation, insofar as they are in close correlation (Von Stamm, 2008). “Design is what links creativity and innovation. It shapes ideas to become practical and attractive propositions for users or customers. Design may be described as creativity deployed to a specific end”. (Bitard and Basset, 2008). From this emerges the need for a new culture that aims to stimulate, encourage and welcome the opportunity for the development of personal and group creative skills as a source of innovation strategies.