Without touch points we do not create value
When I think of creativity, I think of connectivity and I imagine a universe of complex relationships and connections, full of surprises and attributes.
To be connected means that I’m not indifferent to what is happening in the world around me.
Imagine a work network in an organization where each of us represents a connection point to others. Speed, frequency and intensity with which these connections take place are connectivity.
Saying this way it seems to be easy to imagine that the higher the connectivity, greater speed and volume of exchange of ideas take place and more creativity emerges.
I.e. creativity emerges as a confluence of several factors, whether they are our intellectual capacity, knowledge, our style of thinking, our personality, motivation or context.
For example people who are more prone to think in a divergent way are more creative and exhibit higher levels of cognitive complexity and also greater flexibility in the approach to problems.
It seems to be true that creative people are good to deal with ambiguous and unstructured situations. (What do you think?)
This could mean that a creative person has some salient characteristics, such as tolerance for ambiguity, self-confidence (in his creative activity), independence and autonomy in decision-making (and they may be collaborative too), persistence and self-discipline, a very peculiar narrative and they believes in their activity.
Imagine an exchange of experiences in an interdisciplinary team, in which participants build a map through which any user can construct a new structured representation of concepts and relationships between them!
This map can be used to formalize, organize and represent concepts and even other maps of various disciplines, thus facilitating the sharing of information and knowledge, and giving way to the creation of new knowledge.
In these circumstances we can “guess” that the ambiguity arises naturally as a consequence of the absence of a common language between disciplines, but that is quickly faded with a collaborative methodology and belief in success.
This is a liberating form of knowledge and at the same time a lever for creativity.
We can observe easily that, on the one hand, it is common to have knowledge of boundary between the various disciplines, and this knowledge is easily integrated and, on the other hand, the knowledge that does not lie on the borders favors the curiosity and research providing greater wealth among the various disciplines.
Thus, as the results based on different perspective are complemented each other, we have acquired a whole much greater than the sum of its parts, because there may be place to validations that before were not imagined.
Today the world is of relationships, connectivity, even if virtual, where knowledge is a strong currency to trade between individuals and groups who promote creativity through connections.
The role of creative people is connecting things that apparently do not relate. With an increasingly connected through the Web the amount of loose ends in information, increases every day, and the opportunities of generating ideas accompany this growth.
The context where people fall, is of course a factor that we consider when we talk about wealth of ideas and quantity or in terms of “quality”, i.e. comprehensiveness, complexity and effectiveness of troubleshooting or satisfaction of needs.
It is in this aspect, the needs of people, that raises the question of another need, the need of empathy.
Is that true, that for an idea to be valid, or actually with value, it needs to fit an existing need, even if hidden?
Does this make it necessary to have an empathic attitude with people to solve the problems?
I have no doubt that only the deep understanding of the problems allows that generation of ideas is capable of meeting the real needs of consumers/users, but there are hidden therefore unmet needs, which will only be satisfied if there is a broad connectivity environment in the creative process.
“When you ask a creative person how they did something, they may feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after awhile. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things. And the reason they were able to do that was that they’ve had more experiences or have thought more about their experiences than other people have. Unfortunately, that’s too rare a commodity. A lot of people in our industry haven’t had very diverse experiences. They don’t have enough dots to connect, and they end up with very linear solutions, without a broad perspective on the problem. The broader one’s understanding of the human experience, the better designs we will have.” – Steve Jobs
Do you want to comment?
Jose Baldaia – Top 40 Innovation Bloggers of 2011
TagsAnalyses and intuition Art and innovation Ask questions Assumptions and innovation Behavior and innovation Behavior change Business model Business models Collaboration and innovation Connections and creativity Create value Creativity and diversity Creativity and empathy Creativity and sustainability Critical thinking Designthinking Design thinking and business Diversity and creativity Diversity and Innovation Emotional experiences Empathy and innovation Evaluation of ideas Innovation and Human Resources Innovation and Management Innovation and networks Innovation and observation Innovation and possibilities Innovation and trust Innovation Culture Inovattion Institute for the Future Interception of ideas Intuitive thinking Making decisions Marty Neumeir Motivation and collaboration Open Innovation Services Passion and creativity Protoypes Resistance to change Rethinking options Simplicity and innovation Time and creativity values and innovation White space