Negative Creativity and Creativity Theft

Creativity and imagination are increasingly recognized as the most important human abilities in the twenty-first century. This sentiment is echoed by academics and practitioners globally and across disciplines. Together with collaboration, co-creation is the new currency of the twenty-first century. Indeed Sir Ken Robinson notes that “Imagination is the source for all human achievement”. The modernistic view of creativity was centred on the individual as the creator. It was generally not associated with the creation of an idea, process or product by a team, business or society. Indeed most societies, businesses and groups represent conformity and compliant behaviour which suppress collective creativity. Herein lies the dilemma: in as much as change has changed so too has creativity, and groups, businesses and societies are slow to recognize the power and benefit of the shift. They still demand conformity and result in low levels of creative input. The concepts of “negative creativity” and “creativity theft” are presented as two forms of reducing human creativity and imagination. The first is the result of organisational structures, culture, processes and bureaucracy which inhibit creativity as a dimension of strategic thinking. The second reflects the impact of education systems and socialisation that decrease the creative expression of children and young adults. An illustration of negative creativity is illustrated in a discussion related to systemically ‘suppressing’ employee creative potential due to the GFC. During the GFC and the severe financial challenges faced by businesses large and small, leaders tried, through strategy processes, to create an artificial sense of stability. The result has been increased bureaucratisation based on compliance and self-imposed restraint. An approach is suggested that leaders ‘live outside of time’. This requires them to see time as a continuum and logical extension of past fact, current action and future aim of action. The logic, process and model of a simplified strategy framework for leaders and organisations is presented. The Triple-V model, developed in 2010 and validated by further research suggests that successful strategy is based on developing viable alternative futures, making visible and participatory the strategic considerations of these and future direction which, if implemented accordingly will result in valuable strategy. The chapter also re-asserts the importance of leadership in enabling organisational strategy. This is explored in terms of leaders providing direction and developing their organisations into open co-creative systems. This is contrasted to the ‘closed systems’ that typify most organisations that are more reactive to change.