Creativity and ethical leadership in organizational contexts

Looking at Creativity
The main purpose of these chapters is to show what creativity is and how it can often be confused for other things—like backwardness, malevolence, or even stupidity. The author uses the example of Thomas Edison as a boy and the mischief he would get up to and thus makes the point that creativity sometimes comes out in different ways and one should not be quick to judge it negatively.
The key question the author is addressing is what constitutes the creative mind? The author looks at the various qualities of the creative person, creative personality traits and the theories used over time to explain them, such as Freud’s theory or Adler’s theory; the mental processes that go along with creative expression, and how the creative output is judged according to different theoretical models. Essentially the author is asking how should one understand the creative mind?
The most important information in the chapters is the theoretical concepts that the author highlights. The author examines how creativity is applied, where it comes from, and how it is interpreted within the larger context of psychology. So for example the author looks at what Jung had to say about it and compares it to Maslow and Hammer and Rogers. The psychoanalytical theories are discussed and the humanist theories are discussed and this for me was the key information among all the chapters as it helped to explain how creativity has been understood by the leading lights of psychology in the past. The author does not summarily draw a conclusion but does leave it open to discussion, though he himself does say that he finds the humanist interpretation of creativity to be more compelling than the psychoanalytical since the humanist interpretation provides more fruitful insights into the mystery of creativity insofar as he is concerned.
The key concepts we need to understand in the article are humanist theory and psychoanalytic theory. By these concepts, the author means that there are different perspectives that theorists take when it comes to creativity. Psychoanalysts look at creativity from the context of what was going on in the individuals’ early years because they believe that these early years are meaningful in terms of the development of the personality. Some of them see creativity as an early fixation that needs to be overcome and dealt with and that creativity is the effect of an emotional disturbance (the author notes that Jung was the exception to the rule in this regard). The humanists on the other hand take a more positive approach to creativity: they see it as conscious, constructive, cognitive, deliberate, and part of what it means to be human. The psychoanalysts view it mainly as something stemming from the unconscious, which is trying to deal with some repressed emotion. The humanists embrace it as a good thing and see it as flowing outward as part of the human spirit and the creative instinct that is intertwined with all things in the universe.
The main assumption underlying the author’s thinking is that creativity is generally a force for good and should be interpreted in a positive manner because it is through creativity that so many new things and reflective innovations or works of art or ideas are communicated to the public. Creativity is associated with life in the author’s estimation and is not viewed in a negative sense or as an expression that is hiding something else within.
If we take this reasoning seriously, the implications are that creativity should be embraced by society and instead of trying to stifle creativity it should be encouraged and promoted in schools and workplaces and organizations. Much of society is fixated on the idea that everyone needs to be a conformist and that anything outside of the ordinary is a sign of a mental disturbance or a sign of a problem personality. The author indicates that it is actually quite the opposite. It is a sign that this individual likely has something unique and innovative to offer to society and that energy and impulse just needs to be channeled or guided in the right direction. That is what happened with Edison: his father viewed him as a problem child, but his mother rightly identified him simply as a creative child and nurtured and guided Edison’s creative nature while dealing with the weaknesses (such as his poor social skills) and accepting them. There is typically a trade-off in this respect: creative people tend to have some difficulties in some other areas of the personality, usually because they are fixated on an idea or inspiration within themselves and they do not bother too much with externals. Nikolai Tesla was another example of a creative person who did not bother too much with social skills. So if society were to recognize the creative impulse in a humanistic manner, we would celebrate it and support it and not try to treat the child or the adult as if there were something wrong with him that needed to be corrected. We would work to recognize the signs of creativity and identify the personality traits that go along with it and nurture it to help it to grow. We could bring about another type of ancient Athens, which was known as the creative hub of the classical world more than 2000 years ago.
If we fail to take this line of reasoning seriously, the implications are that the creative people in the world will be treated like outcasts or delinquents and their creative instinct will be suppressed and the world will never benefit from the insights that they could have shared with us, the innovations they might have discovered, or the entertainment that might have given us joy or an experience of catharsis. Ignoring the author’s line of thinking could create a sterile and stagnant world in which differences are stomped out and everything is controlled in an authoritarian manner. There would be no real human joy or passion, but everything would be crushed and the human spirit would suffer substantially.
The main point of view presented in this article is that creativity is natural to the human experience and people should strive to understand it rather than criticize it or neutralize it. Using the models of interpreting creativity can help and learning to recognize the signs of a creative personality can help as well. The author indicates that in so doing, people can actually facilitate the creative instinct. At some point, however, the author admits that creativity cannot be overly analyzed because there is a spirit that goes with it, a mystery that cannot be plucked out. One must inevitably accept the mystery of creativity and neither try to root it out or make it into something it is not. There is not always going to be an easy explanation for it and so sometimes the best thing to do is to just take it, reflect upon it and enjoy it.
The chapter relates to the three dimensions in the sense that there is a social responsibility to nurture creativity (the first dimension) particularly among educators and parents, as they are the ones most likely to initially recognize it for what it is. They bear the most responsibility in terms of identifying creativity and helping it to grow. The second dimension is related to in the sense that creativity is connected to the idea of the mysterious and the marvelous and that one must accept it rather than try to stuff it in a box and put a label on it. The third dimension is touched on by way of the various theories that the author explores as he attempts to navigate the idea of creativity and how it has been seen by people in the past.
The related implications, benefits, impact, relevance and returns on investment if we take the author’s underlying premises are that creativity can be a major source of good and change for the better in this world if we just worked a little harder to understand and appreciate it. The problem that most people have is that they themselves are used to conforming to certain standards and ideas and when others step outside those boundaries they feel like they need to take action because they want everyone to do the same things they have done. That is not what creativity is about, however, and the author indicates as much.
Creativity is about looking at the world through fresh eyes and investigating, and trying out new ideas and seeing what else can work. It is refreshing and invigorating and it can offer a great deal of vitality when it is needed most. So it should be respected and appreciated and not looked down upon and creative people should never feel like they are less than others just because they look at things differently. That is the biggest overall impact and the big return on investment of course is that if people accept creativity into their lives they will probably enjoy some fairly innovative concepts that improve their lives in some way. Edison brought some innovative ideas into the world that made the world a better place and that is the story with every creative person. So the relevance of the subject is that the world could use a lot of creativity and letting it happen and accepting the mystery is the best way to approach it.