CREATIVITY AND

MANAGEMENT
David C. Wilson
Warwick Business School
CREATIVITY – THE HYPE
A buzz word and recently incorporated into
‘management speak’ (oed) …see also Ian Hislop
and Ricky Gervais.

Many management texts abound with normative

views characterised by …the assertion that
enhanced creativity is always beneficial to an
organisation…

At the level of management speak, this remains

content-free.
CREATIVITY
 Nevertheless, the concept of creativity has been around long before
management speak in many disciplines (the term has16th century
etymological origins). For example:

 In Mathematics – as the art of making useful combinations from an

almost infinite number of possible useless combinations

 In Philosophy – especially connected with serendipity (which is

not pure luck or chance) but results from identifying 'matching
pairs' of events that are subsequently put to practical use.
Baudrillard uses the analogy of the billiard game – playing off the
cushion – to characterise the rebounding and richocheting nature
of actions and ideas.

 Business examples of such a process can be found under the

topic “innovation” and include the invention of the Swatch (new
combinations or “pairings” of technologies developed in other
industries).
LEGAL DEFINITIONS
Creativity falls under the rubric of intellectual
property for the legal profession. For
organisations these concern outputs (rather than
processes)

For example
 New Ideas (which are protected by patent laws)
 New Products/Services (which are protected by
copyright laws)
CREATIVITY IN ORGANISATIONS AND
CREATIVE ORGANISATIONS
Creativity in organisations focuses on achieving
innovation, competitive advantage and social
benefits by enhancing the ‘level’ of creativity in
the organisation.
This, typically, involves:
 Examining the personality traits and styles of individuals
 Developing an organisational context in which creativity
might be fostered (organisational cultures etc)
 Examining systems (collectivities of organised efforts
coupled with the physical environment) to see how the
systemic tendencies toward stability might be
interrupted….to stimulate new actions and/or different
activities.
 TO SUMMARISE…..

CREATIVE INTERNAL
CONTEXTS

EXTERNAL

CREATIVE
CREATIVE
PROCESSES
INDIVIDUALS
Creativity….
Management theory typically assumes creativity
is solely about the creation of new ideas. This is
innovation
Hence the breathless talk of improvisation, jazz and
unstructured music, commedia del’arte etc….

But creativity in the implementation of existing

ideas and technologies is equally important.

Creativity is therefore a broader concept

incorporating both innovation as well as existing
ideas, structures and processes.
Creativity Involves……
Concepts: ideas and/or technologies

Competences: the repertoires of skills and

abilities of individuals (and the opportunity to use
these skills in the organisation).

Connections: the relationships which individuals,

teams and organisations create (networks).
Sustained by collaboration and can be re-
configured as new ideas emerge/are created.
(Kanter 1999)
Creative Organisations
 Typically, advertising, media, music, arts and entertainment
organisations.

 Creative organisations survive by their ‘creative output’ be

that a magazine, and advertising campaign or a piece of
music.

 To achieve this, they need to employ professional creative

individuals, but also professional managers to ensure
business success.

 This can create tensions which have typically been called

‘creatives versus suits’ (See Chapter 7 in Images of
Strategy by Bilton et al).
Hierarchy, Power and Creatives….
 Professional managers have to deal with creatives,
many of whom feel they have been forced to the bottom
of the organisation. (Silos, hierarchy and managerialism)

 Many creative organisations have become

“managerially” professionalized with the individuals who
actually produce the ‘creative’ product being at the
‘bottom of the pile’.

 Media organisations are just as full of structures, limits

and routines as any other type of organisation. And
creatives are likely to feel constrained and alienated by
them.
Creatives and the Strategy Process
 The disengagement of creatives from strategic decision processes
in a range of creative organisations is striking.

 To what extent would it make sense to involve creatives to a greater

extent in the strategy process?

 There are countless conflicting arguments about this point. Kanter

and others would argue that greater involvement would release
greater levels of innovation and Hickson et al (2003) would argue
that implementation (and performance) would benefit

 Managers of organisations might take the alternative view and

argue that only ‘suits’ should be involved in decision making since
getting creatives involved will be disastrous (they assume they don’t
want to be involved and they are not skilled in strategic thinking).
 Comparing Creatives and Knowledge
Workers…….
There are similarities in some of the above
dilemmas between organisations employing
creatives and professional service firms
employing knowledge workers.

In the same ways as creatives, knowledge

workers are the core competence of the
organisation. They both present similar
difficulties for management.
Retention is a Key Issue
 Some creatives inhabit a fluid labour market. They can
sell their skills freely and can move from job to job, from
contract to contract and from organisation to
organisation (dangerous in a competitive market)…..

 Some will leave at the slightest hint of dissatisfaction and

seek a job elsewhere. Management’s role in maintaining
a supportive context is therefore crucial.

 Professional/knowledge workers display many of the

same characteristics.
The Knowledge Base and Performance

On the basis of empirical evidence, it would be

better to involve ‘creatives’ in the strategic
decision process rather than marginalise them
and keep them away from the process.

They are the ‘knowledge-base of the

organsiation
(Hickson et al 2003; Kanter 1999; Miller et al 2004)
KNOWLEDGE BASE AND ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT/
PERFORMANCE

Knowledge
Base
high
Nestle Carlsberg-Tetley
Philips Nokia
(high (very high

Organisational
performance) performance)

Context
Low high

National Grid
Marks&Spenc (moderate
er performance)
(poor
performance) Low
Selected References

 Hickson DJ, Miller, S.& D. Wilson ‘Planned or Prioritised? Two

Options in the Implementation of Strategic Decisions, Journal
of Management Studies, 47 , November 2003.

 Bilton C. (2003) Strategy as Creativity, In S. Cumming and

D.C. Wilson ‘Images of Strategy’, Blackwell: Oxford.

 Kanter, R.M. (1999) ‘Change in Everyone’s Job: Managing the

Extended Enterprise in a Globally Extended World’
Organizational Dynamics, 28,1, pp. 7-23.

 Miller S., Wilson D.C & Hickson D.J (2004) ‘Beyond Planning’
Long Range Planning.