How to Develop Creativity in Organizations for Growth

This article was originally written for Exploring Personal & Organizational Health, a graduate level course taken with Dr. Nancy Puglisi at Plymouth State University in the Spring of 2020.

A synthesis of an article written by Sarah Keenen and Danah Henrikson titled, Organizational Contexts and Team Creativity: an Interview with Dr. Roni Reiter-Palmon on Innovation within Organizations.

This interview with Dr. Roni Reiter-Palmon on Innovation discusses how to promote creativity as a tool within organizations to solve the complex problems in a country and world with lots of them. Readers are reminded that creativity isn’t simply born, rather,“creativity is a multifaceted process that finds intention in solving problems.” According to the article, “how you understand complex problems provides a frame for the ways you can creatively problem solve is a simple, but powerful idea.” To be able to decide how to tackle a problem within an organization is a calculated process that takes proper time to brainstorm is. Most importantly, “the way you think about [a problem] shapes what solutions you will follow and what sort of solutions will fall by the wayside because they don’t really align with the ideas or the perceptions that you have of the problem.” This means acknowledging that creativity takes time, freedom to take risks and that failure is inevitable and oftentimes a direct path to success. Furthermore, it’s the job of leaders within an organization to provide the tools and resources for members to create a setting that permits the flow of creativity. 

Organizations focused too much on accomplishing tasks and not enough time on finding newer, efficient ways to complete them will lack creativity. Something that Keenan & Kendriksen cite from the interview with Dr. Reiter-Palmon is the importance of  the “feeling of “psychological safety, which is being able to express ideas knowing that you will not be put down.” Otherwise described as the freedom to take risks, it’s important for members in an organization to know that they will be applauded for their thoughts and contribution to the organization and never ridiculed for failure. The inevitability of failure is another point  Dr. Reiter-Palmon discusses. Furthermore, “being able to fail allows for iterations of solutions that might eventually lead to success, or equally importantly, strengthen resilience and acceptance of ambiguity.” When an organization or member within it fails, they learn to accept failure as a natural thing and build resilience which helps them understand failure better the next time. There are three components that provide individuals in workplaces the tools to develop their creativity which bringing new ideas/products and greater efficiency into organizations. They are:

1. Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary thinking
2. Technology
3. Proper implementation. 

Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary thinking

According to the article, “social processes overlapping and influencing several individual’s thoughts.” are how ideas are best discovered. This happens through interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary thinking which are important components of fostering creativity within an organization or workplace. Although, teams who work well together are interdisciplinary and are difficult to create, but they are where the most creative “magic” happens in an organization.

Interdisciplinary work can be described as multiple disciplines working together to create something entirely new. Keenan & Kendriksen use the example of interdisciplinary teams in a hospital consisting of “doctors, nurses, physical therapists, pharmacists, people from their quality assurance, and other health care professionals—all of whom had important and different perspectives that made for good work.” However, the real interdisciplinary work is one hospital, which “by including their Information Technology team, the problem space and potential solution development expanded to consider what IT could do with patients’ medical records to support doctors or nurses in preventing falls.” This is an example of multiple disciplines working together to speak a “familiar language” outside of what they would do individually. It demonstrates, “the importance of giving people time to understand and listen to others’ perspectives and to learn how to work toward the same goals,” and the value of designing teams for multiple perspectives.” By inciting this kind of collaborating, the group at this particular hospital was able to find creativity through interdisciplinarity in a way they would not have been able to, hadn’t they all come together to form this “new language.”

Practicing transdisciplinarity within organizations or workplaces is another way to effectively problem solved and foster creativity; “it suggests the value of teamwork structured for diverse voices, perspectives, and backgrounds that span disciplines.” As cited by Rosenfield (1992) in the article suggests that a group level transdisciplinary approach can provide a systematic, comprehensive theoretical framework for the definition and analysis of the social, economic, political, environmental, and institutional factors influencing human health and well-being. An example of transdisciplinarity in my own life is the work we did in our Food Security Working Group that happened in the CoLab during the 2019-2020 school year at Plymouth State University. We had faculty members from across the university advocating for the different needs of their students. In one meeting, advocates for the Health and Human Performance department discussed food insecurity issues of students having class all day without being able to get quick access to campus dining services or whole foods because the dining hall was too far away. Faculty members from the Interdisciplinary Studies suggested a model they use which is to give out gas cards, grocery cards and nutritious foods at their food pantry to students in need.

While agreeing the food pantry was a good idea, Members from Student Support Foundation shared how “food pantry” is a term with negative connotations and that each department should name theirs something quirky that corresponded with the nature of their department. We brainstormed others phrasing like “Student Kitchen,” or “Student Lounge” that offered a safe space where everyone would feel welcomed.

As defined by the article, this transdisciplinary approach is an example of an organization, “drawing on knowledge and experts from different fields is one of the most viable group structures to allow people to solve problems in creative, effective way.” We were able to come together from various areas and disciplines around campus and work towards a common goal: to ease access to food in various disciplines and areas around the entire campus. Keenan & Kendriksen write, “that building teams to represent diverse disciplines is one of the best ways of resolving real-world scientific problem.

Technology is the component within an organization discussed that provide individuals in workplaces to develop their creativity within an organization or workplace by allowing brainstorming to be happening in a greater context. The traditional meeting, where several people are placed in a room and only one person can talk at once, is becoming obsolete. Interactive & shared spaces to collaborate saves time in traditional meetings that could be spent on further brainstorming or making plans to implement creative ideas.

Keenan & Kendriksen however, warn readers about over-brainstorming. With so much extra time, it’s easy to become overwhelmed with too many ideas that are difficult to process. The important thing for an organization to do is to boil down the creative ideas that will be beneficial, “is start to take those large numbers of ideas and remove ideas that are redundant, remove ideas that cannot be carried out. Start to think about what’s doable and feasible, but also what are some original ideas that we want to implement to come up with that creative idea.”

To conclude, it all comes back to organizations first being able to have enough time for members have the proper tools to brainstorm freely and without judgement. The article uses a relatable example of standardized testing in schools. Creative people are oftentimes “more disruptive in the classroom,” but are told that there’s no time to stray from lesson plans. Teachers are pressured to fill everyday with material to help better prepare students for standardized tests, leaving little unplanned time for students to master the art of creativity. Focus on testing in school can be harmful just like focus on filling every second with “things to get done,” in the workplace can be harmful.

To further elaborate on this, Keenan & Kendriksen cite Cropley who says that, “divergent thinking is widely noted as a core aspect of creative work, in that creative practitioners must be able to generate lots of ideas, far and wide. At the same time, however, they must be able to identify and pursue one of their many divergent ideas. It is through convergent thinking that they can narrow themselves in idea selection to focus and implement novel and effective plans.” Divergent thinking is where creativity happens, it’s birthplace; on the other hand, convergent thinking is where thoughts get implemented. There needs to be structure in creativity to allow for proper implementation which is largely found in transdisciplinarity/interdisciplinarity thinking, efficient leadership and proper use of technology within organizational structures. 

Works Cited Keenan, Sarah F., et al. “Organizational Contexts and Team Creativity: an Interview with Dr. Roni Reiter-Palmon on Innovation within Organizations.” TechTrends, vol. 61, no. 4, 2017, pp. 316–321., doi:10.1007/s11528-017-0198-9.