— that sounds redundant to me. We (people, that is) ARE creative. Can we really speak of creativity and not be speaking of people for the most part? Yet we people also wind up somehow creating environments that stifle creativity. Why?
Perhaps we don’t know where creativity comes from. Certainly we haven’t figured out exactly how the brain connects things in creative ways. We do have some tantalizing hypotheses. Yet, I think we can figure out what environments can lead to creativity and which environments tend to stifle creativity.
Obviously our education system stifles creativity. Kids generally stop dreaming, trying new things and being willing to risk failure by the third grade or so. Our businesses seem to do much the same to make sure we have conformance rather than exploration, trial and/or experimentation. Even those companies who depend on innovation (pharmaceutical companies for example) try to weed out ideas that will not lead to new products. We build silos around the various specialty sciences — neuroscientists rarely hobnob with particle physicists.
There are signs that things may finally be changing in the science community. Recent books exploring human consciousness for example have indicated that many scientific disciplines are in fact collaborating. That’s welcome news. One such book, Life on the Edge, explores how quantum mechanics is informing neuroscience.
Some businesses are also trying to rebuild creative environments by making sure employees have ample opportunities to “bump into” one another. They are assembling cross-functional teams when embarking on large projects and/or attempting to create strategic plans.
None of this change in trying to reclaim human creativity can happen soon enough as far as I’m concerned. As we move toward a world where we will both be replaced by and have our contribution enhanced by artificial intelligence (AI), it would be in our best interest to “amp up” the creative environments for our people.