There is a lot to be said about the position the author takes about creativity. Obviously, someone who is constantly getting diverted from his or her creative pursuits is unlikely to see that creativity produce much of anything. Focus and work ethic are clearly a tremendous boon to a creative mind. That said, I think this is horribly oversimplified. Creativity comes from many places, and to think that a person can only be creative if walled off from all distractions seems comical. In fact, many people find that sparks of creativity come from unsuspecting places or that breaking from an isolated routine is essential to shake conditions like writer's block. Creativity can also be valuable without having to result in something that is productive in the tangible sense mentioned by the author (such as a book or painting). I would argue that creative people are often "productive" in a different sense by enriching the lives of people around them. For example, maybe the author who takes a few minutes to interact with others ends up inspiring those people to be creative. That author's individual creative productivity may decline, but society's net creative production may increase.
This may take the headline too far, but I also think that this article misses the boat on something that to me is endemic to creativity, which is the inclination to find ways to make things possible (e.g., to find ways to say "yes"). Many of the world's most innovative and creative people were willing to ignore doubters and those who always said "no" or "this can't be done." Instead, they were creative precisely because the refused to take no for an answer.
My point here isn't that all of these people should have taken the interview request discussed in the article or that creative people should always say "yes." But I think it is dangerous to define creativity and its value in such a way as to encourage creative people to say no.
Thanks to my friend
Ross for posting this article on Twitter.
"Creative People Say No" by Kevin Ashton
Published in Medium, March 18, 2013
Eric
Is a 33% response rate for an unsolicited survey sent to famous people actually bad?
ReplyDeleteHard to know depending on how they were contacted and how it was presented, but I'm inclined to say that a 33% response rate is probably pretty good.
ReplyDeleteEric
I thought this article presented an interesting mental exercise, but I agree we shouldn't take it as universal.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of creative people finding ways to say yes.
I think this is a ridiculous article for a number of reasons...
ReplyDelete1. his entire basis is a random survey sent out, to respond to thread above when "cold calling" a 1% response rate is phenomenal so if anything he did fantastic. Strip away people saying no and the article is a simple theory
2. Creativity can be, and is, taught. Sure some people are more creative than others but just about anyone can learn techniques to get there. One of the best "books" i ever read called thinkertoys contains a large number of exercises that focus the creative process (just like any process it can be learned). The book over 7 years has led to some amazing ideas that i have implemented at work
3. As part of my creative process i love to involve others, much of creativity comes from cross functional learning and idea sharing. If you say no to everyone than all you have is your own box. 2 minds are better than 1.
Sure there are times to say no, but that is much less about creativity and far more about simple time management. This guy is a hack.