As discussed last time, economists use the term rationalization to denote altering a process or procedure, based on careful design, to achieve goals usually related to cost savings, efficiency enhancement, or compliance with accepted rules. We then described some effective approaches to rationalizing creativity.
Let's now examine approaches to rationalizing creativity that are less effective — and sometimes even counter-effective. Here are four leadership patterns that tend to suppress creativity.
- Emphasize the consequences of failure
- Those who believe that fear is an effective motivator exploit this principle by making clear to subordinates that the consequences of failure are severe and personal. Organizational leaders sometimes predict layoffs or organizational collapse if "we don't get this right."
- This approach is risky. Some people might elect to address the personal threat by searching for alternative employment instead of creatively solving the organizational problems.
- Set people against each other
- Some managers believe that competition among subordinates elicits their best performance, and that setting people against each other fosters such competition.
- This theory might work at the scale of enterprises, though there is some doubt even in that case. But a competitive atmosphere at the personal level is destructive in organizations in which collaboration is essential to creative progress. Moreover, although limited levels of stress do stimulate creativity, intentional efforts to set people against each other can easily exceed those benign levels of stress.
- Emphasize how more than what
- When setting team or organizational goals, it's counterproductive to impose ancillary requirements on the methods of achieving those goals. For example, if the goal is reducing time to market, emphasizing the use of a particular methodology can reduce creativity.
- Constraining how a goal is to be achieved tends to reduce opportunities for creativity in achieving that goal. Be certain that constraints on how are minimal and that they have sound business purposes. Then communicate these purposes clearly and make them part of the goal.
- Confer power and authority according to past achievements
- Managers who Constraining how a goal is to be
achieved tends to reduce opportunities
for creativity in achieving that goalare especially risk averse tend to confer power and authority on those who have demonstrated past success.
- When authors of past achievements accumulate power and authority, organizations tend to approach current problems along the lines that succeeded in the past. That's fine if current problems and current context are analogous to past problems and past context. But when problems and context are novel, creativity is required, and power and authority must be distributed differently. This is one reason why "skunk works" are so effective: their structure insulates from conventional power and authority those people who need to be creative.
As counterintuitive as it might seem, demanding creativity stifles it, as does removing all stress. Creativity needs space, time, resources, courage, and just a dash of stress. First in this series Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenXjoFatGhBwQANIgZner@ChacRapvXvufCeyTxwrUoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Problem Solving and Creativity:
- What, Why, and How
- When solving problems, groups frequently get stuck in circular debate. Positions harden even before
the issue is clear. Here's a framework for exploration that can sharpen thinking and focus the group.
- Decisions: How Looping Back Helps
- Group decision-making often proceeds through a series of steps including forming a list of options,
researching them, ranking them, reducing them, and finally selecting one. Often, this linear approach
yields disappointing results. Why?
- The Tyranny of Singular Nouns
- When groups try to reach decisions, and the issue in question has a name that suggests a unitary concept,
such as "policy," they sometimes collectively assume that they're required to find a one-size-fits-all
solution. This assumption leads to poor decisions when one-size-fits-all isn't actually required.
- Strategic Waiting
- Time can be a tool. Letting time pass can be a strategy for resolving problems or getting out of tight
places. Waiting is an often-overlooked strategic option.
- Linear Thinking Bias
- When assessing the validity of problem solutions, we regard them as more valid if their discovery stories
are logical, than we would if they're other than logical. This can lead to erroneous assessments, because
the discovery story is not the solution.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 2: Narcissistic Behavior at Work: VII
- Narcissistic behavior at work prevents trusting relationships from developing. It also disrupts existing relationships, and generates toxic conflict. One class of behaviors that's especially threatening to relationships is disregard for the feelings of others. In this part of our series we examine the effects of that disregard. Available here and by RSS on May 2.
- And on May 9: Unethical Coordination
- When an internal department or an external source is charged with managing information about a large project, a conflict of interest can develop. That conflict presents opportunities for unethical behavior. What is the nature of that conflict, and what ethical breaches can occur? Available here and by RSS on May 9.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenIjgErqCTOzYDLmzkner@ChacxlGQnPWbyHbXTJsfoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.