Nurturing and Encouraging Creativity

A little less than two years ago, I was in Katmandu for a leadership conference along with 400 educators. It was then that I had the pleasure of listening to Dr. Douglas Reeves’ presentation: How to Value, Nurture and Encourage Creativity. Here, without any interpretation, commentary, or contextualization from me, are the notes I took from Dr. Reeves’ presentation.

  • Creativity is not mere originality. In fact, the best definition of creativity is: The process of examination, evaluation, and follow-through with what already exists in an attempt to make significant discovery, insight, and then further construction.
  • A survey of 1,500 CEOs, conducted by IBM, ranked creativity as the “most important criteria to identify in the company’s recruitment process.” As expected creativity scored higher in importance than test scores, work experience, and the quality of a college education; but surprisingly, and perhaps disappointingly, it also scored higher than integrity.
  • A study conducted by Skidmore (2012) found that the most creative students were consistently the ‘least favorite’ of the teachers. And the ‘least creative students’ were by far the most ‘favored’ in schools.
  • A study by Cornell (2012) found that the most ‘creative children,’ while in their teens, begin to ‘down-play’ and ‘hide’ their creativity in exchange for acceptance by their peers.
  • Paul Torrance, an American Psychologist (who thought IQ tests were an inappropriate way to gauge true intelligence) devised methods of testing creativity that are now employed all over the world. A high score on the Torrance Test for Creativity is one of the most accurate predictors of success in both college and later in an individual’s career.
  • Sometimes the “greater and more strict” limits placed on a process or the creation of a product, produce the greatest creativity. Examples of “great creativity within strict limits” are: Picassos’ Blue Period (when, by design, he forced himself to be monochromatic using only shades of blue), and Dr. Suess’ Green Eggs and Ham (he tasked himself to use only 50 words to write the book).
  • It takes great courage to say, “What we once believed to be a good thing is no longer good.” And we need to have the courage to say this about brainstorming. There is no research to suggest brainstorming (as it currently exists; meaning: no criticism of ideas, and that all ideas shared are good ideas) is of any creative value whatsoever. It has been consistently proven that working-groups with protocols designed to challenge each other, critique ideas early on in the process, deeply value debate, and constructively dissent produce 40% more good ideas than the group brainstorming.
  • Since 2010 there has been a 400% increase in the volume of creative research that has come from Asia and a negative decline in the volume produced in the US and Europe.
  • The path of Mozart’s creative genius can be defined as: first he copied, then he emulated, then he constructed variations upon what already existed. In other words, as Picasso says…
  • The best way to discourage creativity is to confuse feedback with evaluation.
  • A hallmark of creative companies is not problem-solving as much as it is problem-finding. And the truly creative organizations have a commitment to reward process as much, or more, than the final product.

Even though I heard Dr. Reeves talk about this topic a while ago, I think a few points still hold true. However, I also know that we, as educators, are making great strides in nurturing and encouraging creativity. Hope these points can instigate powerful and thoughtful conversations for you.

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *