Innovation or Creativity Article Review

Pages: 4 (1246 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 4  ·  File: .docx  ·  Level: Master's  ·  Topic: Business - Management

¶ … creativity on organizations not only does a double-loop analysis by challenging the entire concept of 'creativity' but also approaches the concept of organizational creativity in an innovative and original manner. Levitt (2002) argues that creativity should not be the decisive elements that organizations should focus on. On the contrary, creativity can sometimes be detrimental to organizations, and conformity may be preferable. Creativity may be impractical and destructive to the business in various ways, such as by resulting in chatter or failing to consider important aspects to the organization consequently deterring innovation from occurring.

Organizations, often, place projects of creativity in the hands of so-called creative types, but Levitt (2002) argues that doing so is counterproductive to the very ethos of an organizational workplace, which is to run on predictability and order. Creative types usually do not understand these concepts. Counter-intuitively, therefore, for innovation to be introduced into the marketplace, projects have to be delegated to 'conformists' who, understanding the workplace ethos, will design and implement their ideas for innovation accordingly.

Buy full Download Microsoft Word File paper
for $19.77
The key learning in this summary is a triple double loop approach. The first is the importance of creativity per se, particularly the traditional expectation of creativity as contravening (and having to contravene) regularity. Levitt, here, demonstrates, that creativity needs conformity (or adherence to principles of tradition, order, and structure) in order to survive. Similarly, creativity juxtaposes conformity rather than having to be oppositional to it as is popularly thought. And thirdly, creative projects should, therefore, be handed to the 'conformist' rather than to the 'creative' employees of the organization to structure and implement, for it is, thusly, more likely, that pragmatic and decisive results will occur.

Article Review on Innovation or Creativity Assignment

Creativity may be more of a millstone than a milestone to the industry, says Levitt (2002), since creativity may result in a wastage of time discussing project with none or little results or worse with impractical results that squander the company's resources. People handed the responsibility of generating creative ideas may tend to confuse abstract creativity with the necessary pragmatics involved in generating results, and underestimate, if not condemn, the necessary intricate complexities and realties of business organizations that need to be considered and taken into account for an idea to succeed.

Creativity is a popular notion today (e.g. Osborn, 1953), but innovation demands living with the practical mundane ness and every-day-life and realties of the internal organization and its external environment in order to introduce an article of innovation that will actually maintain itself and work.

Many 'creators' says Levitt, are 'talker's rather than creators. They mistake brilliant talk and ideas for creation, and are deluding the company and wasting their time (and money) in the process. Idea-producing is easy. Innovation is the challenge, for, so often, you have new ideas that have been lying about in the organization's attic for generations with none implementing them. These ideas may be creative and even promising. Yet energy and the initiative are lacking to put these ideas to work. Ideation, consequently -- claims Levitt -- is common. It is implementation that is lacking. Creativity is not the problem; innovation -- producing original ideas -- is uncommon.

Ideation and innovation are not the synonyms that they are thought to be. People can have ideas a-plenty. It is the people who can implement these ideas who are more rare. It is the know-how, energy, daring, and staying with it factor that are the most important elements for 'creativity' and these are less common. In other words -- and this is one of Levitt's original contributions -- creativity is more common than it is, generally, thought to be. And more so, creativity is not the most important factor. Far more important, and an element that is often overlooked,… [END OF PREVIEW] . . . READ MORE

Two Ordering Options:

Which Option Should I Choose?
1.  Buy full paper (4 pages)Download Microsoft Word File

Download the perfectly formatted MS Word file!

- or -

2.  Write a NEW paper for me!✍🏻

We'll follow your exact instructions!
Chat with the writer 24/7.

Innovation Design and Creativity for Competitive Advantage Thesis

Innovation and Ethics an Analysis Case Study

Managing Change and Creativity Essay

Innovation in Semco Organization Case Study

Innovation the World in Which We Live Term Paper

View 200+ other related papers  >>

How to Cite "Innovation or Creativity" Article Review in a Bibliography:

APA Style

Innovation or Creativity.  (2011, February 3).  Retrieved July 12, 2020, from

MLA Format

"Innovation or Creativity."  3 February 2011.  Web.  12 July 2020. <>.

Chicago Style

"Innovation or Creativity."  February 3, 2011.  Accessed July 12, 2020.