There is a relationship between creative generation and change.
Creativity happens at the edge of chaos is a phrase that is equally terrifying and inspiring. But it makes sense for anyone who has experienced the creative rush that comes from the need to adapt, modify, bootstrap, or Macgyver quickly. Sometimes, our best ideas or most innovative solutions come when something goes wrong, and the perfectly laid plans are disrupted by the chaos and complexity ever present in our world.
Change, it would seem, goes hand in hand with creativity. Pulling familiar elements together to create something completely different and unexpected is the basis of many great works of art or scientific discoveries. The paper and pen, the strings on a violin, or the familiar chemicals can make up new and incredible arrangements, even when known rules govern them. The change that occurs within those arrangements is what makes the outcome creative and the process therein that of creativity.
My work focuses on creativity within organizations, and right away, you might detect the paradox within that very framework. Organizations seek to minimize chaos and complexity by developing rules, internal structures, processes, and communication channels to limit the influence of randomness and disruption within the system.
Early organizational theorists, guided by the popular views of the day, saw the organization as a closed system, a machine that could be limited, managed, and controlled with absolute precision so that not a single action or use of energy was wasted or out of step with the intention of the organization’s goal. This view of great efficiency was what gave the Ford Motor Company its assembly line, a tightly controlled mechanized process that ensured speed in production. Much of this paradigm is alive and well today, from the production lines that create tech products and cars to Amazon’s delivery system.
However, as Western society moved into the 20th century, new paradigms emerged to challenge this thinking. It became apparent that organizations were not closed-system machines but rather quite porous and subject to influence from external forces. New leaders, regulatory changes, shifts in market demand, and even weather can change how an organization functions and adapts. Organizations that clung too rigorously to this sense of control over chaos to avoid adaptation have long since gone under. By seeing an organization in this way, more like an organism than a machine, we start to reveal how creativity can emerge within its structure.
Like a living thing, the organization continuously works toward stability. Change may be a given, but that doesn’t mean we don’t work to adapt and “get back to normal” when something bad happens. The COVID-19 pandemic has proven to be a macro example of this thinking. As the virus continually adapts to new environments, mutating to meet its needs, we shift to adapt through public health measures, changes to our workplaces, and how we develop prevention and cures. Much of this effort was to “get back to normal,” an equilibrium people felt before the COVID-19 pandemic. But we all well know that there is no going back. Culturally, socially, economically, and environmentally, things have changed over the last four years and will never be the same.
So, knowing that organizations seek to minimize chaos and achieve states of equilibrium and, on the other hand, understanding that creativity lives at a point of disruption and change means cultivating creativity within an organization requires more than game rooms, beanbag chairs, and snack stations. Instead, leaders must foster a culture that embraces change, learning, and growth and develop organizational processes, practices, and feedback loops reinforcing these values.
Adaptability, flexibility, and a willingness to change when something is not working are all qualities we laud in employees and leaders. And yet, in our institutions, we often see them as flaws and added hurdles. Indeed, it is much easier to say, “We embrace creativity here,” install a colorful mural, and schedule a team retreat than to say, “We need to change how we do business completely, and our first go at it may not work.” But the second is, of course, a far more creative process.