Theories of Creativity: The Significance of the Insignificant. Research Note: Methodological Reflections behind the Scenes

Benjamin Schiemer; Roman Duffner; S.R. Ayers

doi:10.6092/issn.1971-8853/11587

Authors

Benjamin Schiemer Institute of Organization Science, Johannes Kepler University, Linz http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2930-8098

Dr. Benjamin Schiemer MSc is a Researcher at the Institute of Organization Science at Johannes Kepler University Linz. His research interests cover organizational anthropology, ethnography, science and technology studies, and processual studies of collaborative creativity in music.
Roman Duffner Institute of Theory and History, Anton Bruckner Private University, Linz; Institute of Organization Science, Johannes Kepler University, Linz

Mag. L. Roman Duffner MA is a Doctoral Researcher at the Institute of Theory and History at Anton Bruckner Private University Linz and the Institute of Organization Science at Johannes Kepler University Linz. His research interests cover studies of music and society, science and technology studies and practices in creative work.
S.R. Ayers

S.R. Ayers is a self-taught artist that has been working in comics, illustration & animation for magazines and productions in the US, Austria & Germany for the last 15 years. Along with printed and animated work he has also performed as the live-drawing artist for multiple music/multi-media bands, always with a socially and politically conscious direction in the storytelling. https://www.instagram.com/herr.slidetooth/

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/11587

Keywords:

Graphic Novel, Visual Communication, Science Communication, Methodology, Behind-the-Scenes

Abstract

In this research note we describe the development process of the graphic novel The Significance of the Insignificant. We provide insights behind the scenes and show the making of decisions on selected problems and their solutions, which accompanied the process of translating creativity theory into a graphic novel. The decisions include the choice of setting, genre, characters, and their appearance, as well as the entire storyline. We conclude the research note by considering methodological issues associated with translating science into a graphic novel.

References

Amabile, T.M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357

Amabile, T.M. (1993). Motivational Synergy: Toward New Conceptualizations of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation in the Workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 3(3), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(93)90012-S

Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184. https://doi.org/10.5465/256995

Burt, R.S. (2002). The Social Capital of Structural Holes. The New Economic Sociology: Developments in an Emerging Field, 148(90), 122.

Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., & West, J. (Eds.). (2006). Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford University Press on Demand. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2008.00502.x

Cohendet, P., Llerena, P., & Simon, L. (2010). The Innovative Firm: Nexus of Communities and Creativity. Revue d'économie industrielle, 129–130, 139–170. https://doi.org/10.4000/rei.4149

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention(Vol. 56). New York, USA: Harper Collins.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Flow and Creativity. Namta Journal, 22(2), 60–97. doi: EJ547968.

Duffner, L.R. (2020). Push Button. In T. Beyes, R. Holt, & C. Pias, (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Media, Technology, and Organization Studies(pp. 356–367). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198809913.013.49

Ettlie, J.E., Bridges, W.P., & O’keefe, R.D. (1984). Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical versus Incremental Innovation. Management Science, 30(6), 682–695. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.6.682

Florida, R. (2005). Cities and the Creative Class. New York, USA: Routledge.

Garud, R., Gehman, J., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2011). Complexity Arrangements for Sustained Innovation: Lessons from 3M Corporation. Organization Studies, 32(6), 737–767. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840611410810

Garud, R., Gehman, J., Kumaraswamy, A., & Tuertscher, P. (2016). From the Process of Innovation to Innovation as Process. In A. Langley, & H. Tsoukas (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies(pp. 451–466). London, UK: Sage Publications.

Glăveanu, V.P. (2012). What Can Be Done with an Egg? Creativity, Material Objects, and the Theory of Affordances. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(3), 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.13

Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469

Guilford, J.P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487

Hargadon, A.B., & Bechky, B.A. (2006). When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work. Organization Science, 17(4), 484–500. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0200

Hargadon, A.B., & Douglas, Y. (2001). When Innovations Meet Institutions: Edison and the Design of the Electric Light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3), 476–501. https://doi.org/10.2307/3094872

Harvey, S., & Kou, C.Y. (2013). Collective Engagement in Creative Tasks: The Role of Evaluation in the Creative Process in Groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(3), 346–386. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0001839213498591

Hutter, M., & Farías, I. (2017). Sourcing Newness: Ways of Inducing Indeterminacy. Journal of Cultural Economy, 10(5), 434–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2017.1326969

Joas, H. (1996). The Creativity of Action. Chicago, MA: University of Chicago Press.

Knorr-Cetina, K. (2005). Objectual Practice. In K. Knorr-Cetina, T.R. Schatzki, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory(pp. 175–188).New York, USA: Routledge.

Koestler, A. (1964). The Act of Creation. London, UK: Arkana Penguin.

Lingo, E.L., & O’Mahony, S. (2010). Nexus Work: Brokerage on Creative Projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 47–81. https://doi.org/10.2189%2Fasqu.2010.55.1.47

Masaaki, I. (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.

Mason, J.H. (2003). The Value of Creativity: The Origins and Emergence of a Modern Belief. Farnham, UK: Ashgate. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315236643

Ortmann, G., & Sydow, J. (2018). Dancing in Chains: Creative Practices in/of Organizations. Organization Studies, 39(7), 899–921. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0170840617717096

Paulus, P.B., & Nijstad, B.A. (Eds.). (2003). Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Perry-Smith, J.E. (2014). Social Network Ties beyond Nonredundancy: An Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Knowledge Content and Tie Strength on Creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(5), 831–846. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0036385

Reckwitz, A. (2017). The Invention of Creativity: Modern Society and the Culture of the New. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Polity Press.

Rosso, B.D. (2014). Creativity and Constraints: Exploring the Role of Constraints in the Creative Processes of Research and Development Teams. Organization Studies, 35(4), 551–585. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0170840613517600

Runco, M.A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent Thinking as an Indicator of Creative Potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929

Runco, M.A., & Jaeger, G.J. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092

Sawyer, R.K. (2006). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Schiemer, B., Schüßler, E., & Grabher, G. (2019). Collaborative Innovation Online: Entanglements of the Making of Content, Skills, and Community on a Songwriting Platform. In J. Sydow, & H. Berends (Eds.), Managing Inter-organizational Collaborations: Process Views, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 64 (pp. 293–316). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20190000064018

Schiemer, B. (2021). It’s About What Happens in the Meantime. Temporal Affordances in Creative Work. Under Review.

Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sonenshein, S. (2016). Routines and Creativity: From Dualism to Duality. Organization Science, 27(3), 739–758. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1044

Tanggaard, L. (2013). The Sociomateriality of Creativity in Everyday Life. Culture & Psychology, 19(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X12464987

Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientiﬁc Management. New York, USA: Harper & Brothers.

Uzzi, B., & Spiro, J. (2005). Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem. American Journal of Sociology, 111(2), 447–504. https://doi.org/10.1086/432782

Vedres, B., & Stark, D. (2010). Structural Folds: Generative Disruption in Overlapping Groups. American Journal of Sociology, 115(4), 1150–1190. https://doi.org/10.1086/649497

Zhou, J., & Shalley, C.E. (Eds.). (2007). Handbook of Organizational Creativity. London: Taylor & Francis.

Theories of Creativity: The Significance of the Insignificant. Research Note: Methodological Reflections behind the Scenes

Authors

DOI:

Keywords:

Abstract

References

Downloads

Published

How to Cite

Issue

Section

License

Information

Make a Submission

Keywords

Current Issue