Order Now

Model of Creativity

Talking about creativity as the subject of numerous scholars’ researches, two main approaches to its nature and meaning have to be outlined. The first one is conventional wisdom. This theory is focused on individual differences, which make people creative. In modern science it is well known as limited and limiting, as it does not give background to implement certain ideas for people’s creativity improving (Munro). On the other hand, contemporary school states that people with normal are capacity are able to provide at least moderate creativity under proper social and environmental effects (Lewis). It is obvious that Amabile’s three component model of creativity is heritage of contemporary doctrine. Considering that the last noticed approach to the concept of creativity, we’ll try to take some look at three-component model of creativity .

At first, it should be stressed that creativity can be defined as the production of useful and novel ideas in any domain (Antonities). According to Amabile’s wide adopted theory, the entire phenomenon of creativity involves three mandatory and irreplaceable parts. Some scholars name them in next way: skills specific to the task domain, general (cross-domain) creativity-relevant skills, and task motivation (Conti). Such approach is adequate in the aspect of initial meaning, however, it looks pretty specified. According to general practice and initial author’s theory, three-component model of creativity proposes that individual creativity essentially requires expertise, creative-thinking skills, and intrinsic task motivation (Akmabile). We will follow this more adopted classification. So, let’s take particular looks at each of them.

In his article, Ramo Roa gives incredible laconic and at the same time meaningful definition, claiming that expertise is the foundation of all creative work, which involves abilities, knowledge and proficiencies (Roa). Teresa Amabile, as the author of analyzed theory, states that the most important word about expertise is “knowledge” – technical, procedural and intellectual (Amabile). The next component is creative-thinking skills, that encompasses person’s ability to see familiar things or events in a new light and to draw analogues in general (Roa). Dealing with primary source, we are able to learn that creative-thinking skills is the kind index how flexibly and imaginatively people approach problems. Professor Teresa Amabile outlines the factors that influence this individual feature: “Creative thinking skills depends to some extent on personality characteristics related to independence, self-discipline, orientation towards risk taking, tolerance for ambiguity, perseverance in the face of frustration, and a relative unconcern for social approval (Amabile). The last component of analyzed theory is intrinsic task motivation. It worth being mentioned that this component can be recognized the most important among others, as it enables to accumulate previous ones and determines the value of Amabile’s theory eventually. The inner passion in work, or during certain problem resolving, is the greatest stimulator for creativity. It is much more stronger than other stimulators (f.e. money) (Lewis). In this order, this component should be defined as the desire to work on something because it’s interesting, involving exciting satisfying or personally challenging (Munro). Only it can awake previously mentioned expertise, creative-thinking skills and start the process of creative potential to creative ideas transformation.

Being clear with the meaning of creativity’s components, let’s come back to general value of three-component model of cretivity. The point is people are able to develop their creativity under the influence of proper work environment and organizational culture. Considering three-component creativity study, it is easy to get positive correlations of worker’s creative practise, by his/her immediate motivation affecting and expertise gradual improving.

References

Amabile T. (1996). Creativity and innovations in organizations. Retrieved from http://cms.schwarzpharma.com/_uploads/media/7165_Amabile%20Creativity%20and%20Innovation%20in%20Organizations.pdf
Amabile T. (1998). How to kill creativity?. Harvard Business Review, September, 77–87.
Antonities J. (2003). The concepts: creativity, innovation and opportunity finding. Retrieved from http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-06282004-124700/unrestricted/03chapter3.pdf
Conti R. (1996). Evidence to support the componential model of creativity: Secondary analyses of three studies. Retrieved from http://www.mendeley.com/research/evidence-to-support-the-componential-model-of-creativity-secondary-analyses-of-three-studies/
Lewis J. (2005). Elements of creativity. Retrieved from http://www.celt.iastate.edu/creativity/elements.html
Munro J. (2005). Insights into the creativity process : The components of creativity. Retrieved from http://online.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/selage/pub/readings/creativity_insights/UTC%20compon%20models%20creativ%2005.pdf
Rao R. (2010). Why is creativity Important in decision making? Retrieved from http://www.citeman.com/8326-why-is-creativity-important-in-decision-making/