Critical review of the article ‘MANAGING

CREATIVITY’

Muhammad Umer

Student of M.Phil

(PBA02101003)

Lahore Business School, University of Lahore,

1- KM Defense Road, Lahore Pakistan

E-mail: umerwarich@gmail.com
Critical review of the article ‘MANAGING CREATIVITY’ by Ricahard
Florida (florida@gmu.edu) is the first professor of public policy at
George Mason University Arlington, Virginia. Jim Goodnight
(jim.goodnight@sas.com) is the CEO of SAS institute in Cary, North
Carolina.

(July-August 2005 issue of Harvard Business Review)

In today’s dynamic business environment, creativity represents a key

factor for economic success of organization interested in long-term
competitive development. Companies use their employees’ creativity
as an economic resource and effectively apply a ‘continuous creativity’
strategy (Carr, 1994; Ford, 1999; Rickards, 1999). Firms using their
employees’ creativity had been shown to have conclusive advantages
over those who neglect this factor (Carayannis and Gonzales, 2003).

Therefore, more and more companies participate in the race of

creating new products, new markets and new ways of promotion. Thus,
the companies that do so increase the velocity of the transformation of
creative ideas into innovations, adding pressure to the competition.
“Innovation is the key to success in this business, and creativity fuels
innovation," (Goodnight)

As a result of an increased interest of business in creativity, the

management of creativity appeared as a special theoretical and
practical discipline some years ago. Creativity management has been
developing on theoretical and methodological bases of such disciplines
as Research and Development (R&D) management, creativity
psychology, organizational behavior and innovation management.
Despite the fact that a distinct notion about the specific subject, role,
methods and place of creativity management still does not exist, the
term ‘creativity management’ is not metaphorical, but claims a
scientific status at present (Ford and Gioia, 1996).

In the critical review of the above-mentioned article I have used my

mental-map in developing an in-depth analysis from findings and
arguments presented by the author. My critical review of the article is
largely based upon five critical synopsis questions (Wallace & Wray
2006) i.e. one, why I have selected this article; two, making sense of
what the authors have done to convince the reader, three, I have tried
to summarize what author have said which seems relevant to the
reader, fourth; I have attempted to consider how convincing his
account is & finally; draw up a conclusion on the basis of content of the
text and my evaluation of the author’s arguments.

The reason which has made me select this article for critical review
was of my keen & abiding interest in learning about “managing of
creativity, I wanted to learn those ways in which creativity of
employees could manage or enhance the production of creativity.
These intellectual curiosities in me I guess arouse me to learn about it.

The creative economy is here to stay, and companies that figure out
how to manage for creativity will have a crucial advantage in the ever
increasing competition for global talent. We believe that executives
can look to SAS’s management principles for guidance in boosting
innovation, productivity, and business performance. If you leverage the
intrinsic motivation of creative workers by stimulating their minds and
minimizing hassles; if you raze barriers between mangers and workers
by ensuring that your managers are creative, too; if you tap into the
creative talents of your customers instead of looking just to your
workers for new ideas; and if you nurture long term relationship with
users and employees alike, you will increase your creative capital
manifold.

There’s a virtuous cycle in play at SAS. How quickly other corporations

can readjust the way they manage their own creative workers will
determine how gracefully we are all able to transition into the creative
age.

Firstly; the author’s main focus is upon creativeness. Creativity no

doubt plays a very important part in a company’s success and to
survive in global market of today, but one thing which I haven’t seen in
this article due to which I feel like the author totally biased towards
creativity is “hard work” and “determination”. If creativity is that much
important then were does the hard work, determination and being
focused to a constant goal fall?
Creativity is no doubt a bigger player in the success of any
organization but I think that determination and hard work is also
important to get that creative idea and turn it into a reality.

Secondly; as written in the article “Make Managers responsible for

sparking creativity and eliminate arbitrary distinctions between “suits”
and “creative.” And engage customers as creative partners so you can
deliver superior products.”

I haven’t seen in this article is that who are these managers? Where
they come from? And are they enough capable to identify the
creativity of the employees working under their supervision? Now let’s
take an example of a “hacker”. Many researchers and analysts have
approved this statement that such people are more creative and
innovative than the others in their own special way. They take things in
such a perspective that others don’t even think about. So my point is
that the person identifying the creativity of the employees which at
SAS is Manager should be either super creative or highly experienced
which is a rare commodity in the market.

So to avoid any loss of creative minds the company should develop

some rules or at least some sort of test of the person individual skills to
identify the true ability of the person to enter in the world of creativity.

And one thing which also pops up in my mind after reading these lines
is that who is responsible for keeping a check and balance that
whether the manager is producing or identifying the maximum
creativity from the employees group assigned to him or not?

Third; as written in the article “At SAS the most fitting thanks for a job
well done is an even more challenging project.” According me my point
of view there is a degree of intelligence that varies with every person.
Some are capable to enhance their intelligence and thinking power
instantly some may require some time and others may not be able to
increase their intelligence after reaching a certain level. So for such
people the new and more challenging project would be more of a
headache than a new challenge to go for.
Fourth; as written in the article “Engage customers as creative
partners.” I really like the way this Company is manipulating the minds
of the customers. Getting valuable feedback and suggestions from
them and showing them that it’s for their own benefit, as to improve
the output, in fact developing better software without giving them the
hint that it was their idea that has been implemented.

lastly; what I have drawn from this article is that; the SAS has good
image in the industry because of the respect they give to their
employee’s creativity; the company provides the employees a platform
to enhance their intellectual capabilities. What’s different about SAS is
that it goes to uncommon lengths to find the right intrinsic motivators
for each group of employees. The company also pays special attention
towards the feedback they get from their customers and implement
those ideas for which they are highly reputed among their competitors.

Finally; it can be argued in the end the author idea regarding

managing creativity is really inspiring and learning to the readers.
There are some points which are debatable. Firstly he is totally
focuses on creativity but didn’t even mention the hard work and
dedication required to convert it in reality. SAS is totally depends on
managers who identifying creative minds. It means if any manager
has not enough capability to identify the maximum creative minds
from that group which is assigned to him than what about the rest of
them which are creative but didn’t selected by him.