IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-02349025.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Creative minds: Hyperconnected or Disconnected ?
[Créativité: hyperconnectée ou déconnectée ?]

Author

Listed:
  • Christophe Krzeminski

    (IEMN - Institut d’Électronique, de Microélectronique et de Nanotechnologie - UMR 8520 - Centrale Lille - Institut supérieur de l'électronique et du numérique (ISEN) - UVHC - Université de Valenciennes et du Hainaut-Cambrésis - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UPHF - Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France, PHYSIQUE - IEMN - Physique - IEMN - IEMN - Institut d’Électronique, de Microélectronique et de Nanotechnologie - UMR 8520 - Centrale Lille - Institut supérieur de l'électronique et du numérique (ISEN) - UVHC - Université de Valenciennes et du Hainaut-Cambrésis - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UPHF - Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France)

Abstract

Creativity is the subject of many views. In liberal viewpoint, creativity is considered as the core of the "economical competitivity" being a key driver in terms of change rate and economical growth. The intellectual vision often seen creativity as a reflexion, a mirror of our civilisation. It seems hazardous to consider a single method of creativity method ? An interesting highlight is a comparison between the outcomes of two different creativity processes, the introspective one and the cooperative approach. Striking differences in terms of timescale, relationship, emotion and final outcomes can be identified unfortunately at the end of the creative process. A particular care should be taken to prevent imitation or conformity effects resulting from the misuse of modern technologies. The human nature of reflexion process based on coordinating imagination, associating ideas, aggregating informations has been disrupted by the introduction of hyperconnected digital space. Creativity is probably more fragile, more human and cultural related that it was previously thought. Cultural factors play a main role in the way creativity is organised.

Suggested Citation

  • Christophe Krzeminski, 2019. "Creative minds: Hyperconnected or Disconnected ? [Créativité: hyperconnectée ou déconnectée ?]," Working Papers hal-02349025, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02349025
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02349025v4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02349025v4/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. Andrew B. Hargadon & Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 484-500, August.
    3. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    4. Brooks, Harvey, 1994. "The relationship between science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 477-486, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ardito, Lorenzo & Natalicchio, Angelo & Appio, Francesco Paolo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2021. "The role of scientific knowledge within inventing teams and the moderating effects of team internationalization and team experience: Empirical tests into the aerospace sector," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 701-710.
    2. Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P. & Wang, Jian, 2015. "Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 684-697.
    3. Michaël Bikard & Fiona Murray & Joshua S. Gans, 2015. "Exploring Trade-offs in the Organization of Scientific Work: Collaboration and Scientific Reward," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(7), pages 1473-1495, July.
    4. Carolin Haeussler & Henry Sauermann, 2016. "The Division of Labor in Teams: A Conceptual Framework and Application to Collaborations in Science," NBER Working Papers 22241, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    6. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    7. Jacqueline N. Lane & Ina Ganguli & Patrick Gaule & Eva Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani, 2021. "Engineering serendipity: When does knowledge sharing lead to knowledge production?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1215-1244, June.
    8. Dirk Deichmann & Michael Jensen, 2018. "I can do that alone…or not? How idea generators juggle between the pros and cons of teamwork," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 458-475, February.
    9. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Luis Cabral & Deepak Hegde & Thomas Peeters, 2021. "Are Inventors or Firms the Engines of Innovation?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3899-3920, June.
    10. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak & Rafael Treibich, 2020. "Teamwork and Individual Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2523-2544, June.
    11. Haeussler, Carolin & Sauermann, Henry, 2013. "Credit where credit is due? The impact of project contributions and social factors on authorship and inventorship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 688-703.
    12. Albert Banal-Estañol & Ines Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2016. "Key Success Drivers in Public Research Grants: Funding the Seeds of Radical Innovation in Academia?," CESifo Working Paper Series 5852, CESifo.
    13. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    14. Haibo Liu & Jürgen Mihm & Manuel E. Sosa & Manuel E. Sosa, 2018. "Where Do Stars Come From? The Role of Star vs. Nonstar Collaborators in Creative Settings," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1149-1169, December.
    15. Annamaria Conti & Christopher C. Liu, 2014. "The (Changing) Knowledge Production Function: Evidence from the MIT Department of Biology for 1970–2000," NBER Chapters, in: The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy, pages 49-74, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Chris Forman & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2012. "From Wires to Partners: How the Internet Has Fostered R&D Collaborations Within Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(8), pages 1549-1568, August.
    17. Ventura, Samuel L. & Nugent, Rebecca & Fuchs, Erica R.H., 2015. "Seeing the non-stars: (Some) sources of bias in past disambiguation approaches and a new public tool leveraging labeled records," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1672-1701.
    18. Beck, Susanne & Brasseur, Tiare-Maria & Poetz, Marion & Sauermann, Henry, 2022. "Crowdsourcing research questions in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    19. Annamaria Conti & Christopher C. Liu, 2014. "The (Changing) Knowledge Production Function: Evidence from the MIT Department of Biology for 1970-2000," NBER Working Papers 20037, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Caviggioli, Federico & Colombelli, Alessandra & Ravetti, Chiara, 2022. "Peers and stars: the role of gender among coinventors," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 202201, University of Turin.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Creativity; Thinking Space; Digital Environment; Collaborative approach; Interactive method; Imitation effect; Perceived creativity; Outcomes;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02349025. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.