Visiting the Well

Creativity and IP in Fashion

This is a carry-over post from one of my other study blogs. I thought it posed a propostion of such interest that I'd publish it here too.

I'm not sure how correct this is, but it's certainly a very different view on IP protection than some industries I'm familiar with...

Hard to believe (I'm not sure why but I just had to say that) this neat little article comes from the online pages of the Christian Science Monitor. Entitled 'Control of creativity? Fashion's secret' it suggests that the fashion industry deals with issues of creativity and derivation of ideas far differently from film and music.

The authors, David Bollier and Laurie Racine, pose the following question:

Why do fashion, film, and music - the sultans of cool in our culture, the shapers of our consciousness - take such radically different approaches to the control of creativity?

They then begin to provide an answer:

The music and film industries continue to battle over the need to expand copyright protection, and to limit sharing and reuse of prior work. The fashion industry, driven by similar market interests, employs a modus operandi that accepts rather than rejects derivation and appropriation as creative tools.

The remainder of the article builds on this premise.

Are they correct? I don't know. In our doctoral study group we're going to ask a fashion industry expert in a few weeks.

I'll post her views.

Improvisational Planning

Here's a great post on Improvisational Planning from a blog called How To Save The World. In it, Dave Pollard describes an alternative to the formal strategic planning process, so beloved of corporates (real and wannabe). It focusses on intuition, creativity, quick decision making, continuous adaptation and trust. I won't attempt an extended precis here. Read it in full. As one who has lived through plenty of formal strategic planning exercises, even when done more for political rather than business reasons (as they often are), this is a pleasingly alternative take on planning.

Simple or Simplistic?

The great thing about Edward de Bono's books are that on reading them you invariably think, "Of course!" "That's obvious!" "I could have figured that out!"

That's the point he's making of course and it's amply underlined in his book Simplicity which I have linked on this page. Creative thought, particularly that which leads to simple solutions, is often assymetrical. Significant effort, which may involve years of intellectual gymnastics, postulations and blind alleys, lead at last to the 'Eureka' moment. On looking at the idea or solution however it's often the case that people will think "Of course!" "That's obvious!" "I could have figured that out!" Working backwards from the solution is easy.

In a world where systems invariably trend towards complexity, the fight for simplicity is ongoing. However we often get it wrong by presuming that simple means easy. To really make things simple we must master our craft, understand all the details and then engage in a simplification process that strips way unnecessary layers and embellishments without negatively affecting outcomes . When these processes are undertaken without due preparation and understanding, we end up with systems that are too simplified, that don't function properly and that generate negative results. These are simplistic solutions rather than simple ones. Not enough money in everyone's pockets? Let's just get the mint to print some more! 'Undesirable' people in our country? Just send them back 'to where they came from'. Sound familiar?

The book should be compulsory reading for all managers and educators at the very least.

A brief but necessary diversion

ahhhh ... how wonderful it is to have finished a job. I've been working on a paper for my doctoral studies and have just finished. Not that I'm unused to writing - I've written tens of thousands of words in recent years, but they were all reports, business plans, marketing propaganda etc. I hadn't prepared an academic paper in twenty years. Anyway it's done... so I'll allow myself a little indulgence.

Actually (can't get the paper out of my head) this is just the sort of artistic diversion that all we creative industries managers should engage in regularly to keep our artistic juices flowing and to recharge that little bit of soul that remains in our flinty commercial hearts.

So tonight it's not going to be writing (poetry that I do too infrequently) or painting (which unfortunately I don't do at all at presently - my studio easel is disassembled in the shed) .. it's going to be playing one of my geetars. This one's a beauty I've been lusting after for years and finally bought last Christmas. A Gretsch White Falcon. All you guitar guys out there know what that is. For those who don't the picture is here.

So... let's have some fun. Back to more sensible and managerial-type postings tomorrow - promise.

... Of Creativity and Innovation

Well, aren't these terms being tossed about with gay abandon. We have creative directors and ministers for innovation, creative treatments and innovative ideas, creative industries and innovative companies. One and the same thing do I hear you say? Well, if you listen to political speeches and industry hype you'd think so. I think we're all guilty about using the terms a bit loosely and interchangeably when the mood takes us, but technically they are different, and when applied to the inputs and outputs of creative industries companies the differentiation becomes important to understand.

Of course there are a many definitions and interpretations, but the one I currently favour comes from the book Creativity Inc. by Jeff Mauzy and Richard Harriman, published by Harvard Business School Press in 2003 (see my book link). The authors state quite simply:

"Creativity is about breaking down prior assumptions and making new connections for new ideas. Innovation means taking new ideas and turning them into corporate and marketplace reality. True innovation, as opposed to low level refinement, takes extended creative effort, yet much of the innovation effort lends itself to direction and organizing. It's much harder to organize, direct, and command the creation of first ideas; you have to encourage and tease out creativity individual by individual. Both creativity and innovation need to be nurtured at every level and function for a corporation to become systemically creative."

I quite like that... Both are intimately related in their true forms, but it's obvious that tinkering with old ideas can be passed off as innovation without any true creativity being a pre-requisite.

How does your organisation fare with this definition?