Societal Forces that ERODE Creativity

Abstract

Background/Context Creativity is an indispensable force in intellectual, social, cultural, and economic development. Yet societal forces conspire to erode it. Educators have despaired for many years over how schools often fail to encourage creativity, but society as a whole is just as guilty. But how do schools and society fail to encourage, or actually even erode, creativity? This essay addresses this question. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study The goal of our research was to specify the specific societal forces that erode creativity. We have labeled these forces ERODE: Education, Resources, Opportunities, Diffusion, and Exaggeration. The bottom line is that, although our society claims to want creativity, it most wants it when no one is negatively affected. Because creativity almost always negatively affects some people and groups, society tends to be much more supportive of creativity in theory than in practice. We show why. Research Design Our research design is an analysis of the forces in society that erode creativity. We used historical analysis, media analysis, and analysis of educational practice to draw our conclusions.

Why the tall-poppy syndrome is becoming worse in the creative professions / Razones por las que el síndrome de la amapola alta es cada vez más acentuado en las profesiones creativas

“…The ERODE model Sternberg and Kaufman (2018) have proposed a model for why creativity is at risk of erosion in current times. They call the model ERODE, and it summarizes some of the factors described above.…”

“…The resistance of people to new ideas and to new things can also be found in business contexts (Sternberg & Kaufman, 2018). Consumers, and especially older consumers, often are resistant to creative products (Laukkanen, Sinkkonen, Kivijärvi, & Laukkanen, 2007; Ram & Sheth, 1989).…”

“…Segundo, las propuestas altamente creativas pueden ser rechazadas porque los revisores prefieren propuestas más ‘seguras’, es decir las que tienen más probabilidades de producir resultados estadísticamente significativos (ver Sternberg, & The Rainbow Project Collaborators, 2006). Y en tercer lugar, los investigadores pueden inclinarse por redactar propuestas más seguras pero menos creativas con el propósito de aumentar las probabilidades de recibir fondos (Sternberg & Kaufman, 2018).…”

“…La resistencia de las personas a las nuevas ideas y cosas también puede encontrarse en los contextos empresariales (Sternberg & Kaufman, 2018). Los consumidores, y en especial los antiguos consumidores, a menudo se resisten a aceptar los productos creativos (Laukkanen, Sinkkonen, Kivijärvi, & Laukkanen, 2007; Ram & Sheth, 1989).…”

“…Second, highly creative proposals may be rejected because reviewers will prefer proposals that are ‘safe’, in the sense that they are highly likely to yield statistically significant results (see Sternberg, & The Rainbow Project Collaborators, 2006). Third, researchers may themselves decide to write proposals that are safer but less creative in order to enhance their probability of being funded (Sternberg & Kaufman, 2018).…”