Permalink
2022/2023 KAN-CPSYV3008U Creativity in Organizations
| English Title | |
| Creativity in Organizations |
Course information |
|
| Language | English |
| Course ECTS | 7.5 ECTS |
| Type | Elective |
| Level | Full Degree Master |
| Duration | One Quarter |
| Start time of the course | Autumn, First Quarter |
| Timetable | Course schedule will be posted at calendar.cbs.dk |
| Max. participants | 60 |
| Study board |
Study Board for BSc/MSc in Business Administration and
Psychology, MSc
|
| Course coordinator | |
|
|
| Main academic disciplines | |
|
|
| Teaching methods | |
|
|
| Last updated on 15-02-2022 | |
Relevant links |
| Learning objectives | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Course prerequisites | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| None | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Examination | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Course content, structure and pedagogical approach | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The overarching objective of the module is to engage the students with state of the art knowledge production in the field of creativity and organization. By offering an intensive course where both practical methods and in-depth theoretical analysis are presented, the module will help students develop their own understanding of the field and supply them with conceptual and practical tools. Particular attention will be paid to the development of transferable skills – students will work in groups and apply various creativity techniques as well as exploring space creatively, and will critically reflect on these experiences.
The discourse of creativity is rife within society at large, with the necessity for creativity now seemingly elevated above many other aspects of traditional management discourse. Not only is the discourse of creativity familiar, it is instantly recognisable: we know the language of creativity; we know how to identify and classify creativity; we are told how to be creative; and sometimes we are even asked ‘what do you want to create?’ Creativity has become ‘normalised’; our understanding has become framed by the language of creativity, our ‘being creative’ prescribed both substantively and instrumentally. The literature (and language) of creativity is, of course, evolving. We are re-classifying, finding new methods, working on our understanding of the ‘essence’ of creativity. Creativity has become the modern mantra. We have creative industries, creative partnerships and creative approaches of which individuals, businesses and even governments are trying to harness the potential. Creativity is seen as essential for our survival, economically and socially. Hence the need to challenge clichéd representations of ‘creativity’, the typical “creativity is wonderful and we need a lot more of it...” type arguments, and assist students to become more creative (or at least more reflective) in their own practice. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Description of the teaching methods | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Most sessions will consist of a combination of formal lecturer-led presentations on the topic under discussion and interactive workshop-style exercises that will provide the opportunity for students to translate theory into practice. Readings will be provided in good time before each session and it is vital that students undertake the required reading prior to the sessions in order to gain as much value as possible from the lectures. There is also an extended off-campus experiential learning exercise (5 hours), whilst some theoretical lectures will be prerecorded in panopto, making this a blended learning experience. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Feedback during the teaching period | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| All students are expected to complete a group
project on 'The Creative City' organised around an
experiential learning exercise. Formative feedback will be given in
response to the group presentations on this practical project. The
purpose here is to encourage students to critically reflect on how
one represents and captures experience, and how they can be
‘creative’ in their practices of perceptions and representation.
Students will also be allocated a key reading from the reading list which they will analyse and present on in small groups. All groups will also receive formative feedback on their engagement with the key literature, allowing the groups to learn from their own and others' feedback. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Student workload | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Further Information | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Students are not allowed to use literature from other courses. Especially CMP students. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Expected literature | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Indicative Reading
Ancelin-Bourguignon, A., Dorsett, C., & Azambuja, R. (2019). Lost in translation? Transferring creativity insights from arts into management. Organization, 0(0), 1350508419855716. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1350508419855716
Barthes, R. (1997). The Eiffel Tower and other Mythologies. Los Angeles: University of California. (pp.1-5). [ http://www.columbia.edu/itc/architecture/ockman/pdfs/dossier_4/barthes.pdf]
Benjamin, W. (1978). Hashish in Marseilles. In Reflections: essays, aphorisms, autobiographical writings. New York: Schocken Books. Berman, M. (1984). Signs in the Street. New Left Review, Vol. 144, 114-123.
De Cock, C. (1994). Creativity in MS/OR: Training for creativity - findings in a European context.Interfaces, 24(6), 59-65.
De Cock, C. (2013). Imagination and Organization: A Review of The Imaginary Institution of Society.Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29(4), 406-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2013.01.002
De Cock, C. (2016). ‘From Creativity to Imagination with Cornelius Castoriadis’ in T. Beyes, C. Steyaert and M. Parker (eds.). Routledge Companion to Reinventing Management Education. Oxford: Routledge. p. 234-248 (chapter 17). [ https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315852430]
De Cock C., Rehn A. & Berry, D. (2013). ‘For a Critical Creativity Studies: The radical imagination of Cornelius Castoriadis.’ in J. Chan & K. Thomas (eds.), Handbook of Research on Creativity. London: Edward Elgar. p. 150-161. https://www.elgaronline.com/view/edcoll/9780857939807/9780857939807.00021.xml
Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999). Multilevel Theorizing about Creativity in Organizations: A Sensemaking Perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2): 286-307. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/259083]
Florida, R., Mellander, C., & Adler, P. (2015). Creativity in the City. In C. Jones, M. Lorenzen, & J. Sapsed (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Creative Industries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
George, J. M. (2007). Creativity in Organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 439-477. https://www.docenti.unina.it/webdocenti-be/allegati/materiale-didattico/308335
Gerard, N. (2019). Cursed creatives: alienation, sublimation, and the plight of contemporary creative work. Culture and Organization, 1-17. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14759551.2019.1655422
Hall, S. (2000). Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. London: Sage. [chapter 1: https://culturetechnologypolitics.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/stuart-hall-on-representation-1.pdf]
Leach, J. (2004). Modes of Creativity In E. Hirsch & M. Strathern (Eds.), Transactions and Creations. Property Debates and the Stimulus of Melanesia Oxford: Berghahn. https://www.jamesleach.net/downloads/PTCV%20proof.pdf
Ness, I. J., & Dysthe, O. (2020). Polyphonic Imagination: Understanding Idea Generation in Multidisciplinary Groups as a Multivoiced Stimulation of Fantasy. Creativity Research Journal, 32(1), 30-40. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10400419.2020.1712163
Osborne, T. (2003). Against 'Creativity': A Philistine Rant. Economy and Society, 32(4), 507-525. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0308514032000141684
Perec, G. (1974). Species of spaces and other writings. London: Penguin (chapter on ‘The Street, p.46-56) https://monoskop.org/images/b/b0/Perec_Georges_Species_of_Spaces_and_Other_Pieces.pdf (also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNpVpDp_Grc)
Reckhenrich, J., Kupp, M. & Anderson, J. (2009). Understanding creativity: The manager as artist. Business Strategy Review, 20(2), 68-73 [ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8616.2009.00602.x]
Rehn, A. & De Cock, C. (2009). ‘Deconstructing Creativity’ in T. Rickards, M. Runco & S. Moger (eds.), Routledge Companion of Creativity. London: Routledge. p.222-231. [ https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203888841.ch18]
Rickards, T. & De Cock, C. (2012). ‘Understanding Organizational Creativity: Toward a Multiparadigmatic Approach’. In M. Runco (ed.), The Creativity Research Handbook Vol.2, New York: Hampton Press. p.1-31 (uploaded in Canvas)
Sutton, Robert I., & Hargadon, Andrew. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 685-718. [http://www.jstor.org/stable/2393872]
Thrift, N. (2009). ‘Cityescapes’. In Beyes, T., Krempl, S., Deuflhard, A. (eds) Art and Urban Space. Zurich: Verlag Niggli, 268-284. (uploaded in Canvas)
Volkmann, C. R. & De Cock, C. (2006) ‘Consuming the Bauhaus’, Consumption, Markets and Culture, 9 (2), 129-136. [doi:10.1080/10253860600633689]
Volkmann C. R. & De Cock, C. (2007) ’The Bauhaus and the Business School: Exploring Analogies, Resisting Imitation’, Management Learning, 38 (4), 389-403. [doi:10.1177/1350507607080570]
Yoon, S. J., Chae, Y. J., Yang, K., & Kim, H. (2019). Governing through creativity: Discursive formation and neoliberal subjectivity in Korean firms. Organization, 26(2), 175-198. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1350508418805286 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||