Studies on creative people have consistently shown that creativity is linked to openness to new ideas, risk-taking, and being internally directed. Do these traits make creative people different from the culture and the people around them? The answer is sometimes yes and sometimes no.
Say for example Jeremy is a creative kid who does less than average work in school. He can be seen by teachers and parents as a "daydreamer" and a poor student due to poor performance in objective exams. His latent skills as a right-brain thinker may be underestimated and underdeveloped.
Or consider Alicia, a high school teacher. She is eager to try new teaching methods but finds that her peers tend to be traditional in their approach and even contradict her views. What can she do?
There is no doubt that creative people work hard in the most constructive environment and they get bored with unchallenged tasks. It helps to explain why creative children often get into trouble at school, and why their left-brain teachers often have trouble when their left-brain teachers force them to remember information that they see as absurd or trivial to understand the "big picture" naturally "big picture" . . Life.
When creative people enter the workforce they are often the worst. If they do not choose their profession carefully, they will end up in a job that does not match their special talents and gifts. Unfortunately, they can find a difficult path by getting bored and frustrated at work.
But the job itself may not be the problem. It can also be the social atmosphere in the workplace. Each office has its personality, which develops systematically and changes over time. Some workplaces value new ideas and risk-taking, which is a very exciting environment for a creative, risk-taker. Other environments are harsh and conventional, which can cause frustration and lead to conflict and resentment.
Social psychologists have found that some workgroups are prone to group thinking, which tends to reduce the tendency of some groups to feel superior to others and any evidence to the contrary. These groups value consistency and oppose new ideas. An inventor is considered to be isolated and rejected by colleagues who support this type of environment.
These peers often follow a vague code regarding people who are different or different from the group. They send open and secret messages of disagreement to a creative colleague who proposes new ideas. These prompts include ignoring a person's comments or offering lavish, hollow praise or harsh punishment for proposing ideas that threaten the perceived integrity of the group, such as threats and ridicule.
Most people at work are comfortable with their routines and over time they consider these routines sacred. These types of people often succumb to the expression of the times: "If it does not break, do not fix it", but they apply this attitude and nothing really "broke" for them and others. Indicating means threatening the rest of their work routine. These individuals can react toxicly by proposing new ways for creative and risk-taking colleagues to threaten their “comfort zone”.
All of this suggests that creative people often disagree with those around them and are bored by work environments and rigid and stubborn organizational structures. This is partly because creative people are attracted to new and new ideas and ways of doing things and their creative minds often create alternatives to accepted practices.
The accumulated effects of these frustrations in school, at work, or in any setting can cause some creative people to adopt a rebellious attitude about rules and authority. When this happens the outcome is frustration and conflict from all sides, where the downside occurs as a result of conflict and disagreement between individuals. This frustration can lead to professional changes or disciplinary action in the workplace, an unfortunate by-product of creative individuals not successfully integrating into the workplace community.
These negative expressions of rebellion can be avoided only when organizations and individuals are subjected to dynamics between individuals that differentiate different personality types from each other. One way to do this, which is popular today, is to take a Myers-Briggs personality inventory and discuss the results with colleagues. While this test is not necessarily rigorous in terms of accepted statistical criteria of authenticity or authenticity, it serves the great purpose of opening the door to discuss response styles between individuals and to respect each other for these differences.
Office diversity is generally defined in sociological terms by classifying people into black and white groups, for example, gender, race, and age. Meanwhile, differences between individuals such as other important personalities and creativity rarely receive attention. Yet the dimension of creativity is very important because creativity and risk-taking are important characteristics for organizational health and survival.
To avoid the trap of blind rebellion and open conflict, organizations need to do their best to identify creative employees and foster respect for creativity and ingenuity among all their employees. This does not mean that simple group exercises like “brain” are a good way to foster creativity. Creative people often differ from other coworkers in many ways, including differences between individuals, internal orientation, and work habits. These differences in style and essence need to be addressed in an open and flexible manner.
Creative people should also be taught to understand themselves and appreciate that they have nothing
You must be logged in to post a comment.