ASSIGNMENT 1:

ARGUMENTATIVE
ACADEMIC ESSAY

MAI QUYNH PHAN

CREATIVITY, INNOVATION AND DESIGN-BUSM4550
SEMESTER 2 2020
1

Higher Education Cover Sheet

School Business
Program name International Business
Program code BP253

Course name Creativity, Innovation and Design

Course code BUSM4550

Name of coordinator Nilupama Wijewardena

Name of tutor/Tutorial Wajeeha Shaikh/ Wednesday 14:30-16:30

Student name Mai Quynh Phan

Student ID S3695299

Location of study RMIT University Melbourne – City campus

Assignment no./title Assignment 1: Argumentative academic essay (Individual)

Due date 23:59 28/08/2020

Word count 2703

2

TABLE OF CONTENT

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this argumentative essay is to critically evaluate on whether ‘Organizations can

make very little impact on strengthening creativity, innovation and design thinking processes as

these are dependent on individual employees’ with theoretical and practical evidences. In the

twenty-first century, the era of globalization, especially now is 2020, organizational environment

has become more and more aggressive and more competitive than ever. Moreover, creativity and

innovation have become progressively significant determinants of organizational objectives,

performance and longer-term survival in the workplace environment (Anderson, Potocnik &

Zhou 2014). As a result, my stance on the given statement is that I disagree with it. In addition, a

list of theories about creativity, innovation and design thinking will be used to evaluate the

statement, as well as real-world examples will be listed in this essay in order to support my

stance on the given statement such as Google, Tesla and Pixar.

This essay includes the introduction, body paragraphs, conclusion and reference list. In the body

paragraphs, it includes three body paragraphs with sub-headings. The first body paragraph will

outline the definitions of creativity, innovation and design. Next, creativity, innovation and

design in organizations will be discussed in the second body paragraph. Last but not least, in the

third body paragraph, real-world examples from corporates such as Google, Tesla and Pixar are

used to support my arguments.

3

DEFINITIONS OF CREATIVITY, INNOVATION

AND DESIGN

1. Creativity

Creativity’s standard definition is bipartite which requires originality and effectiveness (Runco &

Jaeger 2012). First of all, originality is indubitably required that it is usually labelled novelty, but

no matter what label it is, if something is not uncommon, novel, or exclusive then it is mundane,

ordinary and predictable (Runco & Jaeger 2012). As a result, it is not original as well as not

creative. Even though originality is essential for creativity but it is not sufficient (Runco &

Jaeger 2012). Indeed, products and ideas are merely original might be inefficient. Secondly,

effectiveness can be in the form of value which is quite obvious in the research of economy on

creativity (Runco & Jaeger 2012). It explains the way of how valuable products and original

products as well as concepts depend on the current market (Runco & Jaeger 2012). Furthermore,

there is another definition of creativity back in 1950 by Guilford that people who exhibit these

behaviours such as designing, inventing, planning, contriving and composing are recognized as

being creative (Weisberg 2015).

On the other hand, dynamic definition of creativity is required potential originality and

effectiveness which brings the only difference between standard definition of creativity and
4

dynamic definition of creativity is a word: potential (Corazza 2016). This new definition of

creativity is to give recognition to the fact that creativity is definitely a dynamic phenomenon. It

can be seen that creative process itself is dynamic that creating multiples results over time.

Likewise, the word: potential has the power to allows both creative inconclusiveness and creative

achievement subsumed by the dynamic definition of creativity (Corazza 2016).

2. Innovation

There are a lot of journals which mentioned the definition of innovation in many different ways.

Innovation can be characterised as the successful implementation to the to the organization of

processes and products that are new and designed to support it and its stakeholders (Wong,

Tjosvold & Liu 2009). There is another definition of innovation that ‘Innovation is widely

considered as the life blood of corporation survival and growth’ (Zahra & Covin 1994). The

meaning of this sentence can be understood as innovation plays a significant role in creating

value and maintaining competitive advantage. There is a definition which provides a detailed

idea of innovation that innovation is considered as a way of improving and changing an

organization, either as a reaction to alternations in the external environment or as a pre-emptive

action to impact the environment (Damanpour 1996). As a consequence, innovation is widely

defined cover a variety of form, which includes new goods and services, new organizational

structures, new technology or new plans or initiatives for employees of the organizations

(Damanpour 1996). Moreover, innovation can be described as the development of new

knowledge and concepts to promote new business outcomes which aimed at enhancing the
5

process of internal business and systems and producing goods and services guides by the

marketplace (Plessis 2007).

3. Design thinking

Design thinking is an analytical and imaginative process which engages an individual in

opportunities to experiment, develop and test models, collect feedback and redesign

(Razumnikova et al. 2017). In today’s technological advancement and globally competitive

world, an individual must learn and use a different set of skills in order to become successful that

design thinking is one of these skills (Shute & Becker et al. 2010). Several design thinking

models have emerged, which based on very different ways of seeing design situations and using

design theory and models from psychology, methodology and education (Dorst 2011).

Nowadays, design thinking is recognised in various fields such as Information Technology,

Business, Education and Medicine (Dorst 2011).

6

CREATIVITY, INNOVATION AND DESIGN IN

ORGANIZATIONS

1. Creativity and innovation

First of all, creativity and innovation in workplace are the main factors which have become

important determinants of corporates’ success, performance and long-term survival environment

(Anderson, Potocnik & Zhou 2014). The creation of novel and appropriate ideas from science to

education, to arts, to business and to daily life, which is nothing other than creativity (Amabile

1997). The ideas must be novel which must be new and different from what has been done

before but it also means that they cannot be simply bizarre; they must be applicable to the issue

or opportunity presented. Additionally, the first step in innovation is creativity that those novel

and appropriate ideas are successfully implemented (Amabile 1997). Furthermore, in order for

long-term organization’s success, creativity is the key, in other words, due to the business world

is never static and the pace of change continues to intensify exponentially, no corporate can

survive long if it always offers the same goods and services. In comparison, businesses which

plan for the future by incorporating new ideas geared towards this changing world will prosper

(Amabile 1997).

There are three broad organizational factors are proposed in the componential model of creativity

and innovation in corporates, which comprises specific elements (Amabile 1988):

(1) Organizational motivation to innovate: a fundamental of organization, which focus on

innovation and supports creativity and innovation throughout the organization (Amabile
7

1988). Moreover, it seems that they key elements of the innovation orientation are: an

emphasis on creativity and innovation in general, a risk-orientation, the pride in

employees of the organization and their passion for the what they are able to do, and an

offensive strategy to lead them toward the future (Amabile 1997). Also, the primary

support for creativity in the entire enterprise appears to be processes for generating

innovation ideas, active exchange of knowledges and ideas, encouragement and

appreciation for creative work, as well as fair appraisal of the work including work that

might be considered as a failure (Amabile 1997).

(2) Resources: means everything that the business available to aid work in the area targeted

for innovation such as adequate time to develop innovative work in the field and

provision of training (Amabile 1988). Those resources include a broad array of elements

such as sufficient time for creating new novel work in the field, people with essential

expertise, resources dedicated to this work domain, domain work systems and processes,

material resources, relevant information and training provision (Amabile 1997).

(3) Management practices: include maintaining independence of flexibility, provision of

challenging, setting specific overall strategic objectives, interesting work and creating

teams by getting people from different expertise and experiences together (Amabile

1988). This component comprises management at all levels, but particularly the

individual departments and projects level. Additionally, some aspects of project

supervision seem to be significant, beginning with the ability to set overall project

objectives clearly and to allow procedural autonomy (Amabile 1997). Also, project

management is likely to promote innovation if clear plan and feedback are given, the

supervisor and the project group are in good communication and enthusiastic support for
8

the work of individuals and for the whole group (Amabile 1997). Lastly, creativity

management practices involve the capability of forming effective work groups which

reflect a range of skills and comprise people who trust and communication well,

challenge each other’s ideas in positive ways, engage with one another and commit

themselves to their work (Amabile 1997).

In addition, work environment influences employees to motivate themselves or develop

individual’s innovation and motivation in workplace (Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby & Herron

1996). For instance, co-workers and supervisors encourage an individual to take risk in a project

work which give that employee have more courage and confidence in order to reach high work

performance Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby & Herron 1996). Moreover, work group

encouragement can occur within organizations, which through diversity background and cultures

of team members, different perspectives and sharing ideas and commitment to the group project.

Thus, exposing employees to various unique ideas may operates creativity in organizations

Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby & Herron 1996).

9

2. Design thinking

Secondly, design thinking considers a way of innovating and handling the transition of

organization in light of shifting customers, hyper-competition, supply chains and false ad-

dressing problem that it is regarded as a source of competitive advantage (Dunne 2018). Design

thinking can be defined as both a problem-solving process and problem thinking (Dunne 2018):

(1) A problem-solving process: it is defined as optimisation in three elements: consumer

requirements, business advantage and technology that these elements can be used for

most of any problem class. A strong interaction with consumers is also important in the

interpretation or framing of the issue (Brown et al. 2009). Designers strive to consider

users and how their usable experience appears from their perception (Dunne et al. 2011).

Hence, they are aiming to create technologies that resolve unarticulated needs and that

can be a source of competitive advantage (Kumar & Whitney 2007).

(2) Problem thinking: this involves a distinct though approach, which is a willingness to

postpone decision on the essence of the issue, a high degree of broad-mindedness and a

readiness to experiment on the fly (Hassi & Laakso et al. 2011).

Design thinking framework provides a natural flow analysis to implementation. Liedtka (2018)

said that immersion in the customer interactions creates data that are turned into observations

which helps teams decide in design requirements used to solve brainstorms. Assumptions are

examined and evaluated by rough prototypes in order to help the teams to develop ideas and

innovations as well as prepare them for real-world experiments that the findings are crucial to the

success of these solutions. Moreover, Liedtka (2018) claimed that design-oriented processes

combat innovation by thwarting the obstacles that typically occur when it comes to finding
10

superior solutions, reducing costs and the risks and buy-in to employees. Recognition of

organization as a set of people inspired by diverse experiences and emotions emphasises

engagement, learning and dialogue. Through involving clients and other stakeholders in the

identifying the issue and designing solutions, design thinking is dedicated to change in a specific

manner. Furthermore, Liedtka (2018) suggests that design thinking allows innovators to

collaborate and achieve a consensus about what is important to the outcomes at each point by

providing a framework to the innovation process. That is achieved not only by disrupting the

regulation of the workplace, but y influencing the perspectives of innovators and their key

stakeholders.

Some businesses choose a centralized model in order to generate early-stage ideas for

implementing in their operating departments in an equivalent, separate design laboratory (Dunne

2018). These laboratories conducted internal training programmes in most situations (Dunne

2018). A distributed model, in which the design program was spread among the operating

departments was an alternative. There was also hybrid model, in which a relatively small

centralized group became a focal point for design and sponsored organizational management

initiatives (Dunne 2018). Finally, the fourth approach was a model of collaboration, in which

organizations along with non-competent organizations, exchanged ideas, facilities and

technologies (Dunne 2018).

11

EXAMPLES FROM REAL-WORLD

ORGANIZATIONS

1. Google

In this part, some examples from real-world organization will be listed and analysed creativity,

innovation and design within organizations in order to strengthen this argument. Firstly,

organizations such as Google are leading the way in keeping employees productive and satisfied

(Coleman 2016). Google is not only well-known for its technology, but also staff perks such as

free food, gym memberships and bowling alleys are available for staff. The company also hires a

chief happiness officer whose exclusive role is to keep employees satisfied and maintain

productivity for their staff (Coleman 2016). Moreover, technology needs a lot of creativity which

is why Google creates a fun, flexible, and enjoyable working environment for their employees to

creative ideas and feel happy (Forbes 2018). In addition, promoting collaboration and

emphasizing an atmosphere of innovation are adopted as a culture in Google, which allows

employees to interact with culture. This is the reason why Google puts lots of effort in recruiting

the right candidates so that the brand can provide a group of employees with common objectives

and team works (Forbes 2018).

12

2. Tesla

Secondly, Tesla is also a great example when it comes to creativity, innovation and design in

organization. Elon Musk who create Tesla, his goal is to reduce the pollutions from cars that use

fossil fuel and generate a sustainable transport by using electric (Techsauce 2018). Therefore,

this could save more energy and help the world sustainable. Moreover, one of Tesla production

processes, which is Roadster model are famous for “Best Innovation Award” as issued by the

TIME magazine. Additionally, Tesla’s innovations also feature its AI technology which enables

its customers to use the autopilot system that can reduce a car accident in the long run

(Techsauce 2018). Also, building a friendly working environment could encourage employees to

have innovative ideas and motivate them to enjoy working in order to create more creative and

innovative products. Developing and training staff makes them feel a part of an organization and

empowers them to think innovatively and create new elements in the organization (Techsauce

2018).
13

3. Pixar

The last example is Pixar, which is an American computer animation film studio. The company

was known as the leading technological pioneer in the computer animation field in the 1990s that

Toy Story was released in 1995, which is the world’s first computer-animated feature film

(Catmull 2008). In the next following thirteen years, Pixar has released many other films such as

Monster, Inc., Finding Nemo and Ratatouille, which are all successful and became blockbusters.

Moreover, Pixar has never bought scripts or ideas for their movie from the outside, unlike most

other studios (Catmull 2008). Pixar’s artistic community has created all their own stories, worlds

and characters internally as well as the studio has continued to push technology limits of

computer animation in making those films, securing dozens of patents (Catmull 2008). In order

to create Pixar’s effective and innovative working environment, cultivating freedom, openness

and truthful communication through feedbacks and shared respect on employees to enhance the

trust value between employees and the organization (UK Essay 2018). Furthermore, in Pixar,

every employee has their own significant role and right to speak as well as providing an

opportunity to attract better employees in order to produce quality product along with advanced

skills. As a consequence, Pixar has achieved success through its open colaboration among talents

people from several disciplines (UK Essay 2018).

14

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this argumentative essay has given both theorical and practical evidences to

support the stance of my disagreement with the given statement that ‘Organizations can make

very little impact on strengthening creativity, innovation and design thinking processes as these

are dependent on individual employees’. Creativity, innovation and design are elements that

define the success of organization which novelty and different from what have been done before.

In addition, creativity, innovation and design in organizations are all about the ways that can help

employees being motivated and influenced in order to create and produce more innovated

outcomes. Moreover, Google, Tesla and Pixar are the three real-world organization examples

which demonstrate the importance of organizations impact on creativity, innovation and design

thinking of employees in long-term survival. Last but not least, an effective working condition

with innovative atmosphere, open and honest communication as well as make employees feel a

part of an organization impact on employees to think creative.

15

REFERENCES

Amabile, T 1988, ‘A model of creativity and innovation in organizations’, Research in

Organizational Behavior, vol. 10, pp. 123-167.

Amabile, T 1997, ‘Motivating Creativity in Organizations: On Doing What You Love and
Loving What You Do’, California Management Review, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 39-58.

Amabile, T, Conti, R, Coon, H, Lazenby, J & Herron, M 1996, ‘Assessing the work environment
for creativity’, The Academy of Management Journal, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 1154-1184.

Anderson, N, Potocnik, K & Zhou, J 2014, ‘Innovation and Creativity in Organizations: A State-
of-the-Science Review, Prospective Commentary, and Guiding Framework’, Journal of
Management, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 1297-1333.

Brown, T 2009, Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires
innovation, Harper Collins, New York.

Catmull, E 2018, ‘How Pixar Fosters Collective Creativity’, Harvard Business Review, viewed
25 August 2020, <https://hbr.org/2008/09/how-pixar-fosters-collective-creativity>.

Coleman, A 2016, ‘Is Google’s model of the creative workplace the future of the office?’, The
Guardian, 11 February, viewed 25 August 2020,
<https://www.theguardian.com/careers/2016/feb/11/is-googles-model-of-the-creative-workplace-
the-future-of-the-office>.

Corazza, G 2016, ‘Potential Originality and Effectiveness: The Dynamic Definition of

Creativity’, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 258-267.

Damanpour, F 1996, ‘Organizational complexity and innovation: developing and testing multiple
contingency models’, Management Science, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 693-716.

Dorst, K 2011, ‘The core of “design thinking’ and its application, Design Studies, vol. 32, no. 6,
pp. 521-532.

Dunne, D 2011, The handbook of design management, Berg Publishers, Oxford.

Dunne, D 2018, ‘Implementing design thinking in organizations: an exploratory study’, Journal

of Organization Design, vol. 7, no. 1.

Forbes 2018, ’13 Reasons Google Deserve Its’ Best Company Culture’ Award’, Forbes, 8
February, viewed 25 August 2020,
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/02/08/13-reasons-google-deserves-its-
best-company-culture-award/#69db1c343482>.
16

Hassi, L & Laakso, M 2011, Conceptions of design thinking in the design and management
discourses Open questions and possible directions for research, Delft, Netherlands.

Kumar, V & Whitney, P 2007, ‘Daily life, not markets: customer-centered design’, Journal of
Business Strategy, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 46-58.

Liedtka, J 2018, ‘Why Design Thinking Works’, Harvard Business Review, viewed 24 August
2020, < https://hbr.org/2018/09/why-design-thinking-works>.

Plessis, M 2007, ‘The role of knowledge management in innovation’, Journal of Knowledge

Management, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 20-29.

Razumnikova, O 2017, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship,

Springer, New York, NY.

Runco, M & Jaeger, G 2012, ‘The Standard Definition of Creativity’, Creativity Research
Journal, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 92-96.

Shute, V & Becker, B 2010, Innovative Assessment for the 21st Century, Springer, New York,
NY.

Techsauce 2018, ‘How Tesla creates Creative Innovations’, Techsauce, 14 December, viewed 25
August 2020, <https://techsauce.co/en/tech-and-biz/how-tesla-creates-creative-innovations>.

UK Essay 2018, ‘Working Environment Practice in Pixar Animation Studio’, UK Essay, viewed
25 August 2020, <https://www.ukessays.com/essays/management/working-environment-
practice-in-pixar-animation-studio-management-essay.php>.

Weisberg, R 2015, ‘On the Usefulness of “Value” in the Definition of Creativity’, Creativity
Research Journal, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 111-124.

Wong, A, Tjosvold, D & Liu, C 2009, ‘Innovation by teams in Shanghai, China: cooperative
goals for group confidence and persistence’, British Journal of Management, vol. 20, no. 2.

Zahra, S & Covin, J 1994, ‘The financial implications of fit between competitive strategy and
innovation types and sources’, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, vol. 5,
no. 2, pp. 183-211.

-THE END-