Print

Print


Hi,

as I initiated that thread, I followed the discussion with much attention. After the first bogged down attempt in autumn 2008 the actual huge participation indicates (me) that the awareness of the crisis is rising. The last information from Ted about the impact of the crisis on the mid-Hudson Valley creative ecosystem confirms that impression.

 

During that dense discussion (except some diluting deviations) I asked myself what I was looking for. Finally the discussion confirmed my own reflection about the dilemma between usefulness and uselessness.

 

Some time ago, I wrote:

“The uselessness (one of the key characteristics of art: the value in itself) includes the usefulness (the key characteristics of business: the added value), because we do not know, what is useful. To know what is useful we should know the meaning of the universe, the world and the life. What we consider as useful is the result of believes, fears, hopes, and concepts, etc. It’s all feelings. But we must survive, eat, earn money, etc. That’s an earthly task requiring production, organisation, and communication, etc. Nobody can say with absolute certitude what will happen, and how to unravel sustainably the earthly task. It’s an evolving issue. Evolving in which direction? It's a matter of fact: We move towards uselessness, because uselessness is the most efficient and durable state of existence as long as we don’t know why we exist. We don’t know what is useful, but we can clearly perceive uselessness, the value in itself. (See the book of Martin Heidegger: “Nihil est sine ratione” or “Nothing is without reason” (Der Satz vom Grund: Nichts ist ohne Grund). By consequence: Useful processes of production, organisation and communication are more durable and efficient if emerges something useless beyond their useful objectives. In other words: Use usefulness for the creation of uselessness, or: use business relevant issues to produce art. This is the way business may profit most from art.”

 

If it would be possible to measure by concrete figures the immediate ROI (= the king in French) of the use of business relevant issues producing art, the dilemma would be disentangled.

 

Who uses business relevant issues to produce art? How can be evaluated the outcome?

 

Jürgen

P.S.: When I will have some time, I will compile the whole thread and put it to the www.aacorn.wikispaces.com . There it will be possible to correct, improve, intensify, update, and continue the thread. If there are any objections, let me know.

 
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Piers Ibbotson
To: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: actualisation

OK Let me hold up my hand in response to Ralph's question about responsibility.
 
About four years ago I led a major arts based intervention for an international group of the worlds rising stars of the banking industry who were gathered in Europe for a major international conference. The theme was growth and risk. We passionately advocated and demonstrated the attitudes of risk-taking and improvisation that are the pre-cursors to creativity in the theatre. We even used the Nietsche quote " that which does not destroy me makes me stronger" to encourage bold and intuitive action over considered caution. They lapped it up with great enthusiasm.
Topics on the conference agenda meanwhile were: "driving revenue growth in North American retail banking" and "unleashing the value of outsourcing and offshoring".
I wonder sometimes about the influence of this event. At the very least we were in tune with the times and supporting a perceived need in the industry for innovation and a new attitude to risk. We may even have been promoting it.
 
Someone has already mentioned that the power of artistic processes can be double-edged. And in retrospect, the choice of Neitsche to quote is apposite, given his disturbing and ambivalent place in European culture. The lesson from this for me seems to be that artistic processes have enormous power and potential, but like any potent source of energy they can be as destructive as they can be useful. Mostly, I suspect, people in our field still have very little real influence. How do we both get more - really bring to bear the enormous potential for transformation that applied arts has - and yet ensure that if we do get it, we know what we are doing?
 
In order to earn my fee at the moment - I have to serve my clients ends - that's the nature of the contract. How do we contract on the basis of subverting, changing or transforming the client? In my experience the desire for change in a client is,usually, really a re-framing of the desire for bigger margins or faster growth, or in todays climate - survival as profitable going concern.
 
Piers
www.piersibbotson.co.uk
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">Stager Jacques, Leslie
To: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 12:24 AM
Subject: Re: actualisation

My two cents would be that I hope as we are able to intervene in organizations, we are costing the benefits for our clients.  If we expect to sit at the table with CEOs, CFOs, CIOs, etc, then we need to be able to speak their language – now more than ever – and that’s numbers. 

 

I believe that the arts are a necessity in all the arenas of our life, as they open and build cognitive paths for new ideas.  (I have evidence to back this up, but not going down the grounded theory route here).  That said, we still need to be able to speak the language of the culture in which we are working.  Speaking the language provides credibility as well as allowing our audience to “hear” us. 

 

FYI:  a good book to start with if you haven’t done this sort of thing is:

 

Costing Human Resources:  The Financial Impact of Behavior in Organizations

By Wayne Cascio

(1982) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

 

We have long secluded the arts from the other areas of our society’s functioning rather than embracing it as an integral part of our operation as humans.  Now more than ever, we need to use the benefits of a creative process to break through the reified barriers that are holding this culture hostage.  I see this time as the supreme opportunity in our lifetime – much like our parents grappled with WWII and the Depression. 

 

As a new member to AACORN myself, I find this discussion stimulating and exciting.  Yes, as one member stated previously, through debate and conversation, we are engaging and finding our process, too.  I’m honored to be a part of so many thoughtful and practical (at the same time!) colleagues!

 

Ok, this ended up being more than two cents…

 

leslie

 

 

 

Leslie Stager Jacques, PhD
Lecturer
Department of Management & International Business
Massey University, Albany Campus
Private Bag 102 904, North Shore MSC
Auckland
New Zealand
Email [log in to unmask]
Phone + 64 9 414 0800 Ext. 9420


From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ralph Kerle
Sent: Thursday, 2 April 2009 2:24 a.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: actualisation

 

Hi Sue,

 

With all due respects, let's leave the rhetoric out about opportunities at the moment.I get emails from the erudite through to spam daily exhorting me to adopt new thinking, new design processes and thinking, creativity and innovation programmes, arts based processes etc that will lead me out of this mess.

 

After two weeks of interviewing CEO's in middle to large corporations in Australia around leadership, creativity and innovation, I can categorically state where business is focused.

 

Back to basic business fundamentals particularly revenues that are dropping rapidly in every industry regardless; prices, costs and head counts and the cutting of all surplus expenditure especially those to do with what are perceived as non essential services such as training, O&D, HR where outcomes cannot be calculated and expressed in hard and fast monetary terms.

 

I found that as opposed to 12 months ago, at least the CEO's are now prepared to listen. They acknowledge they don't know where things are going. They want creative conversations. However, in all the discussions without exception they ask to be shown the tangible outcomes art based processes and creativity and innovation programmes etc will have on their bottom line in order to help them make their figures so their people can retain their jobs!! It's that focused!

 

Senior management is not interested in theorising, they are seeking practical financial outcomes..NOW..it is a matter of survival. So here is the challenge for all of us as I see it involved in this field. 

 

How does one respond to that from an aesthetic, creativity and organisations research perspective?

 

Ralph

 

ralph kerle
chairman
the creative leadership forum
http://www.thecreativeleadershipforum.com
p 612 9403 5327 m 0412 559 603





 

 


From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sue Congram
Sent: Wednesday, 1 April 2009 9:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: actualisation

I agree with these sentiments - that there is an opportunity for the arts to have a positive affect on the current economic situation.

 

I hear time and time again from people in business that there is a need to be 'creative' in order to survive. I hear that as both an inward (how we work) and outward (products and services) statement. My interest is in the extent to which the arts can create paradigm shifts in business, because that is what I believe is needed in order to take business minds into new ways of thinking. To achieve that at a cognitive-thinking level invites the old paradigm to keep it's bag of tricks active, making change difficult. In my view the arts can offer incredibly effective ways to create sustainable paradigm shifts in the way that people engage in leadership, management and business practice (in both the HOW and the WHAT) stepping around old established patterns which no longer work.

 

Is it the case that there is a window of opportunity open right now that will close soon? If so what does it mean to build on the opportunity that is open to us?

 

Interested in your thoughts on this.

 

Sue

 

Bringing imagination to life and work

–––––––––––––––

Sue Congram C.Psychol

Dolgarren

St Weonards

Herefordshire

HR2 8NZ 

 

01981 580040

 

–––––––––––––––––

 'Education and Imagination' Edited by Raya Jones, Austin Clarkson, Sue Congram, Nick Stratton, published by Routledge 

 

–––––––––––––––––

 

 

 

On 31 Mar 2009, at 17:43, Taylor, Steven S. wrote:



I'm with John in that I think the financial crisis is an opportunity for
arts-based thinking/work.  As we start to move beyond the initial panic
responses and start to look for new practices that may be better suited to
working with the complexities of the world the arts offers a lot.

- Steve


On 3/31/09 9:51 AM, "John Cimino" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


Jügen,

 

Thanks for reviving your timely question.  There are probably many unique

responses to the economic crisis from within our profession.  Many of my

American colleagues are impacted by their major clients' withdrawal into a

reactive state of innovation dormancy and short-term thinking.  We believe

this protective mode will soon produce its own problems.  Creativity,

innovation and artful thinking are needed now more than ever.  Some of us

practitioners are endeavoring to position ourselves in anticipation of this

second realization, that creativity holds at least some of the keys to working

ourselves out of the mire of the present economy.  I also find more and more

pracitioners turning to one another in what feels like a very healthy

dialogue, establishing bonds of friendship and a level of sharing more rare in

prosperous times.  I experience this as a silver lining to the present crisis,

something from which much good may come.

 

Secondly, I also perceive at least some of our arts/aesthetics dialogue

merging with the dialogue around "design thinking" which may result in some

healthy cross-fertilization and a strenghtening of the cases for both in the

wider world.  

 

I look forward to your comments and others as well.  Our own community might

well be strengthened by this dialogue.  Best.

 

John

 

John J. Cimino, Jr.

President & CEO

Creative Leaps International

845-469-7254 (office)  845-216-0607 (cell)

[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>

www.creativeleaps.org <http://www.creativeleaps.org>

 



Steven S. Taylor, PhD
Associate Professor
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Department of Management
100 Institute Rd
Worcester, MA 01609
USA
+1 508-831-5557
[log in to unmask]