Unleashing creativity in your schools.

A couple of weeks before I assumed the position of superintendent in a small Northern California school district, my friend and mentor Jake Abbott offered me some words of wisdom. At the time, Jake was superintendent of the Fresno Unified School District, and was approaching the end of a long and distinguished administrative career.

He told me, "Steve, in today's competitive environment, complex organizations like schools do one of two things: they either move forward or they fall behind. There is no such thing as status quo anymore, because as soon as an organization thinks it has a lock on success, some other organization comes along and does things better."

Jake's words not only proved to be incredibly prophetic, but became central to my conceptions of effective leadership. Innovation is the name of the game today. Widespread dissatisfaction with the status quo in education has led to the emergence of alternative ways of thinking about schooling and leadership development.

Take, for example, the charter school movement, voucher plans, large school redesign efforts, and third-party players in the administrative preparation arena such as New Leaders for New Schools. Business as usual in public schools just doesn't cut it anymore.

Envisioning life as it could be

Leadership today is about moving an organization away from the status quo and toward a new order, to envision life as it might be vs. life as it could be (Thomke, 2001). Of course, nothing that school leaders do is more important than "fostering creativity and individuation in the next generation so that it will not only master the lessons already learned, but also so it will be ready for the challenges that are ahead" (Stefik & Stefik, 2004).

Above all else, school leaders are expected to stimulate organizational growth and development: not just sporadically or episodically, but as an ongoing and creative process of self-renewal. The most effective leaders treat creative thinking and innovation as cultural norms rather than extraordinary phenomena, as everyday tasks rather than mysterious and ethereal activities.

Easier said than done. The effort to battle the forces of group conformity, change anxiety and deeply ingrained behaviors requires persistence, passion, fortitude, tact and strategic focus.

Without question, these are very tough times for school leaders. Increasingly pluralistic communities, persistent achievement gaps, paper-thin fiscal resources, grumpy labor unions and mounting pressures to leave no child behind have principals and superintendents scrambling for cover.

Consider, for example, the headlines of a recent edition of the NASSP Principals' Update:

* "More Parents Directing Rage at Coaches"

* "States Report Inflated Graduation Rates"

* "Poll Reveals Broad Support for Reforming U.S. High Schools"

* "State Asks for Leeway on NCLB and More Aid"

* "Race Approved as a Factor in District Student Assignment Plan"

Entrepreneurial thinking and risk-taking in pursuit of educational innovations are often overshadowed by an understandable preoccupation with regulatory compliance, political tranquility and career survival.

The exhortations of leadership gurus to "think outside the box" can ring hollow to leaders on the front lines who measure success through their ability to mitigate the frequency, breadth and intensity of the daily crises and conflicts that inevitably (and unpredictably) mar efforts to manage with strategic foresight.

Given the unrelenting pressures of school management, how can principals and superintendents devote the time or resources to do much of anything that deviates from addressing the basic needs of schools? What are the levers that school leaders can use to infuse creativity and innovation into the cultural Fabric of their organizations?

This article examines these questions, and others like them, in an effort to provide school leaders with a deeper understanding of how complex organizations like schools can learn to think creatively and foster a culture that regularly transforms its creative ideas into innovations that matter for student learning.

Moreover, the article provides a collage of ideas drawn from literature on organizational change that can help school leaders stimulate collective creativity and innovation.

Where does the creative process start?

What comes first: innovation, imagination, invention or creativity? Where does the process start? Clearly, these are highly interrelated and iterative concepts and they are often used interchangeably to describe the same idea.

Scholars describe a sequence or continuum of events that describes how creative change typically occurs in organizations (Stefik & Stefik, 2004; Thomke, 2001). The sequence usually begins at the individual level but over time can expand to become part of a collective dynamic.

The first step involves the activation of one or more of the following "stimulators." Stimulators are in essence catalysts that can spark new ways of thinking and acting in organizations (Stefik & Stefik, 2004). They exist in differing amounts and intensities and may be unevenly distributed among the workforce. They may be cultivated and nurtured or they may exist independent from managerial influence or encouragement. Nevertheless, they are common precursors to creativity, invention and innovation in organizations.

1. A deep passion for an envisioned change or a vision for the future.

2. An unwavering sense of purpose, both personally and for the organization as a whole.

3. A desire for a better way, better outcomes or a better life within the organization.

4. A penetrating curiosity about why things are the way they are, how they might be, and what may lie around the corner (i.e., an urge to discover).

5. A sense of hope for a brighter future and an enduring belief in the goodness of the organization.

6. Feelings of confidence and efficacy in being able to shape and reshape one's work products and environments.

As the continuum unfolds, the activation of a change stimulator(s) engenders the production of imaginative thoughts (the formation of novel mental images, impressions or thoughts). Imagination leads to creative thought (the focused application of imagination toward the production of a novel idea). Creative thought often leads to an invention (the construction of a novel, tangible and fully formed product). And finally, invention results in innovation (the practical application, adoption and further refinement of the product). Of course, this model represents the ideal and is not necessarily how innovations occur in schools.

Solving problems strategically

Unfortunately, pressures to solve problems quickly and expediently often result in a "ready, fire, aim" orientation among school administrators that can throw the sequence out of alignment.

Most seasoned school leaders have a repertoire of heuristic solutions to problems that have yet to arise. Moreover, problems often arrive at such a furious and unpredictable pace that in order to keep up, administrators have become solution-focused rather than problem-focused. As a result, they can miss golden opportunities to lead their schools or districts in strategically advantageous ways.

This is an important issue. A preoccupation with the ends at the expense of the process used to get there diminishes the evolution of divergent perspectives, unexpected or novel connections between problem variables and unconventional thinking. Leaders (in all kinds of organizations) can easily become prisoners of their preconceptions, misconceptions, deeply embedded assumptions and heuristic shortcuts.

There is also a time-worn culture in public education in which the nexus of wisdom and expertise within schools is presumed to reside with administrators. This hierarchy of expertise belies the fact that the capacity to produce good ideas is widely distributed among faculty, staff and the school community. School leaders who fail to recognize this don't take full advantage of the creative resources already available within their organizations.

Creativity and innovation can't be imposed upon the members of an organization. Instead, effective leaders establish an innovative ecology in their schools by creating and supporting conditions where change "stimulators" can flourish. They understand that "the problems that will be most important in the future are difficult to recognize in the present" (Stefik & Stefik, 2004).

By cultivating dissatisfaction with the status quo and encouraging disruptive technologies, forward thinking leaders foster a culture of organizational restlessness and curiosity--the essential building blocks of creativity and innovation.

Obstacles that inhibit creativity and innovation in schools

This is all well and good in theory. But schools are notoriously hard nuts to crack. Obstacles and barriers to change are numerous and stubbornly resistant. Before one can lead people to the "promised land," it's important to understand the terrain. Following are several obstacles to change in schools that are particularly onerous.

1. Schools are homogeneous systems. Most people gravitate toward system norms and most interactions occur between people with similar backgrounds. Much attention is devoted toward optimizing routine activities.

2. Pressures for accountability and standardization inhibit curiosity and the exploration of unconventional ideas. Moreover, fear of sanctions for underperformance on standardized tests shifts attention from a search for opportunities to risk aversion.

3. Scarce and unpredictable fiscal resources discourage innovation and risk taking. Allocation priorities center on programs and technologies that are closely aligned with the subjects targeted through standardized assessment protocols. Valuable programs and learning opportunities that exist on the fringe of the assessment radar screen must right for table scraps.

4. Public conceptions of good schooling are notoriously conservative and rooted in the practices of the past.

5. The continuously swinging pendulum of reform can become tiresome to veteran educators. As a result, people seek refuge in their work and become resistant to the diffusion of innovation (Rogers, 1995).

6. Sclerotic hierarchies and enduring adherence to the principles of scientific rationalism dominate organization structures in schools and school districts. As a result, there is little room for independent or divergent thinking and there is little tolerance for the non-linearity associated with the creative process (Mettke, 2001).

7. School cultures are too frequently framed around a logic of confidence that somehow behind each classroom door all is progressing nicely. In fact, many administrators spend relatively little time in classrooms, and when they do, teaching performances are likely to be carefully orchestrated events that may or may not represent the norm.

8. Collective bargaining agreements in concert with a highly regulated and multi-layered legal environment constrain independent judgment. Rule benders and breakers are often treated as pariahs rather than champions of progress.

9. The white collar/blue collar paradox confounds the clarification of roles and identity formation in schools (e.g., who are we, autonomous professionals or managed labor?).

10. Experimenting with and using untested methods and materials on children raises serious ethical issues. We're talking human beings here, not iPODS or rollerblades. Just how far can we go before unregulated efforts to innovate become impediments to learning or equity in schools?

So, given such daunting challenges, how can school leaders hope to foster an innovative ecology within their organizations? Where does one begin?

Creativity and innovation can die at the top

The subtitle caught you off guard, didn't it? You most likely expected to read that creativity and innovation starts at the top. Well, in some cases it does. Consider that JFK envisioned a man on the moon, the Reverend King dreamed of a world of racial harmony and equality, and Einstein reminded us that while "logic will get you from A to B, imagination will get you everywhere."

Few leaders are quite so prophetic or boldly visionary. In fact, the sources of creativity in schools are broadly distributed. The key, of course, is learning how to tap into the wellspring of creative ideas that already exist within the organization (Kelley & Littman, 2001).

Although creativity and innovation in schools may or may not start at the top, they can certainly die there. We conceive of good leaders as people who support our aspirations and dreams and who inspire us to achieve; to be better than we are. Such is not always the case in practice.

Research on the career derailment of executives and managers suggests that a sizeable proportion of people who attain leadership positions in organizations are ill-equipped for the job (McCall & Lombardo, 1983). A spate of recent literature on the training of school principals echoes this (Murphy, 1992).

A core problem appears to be with leaders who fail to exercise sound emotional or social intelligence (Goleman, Boyatzis & McKee, 2002). In fact, a study of public school principals in California determined that a failure to maintain positive interpersonal relationships was significantly more likely than any other job-related factor to result in a principal's involuntary departure (Davis, 1998).

It makes sense. People who feel good about themselves, their jobs and their organizations are more likely to be creative than people who feel oppressed, unsafe and dissatisfied. A surefire way to kill creative thinking and innovation in a school is to lord over others, to establish rigid systems of command and control, and to discourage purposeful playfulness. Other enemies of creativity in organizations include imitation, conformity, the need to be right immediately, the acceptance of fixed roles and paralysis by analysis (Mauzy & Harriman, 2003).

Big breakthroughs are rare

Bold strokes and grand schemes may be the stuff legends are made of, but big breakthroughs are rare. Whereas the emergence of creative ideas and related inventions may happen quickly, deeply embedded innovations may take years (Stefik & Stefik, 2004).

The problem is that "not all futures happen at the same pace" (Kelley & Littman, 2001). Numerous factors like deeply ingrained rituals, cultural habits, belief systems, fluctuating resources and shifting policy dictums can complicate swift and comprehensive implementation of new ideas. As a result, innovation often develops incrementally and in ways that deviate from expectations.

Experienced leaders understand this dynamic and often settle for solutions to vexing problems and dilemmas that "satisfice" rather than optimize. That is to say, they are prone to accept the first best solution (one that crosses the threshold of acceptability) rather than the best possible solution (Simon, 1997).

In the real world, innovations more often than not nibble away at the status quo. In her book "Tempered Radicals," Debra Meyerson (2001) describes how ordinary people in organizations can, over time and with subtlety, focus and persistence, create the impetus for change and the adoption of new ideas. They do this incrementally and in ways that don't place themselves unnecessarily at risk.

Nibbling away over time can result in surprisingly large effects. In his book "The Tipping Point" (2002), Malcolm Gladwell explains that "people are exquisitely sensitive to subtle changes in their environments. Tinkering with small changes in the environment can result in large-scale change over time."

Quality of presentation a key factor

Oftentimes the critical factor in the launching of a change epidemic resides with the messenger rather than the inventor. The interesting point here is that the quality of an idea may be less important than the quality of its presentation to others. Effective leaders understand this and the importance of making a "great entrance" when introducing a new idea (Kelley & Littman, 2001). Of course, the best ideas often lose their owners and take on a life of their own.

Innovations are typically the product of several distinct approaches to creative thinking (Mauzy & Harriman, 2003; Stefik & Stefik, 2004). Many important scientific breakthroughs have emerged through a theory-driven approach characterized by the development of novel and complex mental models, or theories, about what might work and why. Einstein's theory of relativity is an example of this. Novel ideas may also emerge through the analysis of existing data. Anomalies or gaps in the data can reveal surprising possibilities. Fleming's discovery of penicillin happened this way.

Other innovations emerge through a method-driven approach. For example, existing technologies reveal new discoveries and ideas never before observed. In this way, Galileo's telescope revealed an abundance of new discoveries about the nature of the universe.

In some cases, an innovation arises through an identification of specific problems or dilemmas and a purposeful search for solutions. Many of Edison's inventions were derived this way.

Regardless of the approach used to generate useful innovations, creative people are typically highly reflective and see connections between things in ways that stimulate them to suspend disbelief. They are often conceptualizers who can see entire systems and tend not to get bogged down in the details of a problem.

Perhaps most important, creative people think deeply about their own thinking and practice purposeful confusion. That is, they regularly question and reexamine their assumptions and beliefs about effective professional practice (Goleman, 2001; Mauzy & Harriman, 2003).

Understanding the dynamics of creative thinking allows school leaders to recognize and nourish the traits among teachers and staff and the preferred workplace conditions that are conducive to the discovery of novel ideas or approaches to teaching and learning. When leaders conceive of their schools as "greenhouses" (instead of factories or laboratories), creativity and innovation flourish (Kelley & Littman, 2001).

12 ways leaders can cultivate creativity

Collective creativity comes through a combination of individual and group efforts. The savvy leader works both angles simultaneously. Savvy leaders also understand that creativity must be purposeful and not frivolous, divisive or harmful. Importantly, collective creativity may, in some schools, represent a coherent group effort in pursuit of a common goal. In other schools, it may represent somewhat diverse and even fragmented efforts to improve professional practice.

Metaphorically, it's a good idea to color outside the lines, but not so far as to obscure the essence of the picture. At some point, playfulness and wild ideas must be made practical and aligned with the goals, mission and capacities of the school. Although creativity and innovation can't be prescribed, they can be cultivated by leaders who are astute enough to accurately assess the creative profile of their schools or districts and respond strategically (Mauzy & Harriman, 2003).

In my review of the literature for this article I found several interesting suggestions, many from top business executives and consultants. Following are 12 especially good ideas that may prove useful to school leaders in good financial times and bad. Many of the ideas will be familiar.

Of course, since the chemistry that sparks collective creativity (as well as the barriers and obstacles) in schools can be highly contextual, none of the ideas presented below will ensure success. Arguably, applying combinations of the following ideas is more likely to stimulate creativity and innovation than the application of a single strategy alone.

1 Identify and nurture mavens and champions. Gladwell (2002) suggests that leaders "set maven traps." That is, they find out which people in the organization exert deep influence, not by the virtue of their rank or status, but by the power of their passion and support for a new idea and ability to influence others. These are the people who leaders enlist to become change catalysts. They also identify the champions of change (those who have an established record of successful innovation) and support and recognize their accomplishments (Kelley & Littman, 2001).

2 Hot groups are the engine of organizational creativity (Kelley & Littman, 2001). Hot groups are typically non-hierarchical, diverse, like-minded in pursuit of goals, passionate yet slightly irreverent, but mutually respectful. Hot groups are frequently cross-functional, with members drawn from different units within an organization.

Such collaboration often creates a "buzz" of creative energy that can permeate the organization (Stefik & Stefik, 2004). Stay out of the way! With hot groups it's far better to be a guide on the side than a sage on the stage.

3 Reduce unnecessary controls (Mauzy & Harriman, 2003). Creativity rarely flourishes in highly regulated and constrained work environments. People who work in organizations need to feel efficacious and potent. They need both the physical and mental space to unveil their talents, gifts and best efforts. It often helps to arrange physical spaces and work schedules so that key people can have regular opportunities to interact informally as well as formally. It also helps to develop a "fellowship of the bench" whereby you find opportunities to match the activities of rookies and novices with proven innovators (Stefik & Stefik, 2004).

4 Hire and organize for diversity (Kelley & Littman, 2001; Mauzy & Harriman, 2003). Years ago, as I prepared to take over the principalship of a large suburban high school, the outgoing principal forewarned me that the faculty "could, from time to time, pose a challenge." He had purposefully hired people with different backgrounds (culture, gender, age, politics) as well as those with differing perspectives and beliefs about educating children. He did this precisely because of the vibrancy and energy such diversity can bring to an organization.

As it turned out, the principal was quite right in his assessment of the faculty. However, we were never short of divergent opinions and creative ideas (several of which stuck to the ribs of the organization).

5 Welcome resistance and conflicting ideas (Mauzy & Harriman, 2003). Glad-handers, groupies and yes-men are never at the forefront of creative change. "Only the ideas you disagree with have the power to change you" (Daft & Lengel, 1998). Moreover, resistance surfaces issues that must be addressed if change is to progress and, as such, generates opportunities for further creativity. Leaders who mismanage controversies over conflicting ideas can create a culture of mistrust and tear, and unwittingly engender subversive behaviors.

6 Cultivate brainstorming as a skill. "The best way to get a good idea is to get a lot of ideas" (Kelley & Littman, 2001). Each of us, at one time or another, has participated in structured efforts to collaboratively brainstorm in search of creative ideas or solutions to seemingly intractable problems. But brainstorming is far more than simply throwing goofy ideas at a wall chart. Effective brainstorming requires practice, focus, strategy and a competitive, yet friendly, process.

Encourage wild ideas and playful thinking, yet do so in a manner that is relevant to the issue at hand. It's important to carefully articulate the problem, issue or objective beforehand. Brainstorm frequently and infuse it into the cultural fabric of the organization. Learn how to jumpstart the group when creativity plateaus. It's often when the easy ideas have been exhausted that the deep work of creative thinking begins. Remember, "Great discoveries most often emerge at the point where rational analysis ends and human imagination begins" (Davis, 2004).

7 Fail your way to success, but always make new mistakes (Kelley & Littman, 2001; Stefik & Stefik, 2004). It's probably true that we learn more from our mistakes than from our successes. The reality is that novel ideas are frequently impractical and turn out poorly. What's important to remember is that failures and mistakes should become the grist for opportunistic search rather than stagnation and retreat.

My dad once told me as I was learning to snow ski, "If you don't fall down from time to time, you're not learning anything new." When people fail honestly, with integrity and through calculated risk-taking, they should be acknowledged, coached and encouraged. So, loosen your tie, take 10 deep breaths, and give people a chance to fail safely and instructively. Recriminations and blame for honest ideas gone bad will kill collective creativity faster than bad sausage at a company retreat.

8 Learn how to reframe problems (Bolman & Deal, 2001). Effective leaders do this by stepping into different sets of shoes. They understand that most problems, opportunities or ideas can be conceptualized through different frames of reference. They empathetically consider a problem or an idea as it might be understood through the experiences and perceptions of others.

Reframing can reveal weakness or soft spots in one's own assumptions or practices, and can illuminate useful connections between competing or divergent ideas. It's important for school leaders to teach others how to do this when they are grappling with difficult decisions, dilemmas or creative activities. Tunnel vision can blind people to unforeseen opportunities.

9 Maintain a "junk box" of ideas that didn't work (Kelley & Littman, 2001; Mauzy & Harriman, 2003). Keep a repository of old ideas or solutions that didn't work and treat all prior thinking as a storehouse of emerging solutions. Contexts change, situations change and players change. What failed to work in the past may well provide reasonable solutions (or parts of solutions) in the present. I can't tell you how many times over the course of my career that I've heard school leaders dismiss creative ideas with the statement, "We already tried that and it didn't work."

10 Learn how to "juggle beanbags" (Kelley & Littman, 2001). Focus on building prototypes, not monoliths. Massage good ideas in context. Get the ball rolling! Don't worry about finding perfect solutions or inventions right off the bat. Put new ideas into the field, experiment, test them, seek multiple sources of feedback, and adjust and refine the details along the way (Stefik & Stefik, 2004).

11 Help people to think verbs, not nouns (Kelley & Littman, 2001). Focus on how a creative idea will likely be experienced by others rather than the contextual factors. For example, ask how will it work in action? how will it feel? what emotions will it evoke? as opposed to what the tangible results will be or what behaviors it will change. This kind of thinking gives life to innovative ideas. It humanizes deliberations and fosters an experiential rather than abstract or theoretical orientation to creative thinking.

12 Tell stories about the school, its people and their accomplishments (Bolman & Deal, 2001). Vibrant, interesting and meaningful stories can be powerful symbols about what is valued, what is accomplished, and the positive attributes of those who promote creative change. Stories rich with metaphors, analogies and humor can stimulate the imagination and shake loose deeply ingrained patterns of thinking. Moreover, good stories, especially those in which we are protagonist, can be quite motivating.

Final illuminations

OK, so what's it all about? What are the critical dispositions and strategies needed to stimulate collective creativity in schools?

Stimulating collective creativity and innovation in schools is about encouraging opportunity hunting, entrepreneurialism, and a playful yet purposeful culture. It is about emphasizing new and different vs. better and more. It is about the encouragement of disruptive technologies that challenge the status quo, the ability to articulate and act upon one's intuitions, and the skillful management of powerful symbols, rituals and stories. And, it is about more than simple tolerance for risk-taking. It's about the encouragement and active support of calculated risk-taking in pursuit of important organizational goals.

Once again, easier said than done. Let's face it--it's hard to let go of control, it's hard to trust completely, and it's hard to shed one's fear of failure. Yes, the buck really does stop at your desk. But so can the chance to really make a big difference in the lives of students and teachers.

Consider this statement by George Bernard Shaw (Stefik & Stefik, 2004), "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

The "unreasonable" man--a metaphor for the leader with the courage to rub against the grain, to challenge the status quo, and to relentlessly pursue the dream for a better future. Fostering collective creativity in schools is indeed hard work, often frustrating and discouraging, and often involving learning how to "swim upstream." But, as John F. Kennedy once said, "Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth." So, take some advice from Dr. Seuss: "Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!"

References

Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2001, 3rd ed.). Reframing Organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Daft, R. L. & Lengel, R. H., (1998). Fusion leadership: Unlocking the subtle forces that change people and organizations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Davis, S. H. (2004). "The myth of the rational decision maker: A framework for applying and enhancing heuristic and intuitive decision making by school leaders." The Journal of School Leadership, 14(6), pp. 621-652.

Davis, S. H. (1998). "Superintendents' perspectives on the involuntary departure of public school principals." Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 58-90.

Gladwell, M. (2002). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. New York: Little, Brown & Co.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Kelley, T. & Littman, J, (2001). The art of innovation: Lessons in creativity from IDEO, America's leading design firm. New York: Doubleday/Random House, Inc.

Mauzy, J. & Harriman, R. (2003). Creativity, Inc.: Building an innovative organization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Mettke, K. (2001). Creativity, a grand thing. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Public Administration.

Meyerson, D. (2001). Tempered radicals. How people use difference to inspire change at work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

McCall, M. W., Jr. & Lombardo, M. M. (1983). Off the track: Why and how successful executives get derailed (Technical Report No. 21), Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Murphy, J. (1992). The landscape of leadership preparation: Reframing the education of school administrators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.

Nalebuff, B. & Ayres, I. (2003). Why not? How to use everyday ingenuity to solve problems big and small. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Rogers, E. (1995, 4th ed.). Diffusion of innovation. New York: The Free Press.

Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Stefik, M. & Stefik, B. (2004). Breakthrough: Stories and strategies of radical innovation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Thomke, S. (February 2001). Enlightened Experimentation: The New Imperative for Innovation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Review.

Stephen H. Davis is an associate professor at the Stanford University School of Education and a former high school principal and district superintendent.