Hey everyone,

I’m still working on the second edition of Organizing Creativity.

It takes longer than expected (it is a spare time project), so, I’m putting the current draft version online.

It contains the content of the wiki I had here, so I have removed it.

Like I said, it’s a rough draft — some parts are (almost) finished, others are missing in part or completely — but to make the best of the longer work process, posting it online gives me the opportunity to ask for feedback. This is your chance to influence the final version. What do you think of the content and/or the layout? Any suggestions for improvement? I’d like to hear them. Drop me a line at danwessel@organizingcreativity.com or write a comment.

All the best

Daniel

Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great.
Mark Twain

Looking back at the advice I did get, I didn’t get, I wish I had gotten, I think that a good adviser, when giving advise, looks at:

• who the young scientist is (i.e., where she is in her career, what her attributes are, her character, strengths and weaknesses, etc.),
• how the field is in the area this person wants to be successful in (i.e., the specific research community),
• the possible advantages and (more relevant) the problems this specific young scientist will have if she wants to be successful in this specific field,
• (ideally) possible ways to improve the persons chances, e.g., strengthen the positive aspects and overcome the problems, and
• a way to convey valuable feedback to the young scientist in a way that the young scientist can accept this feedback.

Personally, Andy van Dam, who was the mentor of Randy Pausch exemplifies this kind of mentorship for me. He said (as quoted in the wonderful book: “Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams” by Randy Pausch):

“Randy, it’s such a shame that people perceive you as being so arrogant, because it’s going to limit what you’re going to be able to accomplish in life.”
Andy van Dam to Randy Pausch

Randy Pausch commented this feedback as perfectly worded, because he did not say: “Randy, you’re being a jerk.”, but he identified the core problem of the person in the field he wanted to work in, and he conveyed the message in a way his student could accept.

This kind of advice is very, very rare in my opinion, and after having taught students for a few semesters and some student assistants, also very, very hard. But it is also very, very important if you want to improve yourself.

Note: This posting replaces a previous one, in which I essentially said the same thing, but which was also very emotional and angry. Looking back, I can see why I wrote it is that tone, and seeing it now I can see that it does not fit to person who I like to be(come).

“Son, where did you go to school? If I were you, I’d write them and get my fucking money back.”
Dimitri “Jimmie” Viner, in discussions with his flight test engineers

A while ago I had an interesting conversation with a young woman who works as musician for the US military. We found some interesting connections between science and music, but what really struck me was how she got a music teacher fired for not helping her to become better.

Yup — and she was right.

When she found out that the high-credentials teacher who was giving the course for aspiring professional musicians could or would not give her more help than just some standard stuff you could say to every interpretation of the music piece, she first tired to find better teachers outside of the music school. When this failed, because the school did not want to cover the expenses, she switched to a course that was done by a young teacher. This teacher was not as experienced, did not have all those credentials the other teacher had, and she usually taught the students who did not want to become professionals, but her feedback was much more valuable than that of the high-credentials teacher.

Now, when a really good musician changes courses to an apparently inferior teacher this starts a lot of talk, and by the start of the next semester, all the students of the high-credentials teacher wanted to switch to the young teacher. The school was forced to draw lots who might actually make the switch. After that semester, the high credentials teacher took a sabbatical.

While it may sound harsh and brutal to get a teacher fired this way, it was the best choice. Like she said: “This is not a game for me” — it was about preparing her for the future, allowing her to be successful as a musician. A teacher who gives only the same standard advice for all students, who does not allow her to become better, should not be tolerated.

It was the right decision and I wish more people would act the same.

“People think focus means saying yes to the thing you’ve got to focus on. But that’s not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully.”
Steve Jobs

It’s been a little more than two weeks since Steve Jobs died. Apple did what it does best and gave him an Apple-style simple but beautiful obituary notice on their home page (well, until the next product was unveiled, which probably would have made him smile). It’s sad when someone like him dies … he shaped the future.

I can highly recommend his 2005 Stanford Commencement Address:

and this page about a few inspirational quotes of Steve Jobs.

Farewell, Steve Jobs.

Without Words … from Dilbert.com

English Note: This posting is about a poster I did submit to the MinD-Akademie 2011, showing on one (very large) page how one can organize one’s creativity. It was accepted and well received. The poster is in German, but I will do a translation soon. [Update: Translation is finished and available in this posting here.]

Das Poster zeigt die verschiedenen Punkte die wichtig sind, um Kreativität zu organisieren. Während der Prozess von oben nach unten läuft, ist jeder Punkt auch eine Beschäftigung mit dem Thema (gelbe Pfeile nach oben) und führt entsprechend zu weiteren Ideen (mittige Pfeile nach unten). Auf das Poster oder hier klicken, um das Poster als PDF in DIN-A0 zu sehen (die Bilder selbst sind runterskaliert, so dass die Datei “nur” ca. 7 MB groß ist). Die Datei ist in der Dateigröße reduziert, die Bilder sollten aber trotzdem in druckbarer Qualität sein. Das Poster, das ich ausgestellt hatte, habe ich in Hannover gelassen (vielleicht hat es ja ein nettes Heim gefunden, sonst wurde es halt entsorgt). Ich musste los, habe mein Poster nicht gesehen (oder ich war grad blind) und ich habe mich auch von einigen Leuten nicht (bzw. nicht richtig) verabschieden können (war auch was k.o., auch wenn’s/weil’s riesigen Spaß gemacht hat). Ich hoffe, ich sehe ein paar Personen bald wieder, auch gerne mal zu Besuch in Tübingen, auch wenn ich die Namen grad nicht verfügbar habe (ich denke, ich habe den Networking-Workshop wirklich gebraucht — war gut und eine gute Erinnerung).  Ich wünschte halt, ich hätte mir die Namen notiert, von den Personen, mit denen ich interessante Unterhaltungen geführt hatte (hmm, in der Badewanne eben gab’s eine nette Idee für eine App bzw. die Fortführung einer älteren Idee dazu  … ).

“Don’t make fun of grad students. They just made bad life choices.”
Marge Simpson to Bart after he made fun of a “30 year old grad student who made $600 last year.” [quote found at birdie77's profile at http://www.phinished.org]

A comment lead to me a series of videos on YouTube with the title “So you want to get a PhD in [psychology | humanities | etc]“. The sound — well, it’s computer voices, and the dialogue is somewhat redundant, but the content is … sometimes surprisingly to the point.

I stumbled over two great articles regarding leadership — or the lack thereof — in academia. Unfortunately, both are in German, but they key points were (translating and paraphrasing the authors):

• Using the classification of leadership in laissez-faire, autocratic and cooperating leadership behavior works. It must not be seen as either-or, but as present to varying degrees.
• Leadership behavior is not a matter of personal preference, but has consequences on multiple measures, e.g., affective commitment, achievement motivation, fluctuation, quality of the work relationship, and total work performance of the department. Leadership behavior that is high in cooperative, low in autocratic and low in laissez-faire style leads to the best results.
• There are many good examples of great leadership, of professors who support their staff and help them to become good or even great scientists by opening doors, giving advice and encouragement.
• However, many academics do not see themselves as leaders and do not think that they should show leadership behavior. Often the reason is the (false) argument that academic freedom and training independent scientists precludes leadership, thus resulting in no (i.e., laissez-faire) leadership behavior. However, mentorship — giving advice and feedback — allows the advancement of skills and work and keeps the independence and self-directed work of the young academics.
• Bad leadership behavior is usually not the tyrant who plays god in his department, but the lack of systematic (i.e., targeted, deliberate, reflective) leadership behavior. For example,
  • giving critic without constructive recommendations for change and encouragement,
  • making optimistic estimations regarding whether something can be implemented without giving the necessary support and impulses of how to transform an optimistic estimation to a measurable success,
  • pressing for the implementation of their own visions without gaining commitment by their staff first, and
  • academic thesis advisers who are usually not available.
• Bad leadership wastes potential, because it is a main reason that doctoral students quit their dissertation and leave academia.
• Great leadership combines support/advice with promoting values which are consistent and lived in the everyday work and can be experiences by the staff, e.g., promoting ethical values like respect, transparency, fairness and setting a good example.
• Training of leadership behavior in academia was neglected but — apparently — this is going to change.

I think the articles are highly relevant for anyone working or planning to work in academia, as post-doc or professor. The climate of a department can make or break great science and leaders strongly contribute to it. And as Kurt Lewin, who started research in leadership behaviors, said: “There is nothing so practical as a good theory.” and the texts are great to make sense of leadership behavior in academia.

Highly recommended.

Sources

Schmidt, B., & Richter, A. (2008). Unterstützender Mentor oder abwesender Aufgabenverteiler? – Eine qualitative Interviewstudie zum Führungshandeln von Professorinnen und Professoren aus der Sicht von Promovierenden. Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 30(4), 34-58.

Schmidt, B., & Richter, A. (2009). Zwischen Laissez-Faire, Autokratie und Kooperation: Führungsstile von Professorinnen und Professoren. Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, 31(4), 8-35.

It’s been a few years since I wrote “Organizing Creativity” and in the meantime I have learned a lot. I am also critical of the style of the book — I wanted to write everything I knew, I did and it shows. It contains a lot of information, but it is not exactly easy to read.

So, I am currently working on a new version, more concise and more useful for practical application. For this version I would like to ask you for your input. How do you organize your creativity? What skills and tools did help you? What gave you a boost in working. The questions are very broad and no matter how trivial or supposedly widely known it is, I really like to hear about it.

Thank you in advance

Daniel Wessel

Cut from “The West Wing”

The cut above reminds me of something we often lose: Take a breath for a second, step back and ask yourself: What are you doing? Are you really doing what you want to do? What is important for your? What makes your heart beat faster? What motivates you to get out of bed with a smile?

Don’t get me wrong, no job, no matter which, will always be fun, always be great, nor will you always succeed in it. But there are two things that should characterize any worthwhile job, and I include creative work in the past time to this:

• Over a medium time-frame (let’s say up to six months), the balance of the job in terms of enjoyment vs. dissatisfaction should be positive.
• The job should have consequences that go beyond the work itself — be it people inspired, making the world a little less hostile or complicated, etc. pp.

If you are doing something that is not worthwhile, creating something each and every day that does not move your heart, then perhaps it’s time to stop and think — and find an alternative solution.