http://www.satirworkshops.com/workshops/ba...r-change-model/

Folks,

For those that are interested, the above is a summary of Satir Change Model.

It works at individual level, organization level, society level and so on.

It is a MODEL of how human being deal with change.

And, you can infer from the model how it relates to creativity.

Dreamer

This post has been edited by dreamer101: Sep 21 2009, 07:25 AM

You assume I didn't think about the validity of his point? You presume too much. I thought about it, and saw the flaw in his reasoning. He can be creative, but that doesn't necessary means his "creative thinking" is rationally valid. Its good you can find correlations between different sets of data, but he has mistaken the correlation for causation.


I agree, but please note that "capable of being wrong" means that you are able to accept that you're wrong and keep going until you get it right. It doesn't mean its ok for you to be wrong and to stick with the wrong idea/concept.

Not trying to nick pick, but if you really want to be creative, you gotta change your ways

There are a lot of ways to be creative, and in fact, one can train oneself to be creative (albeit still limited by one's innate creativity) --- but there is only ONE way to kill all your creativity, and that is, to think that you are right all the time

And that's what you are doing to yourself, right now

The only one who can free you out of that teeny tiny box is yourself.... so... it's really up to you

This post has been edited by convivencia: Sep 21 2009, 12:03 PM

Well, i thought creativity is an attempt to do something with method unconventional to norms at that time and yet obey to certain logics. For example, I can say Albert Einstein being creative for noticing light speed is an universal constant and use it as a ruler to measure things in different inertial frame. I can also say the English people are creative for coming out with idea to use machinery to replace human work. As for statement as mentioned regarding why Europe people manage to have industrial revolution and yet chinese dont have, i get this information from a paper that study the reason that China not able to have industrial revolution while their technology is actually once being leading in the whole world. The study clearly state that one of the reason is possibly overpopulation(of course there are several reasons, the following is the world population record in history, shows the whole Europe population have been around 21% of the whole world during the time of industrializationm, compare to Asian of 64%).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

The reasoning for the statement mentioned is that when there is too many people available to work(causing labour cost low), using machinery will in short terms, increase the production cost(Due to costly equipment partly as a result of research cost). As production cost increase, factory using machinery will lost its stand in market( This is what happen in China). Eventually, idea of automating the production system is never realised. Compare to Europe, they have been in war for long time and also suffering from plague. Their population can be significantly less than China at the same time. Therefore, employing labour to work can be said more expensive. Hence, those European start to spend their time to come out with idea to replace human work with machinery. It is important to know that creativity that i mention is refer to the person/nation first come out with idea of doing something differently. The context where russian is industrialize while their population is very high, only means the Russion start from copying idea of industrialiazation. The industrial revolution originate from England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

The above examples are just some well known facts of in history that related to creativity. As to become creative, one must start to think something different from others. In general, when one try to do something differently, there will be quite some mistakes in the process, but it is important that one should learn and understand the mistake. Sometimes, those reasoning from mistakes can also comes out with creative idea( for example, the idea of using radar originate from idea to shoot down aircraft using electromagnetic wave, but it is not successfuly. Eventually, this idea lead to another idea of using radar to detect ranged aircarft. Of course idea of radar originate from a German engineer around 1900)

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/artic..._death_ray.html

This post has been edited by VA1701wb: Sep 21 2009, 05:31 PM

in the case for China, it's the burdening custom that hindered the development of science and technology

there's a Chinese saying --- don't stick your neck up

and then there's the Confucius thinking --- one has to obey their superior with utmost respect

combine the two, we got a stagnant culture in China, and they end up wasting 3000 years out of their 5000 years history

This post has been edited by convivencia: Sep 21 2009, 05:36 PM

Ya, i agree with it. This is also one of the reasoning in the paper that i study for the reason why China never have industrialization although withe leading technology at that time.

silverhawk,

So, how much do you know about Satir Change Model??

Until you KNOW that you DO NOT KNOW, you cannot be CREATIVE.

A FULL pot cannot receive any more water. You have to empty the pot first.

Dreamer

Then the vein of thought is skewered. Obey does not mean to lose all form of intelligent thought, i.e : to question in one's head when the motives or directives are not all for the better. Depending on how the individual interprets the ideal, it could be very retardard or completely otherwise since it doesn't hinder us from asking superiors for knowledge (or, perhaps why method so-and-so was chosen).

I really feel like I am rambling these days.

Hey! This was in the book I read. Very true, since if you do not openly consider other ideas, you will never progress. One-track mindedness never lead to progress in any form.

This post has been edited by ZeratoS: Sep 21 2009, 07:12 PM

The first civilization that institutionalized the "Yes man" mentality is China, courtesy of Confucius

When your superior tells you to do this, you don't say "No" or "Maybe", you must say "Yes !"

Confucius also said "When the father ask the son to die, the son has no choice but die"

That's the mentality that has ingrained into every iota of Chinese culture / thought for thousands of years

Incidentally, most of the Chinese inventions, like Paper, Gunpowder, Compass, were invented before Confucius was born

It's no accident, really

The Confucius thought has effectively stifled Chinese' creativity most of the past 3000 years or so, and in some circles, there are still Chinese who advocate the children to learn Confucius thought, as though it's the Holy Grail

It's just too bad, really

Imagine if there were no Confucius, the Chinese civilization could have added so many wonderful inventions to the Human Society for the past 5000 years

This post has been edited by convivencia: Sep 21 2009, 08:48 PM

The invention of Paper and Compass by China do occur before Confucius. But Gunpowder printing technology was invented after Confucius. It is hard to say whether Confucius affect mentality of China people. But Japanese nation also adopt Confucius idea in their country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism

I personally think that the government policy affect willingness of nation to be creative. By the way, cultural also contribute to the interest of nation in research(which may result in creativity).

Actually gun powder (mainly sulphur and carbon powder) was invented in the late Zhou dynasty, it was still bronze age then, and most of the alchemists who dabble in the manufacturing of gun powder did it under the guise of "medicine"

Regarding the effect of Confucianism on Japan vs that of China, Japan should thank its lucky star

Culturally, in Japan, Shintoism takes precedence over Confucianism

While in China, it's Confucianism over everything else

In other words, the Japanese still have breathing rooms for their creativity but the Chinese don't get to enjoy such luxury

But your point is valid nevertheless --- the policies dictated by the leader do matter --- Japan's rapid rise in the late 19th century was mainly due to the determination by the then Japanese Emperor Meiji (明治天皇) to modernize Japan by adopting a lot of Western ideas

They even change their New Year to January 1st, from their old one based on Chinese lunar calendar

Without Emperor Meiji, the Japan of today may just be like Korea, nothing really impressive

On the other hand, China wasn't (and still isn't) as lucky

The burden of Confucianism has eaten away most of the Chinese's ambition in science and technology, so, instead of innovation in technological gadgets and/or scientific discovery , the Chinese turn to commerce

PS. A not-that-well-known fact about Confucianism is that it allows (and as the matter of fact promotes) corruption !

This post has been edited by convivencia: Sep 21 2009, 08:45 PM

So, is creativity is matter of survival?

This is rich.

Aren't you thinking you're right as well? Look in the mirror man. This isn't a contest of ego, but an intellectual discourse. You throw out an idea, I criticise it, if you can't back up your idea, then its obvious you never thought it through or you are clouded by your own bias and perspectives. Did the flaws in your reasoning even occur to you before I mentioned them? If I made it aware to you, and you're dismissing it, aren't YOU the one thinking in the box?

Sometimes you people think that they're thinking outside the box, but they don't realise their box is just really small and probably smaller compared to the boxes other people have started out with.


The culture is actually quite oriental in nature, you'll see similar concepts in korea and Japan. Yet those 2 countries are rather creative. Japan STILL retains its power hierarchy in its society and its very evident in their working force. Yet they are a very creative nation... doesn't this seem to fly in the face of your theories?

The problem with china's development in the past wasn't because of its restrictive power dynamics. Given such restriction, people will find ways to work within the confines, and history has proved that it often happens. The problem my friend, was because China was delusional about its position and power. It believed itself to be the strongest and best nation in the world and that the "heavens" were on its side. This closed its mind to development because they were "perfect". They no longer strived to be better.


Oh really? A lot of creative people I know do not think they do not know. They think of what they can do with what they know, what can you achieve with what you know?

The Satir Change model? Yea I read it, I've not studied it in depth (as I'm sure there's more to it than just stuff on a website), but from what I can understand, its a model of change. It mentions creativity, but understand that change is not directionally biased. Change goes in any direction, for better or worse no one can really tell. Change can be due to lack of creativity or even the prohibition of creativity. So the Satir Change Model has very little to do with our discussion, unless you can convince me otherwise.

I wonder if the both of you have ever reflected what you said to me, back upon yourselves. Don't you realise that you're both talking as though you know everything, and as though you're the right one? Yet when your ideas and points are criticised, you can't put forth a convincing argument to back your points up. I have no qualms if you think you're right, that is your own opinion, but when criticised you should be able to back it up, otherwise you're not being intellectual at all.

The box is a lie.

You throw out a good point there. Maybe the good Lord up there ran out of L sized boxes and decided to gift the less fortunate ones with rather bigger "assets" -cough-. Always had the misconception that anything one can do is equally possible for another.

I really thinks that knowing Satir Change Model doesn't apply to creativity. We could be creative even we do not know that model. Even I doesn't know what is that model until i searching on the net.




Yes. It was true, as creativity also need knowledge to apply. But it was the matter of knowledge spec, depends on the work field.

Check out on Steinbeck, talented on writings, Einstein, talented on theory, and Vincent van Gogh talented on paintings.

They all creative, but in their specialized field.

If Steinbeck do theory, he will not as best as Einstein, as he was not talented in that.

Creativity, it could be painted, in writings and in many things, as people could see it as creative.

This post has been edited by kekacang: Sep 28 2009, 11:18 AM

Which is why we are discussing something ambiguous. Nothing is set in stone.

yes.... so, when u have kids, buy them TOYS rather than video games...

TOYS trigger imagination while video game limits imagination

Yes, exactly. Our times we could make anything into toys, Lego's the best. What are kids playing nowadays? Maybe that would answer why kids today have so little in their minds.

ahaha... yes... i still can remember when i was small, i could afford to buy remote control boat..

what i did?? i buy cheap remote control car and cheap toy boat and reverse engineer both and merge both

and voilaa... got a remore control boat....

what kids do in school now is try to beat their friends in games

Quoted for the great truth! I miss my lego, but unfortunately they've gone missing. I'm pretty sure I had at least RM3000 worth of lego there..