Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T17:12:32.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Creativity under Strong Constraints: the Hidden Influence of Design Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2017

Armand Hatchuel  and
Milena Klasing Chen
Armand Hatchuel
Affiliation:
MinesParisTech- PSL Research University, CGS, CNRS I3 UMR 9217, France. E-mail: [email protected]
Milena Klasing Chen
Affiliation:
MinesParisTech- PSL Research University, CGS, CNRS I3 UMR 9217, France. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In engineering design, constraints can stimulate creativity but are also often cited as obstacles to innovation. So do constraints hinder or foster creativity? Despite a number of studies, the reason why constraints can have a positive or a negative impact on creativity is still unknown. In this paper, we will propose, theoretically and empirically, that the link between creativity and constraints is not determined by the type of constraints, but by the type of ‘design model’ used. Using C-K theory, a well-documented, general, and formalized theory of design, we first prove that the dual impact of constraints on creativity is predictable. Then we use C-K operators to distinguish two different design models: rule-based design and innovative design. We show that the first model organizes a negative link between constraints and creativity while the second model enables a positive effect. We illustrate these mechanisms through the analysis of several product developments based on both secondary and primary sources.

Type
In Honour of Erol Gelenbe
Information
European Review , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , May 2017 , pp. 194 - 207
Copyright
© Academia Europaea 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Onarheim, B. (2012) Creativity from constraints in engineering design: lessons learned at Coloplast. Journal of Engineering Design, 23, pp. 323–336.Google Scholar
2. Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2003) A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to C-K theory. International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED.Google Scholar
3. Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2009) C-K design theory: an advanced formulation. Research in Engineering Design, 19 (London: Springer), pp. 181–192.Google Scholar
4. Amabile, T.M. (1988) A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10(1), p. 126.Google Scholar
5. Rosso, B.D. (2011) Creativity and constraint: exploring the role of constraint in the creative processes of new product and technology development teams. PhD Thesis, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
6. Rao, B.C. (2013) How disruptive is frugal? Technology in Society, 35, pp. 65–73.Google Scholar
7. Radjou, N., Prabhu, J., Ahuja, S. and Roberts, K. (2012) Jugaad Innovation: Think Frugal, Be Flexible, Generate Breakthrough Growth (London: Wiley).Google Scholar
8. Sharma, A. and Iyer, G.R. (2012) Resource-constrained product development: Implications for green marketing and green supply chains. Industrial Marketing Management, 41, pp. 599–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Keupp, M.M. and Gassmann, O. (2013) Resource constraints as triggers of radical innovation: longitudinal evidence from the manufacturing sector. Research Policy, 42, pp. 1457–1468.Google Scholar
10. Rosenzweig, S. and Mazursky, D. (2014) Constraints of internally and externally derived knowledge and the innovativeness of technological output: the case of the United States. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31, pp. 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Lawson, B. and Dorst, K. (2013) Design Expertise (Oxford: Taylor & Francis).Google Scholar
12. Hatchuel, A., Weil, B. and Le Masson, P. (2013) Towards an ontology of design: lessons from C-K design theory and Forcing. Research in Engineering Design, 24, pp 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Bauert, F. and Grote, K. (2007) Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach (London: Springer).Google Scholar
14. Le Masson, P., Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B. (2011) The interplay between creativity issues and design theories: a new perspective for design management studies? Creativity and Innovation Management, 20, 217–237.Google Scholar
15. Elmquist, M. and Segrestin, B. (2009) Sustainable development through innovative design: lessons from the KCP method experimented with an automotive firm. International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Interscience, 9, pp. 229–244.Google Scholar
16. Radaelli, G., Guerci, M., Cirella, S. and Shani, A. B. (2014) Intervention research as management research in practice: learning from a case in the fashion design industry. British Journal of Management, 25(2), pp. 335–351.Google Scholar
17. Klasing Chen, M. (2013) The design and characteristics of low cost products. First Interdisciplinary Innovation Conference, December 2013, Paris, France. p.19.Google Scholar
18. Winter, A.G. (2013) Stakeholder and constraint-driven innovation of a novel, lever-propelled, all-terrain wheelchair. Proceedings of the ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference IDETC/CIE 2013.Google Scholar
19. Ramdorai, A. and Herstatt, C. (2015) Study 2: Lessons from GE Healthcare: How Incumbents Can Systematically Create Disruptive Innovations. Frugal Innovation in Healthcare (Switzerland: Springer International Publishing), pp. 75–103.Google Scholar
20. Hoegl, M., Gibbert, M. and Mazursky, D. (2008) Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more? Research Policy, 37, pp. 1382–1391.Google Scholar