Harvard Business Review's tips for dealing with creative people, and it's appalling

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04 April 2013   #16
Basically, posts like that are the reason a lot of industries are in the shape they are currently in.

The rise of the MBA and the "manager" who can manage anything without any knowledge fo the specific industry, product or people is they reason why a lot of the business and financial world is in its current state.

Last edited by DoubleSupercool : 04 April 2013 at 12:55 AM. Reason: Spelling
 
Old 04 April 2013   #17
There is a lot of truth in this article... and I am not sure why is everybody offended by generalization, everybody does it every single day while making their decision. Generalization is actually the form of thinking that makes things work inside marketing, economy, politics so why shouldn't it be applied to artists.

5 is also true, because artists are usually motivated by some meaning and higher goals, not actually pay. If you are motivated by money you will probably end up working for VFX industry texturing sphere for 4 months, but that has nothing to do with being artist, it's just a skill with strong mechanical process... artist title is only there to manipulate desires in young people thinking it is highly creative and individualistic work. The point of 5 is if you put money question of the table, artist will not become more productive by giving them higher wages. Most successful people in history were not motivated by money factor, and common quality of those individuals was strong sense of freedom and nonstructural way of thinking.

I have a feeling that it doesn't matter how much development and discovery is there in brain science and behavioral psychology, individual ego will always overgrow those conclusion and be in defense of individuality.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #18
I take exception to this kind of drivel being presented as fact by a quack professor in a supposedly highly respected Universities blog. The fact that this guy makes his living from peddling psycho-babble to big business makes it all the more unpalatable.

It's basically management mumbo-jumbo that you can sell to organisations as a quick fix because they have training budgets they need to spend.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #19
As an Artist, Director, and day-time Company Manager, I have read this article and in the words of the late great Roger Ebert

"TWO. THUMBS. DOWN."
__________________
"Your most creative work is pre-production, once the film is in production, demands on time force you to produce rather than create."
My ArtStation
 
Old 04 April 2013   #20
I don't agree with every point of the article... but the rest isn't all that far fetched either.

However, that point-by-point response is nothing more than childish sour grapes. I'm surprised it didn't end in a declaration that their daddy can beat up he daddy of the article.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #21
Originally Posted by InTerceptoV: There is a lot of truth in this article...


Agreed. After reading it without initial irritation many of the things can be agreed upon. Not all of his conclusions or suggestions are valid, but many remarks are there.

Last edited by Cromfel : 04 April 2013 at 11:40 AM.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #22
Me thinks he is grossly generalizing human behaviour and doing so in a way that would be considered highly offensive if he had made the article focus on race or religious beliefs in the workplace.

I wouldnt bother posting a point by point rebuttal to his article though because as Mark Twain said "Donít argue with an idiot, he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.Ē
 
Old 04 April 2013   #23
It seems like a lot of the replies here misunderstand the meaning of "creative" in this article. This is not about artists, but about innovation. It is about managing people who create ideas, not draw, animate or paint. You don't have to be creative to do 3D/VFX (It might help to be creative, but you don't need it more than any other craftsman).
 
Old 04 April 2013   #24
I think the article is an impossible set of rules to achieve. I have never seen an environment in which you can 'manage/control' all of the variables to the degree that the article implies. That is WAAAY too much work, bordering on micromanagement. It kind of implies that staff are pigs in a pig pen that you can tightly control. I don't know anyone that can manage their teams to that degree.

Every organization that I have been part of has been little more than organized chaos.

This is far closer to what actually works, and it is based on fairly good animal (read: human) behaviour research:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

The author is well meaning. He just seems rather uneducated on the actual nature of human psychology. As a result, his article is about as useful as a sex advice article in Cosmo.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #25
Mr.bean, that was a very enlightening youtube video. Unfortunately, the good doctor isn't that bright. Here is his youtube appearance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Hi5UMVJXr8
 
Old 04 April 2013   #26
This is EXACTLY the list I use with clients who need to be handled with care (without the condescension)! I think the author needs a good smack.

This is how business studies from the 1950's appeared.
__________________
The terminal velocity of individual particles is directly related to pink rabbits on a bank holiday.
Characters, Games, Toys
 
Old 04 April 2013   #27
This was already pointed out but is worth a second voice.

When he says creative people he is NOT speaking about artists, copywriters, designers, animators, directors, etc'.

When he says "creative" he means the people who innovate, and create new processes, products, concepts, plans, etc'. Its people who are more akin to entrepreneurs and inventors than people who do a process (no matter how creative).

Also, when he talks about pay he isn't talking about en extra $5K in annual salary or something like that. He is talking about how creative people will not pursue a half a million dollar job, if they can be more independent and expressive for a lower six figure salary.

You guys don't need to throw a temper tantrum over the article. Most of the people on this site fall under the semi-boring category he mentioned....
__________________
MAKE - All that good visual stuff!
 
Old 04 April 2013   #28
yeah, I think the article was taken too personally. I was fine with everything except point #5, pay them poorly. Other than that, I didn't see anything too horrible or insulting. Heck, he said in the first paragraph that the success of business will depend upon those creative people and management's flexibility to financially endure risks and failures.

It's still up to the creative types to negotiate properly and position themselves so they have leverage over tip #5.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #29
Originally Posted by Blazer: This was already pointed out but is worth a second voice.

When he says creative people he is NOT speaking about artists, copywriters, designers, animators, directors, etc'.

When he says "creative" he means the people who innovate, and create new processes, products, concepts, plans, etc'. Its people who are more akin to entrepreneurs and inventors than people who do a process (no matter how creative).

Also, when he talks about pay he isn't talking about en extra $5K in annual salary or something like that. He is talking about how creative people will not pursue a half a million dollar job, if they can be more independent and expressive for a lower six figure salary.

You guys don't need to throw a temper tantrum over the article. Most of the people on this site fall under the semi-boring category he mentioned....

This made me ponder as well-'maybe the author isn't talking about 'artists'
after all'.
HOWEVER the photograph accompanying the article clearly seems to portray 'artists/designers' showing 'concepts'. Not 'inventor types' at work
(some whom often cannot draw-but make great things/ideas anyway).

So still a confusing presentation overall by HBP! Thumbs down for either being obtuse or idiotic depending on the author's true intention...

Last edited by circusboy : 04 April 2013 at 02:21 PM.
 
Old 04 April 2013   #30
Originally Posted by DoubleSupercool:
The rise of the MBA and the "manager" who can manage anything without any knowledge fo the specific industry, product or people is they reason why a lot of the business and financial world is in its current state.


Movie studio marketing comes to mind. They follow generalized assumptions and ignore things that dont match them (like the fact that studios inherit audiences, they dont make them from scratch).
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.