Imagine W.H. Auden, Carson McCullers, Jane and Paul Bowles, Benjamin Britten, and Gypsy Rose Lee holed up in an old boarding house in Brooklyn, working as hard and fast as they can to create as much new work as possible before the US enters World War II. Can you imagine the discussions? The arguments? The parties?

You will probably hear more from me over the next few weeks on Sherill Tippens book, The February House, an excellently written and researched account of this experiment in communal living. Many of the artists’ most iconic works were created during this period.

Here’s the bit I found really interesting while reading last night: W.H. Auden, upon moving into the house, found it to be a less satisfactory creative environment than what he had hoped for. He took it upon himself to set up a more conducive structure to the house. After years of alternately living the bohemian life and that of the nurtured artist, Auden came to the conclusion that the optimum environment for artists included both order and unexpected disruption.

First, the problem with chaotic environments:

“…he had discarded the romantic idea that unbridled bohemianism was likely to lead to the creation of anything work reading, looking at, or listening to. The fundamental premise on which bohemianism was based—the idea that “‘good’ equals what the bourgeoisie do not do’”—was self-evidently false. Regular meals and quite work hours were required for efficiency in every realm, and just because factory owners relied on them should not prevent artists from doing so as well.”
Tippens, p. 67

Then, the problem with nurturing environments:

“…he had explored the idea that such highly nurturing environments could also harm the artist because they were essentially closed. By limiting the possibility of change and access to the unknown, they prevented the artist from encountering the ambiguous or difficult elements that would spur him toward true creativity and expression. Without the random interloper that interferes with his perfect vision, Auden suggested, an artist becomes stagnant and only repeats himself in a cosseted, self-reflecting cycle.”
Tippens, p. 68

So, for Auden (and I have certainly found this myself), this balance of chaos and order was critical. Tippens writes:

“One could even say that at times the Devil himself served God’s purpose, then, by luring the artist towards inauthentic paths and thus revealing to him, by contrast, what his true path had always been.” Tippens, p. 68.

In practice, this turned into regular meal times, set times for work (and silence in the house) and set times for socializing.

So far, it seems like the criteria for success Auden laid out include:

• Good humor
• Work time
• Play time
• Nutrition and hot water
• Agreement in the house on the above
• Someone to facilitate the above structure
• Someone to manage the details, like bills, repairs, and rent

More to follow…

It seems like I just got back from UX Week and will soon be off to MX East. My session will be a conversation with Sharon Greene, artistic director of the Neo-Futurists, a theater group based in Chicago, known for their long-running show Too Much Light Makes the Baby Go Blind.  We’ll be talking about how you can set up a work environment that encourages continuous, collaborative creativity. If you are interested in learning more about them, I have both a paper and presentation.

Here’s some more information on the conference:

The MX East conference will blaze a trail this October 21 – 23 into the new frontier of innovation and design management. MX East takes a strategic look at the business value of design, and how design drives success in product development and the service industries. The loyalty and trust of today’s consumer is best earned when they remember their experience with a product or service as not only positive but potentially life-changing or empowering; the businesses that respond to this consumer demand are the ones that will succeed.

Read the entire program at http://adaptivepath.com/events/2007/oct

Ideally suited for design, product, and creative managers, MX East bridges the gap between conferences that address the big vision of design and strategy, and conferences that focus on form-making and methods.

MX East brings together a top business and design professionals who have listened and responded to their target customers’ needs. This year’s speakers include thought leaders from a variety of sectors who are using the influence of smart design to win customers and deliver exceptional user experiences, whether through print media, retail stores, consumer products or customer service. Join Adaptive Path hosts Jesse James Garrett and Peter Merholz in welcoming these speakers as they share their stories of innovation and offer a deeper look into what it takes to overcome some of the design challenges that face creative leaders in business today:

- Joshua Wesson, CEO, wine retailer Best Cellars
- Lou Carbone, Experience Engineering
- Mark Jones, Service Design Director, IDEO
- Irene Au, Director of User Experience, Google
- Khoi Vinh, Design Director, The New York Times
- Scott Berkun, industry analyst and author of _The Myths of Innovation_
- and more!

The conference will address topics such as:
- Embedding design practices throughout your company
- Overcoming organizational inertia
- Bringing emotional resonance to the experiences you deliver
- The secrets of innovation, and how to apply them to your work
- Metrics and measurement of design success

Use promotional code FOSN and you’ll get 15% off the registration price, including lodging (saving up to $250).

UX Week starts Monday - it’s going to be a great program. This entire event is one huge collaboration. From content to catering, over a hundred people will make this event possible and 250 people will come to participate.

So, this is where I get teary. Events like UX Week aren’t about a single person or idea. They are about conversation and inspiration, about creating a space where passionate people can share their hard-won experience and great ideas. Fantastic.

Right on time… Scott Berkun has shared yet another great essay, this time on Creative Thinking Hacks.

Out of this essay, come to critical point:

an idea is a combination of other ideas.

I love the simplicity of this description. But there’s a catch:  you must both be open to ideas then fearless about using them. Ah, the rub.

In a recent series of client workshops on a future visioning project, the goal was to exactly this: take existing ideas and combine them in new and unique ways to arrive at a new, multi-channel offering. In the first workshop, we got as many of these ideas out on paper as possible, using a structured ideation process. In the second workshop, we took these point ideas and sought ways to combine them into collections of cohesive ideas.

The challenges we faced, though, with the participants were two-fold. First, we had to convince them that they already had the ideas, right there in the room, in their heads. We had learned this early on in our work with them. As an organization, they were knowledgeable and had loads of interesting ideas but no way to hang them together in a cohesive way. We just kept reminding them of this every chance we got.

Then, we had to help them to take all those ideas and shed their preconceptions about what was possible. This proved tricky. Combining ideas requires experience and practice. While the group got much better at combining ideas over time, the design team–relatively free from politics and willing to take more risks–ultimately synthesized the point ideas and initial grouped ideas into platform recommendations.

Yesterday, I looked at the definition of create. I became enamored of re-examining ordinary processes and potentially changing them to support creativity. In that spirit, I decided to pay attention to my working environment today and try to figure out why, in some places I can easily stay focused and productive and in others, I am hopelessly fragmented. Haven’t found the answer yet but I did find some great resources.

Creative Space Resources

This author has assembled what I can only describe as an exhaustive list of articles and resources on creative spaces.

Designing Your Optimal Creative Environment

Jonathan Vehar describes the spaces of well-known creative folks, like Einstein (went fishing), Mahler (had a “composing cottage”), and Kant (wrapped himself in blankets). He then provides some simple questions to ask yourself about your optimal space. Useful read.

A wise woman I know has encouraged me to take on a beginner’s mind, and closely re-examine words I thought I knew. Looking up common words in the dictionary is a simple but powerful activity. Understanding actual meaning can be a powerful way to get clear around my work.

Today, I started with the word “create”.

Create
to cause to come into being, as something unique that would not naturally evolve or that is not made by ordinary processes

to evolve from one’s own thought or imagination, as a work of art or an invention.

to cause to exist; to bring into being

What I like about these definitions is how active they are – to cause, to evolve, to bring into being. The definitions suggest work, not magic.

In addition, “Not made by ordinary processes” jumps out at me. It suggests that the creativity is not just about what you make but how you make it. Tools and processes themselves can evolve, initially sparking new ideas, but lose their luster over time. It is important to regularly question the impact of tools on the output.

When working in large groups or teams, it can be hard to know how things are going. Was this meeting useful? Did a workshop session go well? Is there some issue that needs to be addressed, something no one is talking about?

Regularly asking people for their observations and feedback accomplishes two important things. First, it assures the group that their input has been received. Second, criticism, both good and bad gets out in the open.

The Method

I use a really simple method for getting quick feedback: I pass out two stickies to each person. A green one is for positive feedback—what’s working, what you like. The pink one is for criticism—what isn’t working, what needs improvement, what you don’t like. I give people a minute or two to write something down then collect all the stickies. I transcribe all the responses (takes a couple of minutes) and send them back to the group.

This method gets you a lot of feedback quickly, much of it directly actionable. The format is simple and anonymous. The limited physical size of the stickie keeps people focused.

Using the Results

Collecting and quickly sharing the results is critically important. Openness about criticism, both positive and negative, can mitigate potentially toxic side conversations and prevent problems from turning in to a major crisis. It can also be incredibly effective to show members of the team the diversity of experience and opinion within the group.

How you communicate the results can depend on the culture of your organization. I like to send out the raw list to the meeting participants before synthesizing. Sometimes I will include a summary the results with some immediate actions identified.

When to Use

I’ve used this technique at Adaptive Path, where folks are typically open and relaxed, to get periodic feedback on the content and format of our weekly practice meeting. I’ve also done this mid-workshop with execs from a Fortune 100 financial organization. The client responded strongly and favorably to providing feedback and seeing other responses. This helped us gracefully get through the “valley of despair” that occurs mid-stream in long work sessions. We were also able to adjust the content of the workshop mid-stream to address concerns.

Let me know

If you try this out, let me know how it goes. I’m always curious how techniques like these work in different cultures and teams.

Over the last day or so, there has been some buzz around Marc Andreeson’s post “Brainstorming is a Bad Idea” with Scott Berkun writing a succinct and useful response “In defense of brainstorming.”

I posted my response by writing “Skills and Practice Make Brainstoring Useful” on Adaptive Path’s blog today.

Yesterday, I promised to write about the six basics of teams from that Wisdom of Teams as they had worked in my experience with design teams. I am in the final days of preparation for UX Week so, while I intend to go through these, I don’t have as much time to dedicate this week as I had hoped.

Creativity, Collaboration, and Consensus in London

This September, Leisa Reichelt, designer, writer, and speaker at UX Week will be giving a workshop in London on techniques designers can use to productively involve clients and other team members in UX work. Full details…

Perhaps every one has read the Wisdom of Teams and I’m just late to the party, but so far so good.

Over the next week or so, I am going to explore each of the six “team basics” Katzenbach and Smith have identified in their research and see how they apply to design teams.

The six team basics are:

small number (fewer than twelve)
complimentary skills
common purpose
common set of specific performance goals
commonly agreed upon working approach
mutual accountability

The list looks deceptively simple, yet few teams I have ever been on have mastered all six. Sometimes the mix of skills is a little off or the performance goals are fuzzy or each person sees the problem at hand in a very different way. I am looking forward tot his exploration.