I thought I would add a little more activity to this blog by posting links to creative websites, ad campaigns, objects, etc. that I encounter.
To begin this trend, I would like to introduce the new mailbox my husband created for the house.
This mailbox is creative in several ways.
It is not like any other mailbox in our neighborhood (or maybe even unlike any other mailbox in our town)
It is artistic as well as functional
It was designed so that it fit the constraints imposed by the city for mailboxes as well as minimizing possible damage to a vehicle running into the solid steel construction.
This last was accomplished through clever use of shear pins on a cylindrical base connected to a wheel hub with intact wheel bearings. This design feature was incorporated into the structure to make sure that no matter the trajectory of the vehicle making contact with the mailbox, it would spin in such a way that the shear pin would give upon contact.
The author of the article discusses how Apple does everything that companies are not supposed to do if they want to be a creative company. As stated in the article, Apple’s organizational structure and business culture more closely resemble “an old-school industrial manufacturer like General Motors than the typical tech firm.”
Apple is a hierarchical organization with the top dog (Steve Jobs) micromanaging every aspect of the company. Supposedly, this micromanaging includes even little details such as the number of screws to place on the bottom of a laptop or the amount of curve in the corners of a monitor. There is little or no individual autonomy.
This top-down management style isn’t implemented in a soft and fuzzy manner in which employees are reassured about their value to the company and their role in the development and future success of the Apple brand. Oh No. It is of the in-your-face, do it, do it well, or do it somewhere else style. Read More
This article taps into the fear of all U.S. entrepreneurs. We know that China can manufacture more quickly and more cheaply. It might even be able to do it better.
We acknowledge that China’s advantages are no longer in just the manufacturing realm and are now moving to the technology domain.
However, we have always held onto the idea that we excel at innovation. The current cultural emphasis on creativity and innovation is the direct result of our belief that our competitive advantage now lies in our ability to generate new ideas and to turn those ideas into innovations.
This article argues that this advantage might soon be disappearing: http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_china
It does not assume any knowledge of psychology on the part of the reader.
The author takes a cognitive approach to creativity but also discusses other approaches to the study of creativity.
I agree with a lot the author has to say but also disagree with some of his beliefs and assumptions. I am hoping this disagreement will result in some good discussion fodder in the class.
One of the first topics addressed in his book is the definition of creativity. Read More
Since I am already on my commercial soapbox, I might as well continue with the discussion of the 20 year advertising war between Mac and PC. This is a Mac driven war and, to give the company credit, it has generated some great commercials. An amazing number of these commercials rely on analogy to communicate the superiority of the Mac to the PC.
The first of these commercials was the 1984 “Big Brother” commercial. It is considered to be a groundbreaking commercial by many in the advertising industry.
Beautiful! The analogy? That PC clones created a clone-like hive mentality with Big Brother IBM setting the standards for a monotonous and bleak computer experience. Ground-breaking, liberated, unique Macs would save us from this and bring color back into our world.Subsequent Mac vs PC commercials over the intervening years continued this theme using a range of analogies to communicate the superiority of the MAC over the PC. For example, the analogy of the PC Intel Pentium II chip to a snail:
And this one comparing the PC 2000 bug to 2001: Space Odessey’s HAL:
What I haven’t liked are the current slew of MAC vs PC commercials, mainly because the analogy doesn’t hold up for me. Now don’t take me wrong. I like both Macs and PCs. I’ve used both over the years and think they are equally useful, each in their own way. The reason the analogy in the new set of commercials doesn’t work for me is that the idea being communicated by the commercials through a variety of analogies (the bloated PC commercial, the PC that can’t speak to the Japanese “camera” commercial, etc) is that Macs are “fun” and PCs are for work. My experiences with both is that it is just the opposite. Most MAC users I know are in the arts or advertising and they appear to spend all their time slaving at their computers. If they want to play, there are precious few games they can play with. The “fun stuff” pushed by Mac just appears to be tools for artistic professionals to do their jobs. Kind of sad.This is actually relevant to the use of analogy for communication. By using an analogy to tap into user’s existing knowledge, you tap into ALL of that knowledge. This is actually one of the problems with using analogy to communicate and why it is so important to choose the correct analogy to describe an innovation or to make a point. All the conceptual baggage comes packaged in an analogy – the good with the bad. By activating that knowledge in the audience, you run the risk of them making some unwanted inferences (should any exist). In my case, the knowledge of how Mac users actually use Macs runs counter to the message implied in the commercials and just rubs me the wrong way.
This is not a good way to win friends and influence people.
The clip below illustrates one of the current Mac vs PC ads for those unfamiliar with the commercials just discussed:
