"Intelligence looks for what is known to solve problems. Creativity looks for what is unknown to discover possibilities." Simon Sinek posted that on June 2, 2016.

Now, to be clear - I'm a big fan of Simon Sinek's 'Golden Circle'...'discovering and starting with your why'. In fact, I've told pretty much every business contact I've known for more than a handful of hours about the value embedded in the Golden Circle concept. And, I've written about it a number of times - link. 

With my admiration of Simon Sinek clarified...

I really struggle with his June 2^nd inspirational thought for the day...

About Simon's June 2^nd thought for the day...

I think it's wrong to presume Intelligence and Creativity are distinct concepts. I think Creativity is a subset of Intelligence. To support this thinking I go back to 'Think and Grow Rich', containing Napoleon Hill's views on what he called Synthetic Imagination and Creative Imagination. While very different in 'form', these concepts are governed/administered by thoughts (in human brains and minds)...i.e., they are forms of Intelligence. Borrowing from and expanding upon Hill's signature phrase:

What the mind can conceive and believe the mind can achieve...because the mind bears the gifts of Intelligence.

It's all about using our minds to THINK. And thinking, even in its poorest form, let alone in its creative forms, contains Intelligence. 

The June 2^nd Simon Sinek post is timely...

At a recent session, we discussed Innovation...which led to discussion of Creativity...(and in my view, quite a bunch of poorly-thought-through communications).

It is surprising to see and hear so many leaders (apparently including Simon Sinek) giving such little thought to the concept of Creativity...and, again with too little thought, so many leaders talking about and delegating work under concepts like Innovation & Creativity...often, in fact regularly, without even taking time to give quality thought to formulating prior to communicating, meaningful definitions of those words! And, in the rare instances where definitions of these words have been created they are often 'unworkable'...'un-transferable'...'un-delegatable'...i.e., destined to reach confused ears and confused minds. 

Leaders ought to remedy that problem...I mean, if they want to inspire changes for the better, leaders ought to be very clear when they talk about important things like Innovation, Creativity, Invention, and other such terms.

If we want Innovation and Creativity (and Invention) (and Possibility Thinking) (and other such things that, as the saying goes, take people's thinking out of boxes), we leaders need to give these topics the effort and study they deserve.

If you are interested in some of my thoughts on these topics, search the words 'creativity', 'innovation', 'curiosity', 'invention' and 'out of the box' at www.rickbaker.ca.

I think all of us should define these words/concepts before we use them to try to influence other people's thinking or behaviour. 

If we find our definitions falling on confused ears (and confused actions make that clear rather quickly...when we choose to follow up and observe)...if we find our definitions of words like Creativity and Innovation and Invention and Possibility Thinking falling on confused ears then we need to step back and consider the changes we need to make to remove the confusion our wording has generated.

PS:  We should avoid at virtually every opportunity the temptation to use that phrase thinking out of the box. 

Are we spoiled rotten?

Is our self-absorption reducing our ability to succeed?

Is our expectation of kindness killing our ability to be competitive?

When I use the word "decadence", my thoughts are much closer to Nietzsche than President's Choice. I'm thinking of two types of people: those with resilient, vibrant, 'living' self-confidence and others with a shortage of that ingrained self-confidence. I'm thinking there is a mix of these two types of people, with the truly confident people being outnumbered by those who are not truly confident. This 'imbalance' creates a natural tension between the two groups...each trying to exert its influence on the other. And, when the influence of those lacking confidence shifts the balance away from confidence the equilibrium is distorted as decadence sets in. 

This is a 'societal phenomenon', affecting all levels of community: nations, tribes, cities, communes, families...and businesses.

Every business has a 'confidence factor'.

Some businesses are founded on confidence: self-confidence in individuals, confidence in relationships and teams, confidence in products and services, confidence in leadership...confidence in business. these confidence-founded businesses enjoy many advantages, to name a handful: 

• can do attitude, which leads to decisive action
• optimism, which breeds open-mindedness and abundance mindsets
• curiosity, which triggers enthusiasm, creativity, and innovation
• efficiency, from role clarity and goal clarity to doing the right things at the right times...'natural discipline' at work
• quality relations, from civility and harmony to trust and real integrity, within the organization and clearly evident to all affected by the organization

Re-phrasing the initial questions...

Are those who lack confidence overriding those who have it, reducing our businesses' aggregate 'confidence factor'?

Are those who lack confidence reducing confident people's ability to realize their visions and goals?

Are those who lack confidence placing our businesses at risk vis-a-vis competitors in our neighbourhoods?...other communities?...other nations?

The question unwritten but embedded below…see yellow highlight

Question: How often does sense of adventure actually make sense in [or fit] the Situation known as working at the office?

Answer: [unless we are a Google wannabe] Not too often. Certainly, in most roles, in most businesses, it cannot be a ongoing daily mindset. In 'normal-productive' office Situations, if we want people to be off on adventures then we need to think in advance and set some boundaries…otherwise, there will much such wandering and who knows where people will end up!

[please...this is not to be construed as an argument against Curiosity]

Sense of Urgency - Sense of Adventure

By Rick Baker
On Jul 23, 2014

The topic 'Sense of Urgency' arose during a conversation today. 

Got me thinking...

Sense of Urgency DEF'N: that's wanting to take prompt action when you know the right thing to do.

But, what about when you want to take prompt action and you aren't sure about the right thing to do - you simply have the urge to take action? Doesn't that also qualify as a Sense of Urgency?

No - I don't think simply wanting to take action satisfies the minimum standard associated with a meaningful Sense of Urgency...i.e., when Urgency is meaningful like the type of 'Urgency' Stephen R. Covey taught about in his Urgency-Important lessons.

[And, if we are not talking about that sort of meaningful Urgency, an Urgency that requires us to use Sense, then what kind of Urgency are we talking about?]

2 Related Points:

1. When we know the right action to take in a given Situation and we feel that action should be initiated sooner rather than later...that's a Sense of Urgency...that's a good thing...that's closely linked with identifying Opportunities and acting quickly to seize advantage. That's the stuff of entrepreneurship. 
2. When we want to take prompt action without believing/knowing that action is the right action to be taking...well...that's a Sense of Adventure!

Sense of Adventure is a good thing too. 

Sense of Adventure is a different thing.

Sense of Adventure fits certain Situations.

Sense of Urgency fits other Situations.

Perhaps we need to communicate more clearly when we are driven to take prompt action?

We wouldn't want other people to mistake our Sense of Adventure for a Sense of Urgency...would we?

We wouldn't want other people to mistake our Sense of Urgency for a Sense of Adventure...would we?