Malevolent Innovation: Opposing the Dark Side of Creativity

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511761225.019

19 - Malevolent Innovation: Opposing the Dark Side of Creativity

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Edited by

James C. Kaufman and

David H. Cropley: Affiliation:
University of South Australia
David H. Cropley: Affiliation:
University of South Australia
Arthur J. Cropley: Affiliation:
University of Hamburg
James C. Kaufman: Affiliation:
California State University at San Bernardino
Mark A. Runco: Affiliation:
University of Georgia

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Cropley (2005) and Cropley, Kaufman, and Cropley (2008) explored the notion that creativity might be employed with the deliberate intention of causing harm or damage to others (e.g., McLaren, 1993; James, Clark, & Cropanzano, 1999) by focusing on acts of terrorism. One of the starkest examples of such malevolent creativity was seen in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11). Judged against the criteria of a functionally creative product developed by Cropley and Cropley (2005) – namely, novelty, relevance and effectiveness, elegance and generalizability – Cropley et al. (2008) argued that terrorists, such as those involved in the 9/11 attacks, exploit creativity to help them achieve their goals. Whether used consciously or unconsciously, creativity is as much a weapon for terrorists as it is for business executives.

Cropley et al. (2008) also, however, explored the notion of “decay” in relation to creativity. In essence, every creative product, process, or service, once implemented, sows the seeds of its own destruction. In the case of the 9/11 terrorists, the very novelty that was so spectacularly successful in the Twin Towers and Pentagon attacks had, by the time of the United Airlines (UA93) hijacking, decayed to the point that UA93's passengers responded quite differently, possibly quite creatively, and with some success. The effectiveness of the terrorist attack on UA93 was significantly diminished in comparison with the other attacks on 9/11 (if we assume that, as is generally thought to be the case, the terrorists intended to crash the plane into either the White House or the U.S. Capitol).

Type: Chapter
Information: The Dark Side of Creativity , pp. 339 - 359

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761225.019 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2010

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, J. V. (1992). Weirder than fiction: The reality and myths of creativity. Academy of Management Executive, 6, 40–47.Google Scholar

Barron, F. X. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

Barroso, J.-M. (2009). Message to the European Commission Conference: Can creativity be measured? Brussels, May 2009.

Benjamin, D. & Simon, S. (2002). The age of sacred terror. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Boden, M. A. (1994). Introduction. In Boden, M. A. (Ed.), Dimensions of creativity (pp. 1–8). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Burghardt, M. D. (1995). Introduction to the engineering profession, 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Buzan, A. (2007). Foreword. In Lundin, S. C. and Tan, J. (Eds.), CATS: The nine lives of innovation (pp. iv–viii). Spring Hill, Queensland, Australia: Management Press.Google Scholar

Cattell, R. B. & Butcher, H. J. (1968). The prediction of achievement and creativity. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar

Cropley, A. J. (1997). Creativity: A bundle of paradoxes. Gifted and Talented International, 12, 8–14.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cropley, D. H. (2005). Eleven principles of creativity and terrorism. Science, Engineering & Technology Summit on Counter-Terrorism Technology, 4th Homeland Security Summit and Homeland Exposition, Canberra.

Cropley, D. H. & Cropley, A. J. (2005). Engineering creativity: A systems concept of functional creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. and Baer, J. (Eds.), Faces of the muse: How people think, work and act creatively in diverse domains (pp. 169–185). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (2008). Elements of a universal aesthetic of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, 3, 155–161.Google Scholar

Cropley, D. H., Kaufmann, J., & Cropley, A. J. (2008). Malevolent creativity: A functional model of creativity in terrorism and crime. Creativity Research Journal, 20, 105–115.CrossRef Google Scholar

Quarterly, Economist Technology. (2002). Thanksgiving for innovation. Economist Technology Quarterly, September 21, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

Florida, R. (2004). America's looming creativity crisis. Harvard Business Review, 82, 122–136.Google Scholar PubMed

Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Heinelt, G. (1974). Kreative Lehrer/kreative Schüler [Creative teachers/creative students]. Freiburg: Herder.Google Scholar

Horenstein, M. N. (2002). Design concepts for engineers, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

James, K., Clark, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Positive and negative creativity in groups, institutions, and organizations: A model and theoretical extension. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 211–227.CrossRef Google Scholar

Koberg, D. & Bagnall, J. (1991). The universal traveler: A soft systems guide to creativity, problem solving and the process of reaching goals. Menlo Park, CA: Crisp Publications.Google Scholar

McLaren, R. B. (1993). The dark side of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 137–144.CrossRef Google Scholar

McMullan, W. E. (1978). Creative individuals: Paradoxical personages. Journal of Creative Behavior, 10, 265–275.CrossRef Google Scholar

Martindale, C. (1989). Personality, situation, and creativity. In Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R., and Reynolds, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 211–228). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Maslow, A. H. (1973). Creativity in self-actualizing people. In Rothenberg, A. and Hausman, C. R. (Eds.), The creative question (pp. 86–92). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

May, R. (1976). The courage to create. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar

Plucker, J. A. & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 35–61). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305–310.Google Scholar

Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Runco, M. (1991). Divergent thinking. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar

Shaw, M. P. (1989). The Eureka process: A structure for the creative experience in science and engineering. Creativity Research Journal, 2, 286–298.CrossRef Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1962). Goals for guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.CrossRef Google Scholar

Torrance, E. P. (1963). Education and the creative potential. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar