Organizational creativity – Hegemonic and alternative discourses

SUMMARY Organizational creativity – hegemonic and alternative discourses Over the course of recent developments in the societal and business environment, the concept of creativity has been brought into new arenas. The rise of ‘creative industries’ and the idea of creativity as a form of capital have attracted the interests of business and management professionals – as well as academics. As the notion of creativity has been adopted in the organization studies literature, the concept of organizational creativity has been introduced to refer to creativity that takes place in an organizational context. This doctoral thesis focuses on organizational creativity, and its purpose is to explore and problematize the hegemonic organizational creativity discourse and to provide alternative viewpoints for theorizing about creativity in organizations. Taking a discourse theory approach, this thesis, first, provides an outline of the currently predominant, i.e. hegemonic, discourse on organizational creativity, which is explored regarding themes, perspectives, methods and paradigms. Second, this thesis consists of five studies that act as illustrations of certain alternative viewpoints. Through these exemplary studies, this thesis sheds light on the limitations and taken-for-granted aspects of the hegemonic discourse and discusses what these alternative viewpoints could offer for the understanding of and theorizing for organizational creativity. This study leans on an assumption that the development of organizational creativity knowledge and the related discourse is not inevitable or progressive but rather contingent. The organizational creativity discourse has developed in a certain direction, meaning that some themes, perspectives, and methods, as well as assumptions, values, and objectives, have gained a hegemonic position over others, and are therefore often taken for granted and considered valid and relevant. The hegemonization of certain aspects, however, contributes to the marginalization of others. The thesis concludes that the hegemonic discourse on organizational creativity is based on an extensive coverage of certain themes and perspectives, such as those focusing on individual cognitive processes, motivation, or organizational climate and their relation to creativity, to name a few. The limited focus on some themes and the confinement to certain prevalent perspectives, however, results in the marginalization of other themes and perspectives. The negative, often unintended, consequences, implications, and side effects of creativity, the factors that might hinder or prevent creativity, and a deeper inquiry into the ontology and epistemology of creativity have attracted relatively marginal interest. The material embeddedness of organizational creativity, in other words, the physical organizational environment as well as the human body and its non-cognitive resources, has largely been overlooked in the hegemonic discourse, although thereare studies in this area that give reason to believe that they might prove relevant for the understanding of creativity. The hegemonic discourse is based on an individual-centered understanding of creativity which overattributes creativity to an individual and his/her cognitive capabilities, while simultaneously neglecting how, for instance, the physical environment, artifacts, social dynamics and interactions condition organizational creativity. Due to historical reasons, quantitative as well as qualitative yet functionally- oriented studies have predominated the organizational creativity discourse, although studies falling into the interpretationist paradigm have gradually become more popular. The two radical paradigms, as well as methodological and analytical approaches typical of radical research, can be considered to hold a marginal position in the field of organizational creativity. The hegemonic organizational creativity discourse has provided extensive findings related to many aspects of organizational creativity, although the con- ceptualizations and understandings of organizational creativity in the hegemonic discourse are also in many respects limited and one-sided. The hegemonic discourse is based on an assumption that creativity is desirable, good, necessary, or even obligatory, and should be encouraged and nourished. The conceptualiza- tions of creativity favor the kind of creativity which is useful, valuable and can be harnessed for productivity. The current conceptualization is limited to the type of creativity that is acceptable and fits the managerial ideology, and washes out any risky, seemingly useless, or negative aspects of creativity. It also limits the possible meanings and representations that ‘creativity’ has in the respective discourse, excluding many meanings of creativity encountered in other discourses. The excessive focus on creativity that is good, positive, productive and fits the managerial agenda while ignoring other forms and aspects of creativity, however, contributes to the dilution of the notion. Practices aimed at encouraging the kind of creativity may actually entail a risk of fostering moderate alterations rather than more radical novelty, as well as management and organizational practices which limit creative endeavors, rather than increase their likelihood. The thesis concludes that although not often given the space and attention they deserve, there are alternative conceptualizations and understandings of organizational creativity which embrace a broader notion of creativity. The inability to accommodate the ‘other’ understandings and viewpoints within the organizational creativity discourse runs a risk of misrepresenting the complex and many-sided phenomenon of creativity in organizational context. Keywords: Organizational creativity, creativity, organization studies, discourse theory, hegemony

Aurinkovoimalaitoksen mitoittaminen suunnitteilla olevaan kerrostaloon

Aurinkopaneelien ja inverttereiden hinnat ovat laskeneet viime vuosina, joten au-rinkosähköstä on tullut kannattava sähköntuotantomuoto kiinteistöille. Tässä kandidaatintyössä kerrotaan, kuinka arvioida suunnitteilla olevan rakennuksen peruskuormaa aurinkopaneeleiden asennuksen näkökulmasta. Voimalaitoksen sijoituskohde sijaitsee Järvenpäässä. Kohteessa on 69 huoneistoa 8 kerroksessa ja yhteiset tilat 9. kerroksessa. Voimalaitoksen kannattavuutta tutkitaan simuloimalla tuotantoja ja arvioimalla kulutusta. Tuotantoja simuloidaan HOMER-ohjelmistolla. Rakennuksen kulutusta arvioidaan suunnittelijoilta saatujen tietojen perusteella, ja vanhempien samankaltaisten kohteiden kulutusten perusteella, jotka saadaan Nuuka-portaalista. Saaduista tuloksista huomataan, että nykyisillä sähkönhinnoilla aurinkopaneelit ovat kannattava investointi, vaikka sähköä tuotettaisiin hieman ylimääräistä, joten paneelit voidaan mitoittaa hieman kulutusta suuremmaksi. Takaisinmaksuaika on noin 20 vuotta. Tulokset ovat linjassa vanhempien tutkimusten kanssa. Tuloksista huomataan, myös että paneeleita jakamalla eri ilmansuuntiin saadaan tuotannon huipputeho pienemmäksi ja samalla tuotanto jakautumaan laajemmalle ajanjaksolle. Paneelien hintojen laskettua on kannattavaa asentaa paneeleja epäedullisempiin suuntiin, täten saadaan tuotantoa ajoitettua mahdollisesti paremmin kulutus-ta vastaavaksi. Mitoituksen voi tarkistaa rakennuksen valmistuttua, sillä raken-nuksesta tullaan mittaamaan paneeleiden tuottama sähkö ja kohteen kiinteistösähkönkulutus.