Content uploaded by Tore Kristensen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tore Kristensen on Mar 06, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Physical Context of Creativity
Tore Kristensen1
Creative processes are complex and consist of sub-processes, e.g. value creation, scaffolding,
imagination and materialization. Creativity takes place in a physical context, i.e. in a confined
space. Such space restricts and enables the free flow of sensory experiences and proximity of
other people. The confinements may make certain sensory experiences available, e.g. vision
of source material, sight and sound (including noise). This framing allows certain cognitive
processes and restricts others. This may induce emotions that, in turn, facilitate or reduce the
enhancement of creativity. Physical space affects the well-being of people, the channels of
information, the availability of knowledge tools and sets the stage for coherence and conti-
nuity, which may contribute to competitive advantages.
Creativity
Acreative individual is somebody who
actively seeks new knowledge, who is moti-
vated by curiosity and who wants to achieve
something. Creative individuals are also able
to sustain ambiguity and stay in a state of
‘indecision’ for longer than others, and may
show a risk-taking attitude. While these char-
acteristics may be true, they should not
be exaggerated. Csikzentmihaly’s (1996)
interviews with over 100 people, especially
selected for achievements at Nobel Prize level,
indicate that lifestyle and being in the right
place at the right time play a major role in cre-
ativity. To know when and where the right
time and place indicates that factors outside
the creative individual are at play. This means
the creative person must match with the field
of experts and the domain of knowledge.
Wallas (1926) introduced a phase model,
which has been used and referred to as an
anchor point of creativity ever since
(Csikszentmihaly & Sawyer, 1995). The model
serves as a good guideline for how a creative
process may consist of different phases. In the
phase model, the first phase is preparation, the
second is incubation followed by insight and
lastly, elaboration and evaluation. We will inspect
these, before describing relations between the
creative processes and the spatial dimensions.
THE PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF CREATIVITY 89
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004. 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4
2DQ and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA. Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004
Introduction
Companies can generate more good ideas
by using the physical space more dili-
gently. By using the choice of place and space,
creative processes may be facilitated. The cre-
ativity literature (e.g. Csikszentmihaly, 1996;
Sternberg & Davidson, 1996) presents many
good examples of individual people’s creative
habits and launches the general argument
that space means a lot for people’s emotional
well-being, which in turn is fundamental for
creative work. In the business literature, cre-
ativity is highlighted, whereas space is hardly
ever mentioned. In the cognitive literature
(e.g. Kirsh, 2001), some ideas on workspace in
general are presented. In architectural litera-
ture, Alexander, Ishikawa and Silverstein
(1977, p. 847) shows how a good workspace
might be designed, but presents little theoret-
ical explanation. Yet there is inspiration to find
in this literature. So far, there is limited knowl-
edge on how the physical space actually
enhances creativity.
The article is organized as follows: the next
section addresses creativity including the con-
ventional phase models. The third section
explores spatial concepts. The fourth section
defines embodied cognition and reframes the
concept of creativity. This leads to further elab-
orations and ways of juxtaposing the nature of
creativity into four different processes in the
fifth section, where we also discuss spatial
requirements. The final section contains a dis-
cussion and conclusion.
1The author wishes to express warm thanks to
Kjell Grønhaug for his generous support.
The Preparation Stage
The general issue of this stage is to facilitate
data and information for the process. Such sit-
uations differ, as both a single individual as
well as a team may conduct the preparation.
Space for organizing the information and
easy retrieval is essential. It is vital for team
members to exchange frameworks, to set the
common goals and stage the remaining
process. The spatial arrangement must
support as much information flow and
absorption as possible to each member. The
tools, like personal computers, bulletin boards
and general access to information are impor-
tant both for individuals and for teams.
Communal space seems important for teams.
Sometimes a private space is essential for
analysis, both by individuals and team
members. The length of this phase can vary –
depending on when the team reaches a barrier,
fatigue or leaves the assignment.
The Incubation Stage
In the incubation stage, the cognitive
processes seem to be essentially a personal or
private affair. Incubation can happen when
people change to other assignments or simply
relax from a previous one, but the cognitive
process of problem solving goes on implicitly.
The literature on incubation only refers to
individual cognitive processes, (Dorfman,
Shames & Kihlstrom, 1997). Despite this, it
seems likely that ‘distributed cognition’
happens because perceptual clues are shared
among team members (Hutchins, 1995). In
such cases, the team members need a medium
of communication e.g. a bulletin board
(Reddy, 2002) or any other cognitive artefact
(Gedenryd, 1998). Some creative people are
best left to themselves in the incubation stage,
while others seek company. Incubation is an
implicit cognitive process, but perceptual
clues may facilitate the process. Staying in the
room where all the information from the
preparation stage is kept may facilitate such
implicit perception as a process of ‘priming’.
The Insight Stage
Insight (or illumination) is a ‘flash’ that occurs
when the winning concept cuts across the bar-
riers of consciousness. Accounts of insights are
often reported as idiosyncratic, and it may not
matter much where it takes place (Hadamard,
1945).
Elaboration and Evaluation
We shall compare the results with the goals of
the preparation stage where the value creation
is at the centre. In this context, thorough analy-
sis and evaluation are necessary in order to
see if the desired goals and values are met.
Contextually, this stage must resemble the pre-
paration stage, as the operations are similar.
While the preparation stage starts with a brief-
ing, the elaboration and evaluation stages end
with a debriefing and implementation. While
we can assume how space may increase
creativity, there are no aspects of this in the
theories.
Spatial Concepts
Concepts of space are often thought of in ‘ver-
nacular’ terms, because of the difficulty of
their articulation (Hillier, 1996). Even archi-
tects have only recently developed a scientific
language for space (Hillier, 1996). The most
basic concept when dealing with space must
be that of place. The position and extent of the
place must be established before the particu-
lars of space matter (Nordberg-Schulz, 1970).
‘Place’ refers to the physical extent or territo-
riality, whether in the home or at work. The
‘dwelling’, signifying the locus one returns to,
is important, as this is the foundation for an
identity within the whole organization. Space
is the ‘built environment’ and includes shelter,
confinement and protection (Lawrence & Low,
1990, p. 454).
‘Built form’ also refers to specific elements
(e.g. doors, windows, roofs, floors and chim-
neys) as well as sub-divisions of buildings
(e.g. rooms, arrangements and connections)
referred as ‘configurations’ (Hillier, 1996,
p. 33). There are several concepts of space
(Nordberg-Schulz, 1970). Although the con-
cepts of physical, perceptual and phenomeno-
logical space differ analytically, in most
situations these concepts must be seen in rela-
tion. Architects and builders create the physi-
cal space, but the space we use is founded on
what we perceive. Physical space is the foun-
dation of the perceived space that affords
opportunities for our activities. Physical space
is the objective and the perceived space is
the subjective aspects of the same space.
Other variables are paths, connecting spaces
or spaces naturally leading to movement or in
a certain direction. Paths guide much auto-
matic behaviour (Bargh & Barndollar, 1996),
since we usually follow them without effort or
conscious decisions, which is an important
aspect of how space directs behaviour. The
density of the place can be important as it
means that people move closer to or further
away from each other, the so-called ‘prox-
emics’ dimension (Hall, 1968). Density is
usually not a homogenous phenomenon. High
90 CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004 © Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004
density may result in more intense interaction,
e.g. when people brainstorm. On the other
hand, when people get too close, the space
becomes crowded (Baldassare, 1978).
Norberg-Schulz (1970, p. 17) defines space
as ‘a relatively stable system of schemata’,
where these schemata can be logical, prag-
matic, perceptual, cognitive, emotional or exis-
tential. A number of spatial dimensions are
important. One is configuration, which has
a quantitative aspect and can be defined
formally:
If we define spatial relations as existing
when there is any type of link-say adjacency
or permeability-between two spaces, then
configuration exists when relations be-
tween two spaces are changed according to
how we relate one or other or both to at
least one other space. (Hillier, 1996, p. 33,
96ff).
When we consider two adjacent rooms and
a situation where a person comes from the
outside and enters one of the adjacent rooms,
it becomes clear why configuration matters.
If you have to pass through one to get to
the other, the configuration is asymmetrical.
This means that it is possible to grade rooms
according to access. Some rooms are accessible
from outside and allow strangers to enter.
Others require more doors and are restricted
to privacy. The issue is both practical and cul-
tural. Few cultures allow a stranger coming
from outside to enter the intimate rooms of a
home or a shop. Buildings in most of the world
have graded accessibility to rooms, marking
the level of intimacy from the outside. Typi-
cally, there will be a communal space that
strangers are invited into first, which is also
the room that provides access to most of the
other rooms in the house. This quantitative
aspect is measured by the simple means of a j-
graph and shown as simple branch or network
models (Hillier, 1996, pp. 35, 99). The configu-
rations can be characterized as form, e.g. cen-
tralized, linear, radial, clustered and grid
(Ching, 1996, p. 57), which all offer a variety
of usages.
The other important characteristic is quali-
tative. This is more complex, and this is where
the real challenge is. Many experiences and
emotions are attributed to space (Baldassare,
1978). Particularly relevant for our purpose
is the connection made between space and
imagination. Aristotle made use of the spatial
term topos (Nordberg-Schulz, 1970), which is
similar in meaning to Newell and Simons’
(1972) term ‘problem space’, meaning a dis-
course. Physical space is correlated with cog-
nitive space. This is a metaphorical relation,
where the physical space gives form to cogni-
tion. Our objective is to identify what qualities
in the outer space feed into an effective inner
creative process.
Embodied Cognition and Creativity
Creative processes are mental, and have been
the object of research among the early cogni-
tive scientists, e.g. Newell and Simon (1973).
The aim of that research was to develop a
metaphor resembling a computer image of the
brain. Although this research was successful
for many years, criticism has recently emerged
claiming that the research programme ignored
context (Clark, 1997; Haugeland, 1995; Hurley,
1998). In contrast, their view assumes that cog-
nition and emotion integrate body and mind,
and that it cannot be regarded as an activity
apart from the physical reality and body of the
thinking and feeling subject. Much cognitive
activity is ‘situated’, that is, it happens ‘on-
line’ when challenges are met and action is
required. This does not mean that planning
and reflection are not happening or that they
are not very important. It means that even
when the best planning has been conducted,
the reality of the situation is a direct force that
must be accommodated in real time and with
complex feedback. Hurley (1998) uses the
following metaphor:
the circus performer who puts the handle of
a dagger in her mouth, tips her head back,
balances a sword by its point on the point
of the dagger, and with the whole kit bal-
anced above her head magisterially climbs
a ladder, swings her legs over the top rung,
and climbs back down the other side of the
ladder. Each move she makes is both the
source of and exquisitely dependent on
multiple internal and external channels of
sensory and motor-signal feedback, the
complex calibrations of which have been
honed by years of practice. An only slightly
less intricate structure of dynamic feedback
relations knits the nervous system of a nor-
mally active organism into its environment.
(Hurley, 1998, p. 2)
Much cognitive work is ‘situated’, once we are
there, we must act out the plan and make all
kinds of situational adaptations as problems
occur. Often, things happen so fast that only
automatic responses (Bargh & Barndollar,
1996) and emotions (LeDoux, 1998) are fast
enough. Creativity is a process that brings new
knowledge, that is, previously unrelated ele-
ments of knowledge that are synthesized
bring new insight through a mental process.
There seem to be four sub-processes, ‘layered’
into each other, which connect with each other
THE PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF CREATIVITY 91
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004 Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004
in a variety of ways. Each of these processes
goes through the four phases of the Wallas
model, but not equally strong. They run partly
simultaneously and partly one of the
processes dominates, according to which
phase of the Wallas model we are in. The
processes are:
•value creation processes;
•scaffolding;
•imagination processes;
•materialization processes.
Value Creation Processes
Value creation penetrates the whole process
as the goal of creative endeavour. A critical
element of innovation in business companies
(Christensen, 1997) is that the process takes
place in close co-operation with the value
chains of the company. An innovation is a
reconfiguration of value chains and if innova-
tions are detached, i.e. done independently of
implementation, implementation may jeop-
ardize the innovation and no new value or
exploitation will be realized.
Scaffolding
‘Scaffolding’ means that a creative process
is designed within a context of space, tools,
people and information. This usually takes
place at the beginning of the creative processes
in order to support the subsequent processes.
Any cognitive process goes on within a medi-
ating cultural and physical context. Cognitive
processes are ‘embodied, environmentally
embedded’ (Clark, 2001 p. 140). Humans
move around in the ‘creative space’ much like
we move around in a landscape. When this
happens, a ‘perceptual rehearsal’ is performed
(Ippolitto & Tweeney, 1995). This supports the
process of imagination, which accommodates
changes in concepts and adopts new ones. In
this process, people perceive sensory impres-
sions. Furthermore, the scaffolded environ-
ment becomes a part of the creative brain, and
an implicit factor that we only question where
we detect problems. Problems of sub-optimal
environments may be experienced only as
symptoms and as emotions can that impair the
creative output.
Haugeland (1995, p. 236) specifically asks
whether the context embodies the information
and knowledge created in cognitive tools and
processes of a laboratory. Any studio or labo-
ratory scaffolds its specific activities to match
their ways of creative working (Kelley, 2001).
The first spatial issue is that of shape or con-
figuration. The basic configurations are; cen-
tralized, linear, radial, clustered and grid
(Ching, 1996). At a very general level, the
activity that takes place must be facilitated by
the floor plan. Long corridors facilitate a hier-
archical organization with people in separated
rooms, whereas a flat structure is afforded by
open space where people interact at many
levels. For instance, people meet when their
paths cross. A forum or meeting place enables
many people to interact simultaneously.
Narrow paths that only allow sequential pas-
sages reduce interaction (Sundstrom, Herbert
& Brown, 1982). The linear space may appear
tidy and well-ordered, but it is difficult for
a group of people to assemble to discuss
preparations or feed new information into the
system. This is best done when a circular struc-
ture can be realized. Often, meeting rooms or
lecture theatres are used in sharing informa-
tion. But these are usually intended to com-
municate the ideas from one person to an
audience, not the audience sharing informa-
tion. Thus a centralized or radial shape seems
more appropriate, in the sense that communal
space can be realized at the centre of the cre-
ative space. Often there will be a centre, where
communal tools may be placed, e.g. storage
of vital information, earlier successes, etc. In
situations where multiple disciplines work
together, the need for a central location and
information system may be vital. IDEO
Product Development (Kelley, 2001) has such
facilities.
More advanced forms, such as clusters or
grids, may improve the space, allowing
special attention to be given to the specific
requirements of tools, e.g. visual or prototyp-
ing. A creative space should allow the peculi-
arities of the present disciplines to deal with
the particulars, while enabling communal
space for intensive exchanges and collabora-
tion. The design studio is a good model, as
many designers like to design their work-
space. Symmetries are often preferred for
aesthetical reasons, but often functionality and
variation is facilitated by asymmetry. An
asymmetric space may also be more challeng-
ing and present an exciting atmosphere.
When two planes are vertically in parallel,
they can provide different configurations and
allow paths to include both horizontal and
vertical movements (Ching, 1996, p. 143). A
grid structure can thus be obtained and allow
both effectiveness and flexibility. A good cre-
ative space seems to contain challenges to the
inhabitants and a part of its use. At first sight,
the studio of the Finnish architect Alvar Aalto
seems to be quite simple, but in reality it is not
(Ching, 1996, p. 138). The space is basically L-
shaped, which promotes functionality. The
Finnish architect Aalto brings the outdoor area
into the picture with an amphitheatre for lec-
92 CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004 © Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004
tures and social occasions in the surrounding
garden. This is visible from the windows and
brings a dynamic into the space that asserts its
potential circular form and sense of commu-
nity. Often, space developed for other pur-
poses, e.g. sacral space, seems to afford
creativity. In such space, the religious activities
are usually centred where the community can
surround the rituals and share them. Similar
activities seem to be a part of the process of
creativity and should therefore be similar.
Imagination
In the creative processes the imaginative is
sought, that which did not exist before. Real
imagination is concerned with new insights.
In a creative process, imagination may be
intense, but with short duration. The concept
imagination (Brann, 1991; Johnson, 1987)
stands for the integration of knowledge into
coherent and unified representations over
time. These should be in the form of
‘schemata’ that mediate between abstract con-
cepts, contents of sensory experiences and the
creative, free, open-ended activities by which
we achieve new ways of experiencing and
accommodating the exiting structure of
knowledge to integrate new knowledge. This
is obvious if the outcome is a physical object,
but even a service or system must be docu-
mented e.g. using visual and verbal descrip-
tions (Horn, 1998).
Imagination is the representation of what
does not yet exist. To imagine is to envision or
create. Imagination is a dramatic human capa-
bility and a way for changes (Brann, 1991,
p. 23ff). Imagination, as the word’s etymolog-
ical origin suggests, is having a picture in the
‘mind’s eye’. Some of the definitions include
‘to abstract or extract from multiple ideas and
compound them into one’ or ‘the human capa-
bility to find analogies’. Lakoff and Johnson
(1999) bring metaphors – cross-domain map-
pings – to the foreground of imagination.
According to them, creativity is the recombi-
nation of existing elements of knowledge or
symbolic representations. Herbert Simon’s
(1996, p. 111) definition of design raises the
issue of imagination. He distinguished
between the logics of ‘what ought to be’ in
contrast to ‘what there is’. Filling this gap is
the role of design and, according to Simon, the
solution is heuristic research, which is equal to
imagining.
The history of creative processes has
explained how their creative thinking was
visual (Feynmann, 1985; Hadamard, 1945).
Crick and Watson (Gick & Lockhart, 1995,
p. 214) similarly ‘saw’ the double helix of DNA
after their own and others’ constant remodel-
ling of the moleculcular structure. The work-
space is found in design studios, and laborato-
ries are filled with images, artifacts and
models. Sometimes ‘odd artefacts’ such as a
DC 3 wing finds its way into existence because
it ‘must be there’ (Kelley, 2001). Such space is
usually personalized and people design it
themselves. The idea of sharing workspace
and leaving a clean desk with no personal
belongings seems to create a sterile environ-
ment that inhibits imagination. What seems to
facilitate creativity is personal and idiosyn-
cratic. Only flexibility can make this happen.
Materialization
Finally, the materialization process transforms
concepts into material objects. Concepts must
be made to sensory experiences. A doctrine
held high in the IDEO Product Development
company is ‘rush to prototypes’ (Kelley, 2001).
It means whenever possible an idea or concept
should be materialized. This is in accordance
with the embodied cognitive theory (Clark,
1997). The idea of ‘wideware’ is that the envi-
ronment facilitates a cognitive process, where
space, surfaces, objects (artefacts) are part of
the apparatus and interact with the biological
brain in a concerted way. Some cognitive
processes are sometimes only possible when
externalized. The lack of visual clues reduces
the memory, although memory techniques
may facilitate it. Brann (1991, p. 282ff) claims
that memory is facilitated by using space – and
by internalizing experiences in a spatial-
temporal setting. Memory is sometimes facili-
tated by the impressions of a particular place.
This could be due to different sensory impres-
sions. Many people, when they forget some-
thing head back to the last place they could
remember what it was about. We can general-
ize from this and use the environment sys-
tematically to stimulate memory creativity. A
simple way of materializing is sketching and
using diagrammatic methods, visual models
and tangible objects. Therefore, availability of
tools for prototyping and models is important.
Some companies rent design studios for the
purpose of immediate availability of work-
shop facilities.
While it was not Newell and Simon’s (1973)
intention to connect workspace and problem
space, we make the connection because the
two are natural extensions of each other when
we consider embodied and embedded cogni-
tion. In particular, when we consider space for
design work and research laboratories, this
makes sense. Creative people externalize the
mental constructs in order to work better with
them. Other studies (Kirsh, 1995, 2001) also
account for the importance of physical space
THE PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF CREATIVITY 93
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004 Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004
in work processes. In the end, value creation
must be material to be implemented in pro-
duction, whether products or services.
Table 1 shows how the concepts of spatial
embodiment and creativity processes work
together.
ACase
Abig pharmaceutical company was in a
process of developing new devices for their
hormones. Having been one of the leaders in
the field, the company decided that in order to
improve their competitiveness, they had to
integrate syringes for delivery of this particu-
lar hormone, aimed at the growth of children.
The process they were aiming for was to
follow a ‘Wallas-type’ creative process (Wallas,
1926). Early explorations led to the idea that
since the new product was not strongly con-
nected to the existing (pharmaceutical)
product lines, there was no particular reason
to expect that the development would benefit
from proximity to the pharmaceutical re-
search, and it was decided that the develop-
ment team find their own space. Available
space in the company is ordinary linear office
space. Small rectangular offices were located
in a sequential fashion like a typical office or
hospital building. It was evident that walls
could be put down and offices combined to
form larger rectangular shapes. This was not
found to be very attractive since the develop-
ment team, consisting of engineers, product
designers, a marketing and brand expert and
a user research expert wanted a centre of
gravity where the project was physically
anchored. Instead, a design studio was com-
missioned on a part time (one to two days a
week) basis to serve the space. The vicinity of
the city centre, with easy access to city life
and nice panoramic views may influence the
process as well as the variation of changing
spaces for one or two days a week. It is diffi-
cult to isolate the affect of place versus space,
but we assume space is the most important
factor.
The studio consists of one big room and
several workshops located in a ‘clustered’
fashion. The big room is at the centre of the
design studio and paths go in radial manners
out from this central location. Since the studio
could only be used one to two days per week
on a regular basis it was not possible to make
fixed installations. Everything had to be flexi-
ble to allow other applications. The centre con-
sists of two large tables with drawing facilities
and computers. The space is large compared
to the limited number of people and crowding
is not an issue. The colours are light and the
walls and floor filled with objects and models.
In the preparation phase, the space was fur-
nished with a bulletin boards, flat tabletops,
drawers and filing cabinets for localization of
specification, progress reports and sketches.
Computers with CAD were present in the
studio, as were metal and wood workshops,
94 CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004 © Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004
Table 1. Embodied Creative Processes
Preparation Incubation Insight Elaboration and
evaluation
Value creation Guiding principle Guiding Guiding Guiding principle
principle principle and benchmark
Scaffolding Physical Subject to No particular No particular role
organization of altering and role
process manipulation
Imagination Perceptual Perceptual The moment No particular role
rehearsal rehearsal of novelty
accumulates accumulates
information information
Materialization Preparation No particular A new The material object or
includes tools for role concept, artefact is subject of
materialization solution or elaboration and
artefact is evaluation
material or
sensory
very close to the main location. Competing
products and other relevant props were dis-
played on shelves surrounding the room.
The work in this phase consisted of a lot of
brainstorming. The individual participants
prepared themselves, mainly at their own
workspace home in the company. Asked why,
the answer was that this was routine work,
and for that purpose the existing structure
served well.
The incubation phase was not experienced
as a real transition. The studio space provided
tranquility and this was supported by suffi-
cient space and light colours, availability of
many objects, both familiar and strange. The
view to outside where people would pass, sit
for drinks in the sun provided a continual
variation of view, very different from the one
at the company site. Incubation just happened
between weeks of intensive collaboration.
It must be stated that this innovation is above
all incremental. Novelty is needed and
patentability is an important issue, still the
process was incremental.
Insights were explained to happen in com-
munal sessions, where well-prepared experts
presented their revised studies for the others.
The close vicinity of the wood and metal
workshops enabled the innovators to jump to
simple models to explain the principles. The
recordings of previous sessions were always
present, easy to access and the bulletin board
and tables displayed previous attempts.
According to the company and the design-
ers who manage the studio the process is very
successful and the collaboration has lasted for
several years. This gives an accumulation of
recorded material and experience which itself
is useful. It seems that the changing place may
be a factor, since isolation from disturbances
may be a factor. The inconvenience of bring-
ing information from the company to the
studio goes in a contrary direction. Most of
the effects should be due to the spatial
issues. Only seating arrangements have been
changed during sessions. Private space for
contemplation and concentration is available
and frequently used.
Conclusions
Alimitation in this study is the lack of
comparative situations. Csikzentmihalyi
(1996) raised this as a general issue in creative
studies. An experiment could be set up where
two teams are given similar assignments but
different spatial conditions. This means that
the case is only an example of how some com-
panies deliberately use physical space as a toll
in their creative pursuits. In this paper, we
have discussed the spatial requirements
during different stages of creative processes.
The article suggests that there are differences
in the requirements between the stages. The
preparation and elaboration stages typically
require a combination of communal and
private space. The incubation and insights
stages probably require more private space.
For example, useful information presented in
the nature of objects, artifacts, tables, images,
tabletops etc. can facilitate the process at an
implicit level.
References
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S. and Silverstein, M.
(1977) APattern Language Towns Buildings Con-
struction. New York, Oxford University Press.
Baldassare, M. (1978) Human Spatial Behavior.
Annual Review of Sociology, 4, 29–56.
Bargh, J. and Barndollar, K. (1996) Automacity in
Action: the Unconscious as Repository of Chronic
Goals and Motives. In Gollwitzer P.M. and Bargh
J.A. (eds), The Psychology of Action. The Guilford
Press, New York, pp. 3–51.
Brann, E.T.H. (1991) The World of Imagination Sum
and Substance Landham. Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers Inc, Maryland.
Ching, F.D.K. (1996) Architecture Form, Space, and
Order, 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New
York.
Christensen, C.M. (1997) The Innovators Dilemma
When New technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail.
Harvard Business School Press, Boston MA.
Clark, A. (1997) Being There: Bringing Brain, Body and
the World Together Again. MIT Press, Cambridge
MA.
Clark, A. (2001) Mindware An Introduction to the
Philosophy of Cognitive Science. Oxford University
Press, New York.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996) Creativity Flow and the
Psychology of Discovery and Invention. Harper
Collins, New York.
Csikszentmihaly, M. and Sawyer, K. (1995) Creative
Insight: The Social Dimension of a Solitary
Moment. In Sternberg, R.J. and Davidson, J.E.
(eds), The Nature of Insight. MIT Press, Cambridge
MA, pp. 329–63.
Dorfman, J., Shames, V.A. and Kihlstrom, J.F. (1997)
Intuition, incubation, and insight: Implicit
Cognition in Problem Solving. In Underwood,
G. (ed.), Implicit Cognition. Oxford Science
Publications, Oxford.
Feynman, R. (1985) Surely You are Joking Mr.
Feynman! Adventures of a Curious Character. New
York, Bantam Books.
Gedenryd, H. (1998) How Designers Work. PhD
dissertation, Lunds University, Lund, Sweden.
Gick, M. and Lockhart, R.S. (1995) Cognitive and
Affective Components of Insight. In Sternberg,
R.J. and Davidson, J.E. (eds), The Nature of Insight.
MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Hadamard, J. (1945) The Psychology of Invention in
the Mathematical Field. Dover, New York.
THE PHYSICAL CONTEXT OF CREATIVITY 95
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004 Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004
Hall, E.T. (1968) Proxemics. Current Anthropology,
9(2–3), 83–108.
Haugeland, J. (1995) Having Thought. MIT Press,
Cambridge MA.
Hillier, B. (1996) Space is the Machine, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Horn, R.E. (1998) Visual Language Global Communi-
cation for The 21st Century MacroVU, Inc.,
Bainbridge Island, Washington.
Hurley, S. (1998) Cognition in Action Cambridge.
Harvard University Press, Boston MA.
Hutchins, E. (1995) Cognition in the Wild. MIT Press,
Cambridge MA.
Ippolitto, M.F. and Tweeney, R.D. (1995) The Incep-
tion of Insight. In Sternberg, R.J. and Davidson,
J.E. (eds) The Nature of Insight. MIT Press,
Cambridge MA.
Johnson, M. (1987) The Body in The Mind The Bodily
Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. The
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Kelley, T. with J. Littman (2001) The Art of Innova-
tion Lessons in Creativity from IDEO, America’s
Leading Design Firm New York, A Currency Book.
Doubleday, New York.
Kirsh, D. (1995) The Intelligent Use of Space. Artifi-
cial Intelligence, 73, 31–68.
Kirsh, D. (2001) The Context of Work. Human Com-
puter Interaction, 16, 305–22.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999) Philosophy in the
Flesh the Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to
Western Thought. Basic Books, New York.
Lawrence, D.L. and Low, S.M. (1990) The Built
Environment and Spatial Form. Annual Review of
Anthropology, 19, 453–505.
LeDoux, J. (1998) The Emotional Brain. MacMillan,
New York.
Newell, A. and Simon, H. (1972) Human
Problem Solving. Prentice–Hall, Englewood Cliffs
NJ.
Nordberg-Schulz, C. (1970) Space, Existence and
Architecture. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Reddy, M.C., Dourish, P. and Pratt, W. (2003)
Coordinating Heterogenous Work: Information
and Representation in Medical Care. In Proceed-
ings of the European Conference on Computer Sup-
ported Cooperative Work (ECSW’01). Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Simon, H.A. (1996) Sciences of The Artificial, 3rd
edition. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Sternberg, R.J. and Davidson, J.E. (eds), The Nature
of Insight. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 329–
63.
Sundstrom, E., Herbert, R.K. and Brown, D.W.
(1982) Privacy and Communication in An Open-
plan Office: ACase Study. Environment and Behav-
ior, 14(3), May, 379–92.
Wallas, George (1926) The Art of Thought. Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, New York.
96 CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT
Volume 13 Number 2 June 2004 © Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2004
Tore Kristensen is at Copenhagen Business
School, Solbjerg Plads 3, DK-2000 Fred-
eriksberg C., Denmark.
E-mail: tk.marktg@cbs.dk