Creative synthesis

Abstract: As a synthesis of organization theory and historiography, the field of organizational history is mature enough to contribute to wider theoretical and historiographical debates and is sufficiently developed for a theoretical consideration of its subject matter. In this introduction to the Special Topic Forum on History and Organization Studies, we take up the question, “What is organizational history?” and consider three distinct arguments that we believe frame the next phase of development for historical work within organization studies. First, we argue that following the “historic turn,” organizational history has developed as a subfield of organization studies that takes seriously the matter of history, promoting historical research as a way to enrich the broad endeavor of organization. Second, if “history matters,” then organization theory needs a theoretical account of the past that goes beyond the mere use of history as a context to test or as an example to illustrate theory. Third, the focus on “his...

Abstract: One of the aims of Culture & Psychology has always been to synthesize past ideas in order to enhance the tools we use to look at the phenomena we want to understand. In order to do so, we also need to understand the approaches our intellectual forefathers applied. The present article brings to light a ‘forgotten’ approach to studying people bound by common language, myth and customs. Volkerpsychologie is the historical predecessor to cultural psychology; however, readers not familiar with the history of psychology may not know what this ‘forgotten’ discipline attempted to achieve. The article focuses on Volkerpsychologie as its founders, Lazarus and Steinthal, conceived of it (including the often overlooked continuation of their journal after 1890), as well as Wilhelm Wundt’s considerable contributions to the discipline. Possible new directions for this approach are suggested in order to make it more suitable for 21st-century cultural psychology.

Abstract: For the last 5 years, four American journals have been the venue for a vigorous debate concerning the appropriate research method for social work. The issues underlying the debate extend well beyond methodology and reflect a broader paradigmatic debate between empiricism and normativism. This debate is extremely important to the future direction of the profession. While the debate remains unresolved in these journals, some movement toward constructive syntheses is possible. Three syntheses are briefly discussed. They are the critical, new paradigm, and creative paradigms.

Abstract: Sarah Harvey has developed an important model called creative synthesis for the use of dialectical reasoning in creative endeavors. This model is put in direct opposition to the evolutionary model called random variation, which, according to Harvey, promotes incremental innovation, while creative synthesis promotes radical innovation. In emphasizing the affirmative stage of the dialectical process, creative synthesis offers a description of how groups can be consistently successful in creative endeavors through collective attention, enabling ideas, and building on similarities. We propose that creative synthesis is not a rival to but an extension of random variation and that the same dialectical reasoning used by Harvey allows us to integrate the two models into a more versatile hybrid: evolutionary synthesis. We contend that the hybrid model better reflects the complexity of reality and avoids the problem of routinization. It appears that innovation is all about Darwin and Marx.