This study questions the coupling of "intellectual" with "capital" and the assumption that such a coupling legitimises measurement. It suggests this coupling presents intellectual capital as an uncontested construction that attracts a broad audience.However, this study lays bare intellectual capital by revealing its contestability and multiple meanings using rational and non-rational management perspectives as examples. Such contestability can be seen both as a strength and weakness in making intellectual capital a meaningful or meaningless construction. Using a metalectic framework, a process is presented that exposes a variety of attitudes of mind so that the integration of rational and non-rational management perspectives becomes a possibility. Using this framework, intellectual labour is captured operating within an eco-work system, which relies on the human attributes of independency and interdependency working simultaneously. It suggests that intellectual capital can only indicate a direction when imagination, creativity and learning are at work. The intention is not to provide yet another management model that will control or change people's behaviours. This paper simply presents an alternative thinking process that accommodates a variety of attitudes of mind and argues that such a process is more appropriate than what is currently on offer if intellectual capital is to become more meaningful.
Purpose -The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate ways in which collective creativity and individual creativity exist in an "and/both" rather than in an "either/or" relationship.Design / methodology approach -This study uses and interrelates a number of dualities using "metalectics", the principal task of which is to balance seemingly conflicting opposites by revealing them and locating them on their strengths.Findings -Collective creativity, as a bridging metaphor, renders itself as an oxymoron, both literally and as an outcome: where individual and collective creativity are dichotomised, diversity is treated as a constraint, and collaboration is confused with coordination. Research limitations/implications -An essential of creativity is deviancy, and that this has to be valued to bring about change.Practical implications -Heterogeneous communities of practice should not be confused with homogenous communities of practice because this causes artificial dialogues that destroy the very creativity they claim to ignite.Originality/value -The paper offers an alternative way of thinking, arguing for a move away from simplified, unbalanced perspectives of creativity that focus on onedimensionality and asymmetry.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.