The aim of this paper is to set out a new position within the socio-material field of creativity research that puts a great emphasis on an ecological and social awareness. As part of a new research project on Creativity and Performance Pressure, the authors map recent contributions to the field of creativity research with an emphasis on socio-materiality. 25 studies are displayed to explore the relation between man, materials and making as creative doings. Based on the findings, the authors argue that an individualized and isolated understanding of creativity endorses a growth paradigm that increasingly challenges both the globe and the life upon it. Future investigations on creativity should aim to learn more about human relatedness and how it contributes to prosperity among all life forms. This leaves behind the isolated individualistic approach towards creativity and replaces it with an ethnographic-informed human curiosity towards social and situational responsiveness.
AnjoJ. E. d. S.TuretaC. (2022). The sociomateriality of the creative process: Script roles in film production. Journal of Creative Behavior, 56(4), 566–583. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.552
2.
ArendtH. (1958). The human condition. University of Chicago Press.
3.
BaradK. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321
4.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe half-way. Duke University Press.
5.
BasuM.BeghettoR. A. (2021). Technology as social-material mediator: From primary to secondary creativity and beyond. Creativity. Theories – Research - Applications, 8(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.2478/ctra-2021-0002
6.
BeauboisV. (2015). “7 design, assemblage and functionality”. In Deleuze and design (pp. 173–190). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748691555-008
7.
Beck & Rosa (2022). Escalating side effects. The transformation of modern society through processes of cosmopolitanization, acceleration and increasing global risks in the Routledge Handbook of Democracy and Sustainability (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429024085
8.
BennettJ. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Duke University Press.
Chakrabarty (2021). The climate of history in a planetary age (p. 91). Chicago University Press.
13.
ChappellK. (2018). From wise humanising creativity to (posthumanising) creativity. In SnepvangersK.ThomsonP.HarrisA. (Eds.), Creativity, education and the arts. Creativity policy, partnerships and practice in education (pp. 279–306). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96725-7_13
14.
ChiaR. (2003). From knowledge-creation to the perfecting of action: Tao, basho and pure experience as the ultimate ground of knowing. Human Relations, 56(8), 953–981. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267030568003
15.
CulpepperM. K.GauntlettD. (2021). Inviting everyday creators to make, think, and talk. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42(100933). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100933
16.
DaviesO.RiachK. (2018). Sociomateriality and qualitative research: Method, matter and meaning. In The Sage handbook of qualitative business and management research methods: Methods and challenges (p. 133). Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526430236.n9
17.
DespretV. (2022). Living as a bird[Habiter en oiseau (2019)] (H. Morrison Trans.). ([UK edition] ed.). Polity.
18.
DinhJ.LordR.GardnerW.MeuserJ.LidenR.HuJ. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005
19.
DuffC.SumartojoS. (2017). Assemblages of creativity: Material practices in the creative economy. Organization, 24(3), 418–432. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508416687765
20.
EinarssonÁ. M. (2021). Crafting, connecting, and commoning in everyday maker projects. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 156(102715). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102715.
21.
FenwichT. (2016). What matters in sociomateriality? In Towards a critical posthuman pedagogy in management education. (pp. 265–279). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315852430-27
GanderJ. M. (2015). Situating creative production: Recording studios and the making of a pop song. Management Decision, 53(4), 843–856. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2014-0165
24.
GauntlettD. (2018). Making is connecting: The social power of creativity, from craft and knitting to digital everything. Polity.
GlăveanuV. P. (2014). Thinking through creativity and culture: Towards an integrated model (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315135625
27.
GlăveanuV. P. (2020). A sociocultural theory of creativity: Bridging the social, the material, and the psychological. Review of General Psychology, 24(4), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268020961763
HarrisD. X.RousellD. (2022). Posthuman creativities: Pluralist ecologies and the question of how. Qualitative Inquiry, 28(5), 427–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004221080219
33.
HartC. (2005). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. Sage Publications.
34.
HultinL. (2019). On becoming a sociomaterial researcher: Exploring epistemological practices grounded in a relational, performative ontology. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.04.004
35.
HultinL.MähringM. (2017). How practice makes sense in healthcare operations: Studying sensemaking as performative, material-discursive practice. Human Relations, 70(5), 566–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726716661618
36.
HvidtfeldtD. L. (2018). Concerted creativity: Emergence in the Socio-(Im)Material and intangible practice of making music. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 52(2), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-017-9406-6
37.
Ilha VillanovaA. L.Pina e CunhaM. (2020). Everyday creativity: A systematic literature review. Journal of Creative Behavior, 55(3), 673–695. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.481
IngoldT. (2018). Toward a new humanism: On world anthropology. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 8(1–2), 158–171. https://doi.org/10.1086/698315
40.
JessonJ. K.MathesonL.LaceyF. M. (2011). Doing your literature review: Traditional and systematic techniques. Sage Publications.
41.
KimS. H.ZimmermanH. T. (2019, June). Understanding the practices and the products of creativity: Making and tinkering family program at informal learning environments. (pp. 246–252). Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on interaction design and Children.Association for Computing Machinery. ACMhttps://doi.org/10.1145/3311927.3323117
LatourB. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor–network theory. Oxford University Press.
44.
LatourB. (2017). Anti-zoom. In Tavel ClarkeM.WittenbergD. (Eds.), Scale in literature and culture, Geocriticism and spatial literary studies (pp. 93–101). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64242-0_
45.
LatourB. (2018). Down to earth: Politics in the new climatic regime (English edition ed.). Polity Press.
46.
LatourB.SchultzN. (2022). On the emergence of an ecological class: A memo. Polity Press.
LawJ. (1989). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In: , 111–35. In Bijker WE, Hughes TP and Pinch T (eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (pp. 111–135). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
LiteratI.GlăveanuV. P. (2018). Distributed creativity on the internet: A theoretical foundation for online creative participation. International Journal of Communication, 12(online), 893–908.
51.
Lund HvidtfeldtD.TanggaardL. (2018). Creativity as a meaningful, socio-(im)material practice: The emergence of Roskilde Festival. Culture & Psychology, 25(4), 544–558. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X18820653
52.
MainemelisC.KarkR.EpitropakiO. (2015). Creative leadership: A multi-context conceptualization. The Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 393–482. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2015.1024502
53.
Malou StrandvadS. (2011). Materializing ideas: A sociomaterial perspective on the organizing of cultural production. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 14(3), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549410396615
54.
MantaA. (2018). Demystifying creativity: AN assemblage perspective towards artistic creativity. Creativity Studies, 11(1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2018.542
MiettinenR. (2006). The sources of novelty: A cultural and systemic view of distributed creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(2), 173–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2006.00381.x
57.
MoeranB. (2014). The business of creativity: Toward an anthropology of worth. Left Coast Press.
58.
NussbaumM. C. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities (Paperback edition ed.). Princeton University Press.
59.
OdomW.WakkaryR. (2015). Intersecting with unaware objects. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 33–42). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2757226.2757240
60.
OhmanA. (2018). Twist and shape: Feedback practices within creative subject content of hairdressing education. Vocations and Learning, 11(3), 425–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-017-9196-5
PanourgiasN. S.NandhakumarJ.ScarbroughH. (2014). Entanglements of creative agency and digital technology: A sociomaterial study of computer game development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 83(March), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.010
ReckwitzA.Havemann TransT.udgave1. (2020). Kreativitetens opfindelse: om den samfundsmæssige æstetiseringsproces[die erfindung der Kreativität] (T. Havemann Trans.) (1. udgave ed.). Hans Reitzel.
66.
RisnerI.GauntlettD.CulpepperM. (2022). The elements of making: A social practice perspective for everyday creators. Creativity Studies, 15(2), 590–605. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2022.14489
67.
RosaH. (2019). Resonance: A sociology of the relationship to the world. Polity.
68.
RudnickiS. (2021). What are ideas made of? On the sociomateriality of creative processes. Creativity Studies, 14(1), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2021.13259
SmallC. (1998). Musicking: The meanings of performing and listening. Wesleyan University Press.
71.
Snake-BeingsE. (2020). The quiet earth: Re-functioning socio-material knowledge in the crisis of the pandemic. Knowledge Cultures, 8(3), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.22381/KC8320205
72.
SørensenE. (2009). The materiality of learning: Technology and knowledge in educational practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576362
73.
StephensenJ. L. (2020). Post-creativity and AI: Reverse-engineering our conceptual landscapes of creativity. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on computational creativity (ICCC ‘20) (pp. 326–333). Association for Computational Creativity.
74.
StierandM. (2015). Developing creativity in practice: Explorations with world-renowned chefs. Management Learning, 46(5), 598–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507614560302
75.
StierandM.BojeD. M.GlăveanuV.DörflerV.HaleyU. C. V.FeulsM. (2019). Paradoxes of “creativity”: Examining the creative process through an antenarrative lens. Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(2), 165–170. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.224
76.
StierandM.DörflerV. (2016). The role of intuition in the creative process of expert chefs. Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(3), 178–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.100
TanggaardL. (2015a). The sociomateriality of creativity: A case study of the creative processes in design work. In Petre GlăveanuV.GillespieA.ValsinerJ. (Eds.), Rethinking Creativity: Contributions from Social and Cultural Psychology (1st ed., pp. 110–124). Routledge. Cultural Dynamics of Social Representation. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315866949-16
80.
TanggaardL. (2015b). The creative pathways of everyday life. Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(3), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.95
81.
TsingA. (2015). The mushroom at the end of the world: on the possibility of life in capitalist ruins (pp. xii). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400873548
82.
TuanY. F. (1975). Place: An experiential perspective. Geographical Review, 65(2), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.2307/213970
83.
WentzerT. S. (2017). Approaching philosophical anthropology: Human, the responsive being. In CahillK. M.GustafsonM.WentzerT. S. (Eds.), Finite but unbounded: New approaches in philosophical anthropology (pp. 25–46). De Gruyter.
84.
WentzerT. S.MattinglyC. (2018). Toward a new humanism: An approach from philosophical anthropology. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 8(1–2), 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1086/698361
85.
WertschJ.RioP.AlvarezA. (1995). Sociocultural studies of mind (learning in doing: Social, cognitive and computational perspectives). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174299
86.
YakhlefA.RietveldE. (2020). Innovative action as skilled affordance-responsiveness: An embodied-mind approach. Creativity and Innovation Management, 29(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12345
