Initiatives of theHamburg Kreativ Gesellschaft
Creatives are driving social transformation, as journalist and author Wolf Lotter writes - but they often have a hard time in large companies. A conversation about curiosity as the most important resource and the end of routine work.
Mr Lotter, your book "Die Gestörten" is about the state of creative knowledge work. You describe how creativity is seen as an exception, even as a disruption. In your opinion, what does it disrupt?
It disturbs us by always doing the same things, which is actually very cosy. We have become accustomed to always doing the same work, from nine to five, not asking questions and avoiding transformation. We don't want to make decisions. Creative knowledge work bothers us because it asks questions, because it is curious and because it says: there is an alternative to this life, which is cosy but not future-oriented - and that is not incredibly popular.
Where do you think the greatest potential of creative knowledge work lies? Why is it - as you say - even a duty to disrupt?
In this society, we need to finally understand how great our potential for innovation is. That's what the creative economy is all about for me. It is the cue and the model for the rest of society, which is often powerless and doesn't know where it is going. We can create things anew, we can shape our own future and we can learn from our present. That is what creative people can and should do now.
"The most important thing is to experiment, enquire, make mistakes and try again. In other words, the classic method of science and art."
They often criticise the individual's lack of curiosity and thus the desire to change things and create something new. Why have we lost this ability?
Curiosity is a biological constant. All living beings have curiosity within them - because they have to learn to adapt to their environment. Human curiosity means that I look for improvements to my condition. We do this constantly, consciously or unconsciously. But if I constantly punish a person for being curious, then at some point nothing will happen. People in the job structure who ask uncomfortable questions, scrutinise things and disrupt the routine: They are silenced - demoted, not promoted. Then curiosity is difficult because it is reduced to a minimum. And at some point, we can no longer think of anything. If we penalise questioning and disruption, then we are dead as a society.
In the meantime, the "old" economy seems to have woken up - business development departments are being created and innovation and transformation managers are being hired. Do you think that works?
It has been proven not to work. These jobs are created when attempts are made to systematise innovation and curiosity. In fact, the most important thing is to experiment, enquire, make mistakes and try again. In other words, the classic method of science and art: we try, we learn, we keep at it. But these are completely different structures to the no-fail structures in industry that such departments and managers are often subject to. There, it's really only ever about optimising a certain process so that it doesn't get any better - but it always gets better. Creative people know that: There is nothing that cannot be done better or differently.
What would the role of creatives look like in your vision?
My vision is that managers who only want routine work do an internship with creative people. To learn how to shape the future and knowledge work. I would strongly advocate that this becomes a compulsory internship and that we, as creatives, treat these people more generously than they have treated us because we have disrupted their circles. There needs to be more appreciation for people who help society to get off the ground so that the transformation can begin.
The Hamburg Kreativ Gesellschaft focuses a lot on the topic of cross innovation - and brings together commercial enterprises with creative people to get out of their own bubble and generate creative input from outside. Do you think this is a sensible alternative to an innovation department?
It's a good way to get started. But you have to go further, otherwise you're just scratching the surface. You have to keep at it and say: when we talk about transformation, we will agree that it is a long, difficult process. This transformation from an industrial to a creative knowledge society is a tough thing and that's why I have to keep trying to go into it. Just like you do.
"The younger generation is much smarter. They no longer say: Can I do that? Instead, they ask: Why can't I do that?"
But what if a company has been very successful for decades and no change seems necessary? They say to themselves: everything is going well, what's the point?
Yes, that's also human. Unfortunately, we are the first generation in human history to have to change while doing well. That is extremely difficult. Futurologists, visionaries or utopians are great terms, but they all have one thing in common: they talk about tomorrow and not today. In reality, we have to look at the situation today and ask: What is my situation now? What do I want to keep? What do I need to do to maintain it?
Is this also a generational question? Won't the inflexible ones die out at some point and the young ones be much smarter than we are?
Yes, I believe that the younger generation is much smarter. You can see that in the questions they ask when they start their careers. They no longer say: Can I do this? Instead, they ask: Why can't I do that? If you can no longer ask these questions, if you only ask what the boss would like, then half the world is lost. This often much-maligned Generation Z has got it absolutely right. They simply say: we are rare here, you want us to work for you. Then please create good framework conditions.
"If AI wasn't fed by humans, there would be nothing. That's the basic understanding we should have."
What developments do you see for the future of creative knowledge work, especially against the backdrop of changing technologies? Will creatives be replaced by AI at some point?
No, AI will not replace creative work. On the contrary, AI will make its necessity clearer. What artificial intelligence can actually do is automate, i.e. represent formal processes. Nothing more. If AI is not fed by humans, there would be nothing. That is the basic understanding we should have. We need to embrace technology and, above all, understand how it works. It is not a miracle! It was created by us. This understanding should be a general education. Only then can we start to say what we expect from it and what we do with it. Without fear. That's something I'm missing enormously in the current debate.
In conclusion: How do you see the future?
Clearly optimistic. You have to remain confident, even if you don't know what will happen. So just get started. Or as Clint Eastwood says: We ride into town, the rest will follow.
Wolf Lotter has been writing for four decades about the transformation from industry to a knowledge society and thus about the end of routine labour and the rise of creative, personal activity. He was a founding member of brand eins and its lead essayist for many years. Today he writes columns, for example for Wirtschaftswoche and tazfutur2, and successful books, including "Kreative Revolution", "Zusammenhänge", "Strengt Euch an" die Gestörten", about creative knowledge work and "Echt. On the value of uniqueness in a world of copies" (Econ). He is a founding member of pen berlin and the Programme Council of ORF and the patron and ambassador of the Ministry of Curiosity and Future Studies.
