 |
|
|
|||||
We have a complicated relationship with creativity. Intuitively, we understand its valuethe ability to produce new ideas and novel innovation. Instinctively, we know that it presents opportunities for marketplace advancements. When we think of some of the most revered organizations in modern times, like the Apples and Disneys of the world, we point to their creative contributions and their impact. However, although most companies revere organizations with a creative culture, there is a deep-seated misnomer that some companies are inherently creative and others just arent, as if creativity is a rare gene or a divine gift that is bestowed on some and coveted by others. But perhaps the mystical nature of creativity isnt that mysterious after all? What if a culture of creativity was more obtainable than you think? Something you can build, not just be born with? As unbelievable as that may seem, Alejandro Chavetta, the Executive Creative Director at Adobe, has made a career of doing that very thing; so, we invited him onto the From The Culture podcast to discuss what it means to facilitate a culture of creativity. What is creativity? To start, we need to lay some groundwork. If organizational culture is the operating system by which individuals co-labor, or collaborate, then fortifying a culture of creativity requires instituting an operating system that facilitates creativity. Simple enough, right? But what is creativity? There are a host of scholarly definitions but far too many are too abstract to apply or too esoteric to operationalize. Therefore, we must first establish a working understanding of what creativity actually is if we are to integrate it into our operating system. Dan Wieden, the renewed advertiser who cofounded the most celebrated advertising agency on the planet, Wieden+Kennedy, and came up with such legendary campaigns as Just Do It for Nike, once described creativity as subversion. That is to say that creativity is the act of bending, contorting, or refashioning what is into something that could be. This framing of creativity makes what has long been considered something reserved for the few something far more democratized for the manyfor all of us. We may not all be able to conceive of brilliant taglines like Dan Wieden, per se, but we can all certainly subvert. In fact, we all do it, every day, unknowingly. Subversion is merely the act of looking at something in a different way, usurping the orthodox frames by which we see a problem or situation. We all have the ability to subvert because we all bring new perspectives to the table in our organizations. We all see the world differently, and the heterogeneity of our diverse perspectives create a plethora of potential subversions that could lead to innovative solutions, new products, or new ways of work. The challenge isnt our ability to subvert, its that our organizations dont recognize this ability in its employees. Chavetta argues that the key to facilitating a culture of creativity is to realize that everyone in the organization can be creativebecause everyone can subvert. Not just the creative directors. Not just the marketing team. But everyone. The guy in finance, Chavetta illustrates as an example, might see something that the copywriter does not, or might bring a point of view that may have otherwise been missed by the creative team which subverts the pre-existing way by which everyone else saw the situation. This new framing might reveal blind spots or unearth unrealized opportunities for the organization that lead to new outcomesa boon to any organizations business, regardless of the industry. And if that be the case, then its the job of the organizations leadership to facilitate an environment that invites everyone to realize this super power that lies within us and inspire them to share it freely. Ideas come from anywhere In the advertising industry, where Ive spent the lions share of my career, there is a ubiquitous refrain: ideas can come from anywherefrom the CEO to the janitor. Although these words are repeated in the halls and pitch decks of just about every creative agency on the planet, rarely are they ever truly practiced. Instead, there is a walled-off garden where creativity dwells. In advertising, we call it the creative department. It might go by another name somewhere else. Whatever the nomenclature, the designation of creativity is relegated to a specific group of people which insinuates that creativity is only capable of and expected from a few. But what if we thought of creativity as something we all harness within us and creation as something achieved through craft? This small, but powerful, shift in thinking could not only welcome new perspectives that lead to new outcomes but also institutionalize an operating system inside the organization where everyone feels licensed to contributethus, facilitating a culture of creativity. Check our full conversation with Alejandro Chavetta as we discuss creative work and organizations on the latest episode of FROM THE CULTURE podcast. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_16-9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_square_thumbnail.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"FROM THE CULTURE","dek":"FROM THE CULTURE is a podcast that explores the inner workings of organizational culture that enable companies to thrive, teams to win, and brands to succeed. If culture eats strategy for breakfast, then this is the most important conversation in business that you arent having.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Listen","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/playlist?list=PLvojPSJ6Iy0T4VojdtGsZ8Q4eAJ6mzr2h","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91470870,"imageMobileId":91470866,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
At one point in my life, I managed a team of seven. My days consisted of 1:1 calls, performance reviews, and running interference between the team, other departments, and customers. I thought thats what I wanted: the perceived power and responsibility of being a manager. But in reality, it was very stressful. Today, I have been a solopreneur for three years. The assumption is that solo businesses are a starting point. You launch alone, build momentum, hire employees, and scale. That’s the entrepreneurs playbook, right? {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-1.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-mobile-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Work Better\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Thoughts on the future of work, career pivots, and why work shouldn\u0027t suck, by Anna Burgess Yang. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.workbetter.media\/\u0022\u003Eworkbetter.media\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.workbetter.media","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91457605,"imageMobileId":91457608,"shareable":false,"slug":""}} But over 80% of small businesses in the U.S. have no employees, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration. For many of us, that’s not a limitation. Staying solo is a deliberate strategy that prioritizes control and flexibility over growth for growths sake. Small is a strategy, not a stepping stone The “grow or die” mentality makes sense for companies that have dreams of becoming large, enterprise organizations. And some small businesses may have that dream. The cultural assumption is that a solo business is Phase One: something to outgrow. But many solopreneurs are choosing to stay small permanently. Hiring employees fundamentally changes what you do every day. You stop being a practitioner and become a manager. Some people want that transition. Many don’tand recognizing that isn’t a failure of ambition. It’s simply prioritizing a different way of working. Revenue isn’t profit A report by Gusto found that 77% of solopreneurs are profitable in their first year, compared to just 54% of businesses with employees. And 93% of solopreneurs expect to be profitable in 2025, versus 80% of employer businesses. A company earning a million dollars per year sounds impressive until you subtract salaries, benefits, payroll taxes, equipment, and the overhead required to keep it all running. The owner of that business may take home less than a solopreneur earning a third of that revenue with almost no overhead. When you stay solo, you can increase your effective rate by being selective. You might take on fewer, better-paying clients instead of chasing volume. In the end, revenue is a vanity metric if you’re working more hours for less take-home pay. You don’t need permission to reinvent yourself Staying solo means retaining total control over your business and your life. When you have employees, every pivot requires buy-in, transition planning, and often difficult conversations. You can’t just decide to raise your rates, shift your niche, or take a three-month sabbatical. In the several years Ive worked for myself, Ive gone through several iterations of Who am I? What do I do? What clients should I serve? I can change my entire service offering without consulting anyone. I can walk away from a client who isn’t working out without worrying about how it affects someone else’s paycheck. That flexibility is especially valuable in an uncertain economy because I can respond to market changes in days, not months. The question solopreneurs should ask themselves isnt necessarily, “How can I grow and scale?” It’s “What kind of business do I actually want to run?” {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-1.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-mobile-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Work Better\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Thoughts on the future of work, career pivots, and why work shouldn\u0027t suck, by Anna Burgess Yang. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.workbetter.media\/\u0022\u003Eworkbetter.media\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.workbetter.media","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91457605,"imageMobileId":91457608,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
The venerable business case study method got its start in 1921 at the Harvard Business School. The method became standard at the school throughout the 1920s and since then Harvard has a near-monopoly grip on the business, selling its cases to over 4,000 rival schools. Cases can be useful and informative, but recognize that they arent reality. The companies featured typically require that the case writer submit the case to them for approval. That introduces survivor biaswhoever is still around at the time of publication gets to dictate how the narrative is told. Another issue is that the companies selected and held up as exemplars are subject to the halo effect. This is the tendency to believe that because a company was successful, copying its practices will create success elsewhere. Unfortunately, the iron law of transient advantage is hard to escape. The 1995 Dell case doesnt hold up so well. A 2002 case about Nokia centered on how the successful phone company was going to deal with the 8 billion in cash piling up in its accounts. And dont even get me started on the 618 (!) cases that feature the General Electric Corporation. Which brings me to the decades of adulation long accorded to Southwest Airlines. The Shortest Distance to Just Another Airline Southwest Airlines ran a Super Bowl ad this year. In it, passengers scramble through a jungle, climbing over each other in a chaotic race to grab seats. The tagline? “That was wild. Assigned seating is here.” The ad was intended (I think) to indulge in gentle mockery of the past. I found it jarring. Herb Kelleher, the airlines colorful co-founder, would have been horrified, I think. I last met with him (over a Wild Turkey bourbon, of course) at the Strategic Management Society Meetings in 2004 and he was adamantemployees first, deep attention to details, and most importantly, fun! The many (348!) cases, book chapters, and textbook references to Southwest reference its tightly integrated strategy where every element reinforced every other, allowing it to be profitable in a notoriously tough business. A Boeing 737-2H4 in Southwest livery, ca. 1977. [Photo: Museum of Flight/CORBIS/Corbis/Getty Images] Kellehers insight was that there was a particular kind of flyer whose other option was driving, so short flights that replaced a 4-5 hour drive were attractive. That meant you didnt have to offer meals. One aircraft type (Boeing 737s) meant simplified maintenance, training, and scheduling. Open seating enabled 20-minute turnarounds instead of competitors’ 35 minutes. That extra utilization squeezed more flights from every plane. Bags fly free meant fewer delays at check-in and faster boarding. Employees came first and everybody pitched in. Pilots helped clean cabins, gate agents jumped in wherever needed. And even with all that, the companys culture of having fun at work made the operational discipline feel human rather than mechanical. One of my favorite examples is a flight attendant rapping the entire safety briefing to the tune of Ice, Ice, Baby. Or this one, safety with a sprinkling of humor. The takeaway The big teaching point from the Southwest cases is that competitive advantage isn’t about any single policy. It’s about the fit between policies. Remove one piece and the whole system weakens. Southwest has now removed all of them. Assigned seating went into effect January 27th. “Bags fly free” ended in May 2025. The company is adding premium extra-legroom sections and tiered fare bundles. They’ve announced redeye flights and partnerships with Icelandair. They’ve conducted the first layoffs in their 53-year history. At least they are honesttheir COO explained the bag fee reversal with refreshing candor: “We need more revenue to cover our costs.” Activist investors at Elliott Management got what they wanted. But what exactly has Southwest become? As one former loyalist put it: “There’s simply no reason to fly Southwest anymore. Southwest’s leadership cited research showing “8 out of 10 customers prefer assigned seating.” They also acknowledged that after fare and schedule, bags fly free was cited as the #1 reason customers choose Southwest. The problem is that when you remove that differentiator, you’re now competing on fare and schedule against Delta, United, and American, carriers with better route networks, international reach, premium cabins, and decades more experience operating their models. Like all the other airlines, we are likely to now see pitched battles for overhead space, another blow to a business model built on fast airport turnarounds. The Super Bowl ad could be a case study in strategic confusion. Southwest is making fun of customers who were passionately loyal to what made Southwest diffeent, while asking those same customers to believe the company’s “legendary hospitality” somehow exists independent of the operational system that enabled it. Take lessons from case studies with caution There’s a deeper lesson here. Case studies are snapshots. They capture what worked at a particular moment, under particular boundary conditions. What they dont speak to is what to do when those conditions shift. Southwest’s open seating made sense for the short-hop flights taken by their initial core customers. When the alternative was expensive legacy carriers, those customers would have been driving were it not for Southwest. By 2024, travelers had options that didn’t exist in 1971 or 1991 or even 2011. JetBlue offered assigned seats with personality. Spirit and Frontier offered unbundled ultra-low fares. Delta went upmarket with better service. The white space Southwest once occupied got crowded. My friends Zeynep Ton and Frances Frei exchanged concerns for the culture of the airline. Frei, a professor at Harvard Business School, captured this concern: “I sure hope this isn’t a case of activist investors coming in and insisting on a set of decisions that they won’t be around to have to endure. Great organizations get built over time. It doesn’t take very long to ruin an organization.” I’m not arguing Southwest should have frozen in amber forever. Markets change. Customer preferences evolve. Even the most elegant strategy eventually needs updating. But there’s a difference between thoughtful evolution and abandoning your model. Herb Kelleher once said humility and discipline go together: “You can’t really be disciplined in what you do unless you are humble and open-minded.” He built an airline that knew exactly what it was, knew exactly who it served, and had the discipline to say no to opportunities that didn’t fit. Southwest’s new leadership knows what investors want. Whether they know what Southwest is anymorethat’s less clear.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||