Creativity by definition means any process or development of an idea about anything that transcends traditional patterns of ideas which people prior have already thought about. So, in that way, creativity means the novelty of an idea about anything (e.g. unique selling proposition – product or service). Creativity can also enact as the factor which helps to improve diversity among people in a certain firm, and which can also contribute to technological developments (Shao et al, 2019). It is something that is manifested in all human activities. In the current and the last decade, we can witness that unprecedented amounts of focus and significance are being given to creativity due to different challenges that companies are facing in the current business landscape (Secundo et al., 2020). For instance, in the light of external environmental challenges in the shape of Climate change, companies are focusing on creative ways to promote sustainability in their day-to-day practices (George et al., 2020). Perhaps, this is why a vast majority of literature in different countries has focused its attention towards unearthing what does creativity stems from. As a result of that critical findings of the concept of creativity have been found and researched using multiple methods (Niu and Kaufman, 2013).

These findings regarding the concept play a very vital role in understanding and helping different companies in developing their creativity and innovation, however, the problem lies in different approaches and various methods which were used to identify what makes people creative (Niu and Kaufman, 2013). Therefore, to understand the nature of creativity among different people, or for that matter creativity in different cultures, this study aims to research different approaches that the two biggest economies America and China take to enhance their level of creativity and innovation in their cultures. At the very core, creativity is inherent to culture. This means that if we say that the culture of a country is their sole background, then their level of creativity and innovation is their way forward or the ‘object’ that is most likely to become their new background. This study aims at revealing how American and Chinese culture different in terms of creativity based on how do they perceive or conceptualize creativity, the different approaches they take towards creativity and innovation, and lastly how each of them promotes creativity.

Most of the theories that the educational institutes tend to use for teaching the concept of creativity mostly from the western part of the world and especially from the United States. This research essay seeks to identify the differences and similarities Americans and Chinese culture have in the context of creativity. This research will also use different metaphors to enhance the understanding of the reader. So firstly to tell apart how Chinese perceive the idea of creativity can be explained by the food grain metaphor. The food grain as the name suggests is small but very important for the survival of a person, can be easily be procured and different people can use them in different styles and multiple areas. Similar is the case with creativity, every person might not inherently possess it but with little effort, they can use creativity in every area of life and have success. Niu (2012) who is inspired by Confucianism, in this paper says that Chinese people view creativity as a concept that a person can be attained throughout their lives. Taking this wisdom forwards, the Chinese believe that to be creative, a person doesn’t have to have an extraordinary skill set or abilities, rather creativity can be expended in any field.  Hu et al. (2013) further sought to examine this idea by studying how creativity is nurtured at the school level. Peng and Plucker (2012) also examine this attainable nature of creativity from a government policy perspective. In their article, Peng and Plucker (2012) explain that Chinese scholars and government policymakers perceive creativity as a factor that may not be innately present in everyone, but it rather is the problem of their poor motivation levels and inadequate training and development, and this is why they (Chinese) need to take a more progressive attitude towards problem-solving or decision, more than their American counterparts. Yi et al. (2013) in their article discuss that educational institutes such as schools play a very vital role in the creative nature of children from the very beginning. They, Yi et al. (2013), also argued that schools must start targeting more innovative programs to children from junior school, which would significantly supplement or boost their creativity levels in later life. While, Zhang and Niu (2013) focus on the importance of routine activities and attitudes as the contributing factors for the creative development of individuals which could succor them later, also emphasizing that creativity could be developed at any moment in life. Therefore, the Chinese believe in creativity which every ordinary person could possess. On the other hand, Americans seem to focus more on radical and revolutionary creativity. This means that creativity is a highly rare and distinct phenomenon and not everyone has it. Lan and Kaufman (2012) in their article talk about that American people place much greater value on novelty and how remarkable creative someone is as opposed to Chinese who appreciate creativity when there are constraints. An analogy/term that is contrasted with the Chinese metaphor for food grain is pork parfait – an Indiana company dish that is made to look like an ice cream sundae, but it is made up of mashed potatoes, pulled pork, and some barbeque sauce (Katel, 2010). This dish is creative in a way that it is unusual and not made for everyday consumption.

Now, when it comes to approaches, they may greatly vary between the two cultures. The Chinese follow the top-down approach to creativity. An example could be taken of China’s national developmental strategies (Regina et al. 2004). These strategies are developed at the very top of the hierarchy, and then these policies and strategies are laid out to national and local educational institutes, telling them how creativity and innovation could be nurtured in classrooms. The top-down approach in China has its benefits and has certainly shown success when the educational sector of the country witnessed the transformation in their educational policies for their creative education in technological schools (Li,   2019). Peng and Plucker believe that setting the priority for creativity in the education sector by the government can also help create awareness in different schools to address the high importance placed on creativity starting at primary levels. Peng and Plucker (2012) however, have also greatly questioned the feasibility and the effectiveness of the top-down approach to creativity in the longer-run. They believe that creativity should come from top-down, but it should rather stem from the bottom-up i.e. students, teachers, employees in the organizations, and other people working at a lower level in governments. While China follows a top-down approach, the USA largely promotes a bottom-up approach to creativity. As opposed to a top-down approach where the leaders at the top negotiate and provide the policies and people at the bottom follow it, the bottom-up approach emphasizes self-initiation where people at the local level take their own decision to promote creativity (Mason, 2005). In the US many creativity institute programs are that’s why funded by separate private agencies. For instance, Sternberg & Rainbow Project is one example. There is a persistent belief in the American culture for creativity through self-exploration and similarly individualism or individual freedom, and promoting this idea or approach to creativity supports that belief.   These two different approaches between the nationalities better explain the difference in their perception of creativity and the performance level. (Jellen & Urban, 1989; Niu & Sternberg, 2001, 2003; Niu, Zhang & Yang, 2007) studies suggest that the Chinese are behind their American counterparts when it comes to creativity.

Thirdly, the American and Chinese people are very different when it comes to promoting creativity in their cultures. Taking forward the attainability idea of creativity, Chinese people put a lot of emphasis on diligence and being assiduous when they want to achieve a high level of creativity. “Practice makes perfection (Shu Neng Sheng Qiao 熟能生巧)” is the right term which

would exemplify how Chinese people promote creativity in their culture. This phrase comes from the story of an old oil peddler. It is often used to describe a person who would put in hard work and perseverance and eventually achieve excellence and a high level of creativity. Also, this has been a recurring phrase for Chinese people as they are in the pursuit of excellence in various fields. This is the reason why Chinese people push their children to take part in various kinds of artistic practices such as playing chess, calligraphy, playing musical instruments, etc. Therefore, Chinese people believe that to achieve a certain skill level, they need to work very hard for it. In many ways, this notion of creativity is similar to reaching the level of perfection and excellence which could ultimately result in success. Yi et al. (2013), found out that those teachers who have more experience, become the best nurturers of creative classroom culture. On the other hand, when we consider American culture, they are more likely to concentrate more on endowing early inspiration than instilling the importance of practice. Using this approach to promoting creativity, American people start to inspire creativity in their younger children by using different sources. Baby Einstein’s series of videos and toys perfectly exemplify this approach, whereby young children are inspired to feel creative by providing them with creative toys and showing them multimedia videos. Researches might not support that approach claim to creativity (DeLoache et al., 2010; Wartella, Richert & Robb, 2010). But the continued popularity of these toys shows that Americans might believe that they need to inspire children rather them getting instilled by creativity like the Chinese. Moreover, the American idea of creativity is more on the individualistic side, whereby they believe one should possess creative qualities that are rarer in the general public, and then only they are ready to convince other of their ideas, abilities, and capabilities (Sternberg & Lubart, 1991, 1995).

Creativity plays a great role in the growth and development of individuals and whole societies. It may stem in individuals or groups as a result of a challenge they may facing or any circumstances that require a novel decision-making response. For instance, to confront the challenge of climate change, many companies are moving towards sustainable development and practices. Therefore, to understand how creativity as a process and concept could help meet global challenges, we are chiefly studying the two biggest economies- America and China. The scope of the study is narrowed down to these countries due to their global significance at the moment. In this essay we studied creativity from the context of America and China – how do they perceive creativity, two prime approaches they take for being creative, and lastly how do they promote creativity in their respective cultures.

Appendices