Philosophical Ties That Bind Practice

Abstract

This article examines how philosophical assumptions of practice can thwart the conception, adoption, and implementation of critical actions such as creativity. Delineating positivism and interpretivism, it is argued that the former treats the world as an objective system that can be studied through scientific methods, whereas the latter conceptualizes the world as an ambiguous social construction that cannot be readily apprehended via standard empirical inquiry. This distinction is not drawn to aim another invective against positivist science but to connect it to scientific realism and scientific instrumentalism, revealing iterative mutuality. With the cultural value afforded positivism and the formal training delivered in professional schools, practitioners largely adhere to positivist assumptions. Therefore, after identifying and briefly reviewing the creativity literature as it relates to organizational change and innovation, three contrasts are drawn to illustrate how underlying assumptions prevent practices necessary for effective introduction of creative ideas and actions.