What Is Creativity? Definition, Types, and How to Cultivate It in the Era of AI

Key Elements of Creativity

• Creativity is not merely about generating novel ideas, but about translating new concepts into a tangible or intangible reality.
• According to the standard definition (Runco & Jaeger), creativity requires two essential pillars: originality (novelty) and effectiveness (utility or tangible value creation); it unfolds in two phases: thinking and producing.
• Creativity emerges from the confluence of three core components:
  • Knowledge: The background information and underlying understanding a person brings.
  • Creative Thinking: The flexible and distinct approach used to address problems.
  • Motivation: The primary catalyst of the process, where intrinsic motivation (genuine passion and interest in the work) makes all the difference.
• The concept of creativity applies across three interconnected domains:
  • Processes: The mental operations that drive creative thinking.
  • People: The personality traits and attitudes of creative individuals.
  • Products: The outcomes (works, technologies, processes, business models).
• Recent research emphasizes that creativity is not solely an individual talent or phenomenon, but a culturally mediated, relational action with profound social impact and responsibility.

“What is creativity?” It is a question that echoes across boardrooms, design studios, scientific laboratories, and the minds of professionals driven to make a difference. At its core, creativity is the capacity to generate novel, valuable ideas and translate them into reality—be it a product, service, artwork, or unprecedented solution. Far from being a gift reserved for artists, it is a skill that can be learned, trained, and applied across all disciplines.

In a fast-changing world, creativity has evolved from a luxury into the most sought-after skill for survival and growth in any field. Accumulating knowledge is no longer enough; true value lies in applying that knowledge in innovative ways to solve complex problems, optimize processes, and drive disruptive innovation.

Creativity plays a vital role in lifelong learning, adaptation, and human development (Lebuda et al., 2026). Accordingly, this comprehensive guide explores the definition and origins of creativity, how the creative brain functions, its various types, its distinction from innovation, and—most importantly—concrete techniques to cultivate it, including its dynamic relationship with artificial intelligence.

What Is Creativity? Meaning, Concept, and Definition

The word creativity derives from the Latin creare, meaning “to create, generate, or bring forth from nothing.” Thus, its most fundamental meaning refers to the ability to bring into existence something that was not there before. In everyday usage, the concept of creativity denotes the aptitude to invent, imagine, and devise original solutions to a problem.

As an operational definition: creativity is the process of translating new ideas into a tangible or intangible reality, characterized by the ability to perceive the world from fresh perspectives. This process involves two core phases: thinking (idea generation) and producing (idea materialization).

The Standard Definition and Its Evolution

In academic contexts, there is a widely accepted standard definition. According to Runco & Jaeger (2012), creativity comprises two indispensable elements: originality and effectiveness (or utility). While originality is essential, it is insufficient on its own: for an idea to be genuinely creative, it must also be effective—that is, it must deliver tangible value.

This perspective has evolved. Corazza (2016) outlines a transition from viewing creativity as an elitist phenomenon to understanding it as a fundamental necessity for all human beings. Creative outputs are diverse, ranging from physical objects—such as artworks and technological devices—to abstract ideas, processes, and systems (Cropley, 2011).

More recent frameworks refine this concept further. Green et al. (2023) advocate focusing the definition on the creative process rather than the final product. Similarly, Harvey and Berry (2023) suggest that while novelty and utility remain the core pillars, creativity can manifest in three distinct ways: by maximizing one of these attributes, balancing both, or fully integrating them. Meanwhile, Brainard (2026) proposes a unifying theory of creativity across the arts, sciences, and other domains, asserting that creativity should primarily be understood as a form of successful exploration.

From a child development perspective, the LEGO Foundation defines creativity as “a critical skill and mindset for children today,” nurtured through play in an iterative process of connecting with, exploring, and transforming the world.

In summary: generating something original without practical utility is not complete creativity; nor is solving a problem effectively by merely copying an existing model. True creativity thrives at the intersection of novelty and value.

The Value of Creativity

The value of creativity within our society is increasingly recognized by both the corporate sector and academia (Hutten, 2015), and is frequently viewed as a critical competitive advantage. For businesses, creativity has proven to be a significant driver of economic and technological development. Furthermore, it has emerged as a strong predictor of both educational success and social well-being.

An IBM survey of over 1,500 CEOs across 60 countries and 33 industries identified creativity as the paramount leadership quality for the future. The rationale is sound: creative employees conceive ideas, products, services, and processes that can culminate in innovations benefiting the entire organization (Lu et al., 2017).

This widespread recognition explains why creativity is currently regarded as a core 21st-century competency, on par with critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. In this regard, Brainard (2026) concludes that we cherish creativity because we value forging new pathways to learn about ourselves and the world around us—pathways that only emerge when we choose to step off the beaten track.

Creativity Manifesto: A Paradigm Shift

A collective of 20 scholars led by Vlad Petre Glăveanu (2019) published a manifesto marking a conceptual turning point in the field. Its core principles include:

• Creativity is simultaneously a psychological, social, and material phenomenon.
• It is a culturally mediated and inherently relational action at all times.
• It is meaningful and foundational to society.
• It is dynamic in both its meaning and practice.
• It is situated: its expression displays similarities and differences across contexts and domains.
• Research must incorporate power dynamics into its analyses.
• Methodologies require solid theoretical foundations, embracing both quantitative and qualitative approaches.
• Classical literature must be critically revisited, not abandoned.
• Creativity researchers carry a profound social responsibility.

This manifesto is pivotal because it shifts creativity from an individualistic view (“the solitary genius”) toward a sociocultural understanding: we always create in relation to others, within a culture, and alongside specific materials.

How Does Creativity Emerge? The Components of the Creative Act

According to Adams (2005), creativity arises from the confluence of three key components:

• Knowledge: The comprehensive understanding that an individual brings to a creative endeavor.
• Creative Thinking: How individuals approach problems, dictated by their personality and cognitive or working style.
• Motivation: Widely acknowledged as the primary driver of creative output, where intrinsic passion and genuine interest in one’s work represent the most vital motivators.

How does creativity arise?

According to Adams (2005), creativity arises from the confluence of the following three components:

• Knowledge: All the relevant understanding an individual brings to a creative effort.

• Creative thinking: Related to how people approach problems and depends on personality and thinking/working style.

• Motivation: Motivation is generally accepted as the key to creative production, and the most important motivators are intrinsic passion and interest in one’s work.

For his part, Cropley (2011) highlights that the term “creativity” is used in three ways: it refers to a group of processes (creative thinking), a group of personal characteristics of people (creative personality), and to the results (creative product).

Creative Thinking: Divergent vs. Convergent

Creative breakthroughs have propelled human culture across all fields: science, technology, philosophy, the arts, and the humanities. Creative thinking is a tangible competency—grounded in knowledge and practice—that helps yield better outcomes, often within constrained and challenging environments. It is not a mystical talent, but a trainable skill that enhances other abilities such as metacognition, problem-solving, interpersonal skills, academic performance, and social engagement. The Strategic Advisory Board, cited by PISA (2021), defines it as “the process by which we generate new ideas; it requires specific knowledge, skills, and attitudes, and involves making connections between subjects, concepts, disciplines, and methodologies.”

The Two Engines: Divergent and Convergent Thinking

Psychologist J. P. Guilford popularized the distinction between two modes of thought that alternate during the creative process:

• Divergent Thinking: Generates multiple possible responses from a single starting point. It is fluid, flexible, and expansive—the key mechanism in a brainstorming session.
• Convergent Thinking: Narrows and selects. It evaluates options to converge on the best solution through analytical and critical reasoning.

Effective creativity is not merely divergence; it demands both. You first broaden the spectrum of possibilities (diverge) and then narrow it down by selecting what works (converge).

Finally, Eymann et al. (2026) conclude that divergent and convergent thinking should not be viewed as opposing or independent intellectual processes, but as two ends of a continuum; different creative tasks fall along this spectrum based on processing demands and problem-space accessibility.

The Creative Process: How Ideas Are Generated

The creative process entails generating ideas and applying them through innovation to solve problems and formulate strategies for change. The LEGO Foundation (2019) describes it through three interconnected experiences—connecting (inquiring into the world with curiosity), exploring (experimenting and trying new things), and transforming (communicating, reflecting, and sharing).

One of the most useful classic frameworks is the four-stage model, synthesized by Dulgheru (2011) as follows:

• a) Preparation: Takes place primarily at the conscious level; the problem is defined, redefined, and data is systematically gathered.
• b) Incubation: The most controversial phase; problem-processing shifts to an unconscious and spontaneous plane.
• c) Illumination (or inspiration): The moment of insight, when a connection among problem components suddenly emerges.
• d) Evaluation: The solution is consciously examined to determine whether it truly fits the problem.

Preparing the Idea or Producing It? Insight vs. Production

A more recent and counterintuitive contribution comes from Lucas and Mai (2022), who identify two mental models regarding how we believe creativity works. The distinction matters because it dictates where we invest our effort.

Lucas and Mai’s practical conclusion is clear: deliberate ideation and high-volume production are generally more effective than waiting for flawless illumination. Inspiration exists, but it far more often finds those who are actively at work.

Types of Creativity

Creativity is not one-size-fits-all. Various authors offer complementary classifications that can help you identify your personal creative style:

• Dietrich (2019) categorizes creativity into three modes based on how ideas emerge: deliberate (conscious, targeted effort), spontaneous (unbidden insights), and flow (near-automatic execution driven by expertise).
• Jeff De Graff outlines five types oriented toward practical innovation: mimetic (adapting existing concepts), bisociative (connecting rational and intuitive thought), analogous (using analogies to break habitual thinking), narrative (storytelling), and intuitive (receiving and generating raw ideas).
• Traditional Pedagogical Frameworks classify creativity by domain: plastic (visual/artistic), fluent (verbal/idea generation), scientific, inventive, social, or philosophical.

Levels of Creativity

The study by Ivcevic and Kaufman (2026) posits that the criterion of appropriateness or utility—which traditionally accompanies originality in defining creativity—varies in meaning and importance depending on the level of creativity under consideration. Based on this premise, the authors identify four dimensions of quality that define appropriateness across different levels of creativity:

• Meaningfulness for mini-c (personal) creativity: The central question is whether ideas or actions hold relevance for the individual and help them forge personal connections or gain new insights.
• Relevance for little-c (everyday) creativity: Assesses whether ideas satisfy the requirements of a specific domain, task, or purpose in daily life.
• Effectiveness for Pro-c (professional) creativity: Measured by the extent to which ideas or actions successfully resolve a problem or achieve goals in a manner valued and recognized by the relevant professional audience or environment.
• Impact for Big-C (eminent) creativity: Determined by the profound value or enduring influence of ideas and works that withstand the test of time and remain subject to examination.

Creativity vs. Innovation: Key Differences

Confusing “creativity” and “innovation” as synonyms is the most common conceptual error. While closely related, they are distinct. According to Nakano and Wechsler (2018), innovation encompasses two stages: the creative phase (idea generation) and the implementation phase (putting those ideas into practice and achieving adoption). Simply put: creativity generates the idea; innovation converts it into something applicable that delivers market or societal value.

Creativity is a necessary precondition for innovation, yet innovation also depends on external factors like market dynamics, funding, and regulation. A study by Nijstad et al. (2026) reveals that transitioning from a creative idea to successful innovation relies on a complex interplay of individual factors, group processes, organizational support structures, and collective environments, dismissing simple linear models.

In short: creativity is the generation of ideas; innovation is the capacity to turn them into reality. You can delve deeper into what innovation entails and how to manage corporate creativity.

Creativity and Intelligence: Do They Always Go Hand in Hand?

Sternberg (2003) identifies three core aspects of intelligence essential for creativity:

• a) Synthetic (Creative): The ability to generate novel, high-quality, and appropriate ideas, often by redefining problems. It relies on three knowledge acquisition processes: selective encoding (distinguishing relevant from irrelevant information), selective combination (combining information in novel ways), and selective comparison (relating new information to existing knowledge in original ways).
• b) Analytical: Critical thinking that evaluates the value of one’s ideas, pinpoints strengths and weaknesses, and suggests improvements.
• c) Practical: The capacity to apply ideas in real-world contexts and effectively “sell” creative proposals.

A crucial distinction: creativity and intelligence are not synonymous. Classical research suggests a “threshold relationship”—a base level of general intelligence is required for creativity, but beyond that threshold, a higher IQ does not guarantee greater creativity. Highly intelligent individuals may lack creativity, and vice versa. Creativity depends as much on a willingness to explore and take risks as it does on analytical capability.

Techniques for Developing Creativity

Here is the good news that most people are looking for: creativity can be trained. You do not depend on waiting for inspiration; there are proven methods that structure idea generation. Here are the most effective techniques, ordered from collective to individual.

Brainstorming

Formalized by Alex Osborn in the 1950s, brainstorming separates generation from evaluation: first, many ideas are produced without judging them, and only afterwards are they filtered. Its basic rules—deferring judgment, striving for quantity, welcoming wild ideas, and combining proposals—remain the standard for group divergent thinking.

SCAMPER

Developed by Bob Eberle based on Osborn’s questions, SCAMPER is a checklist to transform something existing through seven operations: Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to other uses, Eliminate, and Reverse (or rearrange). It is ideal when you already have a product or process and want to reinvent it.

Mind Maps

Popularized by Tony Buzan, mind maps represent ideas in a radial and visual manner stemming from a central concept. They leverage association and visual memory to discover connections that would go unnoticed in a linear list.

Remote Associations and Analogies

Creativity is, to a large extent, connecting seemingly unconnected things. Techniques such as forcing analogies between your problem and a distant field (biology, music, cooking) break functional fixedness and open up new pathways. Mednick’s classic Remote Associates Test relies precisely on this ability.

Six Thinking Hats

Edward de Bono’s method proposes analyzing a problem from six “hats” or perspectives (data, emotions, risks, benefits, creativity, and process), preventing critical thinking from stifling creative thinking prematurely.

Physiological Levers: Sleep, Rest, and Exercise

Creativity is also cultivated from the body:

• Hypnagogia (N1 sleep stage): The twilight state just before falling asleep favors unusual associations; very brief naps can stimulate ideation.
• Mindfulness: Full awareness helps overcome mental blocks and allows problems to be observed without fixedness.
• Aerobic Exercise: Moderate physical activity is associated with improvements in divergent thinking.
• Rest and Incubation: Stepping away from the problem allows the mind to process it in the background.

Practical Tip: Combine a divergent phase (brainstorming or SCAMPER, without judging) with a subsequent convergent phase (clear criteria for selection). Most creative blocks stem from mixing both at the same time.

Where Is Creativity Applied?

Although we commonly associate it with the arts, creativity permeates virtually every domain of life:

• Business and Enterprise: Product development, business models, marketing, and organizational problem-solving.
• Science and Technology: Formulating hypotheses, designing experiments, and devising original technical solutions.
• Education: Fostering active learning, connecting disciplines, and cultivating critical thinking in students.
• Arts and Culture: Music, writing, design, as well as visual and performing arts.
• Everyday Life: Cooking with available ingredients, managing time, mediating conflicts, or improvising household solutions.

Creativity, ultimately, is not a compartmentalized domain: it is a cross-cutting approach to engaging with reality.

The New Frontiers of Creativity

To provide comprehensive coverage, it is worth exploring the most recent debates, which most guides still overlook.

Creativity in the Era of Artificial Intelligence

The emergence of generative artificial intelligence has reopened a fascinating question: Can a machine be creative? Today, AI serves primarily as a tool to augment human creativity—generating drafts, visualizing concepts in seconds, and identifying patterns that would otherwise be missed. However, intentionality, consciousness, and a deep understanding of context remain exclusively human domains. The true revolution lies in human-AI collaboration, where our creativity directs the machine’s computational power. In this regard, Moruzzi (2025) highlights that rather than viewing AI in isolation, the ultimate goal should be developing a co-creative and synergistic relationship.

Emerging evidence confirms this trend. Ivcevic and Grandinetti (2024) conclude that AI is a promising tool for enhancing human creativity, particularly by boosting average originality and improving the performance of individuals with lower initial creative capacity. Furthermore, Runco (2023) argues that AI advancements necessitate an update to the standard definition of creativity, proposing the term “artificial creativity” to describe its outputs.

The Ethics of Creativity and Innovation

Great ideas carry great responsibility. Creativity can design sustainable solutions or addictive technologies. The ethics of innovation require us to ask not only whether we can create something, but whether we should—taking into account long-term consequences, social impact, and potential misuse.

Neuroscience of Creativity: What Happens in the Brain

The myth of the “creative right hemisphere” has been debunked. Modern neuroscience demonstrates that creativity involves the coordinated activation of multiple neural networks throughout the entire brain (Tzachrista et al., 2023), particularly the prefrontal cortex, the anterior cingulate cortex, and the default mode network.

Today’s most widely accepted model describes the interplay of three primary networks:

• Default Mode Network (DMN): Active during mental rest and incubation; it spontaneously generates associations and ideas.
• Executive Control Network (ECN): Active during evaluation and focus; it filters, refines, and directs ideas toward a goal.
• Salience Network: Acts as a “switch” that determines which ideas from the DMN warrant passing into the conscious control of the ECN.

Creativity emerges precisely from the flexible dance between generation (DMN) and evaluation (ECN), coordinated by the salience network. Understanding these mechanisms enables the design of environments and habits that facilitate the process. However, a study by Vallée-Tourangeau (2026) concludes that while the brain is obviously indispensable, real creativity does not occur in an internal “second world” inside the head, but in the material world through a continuous physical dialogue of trial and error (prototyping) with the objects we create.

Creativity and Mental Well-being: The Myth of the “Mad Genius”

The relationship between creativity and mental health is complex and frequently misunderstood. For centuries, the romanticized image of the “tormented genius” fueled the notion that creativity and mental disorders go hand in hand. The evidence is far more nuanced: while some studies find statistical links between high creativity and traits associated with certain conditions—such as reduced “latent inhibition,” allowing more stimuli into consciousness, or dopamine’s role in idea generation—most creative individuals do not suffer from any disorder, and correlation does not imply causation.

What is best documented is the exact opposite of the myth: for the vast majority, the creative act is a powerful tool for well-being. Writing, painting, or creatively solving problems reduces stress, elevates mood, and fosters a sense of purpose and self-expression. Along these lines, Tobore (2025) concludes that creativity is essential to the meaning of life and human progress, serving as the medium through which individuals “settle their existential debt.”

On the other hand, Campidelli et al. (2026) suggest that creativity may play a protective or propaedeutic role in active aging, helping to shape and maintain semantic memory access and organization against age-related cognitive decline.

Note: The relationship between creativity and mental disorders is a sensitive topic without definitive consensus. This section is informational; if you are experiencing psychological distress, please consult a mental health professional.

Conclusions

Creativity is the capacity to generate original, valuable ideas and convert them into reality, making it one of the most sought-after competencies across all sectors today. Far from being an innate gift, the evidence is clear: creativity can be developed, trained, and evaluated. Concrete methods and tools—from brainstorming and SCAMPER to mind mapping, sleep hygiene, and mindfulness—exist to foster creative thinking. In the era of artificial intelligence, the challenge is not to compete with the machine, but to direct it: leveraging AI as an amplifier for a creativity that remains, at its core, profoundly human. If you wish to take the next step, explore our recommendations to foster creativity and discover how to align it with business innovation.

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions about Creativity

References

Adams, K. 2005. The Source of Innovation and Creativity. A Paper Commissioned by the National Center on Education and the Economy for the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce. 59 p.

Brainard Lindsay, What is creativity?, The Philosophical Quarterly, Volume 76, Issue 1, January 2026, Pages 51–73, https://doi.org/10.1093/pq/pqae075

Campidelli, L., Domanti, U., Fusi, G., Kenett, Y. N., & Agnoli, S. (2026). Creativity, the fountain of youth: Association between creativity and semantic memory networks across the lifespan. Cognition, 266, 106318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106318

Corazza, G. (2016) Potential Originality and Effectiveness: The Dynamic Definition of Creativity, Creativity Research Journal, 28:3, 258-267, DOI: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1195627

Cropley, A. J. (2011). Definitions of creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 511-524). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

De Graff J. 2013. Descubre los cinco tipos de creatividad. Expansión.

Dietrich, A. Types of creativity. Psychon Bull Rev 26, 1–12 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1517-7

Dulgheru, Valeriu. (2011). Types and forms of creativity. Meridian Ingineresc, ISSN 1683-853X. -. pp. 97-98.

Eymann, V., Beck, A. K., Lachmann, T., Jaarsveld, S., & Czernochowski, D. (2026). Reconsidering Divergent and Convergent Thinking in Creativity – a Neurophysiological Index for the Convergence-Divergence Continuum. Creativity Research Journal, 38(1), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2024.2419751

Garcés S. 2018. Creativity in science domains: a reflection. Atenea 517, pp. 247-253.

Green, A. E., Beaty, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., & Kaufman, J. C. (2023). The Process Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 36(3), 544–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2254573

Harvey, S., & Berry, J. W. (2023). Toward a meta-theory of creativity forms: How novelty and usefulness shape creativity. Academy of Management Review, 48(3), 504-529. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2020.0110

Hutten, E. (2015). The concept of creativity : the relationship between usefulness and creativity.

Ivcevic, Z., & Grandinetti, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence as a tool for creativity. Journal of Creativity, 34(2), 100079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjoc.2024.100079

Ivcevic, Z., & Kaufman, J. C. (2026). Inside the box: Considering the role of appropriateness for creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 20(1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000703

Lebuda, I., Preiss, D., Greiff, S., & Lubart, T. (2026). Creativity from individual differences perspectives: A systemic approach. Learning and Individual Differences, 102978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2026.102978

Lu J., Modupe Akinola, Malia F. Mason. 2017. ‘‘Switching On” creativity: Task switching can increase creativity by reducing cognitive fixation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 139: 63-75

Lucas Brian J., Mai Ke Michael. 2022. Illumination and elbow grease: A theory of how mental models of the creative process influence creativity, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 168, 104107, ISSN 0749-5978, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2021.104107.

Moruzzi, C. (2025). Artificial Intelligence and Creativity. Philosophy Compass, 20(3), e70030. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.70030

Nakano, T. C., & Wechsler, S. M. (2018). Creativity and innovation: Skills for the 21st Century. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 35(3), 237-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-02752018000300002

Nijstad, B., Calic, G., De Faria, P., Grimpe, C., & Kauppila, O. (2026). Connecting creativity and innovation research: Building bridges to cross divides. Research Policy, 55(2), 105391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2025.105391

OECD. 2019. PISA 2021 – Creative Thinking Framework (Third Draft). 56 p.

Ramadani, Veland & Gerguri, Shqipe. (2010). Innovation: Principles and Strategies. University Library of Munich, Germany, MPRA Paper.

Runco, Mark & Jaeger, Garrett. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal – CREATIVITY RES J. 24. 92-96. 10.1080/10400419.2012.650092.

Runco, M. A. (2023). Updating the Standard Definition of Creativity to Account for the Artificial Creativity of AI. Creativity Research Journal, 37(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2257977

SUDOE – FEDER. Crea Business Idea: Manual de la Creatividad Empresarial. 52 p.

Sternberg, R. 2003. Creative thinking in the Classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Education Research; Vol. 47, No 3.

Tobore, T. O. (2025). On creativity and meaning: The intricate relationship between creativity and meaning in life and creativity as the means to repay existential debt. Communicative & Integrative Biology, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2025.2484526

Tzachrista, M., Gkintoni, E., & Halkiopoulos, C. (2023). Neurocognitive Profile of Creativity in Improving Academic Performance—A Scoping Review. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1127. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111127

Vlad Petre Glaveanu, et al. 2019. Advancing Creativity Theory and Research: A Socio-cultural Manifesto. Journal of Creative Behavior, Volume54, Issue3, September 2020, Pages 741-745 https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.395

Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (2026). The One-I model of creativity: A commentary on Green et al. (2024). Creativity Research Journal, 38(3), 684–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2025.2534806

Milthon Lujan Monja

Editor and founder of “Innovar o Morir” (‘Innovate or Die’). Milthon holds a Master’s degree in Science and Innovation Management from the Polytechnic University of Valencia, with postgraduate diplomas in Business Innovation (UPV) and Market-Oriented Innovation Management (UPCH-Universitat Leipzig). He has practical experience in innovation management, having led the Fisheries Innovation Unit of the National Program for Innovation in Fisheries and Aquaculture (PNIPA) and worked as a consultant on open innovation diagnostics and technology watch. He firmly believes in the power of innovation and creativity as drivers of change and development.