Posted by: Xhyra Graf | 19 January 2007

Model 17

The Space Sharing (or Collaboration) Models

The system model broke the individualist spell that had limited creativity research for generations. It got people interested in seeing the communal, social nature of creativity (Montuori et al, 1999; Casti, 1997; John-Steiner, 2000; Schrage, 2000; Horgen et al, 1999). An offshoot of this was the discovery of simultaneous discovery. Nearly all of Einstein’s ideas had been around in the discourse of physicists–Einstein put it all together in an especially cogent and coherent way. DNA’s structure was being tracked down by a dozen labs, if Watson and Crick had been a few months late, any of several labs would have announced the same finding they did. The richness of intellect was at least as much in these competing communities of people following similar interests as in individual creators among them. Collaboration models go back over creation history and show how two or three people “discovered”, that is, did the work, that is now attributed to just one “creator”. Inparticular, they often show how women did the key work but their husbands or lovers took the credit.

Related to these collaboration models are models of space sharing, which may be more fundamental and explain  collaborations. The space that is shared is intellectual space–a common set of ideas and operations on ideas. People who share such spaces collaborate and compete within them. They extend them and occasionally break off from them or fuse them. Particular physical places–a coffee shop, for example–or other tools–internet news groups, for example–may define, amplify, or modify such shared spaces. For designers new CAD tools and models often constitute such shared intellectual spaces, unifying and uniting discourses, making ideas come to the attention of similarly interested others. Collaborations, among colleagues sharing an office or a marriage, are a subset of such shared spaces, perhaps. Intensely sharingsuch intellectual spaces is enough to cause creation in these models.



  1. […] Models 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, 25, 26, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42. […]

  2. […] *Right 14 stays a no, naming it a Systems model under the Social Type was misleading -  just had to reread it again taking in his explanation. So maybe it’s 13-Community of Ideas Model [which was a no also-seems I left out 4 of the 6 ‘Social Types’ on initial choosing.  I wonder why? lmao.]  The Space Sharing or collaboration model [17-one of the two left] is close to 13 in that it fosters a community of ideas, but at this level one has already begun to cross into sub-creation…maybe though this is what I am looking for.  Have to decide or do I?  It’s possible that anything beyond the Self and Mind Type Models chosen would only pertain to a group used to investigate the phenomenology of subjective experiene within the creative act OR 13 would pertain to as he said the ‘most elemental of the social models’ and can speak to general creativity and 17 would pertain to an already directed self-making model creativity. Dum de dum….Ugh! Which do I need NOW. Well, as always the thing needed now is the thing that has the most future potential, makes no sense to dally with the general.  I am directed toward something.] For each Type so far […]