Tag: “Science”

You have probably heard of the famous experiment that was conducted a few decades ago in a laboratory at Stanford University: a few children were left alone in a room and were told that they could have a candy at that time or wait until the experimenter came back, in which case they could have two candies. The experiment did not end there, since the social and cognitive skills of these children were tested some years later. The result was that, at least academically, the ones who had delayed instant gratification obtained better scores and were more popular than those who had not.

An Internet user just needs 50 milliseconds to form a first impression of the page he is visiting. It is even more interesting to know that, after a much longer lasting exposure to that page, the final impression hardly changes compared to that first and brief impression.

Daniel Pink ensures in his book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us that the traditional motivation based on rewards and punishments is practically useless in the age of knowledge workers. Money may work at first, but once the needs you think are important are already met, it is not a source of motivation anymore. From there, the one that works is the intrinsic motivation that exists within the individual.

Surely you are aware that there are times in your life when you have thoughts like, “What can I do to be more competitive or productive?” “How can I improve my skills and advance my career?” “Should I move to this or that city?” This kind of big-picture thinking is called divergent, and is the one you use to generate ideas when you face a problem.

For some reason I don’t quite understand, it seems that creative people are not very fond of seeking greater productivity through better personal organization. There is the idea that to be creative one must not be subject to any rule or system that can stifle the freedom that creativity requires. You must unleash your imagination, intuition, and intellectual curiosity.