Shaping Strömsö: Examining Elements in a Creative Process for the Design of New Television Content

Open access


This paper explores elements in the creative process of the development of a new television format from both practice and research-based perspectives. We compare and integrate findings from an unpublished case study of the popular Finnish lifestyle television program, Strömsö, with the broad research literature on creativity. Through this lens, fourteen elements, which were identified through this case study to be present in the creation of Strömsö, are explored and contextualized with examples from the show’s creation. These elements were: 1) idea, 2) analyze, 3) brainstorm, 4) research, 5) benchmark, 6) toss ideas, 7) temporary input, 8) inspiration from an unexpected source, 9) rest, 10) formulate, 11) concretize, 12) pilot, 13) make mistakes, and 14) chaos. Research on multiple subtopics related to creativity is utilized to illustrate how knowledge gained through the academic literature can be integrated with these findings to provide possible guidance for practice. In doing so, we show how diverse epistemological and methodological approaches to examining the same phenomena can bolster insight and understanding for researchers and practitioners alike. Researchers will be able to note how topics that they are familiar with manifested in a practical setting, and non-academic professionals involved in creating content for television and new media will be introduced to theory and research that may aid in their creative endeavors. We intend this manuscript to provide useful information to such professionals and inspire additional research in the academic community.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Aaltonen J. (2018). Käsikirjoittajan työkalut. Audiovisuaalisen käsikirjoituksen tekijän opas. [Tools for the Screen Writer. A guide for the practitioner of audiovisual screen-writing]. Tampere: SKS.

  • Abuhamdeh S. & Csikszentmihalyi M. (2004). The artistic personality: A systems perspective. In R. J. Sternberg E. L. Grigorenko & J. L. Singer (Eds.) Creativity: From potential to realization (pp. 31-42). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10692-003

  • Amabile T. M. Conti R. Coon H. Lazenby J. & Herron M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal 39(5) 1154-1184. doi:10.2307/256995

  • Baird B. Smallwood J. Mrazek M. D. Kam J. Y. Franklin M. S. & Schooler J. W. (2012). Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science 23(10) 1117-1122. doi:10.1177/0956797612446024

  • Barron F. (1963). The need for order and disorder as motives in creativity. In C.W. Taylor & F. Barron (Eds.) Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 153-160). New York: Wiley.

  • Basadur M. (1995). Optimal ideation-evaluation ratios. Creativity Research Journal 8(1) 63-75.

  • Baxter P. & Jack S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report 13(4) 544-559.

  • Beghetto R. A. (2014). Creative mortification: An initial exploration. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 8(3) 266-276.

  • Benedek M. & Neubauer A. C. (2013). Revisiting Mednick’s model on creativity-related differences in associative hierarchies. Evidence for a common path to uncommon thought. Journal of Creative Behavior 47(4) 273-289.

  • Bourgeois-Bougrine S. Glaveanu V. Botella M. Guillou K. De Biasi P. M. & Lubart T. (2014). The creativity maze: Exploring creativity in screenplay writing. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 8(4) 384-399. doi:10.1037/a0037839

  • Cai D. J. Mednick S. A. Harrison E. M. Kanady J. C. & Mednick S. C. (2009). REM not incubation improves creativity by priming associative networks. PNAS Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences of The United States of America 106(25) 10130-10134. doi:10.1073/pnas.0900271106

  • Cameron R. (2011). Mixed Methods Research: The Five Ps Framework. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 9(2) 96-108.

  • Cropley D. H. Kaufman J. C. & Cropley A. J. (2008). Malevolent Creativity: A Functional Model of Creativity in Terrorism and Crime. Creativity Research Journal 20(2) 105-115.

  • Csikszentmihalyi M. & Getzels J. W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behavior and the originality of creative products: A study with artists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 19(1) 47-52. doi:10.1037/h0031106

  • Csikszentmihalyi M. (2014). The systems model of creativity and its applications. In D. K. Simonton (Ed.) The Wiley handbook of genius (pp. 533-545). Chichester England: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118367377.ch25

  • Dane E. (2010). Reconsidering the trade-off between expertise and flexibility: A cognitive entrenchment perspective. The Academy of Management Review 35(4) 579-603.

  • Davey N. (2006). Unquiet understanding: Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics. Albany NY: SUNY Press.

  • Eisenhardt K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review 14(4) 532-550.

  • Fleming L. Mingo S. & Chen D. (2007). Collaborative brokerage generative creativity and creative success. Administrative Science Quarterly 52(3) 443-475.

  • Gilson L. L. & Madjar N. (2011). Radical and incremental creativity: Antecedents and processes. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 5(1) 21-28. doi:10.1037/a0017863

  • Goodell G. (1998). Independent feature film production. A complete guide from concept through distribution. New York NY: St. Martin’s Griffin.

  • Grosser T. J. Venkataramani V. & Labianca G. (2017). An alter-centric perspective on employee innovation: The importance of alters’ creative self-efficacy and network structure. Journal of Applied Psychology 102(9) 1360-1374. doi:10.1037/apl0000220

  • Guilford J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin 53(4) 267-293. doi:10.1037/h0040755

  • Hanson W. E. Creswell J. W. Clark V. L. P. Petska K. S. & Creswell J. D. (2005). Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology 52(2) 224.

  • Henderson K. A. & Bedini L. A. (1995) Notes on linking qualitative and quantitative data. Therapeutic Recreation Journal 29(2) 124-130.

  • Hocevar D. (1979a). A comparison of statistical infrequency and subjective judgment as criteria in the measurement of originality. Journal of Personality Assessment 43(3) 297-299. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4303_13

  • Hocevar D. (1979b). Ideational fluency as a confounding factor in the measurement of originality. Journal of Educational Psychology 71(2) 191-196. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.71.2.191

  • Huber J. C. (1998). Invention and inventivity is a random Poisson process: A potential guide to analysis of general creativity. Creativity Research Journal 11(3) 231-241.

  • Hunter S. T. Bedell K. E. & Mumford M. D. (2007). Climate for creativity: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal 19(1) 69-90. doi:10.1080/10400410709336883

  • Jay E. & Perkins D. (1997) Creativity’s compass: A review of problem finding. In M. A. Runco (Ed.) Creativity research handbook Vol. 1 (257-293). Cresskill NJ: Hampton Press.

  • Kessel M. Kratzer J. & Schultz C. (2012). Psychological safety knowledge sharing and creative performance in healthcare teams. Creativity and Innovation Management 21(2) 147-157. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00635.x

  • Kirton M. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: A description and measure. Journal of Applied Psychology 61(5) 622-629.

  • Kornilova T. V. & Kornilov S. A. (2010). Intelligence and tolerance/intolerance for uncertainty as predictors of creativity. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art 3 240-256. doi:10.11621/pir.2010.0012

  • Levine K. J. Heuett K. B. & Reno K. M. (2015). Re-operationalizing established groups in brainstorming: Validating Osborn’s claims. The Journal of Creative Behavior 51 (3) 252-262. doi:10.1002/jocb.122

  • Madjar N. Oldham G. R. & Pratt M. G. (2002). There’s no place like home? The contributions of work and nonwork creativity support to employees’ creative performance. Academy of Management Journal 45(4) 757-767. doi:10.2307/3069309

  • Mäkelä M. & Routarinne S. (2006). An introduction to the art of research. In M. Mäkelä & S. Routarinne (Eds.) The art of research. Research practices in art and design. (p.22) Helsinki: University of Art and Design.

  • Martindale C. (1990). Innovation illegitimacy and individualism. Creativity Research Journal 3(2) 118-124. doi:10.1080/10400419009534343

  • Maxwell J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks CA: SAGE Publications.

  • McMahon K. Ruggeri A. Kämmer J. E. & Katsikopoulos K. V. (2016). Beyond idea generation: The power of groups in developing ideas. Creativity Research Journal 28(3) 247-257.

  • Mednick S.A. (1962) The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review 69 220–232.

  • Morney E. (2007). Pitchrundan våren 2007 - ett nytt element i beställningsprocessen på Svenska Yle [Pitching spring 2007 - a new element in the process of ordering new television programs at Yle Swedish section] (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Industrial Arts Helsinki.

  • Morney E. (2011). Strömsö – Så skapades programkonceptet [Strömsö – This is how the concept was made]. Helsinki: Svenska Yle. Internally published report.

  • Mumford M. D. & Gustafson S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration application and innovation. Psychological Bulletin 103(1) 27-43

  • Ness I. J. & Søreide G. E. (2014). The Room of Opportunity: Understanding phases of creative knowledge processes in innovation. Journal of Workplace Learning 26(8) 545-560.

  • Oleynick V. C. Thrash T. M. LeFew M. C. Moldovan E. G. & Kieffaber P. D. (2014). The scientific study of inspiration in the creative process: Challenges and opportunities. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00436/full

  • O’Quin K. & Besemer S.P. (2011). Creative products. In M. A. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.) Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 273-281). San Diego CA: Academic Press.

  • Osborne A.F. (1953). Applied imagination. New York: Scribner’s.

  • Rhodes M. (1961). An analysis of creativity Phi Beta Kappen 42 305-310.

  • Root-Bernstein R. S. (1988). Setting the stage for discovery. The Sciences 28(3) 26-34.

  • Runco M. A. (1994a). Conclusions concerning problem finding problem solving and creativity. In M. A. Runco (Ed.) Problem finding problem solving and creativity (pp. 271-291). Westport CT US: Ablex Publishing.

  • Runco M. A. (1994b). Creativity and its discontents. In M. P. Shaw & M. A. Runco (Eds.) Creativity and affect (pp. 102-123). Westport CT: Ablex Publishing.

  • Runco M. A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian Journal of Education 47 317-324.

  • Runco M. A. (2007). A hierarchical framework for the study of creativity. New Horizons in Education 55(3) 1-9.

  • Runco M. A. (2014). Creativity: Theories and themes: Research development and practice (2nd ed.). San Diego CA US: Elsevier Academic Press.

  • Runco M. A. & Cayirdag N. (2012). The theory of personal creativity and implications for the fulfillment of children’s potentials. In O. N. Saracho (Ed.) Contemporary perspectives on research in creativity in early childhood education (pp. 31-43). Charlotte NC: IAP Information Age Publishing.

  • Runco M. A. & Chand I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review 7(3) 243-267.doi:10.1007/BF02213373

  • Runco M. A. & Charles R. E. (1993). Judgments of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences 15(5) 537-546. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(93)90337-3

  • Runco M. A. & Jaeger G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 24(1) 92-96. doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.650092

  • Runco M.A. & Kim D. (2011). The four P’s of creativity: Person product process and press. In M. A. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.) Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 534-537). San Diego CA: Academic Press.

  • Sawyer R. K. & DeZutter S. (2009). Distributed creativity: How collective creations emerge from collaboration. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 3(2) 81. doi:10.1037/a0013282

  • Simonton D. K. (1976). Philosophical eminence beliefs and zeitgeist: An individual-generational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34(4) 630-640. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.34.4.630

  • Simonton D. K. (1979). Multiple discovery and invention: Zeitgeist genius or chance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37(9) 1603-1616. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.9.1603

  • Simonton D. K. (1980). Thematic fame melodic originality and musical zeitgeist: A biographical and transhistorical content analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38(6) 972-983. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.6.972

  • Simonton D. K. (1990). History chemistry psychology and genius: An intellectual autobiography of historiometry. In M. A. Runco & R. S. Albert (Eds.) Theories of Creativity (pp. 92-115). Newbury Park CA: Sage.

  • Simonton D. K. (1998). Creativity genius and talent development. Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education 21(1) 86-87.

  • Simonton D. K. (2004). Exceptional creativity and chance: Creative thought as a stochastic combinatorial process. In L. V. Shavinina & M. Ferrari (Eds.) Beyond knowledge: Extracognitive aspects of developing high ability (pp. 39-72). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

  • Simonton D. K. (2013). Creative thought as blind variation and selective retention: Why creativity is inversely related to sightedness. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 33(4) 253-266. doi:10.1037/a0030705

  • Simonton D. K. (2015). Thomas Edison’s creative career: The multilayered trajectory of trials errors failures and triumphs. Psychology of Aesthetics Creativity and the Arts 9(1) 2.

  • Sio U. N. & Ormerod T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin 135(1) 94-120. doi:10.1037/a0014212

  • Sullivan G. (2010). Art practice as research: Inquiry in visual arts (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.

  • Tashakkori A. & Teddlie C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks CA:Sage.

  • Thompson P. Parker R. & Cox S. (2016). Interrogating creative theory and creative work: Inside the games studio. Sociology 50(2) 316-332

  • Tierney P. & Farmer S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal 45(6) 1137-1148.

  • Tobi H. & Kampen J. K. (2018). Research design: the methodology for interdisciplinary research framework. Quality & Quantity 52(3) 1209-1225.

  • Torrance E. P. (1979). The search for satori & creativity. Buffalo N.Y.: Creative Education Foundation.

  • Tracy S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry 16(10) 837-851.

  • Wallas G. (1926). The art of thought. J. Cape: London.

  • Woodman R. W. Sawyer J. E. & Griffin R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. The Academy of Management Review 18(2) 293-321. doi:10.2307/258761

  • Zhang L. & Sternberg R. J. (2011). Revisiting the investment theory of creativity. Creativity Research Journal 23(3) 229-238.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 221 221 4
PDF Downloads 145 145 3