Will Asia be a Creative Center?

McKinsey & Company recently published two perspectives on Asia's innovation potential. There is growing concern among some in the US, fed by some recent reports, that Asia may surpass the US as an incubator of innovation.

This may be true in terms of process innovation. They may be able to produce and distribute products and services more efficiently using new methods. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, many developing countries are branching out into new industries, and may not have a lot of bad habits to unlearn before they can apply new techniques. Second, both developed and developing countries can learn lessons from long-standing economic powers regarding what works and what doesn't. I've heard it suggested that this is why mass transit in some major Asian cities seems much better than that in big Western cities with older systems. Learning from others' mistakes is typically cheaper than learning from your own. It isn't just mistakes, of course, that offer lessons; Iqbal Qadir suggests in the McKinsey debate that technologies originally designed in the West are being used in Asia for new purposes.

But innovation is not the same as creativity. When we talk about Creatives we mean people who create something new. Innovation includes this, of course, but it also includes improvements on existing things. Asia may be better improvers, now or in the future, but they are missing a few things that would allow them to take the lead in creativity.

First, a stable and free government is important. Stability helps ensure basic needs are met so people can devote time and energy to creativity rather than to basic survival. Freedom is important so Creatives can work without constantly looking over their shoulder to see who they're upsetting. In Southeast Asia, Singapore does the best in this regard; Thailand, which was on its way to becoming a model for the region, stumbled in the past couple years, while Malaysia and Indonesia are making progress but not quite there yet.In Northeast Asia, japan and Korea stand out, while in Southwest Asia, India has policies designed to encourage creativity in certain fields.

Another important element is an educational system that provides a foundation for creative pursuits. Having taught at a university in Asia, I found that my students had experienced an educational upbringing that emphasized memorization, discouraged challenges to the instructor, and did not encourage independent thinking. Though different educational opportunities are being introduced that encourage creativity, they will take time to have an effect across society.

Finally, creativity benefits from social capital, which comes from relationships and trust among members of a society, and this is a trait many Asian societies lack for a variety of reasons. Francis Fukuyama's book Trust examined cultures in Asia and the west and found Asian cultures often lacked social capital in favor of emphasis on the family or the state. A strong civil society and the subsequent social capital is essential for encouraging collaboration and developing Creatives. Creativity is sharply improved by collaboration, which is common in the US but not so much in Asia.

So, concerns about Asia taking over creative dominance might not be valid, despite their growth in the broader realm of innovation. One thing to watch in the future is the trend of foreign students and workers in the US returning to their home countries. Taking back the education, the experiences, and the lessons they learned in the US can enhance the creative power of their countries. For now, though, the US seems to retain its place as the most desirable environment for Creatives.