How to Fly a Horse: The Secret History of Creation, Invention, and Discovery

Chapter 8 examines which organizations are best able to create. In an earlier chapter, Ashton argues that the best creating happens alone, so here he asks the question, “How can anyone build an organization that creates?” (194). He begins with a story about the development of the first fighter plane to use jet engines in the US military. Lockheed Corporation received this task by the government under a strict timetable of 180 days, and it not only succeeded but came in ahead of schedule. The author then dissects how Lockheed achieved this feat.

Part of the recipe for success lay in the culture of the company. The engineer who led the project, Kelly Johnson, had questioned the design of an airplane when he was fresh out of college. Instead of the company firing him, or Johnson being laughed out of the room, Lockheed gave Johnson a chance to prove himself. He turned out to be correct. Ashton calls this the “show me” approach, when a manager looks for evidence with an open mind rather than making assumptions. Other aspects that can lead to creative organizations include a bond shared by the secrecy of a project or an isolated location, engineers and mechanics working together with equal input, and action taking precedence over planning and discussion.

This last point is one Ashton deals with extensively. He presents an exercise developed by designer Peter Skillman and a colleague in which a group of people receive some uncooked spaghetti, string, tape, and a marshmallow. In 18 minutes, they had to build the tallest structure they could to support the marshmallow on top. Different groups, including children, attempted the test, and among those building the highest structures were kindergarteners. Their results were better than adult groups made up of attorneys, CEOs, or business school students. The reason is that they jumped right in and just started working together. Adults, on the other hand, wasted too much time talking before beginning to work—especially in terms of “power struggles” that involved hierarchy. Studies show that children who have just developed language skills use them simultaneously with the pursuit of a goal. Over time, however, humans learn that talking and acting are separate and exclusive behaviors. In short, “adults think before acting; children think by acting” (221).

Aside from language use, the other important thing the “marshmallow test” highlighted was the lack of hierarchy among the kindergarteners. As Ashton notes, “Organizations are made of people interacting. What an organization organizes is everyday human interactions” (223). The field of microsociology examines the “interaction rituals” of organizations that determine how creative they are. Those that spend more time on meetings are less creative. Meeting equals talking, which is not doing. Ashton argues this is not just unproductive but actually counterproductive due to something called the “hidden curriculum.” There is often a disconnect between what an organization says or espouses and what it actually does. Over time, this causes employees to disengage and cease caring because of the almost hypocritical nature of the environment. Thus, the most creative organizations emphasize rituals of doing over rituals of talking and minimize hierarchy.

This short closing chapter emphasizes the need to give everyone opportunities to create. The author briefly recounts the story of Francis Galton, one of the early advocates of eugenics, which was the belief that the human race can evolve by excluding certain genetic groups and promoting others in the process of reproduction. The modern notion of the word “genius” comes from Galton’s book Hereditary Genius—that is, exceptional abilities possessed by a rare few. The original meaning was “spirit,” which Ashton argues is the true meaning of the term “creative genius.” It is something that is part of human nature, a spirit in all of us.

Ashton concludes that the universality of creativity is necessary for humankind. As problems arise, we all need to do our part to help find solutions. He claims that the reason Thomas Malthus’s dire 18th-century predictions about population outstripping resources have not come true is that with increased population comes increased creativity. In short, we have found answers to the problems caused by population, and as long as everyone is allowed to participate in this, we will continue to stay ahead of the problems by creating more solutions. According to Ashton, “this is why we need new. Consumption is a crisis because of math; it is not yet a catastrophe because of creation. We beat change with change” (240).