653224
research-article2016
JHPXXX10.1177/0022167816653224Journal of Humanistic PsychologyLombard and Müller
Article
Opening the Door
to Creativity: A
Psychosynthesis
Approach
Journal of Humanistic Psychology
2018, Vol. 58(6) 659–688
© The Author(s) 2016
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167816653224
DOI: 10.1177/0022167816653224
journals.sagepub.com/home/jhp
Catherine Ann Lombard1
and Barbara C. N. Müller2
Abstract
Given the great importance of creativity in society, and in health psychology
in particular, investigating how creativity can be enhanced is a valuable area
of research. Interventions that enable individuals to become more creative
vary in their focus from increasing divergent thinking to task reactivation
during sleep. This article introduces psychosynthesis psychology as an
additional theoretical and therapeutic approach for enhancing creativity
through its concept that creativity originates from different levels of
the unconscious. We show that the subpersonality model, one of the
fundamental psychosynthesis techniques, is an effective intervention for
aiding creative expression as it helps people connect to different levels
of their unconscious creativity. It is assumed that through the use of this
technique, clients are able to release and unblock energies that not only
allow them to rebuild their personal identities but also become actively
creative in their daily lives. We support this assumption with qualitative
findings that include testimonies from eleven clients in The Netherlands
who received psychosynthesis counseling. In addition, qualitative data of a
case study demonstrates subpersonality integration and its role in helping
clients to become more creative in their personal and professional lives. The
1Istituto
di Psicosintesi, Centro di Firenze, Florence, Italy
Science Institute, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
2Behavioural
Corresponding Author:
Catherine Ann Lombard, Istituto di Psicosintesi, Centro di Firenze, Via S. Domenico, 16,
50133 Florence, Italy.
Email: loveandwill@live.com
660
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
present article is, to the best of our knowledge, the first to demonstrate
the beneficial effects of using psychosynthesis to facilitate creativity. The
framework of psychosynthesis psychology, its techniques (which include the
subpersonality model), and its therapeutic approach are viable methodologies
for anyone searching to unblock and activate new creative energy and
achieve personal and professional growth.
Keywords
creativity, psychosynthesis, subpersonality, personal growth, self-actuation,
self-individuation
Introduction
The creative process has been of interest to great thinkers since the time of
Plato and Aristotle, yet after more than 2,000 years, no general consensus
exists for its definition. It is, however, generally accepted that creativity
involves a novel product, idea, or solution that is of value to the individual
and/or larger social group (Amabile, 1983). One of the essential abilities fundamental to creativity is cognitive flexibility (Chi, 1997; Jausovec, 1991,
1994; Müller, Gerasimova, & Ritter, 2016; Runco & Okuda, 1991; Thurston
& Runco, 1999). Cognitive flexibility is the ability to break cognitive patterns, to overcome fixed association patterns, and to avoid a reliance on conventional ideas or solutions (Guilford, 1967). Researchers describe cognitive
flexibility as the cognitive core of creativity and an important component of
“real life” creativity (Baghetto & Kaufman, 2007; Hennessey & Amabile,
2010). In addition, studies have shown that high cognitive flexibility relates
positively to better and even exceptional creative achievement (e.g., S. H.
Carson, Peterson, & Higgins, 2005).
As creativity has been suggested to have many positive outcomes for
health and well-being (for a review, see Stuckey & Nobel, 2010), techniques
to foster creativity are well investigated. Well-known techniques to enhance
creative thinking and cognitive flexibility are, among others, practicing
divergent thinking and metaphor generation (for a review, see Scott, Leritz,
& Mumford, 2004). Perhaps three of the most broadly applicable tactics are
(1) a shift of perspective, (2) questioning one’s own assumptions, and (3) the
use of analogies (e.g., Cropley, 1997; Nickerson, 1999; Scott et al., 2004).
Often these three tactics can function in sequence. For example, it is assumed
that by questioning our assumptions, we begin to release our expectations
and open up avenues for new ideas, activities, and possibilities (i.e., new
Lombard and Müller
661
perspectives) and, consequently, begin to engage more readily in analogical
reasoning.
A change of perspective can occur outwardly in a literal and sensory way
or inwardly in how the individual thinks about or defines a problem. For
example, a current tactic often used in programs designed to enhance creative
potential is to ask participants to “stand the problem on its head,” that is, turn
the issue upside down to obtain a different point of view (Runco, 1999).
Often our perceptions of a problem are held in place by our assumptions.
While assumptions can be beneficial in directing our daily behavior and
allowing us to be free from thinking through every detail of routine issues,
they can also inhibit creativity by limiting our perceptions. Too often assumptions are patterns of thinking that are difficult to break away from and even
incorrect when facing new problems (Davis, 1999). Once we are able to
change our assumptions and open up our perspectives, analogical reasoning
can also occur. Analogical reasoning involves the active construction of
coherent relational mappings, such as metaphors. Studies in this field have
focused on how people use existing knowledge to draw inferences about new
situations and, in particular, the successful combination and reorganization of
ideas to generate new understandings (e.g., Mumford & Porter, 1999).
This present article shows that psychosynthesis, until now lacking in
the creativity literature, is a needed framework and therapeutic approach
to enhancing creativity. One of the concepts of psychosynthesis is that
creativity not only emerges from the lower unconscious but also from the
higher unconscious. Psychosynthesis therapy includes techniques, such as
the subpersonality model, that encourage clients to connect to their different levels of unconsciousness and, consequently, to a broader range of
their creative energies. This article is a qualitative study showing how psychosynthesis counseling works to enhance creativity. In the next sections,
we introduce psychosynthesis concepts, its views on creativity, and its
therapeutic techniques, in particular the subpersonality model, used to foster creativity.
Surprisingly, notions of creativity are not widely found in the counseling
literature. However, research has shown parallels between creative training
processes and counseling methods (Cole & Sarnoff, 1980; Frey 1975; Schubert
& Biondi, 1975). Similarly, studies have shown that outcomes of both creative
training as well as counseling include an increase in participants’ personal
growth, enjoyment, and self-confidence in a variety of nontechnical areas;
increased levels of functioning in relationships, communication, and problem
solving; and improved performances in divergent thinking and feeling
(Mansfield, Busse, & Krepelka, 1978; Parnes & Noller, 1973). Although correlation studies have shown evidence that creativity and self-actualization are
662
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
related, there is some uncertainty about the direction of effect (Buckmaster &
Davis, 1985; Runco, Ebersole, & Mraz, 1991).
Divergent thinking is a central feature of creativity and tends to be tentative
and exploratory, oriented to multiple possibilities, including the ability to hold
contradictory ideas simultaneously in one’s mind while incorporating and
modifying new ideas. In fact, for many clients in counseling, their first step
toward positive growth and change can be learning and practicing divergent
thinking and feeling (e.g., D. K. Carson, 1999). In line with this assumption,
Milenković (2007) has stated that “psychotherapy is a scientific discipline but
also an art of re-creation for people, their personality and behavior, . . . implying new attitudes towards oneself, others, and the future that involves awakening the creativity in the client” (p. 56). Rogers (1961) also argued that “the
mainspring of creativity appears to be the same tendency . . . as the creative
force in psychotherapy” (p. 351). Jung (1922/1966) believed that creativity
plays a pivotal part in the process of self-realization, and Maslow (1971) concluded that self-actualization and creativity are interdependent, with each one
facilitating the other, and may in fact “turn out to be the same thing” (p. 57). As
such, the counselor and client can be seen as coproducers of ideas and solutions
that are both novel and useful in that they create a new way of being for the
client that is more satisfying, empowering, and ultimately creative.
Despite psychosynthesis psychology having the possibility of providing a
holistic framework for the enhancement of creativity, this approach remains, for
the most part, missing from the creativity literature. Psychosynthesis is an integrative transpersonal psychology that provides a universal framework to incorporate an understanding of one’s body, feelings, attitudes, and behavior into a
harmonious and synthesized whole that includes all the human dimensions—
physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual. Psychosynthesis also provides a therapeutic approach that focuses on enabling clients to work toward such a
synthesis. Psychosynthesis differs from psychoanalysis in that psychosynthesis
emphasizes personal and spiritual synthesis, not analysis (Assagioli, 2000,
2002; Nguyen, 2002). Before introducing how psychosynthesis can increase
creativity, we first provide an overview of the psychosynthesis model of the
human personality followed by a brief description of its therapeutic techniques,
in particular, the subpersonality model. We then present our qualitative findings,
including a case study, of how the subpersonality model enhanced creativity for
eleven international clients who received psychosynthesis counseling.
An Overview of Psychosynthesis
In 1933, Assagioli (1888-1974) first published in English his model of the
human psyche (Figure 1), which he described as a:
Lombard and Müller
663
Figure 1. Assagioli’s (2000, p. 15) model of the structure of the psyche.
Note. Dotted lines indicate permeable boundaries.
Conception of the constitution of the human being in his living concrete reality
. . . It is, of course, a crude and elementary picture that can give only a structural
static, and almost “anatomical” representation of our inner constitution, while
it leaves out its dynamic aspect, which is the most important and essential one
(Assagioli, 2000, p. 14).
As Assagioli was quick to recognize, his model of the human psyche may
appear “crude and elementary,” but one could view it in the same light as, for
example, the Pythagorean theorem, the mathematical abstraction that provides an equation for a perfect right triangle. Even though no triangle in the
physical world actually exists that equates to its formula, this theorem helps
our understanding of right triangles. We propose that Assagioli’s model of the
human psyche is similar, providing an abstract formula for the human
psyche—a working model for the structure, mechanisms, and processes triggering personal and spiritual growth.
The Self and I–Self Connection. According to Assagioli (2000), the Self is a
transpersonal center, a “unifying and controlling Principle of our life” (p. 21).
The Self (6) is represented in Figure 1 as a star, and stands in relationship
664
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
with the “I” (5), the “inner still point that we experience as truly ourselves”
(Hardy, 1987, p. 28). In addition, every individual has a field of “I” consciousness (4), which contains our conscious sensations, images, thoughts,
feelings, desires, and impulses. The Self and the “I” are ideally aligned as
indicated by the vertical dotted line, and the connection between them is
referred to as the I-Self. Both the Self and the “I” have two central functions:
consciousness and will. From a psychosynthesis point-of-view, our life’s
journey is to seek, reconnect, and synthesize the consciousness and will of
the “I” with the consciousness and will of the Self—in other words, to synthesize the personal with the transpersonal. With the Self incorporated into
his model, one could assert that the Self, as defined by Assagioli, has a more
systematic role than the Self as defined by Jung. The Self, as proposed by
Jung (1979), is a fundamental transcendent archetype that expresses human
wholeness and the union of opposites, most generally, the union of the polarity of the conscious and unconscious. What is strikingly different from Assagioli’s concept of the Self is that, according to Jung, the Self (like all
archetypes) cannot be directly experienced by the individual but is rather a
guide and attractor through the process of individuation. In contrast, Assagioli believed that the Self is a reality that can be directly experienced by the
individual, and is actually the key part of the individual (as opposed to outside the person) that connects the transpersonal with the personal and, hence,
the personal with the universal. For a full comparison of Assagioli and Jung,
please refer to Rosselli and Vanni (2014).
Different Levels of Personal Unconsciousness. Psychosynthesis subdivides the
personal unconscious into (1) lower, (2) middle, and (3) higher. The lower
unconscious contains basic psychological activities which coordinate bodily
functions, fundamental drives, and primitive urges, as well as complexes
containing intense emotion (Assagioli, 2000). Although on first sight comparable to Freud’s psychoanalysis, psychosynthesis goes beyond analyzing the
human personality and its dysfunctionalities by placing an emphasis on fostering synthesis. Like psychoanalysis, psychosynthesis also aims to develop
a healthy ego and heal (childhood) trauma, however, its ultimate goal is to
create a well-integrated whole that encompasses the client’s personal and
spiritual levels (Assagioli, 2007).
The middle unconscious contains the awareness that lies within the periphery of our consciousness and remains “easily accessible to it” (Assagioli,
2000, p. 15). This is where memories are held that are easily retrievable and
where “imaginative activities are elaborated and developed in a sort of psychological gestation before their birth into the light of consciousness”
(Assagioli, 2000). The higher unconscious or superconscious holds our
Lombard and Müller
665
greater human potential and is the region from which we receive our “higher
intuitions and inspirations—artistic, philosophical or scientific, ethical
‘imperatives’ and urges to humanitarian and heroic action” (Assagioli, 2000).
Personal Psychosynthesis and Spiritual Psychosynthesis. What distinguishes psychosynthesis from most other psychologies is the understanding that the Self
relates to the higher qualities within human beings allowing them to foster their
I-Self connection and grow toward their authentic personality. One’s authentic
personality is defined as an “expression of the natural, authentic sense of self,
of who we truly are” which is more than the sum of one’s social roles (Firman
& Gila, 2002, p. 48). The reestablishment of the I-Self connection can occur
along two lines: personal psychosynthesis and transpersonal or spiritual psychosynthesis. Human growth that involves work with either the middle unconscious or the lower unconscious is referred to as personal psychosynthesis
while spiritual psychosynthesis is aimed at integrating material from the higher
unconscious (Firman & Gila, 2002). These two developmental paths correspond with Maslow’s (1968) recognition that some individuals are “self-actualized” and other “transcending self-actualizers,” the latter distinguished as
people in touch with superconscious material or peak experiences.
Psychosynthesis Psychotherapy. While psychosynthesis counseling sessions
might look similar to other forms of counseling such as Psychodynamic,
Person-Centered or Gestalt, what is distinct to psychosynthesis is the idea
that there is a Self and all counseling is ultimately trying to achieve the recovery of the Self (Whitmore, 2004). Fluent in Sanskrit and a scholar of Eastern
religions, Assagioli (n.d.) understood that the realization of the Self was a
“supreme paradox” which could manifest through three distinct attitudes: (1)
the Buddhist understanding of “No Self,” (2) the mystical merging in Another,
in God, and (3) the Vedanta philosophical realization of the true Self, of one’s
true Being. He wrote,
If one identifies “Self” with the empirical personality, then the attitude is either
1) or 2), according whether one is mystical or not. If one identifies oneself with
the emerging spiritual consciousness and transfers the self-identity to each
higher level, then 3). There are advantages and drawbacks of each attitude.
What is important is to recognize that the three attitudes are three ways of
realizing the same glorious Reality, of attaining the same sublime goal.
(Assagioli, n.d.)
Perhaps this inclusion of such distinct attitudes and their equal potential in
helping us reach great inner freedom and joy is what makes psychosynthesis
666
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
so fruitful. By including a higher consciousness within the psyche’s framework and a Self to which we all have a universal and yet personal connection,
psychosynthesis concepts and techniques provide a framework in which the
realization of the Self is not only permitted but also nurtured, anticipated, and
longed for.
On a practical level, psychosynthesis counselors work within a flexible
yet structured framework helping clients to examine and ruminate over the
situations that trigger their problems, interpersonal relationships involved,
physical sensations and emotions evoked, attitudes and beliefs stimulated,
and the values which may be hidden and implicit (Assagioli, 2000; Nguyen,
2002; Whitmore, 2004). Problems and obstacles are seen not as pathological
states to be eliminated but rather as creative opportunities that “at their deepest level are inherently meaningful, evolutionary, coherent, and potentially
transformative” (Whitmore, 2004, p. 11).
Psychosynthesis View of Creativity
Psychosynthesis literature on creativity and the creative process have mainly
focused on methods to foster, regulate, and direct children’s and young adult’s
education and creative expression (Assagioli 1963, 1988; Whitmore, 1986).
The psychosynthesis perspective regarding creativity is that the creative process often starts and is almost wholly carried through our three different
fields of unconsciousness (1, 2, and 3 in Figure 1) as opposed to our field of
consciousness (4 in Figure 1). This idea corresponds precisely with Maslow’s
(1962) statement that the generation of new ideas—what he defined as primary creativeness—is derived from the unconscious and is a “heritage of
every human being” (p. 95).
One’s creative imagination and its subsequent creative expression differs
according to the level of unconsciousness from which it originates. Assagioli
(1963) states that the most frequent sources of creative expression are drives,
urges, desire, and emotions that spring from the lower or middle levels of the
unconscious. In addition, creative expression that originates in the higher
consciousness or superconscious, while often dormant, holds the potential for
more meaningful and life-enhancing results, including the energy to creatively rebuild one’s identity through the integration and synthesis of various
aspects and functions of the personality. Assagioli (2000) differentiates
superconscious material from middle and lower unconscious material in that
superconscious material often arrives intact and new with very little connection to previous experiences. Superconscious material does not arise “in the
usual way from the lower unconscious as the result of now released but previously repressed experiential contents; it is something new” (Assagioli, 2000,
Lombard and Müller
667
Figure 2. Stars or clusters (8) in the superconscious indicate creative activities
(e.g., literary or musical) as they project their outcome into the field of everyday
consciousness (4) (Assagioli, 2000, p. 178). Dotted lines indicate permeable
boundaries.
p. 175). This idea matches Maslow’s (1962) definition of primary creativeness as that “which is a source of new discovery—of real novelty—of ideas
which depart from what [already] exists” (p. 94).
Assagioli continues by explaining that there are two ways that creative
superconscious material is received and experienced. The first way is when
the creative material descends into the field of “I” consciousness (see
Figure 2). In other words, the creative activity is projected by the superconscious onto the personal “I,” and this everyday “I” consciousness “remains
practically unchanged and merely receives—sometimes surprised and
intrigued—the new and unexpected contents or the results of something
working within” (Assagioli, 2000, p. 178).
The second way superconscious materials enters consciousness is by the “I”
ascending to superconscious levels which can occur either spontaneously, for
example, during heightened moments of danger or through strenuous inner
exercise such as prayer, meditation, or focusing on an abstract thought. At these
moments, individuals often receive intuitive flashes of understanding and
668
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
profound meaning. Several studies have, in fact, investigated the link between
meditation and creativity (e.g., Colzato & Ozturk, 2012; Cowger & Torrance,
1982; Horan, 2009; Müller et al., 2016; Orme-Johnson & Granieri, 1977) and
suggested that meditation is a means to enhance creativity.
It is important to note that an individual can have access to creative superconscious material without having developed a well-organized, harmonious
personality. Mozart is an example of someone with an extraordinary gift for
creating music, yet whose personality was not necessarily integrated or synthesized with the higher unconscious. Jung (1952) also clearly points out that
development of the personality is not an absolute prerogative of a person of
genius. On the other hand, Assagioli (2000) differentiates those individuals
who like Mozart are creatively gifted but whose personalities remain unaltered from those like Pythagoras, Plato, and Dante, whom he sees as “great
universal geniuses who have an all-round expansive self-realization” and
successfully demonstrated “their greatness through their creative action in
various fields” (p. 176).
Any exchange of content between the superconscious and “I” can often
result in a transcendent experience, or what Maslow (1954, p. 164) referred
to as a “peak experience” that can occur along a continuum from intense to
mild intensity. According to Assagioli (2000), such peak experiences are of
“great importance and value for fostering creativity and for achieving psychosynthesis” (p. 35). This exchange of creative material between the individual’s superconscious and “I” can yield a source of joyous self-revelation
regarding unforeseen aptitudes and gifts that an individual has yet to creatively realize, such as mathematical skills, artistic talent, or leadership ability (Assagioli, 1963). In line with this, Maslow (1954, 1962) also observed
that self-actualized persons were more creative in their everyday activities,
and those who had peak experiences were more apt to be creative in the fields
of poetry, music, philosophy, and religion. James (1982) also defined mystical experiences as always providing “insight into depths of truth unplumbed
by the discursive intellect” (p. 380), that is, a novel poetic quality.
Psychosynthesis Techniques for Fostering Creativity
While psychosynthesis counseling techniques are numerous and varied, particular to psychosynthesis are the self-identification exercise and the subpersonality model. Briefly, the goal of the self-identification exercise is to guide
the client through a meditation that systematically connects and brings awareness to the physical, emotional, and mental aspects of his or her personality.
Once this occurs, the client is then guided to dis-identify from each aspect and
ultimately to connect to the personal “I,” the source of pure consciousness and
Lombard and Müller
669
will. In the present article, we focus on whether the subpersonality model
increases creativity (see also, Cole & Sarnoff, 1980). The subpersonality
model describes a process by which the roles that we play in our lives become
synthesized into a unifying center of authenticity. Once the “I” disidentifies
from each subpersonality, it becomes the director and observer of all the individual’s subpersonalities, enabling them to function in a harmonious and balanced way. The self-identification exercise is often used in conjunction with
the subpersonality model to help clients effectively recognize and dis-identify
with their different subpersonalities. As integration of an individual’s subpersonalities proceeds and personal psychosynthesis develops, less energy is lost
in managing conflicting subpersonalities—instead their potential strengths
and capabilities become available. With subpersonality integration, one’s personal field of consciousness expands to include those subpersonalities that
were previously acting unconsciously and, consequently, the individual gains
more access to creative material in his or her middle and lower unconscious.
Like the model of the human psyche, the subpersonality model might initially
appear simplistic. However, the actual process of psychosynthesis is essentially dynamic, and spiritual psychosynthesis, in particular, “a long and arduous journey . . . full of surprises, difficulties, and even dangers [involving] a
drastic transmutation of the ‘normal’ elements of the personality, an awakening of potentialities hitherto dormant” (Assagioli, 2000, pp. 35-36).
Ultimately, synthesis of one’s subpersonalities allows for the greatest freedom of expression, as creative intuitions that exist in the unconscious can be
more readily actualized by the directing “I.” For example, the subpersonality
model has been shown to help international student sojourners come into
relationship with themselves and others, rebuild their personal and social
identity, and develop into more fully integrated human beings (Lombard,
2014). This current article examines how subpersonality integration also
resulted in the students’ increased creative activities in both their personal
and professional lives. The subpersonality model is further described in the
“Research Method” section. For a full explanation about the self-identification exercise and subpersonality model, please refer to the psychosynthesis
literature (Assagioli, 2000; Carter-Harr, 1975; Ferrucci, 1982; Lombard,
2014; Vargiu, 1974).
The Aim of this Study
The aim of this study was to ascertain if the psychosynthesis technique of the
subpersonality model might aid clients in The Netherlands to grow personally and creatively. In this part of the study, we hypothesized that, as the clients through psychosynthesis counseling were able to grow in personal “I”
670
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
consciousness, stymied energies formerly engaged in managing stress and
inner conflict would then be released for higher goals. These newfound energies could then come into contact with unconscious material which would
then be expressed through new creative activities. Maslow (1954) has noted
that “creativity . . . seemed to be an epiphenomenon of . . . greater wholeness
and integration,” and that “the extent that creativeness is constructive, synthesizing, unifying, and integrative, . . . depends in part on the inner integration of the person” (pp. 140-141).
Research Method
The source of data is psychosynthesis counseling work conducted in The
Netherlands from October 2008 to November 2013. The data gathered and
analyzed in this study are qualitative, and the following is a brief outline of
the research method used for this current study (for a more detailed explanation, see also Lombard, 2014).
Participants
Eleven clients (two male, nine female, ages ranging from 25 to 36 years)
voluntarily sought counseling, with nationalities from the following countries: Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal,
and South Africa. Four were married and the rest single; none had children.
Except for three, all were midway through their doctorate degree. The exceptions were two postdoctoral researchers and the spouse of a PhD candidate.
Clients’ fields of research included philosophy, tissue engineering, nanobiology, physiochemistry, computer science, geoscience, and technology and
sustainable development.
Psychosynthesis Clinical Methodology
Clients met the counselor from 10 to 55 times, two to four times per month,
with each session lasting 1 hour (>280 hours counseling work). Sessions
were conducted in English. In addition, clients were invited to self-reflect and
write about any critical issues they faced or emotions they felt between sessions and to e-mail their observations to the counselor. While the subject for
self-reflection remained open at all times, the client would sometimes be
directed to reflect and write on a specific topic and e-mail that reflection
before the next session. All clients were assured of confidentiality and anonymity and permission from all clients to quote them in this article has been
obtained.
Lombard and Müller
671
Subpersonality Model
Psychosynthesis assumes that we all have multiple subpersonalities that help
us to function in the world, mostly without much reflection or conscious
choice, such as Mother, Father, Teacher, and Leader. Often these subpersonalities are polar in nature, acting contrarily with antagonistic traits. We might be
carefree and spontaneous in one situation and frozen in another. Perhaps most
essential is the notion that a higher quality lies at the core of each subpersonality, no matter what its outer behavior might be. These higher qualities, like
truth, strength, and courage, are considered to be transpersonal, universal, and
timeless. However, these qualities can often be degraded or distorted when
expressed through a subpersonality. The challenge is not to repress or eliminate any subpersonality’s behavior, but rather to recover its higher quality and
express that gift in a more positive and holistic way. Psychosynthesis is about
synthesizing all of one’s subpersonalities into a unifying center of authenticity
where the “I” becomes the director and observer of all subpersonalities,
enabling them to function in a harmonious and balanced way. The subpersonality model includes the following stages: recognition, acceptance, coordination, integration, and finally synthesis of one’s numerous subpersonalities.
During psychosynthesis counseling sessions, clients initially recognized
their subpersonalities by assessing, alongside the counselor, what subpersonalities might be playing a dominant role in their presenting issue(s). These
subpersonalities were revealed through the different roles clients played in
different situations with different people. Once the subpersonality was recognized, the next step was to give it a name, for example, the Rebel or the Joker.
Humor was used during this stage to facilitate dis-identification, allowing the
client to playfully engage in relationship with that subpersonality. Once naming the subpersonality, the client then created its character sketch including a
drawing of the subpersonality, and was asked to continue reflecting on it in a
personal journal.
After recognition, the next step for the client was to accept his or her subpersonality. The client was asked to observe what triggered each subpersonality’s appearance and to watch and allow that subpersonality to exist. This
exercise helped strengthen the observer “I.” Alongside acceptance was the
complementary stage of coordination, which had the basic purpose of identifying and becoming more conscious of the subpersonality’s wants and needs
to find acceptable ways in which the needs could be fulfilled. Therefore, clients first identified how the needs of a subpersonality were typically fulfilled.
Subsequently, clients were asked to imagine how they might fulfill their subpersonalities’ needs in new, objective, and creative ways in order to transform
inner conflicts.
672
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
The final stages of the subpersonality process—integration and synthesis—
are lifetime endeavors. While coordination deals with the development and
understanding of specific subpersonalities, integration is concerned with the
relationship between subpersonalities as well as each one’s activity within
the personality as a whole. Synthesis involves the culmination of individual
growth that allows for balance and harmony of the entire personality and is
essentially interpersonal and transpersonal. As a result of synthesis, the life of
the individual and his or her interactions with others become “increasingly
characterized by a sense of responsibility, caring, co-operation, altruistic love
and transpersonal objectives” (Vargiu, 1974, p. 89).
To initiate these final stages, clients were presented an opportunity for
their subpersonalities to interact. Numerous techniques were used to allow
for such interactions including guided visualization, role play, imaginary
meetings, and/or letter writing from the observer to the subpersonality (and
vice versa). Throughout such interactions, clients were encouraged to
strengthen their role as the observer and, consequently, to consciously and
more creatively fulfill any conflicting needs. Clients were ultimately guided
to assess, appreciate, and come into relationship with the higher quality held
by each of their subpersonalities. Once the need of the subpersonality was
met in a new creative way, clients were asked to reflect on, practice, and
observe their expression of the subpersonality’s higher quality in the world.
Data Collection and Analysis
Clients played a central role in the process of data analysis to check for counter-indications of the emerging theses (Yin, 2003). First, at regular intervals,
the counselor and client held an evaluation of how the psychosynthesis counseling was working for the client and what techniques he or she found particularly useful. In addition, all clients held a self-evaluation with the
counselor during their last session; long-term clients self-evaluated their
meetings every 6 to 9 months. Prior to these evaluation meetings, clients
were asked to reflect on the turning points of their inner process, which were
considered changes in behavior or attitude that led to the resolution of any
presenting issues. Turning points were discussed one-by-one to reach consensus. In this way, clients were able to correct, reshape, or contextualize the
counselor’s perceptions as they deemed appropriate.
Data collected and analyzed from the counseling sessions included
e-mailed reflections, drawings created by all clients during the sessions, verbal testimonies of the participants who were recorded, and the researcher’s
reflections carefully written and compiled immediately after a session. For
those clients whose sessions were recorded, tapes were listened to by the
Lombard and Müller
673
researcher and reviewed. In particular, subpersonalities of each client were
collected from the researcher’s notes and clients’ e-mails with the following
details noted: the subpersonality name, the client’s description and drawing
of the subpersonality, the subpersonality’s wants and needs, its higher quality,
what triggered the appearance of the subpersonality and its response(s) to the
trigger(s). Also noted, if appropriate, was the subpersonality’s first appearance, past expressions, and possible origin within the context of the client’s
personal history. In addition, the researcher noted over time how the subpersonalities’ needs were being met, how its higher qualities were expressed,
and how the different subpersonalities of an individual were interacting.
After a session during which turning points were reviewed with the client, the
researcher carefully noted the agreed-upon items, allowing clients’ reflections and adjustments to be integrated into the final data collection and analysis. Consequently, the narrative of each client was carefully held, reflected
on, observed, and analyzed with the aim of garnering themes or patterns in
each client’s psychological process.
Results
To show how the subpersonality process enabled clients to more actively
engage with their creative process, the results are first presented through the
case study of Rudy,1 followed by direct quotes from the other clients. Rudy’s
narrative was chosen to demonstrate the findings and subpersonality model
because (1) his process best represents the processes of the other clients and
(2) his inner and outer journey best represents the process of personal psychosynthesis and how it can lead to an increase in creativity.
Reactivating Creativity Through Subpersonality Integration: A
Case Study
Rudy’s presenting issues were feelings of being stuck, both in his scientific
research and personal relationships. In the laboratory, he felt that his experiments were not yielding any useful data. For the past 6 months, he had been
struggling with a particular experiment that he “couldn’t seem to make happen.” In addition, 16 months earlier he had ended a relationship but was
afraid to start dating again. He admitted:
I feel like [the relationship] never ended or ended unsatisfactorily because I
couldn’t fix it. . . . Since grammar school, I’ve always had goals and I always
worked towards them. But then when my girlfriend left, I felt lost. Nothing
seemed to work anymore. I lost interest in my life.
674
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
Figure 3. Mr. Fix It (left) and Mr. Freeze. Two subpersonalities identified and
drawn (in separate sessions) by the client.
Identification and Recognition of Two Subpersonalities. By the seventh session,
Rudy identified a subpersonality he called Mr. Freeze (Figure 3, right), who
wanted to connect to others but needed space and time to feel safe. For example, recently at a friend’s wedding party, Mr. Freeze felt unable to join the
dancing, despite his skill and love for dancing. To feel safe in unfamiliar
company, Mr. Freeze immediately disengaged and remained “frozen” outside
the group. By Session 18, another more dominate subpersonality called Mr.
Fix It was identified (Figure 3, left), who wanted everyone to be happy and
also needed to feel safe (the same need as Mr. Freeze). This subpersonality
was connected to a deep unexpressed anger Rudy had recognized toward his
former girlfriend and also his younger sister. For example, in an attempt to fix
his relationship with his former girlfriend, Rudy had bought a house and
“fixed it up.” Mr. Fix It was happy when he could fix everyone’s problems,
but would become angry and frustrated when he could not. Whenever conflict arose around an unresolvable problem, to repress his anger and, consequently, feel safe, Mr. Fix It would immediately disconnect from the person
whose problem(s) he could not fix. Disconnecting from the other was the
same strategy Mr. Freeze employed when he felt unsafe. Part of Rudy’s
unconscious reason for entering counseling was to find a way to feel safe
with his feelings of anger and to learn how to express his anger without disconnecting from the conflicted relationship.
Lombard and Müller
675
Figure 4. The Lion (symbolizing anger) is waiting for the door to open. Drawing
by client.
In other words, Rudy’s feelings of anger were blocked, which manifested
in as an overall feeling of “being stuck.” This connection between his unexpressed anger and feeling of inertia became clear after Rudy was led through
a visualization during which he was asked to imagine his anger to be an animal. Rudy imagined his anger as a lion, waiting to be let out of a door, which
Rudy was unable to open, even in his imagination (see Figure 4). After this
visualization, Rudy remarked:
It was just a visualization, so why couldn’t I even visualize opening the door?
I even felt a bit stupid! What is this? If my imagination cannot open the door,
how can I myself open the door?
Exploring the Origins of Rudy’s Subpersonalities and How He Learned to Repress
Anger. Rudy agreed to more closely explore the epistemology of these two
subpersonalities as well as his attitude toward anger. Until the age of 5 years,
Rudy lived and traveled with his parents on a freight ship that transported 350
tons of cargo around northern Europe. His mother and father would take
shifts captaining the ship 24/7. Rudy related Mr. Fix It to learning at a young
age the need for everything to be shipshape on the boat. However, more profoundly, before Rudy’s birth, his mother was initially unable to become pregnant because of a hormonal problem. His parents began adoption procedures
for a child from India, which was expected to take 5 years to complete. During this time, the doctors provided Rudy’s mother with medicine, but still
insisted that she should not expect to become pregnant. However, Rudy was
676
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
soon conceived and born. In a profound and mysterious way, Rudy had
“fixed” his mother’s infertility problem. When Rudy was 3 years old, his
adoptive sister arrived from India, and 5 years later an adoptive brother (also
from India, but unrelated to his sister).
Rudy recalled his first experiences of Mr. Freeze when he was 10 years
old. Upon moving to a new school, Rudy remembered being very distraught
and crying in his room. He was having difficulty making new friends as he
found them harsh and deceitful. In addition, every summer his family would
vacation in caravan holiday parks where Rudy found himself “frozen with
dread” and unable to connect to the other children his age. As much as Mr.
Freeze longed to make new friends, he never felt safe enough.
Regarding his experience of expressing anger as a child, Rudy said that
anger was not allowed to be expressed in his family. He related an experience
from childhood when he was 8 years old, which happened three times. While
watching the news on TV and seeing all the injustice in the world, he became
very angry because he could not fix or change anything: “I went to my room
and shut the door. I didn’t want anyone to see me.” His mother and/or father
then would enter his room to console him. “Yes, we don’t like it either,” they
would say, “but there’s nothing we can really do about it.” Rudy quickly
learned that anger “doesn’t do any good” and “is a waste of time” and to
reason it away, instead of learning how to feel, accept, integrate, and express
it. These childhood incidents further crystallized Mr. Fix It’s behavior; as a
child, Rudy learned that whenever he could not fix a problem, “it was better”
to repress his feelings, especially those of anger.
Rudy described another example of a frustrated and angry Mr. Fix It who
learned to disconnect. When he was between 15 and 16 years, his sister (1314 years) managed to evoke anger in the family by choosing to date boyfriends that Rudy’s family felt were unacceptable and/or abusive. Rudy
recalled his parents holding long frantic discussions with him every night
about what to do about his sister. Finally when Rudy was 16, he told his parents that he refused to deal with his sister’s issues. Whenever they started
talking about her, he would go to his room, thereby disconnecting himself
from the family.
Identifying the Higher Qualities of Each Subpersonality. In both cases, two weeks
after he first identified Mr. Freeze and Mr. Fix It, Rudy was able to identify
each subpersonality’s higher quality. The higher quality held by Mr. Freeze
was a deep and sincere commitment when in relationship. And the higher
quality of Mr. Fix It was care for the other. “Care is the biggest and strongest
tool in Mr. Fix It’s toolbox,” said Rudy (see black box in Figure 3).
Lombard and Müller
677
Coordination and Integration of Mr. Freeze and Mr. Fix It. Once Rudy was able
to recognize and accept his two subpersonalities, he was also able to start to
observe what triggered their appearance and meet their needs in a new and
more creative way. For example, by accepting his Mr. Freeze subpersonality,
Rudy was able to consciously choose not to attend large social gatherings that
required quick and spontaneous connections and, consequently, triggered
feelings of being unsafe. Instead, he chose to frequent smaller more intimate
functions, like PhD association evenings, where he could take his time to
connect to others. In addition, he began to invite friends to also attend different functions with him in order to provide the social safety he felt he needed.
The more dominant Mr. Fix It subpersonality, however, was more difficult
to integrate as it required that Rudy also recognize, accept, and coordinate his
feelings of anger and frustration which could occur when Mr. Fix It was not
successful in managing or repairing a social situation. The key to learning to
fulfill Mr. Fix It’s need for safety in a new way was to learn how to manage
and express (that is “to fix”) his anger in a new way (other than simply disconnecting). Gradually, Rudy was able to learn to stay connected to the other
and express his anger in what felt to him as a safe manner. For example, Rudy
(as Mr. Fix It) had volunteered to maintain all the laboratory equipment for
his department. During one session, he explored with the counselor his inability to express anger in an appropriate way with a colleague who had broken a
scientific instrument. Immediately afterward and on returning to the lab, the
exact same colleague broke the exact same instrument again, providing Rudy
with a new chance to express his anger with this colleague. Rudy said that
despite initially feeling extremely angry, he and the colleague were able to
have “a good talk and things are good between them now.” He also observed:
It’s funny because this hour together just seems like we talk about things, but it’s
really about the awareness that comes and that carries out through the rest of the
week. I know now that I can still become angry, but realize that it’s because I
cannot fix the situation or I don’t agree with the ideas being talked about. I am
learning not to judge my anger, but to judge how I express my anger.
Ultimately, within the therapeutic alliance, Rudy felt safe enough to also
express his past anger against his ex-girlfriend, sister, and parents. During the
ninth session, Rudy heavily sobbed and was finally able to relieve his grief
for not having experienced in past relationships his deep longing for connection and safety, the two fundamental needs of his two subpersonalities. Along
with this physical and emotional release, Rudy’s counseling work continued
around balancing, coordinating, and integrating his two subpersonalities as
well as his anger.
678
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
Activating Synthesis and Experiencing a More Creative Life. To work toward the
ultimate stage of synthesis, Rudy was asked to reflect on, practice, and
observe the expression of his subpersonalities’ higher qualities in the world.
For example, once reflecting on the higher qualities of Mr. Freeze, Rudy was
better able to acknowledge, appreciate, and enjoy his deeper relationships
with friends and family. Right after the session during which Rudy sobbed,
he called his mother and together they cried on the phone about their past
broken relationship. Rudy also made the effort to visit his sister and managed
to reconnect to her. Midway through the counseling sessions, Rudy was dating again and had enrolled in a new dance class. A month before counseling
sessions ended, Rudy ran into his ex-girlfriend at a party by chance. Rudy
was able to approach and chat with her amiably, without feeling any anger
even though he felt her aloofness. This encounter allowed Rudy to finally
accept the ending of their relationship.
During Rudy’s last meeting, he noted,
I don’t feel stuck anymore. I thought the reason I was stuck was because I
hadn’t finished my relationship with my girlfriend. Then I found out I was
really angry, and I didn’t even want to say that word. Now I can recognize
situations where I freeze and can work with them. This frees up space in my
mind.
I also learned that I was always trying to fix things. In some cases, I would do
better to . . . just care about the person. Just to listen or say some comforting
words. Now I recognize situations where I am not responsible to fix things, but
I can care.
Coming into relationship with these subpersonalities and working with them
gives me more confidence. I feel more connected to myself, my body and
feelings. I really see that when I am not connected to myself, I lose myself, and
then I lose the connections to my work and to my relationships.
This new connection to his work was evident through the fact that Rudy felt
his research was also unstuck. By the end of the counseling work, Rudy was
able to more clearly discern that data collected before the meetings were
actually of value:
I can now look at past data and actually see that it works and proves that [my
project] works. But I used to think this data was rubbish. It never looked good
enough because I didn’t trust what I was doing. I felt frustrated and de-motivated.
Now I can see publications that I can write using this data. I even presented this
data as a keynote speaker at a conference. This data didn’t change. I changed!
Lombard and Müller
679
Now I have the confidence and trust in what I’m doing. It makes things more
clear. Everything comes more together instead of diverging into infinity.
Finally, Rudy returned to the image of the lion waiting for the door to open:
That was a very strong, striking visualization. Now I am opening the door—
wide open. I learned that if I feel stuck, there are ways to get myself unstuck.
Now I am looking for opportunities instead of past failures.
In sum, Rudy’s case study shows that by working with the subpersonality
model, creativity can be increased in three areas: in relationship with others,
in one’s personal life, and by enhancing professional achievement. First,
through the act of rebuilding a more conscious identity or “I,” the client was
able to explore more creative ways to deal with certain social situations and
develop new strategies for responding to conflict, thereby enabling him to
more effectively engage with others when confronted with difficult circumstances instead of disconnecting from the people around him. This implementation of new strategies for social interaction and the healing of past
conflicts helped foster more creativity in his personal life, as can be seen by
his participation in new dance lessons and his dating once again. Finally,
through the recognition, coordination and integration of different subpersonalities, the client was able to unblock repressed emotions, which, in turn,
enabled him to open up new perspectives when reviewing previously collected scientific data.
Reactivating Creativity Through Subpersonality Integration:
Other Client Examples
Rudy is one example of how clients were able to engage and work with the
subpersonality model in order to open up new creative approaches in their
personal and professional lives. In fact, all but one of the clients in this study
readily grasped the concept of subpersonalities and quickly incorporated and
applied the various techniques to manage and integrate them. As each client
began to build a relationship with their different subpersonalities, all were able
to better direct their energies toward their creative lives, personally and
professionally. For example, another client began counseling sessions feeling
depressed, lonely, and even fearful of the town and his local environment. After
15 sessions during which he began to recognize and, subsequently, coordinate
and integrate numerous subpersonalities, he was making new friends, had been
elected president of a professional association, and received two international
awards for his presentations and articles. He said:
680
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
Figure 5. Painting by a client who was prompted to attend art classes after
working with the subpersonality model.
My work is going so well. I am producing so much more than last year and I
have more concentration and energy.
Personal artistic creativity was the result for many clients once they
learned how to relate and work with their subpersonalities. For example, one
client decided to follow through on her long-held desire to take artistic photographs. Similarly, another client was encouraged through the actual act of
drawing her subpersonalities to pursue and develop her artistic talent. Here,
she reflects on her enrollment in drawing and painting classes (see Figure 5):
Indeed [my drawing] was very much related to our work, especially around my
subpersonality Miss Perfect. I took the classes, in part, to give myself a chance
to not be perfect. I also discovered that if I was missing art [in my life], I didn’t
have to look to somebody else, [but to] myself.
Here are other remarks by clients in recognition of their newly released
creative energy:
Our sessions helped me to grow personally far beyond what I could have
predicted. Now, I have more creative energy. It’s more “green” to be myself! I
see the post-doc that I want. And I have the energy to grab it. And it feels
exciting and so much better. (Portuguese client)
Lombard and Müller
681
What I have done . . . is a journey into self exploration. It has been a process of
understanding, acceptance and management of different aspects of myself.
This is a lifelong journey that I think everyone should begin. The counseling
helped me immensely not only in dealing with such a process, but also in
growing as a person and as a researcher. (Italian client)
As clients were able to objectively recognize their subpersonalities and
direct them from a stronger center of their personal “I,” they also discovered
new creative ways to engage in relationship with others. The follow testimonies demonstrate clients’ new perspectives on relationships:
Through the [psychosynthesis counseling] . . ., I learned how to address my
difficult supervisor and found a solution that has proved to be more successful
than I could have imagined. (Canadian client)
The ongoing therapy was very helpful to my personal growth. I’ll continue to
cultivate the strength, calmness, peace, passion and love I have learned with
care, and let them stay and grow deep inside me to illuminate my life and loved
ones. (Chinese client)
I’ve changed so much. . . . I’m now not just a better student, but also a better
friend, son, and brother. And the change is deep inside me. I know in the future
that I will also make a better husband and father. . . . And no one can ever take
these things away from me. (Brazilian client)
All these results show that clients expressed their new creativity in three
ways: (1) more artistically (as expressed through dance, painting, photography), (2) in their behavior and relationships (i.e., when confronted with both
intra- and interpersonal conflict), and (3) professionally (increased divergent
thinking, problem solving, analysis of data, and creative expression through
writing and presentations).
Discussion
Psychosynthesis counseling and, in particular, the subpersonality process has
shown to help clients become more creative in their personal and professional
lives. Through the integration of previous unconscious subpersonalities, clients were able to release blocked emotions, more creatively resolve personal
and interpersonal conflicts, access higher qualities, and engage more readily
in ordinary creative activities in their daily lives.
In short, clients showed increased creative thinking and cognitive flexibility through their subpersonality integration process, which required them to
682
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
continually question their assumptions, shift their perspective, and use analogies. As Thurston and Runco (1999) have pointed out, flexibility is an essential aspect of the cognitive process and can facilitate creative problem solving.
Flexibility, which reflects a capacity to redefine the task at hand, reinterpret
the goal, see a new way to use information, and/or change one’s strategy, is
also an important scoring index on most divergent thinking tests (Runco,
1991). Flexibility also allows an individual to see the whole of a situation or
problem—not just the parts, an ability that is fundamental to synthesis, in
general, and psychosynthesis in particular (Assagioli, 2000, 2003). As
Maslow (1968) stated, creative people are able “to bring separate and even
opposites into unity,” and creativity is “constructive, synthesizing, unifying,
and integrative” (p. 147). Assagioli (2003) also believed that all forms of
human creation are a result of a dynamic synthesis between polar elements,
and that “an essential attribute of wisdom is the power to ‘play with opposites’” (Assagioli, 2000, p. 104).
The subpersonality process is fundamentally concerned with creatively
bringing separate, often conflicting and opposite inner subpersonalities into
relationship and ultimate synthesis. Through the practice of active imagination, drawing, and humor, clients were able to first recognize and accept their
subpersonalities. As more awareness of each subpersonality grew, clients
then became active observers of their subpersonalities’ appearance, wants,
needs, and higher qualities. By searching and identifying new creative ways
to meet each subpersonalities’ needs, clients began to overcome fixed association patterns between the subpersonalities’ triggers and reactions, and thus
enhanced their cognitive flexibility. Clients were also prompted to question
their assumptions about their own behavior and choices, worldview, and perceptions of others. Over time, clients were able to move away from old patterns and solutions that they typically held regarding both inner and outer
conflicts. Consequently, their rebuilt identity enabled them to engage more
freely and creatively in the world.
Psychosynthesis counseling and the subpersonality process not only
helped increase clients’ divergent thinking through the active questioning of
their assumptions but also broadened their perspectives. Examples include
Rudy being able to suddenly see valuable data he had previously collected
and had thought worthless, and the clients who began to spontaneously pursue and develop their artistic skills such as photography and drawing. Finally,
the subpersonality process required clients to use, at times, profound and
deeply meaningful analogies. A subpersonality’s behavior in the here-andnow was often reflected on, compared with, and formulated alongside its first
appearance in the life of the client. In addition, fairy tales, dreams, and visualizations were regularly introduced to help the client draw certain
Lombard and Müller
683
understandings of their identity and behavior in a wider context, all of which
required clients to activate their creative imagination and draw analogical
parallels between symbolic representations and the reality of their lives.
Ultimately, throughout the subpersonality process, clients focused and
worked toward synthesis of their inner life and, as a consequence, emotional
energy was released. As clearly stated by Davis (1999) emotional barriers
interfere with creative thinking “by making us ‘freeze’” (p. 168). This phenomenon is easily recognizable in Rudy’s Mr. Freeze subpersonality. Through
the unblocking of emotional barriers such as anger, anxiety, fear of failure,
and even dread, other clients were also able to assess creative energy that not
only helped them rebuild their inner identity but also manifest creative acts in
their outer lives. This new creative energy appeared through their improved
work performance, daily activities, and their ability to more creatively engage
in relationship with themselves and others.
Of interest from a psychosynthesis perspective is the fact that none of the
clients related transpersonal or peak experiences during their time spent in
counseling. This result seems to indicate that all the clients developed along
the level of personal psychosynthesis, which, as stated earlier, focuses on
growth that involves work with either the middle or the lower unconscious
(Firman & Gila, 2002). Therefore, we assume that the creative activity later
revealed by all the clients came from those specific levels of consciousness.
For further research, it might be interesting to investigate whether and how
creative activity from higher levels of the unconsciousness is facilitated
through the subpersonality model.
Limitations and Future Research
This article has some limitations that need to be addressed. First, the findings
rest on the presumption that clients’ increased creative activity are the direct
effect of the subpersonality model and not other influences during the psychosynthesis counseling sessions. It might be possible that other used techniques,
such as the self-identification exercise, also enhanced creative processes. Based
on the literature, it is possible that other techniques such as expressive movement, music, and the use of symbolic images have an influence on creativity
(Assagioli, 1963). Because of the counseling setting, it was not possible to disentangle these influences, and future research is needed to look at possible interactions. In addition, this small client sample, while culturally and demographically
diverse, makes it difficult to draw any general conclusions, and future research
in this area should try to increase the number of participants. However, we think
that, together with the literature, our data nicely demonstrate the positive influences the subpersonality model can have for some clients.
684
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
Another limitation exists because of the fact that this study was conducted
using a qualitative research method. There is a long debate in the literature on
whether or not qualitative research can or cannot indicate causal relationship
(see, Maxwell, 2004a). In line with the realist position (Maxwell, 2004b), we
think that, especially when it comes to the process of giving meaning to certain events like psychosynthesis does, cause–effect relationships can be
drawn. Nevertheless, future research should investigate the effectiveness of
the subpersonality model for increasing creativity alongside the collection of
empirical, quantitative data, through the use of well-established divergent
thinking tests (such as those by Christensen, Guilford, Merrifield, & Wilson,
1978; Torrance, 1974) to further support our conclusions. Nevertheless, the
qualitative methodology did allow for intimate conversations over many
months with clients, bringing depth and breadth to this analysis, which would
be lost when applying solely quantitative analyses. With only a handful of
published articles on psychosynthesis methodology and techniques, there
remains no doubt that more research is needed to explore its theory, tools, and
practice for the enhancement of creativity.
Conclusion
This research indicates that the subpersonality model might provide an effective means for fostering creative thinking and cognitive flexibility within the
context of counseling. As such, the model could also be offered outside this
context as part of a larger training program on an individual, small group, or
team basis. Psychosynthesis is one means for individuals to come closer to
their own personal consciousness and will and, consequently, more easily in
touch with their emotions, intuitions, and imagination—all fuel for creative
activity.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all the participants whose testimonies and drawings appear
in this study. We would also like to thank the Association for the Advancement of
Psychosynthesis for their mini-grant, which aided the authors in the writing of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by a
Lombard and Müller
685
mini-grant from the Association for the Advancement of Psychosynthesis for the
writing of this article.
Note
1.
All clients’ names are pseudonyms.
References
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357-376.
Assagioli, R. (1963). Creative expression in education. Psychosynthesis Research
Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.psykosyntese.dk/a-176/
Assagioli, R. (1988). Educare l’uomo domani [Educating man tomorrow]. Florence,
Italy: Istituto di Psicosintesi.
Assagioli, R. (2000). Psychosynthesis, A collection of basic writing. Amherst, MA:
Synthesis Center.
Assagioli, R. (2002). The act of will. London, England: The Psychosynthesis &
Education Trust.
Assagioli, R. (2003). I tipi umani [Human types]. Florence, Italy: Istituto di
Psicosintesi.
Assagioli, R. (2007). Handboek: Psychosynthese [Handbook: Psychosynthesis].
Utrecht, Netherlands: Kosmos.
Assagioli, R. (n.d.). Results—Realization of the self (Archivio Studio, Box 29: Folder
2.27.1. Freedom in jail). Florence, Italy: Istituto di Psicosintesi. Retrieved from
http://www.archivioassagioli.org/
Baghetto, R., & Kaufman, J. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A
case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
1, 73-79.
Buckmaster, L., & Davis, G. (1985). ROSE: A measure of self-actualization and its
relationship to creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 19, 30-37.
Carson, D. K. (1999). Counseling. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia
of creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 395-402). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and
factor structure of the creative achievement questionnaire. Creativity Research
Journal, 17, 37-50.
Carter-Harr, B. (1975). Identity and personal freedom. In J. Evans & R. Evans (Eds.),
Fundamentals of psychosynthesis (Vol. 1, pp. 67-91). London, England: Institute
of Psychosynthesis.
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Creativity: Shifting across ontological categories flexibly. In
T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of
conceptual structures and processes (pp. 209-234). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Christensen, P. R., Guilford, J. P., Merrifield, P. R., & Wilson, R. C. (1978). Designed
to represent an expected factor of “flexibility of thinking” in an investigation of
creative thinking. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden.
686
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
Cole, H. P., & Sarnoff, D. (1980). Creativity and counseling. Personnel and Guidance
Journal, 59, 140-146.
Colzato, L. S., & Ozturk, A. (2012). Meditate to create: The impact of focusedattention and open-monitoring training on convergent and divergent thinking.
Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1-5.
Cowger, E. L., & Torrance, E. P. (1982). Further examination of the quality of changes
in creative functioning resulting from meditation (zazen) training. Creative Child
and Adult Quarterly, 7, 211-217.
Cropley, A. J. (1997). Fostering creativity in the classroom: General principles. In
M. A. Runco (Ed.), Creativity research handbook (pp. 83-114). Cresskill, NJ:
Hampton Press.
Davis, G. A. (1999). Barriers to creativity and creative attitudes. In M. A. Runco & S.
R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 165-174). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Ferrucci, P. (1982). What we may be. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Firman, J., & Gila, A. (2002). Psychosynthesis: A psychology of the spirit. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Frey, D. H. (1975). The anatomy of an idea: Creativity in counseling. Personnel and
Guidance Journal, 54, 23-27.
Guilford, J. P. (1967). Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Journal of Creative
Behavior, 1, 3-14.
Hardy, J. (1987). A psychology with a soul. London, England: Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. In S. Fiske (Ed.), Annual
review of psychology (pp. 569-598). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
Horan, R. (2009). The neuropsychological connection between creativity and meditation. Creativity Research Journal, 21, 199-222.
James, W. (1982). The varieties of religious experience. New York, NY: Penguin
Books.
Jausovec, N. (1991). Flexible strategy use: A characteristic of gifted problem solving.
Creativity Research Journal, 4, 349-366.
Jausovec, N. (1994). Flexible thinking: An explanation for individual differences
inability. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Jung, C. G. (1952). Psychology and literature. In B. Ghiselin (Ed.), The creative process: A symposium (pp. 217-232). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Jung, C. G. (1966). On the relation of analytical psychology to poetry. In H. Read, M.
Fordham & G. Adler (Eds.), Collected works (Vol. 20, pp. 65-83). Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1922)
Jung, C. G. (1979). Collected works of C.G. Jung: Vol. 9. Part II: Aion: Researches
into the phenomenology of the self (G. Adler & R. F. C. Hulk, Eds. & Trans.).
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lombard, C. A. (2014). Coping with anxiety and rebuilding identity: A psychosynthesis approach to culture shock. Counselling Psychology Quarterly. doi:10.1080/
09515070.2013.875887
Lombard and Müller
687
Mansfield, R. S., Busse, T. V., & Krepelka, E. J. (1978). The effectiveness of creativity training. Review of Educational Research, 48, 517-536.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Maslow, A. (1962). Emotional blocks to creativity. In S. J. Parnes & H. F. Harding
(Eds.), The source book for creative thinking (pp. 93-103). New York, NY:
Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Maslow, A. (1968). Towards a psychology of being. New York, NY: D. Van
Nostrand.
Maslow, A. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York, NY: Viking.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004a). Using qualitative methods for causal explanation. Field
Methods, 16, 243-264.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004b). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific
inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.
Milenković, S. (2007). Humour as a paradoxical intervention in psychotherapy.
International Journal of Psychotherapy, 11(3), 56-65.
Müller, B. C. N., Gerasimova, A., & Ritter, S. M. (2016). Meditation influences creativity by enhancing cognitive flexibility. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity,
and the Arts, 10(3), 278.
Mumford, M. D., & Porter, P. P. (1999). Analogies. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 71-77). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Nguyen, T. (2002). Psychosynthesis: A way of openness. International Journal of
Psychotherapy, 16(2), 20-28.
Nickerson, R. S. (1999). Enhancing creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Creativity
handbook (pp. 392-430). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Orme-Johnson, D. W., & Granieri, B. (1977). The effects of the age of enlightenment governor training courses on field independence, creativity, intelligence,
and behavioral flexibility. In Scientific Research on Maharishi’s Transcendental
Meditation and TM-Sidhi Program, Collected Papers (Vol. 1, pp. 713-718).
Fairfield, IA: Maharishi University of Management Press.
Parnes, S. J., & Noller, R. B. (1973). Toward supersanity: Channeled freedom.
Buffalo: D.L.K. Publishers.
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Rosselli, M., & Vanni, D. (2014). Roberto Assagioli and Carl Gustav Jung. Journal of
Transpersonal Psychology, 46, 7-34.
Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (1991). Divergent thinking. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Runco, M. A. (1999). Perspectives. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 2, pp. 373-376). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Runco, M. A., Ebersole, P., & Mraz, W. (1991). Self-actualization and creativity.
Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 161-167.
Runco, M. A., & Okuda, S. M. (1991). The instructional enhancement of the flexibility and originality scores of divergent thinking tests. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 5, 435-441.
688
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 58(6)
Schubert, D. S. P., & Biondi, A. M. (1975). Creativity and mental health: Part I—The
image of the creative person as mentally ill. Journal of Creative Behaviour, 9,
223-227.
Scott, G., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity
training: A quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 327-361.
Stuckey, H. L., & Nobel, J. (2010). The connection between art, healing, and public
health: A review of current literature. American Journal of Public Health, 100,
254-263. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.156497
Thurston, B. J., & Runco, M. A. (1999). Flexibility. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (Vol. 1, pp. 219-238). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). The Torrance tests of creative thinking-norms—Technical
manual research edition—Verbal tests, Forms A and B—Figural tests, Forms A
and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.
Vargiu, J. (1974). The theory: Subpersonalities. In Synthesis (Vol. 1, pp. 52-90).
Redwood City, CA: Synthesis Press.
Whitmore, D. (1986). Psychosynthesis in education. Rochester, VT: Destiny Books.
Whitmore, D. (2004). Psychosynthesis counseling in action. London, England: Sage.
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. London, England: Sage.
Author Biographies
Catherine Ann Lombard, MA, is a psychosynthesis psychologist,
practitioner, and researcher. She has had numerous articles published on psychosynthesis and specializes in multiculturalism as
described in her book From Culture Shock to Personal
Transformation: Studying Abroad and the Search for Meaning.
You can follow her bimonthly blog at LoveAndWill.com.
Barbara C. N. Müller received her PhD in 2013 from Radboud
University. Her research covers a wide array of topics such as
human/nonhuman interaction, social influence, and stereotyping.
Currently, she works as an assistant professor at the Radboud
University Nijmegen, Netherlands.
contributed articles
-
Praise, pay, and promote crowd-member
workers to elicit desired behavioral
responses and performance levels.
By Ognjen Scekic, Hong-Linh Truong,
and Schahram Dustdar
Incentives and
Rewarding
in Social
Computing
help align the interests of
employees and organizations. They first appeared
with the division of labor and have since followed
the increasing complexity of human labor and
organizations. As a single incentive measure always
targets a specific behavior and sometimes additionally
induces unwanted responses from workers, multiple
incentives are usually combined to counteract the
dysfunctional behavior and produce desired results.
Numerous studies have shown the effectiveness20 of
different incentive mechanisms and their selective
and motivational effects.14 Their importance is
reflected in the fact that most big and mid-size
companies employ some kind of incentive measures.
Expansion of social computing18 will include not
only better exploitation of crowdsourcing5 but also
In ce ntives and reward s
72
communicatio ns o f the acm
| j u ne 201 3 | vo l . 5 6 | no. 6
solutions that extend traditional business processes (see Figure 1); increasing research interest seems to confirm
the trend.3 Several frameworks aiming to support such new collaboration
models are being developed (such as
socially enhanced computing6,7). These
new forms of social computing are intended to support greater task complexity, more intelligent task division,
complex organizational and managerial structures for virtual teams, and
virtual “careers.” With envisioned
changes, incentives will also gain importance and complexity to address
workers’ dysfunctional behavior. This
new emphasis calls for automated ways
of handling incentives and rewards.
However, the social computing market is dominated by flat and short-lived
organizational structures, employing
a limited number of simple incentive
mechanisms. That is why we view the
state of the social computing market
as an opportunity to add novel ways of
handling incentives and rewards.
Here, we analyze incentive mechanisms and suggest how they can be
used for next-generation social computing. We start with a classification
of incentive mechanisms in the literature and in traditional business organizations, then identify elements that
can be used as building blocks for any
composite incentive mechanism and
show the same elements are also used
in social computing, even though the
resulting schemes lack the complexity
key insights
E xisting social computing platforms
lack the ability to formulate, compose,
and automatically deploy appropriate
incentive mechanisms needed for complex
agent collaborations.
A nalyzing incentive mechanisms in
traditional companies and in social
computing platforms reveals how incentive
mechanisms consist of simpler reusable
elements that can be formally modeled.
F ormal modeling of incentive mechanisms
allows composition, optimization, and
deployment of portable and dynamically
adaptable incentive schemes for social
computing environments.
cred it t k
ILLUSTRATION
by A lic ia Ku bista /Andrij Borys Associat es
doi:10.1145/ 2461256.2461275
cred it t k
J u n e 2 0 1 3 | vo l. 56 | n o. 6 | c ommu n icat ion s of t he acm
73
contributed articles
Figure 1. Social computing is evolving from social networks and crowdsourcing to include structured crowd organizations able to solve
complex tasks.
+
+
Internet
Traditional Company
needed to support advanced business
processes; we conclude with our vision
for future developments.
Related Work
In economics, incentives are predominantly investigated within the models
set out in the Principal-Agent Theory,13,20 introducing the role of a principal that corresponds to owners or managers who delegate tasks to a number
of agents corresponding to employees
(workers) under their supervision. The
principal offers the agents an incentive to disclose part of their personal
performance information (signal) to
devise an appropriate contract.
Only a few articles in the computer
science literature have addressed incentives and rewards, usually within
specific application contexts (such as
social networks and wiki systems,9,32
peer-to-peer networks,23 reputation
systems,22 and human micro-task
platforms16,17,28,29). Much recent research aims to find suitable wage
models for crowdsourcing.11 However, to the best of our knowledge, the
topic has not been comprehensively
addressed.
Incentive Mechanisms
The incentive mechanisms we cover
here involve most known classes of
incentives used in different types of organizations: companies, not-for-profit
(voluntary), engineering/design, and
crowdsourcing. Different organiza74
comm unicatio ns o f th e acm
Crowdsourcing Company
tions employ different (combinations
of) incentive mechanisms to stimulate
specific responses from agents:
Pay per performance (PPP). The guiding principle says all agents are to be
compensated proportionally to their
contribution. Labor types where quantitative evaluation can be applied are
particularly suitable. In practice, it
shows significant, verifiable productivity improvements—25% to 40%—when
targeting simple, repetitive production tasks, both in traditional companies15 and in human intelligence tasks
on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform.17 Other studies, as cited by Prendergast,20 conclude that approximately
30% to 50% of productivity gains is due
to the filtering and attraction of better workers, due to the selective effect
of the incentive. This important finding explains why greater profit can be
achieved even with relatively limited
incentives. PPP is not suited for large,
distributed, team-dependent tasks,
where measuring individual contributions is inherently difficult. However,
it is frequently used to complement
other incentive mechanisms.
Quota systems and discretionary bonuses. With this mechanism, the principal sets a number of performancemetrics thresholds. When agents reach
a threshold they are given a one-off bonus. Quota systems evaluate whether a
performance signal surpasses a threshold at predefined points in time (such
as annual bonuses). On the other hand,
| j u ne 201 3 | vo l . 5 6 | no. 6
Crowd Management
Socially Enhanced Computing Company
discretionary bonuses may be paid
whenever an agent achieves a performance level for the first time (such as a
preset number of customers).
Two phenomena20 typically accompany this mechanism:
˲˲ The effort level always drops off
following an evaluation if the agent
views the time until the next evaluation
as too long; and
˲˲ When the performance level is
close to an award-winning quota, motivation is significantly greater.
Appropriate evaluation intervals and
quotas must be set in such a way that
they are achievable with a reasonable
amount of additional effort, though
not too easily. The two parameters are
highly context-dependent, so can be
determined only after observing historical records of employee behavior in
a particular setup. Ideally, these parameters are dynamically adjustable.
Deferred compensation. This mechanism is similar to a quota system,
in that an evaluation is made at predefined points in time. The subtle but
important difference is that deferred
compensation takes into account three
points in time: t0,t1,t2. At t0 an agent is
promised a reward for successfully
passing a deferred evaluation at t2. The
evaluation takes into account the period of time [t1,t2], not just the current
state at t2. In case t1 = t0 the evaluation
covers the entire interval.
Deferred compensation is typically
used for incentivizing agents working
contributed articles
on complex, long-lasting tasks. The advantage is it allows more objective assessment of an agent’s performance at
a particular time. Agents are also given
enough time [t0,t1] to adapt to the new
conditions, then prove the quality of
their work over some period of time
[t1,t2]. The disadvantage of this mechanism is it is not always applicable,
since agents are not always able to wait
for a significant portion of their compensation. A common example of this
mechanism is the “referral bonus,” or
a reward for employees who recommend or attract new employees or partners to the company.
Relative evaluation. Although this
mechanism can involve many variations the common principle is that an
entity is evaluated with respect to other
entities within a specified group. The
entity can be a human, a movie, or a
product. The relative evaluation is used
mainly for two reasons:
˲˲ By restricting the evaluation to a
closed group of individuals, it removes
the need to set explicit, absolute performance targets in conditions where
the targets are not easily set due to the
dynamic and unpredictable nature of
the environment; and
˲˲ It has been empirically proved that
people respond positively to competition and comparison with others (such
as in Tran et al.30).
Promotion. Empirical studies (such
as Van Herpen et al.31) confirm that
the prospect of a promotion increases
motivation. A promotion is the result
of competition for a limited number of
predefined prizes. Promotion schemes
are usually treated under the tournament theory,14 though there are other
models, too. The prize is a better position in an organization’s hierarchy,
bringing higher pay, more decisionmaking power, and greater respect
and esteem. Promotions include basic
Table 1. Adoption of incentive mechanisms in different business environments: + = low, ++ = medium, +++ = high; application
considerations (right).
Usage Environments
Application Considerations
Traditional Company
Mechanism
Pay Per
Performance
Quota/
Discretionary
Bonus
Deferred
Compensation
Relative
Evaluation
Promotion
Team-based
Compensation
Psychological
SME
++
+
+
+
++
+
+
Large
Enterprise
+++
+++
+++
++
+++
++
+
Negative
Application
Conditions
Social
Computing
Positive
Application
Conditions
+++
large, distributed,
team-dependent
tasks; measurement
inaccuracy; when
quantitative evaluation favoring quality over
quantity
possible
+
recurrent evaluation
intervals
allows peaks/
constant level of effort intervals of increased
performance
needed
+
complex, risky, longlasting tasks
subjective evaluation;
short consideration
interval
better assessment of
achievements; paying
only after successful
completion
+++
cheap groupevaluation method
available
subjective evaluation
decreases solidarity;
no absolute
performance targets; can discourage
eliminates subjectivity beginners
+
need to elicit loyalty
and sustained effort;
when subjective
evaluation is
unavoidable
flat hierarchical
structure
forces positive
selection; eliminates
centrality bias
+
complex, cooperative
tasks; inability to
measure individual
contributions
when retaining the
best individuals is
priority
increases cooperation disfavors best
and solidarity
individuals
++
stimulate competition;
stimulate personal
when cooperation
satisfaction
must be favored
Advantages
Disadvantages
fairness; effort
continuity
oversimplification;
decreased solidarity
among workers
effort drops after
evaluation
workers must accept
risk and wait for
compensation
decreases solidarity
limited effect on best
and worst workers
cheap implementation (anchoring effect)
J u n e 2 0 1 3 | vo l. 56 | n o. 6 | c ommu n icat ion s of t he acm
75
contributed articles
ideas from relative evaluation and quota systems. They eliminate centrality
bias and enforce positive selection. The
drawback is that by valuing individual
success, agents can be de-motivated
from helping each other and engaging
in collaborations. They often incorporate subjective evaluation methods,
though other evaluation methods are
also possible in rare instances.
Team-based compensation. This
mechanism is used when the contributions of individual agents in a team
environment are not easily identified.
With it, the entire team is evaluated
and rewarded, with the reward split
among team members. The reward can
be split equally or by differentiating individual efforts within the team. The
latter is a hybrid approach combining a
team-based incentive, together with an
incentive mechanism targeted at individuals, to eliminate dysfunctional behavior. Some studies (such as Pearsall
et al.19) show this approach is indeed
more effective than pure team-based
compensation. One way to avoid having to decide on the amount of compensation is to tie it to the principal’s
profit, and is called “profit sharing.”
Team-based compensation is also
susceptible to different dysfunctional
behavioral responses. Underperforming agents effectively hide within the
group, while the performance of the
better-performing agents is diluted.
Moreover, teams often exhibit the
free-rider phenomenon,12 where individuals waste more resources (such as
time, materials, and equipment) than
they would if individual expenses were
measured. Minimizing these negative
effects is the primary challenge when
applying this mechanism.
Psychological incentive mechanisms.
Psychological incentives are the most
elusive, making them difficult to define and classify, since they often complement other mechanisms and can be
described only in terms of psychological actions. A psychological incentive
must relate to human emotions and
be advertised by the principal and be
perceived by the agent. The agent’s
perception of the incentive affects its
effectiveness. As this perception is context-dependent, choosing an adequate
way of presenting the incentive is not
trivial; for example, choosing and promoting an “employee of the month” is
76
comm unicatio ns o f the acm
The effort level
always drops
following
an evaluation
if the agent views
the time until
the next evaluation
as too long.
| j u ne 201 3 | vo l . 5 6 | no. 6
effective in societies where the sense of
common good is highly valued. In more
individually oriented environments
competition drives performance. A
principal may choose to exploit this
fact by sharing comparisons with the
agents. Acting on human fear is a tactic
commonly (mis)used (such as through
the threat of dismissal or downgrading). Psychological incentives have
long been used in video games, as well
as in more serious games, to elicit player dedication and motivation. Such
techniques (including gamification4)
are also used to make boring tasks
(such as product reviews and customer
feedback) feel more interesting and appealing (see Table 1).
Analyzing Incentive Mechanisms
No previous work has analyzed incentives past the granularity of incentive
mechanisms, preventing (development of) generic handling of incentives
in information systems. Our goal is to
identify finer-grain elements that can
be modeled individually and used in
information systems to compose and
encode the described incentive mechanisms (see Figure 2). Such a conceptual
model would allow specification, execution, monitoring, and adaptation of
various rewarding and incentive mechanisms for virtual teams of humans.
Each incentive mechanism described earlier can be modeled using
three incentive elements:
Evaluation method. Provides input
on agent performance to be evaluated
in the logical context defined in the incentive condition;
Incentive condition. Contains the
business logic for certain rewarding
actions; and
Rewarding action. Is meant to influence future behavior of agents.
Though we describe these elements
informally here, their true power lies in
the possibility of being formally modeled. An evaluation method can ultimately be abstracted to an evaluation
function, incentive condition to a logical formula, and rewarding action to
a function, structural transformation,
or external event. These abstractions
allow us to formally encode each incentive mechanism and thus program
many real-world reward strategies for
crowds of agents working on tasks
ranging from simple image tagging to
contributed articles
Table 2. Application and composability considerations for evaluation methods.
Application Considerations
Evaluation Methods
Quantitative
Group
Subjective
fairness,
simplicity, low
cost
simplicity, low
cost
measurement
inaccuracy
subjectivity;
inability to
assess different
aspects of
contribution
Issues
Alleviated By
no
multitasking
peer evaluation;
indirect
evaluation;
subjective
evaluation
yes
centrality bias;
leniency bias;
deliberate
low-scoring;
embellishment;
rent-seeking
activities
incentivizing
decision maker
to make honest
decisions (such
as through peer
evaluation)
yes
preferential
attachment;
coordinated
dysfunctional
behavior of
voters
depends on
algorithm used;
fitting data to the
algorithm
Peer
fairness; low
cost in social
computing
environment
active
participation
required
Indirect
accounts
for complex
relations among
agents and their
artifacts
evaluationalgorithm cost of
development and
maintenance
no
modular software development.
Individual Evaluation Methods
Quantitative evaluation. Quantitative
evaluation represents the rating of individuals based on the measurable
properties of their contribution. Some
labor types are suitable for precisely
measuring an agent’s individual contributions, in which case the agent
can be evaluated on number of units
processed, but apart from the most
primitive types of labor, evaluating an
agent’s performance requires evaluating different aspects of performance, or
measurable signals, the most common
being productivity, effort, and product
quality. Different measures are usually
taken into consideration with different
weights, depending on their importance and measurement accuracy.
Quantitative evaluation is attractive because it does not require human
participation and can be implemented
entirely in software. Associated problems are measurement inaccuracy
and difficulty choosing proper signals
and weights. An additional problem is
a phenomenon called multitasking,
which, in spite of its counterintuitive
name, refers to agents putting most
Solving
Typical Use
issues due to
subjectivity
pay per
performance;
quota systems;
promotion;
deferred
compensation
multitasking
relative
evaluation;
promotion
incentivizing
peers (such as
also by peer
evaluation)
multitasking;
issues due to
subjectivity
relative
evaluation;
team-based
compensation;
psychological
peer voting;
better
implementation
of algorithm
issues due to
subjectivity;
peer-evaluation
issues
relative
evaluation;
psychological;
pay per
performance
of their effort into tasks subject to incentives while neglecting other tasks,
subsequently damaging overall performance.10
Subjective evaluation. When important aspects of human work are
understandable and valuable to humans only, we need to substitute an
objective measurement with a human (subjective) assessment of work
quality. In this case a human acts as a
mapping function that quantifies human-oriented work by combining all
undefinable signals into one subjective assessment signal. Even though
subjective evaluation is implemented
simply and cheaply, it is also inherently imprecise and prone to dysfunctional behavioral responses. Phenomena
observed in practice20 include:
Figure 2. Incentive strategies consist of smaller, easily modeled components.
Business
Logic
Evaluation
Methods
Rewarding Actions
Quantitative
Quantitative Reward
(Punishment)
Subjective
Peer Voting
Indirect
Eval.
Cond.
Action
Structural Change
Psychological
Incentive Mechanisms
Incentive Strategy
Individual
Advantages
Composability
Active Human
Disadvantages Participation
Incentive
mechanism
Eval.
Cond.
Action
Pay Per Performance
Quota Systems/Discretionary Bonus
Relative Evaluation
Promotion
Incentive
mechanism
Eval.
Cond.
Action
Team-based Compensation
Psychological
J u n e 2 0 1 3 | vo l. 56 | n o. 6 | c ommu n icat ion s of t he acm
77
contributed articles
Centrality bias. Ratings concentrated around some average value, so not
enough differentiating of “good” and
“bad” workers;
Leniency bias. Discomfort rating
“bad” workers with low marks; and
Rent-seeking activities. Actions taken
by employees with the goal of increasing the chances of getting a better rating from a manager, often including
personal favors or unethical behavior.
sons and a considerably larger group
of voters and both groups are stable
over time, this method is particularly
favorable. In such cases, voters have
a good overview of much of the voted
group. Since the relationship voter-tovoted is unidirectional and probably
stable over time, voters do not have an
interest in exhibiting dysfunctional
behavior, a pattern common on the
Internet today.
The method works as long as the
size of the voted group is small. As the
voted group increases, voters are unable to acquire all the new facts needed
to pass fair judgment. They then opt
to rate better those persons or artifacts they know or feel have good reputations (see Price21), a phenomenon
known as “preferential attachment,”
or colloquially “the rich get richer.” It
can be seen on news sites that attract
large numbers of user comments. Newly arriving readers usually tend to read
and vote only the most popular comments, leaving many interesting comments unvoted.
In non-Internet-based businesses,
cost is the major obstacle to applying
this method, in terms of both time
and money. Moreover, it is technically
challenging, if not impossible, to apply it often enough and with appropriate voting groups. However, the use of
information systems, the Internet, and
social networks now makes possible a
drastic decrease in application costs.
A number of implementations exist on
the Internet (such as Facebook’s Like
button, binary voting, star voting, and
polls), but lacking is a unified model
able to express their different flavors
and specify the voters and voted groups.
Indirect evaluation. Since human
performance is often difficult to define and measure, evaluating humans
Group Evaluation Methods
Peer evaluation (peer voting). Peer
evaluation is an expression of collective intelligence where members of
a group evaluate the quality of other
members. In the ideal case, the aggregated, subjective scores represent a
fair, objective assessment. The method alleviates centrality and leniency
bias since votes are better distributed,
the aggregated scores cannot be subjectively influenced, and activities
targeting a single voter’s interests are
eliminated. Engaging a large number
of professional peers to evaluate different aspects of performance leaves
fewer options for multitasking.
This method also suffers from a
number of weaknesses; for example,
in small interconnected groups voters
may be unjust or lenient for personal
reasons. They may also feel uncomfortable and exhibit dysfunctional behavior if the person being judged knows
their identity. Therefore, anonymity is
often a favorable quality. Another way
of fighting dysfunctional behavior is to
make voters subject to incentives; votes
are compared, and those that stand
out discarded. At the same time, each
agent’s voting history is monitored to
prevent consistent unfair voting.
When the community consists of
a relatively small group of voted per-
Table 3. Incentive mechanisms used by social computing companies.
78
is commonly based on properties and
relations among the artifacts they
produce. As the artifacts are always
produced for consumption by others, determining quality is ultimately
left to the community. Artifacts are
connected through various relations
(such as contains, refers-to, and subclass-of) among themselves, as well as
with users (such as author, owner, and
consumer). The method of mapping
properties and relations of artifacts
to scores is nontrivial. An algorithm
(such as Google’s PageRank) tracks relations and past interactions of agents
or their artifacts with the artifact being evaluated and calculates the score.
A t...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment