IndexAbstractDefinitionDefinition of creativityDefinition of knowledgeApproaches to knowledge and creativityConclusionAbstractThe purpose of this article is to analyze the effect of knowledge and creativity on the overall outcome of a design process, in order to investigate how apply these two principles to produce the best result. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayAfter defining these two concepts, different types of methods and approaches will be explored, drawing a parallel between knowledge-based, convergent thinking and creative thinking, divergent thinking. These two methods use different tools and therefore pursue different results. However, tackling a design problem based only on one of these two methods is in itself limiting, as they allow only part of the overall issue to be analyzed. an approach will be outlined in which the creative and knowledge-based approaches are intertwined, so that the designer can both rely on their prior knowledge, but also create new ideas by finding hidden correspondences. Definition It is not uncommon to hear the words “knowledge” or “creativity” in everyday conversation, even if it involves people unrelated to design activities. All people share a general idea about what these terms mean, an idea clear enough for them to use these words and be understood by others: yet, if someone were asked to give their own definition of knowledge or creativity, everyone would they would give a slightly different answer. Defining knowledge and creativity is worrying not only for people not involved in design, but for all kinds of experts, who have produced different explanations throughout history. Since it would be difficult to compare two unclear concepts, as this article aims to do , it would be appropriate to start by framing each of them in a clear definition. Definition of creativity The writer Eric Jerome Dickey compared explaining creativity to asking a bird: "How do you fly?". Despite its simplicity, this quote encapsulates the problem: the result of creativity is visible (the bird flying), the process is not. In recent times, one of the academic institutions that is striving to explain this concept uniquely is the Marconi Institute for Creativity. (MIC), based in Bologna, Italy. They pursued a well-structured definition process, starting from the so-called standard definition of creativity: “Creativity requires originality and effectiveness.” (source: Runco, Garrett) Based on this they then proposed the dynamic definition of creativity: "Creativity requires potential originality and effectiveness". The need for the word "potential" can be explained as follows: first of all, we must keep in mind that creativity is not necessarily a successful process. Someone can invest time and resources in a creative action and end up with a failed result. This does not mean that the creative process was useless (as Corazza argues, it would be like saying that a football team that did not score in a match did not actually play football). Secondly, potential also has a temporal meaning: the creativity of an object, of a work of art, of a design choice is inevitably linked to the judgment of a specific historical moment. Many artists were not appreciated in their lifetime, even though their creativity was undeniable. So, to summarize this definition, creativity is a potential that, even when it is present, can only be expressed when the result is positive and recognized by society.Definition of knowledgeThe discussion on knowledge is immensely older, as the philosophers of the classical age were the first to try to give a definition: one of the first examples is Plato's Theaetetus (source: Stefanov), in which various attempts are made, but At the end the author leaves the question open. The general definition is: human faculty resulting from interpreted information; understanding that germinates from the combination of data, information, experience and individual interpretation (businessdictionary.com, 2015). However, throughout history, it has been variously defined as “Things that are believed to be true in a given context” text and that move us to action if there were no impediments” (André Boudreau). "Ability to act" (Karl Sweiby). “True, justified belief that increases an entity's ability to act effectively” (Nonaka and Takeuchi). All these definitions highlight an idea of ​​knowledge that enables action: therefore, without knowledge, a person (or, in a broader sense, a team, a company...) does not have the right to act in any way, or His actions have no meaning. Otherwise, seen the other way around, it means there is no reason to know if it doesn't lead to action. Therefore, like creativity, knowledge can also be seen as a potential, which cannot be expressed except by concretely applying it. This brings us to design. Another aspect that cannot remain ignored is the relativity of knowledge, since it is an ever-evolving concept whose parts can be reformulated, expanded or removed. This is perhaps what makes this term so difficult to understand. Knowledge-based and creativity-based approaches Knowledge and creativity are undoubtedly two key components in any design process: what is less obvious is how these two principles come together to create an outcome successful. The effects of knowledge and creativity on design have been mapped individually, as their application is embodied by two different approaches, convergent and divergent thinking. Convergent thinking is more intimately related to knowledge, that is, using existing knowledge to produce new knowledge, leaving no room for knowledge. unknown possibilities. The convergent process relies on methods based on the designer's prior knowledge, such as the evaluation matrix. The result is typically one, or very few, answers to a given problem. It can lead to knowledge-based errors, when the designer's evaluation is influenced by his prior knowledge, causing him to ignore other important aspects of the problem. Divergent thinking, on the other hand, is the ability to explore off the beaten path. , creating a variety of possibilities from available information. It usually uses free-flow methods (brainstorming, bodystorming…), so the solutions provided are numerous. Although convergent and divergent thinking have often been seen as competing processes (Getzels and Jackson, 1962), in more recent times there has been a recognition of their mutual utility (Rickards, 1993; Brophy, 1998). The purpose of this article is to demonstrate, like many other sources, that the best approach is a blend of the two. Different methodologies and approaches have been developed so that these two ways of thinking are used together in a fruitful way: one of the most pre-eminent is undoubtedly the CK theory (Concept-Knowledge Theory) (source: Le Masson): this is no coincidence that this theory was first developed during the 1990s, just when traditional innovation was experiencing an unprecedented crisis. For this reason, new approaches to design and production were needed, while knowledge and know-how were no longer sufficient. Whereas, in.