Recent comments on a LinkedIn post got me thinking about this question.
Context: A writer applied ten business success principles (based on his book of the same ten business success principles) to the KPop phenom PSY song Gangnam Style. It was a classic exercise in trying to dissect what made this one song a worldwide sensation while the other 99% of KPop hits are on no one’s radar. Additionally, it begs the question about the fundamentals of creativity: does passion drive the creative process or does purpose?
Compelling analysis, but not everyone was on board with it as illustrated in the following comments:
Comment #1: There is nothing “killer” about this idea. In fact, I don’t even think it deserves ideation credit. It was an accident.
Comment #2: Love it when business people try to over-analyze popular culture. Why can’t fun things just be fun and business things just be fun? Why does there have to be a formula behind everything?
Now I’d be willing to bet all the money PSY has earned from this sensation that he did not sit down with a list of 10 principles for “killer ideas” BEFORE he wrote-performed-filmed-promoted his video. My experience as a creative is creativity doesn’t work this way. If it did, more people would be creative.
No, “Gangnam Style” was not the outcome of a paint-by-numbers exercise. What is much more plausible is PSY was inspired. Put together something fun. And got lucky because his song-performance-personality touches so many nerves. As commentator #2 so precisely put it: “It was an accident.”
Business books filled with lists and formulas for success are a dime a dozen. They make their authors money and give them a platform to share their bigger vision. And, there are often golden nuggets within their pages. We humans love lists and templates because they make things easier for us to complete. But to suggest that a pop sensation became a pop sensation because creators used a 10-point template for creating the product is reaching – a lot.
Despite our desperate desire for formulas in the creative space, what works for one creator may not work for another. Given the same list of principles, two artists would come up with completely different things, which in turn may – or may not – go on to any kind of success, let alone world domination.
What is almost always at work with the “big hits” is the magic, that woo woo that number-crunchers dismiss so readily because there isn’t a formula for it. Yet the magic and the woo-woo are precisely what make the difference, and will be what make the difference as long as human beings are involved.
Purpose has its place, as it drives us to be bigger and better than we are. But for this argument, I stand behind the passion column when it comes to the big hits.
What about you?
