The word pivot needs to be put in the corporate-jargon-recycling-bin. It can hang out in there with its friends, synergy, and disrupt.  

Raise your hand if you are so freaking sick of pivoting. Can we just get off the rollercoaster for a second? The answer to that question is probably “no,” but maybe just acknowledging our collective exhaustion has value. 

Okay… Let’s take a collective pause. 

Close your eyes. 

Breathe in deeply. Imagine the word pivot being trampled by horses and set on fire. Not just a little fire, but a glorious full-on borderline pyro-kinda-fire. 

Exhale slowly. Feel the tension leave your body. Do the corners of your mouth want to twitch up into a tiny satisfied smirk? Let them. 

Breathe in. Breathe out. 

And when you are ready to get back on the problem-solving rollercoaster, gently open your eyes. 

Back to gettin’ shit done.

What Does the Problem Need?

The issue with uncertainty is that it can push us into the false dichotomy of “freeze or frantic.” We are do-ers, so we know we can’t freeze, so we MOVE. Movement feels responsible. Movement feels like leadership. Movement gives us meetings, committees, to-do lists, and the dopamine hit of making lists and checking boxes. 

But constant motion is not the same as creative agility. 

Sometimes it is just noise disguised as productivity.

And I say that with love and a deep personal resonance for the human instinct to do something, anything, dear God, please let there be a next step when uncertainty starts breathing down our necks.

Often, the problem is that we move without fully understanding (or accepting) what the problem is asking of us. 

Some problems need sharper definition. Some need more imagination. Some need a constraint. Some need evidence. Some need dissent. Some need a prototype. Some need us to stop polishing the wrong idea and finally admit the frame is broken or that we are answering the wrong question.

There is a difference between asking “What is the solution?” and “What does the problem need?”

Not Every Problem is Asking for the Same Kind of Creativity

This is where many teams get into trouble.

We tend to treat uncertainty like it is one thing. It is not.

Uncertainty can mean the problem is poorly defined. It can mean the problem is emotionally loaded. It can mean the idea is too small. It can mean the idea is too big. It can mean the team has plenty of imagination, but absolutely no decision-making structure. It can mean everyone is being very “collaborative,” which can feel good but may actually serve as a socially acceptable way to avoid accountability and the discomfort of disagreement.

A poorly defined problem does not need a solution brainstorming (yet). It needs sharper seeing.

An overconstrained problem does not need to push harder. It needs space and oxygen.

A room full of possibilities and no traction does not need another inspiring conversation. It needs a decision framework and the chutzpa to stick to it.

A problem that keeps producing “obvious” answers does not need immediate execution. It needs a better provocation.

An emotionally loaded problem may not need a clever solution at all. It may need someone to say the weird quiet part out loud so the room can stop pretending.

Different problems ask different things of us.

That sounds obvious. Irritatingly obvious. But in practice? We forget it constantly.

We push speed when the work needs patience. We tout imagination when the work needs structure. We level critique when the work needs protection. We bring performative optimism when the work needs honesty. We commit to refinement when the idea is too soft to polish. 

Then we wonder why the work feels stuck.

From “What’s the solution?” to “What does the idea need?”

Once the problem begins to reveal what it needs, the work changes.

The question becomes more intimate and more demanding:

What does the idea need now?

Ideas are not static objects. They are dynamic and amorphous, moving through phases and changing states. They have different needs at different moments.

Early on, an idea may need looseness. Strange inputs. Permission to be awkward. Time to be bad before it becomes useful.

Later, it may need pressure. Someone has to ask, “Do we actually believe this, or do we just like how it sounds?”

Then it may need shape. A boundary. A name. A clearer decision about what it is and what it is not.

Then it may need contact with reality. A prototype. A conversation with the people it is supposedly for. The brutal little gift of evidence.

Eventually, if it is going to become real, it needs commitment. Not admiration. Not another round of “this has so much potential.”

Build the thing. Test the thing. Let the thing meet the world and get its little feelings hurt.

This is creative work. Not the romantic version where everyone has breakthrough ideas in moody lighting. The real version.

The version with ambiguity, defensiveness, false starts, weird team dynamics, unspoken stakes, and budget constraints.

This is the Creative Cycle.

Not a neat checklist. Not a tidy sequence where good ideas obediently and linearly proceed from insight to concept to execution.

The Creative Cycle is more alive than that — more unpredictable. It loops. It doubles back. It needs resistance and friction. It asks different things of us as the work develops.

Sometimes the idea needs expansion.
Sometimes it needs refinement.
Sometimes it needs protection.
Sometimes it needs to be broken open.
Sometimes it needs to leave the whiteboard and meet the world.

The creative question is not simply, “Do we have a good idea?”

It is: Can we recognize what the idea needs next?

Creative Agility is Not the Same as Creative Output

We often talk about creativity as if it were measured by the volume of ideas a person can produce. But that is a narrow view.

Creative agility is not just about generating ideas. It is the ability to shift between creative modes as the work demands. To dodge and weave. This kind of agility is especially valuable in uncertain conditions because uncertainty tends to entrench our defaults. Under pressure, human nature tells us to double down and do more of what already feels natural and comfortable.

The expander expands harder.
The organizer organizes harder.
The challenger challenges harder.
The maker starts making before the question is clear.
The refiner starts improving before anyone has asked whether the idea is worth improving.
The meaning-maker keeps searching for significance while the window for action quietly closes.

None of these patterns are wrong. In fact, each one is powerful, and when positioned and timed correctly, helpful.

But any creative strength, overused or mistimed, can become a liability.

The Creative Cycle Requires Self-Recognition & Loves Inputs

Truth time. You do not have all the answers. Your way, although potentially fantastic, is not the only way, and it may or may not be the “best” way for the given situation. 

Most of us enter problem-solving mode (aka the Creative Cycle) brandishing our default moves. We need to reflect deeply enough to truly understand what those default moves are, and when they are and are not helpful.

This is why I am interested in creative self-recognition. Not personality typing as a game (yes, it is fun), but as a tool of self-reflection and awareness. Self-recognition is the goal. The moment when a pattern becomes visible enough that you can work with it. See where you naturally create momentum, and where you create friction. See the edges of your superpowers and identify where you can stretch. 

That kind of recognition does not box people in. It gives them access to more range, and it gives us the ability to seek out the most helpful and complementary inputs from the outside world. 

Ideas, creativity, and the creative cycle are inherently interactive energies. They crave community, collaboration, and inputs. Creation is relational. Creative agility is about understanding what the problem and idea need to know to determine who to bring to the table. 

The Creative Agility Index

The Creative Agility Index grew out of this type of inquiry.

It is not designed to tell people whether they are creative. It assumes that to be human is to be a creative, meaning-making, storytelling being. 

It asks the more interesting and useful questions: 

How does creativity move through you?
Where do you navigate possibility?
How do you shape ideas?

The CAI is designed as a mirror for creative behavior and skills: a way to recognize your creative default, your growth edge, and the role you most naturally play in the life of an idea.

Because the world is not slowing down, and we all need to refine our skills of adaptation, reimagination, deconstruction, reconstruction, discernment, and critical thinking. All of these skills begin with self-awareness and curiosity.

Take the Quiz. Find Your Archetype.

XO,
AB

🧰 Free Leadership Resources: