Some creativity researchers claim there are three components to creativity. Some argue for four. But almost all can agree on two key determinants, according to James Kauffman, professor of educational psychology at the University of Connecticut and the author of Creativity 101.

Novelty

“Creativity must represent something different, new, or innovative,” writes Kauffman. How new? How different? That part is debatable, but there has to be some degree of newness. But novelty alone doesn’t equal creativity.

Utility

“Creativity must also be appropriate to the task at hand.” If someone asks you for directions to the mall and you respond by crawling into a garbage bag and making chirping noises . . . well, that’s novel, but irrelevant. Thus, not creative. (This component makes me think of the term from the writing world: “rhetorical situation.” When writers talk about rhetorical situation, they’re talking about things like audience, purpose, the context in which their work will be placed—all the stuff that will help them shape their work to be meaningful and appropriate to the situation.)

X=Multiplication

This isn’t addition. That times sign is there for a reason. Both determinants need to be there. If either one is zero, the whole equation is zeroed out.

This equation isn’t the final word in determining creativity, of course. It gives rise to huge questions like, Who determines whether a creation is appropriate? and What if there is no clear task at hand? But I would argue that’s half the value of any framework for understanding—to serve as a springboard for good questions.

One final note: This post draws heavily on Creativity 101, as you can no doubt tell. The book is like a glacier lake: clear and deep. James Kauffman is a decorated academic, but he writes like an actual human—a really funny and interesting human, at that. I’m going to be using the book in my first-year seminar on creativity in the fall, and if you’re interested in this kind of thing I commend it to you, as well.