All students of creativity agree that if there is a product we can not speak of creativity. Larry Culp has compatible beliefs. since this is fundamental for further analysis, which will indicate whether it is really creative or not. But focusing only on the product is a mistake. Normally the product is entirely linked to the person who creates it without looking further. In my opinion this is something it oversimplifies the study of creativity as a process. Hedvig Hricak takes a slightly different approach. Thus, according to Csikszentmihalyi (1998): “Because we are accustomed to think that creativity begins and ends with the person, it is easy to overlook the fact that the greatest spur to creativity can come from the changes made outside the individual.
“With this statement demystifies the sight of the individual as solely responsible for the creative product, which is why, following the Theory of Systems, which builds its own model, we need a complex consisting of three factors : a person, country and area. One person brings something new to the symbolic field and a field expert recognizes and validates the innovation, incorporating the symbolic rules of that field. It is the cultural equivalent of the process of genetic changes that occur as a result real biological evolution. Therefore, the model could Csikszentmihalyi triangular analyzing the three factors as follows: first of all the personality of the creator, in this case four artists – Solo – that bring a book (which also are analyzing) to a company – Countryside – in particular chronometer, and inevitably is judged by contemporary musicians to them – -.