{"id":81,"date":"2020-05-07T00:51:11","date_gmt":"2020-05-07T00:51:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/?p=81"},"modified":"2020-05-07T00:51:11","modified_gmt":"2020-05-07T00:51:11","slug":"a-critique-of-flow","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/2020\/05\/07\/a-critique-of-flow\/","title":{"rendered":"A Critique of “Flow”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi defines \u201cthe optimal experience\u201d in Flow<\/em> (1990). Flow is described as a nearly euphoric, immersive state of ecstasy during focused productivity that occurs when a nearly one to one ratio of challenge-to-ability is achieved and some basic conditions, such as clear goals, immediate feedback, and flexible challenges are met. Csikszentmihalyi goes on to suggest that those most likely to experience a flow state have an \u201cautotelic\u201d personality, an accumulation of low self-centeredness, curiosity, and self-motivation to name a few traits\u00a0(1990).<\/p>\n

While flow states seem to have legitimacy and merit to them, as evidenced by countless researchers supporting the concept\u00a0(Harmat, Andersen, Ullen, Wright, & Sadlo, 2016), a particularly concerning reoccurrence appears in Csikszentmihalyi\u2019s 1990 book: achieving flow in unideal conditions. It is postulated that even those in forced labor or internment hold the ability to find the \u201coptimal experience\u201d via an achieved flow state, and thus even though \u201cthat person is objectively a slave, subjectively he is free\u00a0(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).\u201d Challenge, adversity, and particular character strengths may give rise to either an individual immersing themselves into productivity as a means of distraction, a coping mechanism for a brutal situation, akin to workaholics\u00a0(Huljich, 2012). Further, Csikszentmihalyi seems to conflate Viktor Frankl\u2019s (1963) notion of finding meaning to life in even the most horrid of conditions with an autotelic personality. While there may be overlap of the two concepts, it is hard to imagine someone having the \u201coptimal human experience\u201d in an internment camp. It could be assumed that if flow conditions may be induced through reeducation and provisions of task design, that people could be manipulated into self-dissociative production machines of flow, no matter how grizzly the circumstances.<\/p>\n

Frankl was not free from criticisms for his ideas, and Csikszentmihalyi echoes Frankl\u2019s most contentious point of personal accountability for experience when he states that it \u201cdepends more on a person\u2019s approach to [work dissatisfaction] than on actual working conditions (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).\u201d The question arises: Is it psychologically sustainable to be in a job we do not identify with, so long as we readjust our \u201capproach\u201d? Csikszentmihalyi\u00a0(1990) appears to notice the juxtaposition of job dissatisfaction and people\u2019s general feeling that their job is \u201csomething they have to do, a burden imposed\u201d externally. Csikszentmihalyi may suggest that a simple reframing of the situation should remedy the dissatisfaction and lead to flow states; however, Self-determination Theory (SDT) would claim that a truly optimal experience cannot be realized when a person perceives they are working for external causes\u00a0(Ryan & Deci, 2000). In fact, mental and physical well-being may be jeopardized should an individual continually invest energy into a job that does not fulfill genuine intrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000), even though temporary positive experiences may exist.<\/p>\n

With Gallup polls reporting only a third of the US workforce being engaged\u00a0(Harter, 2018), Csikszentmihalyi\u2019s argument that one can achieve an optimal experience through an attitude adjustment seems far-fetched. While flow states may exist in sub-optimal conditions, corporate culture, job-design, and appropriate job placement would likely illicit flow states more often and a truly optimal experience.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

References<\/p>\n

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow.<\/em> New York: HarperCollins.<\/p>\n

Frankl, V. (1963). Man’s Search for Meaning.<\/em> Boston: Beacon Press.<\/p>\n

Harmat, L., Andersen, F. O., Ullen, F., Wright, J., & Sadlo, G. (2016). Flow Experience Empirical Research and Applications.<\/em> Basel, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing Switzerland.<\/p>\n

Harter, J. (2018, August 26). Employee Engagement on the Rise in the U.S.<\/em> Retrieved from Gallup: https:\/\/news.gallup.com\/poll\/241649\/employee-engagement-rise.aspx<\/p>\n

Huljich, P. (2012, September 27). Identifying Coping Mechanisms<\/em>. Retrieved from Psychology Today: https:\/\/www.psychologytoday.com\/us\/blog\/mind-wellness-awareness\/201209\/identifying-coping-mechanisms<\/p>\n

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist, 55<\/em>, 68-78.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi defines \u201cthe optimal experience\u201d in Flow (1990). Flow is described as a nearly euphoric, immersive state of ecstasy during focused productivity that occurs when a nearly one to one ratio of challenge-to-ability is achieved and some basic conditions, … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9790,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2422],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-81","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-book-reviews"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9790"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=81"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":82,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81\/revisions\/82"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=81"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=81"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ryanmccreedy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=81"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}