There is no other measure. Creativity might be defined as the unique product which meets the needs of a given context.
The potential for creativity has thwarted all attempts of predictive measurement in advance. Crude attempts have been and using IQ testing and other forms of psychometry. All have failed. However, it can be said that there is a triad of components which appear to be necessary, if not sufficient: these are hindsight, insight and foresight. Measuring these with any level of predictive accuracy is likely to be impossible, given the complexities inherent in human creative genius.
Productivity, on the other hand, is predictable and capable of measurement. It is also measured by end product). However, there is a very clear division between creativity and productivity. The latter will always follow the former and is always the result – when taken to its ultimate origin- of the thought process of a single creative individual who is not necessarily the producer.
Considering productivity alone, this can be the result of rote activity. Productivity can be multiplied, as it is on an assembly line, or in a factory using the repetitive skills of its employees. It is not considered, for one moment, that productivity can be separated from skilfulness – this is not the case. However, it can be clearly separated from the spark of genius of a creator.
Thus the concept that a bureaucratic organisation can “create employment’ is mistaken. A creator is an essential requirement and it is also required that such creators have the drive to push into effect the cognitive concept.
Naturally, emulation, copy-catting, and mimicry can be used to produce a but ensuring that that product meets the economic needs of humans can likely come only from a single creative mind. Governments or bureaucracies alone cannot initiate true creativity or an economically satisfying productivity.