Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article finds that valuing improvisation in performance indicates its complementary role with structured decision-making.
Improvisation is standardly valued for its capacity to exhibit a performer's creativity and individuality. An issue so far under-explored is whether improvisation is also valuable in work-performance. This article addresses this question, asking whether there are reasons to prefer an approach to performance that deliberately leaves room for meaningful improvised decisions. This approach is opposed to one that seeks to minimize the need for spontaneous decision-making. I argue against a number of possible arguments in defense of the superiority of the improvisational approach. Finally, I propose an account that makes sense of the coexistence and complementarity of the two approaches in actual musical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Matteo Ravasio (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: