Abstract. Most ideas do not fail in selection. They fail before they become selectable. This paper identifies the phase in which that failure occurs and argues that its systematic omission from creativity theory has produced a field that has largely studied a biased sample: the ideas that survived long enough to be observed, while attributing variation in creative outcomes to factors that operate downstream of where the real loss occurs. The foundational frameworks of creativity research, from Guilford's divergent thinking to Amabile's componential model to Csikszentmihalyi's systems model, share a structural assumption this paper interrogates: that ideas exist in a sufficiently formed state to be generated, evaluated, and selected. Between the emergence of a signal and the point at which it becomes evaluable lies an intermediate phase, the formation interval, in which early-stage ideas are neither stable nor assessable. A significant proportion of creative potential is lost in this interval, not through selection but before selection becomes possible. We introduce novelty metabolization as the organizational process through which emerging signals are transformed into evaluable ideas, and premature closure as the mechanism through which this process is disrupted under conditions of velocity and constraint. We further specify metabolization capacity as the system-level property that determines whether ideas survive long enough to become selectable. Six propositions link field-level model mis-specification, measurement bias, and structural omissions in creativity research to the organizational conditions that produce them. Drawing on organizational learning, cognitive and social psychology, and innovation theory, the framework repositions creativity not as a problem of generation or selection, but as a problem of idea survival in the interval that precedes both. Keywords: novelty metabolization, premature closure, idea survival, early-stage idea loss, creativity theory, organizational creativity, creative process, formation interval, metabolization capacity, innovation process, idea formation, organizational learning
David S Morgan (Thu,) studied this question.