  This contribution examines the current controversy over research
productivity. There are two sides in this controversy. Using extensive data
from several industries and areas of research, one side argues that research
productivity is currently in decline. The other side disputes this conclusion.
It contends that the data used in making this argument are selective and
limited; they do not reflect the overall state of research. The conclusion that
follows from this critique is that the indicators of research productivity we
currently use are not reliable and do not warrant a definitive answer to the
problem.
  The article agrees that we need a new set of indicators in assessing research
productivity. It proposes that we should look at global indicators related to
knowledge production in general, rather than look at selective data that are
inevitably limited in their scope. The article argues that the process of
creation plays the essential role in knowledge production. Therefore, the
perspective that uses the process of creation as its central organizing
principle offers a unique and global view on the production of knowledge and
makes a definitive resolution of the controversy possible. The article also
outlines some steps for improving research productivity and realizing the full
potential of the human capacity to produce knowledge.
  Key words: Research productivity, knowledge growth, the process of creation,
levels of organization, equilibration and the production of disequilibrium.
