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.