Search results

Accumulating evidence suggests that individualism provides an atmosphere conducive to creative idea generation. However, research in both cross-cultural and social psychology suggests that individualism may reflect either independence or competition; a distinction that has been overlooked in research on group creativity. In this chapter, we highlight the distinction between these two constructs and develop a series of testable propositions that help distinguish their unique effects on the creative process. In doing so, we uncover several theoretical insights, including the possibility that independence and competition (a) are theoretically and empirically distinct, (b) have differential effects on idea generation, (c) have similar effects on idea selection but through different mechanisms, and (d) may interact to stimulate group creativity. We conclude by suggesting methodological approaches to disentangling these constructs in future research.

Creativity is increasingly being recognized as an important source of competitive advantage because a single creative idea that is both novel and useful may take an organization in a profitable new direction. A long tradition of research has focused on individual creativity; especially the traits and social situations that make some people more creative than others. Over time, however, there has been a major shift in the way work is conducted such that organizations are becoming increasingly “team” based and employees are spending more time working as a member of a group. In line with this shift, research on creativity also moved from a focus on the individual to a focus on groups of people who collaborate to generate creative ideas. The growing interest in group creativity reflects an underlying assumption that the exchange of ideas that occurs in a group setting is more likely to result in a wider range of ideas that are more creative than any one person could have come up with alone. Although the evidence to support this assumption is somewhat mixed, there is a great deal of work yet to be done. Our goal in this volume is to promote the already burgeoning interest in group creativity by identifying new questions that will drive future research in this area.

In this chapter, we develop a theoretical model of group splits, culture shifts, and creativity in diverse groups. This model explains how the strength of informational faultlines can elicit a culture shift from a desired to an actual culture of creativity in a team, which then might differentially influence team creativity and group performance. We further argue that subgroup support and team creative efficacy may enhance the interaction of informational faultlines with a desired culture of creativity to facilitate the shift toward an actual culture of creativity. We also discuss future research directions and practical implications for stimulating creative behaviors in organizations.

Despite the oft made argument that demographic diversity should enhance creativity, little is known about this relationship. We propose that group diversity, measured in terms of demographic faultlines, affects creativity through its effects on group members’ felt psychological safety to express their diverse ideas and the quality of information sharing that takes place across subgroup boundaries. Further, we propose that the relationship between faultlines and creativity will be moderated by task interdependence and equality of subgroup sizes. Finally, we provide suggestions for how organizations can establish norms for self-verification and use accountability techniques to enhance creativity in diverse groups.

Intuition, along with empirical research, suggests that the generation of creative ideas benefits from divergent thinking among team members. However, the generation of creative ideas represents only one stage of the innovative process; teams also must implement ideas. In this chapter, we propose that effective idea implementation may depend on the opposite of team divergence: team conformity. Specifically, we propose that conformity facilitates various group processes important for effective idea implementation, including team coordination, information exchange, conflict management, and collective efficacy. Next, we discuss the role of leaders in managing the magnitude and processes of conformity. The chapter concludes with a discussion of implications and important next steps for studying conformity in relation to team innovative effectiveness.

This chapter presents a theoretical framework for the effects of prior task experience on team creativity. We distinguish among different types of experience within teams, namely direct and indirect prior task experience. We argue that different types of prior task experience differentially influence team creativity, and that the prior experience–creativity relationship is mediated by the development and use of transactive memory systems (TMS). We also argue that team characteristics such as identity and communication moderate the effect of prior task experience on TMS, and task characteristics such as uncertainty and interdependence moderate the effect of TMS on group creativity.

Purpose – We investigate the antibias norm, “political correctness” (PC), and explore the consequences of the PC norm for group processes and group performance.

Methodology/approach – We define the term PC as it is used in public discourse and distinguish the PC norm from the related antibias norm of color blindness.

Findings – We suggest that the PC norm may play a unique role in reducing a critical type of uncertainty that would otherwise constrain performance, in particular, group creativity and decision making, in diverse work groups. We then explore the controversial argument that being politically incorrect can actually promote freedom of expression.

Originality/value of chapter – We conclude by reflecting on the costs of the PC norm and why the PC norm may remain prevalent in work groups for some time to come.