C H A P T E R

11
E L E V E N

Creativity and Team

Decision Making
McGraw-Hill Ryerson 1 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001
Creative Process Model

Verification

Insight

Incubation

Preparation

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 2 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Creativity at Millenium Technology
Illich Cheng and his employees
at Millennium Technology Inc.
have the persistent motivation
and insight to design a better
magnetic resonance imaging
system (MRI). Some people are
more creative than others due to
their intelligence, experience,
inventive thinking style, and
R. Ernst, Vancouver Province
persistence.

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 3 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Characteristics of Creative People

• Intellectual abilities
– Synthetic, general, practical

• Relevant knowledge and

experience

• Motivation and persistence

• Inventive thinking style

R. Ernst, Vancouver Province

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 4 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Creative Work Environment
• Organizational support
– Tolerates mistakes
– Encourages communication
– Offers job security

• Intrinsically motivating work

– Task significance, autonomy, feedback
– Self-leadership
– Flow -- align competencies with job

• Sufficient time and resources

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 5 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Creative Practices
Redefine Associative Cross-
the Problem Play Pollination

• Jamming • Chain story • Diverse teams

• Review past • Artistic • In-house

projects activities presentations

• Tell me, • Metaphors

stranger
• Morphological
analysis

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 6 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Team Decision Making Constraints

• Time constraints
– Process loss
– Production blocking

• Evaluation apprehension
– Belief that other team
members are silently
evaluating you

• Conformity to peer
© Photodisc. With permission.
pressure
– Suppressing opinions that
oppose team norms

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 7 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Team Constraints: Groupthink

• Tendency in highly
cohesive teams to value
consensus at the price of
decision quality
• More common when the
team:
– is highly cohesive
– is isolated from outsiders
– faces external threat
© Photodisc. With permission.
– has recent failures
– leader tries to influence
decision

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 8 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Team Constraints: Group Polarization

• Tendency for teams to

make more extreme
decisions than individuals
alone
• Riskier options usually
taken because of
gambler’s fallacy --
believe luck is on their
side
© Photodisc. With permission.

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 9 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Group Polarization Process
High Risk

Decision Process
Team Decision

Social Support
Individual Persuasion
Opinions
Shifting Responsibility

Team Decision

Low Risk

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 10 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Improving Team Decision Making

1. Ensure neither leader nor any member

dominates
2. Maintain optimal team size
3. Team norms encourage critical thinking
4. Introduce effective team structures

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 11 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Generating Constructive Controversy

• Form heterogeneous decision

making team

• Ensure team meets often to face

contentious issues

• Members should take on different

discussion roles

• Team thinks about the decision

under different scenarios

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 12 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Brainstorming at IDEO

IDEO, a leading industrial

design firm, relies on
brainstorming sessions that
generate ideas, usually about
designing products. A typical
session lasts between 1-2
hours and is attended by the
design team as well as other
IDEO engineers with relevant E. Luse. San Francisco Chronicle

skills.

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 13 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Features of Brainstorming

1. No criticism

2. Encourage many ideas

3. Speak freely

4. Build on others’ ideas

E. Luse. San Francisco Chronicle

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 14 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Evaluating Electronic Brainstorming

Benefits
+ Less production blocking
+ Less evaluation apprehension
+ More creative synergy
+ More decision efficiency

Problems
– Too structured
– May be costly
– Lacks interpersonal dynamics
– Candid feedback is threatening Photo: Courtesy of IBM Canada

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 15 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Nominal Group Technique

Individual Team Individual

Activity Activity Activity

Possible
Write down Vote on
Describe solutions
possible solutions
problem described
solutions presented
to others

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 16 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

C H A P T E R

11
E L E V E N

Creativity and Team

Decision Making
McGraw-Hill Ryerson 17 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001
Solutions to Creativity
Brainbusters

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 18 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Double Circle Problem

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 19 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Nine Dot Problem

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 20 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Nine Dot Problem Revisited

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 21 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Five Letters Problem

FCIRVEEALTETITVEERS

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 22 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001

Burning Rope Problem

After first rope burned

i.e. 30 min.

One Hour to Burn Completely

McGraw-Hill Ryerson 23 © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2001