TEAM

CREATIVITY

December 2, 2017 MS 232 1

 FOSTERING TEAM CREATIVITY

Team creativity is the generation of unique and useful ideas by an

individual in a team or an organization.
Innovation builds on unique ideas.
Creativity helps employees uncover problems, identify opportunities,
and make novel choices in solving problems.
Is the creation of a valuable, useful, and novel product , service, idea,
procedure, or process carried out via discovery rather than a
predetermined stepbystep procedure, by individuals working together
in a complex social system
Organizations that will survive and thrive are those that make the best
use of the creativity of their workforce

December 2, 2017 MS 232 2

 Creativity is defined as the ability to generate new ideas that challenge
status quo and aid problem solving or open up new possibilities. Team
creativity, also known as group or collective creativity, is not just the
aggregate sum of individual creativity of the team members but it is a
synergized result of their interactions and shared commitments. Individual
creativity acts as the raw material which is processed and molded by the
team climate into collective creativity.
CREATIVITY VS INNOVATION
According to Theodore Levitt, creativity is thinking up new things while
innovation is doing new things. Simply put, Creativity = Idea, and,
Innovation = Idea + Action.
This means that every creative thought or idea cannot be innovative. Only
an idea that can be put to a meaningful use is called innovative. But all
successful innovations stem from a creative idea.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 3

 FACTORS THAT PROMOTETEAM CREATIVITY

Competent Team Members: Each individual in the team should have the relevant
domain expertise, creative thinking skills and intrinsic task motivation. Therefore
when selecting the members for a team one should focus on these qualities. The
creative thinking skill manifests itself as problem solving, managing ambiguity,
perseverance and self-discipline.
Inspiring Vision: A simple ambitious objective that is shared by the team helps to
outline the spirit and to set the direction. For example 3Ms vision of developing
technology that advance every company, products that enhance every home and
innovation that improves life, goes a long way in giving a sustainable purpose to
each employee of the organization.
Team Conflict: Research studies indicate that moderate level of disagreement
among the team members during formative stages of team development
enhances the creativity and performance of the team. A moderate degree of
cognitive conflict stimulates divergent thinking and brings forth the different
perspectives challenging the old ways of doing things.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 4

 Trust: Each individual should be confident of sharing his ideas and opinions
without the fear of being laughed at or criticized by others. This promotes
participation in decision making.
Idea Time: When there is long list of tasks to be completed each day, it leaves
little room to think outside the structured routine. Therefore some relax or quiet
time should be given to each member to generate new ideas or critically
evaluate the existing ones answering what we can do better? For example,
Googles Twenty Percent Time program encourages its employees to devote
20% of their total work time on any project of personal interest. This has to led to
the creation of newer services like Gmail, Orkut andGoogle News.
Risk Taking: The saying No risk, no gains holds true to promote creativity. The
team leader should let people take calculated risk and fail. Failure should be
accepted as part of the process of creativity, learning made and the team should
move on. At no point failure should be criticized or punished as that would make
people fear taking newer initiatives.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 5

December 2, 2017 MS 232 6
December 2, 2017 MS 232 7
 INTRODUCTION:

The Delphi method is a structured communication technique, originally

developed as a systematic, interactive forecasting method which relies on
a panel of experts.
The experts answer questionnaires in two or more rounds. After each
round, a facilitator provides an anonymous summary of the experts
forecasts from the previous round as well as the reasons they provided for
their judgments. Thus, experts are encouraged to revise their earlier
answers in light of the replies of other members of their panel.
It is believed that during this process the range of the answers will
decrease and the group will converge towards the "correct" answer. Finally,
the process is stopped after a pre-defined stop criterion (e.g. number of
rounds, achievement of consensus, stability of results) and the mean or
median scores of the final rounds determine the results

December 2, 2017 MS 232 8

 Delphi method have been designed for normative and explorative use,
particularly in the area of social policy and public health. In Europe,
more recent web-based experiments have used the Delphi method as
a communication technique for interactive decision-making and e-
democracy.
Mini-Delphi or Estimate-Talk-Estimate (ETE)
Delphi is based on the principle that forecasts (or decisions) from a
structured group of individuals are more accurate than those from
unstructured groups. This has been indicated with the term "collective
intelligence". The technique can also be adapted for use in face-to-face
meetings, and is then called mini-Delphi or Estimate-Talk-Estimate
(ETE).

December 2, 2017 MS 232 9

 DELPHI DEFINED AS.

An organized method for collecting views and information pertaining to

a specific area;
A method that allows dialogue between geographically separated
experts while serving an effective means for learning;
Gathering a group of experts to forecast events and assess complex
issues;
Collective human intelligence;
A process of exploring assessing and evaluating.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 10

 HISTORY:

The name "Delphi" derives from the Oracle of Delphi

The Delphi method was developed at the beginning of the Cold War to
forecast the impact of technology on warfare.
In 1944, General Henry H. Arnold ordered the creation of the report for
the U.S. Army Air Corps on the future technological capabilities that
might be used by the military.
Different approaches were tried, but the shortcomings of traditional
forecasting methods, such as theoretical approach, quantitative models
or trend extrapolation, in areas where precise scientific laws have not
been established yet, quickly became apparent.
To cross these shortcomings, the Delphi method was developed by
Project RAND during the 1950-1960s (1959) by Olaf Helmet, Norman
Dalkey, and Nicholas Rescher.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 11

 KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DELPHI
METHOD
The following key characteristics of the Delphi method help the participants
to focus on the issues
Structuring of information flow
The initial contributions from the experts are collected in the form of
answers to questionnaires and their comments to these answers. The panel
director controls the interactions among the participants by processing the
information and filtering out irrelevant content. This avoids the negative
effects of face-to-face panel discussions and solves the usual problems of
group dynamics.
Regular feedback
Participants comment on their own forecasts, the responses of others and
on the progress of the panel as a whole. At any moment they can revise
their earlier statements. While in regular group meetings participants tend
to stick to previously stated opinions and often conform too much to group
leader, the Delphi method prevents it.
December 2, 2017 MS 232 12
 Anonymity of the participants
Usually all participants remain anonymous. Their identity is not
revealed, even after the completion of the final report. This prevents the
authority, personality, or reputation of some participants from
dominating others in the process. Arguably, it also frees participants (to
some extent) from their personal biases, minimizes the "bandwagon
effect" or "halo effect", allows free expression of opinions, encourages
open critique, and facilitates admission of errors when revising earlier
judgments.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 13

 ROLE OF THE FACILITATOR

The person coordinating the Delphi method can be known as a

facilitator, and facilitates the responses of their panel of experts, who
are selected for a reason, usually that they hold knowledge on an
opinion or view. The facilitator sends out questionnaires, surveys etc.
and if the panel of experts accept, they follow instructions and
present their views. Responses are collected and analyzed, then
common and conflicting viewpoints are identified. If consensus is not
reached, the process continues through thesis and antithesis, to
gradually work towards synthesis, and building consensus.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 14

 APPLICATIONS OF THE DELPHI METHOD

First applications of the Delphi method were in the field of science and
technology forecasting. The objective of the method was to combine
expert opinions on likelihood and expected development time, of the
particular technology, in a single indicator.
Later the Delphi method was applied in other areas, especially those
related to public policy issues, such as economic trends, health and
education. It was also applied successfully and with high accuracy in
business forecasting.
The Delphi method has also been used as a tool to implement multi-
stakeholder approaches for participative policy-making in developing
countries.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 15

 DELPHI..WHEN IT IS APPROPRIATE ?

In situations where there is no clear-cut resolution of a given policy issue;

When time & cost constraints make frequent face-to-face meetings
difficult to arrange.
When the heterogeneity of the participants must be preserved and
anonymity assured.
Use it to explore an issue with a distributed group of people.
Use it move a group of people towards consensus.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 16

 HOW TO USE IT:

Define the problem

Give everyone the problem

Collate the responses

Give everyone the collection

Repeat as necessary

December 2, 2017 MS 232 17

 Define the problem:
1. Identify the problem that you want to work on, writing it down in a clear way that is
easy to understand. This can be in various forms , form a questionnaire to a broad and
open question.
2. You can work on one problem and you can work on several problems at once. The
constraint is usually the bandwidth and expertise of the people in the Delphi group.
Give everyone the problem:
1. Recruit people to the Delphi group. This includes anyone who has been selected to
contribute thinking on this project. There is seldom a meeting needed for Delphi work,
making it ideal for virtual teams.
2. Delphi thinking can be done with a small group and it can be done with hundreds of
people. Around 20 people is fairly common size
3. Send the problem or problems to everyone who is in the group and ask them respond,
You will have to handle a lot of feedback, so asking for short bullet-points will make
things much easier to deal with than rambling text.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 18

 Collate the responses:
1. Take the responses that people send back to you and collate these into a single
anonyms list of sets of list.
2. Make this as easy as possible for the people to read when you send it back out again,
but be aware of casing inappropriate bias. For example you may group responses into
appropriate headings, but with the caution that this might presuppose particular
thinking.
3. On the other hand, if you are seeking creative ideas you may deliberately mix up the
answers.
Give everyone the collation:
1. Send the collation back out to everyone with the request to score each item on a given
scale. You may also allow them to add further items as appropriate.
2. Remember to include the original problem at the top of the page, along with
instructions on what to do. You can also make responding easier by putting the items
in a table with space for the score.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 19

 Repeat as necessary:
1. The process may now be repeated as many times as is deemed appropriate. If your
are seeking consensus and there was a wide range of responses, then this may
require several iterations. In particular at least a second round to see how others
have scored can be very useful.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 20

 ADVANTAGES..

Opportunities for large number of people to participate;

Focus is on ideas rather than individuals;
Anonymity for participants which make contributions of ideas a safe
activity;
Opportunities for participants to reconsider their opinions;
Allows for identification of priorities.
During last ten years, the Delphi method was used more often especially
for national science and technology foresight. Some modifications and
methodological improvements have been made, mean while.
Nevertheless, one has to be aware of the strengths and weakness of the
method so that it cannot be applied in every case.Delphi method is
better to use as additional method to other research methods.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 21

 LIMITATIONS

Large amount of time to conduct several rounds;

The complexity of data analysis;
The difficulty of maintaining participant enthusiasm throughout
process;
The problem of keeping statements value free and clearly defined;
Self reporting data is subject to respondents biases and memories;
The bandwagon effect of a majority opinion;
The power of persuasion or prestigious individuals to shape group
opinion;
The vulnerability of group dynamics to manipulation;
The unwillingness of individuals to abandon publicly stated positions.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 22

December 2, 2017 MS 232 23
 NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE
Nominal (meaning in name only) group technique (NGT) is a structured
variation of a small-group discussion to reach consensus. NGT gathers
information by asking individuals to respond to questions posed by a
moderator, and then asking participants to prioritize the ideas or suggestions
of all group members. The process prevents the domination of the discussion
by a single person, encourages all group members to participate, and results
in a set of prioritized solutions or recommendations that represent the
groups preferences.
This technique was originally developed byAndre DelbecqandAndrew H. Van
de Ven,and has been applied to adult education program planning by
Vedros,and has also been employed as a useful technique in curriculum
design and evaluation in educational institutions.
Is more formal and structured decision making process
An improvement over Brainstorming technique

December 2, 2017 MS 232 24

 STEP 1: PREPARATION
Prior to using the Nominal Group Process, it is necessary for the meeting facilitator to complete a set
of sequential preparatory tasks that set the stage for a successful meeting:
Design preparation
Prepare the NGT question that clarifies the objective of the meeting and illustrates the desired
responses in terms the level of abstraction and scope. Often the leader will pilot test the question prior
to the meeting.
Print the question on worksheets for each participant.
Select the desired voting method (e.g., ranking vs. rating).
Room preparation
Secure a room large enough to comfortably seat group participants (five to nine persons) at
individual U-shaped tables. Note: if the NGT process involves a large number of persons, please
provide adequate separation between the tables for each group.
Bring the following supplies: flip charts, masking tape, markers, pens and paper for each participant
and either 3" x 5" index cards or post-it notes.
Meeting preparation
Prepare a welcome statement that explains the purpose of the meeting, outlines individual roles,
and describes how the output will be used.
Conduct the meeting following the NGT process.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 25

 STEP 2: SILENT IDEA GENERATION

Prior to starting, the group leader should prepare and present, in writing
and verbally, the question that the group will consider during their meeting.
A well-thought-out question will help generate a wealth of potential ideas.
The leader will encourage participants to silently and independently write
ideas in brief phrases.
The benefits of silent generation include:
Allows adequate time for thinking and reflection through recall
Promotes social facilitation (e.g., seeing others hard at work)
Avoids interruptions, undue focus on one idea, and competition, as well
as status and conformance pressures or choosing prematurely between
ideas
Promotes a problem-centered focus

December 2, 2017 MS 232 26

 STEP 3: ROUND-ROBIN RECORDING OF IDEAS

In this step, the group leader goes around the table and records one idea from each
participant on the flip chart. The ideas should be recorded verbatim with little to no
paraphrasing by the leader. However, leaders are allowed to ask questions for
clarification of the idea. The process continues until all ideas have been recorded. When
a participant is out of ideas, they should indicate by passing.
The benefits of the round-robin recording are that it:

Promotes equal participation in the presentation of ideas

Increases problem-mindedness and the ability to deal with a large number of ideas
Separates the ideas from the person
Allows for the tolerance of conflicting ideas
Encourages hitchhiking on ideas
Provides written records of the ideas
In the NGT process, hitchhiking refers to a process that may stimulate other participants to think of
an idea not recorded during silent generation and allows them to record and offer it during their
turn.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 27

 STEP 4: SERIAL DISCUSSION OF IDEAS

This involves taking each idea, one at a time (serially) and

discussing or clarifying the idea prior to the preliminary vote.
The benefits of this step are that it:

Avoids unduly focusing on any one idea or a subset of ideas

Provides an opportunity for clarification and the elimination
of any misunderstanding
Outlines the arguments and disagreements over ideas
Records differences of opinion without undue augmentation

December 2, 2017 MS 232 28

 STEP 5: PRELIMINARY VOTING

During this stage, the group participants will begin to narrow

the list of potential ideas. Building on the discussion of ideas,
each member will make an independent judgment about
those ideas that they consider most likely to represent the
problem to be solved or the potential solution to address it.
The two voting methods, typically used, are ranking and rating.
Rating method: When rating the ideas, each participant
distributes a set number of points (e.g., 100) across the ideas,
as seen in the example table below:

December 2, 2017 MS 232 29

As seen in the table above, each of the four team members distributed their points
across the ten ideas they generated during Step 2 . Note that participants have the
option of assigning all of their points to one idea if they feel strongly that it is truly the
best (i.e., Sue). From the table, it can be seen that Idea 3 has the highest point total,
and the team can end the NGT process at this point, and choose this option.

Rating Method
Idea # Joe Sue Kelly Jim Total
1 50 50
2 40 30 70
3 20 100 32 152 In another
4 0 variation of
5 30 30
this method,
6 20 30 50
participants
assign colored
7 0
dots to ideas,
8 0
using the
9 20 5 18 43
same
10 5 5
December 2, 2017 MS 232
process. 30
Total 100 100 100 100 400
 Ranking method: When ranking items, each participant is asked to choose roughly half
of the total number of ideas generated, and to rank these from most important to least
important. This process will place emphasis on fewer ideas. In preparation for recording
the vote, the leader should list the number of each idea on a separate piece of paper.
When the actual votes are recorded, she/he will record the rank assigned by each
participant to the idea, as seen in the example below.

As seen from the table above, Idea 3 has Ranking Method

Idea # Joe Sue Kelly Jim Total
the highest score. In many instances, the
1 1 5 6
NGT process will end after this step. If
2 5 5 10
greater accuracy is desired, and especially
3 4 5 4 13
if the group has generated a large number 4 0
of ideas, the group may chose to engage in 5 3 4 1 8
the following two additional steps ( Step 6 6 2 4 3 2 11
and 7 ), and iterate as many times as 7 0
needed. 8 2 2
9 3 1 2 3 9
December 2, 2017 10
MS 232 1 1 31
 STEP 6: DISCUSSION OF PRELIMINARY VOTING

This brief step in the NGT process is designed to examine

items with inconsistent voting patterns and provide an
opportunity for a discussion of ideas perceived as receiving
too many or too few votes. While this step seldom results in
radical changes in how the groups perceives an idea, it can
result in a more accurate final vote.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 32

 STEP 7: FINAL VOTING

In this final step, individual judgments on the ideas are combined

into a group decision. While the leader may chose to follow the
same voting technique used in Step 5 , they also may choose to use
a more refined voting technique such as rating.

The final vote helps:

Determine the outcome of the meeting

Provides a sense of closure and accomplishment
Records the final group judgment in relation the initial question

December 2, 2017 MS 232 33

ADVANTAGES
Facilitate a meeting and identify the major strengths of a
program.
Motivate the employee to complete a task, reaching
consensus on the problem solution.
Opportunities for equal participation of group members
DISADVANTAGES
Opinions may not converge in the voting process.
Cross-fertilization of idea may be constrained and the
Process may appear to be too mechanical.

December 2, 2017 MS 232 34

December 2, 2017 MS 232 35
December 2, 2017 MS 232 36
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEup5jcD-Xg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAtRcyjqLek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQCOp6p7a9Y dt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=FFfKOSTftcs&ebc=ANyPxKrtQk6S6_NbmLAzoXRTyE_yXJ5ZWX9CzEIIn
xozKVreMZnuJuP60i9L8PF_DT1sT4u_yAc1HI3HLkHWe6MkOZO6NTTVFg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZjL13vD-dA ngt

December 2, 2017 MS 232 37