Team Creativity Between Local Disruption and Global Integration

  • Axel MenningEmail author
  • Benedikt Ewald
  • Claudia Nicolai
  • Ulrich Weinberg
Part of the Understanding Innovation book series (UNDINNO)


What differentiates an average conversation from a creative conversation? In this book chapter, we answer this question by looking at coherence styles of design conversations. With the help of the Coherence Style Framework (CSF), we are able to illustrate what divergent and convergent thinking on the conversational level looks like. Highly creative teamwork is represented as an alternation between local disruption (local low coherence) and global integration (global high coherence). This has implications for the current practices of idea generation of design thinking and innovation teams.


  1. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boden, M. A. (2009). Computer models of creativity. Interfaces, 1993(April), 80–83.Google Scholar
  3. Bublitz, W., & Augsburg, U. (1999). A bibliography of coherence and cohesion. In W. Bublitz, U. Lenk, & E. Ventola (Eds.), Coherence in spoken and written discourse. How to create it and how to describe it (pp. 267–295). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  4. Cattell, R. B., & Butcher, H. J. (1968). The prediction of achievement and creativity. New York, NY: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
  5. Chase, C. I. (1985). Review of the torrance tests of creative thinking. In J. V. Mitchell Jr. (Ed.), The ninth mental measurements yearbook (pp. 1631–1632). Lincoln: University of Nebraska, Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.Google Scholar
  6. Cropley, A. (1999). Definitions of creativity. In M. Runco & S. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 511–524). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cropley, A. J. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. Oxford: Berg Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Bono, E. (1991). Lateral and vertical thinking. In J. Henry (Ed.), Creative management (pp. 16–23). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Einstein, A. (1954). Ideas and opinions. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
  12. Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and Applications. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gilson, L. L., Lim, H. S., Litchfield, R. C., & Gilson, P. W. (2015). Creativity in teams: A key building block for innovation and entrepreneurship. In C. E. Shalley, M. A. Hitt, & J. Zhou (Eds.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship (pp. 177–204). New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Glock, F. (2009). Aspects of language use in design conversation. CoDesign, 5(1), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldschmidt, G. (2014). Linkography: Unfolding the design process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 44–50).Google Scholar
  18. Grosz, B. J., Weinstein, S., & Joshi, A. K. (1995). Centering: A framework for modelling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2), 203–225.Google Scholar
  19. Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American psychologist, 5, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Halliday, M. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  21. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  22. Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. Korolija, N., & Linell, P. (1996). Episodes: Coding and analyzing coherence in multiparty conversation. Linguistics, 34(4), 799–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Menning, A., Ewald, B., Nicolai, C., & Weinberg, U. (2018). “… and not building on that”: The relation of low coherence and creativity in design conversations. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research. Understanding innovation. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Menning, A., Grasnick, B. M., Ewald, B., Dobrigkeit, F., & Nicolai, C. (2017). Combining computational and human analysis to study low coherence in design conversations. In B. T. Christensen, L. J. Ball, & K. Halskov (Eds.), Analyzing design thinking: Studies of cross-cultural co-creation. Leiden: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  29. Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. S. (1996). Design and other types of fixation. Design Studies, 17(4), 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. Scholar
  31. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1993). Investing in creativity. Psychological Inquiry, 4, 229–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1997). What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis. Design Studies, 18(4), 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Torrance, E. P. (1966). The torrance tests of creative thinking–Norms: Technical manual research edition—Verbal tests, forms A and B—Figural tests, forms A and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.Google Scholar
  35. Valkenburg, R. (2000). The reflective practice in product design teams. Delft: Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Axel Menning
    • 1
    Email author
  • Benedikt Ewald
    • 1
  • Claudia Nicolai
    • 1
  • Ulrich Weinberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Hasso Plattner Institute for Digital EngineeringPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations