Abstract
Although the collective view is receiving increasing attention in research, this perspective is missing from the approaches for fostering creativity and ideation. The present study aims to fill this research gap by understanding ideation as a collective phenomenon and by introducing a novel method for fostering collective ideation. The study builds on current research on knowledge creation, collective creativity, idea generation, and collective theatrical improvisation to introduce an approach for fostering collective ideation. In addition, as a secondary goal, the study provides empirical findings about the implementation of collective ideation in 13 distinct cases. The study builds links between knowledge creation and collective theatrical improvisation and, thus, highlights social and affective aspects of collective ideation as a knowledge creation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376.
Amin, A., & Roberts, J. (2008). Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice. Research Policy, 37(2), 353–369.
Bakeman, R., & Beck, S. (1974). The size of informal groups in public. Environment and Behavior, 6(3), 378.
Bantel, K., & Jackson, S. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10(S1), 107–124.
Barry, D., & Meisiek, S. (2010). Seeing more and seeing differently: Sensemaking, mindfulness, and the workarts. Organization Studies, 31(11), 1505–1530.
Bartunek, J., Gordon, J., & Weathersby, R. (1983). Developing “complicated” understanding in administrators. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 273–284.
Björk, J. (2012). Knowledge domain spanners in ideation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(1), 17–27.
Björk, J., Magnusson, M., Sukhov, A., Magnusson, P., & Olsson, L. E. (2016). The what, who, when, where, and how of idea assessment. Paper presented at the ISPIM Innovation Forum, Boston, MA, USA on 13–16 March, 2016.
Brown, V., Tumeo, M., Larey, T., & Paulus, P. (1998). Modeling cognitive interactions during group brainstorming. Small Group Research, 29(4), 495–526.
Catmull, E. (2008). How Pixar fosters collective creativity. Boston: Harvard Business School.
Choi, J., Sung, S., & Cho, T. (2014). Creative contribution of individuals in groups: Effects of goal orientation and participative safety. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(3), 407–422.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1994). Fortune favors the prepared firm. Management Science, 40(2), 227–251.
Cook, S., & Brown, J. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 381–400.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Motivation and creativity: Toward a synthesis of structural and energistic approaches to cognition. New Ideas in Psychology, 6(2), 159–176.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (p. 313). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Denzin, N. L., & Lincoln, Y. Y. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497.
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1991). Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 392.
Dodgson, M., Salter, A., & Gann, D. (2005). Think, play, do. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Drazin, R., Glynn, M., & Kazanjian, R. (1999). Multilevel theorizing about creativity in organizations: A sensemaking perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 286–307.
Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 105–123.
Elsbach, K. D., & Kramer, R. M. (2003). Assessing creativity in Hollywood pitch meetings: Evidence for a dual-process model of creativity judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3), 283–301.
Erden, Z., Von Krogh, G., & Nonaka, I. (2008). The quality of group tacit knowledge. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(1), 4–18.
Eriksson, P., & Kovalainen, A. (2015). Qualitative methods in business research: A practical guide to social research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Fisher, E. P. (1992). The impact of play on development: A meta-analysis. Play & Culture, 5(2), 159–181.
Gadamer, H. (1989). Play as the clue to ontological explanation. Truth and method, crossroad. New York: Crossroad.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 73–96.
Grawitch, M., Munz, D., & Kramer, T. (2003). Effects of member mood states on creative performance in temporary workgroups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(1), 41.
Guzzo, R., & Dickson, M. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 307–338.
Hammond, M., Neff, N., Farr, J., Schwall, A., & Zhao, X. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 90.
Handzic, M., & Chaimungkalanont, M. (2004, December). Enhancing organisational creativity through socialisation. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(1), 57–64.
Hargadon, A. B. (2002). Brokering knowledge: Linking learning and innovation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 41–85.
Hargadon, A., & Bechky, B. (2006). When collections of creatives become creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work. Organization Science, 17(4), 484–500.
Harrington, D. M. (1975). Effects of explicit instructions to “be creative” on the psychological meaning of divergent thinking test scores 1. Journal of Personality, 43(3), 434–454.
Harrison, D., & Klein, K. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199–1228.
Harvey, S. (2013). A different perspective: The multiple effects of deep level diversity on group creativity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 822–832.
Harvey, S. (2014). Creative synthesis: Exploring the process of extraordinary group creativity. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 324–343.
Harvey, S., & Kou, C. (2013). Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(3), 346–386.
Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2009). CK design theory: An advanced formulation. Research in Engineering Design, 19(4), 181.
Heslin, P. (2009). Better than brainstorming? Potential contextual boundary conditions to brainwriting for idea generation in organizations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82(1), 129–145.
Hjorth, D. (2004). Creating space for play/invention – Concepts of space and organizational entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(5), 413–432.
Hjorth, D. (2005). Organizational entrepreneurship: With De Certeau on creating heterotopias (or spaces for play). Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(4), 386–398.
Huizinga, J. (1949). Homo Ludens. A study of the play-element in culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
James, K., Clark, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Positive and negative creativity in groups, institutions, and organizations: A model and theoretical extension. Creativity Research Journal, 12(3), 211–226.
John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Johnstone, K. (1979/2015). IMPRO. Improvisation and the theatre. New York: Routledge/Theatre Arts Books.
Kohn, N., Paulus, P., & Choi, Y. (2011). Building on the ideas of others: An examination of the idea combination process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(3), 554–561.
Koppett, K. (2001). Training to imagine: Practical, improvisational techniques to inspire creativity, enhance communication and develop leadership. San Francisco: Stylus.
Kurtzberg, T., & Amabile, T. (2001). From Guilford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3–4), 285–294.
Litchfield, R., Fan, J., & Brown, V. (2011). Directing idea generation using brainstorming with specific novelty goals. Motivation and Emotion, 35(2), 135–143.
Locke, E., & Latham, G. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
MacKinnon, D. W. (1962). The nature and nurture of creative talent. American Psychologist, 17(7), 484.
Mainemelis, C., & Ronson, S. (2006). Ideas are born in fields of play: Towards a theory of play and creativity in organizational settings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 81–131.
Montuori, A. (2003). The complexity of improvisation and the improvisation of complexity: Social science, art and creativity. Human Relations, 56(2), 237–255.
Moorman, C., & Miner, A. (1998). The convergence of planning and execution: Improvisation in new product development. The Journal of Marketing, 62, 1–20.
Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93(1), 23.
Nijstad, B., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affects the mind: A cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 186–213.
Nijstad, B., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. (2002). Cognitive stimulation and interference in groups: Exposure effects in an idea generation task. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(6), 535–544.
Nisula, A. M., & Kianto, A. (2018). Stimulating organisational creativity with theatrical improvisation. Journal of Business Research, 85, 484–493.
Nisula, A. M., Kallio, A., Oikarinen, T., & Kianto, A. (2014). Fostering team creativity and innovativeness with playfulness: A multi-case study. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 17(1), 79–97.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: Knowledge creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1(1), 2–10.
Nonaka, I., & Von Krogh, G. (2009). Perspective—Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science, 20(3), 635–652.
Oikarinen, T., & Kallio, A. (2012). Absorption and creation of new knowledge: A multi-case study of different forms of knowledge impacting on absorptive capacity. Presented at OLKC, Valencia, 25–27 April 2012.
Oldham, G., & Baer, M. (2012). Creativity and the work context. In M. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 387–413). London: Elsevier Academic Press.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3), 249–273.
Osborn, A. (1953). Applied imagination. Oxford: Scribner’s.
Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. R. (2003). Enhancing ideational creativity in groups. In Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 110–136). New York: Oxford University Press.
Paulus, P., & Yang, H. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 76–87.
Phillips, N. (1995). Telling organizational tales: On the role of narrative fiction in the study of organizations. Organization Studies, 16(4), 625–649.
Roos, J., & Roos, M. (2006). Play is the key. In J. Roos (Ed.), Thinking from within. A hands-on strategy practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Runco, M. (2010). Divergent thinking, creativity, and ideation. In J. Kaufman & R. Steinberg (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 413–446). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sawyer, R., & DeZutter, S. (2009). Distributed creativity: How collective creations emerge from collaboration. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(2), 81.
Sawyer, R., Csikszentmihalyi, M., John-Steiner, V., Moran, S., Feldman, D., Gardner, H., Sternberg, R., & Nakamura, J. (Series Eds.). (2003). Creativity and development. Counterpoints: Cognition, memo. New York: Oxford University Press.
Shalley, C. (1991). Effects of productivity goals, creativity goals, and personal discretion on individual creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 179.
Simonton, D. K. (1999). Creativity as blind variation and selective retention: Is the creative process Darwinian? Psychological Inquiry, 10, 309–328.
Spolin, V. (1983). Improvisation for the theater: A handbook of teaching and directing techniques. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Unsworth, K. (2001). Unpacking creativity. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 289–297.
Van Dyck, C., Frese, M., Baer, M., & Sonnentag, S. (2005). Organizational error management culture and its impact on performance: A two-study replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1228.
Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541.
Wageman, R., Gardner, H., & Mortensen, M. (2012). The changing ecology of teams: New directions for teams research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 301–315.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293–321.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix 1: Assignment for Collective Ideation
The task of your group is to create a business idea concept from incidental ingredients as described below.
1.1 Task
1.1.1 Part I: Ideation
Duration 25–30 min
You will get three random elements/words:
-
1.
Object/artifact
-
2.
Function
-
3.
Target group (users for whom you create the solution)
These three words (elements) are ingredients for your ideation work, and all these elements need to be involved in your final solution in one way or another.
IA: Ideate and co-create
a product, process, or service concept by using the object/artifact and function elements (words 1 and 2) for your target group or users (word 3). Be imaginative!
IB: Illustrate and present
your idea on paper (pictures, sketch, text, etc.) and be prepared to pitch (explain and sell) it to the audience (class)—e.g., what the product or solution is, how it serves the target group, and what the business model is for commercializing it. Imagine that you are seeking funding for your product/solution (50,000 €) for further development and testing of your product and the related business model.
1.1.2 Part II: Pitch
In the pitch, describe and sell your solution to the audience (investors). Prepare a short presentation (2 min max) about your solution (by using sketches or other illustrations).
1.1.3 Part III: Crowd Evaluation
Peer-to-peer (or crowd) evaluation according to instruction
Appendix 2
Implemented collective ideation cases (2013–2017) (Author’s own illustration)
Case | Year | Participants | Respondents | Typea | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Working adult university students/M.Sc. (Economics and Engineering) | 2013 | 44 | 14 | S |
2 | Adult working university students/MBA | 2013 | 15 | 9 | S |
3 | Working adult university students/M.Sc. (Economics and Engineering) | 2013 | 28 | 27 | S |
4 | Working adult university students/applied social sciences | 2014 | 22 | 20 | S |
5 | Working adult university students/M.Sc. (Economics and Engineering) | 2014 | 25 | 24 | S |
6 | City I/large | 2015 | 75 | 65 | O |
7 | City II/large | 2015 | 28 | 25 | O |
8 | University students/M.Sc. (Economics and Engineering), international | 2015 | 27 | 27 | S |
9 | Working adult university students/M.Sc. (Economics and Engineering) | 2016 | 34 | 29 | S |
10 | Large technology company | 2016 | 48 | 44 | O |
11 | Working adult university students/M.Sc. | 2017 | 35 | 29 | S |
12 | Adult working university students/MBA | 2017 | 10 | 8 | S |
13 | Working adult university students/M.Sc. (Economics and Engineering) | 2017 | 50 | 48 | S |
Total | 441 | 369 |
Appendix 3
Positive experiences (Author’s own illustration)
Second round concept | First round concept | Sample expressions | |
---|---|---|---|
Positive experiences | Emotionally positive experience, playful, joy, fun, inspiring, pleasure | Fun | “Fun,” “lot of fun,” “great fun,” “Nice and fun co-creation event, usually people utilize humor to manage this kind of co-creation events” |
Nice | “Nice,” “nice co-creation event,” “it was nice,” “nice experience” | ||
Interesting | “Interesting,” “Interesting and creative! Some brilliant ideas can be triggered here!” | ||
Inspiring | Inspiring | ||
Good/great | “Good,” “good co-creation event,” “great,” “The pitches part is really good. Really timely and helps to test and stimulate one’s potential” “Well organized, it kept the attention well” | ||
Pleasurable | “pleasurable experience,” “enjoyable,” “I like,” “I liked,” “I love this experience” | ||
New and fresh experience | Refreshing Different Variation New Surprising | “Variation from familiar work,” “Nice variation,” “I experienced this as new compared to on what I am familiar with,” “Awesome,” “Different way to ideate and make impossible possible” “Different exercise is good for you” “New co-creation event, new wonderful companionship” “Energizing” | |
Expanding experiences | Breaking boundaries Creative thinking Liberating First difficult – then inspiring | “triggers thinking,” “eye-opening,” “out of the box,” “open-minded,” “Breaking one’s boundaries,” “Stimulates thinking,” “Creates thinking and how to sell quickly your items,” “Creative – let it go, fly!”; “First difficult – then I got inspired” | |
Contradictory experiences | Unpleasant experiences | Difficult | “Difficult,” “Difficult (I am not familiar with this)” |
Not for me Too fast Didn’t like | “I like larger groups,” “We must have been on different wavelength, or at least we could not connect [at the cognitive level]. As a human she is certainly ok” “We had too little time” “Boring – took too much time,” “a little bit foolish,” “Business oriented, not used in social and health care sector” |
Appendix 4
Social and cognitive aspects (Author’s own illustration)
Second round concept | First round (concept) | Examples of expressions | |
---|---|---|---|
Social interaction | Communication | Communicative | “Communicative,” “it lead us to a good conversation,” “Supports familiarization,” “Communicative and egalitarian” “Led to good conversation” |
Socialization | Get to know each other | “Interactive – I got to know a new person” “This is fun way to get to know new people and generate new ideas” | |
Transcended interaction | Break barriers between people | “It’s a great way to broke barriers between persons and inside group” | |
Interactive | “It was even easier to start working with an unknown person than it sometimes tend to be with known person” “Interactive….” | ||
Trust | Trust | “You have to trust. You have to trust your creativity and your team members’ creativity” | |
“new way to facilitate creativity and turn it into a product” | |||
Cognition | Makes knowledge and skills visible | Reveals skills | “I learned to make decision in short time of period” |
Reveals abilities | “This co-creation event demonstrated well mine and my team member’s ability to start working quickly and exchange ideas boldly without knowing her personality” | ||
Brings knowledge and skills accessible | “counterpart can be surprisingly innovative,” “You can learn about other person quite a lot in short time” “facilitates knowledge sharing and ideation. It gives a good feeling when shared idea is found” “It was great to change ideas wit someone unfamiliar to you” “You learn to know other persons’ logic of thinking, which makes communication easier” | ||
Collective creativity | Stimulates creativity | “This can really get your creativity going,” I thought I wasn’t creative, but with collaboration with another you may be!” “Thanks for remaining to be innovative and open mind!” |
Appendix 5
Collective processes (Author’s own illustration)
Second round concept | First round (concept) | Examples of expressions | |
---|---|---|---|
Collective processes | Attention | Attention | “It kept well attention” |
Engagement into collective ideation | Forces to throw into ideation | “A nice and positive way to force one into ideation and innovation” “It was nice to let ideas flow—we had very appreciative and humorous climate” “Effective in throwing into action and in opening group work” | |
Mutuality | Support each other building on others’ contributions | “We encouraged each other” “Point of view was broader and other person one said something other than what I had thought about and the ideas was further developed in my head” “We were very good team and inspired each other. It seemed as if we have been working together for years” | |
Shared view | Shared understanding | “Showed, how easy it was to find a shared understanding” “Natural and fluent – it was easy to find a shared practice and language” | |
Commitment shared idea | Shared outcome | “it was good and creative solutions here made in the class” “given words were difficult, but we succeeded to invent nice solution” | |
“new way to facilitate creativity and turn it into a product” |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nisula, AM., Blomqvist, K. (2019). Understanding and Fostering Collective Ideation: An Improvisation-Based Method. In: Handzic, M., Carlucci, D. (eds) Knowledge Management, Arts, and Humanities. Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, vol 7. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10922-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10922-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-10921-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-10922-6
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)