Follow the crowd in a new direction: When conformity pressure facilitates group creativity (and when it does not)

Abstract

Adopting a person by situation interaction approach, we identified conditions under which conformity pressure can either stifle or boost group creativity depending on the joint effects of norm content and group personality composition. Using a 2 x 2 x 2 experimental design, we hypothesized and found that pressure to adhere to an individualistic norm boosted creativity in groups whose members scored low on the Creative Personality Scale (Gough, 1979), but stifled creativity in groups whose members scored high on that measure. Our findings suggest that conformity pressure may be a viable mechanism for boosting group creativity, but only among those who lack creative talent. AbstractAdopting a person by situation interaction approach, we identified conditions under which conformity pressure can either stifle or boost group creativity depending on the joint effects of norm content and group personality composition. Using a 2 x 2 x 2 experimental design, we hypothesized and found that pressure to adhere to an individualistic norm boosted creativity in groups whose members scored low on the Creative Personality Scale (Gough, 1979), but stifled creativity in groups whose members scored high on that measure. Our findings suggest that conformity pressure may be a viable mechanism for boosting group creativity, but only among those who lack creative talent.Keywords: Group creativity, conformity pressure, individualism-collectivism; group personality composition CONFORMITY PRESSURE AND CREATIVITY 3Follow the Crowd in a New Direction: When Conformity Pressure Facilitates Group Creativity (And When it Does Not)To remain competitive, many organizations actively seek out creative ideas that may lead in profitable new directions (Amabile, 1996). A creative idea is defined as one that is both novel and useful (Amabile, 1983). The classical research on group creativity has assumed that because creative ideas are initially out of the ordinary, even deviant, (Moscovici, 1976), pressure to conform to a group majority stifles creative expression (Crutchfield, 1962;Nemeth & Staw, 1989;Woodman, Sawyer & Griffin, 1993). This argument reached its clearest and most extreme form in Nemeth & Staw (1989) who claimed that creativity and conformity are a direct one-toone tradeoff; the freer people are to deviate from shared expectations, the more likely they are to suggest creative solutions.A decade ago, Flynn and Chatman (2001) tried to turn the tables on this perspective by proposing that conformity pressure can reinforce creativity relevant norms and thereby increase rather than stifle creative performance. This alternative point of view on group creativity suggests a number of exciting possibilities. Yet ten years later, the empirical evidence that would either definitively support or refute this prediction has not materialized.Indeed, the classical assumption that conformity necessarily stifles creative expression is a logic that many researchers of creativity still find appealing. For example, Sutton (2002) suggested that to pr...

The Impact of Culture on Creativity

“…Creativity research to date has greatly emphasized the importance of divergent thinking (Guilford, 1956;McCrae, 1987;Baer, 1993Baer, , 1996Torrance, 1998), but some scholars have argued that convergent thinking has a critical role to play as well. Goncalo and Duguid (2011) found that in teams whose members are not particularly creative, conformity to individualist norms boosts creative performance, and Cropley (2006) argued that convergent thinking helps an innovator evaluate ideas with an eye to practicality and implementation. Divergent thinking is great for the generation of novel ideas, but convergent thinking is required to ascertain if these ideas would be useful for a given problem context.…”

Research on Workplace Creativity: A Review and Redirection

“…Goncalo & Duguid (2012) conducted an experiment to test the joint effect of conformity pressure, norm content (individualism versus collectivism), and team members' creative personality on the rated creativity of the ideas generated by groups. They found a two-way interaction between creative personality and conformity pressure such that the effect of conformity pressure was negative for teams with more creative members but not for teams composed of members with less creative personalities.…”

The Social “Cost” of Working in Groups and Impact on Values and Creativity

“…Previous research has reported that groups are often less original and productive than individuals (e.g., McGrath, 1984;Sternberg, 1995), but explanations have focused on social loafing (Karau & Williams, 1993;Sosik, Kahai, & Avolio, 1998), conformity (Goncalo & Duguid, 2012;Larey & Paulus, 1999;Sternberg, 1995), expected evaluations (Dennis & Gallupe, 1993;Paulus & Dzindolet, 1993), and "productivity losses" (Diehl & Stroebe, 1987). Recent research also revealed that there is a bias against creative ideas even though people tend to express that they welcome creativity (Mueller, Melwani, & Goncalo, 2012).…”