Group creativity under conditions of success or failure and variations in group stability.

Abstract

This study deals with the creativity of groups with a history of success or failure followed by 4 variations of group stability: the addition, replacement, or removal of a member, and a control condition in which the original group composition was maintained. Following an induction of group success or failure, 1 of the 3 variations of group composition change or the control condition was effected. The 64 experimental groups were initially composed of either 2, 3, or 4 persons, depending upon the experimental conditions; but following the stability conditions, all groups were comprised of 3 persons. The creativity task involved composing as many captions for a Saturday Evening Post cartoon as possible within a given time limit. The results indicate (p < .05) that groups which experienced membership changes (open groups) were more creative than the stable groups (closed groups).According to Guilford (1959), a distinguishing characteristic of the creative process is "divergent intellectual production" or the generation of a variety of mental responses. This investigation deals with the divergent intellectual productivity of laboratory groups with a history of success or failure followed by any one of four variations in group stability: the addition, replacement, or removal of a member, and a control condition in which the original group composition was maintained. The study also investigates the group's perceived probability of goal attainment under the same experimental conditions.Many social scientists have long held that creativity flourishes in societies where there is a continuous flow of new members and is curbed in societies from which strangers are restricted. The usual rationale for this proposition is that isolation results in highly specialized conceptual frameworks and rigid limitations on the kind of behavior deemed acceptable in a given situation (Redfield, 1947). Sorokin (1927), however, proposed that in a horizontally immobile society with its "permanent and monotonous environment, there is little incentive for invention." Can

Computational studies to understand the role of social learning in team familiarity and its effects on team performance

“…Investigating creative design teams, Choi and Thompson (2005) point out that most studies (Rogers et al 1961, Goodman and Leyden 1991, Pisano et al 2001, Mathiyalakan 2002) report negative effects of membership change on team performance because they focus on task co-ordination. Building on Ziller's (Ziller et al 1961, 1962, Ziller 1965 research, Choi and Thompson (2005) investigate the effects of membership change on the performance of creative teams, and report that the reduction in level of team familiarity may have a positive impact on the team's performance. Their findings suggest that teams with greater membership change generate more ideas and more varied ideas.…”

9 Creativity in Organizations

“…Choi and Thompson (2005) addressed group composition vis-à-vis the effects of membership change and the introduction of newcomers in groups. They suggested that membership change might promote creativity in groups by increasing task focus (e.g., Ziller, 1965;Ziller, Behringer, & Goodchilds, 1962) and the heterogeneity of knowledge, perspectives, and viewpoints in a group (e.g., Levine & Choi, 2004;Staw, 1980), and by establishing more dynamic group processes such as minority dissent (e.g., Nemeth, 1992;Nemeth & Owens, 1996). In two laboratory experiments, Choi and Thompson (2005) found that membership change resulted in groups generating ideas that were more fluent and flexible and that the creativity of old-timers in groups was enhanced by the introduction of newcomers.…”

Creative idea generation: harmony versus stimulation

“…Studies by Ziller, Behringer, and Goodchilds (1962) and, more recently, by Choi and Thompson (2005) provide evidence that the addition or replacement of a member can aid some elements of creative thought. In the Choi and Thompson study, there were two related tasks (one before and one after the replacement of a single member).…”