Independent self-concept promotes group creativity in a collectivistic cultural context only when the group norm supports collectivism.

Abstract

How does independence in self-concept affect group creativity in a collectivistic cultural context? Unlike the Western perspective that emphasizes individualism as the impetus to group creativity, we propose that in a cultural environment where collectivistic values are predominant, a combination of group members' independent self-concept and a collectivistic group norm promotes group creativity. In an experiment involving three-person laboratory groups (N = 64 triads), we primed group members with an independent (vs. interdependent) self-concept and instructed them to work under a collectivistic (vs. individualistic) group norm. Using a collaborative idea development task, we found that groups produced more creative ideas when they combined an independent selfconcept with a collectivistic group norm than with an individualistic group norm. Further, group creativity suffered the most when members combined an independent self-concept with an individualistic group norm. Implications of these findings for research on the link between culture and group creativity are discussed. Highlights and Implications• Research conducted in Western societies suggests that group creativity thrives with cultural individualism.• We argue and show that an independent self-concept and a collectivistic group norm jointly promote group creativity in a collectivistic cultural context.• By contrast, we found that when an independent self-concept is combined with an individualistic group norm, group creativity suffers the most.• Research on the link between culture and group creativity needs to go beyond the monolithic view of individualism-collectivism and address the important ways cultural contexts affect the shaping of creative processes in groups at work.

Originality vs. Appropriateness: The Moderating Role of Culture on the Effect of Instructional Focus on Individual and Team Creativities

“…Specifically, originality-focused instruction enhanced individual creativity for American students, while appropriateness-focused instruction promoted team creativity for Chinese students. As discussed in previous studies (Choi et al, 2019;Lee & Choi, 2022), the group interaction level can magnify the role of cultural norms, which in turn makes the cultural difference more robust. We suspect that the team work modality could activate their collectivistic cultural norms, which further improved team creativity.…”

“…Although our power analyses indicated that a sample size of 48 teams with 144 individuals was sufficient to test the proposed effects, a large sample-particularly a large number of teams-may be desired for future study. We also noticed that although previous studies (Choi et al, 2019;Lee & Choi, 2022) investigated the mechanism of the cultural norm on creativity by manipulating the cultural norms (i.e., via activation of the cultural identity of individuals), we did not adopt the same method examining the cultural norm. As aforementioned, it was unclear which one -the instructional focus or work modality-activated the cultural norms and influenced creative performance.…”

“…In the most recent study, Lee and Choi (2022) studied the differentiated effect of group norms (individualistic vs. collectivistic) and individual self‐concept (independent vs. interdependent) on team creativity in the collectivistic cultural context (i.e., South Korea). By manipulating both group norms and individual self‐concept, the study found that a combination of independent self‐concept and a collectivistic group norm promoted group creativity, whereas a combination of an independent self‐concept and an individualistic group norm stifled group creativity.…”

The influence of culture on creativity in ideation: a review

“…This allowed the authors to assess differences among groups and verify the connection between culture and creativity (Ge et al, 2021;Haines, 2013;Koronis et al, 2019;Liou & Lan, 2018;Nouri et al, 2015;Peng et al, 2021;Saad et al, 2015;Wodehouse et al, 2011;Wodehouse & Maclachlan, 2014;Yi et al, 2013;Zheng et al, 2022). Seven studies conducted in a single country recruited participants and manipulated their cultural values before ideation (Bechtoldt et al, 2012;Choi et al, 2019;Goncalo & Duguid, 2012;Goncalo & Staw, 2006;Lee & Choi, 2022;Wang et al, 2011;Ye & Robert, 2017). The participants were divided into different conditions (e.g., individualistic and collectivistic value orientations) based on manipulations before an ideation task to measure differences among groups and demonstrate the influence of culture on creativity (Goncalo & Staw, 2006).…”

“…Finally, in three studies, the authors judged creativity-related content (e.g., by counting the number of ideas). The metrics of creativity evaluation were varied, and they included flexibility (Choi et al, 2019), fluency (Bechtoldt et al, 2012), novelty (Choi et al, 2019;Lee & Choi, 2022), productivity (Wang et al, 2011), originality (Bechtoldt et al, 2012) and creativity (Goncalo & Duguid, 2012;Lee & Choi, 2022) (see Figure 2). For each metric, the authors employed different assessment methods.…”