Hey all,
Sometimes I like to share things that I've read for side projects and essays on here.
While researching a school I'm interested in, I came across a really interesting research paper from Professor Jack Goncalo of Cornell University.
The paper titled "The Bias Against Creativity: Why People Desire But Reject Creative Ideas" was extremely relevant to issues within FRC and any problem solving enterprise - the potential stifling of creativity and possibly, innovation. The entire paper isn't very long at all, but here's a highlight of it that I thought many folks would enjoy and could relate back to the initial brainstorming and design meetings that occur in week 1.
Quote:
Creative ideas are both novel and useful, and novelty is the key distinguishing feature of creativity beyond ideas that are merely well done [2]. Yet the requirement that creative ideas contain novelty can also promote a tension in evaluators’ minds when they judge whether to pursue an idea. Indeed, evaluators have a hard time viewing novelty and practicality as attributes that go hand in hand, often viewing them as inversely related [3]. There are several reasons why. Practical ideas are generally valued [4]. However, the more novel an idea, the more uncertainty can exist about whether an idea is practical, useful, error free, and reliably reproduced [5]. When endorsing a novel idea, people can experience failure [6], perceptions of risk [7], social rejection when expressing the idea to others [8], and uncertainty about when their idea will reach completion [9]. Uncertainty is an aversive state [10][11] which people feel a strong motivation to diminish and avoid [12]. Hence, people can also have negative associations with novelty; an attribute at the heart of what makes ideas creative in the first place.
[1] Hennessey & Amabile, 2010
[2] Amabile, Barsade, Mueller, & Staw, 2005
[3] Rietzschel, Nijstad, & Stroebe, 2009
[4] Sanchez-Burks, 2005
[5] Amabile, 1996
[6] Simonton, 1984
[7] Rubenson & Runco, 1995
[8] Moscovici, 1976; Nemeth, 1986
[9] Metcalfe, 1986
[10] Fiske & Taylor, 1991
[11] Heider, 1958
[12] Whitson & Galinsky, 2008
|
The full paper isn't very long at all and is worth taking a look! It can be found
here. If anyone takes the time to read parts of it, I'd be interested in hearing about past experiences with things regardingthis on your teams.
-Akash