Is Group Creativity ReallyAn Oxymoron? Some Thoughts on Bridging the Cohesion–Creativity Divide

Abstract

The papers in this volume can be characterized by a “cohesion–creativity divide.” On one side are scholars who describe the very nature of groups – its norms, interaction patterns, social influence, and hierarchy – as anathema to creativity. On the other side are advocates of cohesion and coordination, where the primary benefits of groups are to draw people together, form common ideas, and integrate knowledge into shared solutions. To bridge this “cohesion–creativity divide,” I have proposed four modes of resolution. They are: (1) searching for an overarching design that incorporates both integration and differentiation, (2) emphasizing dimensions of creativity most needed at a particular stage of the creative process, (3) promotion of a strong but creative culture, and (4) redefining creativity so that the tradeoffs inherent in the cohesion–creativity divide are drastically reduced. Each of these solutions is discussed in light of the papers in this volume as well as the creativity literature as a whole.

Citation

Staw, B.M. (2009), "Is Group Creativity ReallyAn Oxymoron? Some Thoughts on Bridging the Cohesion–Creativity Divide", Mannix, E.A., Goncalo, J.A. and Neale, M.A. (Ed.) Creativity in Groups (Research on Managing Groups and Teams, Vol. 12), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 311-323. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1534-0856(2009)0000012015