Creative Intensive

Article review by
Senior Editors Kristi Ryan and Maggie Rieth

In their article “Measuring Climate for Work Group Innovation: Development and Validation of the Team Climate Inventory” Anderson and West search for a way to measure the climate for innovation in “shared perception” work groups. They define shared perception as a level of interdependence between team members who interact and rely on each other as a group to develop innovative outcomes.

The authors developed the Team Climate Inventory (TCI), their method for measuring innovative climate that is based on four factors:

• Vision - In a work group, clear vision motivates each team member for a higher goal and depends on clarity, visionary nature, attainability, and “sharedness”.
• Participative Safety - ensures that team members feel safe to contribute ideas for innovation.
• Task Orientation - describes the general commitment and accountability of tram members to search for the best methods of obtaining their goals.
• Support for Innovation - entails the resources and support bestowed on the group.
  

The TCI focuses on the development of innovation in work groups, instead of the organization as a whole, and can be best demonstrated in the following fictional example:
Lets say Googuly Gum, Inc. is the world’s largest manufacturer of Pineapple flavored bubble-gum and they want to expand their customer base through a new and innovative marketing plan. In order to generate the most creative and ingenious ideas, the President of Googuly Gum decides to create two different teams, one team headed by John, and the other by Ron.

Ron starts off the first meeting talking about himself and how he really wants to get a promotion. When Sally, a member of his team, begins to ask about the vision, he cuts her off and tells her to stop asking stupid questions. He then lays out an incredibly vague vision: get customers to buy gum. His team doesn’t know where to begin, and gets frustrated with the process. When a different member tries to come up with an idea, Ron shuts him down and says his idea isn’t feasible. Not knowing what they are trying to accomplish or what their guidelines are, the group gets off task and settles for a second rate solution. Googuly Gum is disappointed and puts the plan on the shelf, never to be implemented.

John, on the other hand, starts off his first meeting getting to know the members of the team and making sure they all feel comfortable sharing their ideas and expressing their feelings. The team then establishes a detailed vision. They not only want to increase the customer base, but they also want to stay within a reasonable budget and maintain former customers. By having a clear vision and allowing members to participate “safety,” each member of the team feels invested in the outcome and remains task-oriented throughout the brainstorming process. They end up with a revolutionized marketing plan for Googuly Gum! John gets a promotion, and all the members of his team get an all expense paid vacation to the Caribbean!!! John’s group successfully encompasses all four factors of the TCI and subsequently did better in coming up with more innovative ideas.

Ok. fiction aside, lets look at what other people say about some of these concepts. In a recent article titled “Can Genius Flourish in a Team,” author Wan Lixin argues that a team-based decision-making process is more likely to lead to original ideas (makes complete sense, no?). Lixin quotes author Keith Sawyer (Group Genius: The Creative Power of Collaboration) who also debunks the idea of creative geniuses growing in isolation. In our example, Ron represents the obsolete innovation method of the “isolated genius inventor,” while John’s group portrays the web of collaboration Lixin and Sawyer talk about. The shared vision, “safe” participation, and clear task orientation may depend more on the work group (and their leader, of course) while support for innovation (such as resources) often depends on the organization itself. Googuly Gum may support its employees with ample resources but it depends on how each team and leader chooses to use these resources.