Abstract
While most creative cognition models include three core processes (problem identification and construction, idea generation, and idea evaluation and selection), the majority of research has focused on idea generation. Limited attention has been given in the literature to the processes that take place before and after idea generation. In this study, we seek to partially fill this gap by examining the processes that take place after idea generation, that is, idea evaluation and selection. Specifically, we evaluate the role of providing instructions and structure for idea evaluation (in the form of definitions and rubrics) and idea selection (by creating a two-step procedure) on the accuracy of evaluation and ultimate idea selection. We examine the impact of the level of specificity and detail provided in the evaluation process on the accuracy of team evaluation and selection of creative solutions. We also examine how structured and unstructured selection processes influence the selection of creative solutions. Our findings suggest that having a rubric to support evaluating quality and originality does not necessarily increase the accuracy of team evaluation. Further, following an iterative solution selection process results in the selection of lower quality solutions, but having instructions and structure during both evaluation and selection processes results in selection of most original ideas. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Basadur, M. (1994). Managing the creative process in organizations. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 237–268). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.
Basadur, M., Runco, M. A., & Vega, L. A. (2000). Understanding how creative thinking skills, attitudes and behaviors work together: A causal process model. Journal of Creative Behavior, 34, 77–100.
Benedek, M., Nordtvedt, N., Jauk, E., Koschmieder, C., Pretsch, J., Krammer, G., et al. (2016). Assessment of creativity evaluation skills: A psychometric investigation in prospective teachers. Thining Skills and Creativity, 21, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.007.
Blair, C. S., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Errors in idea evaluation: Preference for the unoriginal? Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 197–222.
de Vreede, T., Boughzala, I., de Vreede, G. J., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2017). The team creativity model: An exploratory field study. Journal of the Midwest Association for Information, Systems, 1, Article 4.
Diedrich, J., Benedek, M., Jauk, E., & Neubauer, A. C. (2015). Are creative ideas novel and useful? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9, 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038688.
Faure, C. (2004). Beyond brainstorming: Effects of different group procedures on selection of ideas and satisfaction with the process. Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 13–34.
Frederiksen, M. H., & Knudsen, M. P. (2017). From creative ideas to innovation performance: The role of assessment criteria. Creativity and Innovation Management, 26, 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12204.
Girotra, K., Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. T. (2010). Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Science, 56, 591–605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1144.
IBM. (2010). Capitalizing on complexity: Insights from the global chief executive officer study.
Kaufman, J. C., Beghetto, R. A., & Watson, C. (2016). Creative metacognition and self-ratings of creative performance: A 4-C perspective. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 394–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.05.004.
Kennel, V., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2012). The effects of group regulatory focus, psychological safety, and communication on the accuracy of team idea evaluation and selection.
Lonergan, D. C., Scott, G. M., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). Evaluative aspects of creative thought: Effects of appraisal and revision standards. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1602&3_7.
Mumford, M. D., Feldman, J. M., Hein, M. B., & Nagao, D. J. (2001). Tradeoffs between idea and structure: Individual versus group performance in creative problem solving. Journal of Creative Behavior, 35, 1–23.
Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.1.27.
Mumford, M. D., & Hunter, S. T. (2005a). Innovation in organizations: A multi-level perspective on creativity. Research in Multi-Level Issues, 4, 11–73.
Mumford, M. D., Lonergan, D. C., & Scott, G. (2002). Evaluating creative ideas: Processes, standards, and context. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 22, 21–30.
Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Reiter-Palmon, R., Uhlman, C. E., & Doares, L. M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419109534380.
Mumford, M. D., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Redmond, M. R. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 3–39). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.
Mumford, M. D., Supinski, E. P., Baughman, W. A., Costanza, D. P., & Threlfall, K. V. (1997). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills: V. Overall prediction. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1001_8.
Nijstad, B. A., Rietzschel, E. F., & Stroebe, W. (2006). Four principles of group creativity. In L. Thompson & H. S. Choi (Eds.), Creativity and innovation in organizational teams (pp. 161–179). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Putman, V. L., & Paulus, P. B. (2009). Brainstorming, brainstorming rules and decision making. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 43, 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01304.x.
Reiter-Palmon, R. (2018). Creative cognition at the individual and team level: What happens before and after idea generation. In R. Sternberg & J. Kaufman (Eds.), The nature of human creativity (pp. 184–208). New York: Cambridge Press.
Reiter-Palmon, R., Herman, A. E., & Yammarino, F. (2008). Creativity and cognitive processes: Multi-level linkages between individual and team cognition. In M. D. Mumford, S. T. Hunter, & K. E. Bedell-Avers (Eds.), Multi-level issues in creativity and innovation (pp. 203–267). San Diego, CA: JAI Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-9144(07)00009-4.
Reiter-Palmon, R., Illies-Young, M., Kobe Cross, L., Buboltz, C. B., & Nimps, T. (2009). Creativity and domain specificity: The effect of task type on multiple indexes of creative problem solving. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013410.
Reiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M. D., & Threlfall, K. V. (1998). Solving everyday problems creatively: The role of problem construction and personality type. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 187–197.
Reiter-Palmon, R., Wigert, B., & de Vreede, T. (2012). Team creativity and innovation: The effect of group composition, social processes, and cognition. In M. D. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 327–357). Waltham, MA: Elsevier.
Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). Productivity is not enough: A comparison of interactive and nominal brainstorming groups on idea generation and selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 244–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.005.
Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609X414204.
Runco, M. A., & Basadur, M. (1993). Assessing ideational and evaluative skills and creative styles and attitudes. Creativity and Innovation Management, 2, 166–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.1993.tb00088.x.
Runco, M. A., & Chand, I. (1995). Cognition and creativity. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 243–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02213373.
Runco, M. A., & Smith, W. R. (1992). Interpersonal and intrapersonal evaluations of creative ideas. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90105-X.
Runco, M. A., & Vega, L. A. (1990). Evaluating the creativity of children’s ideas. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 439–452.
Seeber, I., Maier, R., de Vreede, G. J., & Weber, B. (2017). Beyond brainstorming: Exploring convergence in teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 34, 939–969.
Sharma, A. (1999). Central dilemmas of managing innovation in large firms. California Management Review, 41, 146–164.
Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Finke, R. A. (1999). Creative cognition. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 189–212). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgment
Research reported in this chapter was funded by the University of Nebraska at Omaha, FIRE grant to Dr. Roni Reiter-Palmon and G.J. de Vreede.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Reiter-Palmon, R., Kennel, V., de Vreede, T., de Vreede, GJ. (2019). The Role of Structure and Instruction on Creative Idea Evaluation and Selection. In: Lebuda, I., Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Social Creativity Research. Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95498-1_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95497-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95498-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)