Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why and how do creative thinking techniques work?: Trading off originality and appropriateness to make more creative advertising

  • Original Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The research examines the effects of divergent and convergent creative thinking techniques on creative ideation processes. To analyze these effects an experiment is undertaken on advertising creatives, account executives, and students. Results demonstrate that divergent thinking techniques improve the idea originality of account executives, but not creatives. Alternatively, creatives produce more appropriate ideas by using convergent thinking techniques, yet account executive performance is clearly harmed by them. Few effects are seen on the student control group, who lack both knowledge of techniques and the domain. The findings suggest that creativity techniques are not a one-size-fits-all proposition but need to be tailored to the person and the situation in which they are applied. Implications for researchers and marketing managers are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelson, B. (1984). When novices surpass experts: the difficulty of a task may increase with expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10(3), 483–495. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.10.3.483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 123–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baughman, W. A., & Mumford, M. D. (1995). Process analytic models of creative capacities: Operations influencing the combination-and-reorganization process. Creativity Research Journal, 8, 37–62. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj0801_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briskman, L. (1980). Creative product and creative process in science and art. Inquiry, 23(1), 83–106. doi:10.1080/00201748008601892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, M. M. (1997). Ideation skills training: a key element in creativity training programs. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 33–44. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1001_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coney, J., & Serna, P. (1995). “Creative thinking from an information processing perspective: a new approach to mednick’s theory of associative hierarchies”. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 109–130. 2nd Qtr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperPerennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bono, E. (1968). New think: the use of lateral thinking in the generation of new ideas. New York: Basic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, A., Steinberg, H., & Coulson, M. (1998). Conditions in which British artists achieve their best work. Creativity Research Journal, 11(4), 275–282. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1104_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, C. L. (1998). The writer tells: the creative process in the writing of literary fiction. Creativity Research Journal, 11(1), 29–37. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1101_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Murad, J., & West, D. C. (2004). The definition and measurement of creativity: What do we know? Journal of Advertising Research, 44, 188–201. June. doi:10.1017/S0021849904040097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, D. E., Mah, J. J., & Sadri, G. (1997). An empirical comparison of entrepreneurs and employees: Implications for innovation. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 45–49. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1001_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112–1142. doi:10.2307/259166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frensch, P. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (1989). “Expertise and intelligent thinking: When is it worse to know better?”. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldenberg, J., & Mazursky, D. (2002). Creativity in product innovation. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldenberg, J., Mazursky, D., & Solomon, S. (1999). The fundamental templates of quality ads. Marketing Science, 18(3), 333–351. doi:10.1287/mksc.18.3.333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, W. J. J. (1961). Synetics: the development of creative capacity. New York/Evanston/London: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, W. G. (2008). From performance to mastery: Developmental models of the creative process. Journal of Advertising, 37, 95–108. Winter. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367370408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. The American Psychologist, 5, 444–454. doi:10.1037/h0063487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, J. P. (1968). Intelligence, creativity and their educational implications. San Diego, California: Knapp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, D. M. (1975). “Effects of explicit instructions to “Be Creative” on the psychological meaning of divergent thinking test scores”. Journal of Personality, 43, 434–454. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1975.tb00715.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hecht, H., & Proffitt, D. (1995). The price of expertise: Effects of experience on the water-level task. American Psychological Society, 6(2), 90–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M. A., & Garrett, D. E. (1990). Intercoder reliability estimation approaches in marketing: a generalizability theory framework for quantitative data. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 27(2), 185–195. doi:10.2307/3172845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johar, G. V., Holbrook, M. B., & Stern, B. B. (2001). The role of myth in creative advertising design: Theory, process and outcome. Journal of Advertising, 30(2), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasof, J. (1995). Explaining creativity: the attributional perspective. Creativity Research Journal, 8(4), 311–366. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj0804_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour, A. M. (2008). Understanding creativity: the creative thinking process and how to improve it. Staarbrucken Germany VDM Verlag.

  • Kirton, M. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: a description and measure. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(5), 622–629. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.61.5.622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koslow, S., Sasser, S. L., & Riordan, E. A. (2003). What is creative to whom and why? Perceptions in advertising agencies. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(1), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koslow, S., Sasser, S. L., & Riordan, E. A. (2006). Do marketers get the advertising they need or the advertising they deserve? Agency views of how clients impact creativity. Journal of Advertising Research, 35(3), 81–101. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367350306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kover, A. J., & Goldberg, S. M. (1995). The games copywriters play: Conflict, quasi-control, a new proposal. Journal of Advertising Research, 35, 52–61 November/December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemons, G. (2005). When the horse drinks: Enhancing everyday creativity using elements of improvisation. Creativity Research Journal, 17(1), 25–36. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1701_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., Landau, J. D., & Hicks, J. L. (1996). How examples may (and may not) constrain creativity. Memory & Cognition, 24(5), 669–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., Ward, T. B., & Landau, J. D. (1999). “The inadvertent use of prior knowledge in a generative cognitive task”. Memory & Cognition, 27(1), 94–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinsen, O. (1995). Cognitive styles and experience in problem solving: Replication and extension. Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 291–298. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj0803_8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadzean, E. (2000). Techniques to enhance creative thinking. Team Performance Management, 6(3/4), 62–73. doi:10.1108/13527590010731989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGann, A. E. (1986). Advertising education. Journal of Advertising, 15(4), 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mednick, S. A. (1962). The Associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 3, 220–232. doi:10.1037/h0048850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, C., & Miner, A. S. (1997). The impact of organizational memory on new product performance and creativity. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 91–106. February. doi:10.2307/3152067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., & Simonton, D. K. (1997). Creativity in the workplace: People, problems and structures. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 31, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., Whetzel, D. L., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (1997a). Thinking creatively at work: Organization influences on creative problem solving. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 31(1), 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., Maher, M. A., Costanza, D. P., & Supinski, E. P. (1997b). Process-based measures of creative problem-solving skills: IV. Category combination. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 59–71. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1001_7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme and word fragment norms, Retrieved August 16 2004, from http://www.cyber.acomp.usf.edu/FreeAssociation/Intro.html: 1–22.

  • Nickerson, R. S. (1999). “Enhancing creativity”. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 392–429). Cambridge, U.K: New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination (Rev Ed.). New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting creativity to work: Leader influences on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 120–151. doi:10.1006/obhd.1993.1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, L. N., King, K. W., & DeLorme, D. E. (1998). Top-level agency creatives look at advertising creativity then and now. Journal of Advertising, 27(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter, J. R. (2008). Defining the necessary components of creative, effective ads. Journal of Advertising, 37, 139–144. Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657–687. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., & Charles, R. (1992). Judgments of originality and appropriateness as predictors of creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(5), 537–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasser, S. L., & Koslow, S. (2008). Desperately seeking advertising creativity: Engaging an imaginative ‘3Ps’ research agenda. Journal of Advertising, 37, 5–19. Winter. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367370401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, M. A. (2005). A ‘Small-World’ network model of cognitive insight. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2 & 3), 131–154. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1702&3_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, G. M., Lonergan, D. C., & Mumford, M. D. (2004a). Conceptual combination: Alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361–388. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1604_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, G. M., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004b). The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review. Creativity Research Journal, 16(4), 361–388. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1604_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, R., Smith, D. C., & Whan Park, C. (2001). Cross-functional product development teams, creativity, and the innovativeness of new consumer products. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 73–85. February. doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.1.73.18833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1986). “How managers express their creativity.” Across the Board, Mar(3), 11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2003). Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 475–494. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Schumacher, J. S. (1993). Constraining effects of examples in a creative generation task. Memory & Cognition, 21, 837–845.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. M., Ward, T. B., & Finke, R. A. (1995). “Principles, paradoxes, and prospects for the future of creative cognition”. In S. M. Smith, T. B. Ward, & R. A. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 327–335). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W., & Furse, D. (1986). Effective television advertising—a study of 1000 commercials. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W., & Koslow, S. (1989). Executional factors and advertising effectiveness: a replication. Journal of Advertising, 18(3), 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W., Cheng, Y., & Wan, H. (2008). Creative and effective advertising: Balancing spontaneity and discipline. Journal of Advertising, 37, 135–139. Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, J., Duke, L., & Abernethy, A. (2004). A model of marketing information flow. Journal of Advertising, 33(4), 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Lexington MA: Personnel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, T. B. (1994). Structured imagination: the role of conceptual structure in exemplar generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 1–40. doi:10.1006/cogp.1994.1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, D. C. (1999). 360° of creative risk. Journal of Advertising Research, 39, 39–50 January/February.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, D. C., & Ford, J. (2001). “Advertising agency philosophies and employee risk taking”. Journal of Advertising, 30, 77–91. 1 Spring.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, D. C., Kover, A. J., & Caruana, A. (2008). Practitioner and customer views of advertising creativity: Same concept, different meaning? Journal of Advertising, 37, 35–45. Winter.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, J. (1998). Expertise as mental set: the effects of domain knowledge in creative problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 26(4), 716–730.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, J. W. (1960). A technique for producing ideas. Chicago: Advertising.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, Waikato Management School, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Mark Kilgour & Scott Koslow

Authors
  1. Mark Kilgour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Scott Koslow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott Koslow.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kilgour, M., Koslow, S. Why and how do creative thinking techniques work?: Trading off originality and appropriateness to make more creative advertising. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 37, 298–309 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0133-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0133-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation