Advertisement

Creativity Support Systems

  • Monica J. Garfield
Part of the International Handbooks Information System book series (INFOSYS)

Abstract

Creativity support systems (CSSs) aid companies in finding ways to differentiate themselves by examining their current paradigm and improving or modifying the paradigm in a fundamentally new way. The four key factors involved in the execution of creative acts are the four Ps: person, process, press, and product. Each of these four factors plays an active role in how CSSs should be designed and utilized. The cognitive process of creativity starts in the mind of individuals to formulate the problem and produce ideas. At the individual level, a CSS can be used to present a variety of stimuli to the individual in an effort to break cognitive inertia and to help stimulate dissimilar memory chunks or frames. Various creative processes and techniques can be supported and implemented in a CSS. The creative press or environment is the context in which creative ideas are produced and explored. When a CSS is introduced to the creative process, it brings in its own internal environment comprising of the technology’s spirit and its structural features. The creative product can be measured by the quality, the novelty, degree of originality, feasibility, appropriateness, or usefulness of the idea. As organizations strive to produce creative products, CSS tools, with their potential to enhance or modify the creative output of an individual or group, become increasingly called upon to aid in this goal.

Keywords

Creative Process Creative Idea Creative Product Group Decision Support System Group Support System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ajzen, I., “The Theory of Planned Behavior,” Organ Behav Hum Dec, 50(2), 1991, 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amabile, T., R. Conti, H. Coon, J. Lazenby and M. Herron, “Assessing the work environment for creativity,” Acad Manage J, 39(5), 1996, 1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amabile, T.M., Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. Boulder, CO: Westview, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. Amabile, T.M. “The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization,” J Pers Soc Psychol, 45, 1983, 357-376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amabile, T.M., The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1983.Google Scholar
  6. Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1980.Google Scholar
  7. Anderson, J., “Automaticity and the ACT theory,” Am J Psychol, 105(2), 1992, 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Anderson, J.R., The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  9. Anderson, J., “Skill Acquisition,” Psychol Rev, 94(2), 1987, 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barron, F., “The Psychology of Creativity,” in Newcomb, T.M. (ed.), New Directions in Psychology 1. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968, pp. 1-34.Google Scholar
  11. Benbasat, I. and L.-H. Lim “The effects of group, task, context, and technology,” Small Gr Res, 24(4), 430.Google Scholar
  12. Boland, R.J., Jr. and R.V. Tenkasi, “Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing,” Organ Sci, 6(4), 1995, 350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conti, R., H. Coon and T.M. Amabile, “Evidence to Support the Componential Model of Creativity: Secondary Analyses of Three Studies,” Creat Res J, 9(4), 1996, 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Couger, J.D., Creative Problem Solving and Opportunity Finding. Boston, MA: Boyd and Fraser, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. Couger, J.D., L.F. Higgins and S.C. McIntyre, “(Un)Structured Creativity in Information Systems Organizations,” MIS Quart, 17(4), 1993, 375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Bono, E., Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step By Step. New York, NY: Harper and Row, 1970.Google Scholar
  17. Dennis, A.R., B. Wixom and R. Vandenberg, “Understanding Fit and Appropriation Effects in Group Support Systems Via Meta-Analysis,” MIS Q, 25(2), 167-193.Google Scholar
  18. Dennis, A.R. and J.S. Valacich, “Group, Sub-Group, and Nominal Group Idea Generation: New Rules for a New Media?,” J Manage, 20(4), 1994, 723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dennis, A.R., J.S. Valacich, T. Connolly and B.E. Wynne, “Process structuring in electronic brainstorming,” Inform Syst Res, 7(2), 1996, 268.Google Scholar
  20. DeSanctis, G. and M.S. Poole, “Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory,” Organ Sci, 5(2), 1994, 121.Google Scholar
  21. Diehl, M. and W. Stroebe, “Productivity Loss In Brainstorming Groups,” J Pers Soc Psychol, 53(3), 1987, 497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Drazin, R., M.A. Glynn and R.K. Kazanjian, “Multilevel Theorizing About Creativity in Organizations: A Sensemaking Perspective,” Acad Manage Rev, 24(2), 1999, 286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Drucker, P.F., Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practices and Principles. New York, NY: Harper and Row, 1985.Google Scholar
  24. Durand, D.E. and S.H. VanHuss, “Creativity Software and DSS: Cautionary Findings,” Inform Manage, 23(1), 1992, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Elam, J.J. and M. Mead, “Can Software Influence Creativity?,” Inform Syst Res, 1(1), 1990, 1.Google Scholar
  26. Eysenck, H.J., “Creativity and Personality: An Attempt to Bridge Divergent Traditions,” Psychol Inq, 4(3), 1993, 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fellers, J. and R.P. Bostrom, “Application of group support systems to promote creativity in information systems organizations,” in Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, 1993, pp. 332-341.Google Scholar
  28. Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen, “Attitudes towards Objects as Predictors of Single and Multiple Behavioral Criteria,” Psychol Rev, 81(1), 1974, 59-74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ford, C.M., “A Theory of Individual Creative Action in Multiple Social Domains,” Acad Manage Rev, 21(4), 1996, 1112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gallupe, R.B. et al., “Electronic Brainstorming and Group Size,” Acad Manage J, 35(2), 1992, 350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Garfield, M.J., N.J. Taylor, A.R. Dennis and J. W. Satzinger, “Research Report: Modifying Paradigms-Individual Differences, Creativity Techniques, and Exposure to Ideas in Group Idea Generation,” Inform Syst Res, 12(3), 2001, 322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gersick, C.J. and J.R. Hackman, “Habitual Routines in Task-Performing Groups,” Organ Behav Hum Dec, 47(1), 1990, 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gryskiewicz, S.S., K.D. Holt, A.M. Faber and S. Sensabaugh, “Demystify Creativity, Enhance Innovation,” J Prod Innovat Manage, 2(2), 1985, 101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gyrskiewicz, S.S., Predictable Creativity : Frontiers of Creativity Research: Beyond the Basics. Buffalo, NY: Bearly, 1987.Google Scholar
  35. Hellriegel, D. and J.W. Slocum, Jr., “Management: A Contingency Approach (Book),” Train Dev J, 29(3), 52.Google Scholar
  36. Hender, J.M., D.L. Dean, T.L. Rodgers and J.F. Nunamaker, Jr., “An Examination of the Impact of Stimuli Type and GSS Structure on Creativity: Brainstorming Versus Non-Brainstorming Techniques in a GSS Environment,” J Manage Inform Syst, 18(4), 2002, 59.Google Scholar
  37. Jabri, M.M., “The Development of Conceptually Independent Subscales in the Measurement of Modes of Problem,” Educ Psychol Meas, 51(4), 1991, 975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jung, D.I., “Transformational and Transactional Leadership and Their Effects on Creativity in Groups,” Creat Res J, 13(2), 2001, 185-195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kirton, M., “Adaptors and Innovators: A Description and Measure,” J Appl Psychol, 61(5), 1976, 622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kirton, M.J, “Adaptors and Innovators at Work,” in Kirton, M.J. (ed.), Adaptors and Innovators: Styles of Creativity and Problem Solving, 1989, pp. 1-36.Google Scholar
  41. Kurtzberg, T.R. and T.M. Amabile, “From Guilford to Creative Synergy: Opening the Black Box of Team-Level Creativity,” Creat Res J, 13(3/4), 2001, 285-294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. MacCrimmon, K.R. and C. Wagner, “Stimulating Ideas through Creative Software,” Manage Sci, 40(11), 1994, 1514.Google Scholar
  43. MacKinnon, D.W, “The Nature and Nurture of Creative Talent,” Am Psychol, 17, 1962, 484-495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Marakas, G.M. and J.J. Elam, “Creativity Enhancement in Problem Solving: Through Software or Process?,” Manage Sci, 43(8), 1997, 1136.Google Scholar
  45. Massetti, B., “An Empirical Examination of the Value of Creativity Support Systems on Idea Generation,” MIS Q, 20(1), 1996, 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Meyer, D.E., “On the Representation and Retrieval of Stored Semantic Information,” Cognitive Psychol, 1, 1970, 242-300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Miller, W., The Creative Edge. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar
  48. Mullen, B., C. Johnson and E. Salas, “Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: A Meta-Analytic Integration,” Basic Appl Soc Psych, 12(1), 1991, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Myers, I.B. and K.C. Briggs, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists, 1952.Google Scholar
  50. Myers, I.B., Introduction to Type: A Description of the Theory and Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists, 1987.Google Scholar
  51. Nagasundaram, M. and R.P. Bostrom, “The structuring of creative processes using GSS: A framework for research,” J Manage Inform Syst, 11(3), 1994, 87.Google Scholar
  52. Oldham, G.R. and A. Cummings, “Employee Creativity: Personal And Contextual Factors At Work,” Acad Manage J, 39(3), 1996, 607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Perry-Smith, J.E. and C.E. Shalley, “The Social Side of Creativity: a Static and Dynamic Social Network Perspective,” Acad Manage Rev, 28(1), 89-106.Google Scholar
  54. Quinn, J.B., P. Anderson and S. Finkelstein, “Managing Professional Intellect: Making the Most of the Best,” Harvard Bus Rev, 74(2), 1996, 71.Google Scholar
  55. Rickards, T. and S. Moger, “Creative Leadership Processes in Project Team Development: An Alternative to Tuckman’s Stage Model,” Br J Manage, 11(4), 2000, 273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rickards, T. and S. Moger, “Creative Leaders: A Decade of Contributions from Creativity and Innovation Management Journal,” Creat and Innov Manage, 15(1), 2006, 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rhodes, M., “An Analysis of Creativity,” Phi Delta Kappa, 42(7), 1961, 305-310.Google Scholar
  58. Ruscio, J., D.M. Whitney and T.M. Amabile, “Looking Inside the Fishbowl of Creativity: Verbal and Behavioral Predictors of Creative Performance,” Creat Res J, 11(3), 1998, 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Santanen, E.L., R.O. Briggs and G.-J. De Vreede, “Causal Relationships in Creative Problem Solving: Comparing Facilitation Interventions for Ideation,” J Manage Inform Syst, 20(4), 2004, 167.Google Scholar
  60. Satzinger, J.W., M.J. Garfield and M. Nagasundaram, “The Creative Process: The Effects of Group Memory on Individual Idea Generation,” J Manage Inform Syst, 15(4), 1999, 143.Google Scholar
  61. Scott, S.G. and R.A. Bruce, “Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of Individual Innovation in the Workplace,” Acad Manage J, 37(3), 1994, 580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van de Ven, A.H., “Central Problems in the Management of Innovation,” Manage Sci, 32(5), 1986, 590.Google Scholar
  63. VanGundy, A.B., Techniques of Structured Problem Solving. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988.Google Scholar
  64. Woodman, R.W., J.E. Sawyer and R. Griffin, “Toward a Theory of Organizational Creativity,” Acad Manage Rev, 18(2), 293.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monica J. Garfield
    • 1
  1. 1.CIS DepartmentBentley CollegeWalthamUSA

Personalised recommendations