Category assignment and relatedness in the group ideation process

When groups gather to generate creative ideas on a particular topic, they can consider many aspects or components of the problem. Because such a multitude of alternatives can be overwhelming, groups may find it helpful to focus on specific aspects or categories of the problem. However, it is not clear whether it is best for group members to focus on the same components of the problem at the same time or whether it is better for group members to focus on different components of the problem. Furthermore, the impact of this type of focus may depend on the extent to which the different components of the problem are closely related semantically. It may be easier to generate ideas in semantically related areas but semantically unrelated areas may stimulate generation of more creative ideas. The present study provided a comprehensive test of the effects of task components or category assignment and the degree of relatedness of the assigned categories on the creativity of groups. Groups that were jointly assigned a small set of categories to focus on at the beginning of their session generated more ideas, explored more categories and exhibited higher clustering of similar ideas than the groups whose members were assigned their own unique category. The groups assigned with low related categories surveyed more categories than those assigned with categories of high relatedness. This study suggests that interdisciplinary or diverse groups or teams should have some common focus in the initial phase of their creative sessions and focus on unrelated aspects of the problem in this phase.

► Groups with an initial focus on common issues are more productive than groups with an initial focus on individual issues. ► Interdisciplinary teams explore more options to solve a problem compared to teams from the same discipline. ► An initial focus on multiple categories enhances the divergent thinking and associational processes in interactive groups.