These are the kinds of things that make us ask: How did they get there? And, more importantly, how can I get my team there?
Monday, October 10, 2016
Three Ways To Make Your Entire Team More Creative
These are the kinds of things that make us ask: How did they get there? And, more importantly, how can I get my team there?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
This article was pretty uplifting, a lot of methods of working together creatively that we take for granted or perform subconsciously have been proven to help teams generate more ideas when problem-solving. For a while in the study cited, it appeared that people brainstorm better on their own. But after editing the conversation style of the groups, productivity increased past what the individuals generated. It really is easier to default to frustration or logistics when creative groups aren;t working well together, and it's nice to have a scientific reminder that niceties and respect prevail. However, the article mentions big names, Uber and Apple and more, as examples of innovative companies but doesn't tie their successes into the positive results of the study. It seemed like they were name dropping to aid their point, but it wasn't necessary. In conclusion, focusing on encouraging debate and positivity generate the best results when working in teams.
POSITIVITY WINS (most of the time)! This article serves as a reminder that most of what we are doing in Cake Everyday is actually paying off. Over the course of this mini I have been actively trying to wrap my head around why the sophomore class is enrolled in this class, with such a sporadic curriculum. With the course wrapping up, for me, I would like to say that I learned the most about collaboration, and how and what types of people I enjoy working with. The topics spoken about in this article offer some pretty sound material that puts to ease a lot of my concerns about my education. I am glad that the information provided in this article mimicked my SOD curriculum. The article mentions brainstorming, and kind of says that the "brainstorming with no criticism" is a fault. I agree. In class, we are taught to brainstorm, then go back and distill. However, sometimes I feel that the "no criticism" rule is hindering to discussion and development. Though I agree that it fosters a positive environment, sometimes we move too far down a list of ideas for me to go back and think about the ones at the top. Stopping and elaborating on specific ideas as one brainstorms, though it may take longer, seems like it would benefit the conversation. Maybe its running a red light, but maybe, the conversation and elaboration on one specific idea can lead you down a new path that makes you take a left turn and leads you to even more ideas and innovations.
This article was so interesting to read and I actually learned a lot from it ! I am especially drawn to the Hangan game part of this article because I feel like it relates so closely to the stress culture and time management here at Carnegie Mellon. Often I find by breaking up large task and assignments into smaller parts I am able to better conquer the project, because I feel like I have more to do. Thus, the stress created makes me work quicker and harder to accomplish what I have think is more. That is how the brain work. If I deceive myself into thinking the project is larger, then I'll be able to accomplish it sooner because I will put a larger deal of effort into that assignment. Hangen states that this concept also helps to weed out unnecessary steps or jobs without a task. Often at Carnegie Mellon I give myself more work because I tell myself that I needs to happen when it all actuality I'm creating work that doesn't need to be done or not to the level in which I'm doing it. Possibly by using the Hangen game message in my own life I'll be able to destress and better accomplish work at the quality of which it needs to be completed in the school of drama
I think this article is very successful in addressing creative collaboration for companies that work in a relatively methodical way, but I am also curious about how people should work collectively if their creative vision don't agree. For example, in businesses that the article mentions in the article, the various teams seem to be involved direct problem-solving, as in they usually have an clear problem/task. Over the summer when I researched for human-computer interaction institute, collaboration was effective and straight-forward because it was easy to divide up the work and tackle each problem. However, if people are working on a piece of writing or film production, how do they work collectively if there are a lot of subtle or non-subtle differences in their creative vision? In the past I have tried to find writing partners and co-direct short videos, but it always turned out to be very hard because in the process of collaboration, our original styles often got lost due to the compromises we had to make to include each other's vision into the final product. I do believe in the huge importance of collaboration in the creative process, but I think I just need a lot more experience to get used to this particular mindset.
As Jake has said, this is a quality article to read at this point in our education, as Cake Every Day begins to wind down. Cake is a class about many things, but most of the projects deal with working with a team to tell a story effectively and create projects that are simultaneously effective and creatively enticing. Each point that the author makes are valuable, especially when it comes to honing in your big ideas into feasible ideas that still maintain the wonder of the initial concept. To that end, creating constraints, setting deadlines, and defining problems are important skills to use on a team of students who want to be able to create an entire world with 2 days and no budget. Now, the article also discusses brainstorming, and talks about the no bad ideas approach, which is one we use in the class to find the whole gamut of the things we can accomplish. On the one hand, I can see where the author is coming from on the thought of not using that method, as unchecked creativity can often lead to silly ideas that people say just to get ideas out there, but, by the same token,on the last project we did, the idea we used was around the 40th idea we came up. There is value in just having unchecked creativity, but there needs to be a hard end point so that whittling down can be a quick and effective process. To that end, fostering positivity is perhaps the most important thing the author brings up. By creating a space where people feel valued and that their ideas have merit means creating a space where creativity can run free, without people worried about judgments.
I 100% agree with the author and Jake, THINK POSITIVE! I am currently taking an Organizational Behavior class and much of this information we are exploring, and I think its really useful in this industry as well in day to day life. We have been looking at companies like IDEO and Uzzi that employ these ideas to the max, the office space is open and has games, puzzles, and colors. Both companies are largely successful in innovation, and much of it is contributed to the environment. Emotionally the environment is happy, fun, little hierarchy and judgement free, which has the same effect and keeps it positive. I have never heard of the smaller sized group idea, which is interesting to think about because the focus it would cause can be very beneficial but on a social scale I don't know if it would be all that helpful, what if they took out your best friend? I would be worried I was next.
Thinking positive is so imperative, and from the other comments, many people agree, so its time we start changing the norm of our communication to be more positive too. In about an hour the sophomore DP class has the Electrics test, and I have heard a number of my classmates say things like, "Time to fail" "I'm going to fail this" "I won't do well so who cares" and this is a negative thought as well as fostering more negative thinking. Come on! WE NEED TO CHANGE THIS. Start thinking: I am going to try my best, I will study a little, I'm going to work hard, I can do it. These are the thoughts we need to express. Why is it 'cool' or at least the norm to be negative, lets change the story. :)
I found this article very interesting. I wouldn’t have considered the idea that by presenting some sort of obstacle that forces people to be creative, it will put them in a more creative mindset for when they do a task that requires creativity but doesn’t necessarily force it. It also is a very useful piece of information, since it is easy enough to potentially do some sort of quick “warm up” puzzle to boost creativity before brainstorming, or something similar. In terms of brainstorming, I’ve mostly heard about the standard judgement-free idea generation method, so it is interesting to hear that doing more or less the opposite probably works better. I think the judgement-free method still probably has the advantage of people not worrying about sounding stupid, but my guess is that one of the benefits of debating is the pointing out the flaws with one idea could get someone else to come up with a new idea that solves the problems with a previous one. I suppose when those benefits are paired with the positive environment described next in the article, that more or less solves the fear of looking stupid problem. When it comes to the positive attitude, I think one of the most important things is people asking questions to better understand other people’s ideas, rather than just focusing on sharing their own. Building on eachothers’ ideas is vital for collaboration, and it is impossible to build on something you don’t understand. Overall, I think this article was very helpful, and I can see a lot of ways I can apply the principles it discussing to future creative tasks/ meetings and projects.
I think this article is excellent and a helpful reminder, especially for those of us who are managers, about the impact of positivity, debate, and criticism (both productive and not productive) on a creative process.
I was particularly struck by the two questions used to classify observations by the team working on positivity and group dynamics. They highlighted several areas I know I can personally improve on: making more of my statements positive (and just generally being aware of whether my statements are neutral, negative, or positive,) being more interested in asking questions rather than just advocating for my point, and making sure I approach challenges with an understanding of their context. As a manager, I would like to keep all of these ideas in the front of my brain.
I was very surprised about the assertion that solo brainstorming is more productive than group brainstorming, considering how ubiquitous group brainstorming has become. Perhaps conventional wisdom needs to be altered a little bit… it seems worthwhile for managers to find opportunities for their employees to do more solo brainstorming.
Getting your team to be more creative can often be a difficult task if you go about it the wrong way. I think the Hangen game was really interesting because you would think that you would get more work done with more people. By taking away half the group, you are causing the new group to work a lot harder to accomplish the same goals with less people. They now need to think of different ways to do each task and maybe combine some together. They are forced to be creative and problem solve. When you give people more leeway and time to do things they are not as creative because they waste time or do not try hard enough to make the best outcome. Pressure and deadlines is a really good way to get people to really buckle down and work hard to create something in that limited amount of time or with specific parameters. I know I work a lot better under pressure and with tight deadlines even though I may lose some sleep. If I have too much time I will waste it until the last minute and I really have to get work done.
I think there is a reason so many of the truly groundbreaking innovations in modern industry have come from small nimble startups. Tesla, Space X, Uber, Airbnb, Pixar, paypal and many other companies have transformed the world with one thing in common. They set out to accomplish a task that was considered not only traditionally, but even currently, to be completely impossible. Businesses thrive on reduced risk, making decent margins on large safe products. Unfortunately it makes it hard to stick your neck out because in the name of the bottom line you get shoved right back into your place, meaning only incremental improvements can occur. The advantage of the startup model is that you don’t have the baggage of success. You aren’t beholden to turn a profit just yet and all you have to do is the impossible. Usually without enough money, time, or people. This I think is the key to a creative company, being willing to accept that failure, not only on a small scale, is a part of any revolution. Now all we need to do is figure out how to pay the bills and fail a lot at the same time.
These are always fun to read just to see what we have and have not been doing in 33 to be creative and make good work. I feel we've done a pretty good job with these. Our professors of course set the deadlines and constraints of projects which helps us to focus on the task at hand and make goals to accomplish this. We are VERY good at debating as well. Everything has a pro and a con and we can usually adapt ideas to fit everyone's needs, time constraints, etc. debate helps us to think deeper, step outside our preconceived notions, and question why we're doing what we're doing. Staying positive is always the hardest part of this whole process. Balancing time, quality of the project and the actually guidelines of the project can sometimes push out things we should make a priority like enjoying the process and seeing the good in something we've been staring at for 15 hours straight. This is something we can work toward though.
This article gives a very interesting look into the creative process. I found myself agreeing with a lot of what was said, and realizing that the author put words to many things that I have just started to realize. One of these things is the Hangen game. In some of the group projects I have encountered this past semester, it could have gone easier with less people. That would have allowed us to be less worried about saying something that would make another member upset. The constraints given to us for these projects definitely helped to inspire creativity, negating some of the problems that came from being in a group. I agree with this article in where it states that having limited resources inspires creativity. Only having specific items forces you to look at those items in a new way to get the outcome you want. The section on brainstorming reminded me of what we learned in Cake, that in this phase, just say everything that comes to your mind, no matter how stupid it might sound, as it might inspire another new idea.
Every sophomore who comments on this article will probably talk about Cake Everyday, and rightfully so because its relevant but also because it’s ruling my life. Almost everything we do in Cake is collaboration. To a lot of people that sounds like their own personal nightmare but I love working in groups with other people because watching the way groups interact under high stress has to be one of the most interesting things in the world to me. Something I have learned in my very extensive 20 years of group activities is that negativity is the most pointless thing in the world, and this article (thankfully) backs me up. I have worked on projects where I absolutely hate what we are doing and I make an active effort to seem like I enjoy it. Partly for me, but mostly because who wants to work with the person who says no all the time or looks bored, or never contributes because they don’t care. In groups you hope that you work well, and enjoy what you’re doing, but if not shut up and fake it till it’s over. The happier you act, the happier you’ll be. This article talks about no limits brainstorming as something that doesn’t always produce the best results. I have no information to prove that wrong but I will say that no limits brainstorming is pretty great for group dynamic if nothing else. First it establishes leaders in groups and it also lets you know what kind of ideas everyone has so you get a good feel of who is knowledgeable about what. It also is fun. Which I think we forget about sometimes. It is not always about being the absolute best or having the greatest idea known to man. Sometimes it is about getting to a place everyone is comfortable with without killing each other, and no limits brainstorming breaks the ice and makes people laugh, and starts the collaboration process off positively. Even if the groups don’t do as well as the individuals with ideas they have a better time, and a maybe a more positive experience which I think is just as important.
How to think creatively is a big part of what we're learning in classes like cake every day right now, and this article offers some practical solutions that I can definitely see working. I can recount times in group meetings where we're all sitting there going "we need to be more creative than that" and then just go back to silence and think. I find encouraging debate as well as the "no criticism" brainstorming guidelines to be so helpful in fostering creative and unconventional ideas, because even though we say that we don't (or shouldn't) care about other people's judgements, we still are (just to different extents). Another thing this article mentions that goes hand in hand with the "no criticism" brainstorming guideline is fostering positivity. With an encouraging and non-judgmental positive environment, debate of different ideas can then efficiently happen without anyone feeling personally criticized or attacked as everyone's focusing on bettering the project rather than hanging on to "the idea that I came up with".
Post a Comment