Hush then discuss for better performance Friday, 9 May 2014

There’s a quick way to increase the number of innovative ideas at work. New research by Associate Professor Daan Stam of Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University demonstrates that shortly suspending group debate to reflect and generate ideas individually leads to more ideas and more diverse ideas compared to traditional, continuous group debates. This no-cost, easy-to-deploy method for increasing development productivity has now successfully been tested.

Innovative ideas and high quality concepts are crucial to the successful development of new products. Past research has provided methods to generate good ideas, but these are often costly and difficult to use. According to Daan Stam’s research – in which more than 200 participants took part – suspending group debate to invite individual, silent reflection causes teams to generate more ideas, more original ideas, and more diverse ideas. The results of the research, which was conducted together with Dr Arne de Vet, Professor Harry Barkema, and Professor Carsten de Dreu, show that suspending group debate causes groups to generate 53 per cent more ideas and 47 per cent more categories of ideas. It also results in more original ideas, although this effect is less pronounced.

Suspending group debate simply means taking a break from group discussion so that members can individually and silently gather and process their thoughts, reflect on the problem at hand, and work towards its resolution. Debate is resumed after five minutes and ideas are discussed and eventually integrated collectively into concepts.

This is especially effective because some people, in particular those who have introvert tendencies, have trouble with multitasking and working in noisy environments, both of which are normal in brainstorming sessions. The current research shows the effects of suspending group debate are especially pronounced for groups with one or more introverted members. Considering that many groups have a member that is introverted, suspending group debate is a logical and wise action.

Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University (RSM) is ranked among Europe’s top 10 business schools for education and among the top three for research. RSM provides ground-breaking research and education furthering excellence in all aspects of management and is based in the international port city of Rotterdam – a vital nexus of business, logistics and trade. RSM’s primary focus is on developing business leaders with international careers who carry their innovative mindset into a sustainable future thanks to a first-class range of bachelor, master, MBA, PhD and executive programmes. RSM also has offices in the Amsterdam Zuidas business district and in Taipei, Taiwan. www.rsm.nl

For more information about RSM or on this release, please contact Ramses Singeling, Media Officer on +31 10 408 2028 or by email at singeling@rsm.nl.

Read the entire RSM Insight article on the research below.

Why quiet reflection improves development performance

By Daan Stam, Arne de Vet, Harry Barkema and Carsten De Dreu

No-cost, easy-to-deploy ways for increasing development productivity have now been successfully tested in and out of the lab. R&D managers, meeting facilitators and anyone interested in idea generation, take note.

Unsurprisingly, innovative ideas and the quality concepts these ideas generate are crucial to successful new-product development (NPD). They are part of an innovation process in which ideas for new products are initially generated and subsequently evaluated and integrated into a concept. Now, considering that this is largely a team effort, and that many scientific studies demonstrate that creativity in teamwork is most often at a low level, it is vital – especially for business – to understand how teams can optimise idea generation in the whole NPD process.

Although past research in this area has developed various interventions to enhance the ability of teams to generate ideas and concepts, these are often costly and impractical. Furthermore, there is a lack of practical knowledge on deploying these interventions effectively, or how they influence the success of turning initial ideas into concepts. This brings into question the usefulness of these interventions for NPD teams, something that led us to study alternate ways of improving the creative process. These in turn produced our theories on suspending group debate, which impact idea generation and concept development.

Taking a break

Suspending group debate simply means taking a break from group discussion so that members can individually (and silently) gather and process their thoughts, reflect on the problem at hand, and work towards its resolution. Debate is resumed at some point and these ideas are then discussed and eventually integrated collectively into concepts. According to our hypotheses, suspending group debate (and inviting individual reflection) causes teams to generate a higher number of ideas, a higher number of original ideas, and a more diverse set of ideas.

In addition, we developed a theory about where suspending group debate is especially effective: when at least one group member is low on extraversion. This is a personality characteristic that explains why some individuals (with high extraversion) prefer working in a group, while others (with low extraversion) prefer working alone. Highly extraverted individuals are most probably excitable, socially active and good at multitasking. On the other hand, individuals low on extraversion are introspective, not very active socially, and have no multitasking skills. Considering many groups have a member that is low on extraversion, suspending group debate is a logical and wise action.

Put to the test

We tested our hypotheses using an experiment in which teams generated ideas and developed concepts for a specific organisational problem. Participants comprised 206 business and economics students (155 males, 51 females, born between 1978 and 1985) divided into 45 teams of four to five persons each. The experiment was part of a business-simulation course at a Dutch university. Teams were randomly selected to suspend group debate, or not.

Results show that suspending group debate causes groups to generate 53 per cent more ideas and 47 per cent more categories of ideas (the effects on the number of original ideas generated were much weaker). Importantly, the results demonstrate that for teams with one or more members who are very low on extraversion, suspending group debate positively influences all three idea-generation measures: the number of ideas generated; the number of original ideas generated, and the diversity of ideas generated. Furthermore, both the diversity of the idea set – as well as the number of original ideas – positively influence the innovativeness of the final concept, while only the diversity of the idea set influences the comprehensiveness of the final concept. In other words, suspending group debate really works, especially for groups with one or more group members low on extraversion.

Highly practical

Although we should be cautious about deducing practical recommendations from a single experimental study, current findings could provide NPD teams with valuable information and advice. Considering that suspending group debate may positively influence idea generation and subsequent concept development. It, therefore, seems a sensible strategy to mix individual brainstorming with group debate when developing new products. Importantly, although other strategies to improve NPD performance exist, suspending group debate for short periods of time is a highly practical technique because it is easy to do and has no costs attached.

Outside the lab, we applied suspending group debate in actual team discussions at several companies – not only at NPD meetings, but also in a wide variety of debates in which managers discussed solutions to whole range of problems. We achieved good results. Participants responded very positively to our new approach, which also produced quality brainstorming. Notably, this also illustrates that our findings can be largely applied to brainstorming in general, and not only to strictly R&D activity.

But there is still work to be done. Our study shows that suspending group debate has an effect beyond idea generation, which could also indirectly impact concept development. This is an area that needs further research, not least because these effects are crucial in understanding the factors behind successful NPD.

This article is based on the paper "Suspending Group Debate and Developing Concepts", written by Daan Stam, Arne de Vet, Harry G. Barkema, and Carsten K. W. De Dreu, and published in "The Journal of Product Innovation Management", Vol 30, Issue Supplement S1, 48-61. DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12063

Daan Stam is Associate Professor of Innovation Management, Department of Technology and Operations Management, Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. Email:  dstam@rsm.nl

Arne de Vet studied at Erasmus University and is now an independent strategy consultant.

Prof. Harry Barkema holds the DSM Distinguished Chair in Innovation Management, Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. Email:  hbarkema@rsm.nl

Carsten De Dreu is Professor of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.

This article was published in RSM Insight 17. More information about and back copies of RSM Insight can be found here.