LDRD final report for improving human effectiveness for extreme-scale problem solving : assessing the effectiveness of electronic brainstorming in an industrial setting.

An experiment was conducted comparing the effectiveness of individual versus group electronic brainstorming in order to address difficult, real world challenges. While industrial reliance on electronic communications has become ubiquitous, empirical and theoretical understanding of the bounds of its effectiveness have been limited. Previous research using short-term, laboratory experiments have engaged small groups of students in answering questions irrelevant to an industrial setting. The present experiment extends current findings beyond the laboratory to larger groups of real-world employees addressing organization-relevant challenges over the course of four days. Employees and contractors at a national security laboratory participated, either in a group setting or individually, in an electronic brainstorm to pose solutions to a 'wickedly' difficult problem. The data demonstrate that (for this design) individuals perform at least as well as groups in producing quantity of electronic ideas, regardless of brainstorming duration. However, when judged with respect to quality along three dimensions (originality, feasibility, and effectiveness), the individuals significantly (p<0.05) out-performed the group working together. When idea quality is used as the benchmark of success, these data indicate that work-relevant challenges are better solved by aggregating electronic individual responses, rather than electronically convening a group. This research suggests that industrial reliance uponmore » electronic problem solving groups should be tempered, and large nominal groups might be the more appropriate vehicle for solving wicked corporate issues.« less

[1]  Terence Connolly,et al.  On the Effectiveness of Group Brainstorming , 1993 .

[2]  Roya Ayman,et al.  Group Decision Making and Perceived Decision Success: The Role of Communication Medium , 2005 .

[3]  J. Valacich,et al.  Group, Sub-Group, and Nominal Group Idea Generation: New Rules for a New Media? , 1994 .

[4]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Teams and technology Interactions over time , 2000 .

[5]  Alain Pinsonneault,et al.  Electronic Brainstorming: The Illusion of Productivity , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

[6]  Tobias Greitemeyer,et al.  Information sampling and group decision making: the effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[7]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Production blocking and idea generation: Does blocking interfere with cognitive processes? , 2003 .

[8]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  A Typology of Virtual Teams , 2002 .

[9]  K. Douglas,et al.  Identifiability and self-presentation: computer-mediated communication and intergroup interaction. , 2001, The British journal of social psychology.

[10]  R. Spears,et al.  De‐individuation and group polarization in computer‐mediated communication , 1990 .

[11]  Michael Diehl,et al.  Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. , 1991 .

[12]  T. Bouchard,et al.  Size, performance, and potential in brainstorming groups. , 1970, The Journal of applied psychology.

[13]  George S. Davidson,et al.  Yellow sticky, PHP software for an electronic brainstorming experiment. , 2007 .

[14]  Fredric M. Jabljn CULTIVATING IMAGINATION: FACTORS THAT ENHANCE AND INHIBIT CREATIVITY IN BRAINSTORMING GROUPS , 1981 .

[15]  M. Diehl,et al.  Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. , 1987 .

[16]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Process Structuring in Electronic Brainstorming , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[17]  Vincent R. Brown,et al.  Toward More Creative and Innovative Group Idea Generation: A Cognitive‐Social‐Motivational Perspective of Brainstorming , 2007 .

[18]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams , 2006, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[19]  R. Brent Gallupe,et al.  Blocking electronic brainstorms. , 1994 .

[20]  Kipling D. Williams,et al.  PROCESSES Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration , 2022 .

[21]  E. Salas,et al.  Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. , 1991 .

[22]  R. Zajonc SOCIAL FACILITATION. , 1965, Science.

[23]  Bernard Guerin,et al.  Mere presence effects in humans: A review , 1986 .

[24]  Adrian Furnham,et al.  The Brainstorming Myth , 2000 .

[25]  Mary T. Dzindolet,et al.  The effects of facilitators on the performance of brainstorming groups , 1996 .

[26]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  ELECTRONIC BRAINSTORMING AND GROUP SIZE , 1992 .

[27]  P. Paulus,et al.  Idea Generation in Groups : A Basis for Creativity in Organizations , 1994 .

[28]  Wade C. Rowatt,et al.  Perceptions of Brainstorming in Groups: The Quality Over Quantity Hypothesis , 1997 .

[29]  Donald W. Taylor,et al.  DOES GROUP PARTICIPATION WHEN USING BRAINSTORMING FACILITATE OR INHIBIT CREATIVE THINKING , 1958 .

[30]  N. Kerr,et al.  Group performance and decision making. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[31]  C. F. Bond,et al.  Social facilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies. , 1983, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  J. McGrath,et al.  Group Task Performance and Communication Technology , 1993 .

[33]  Vincent R. Brown,et al.  Effects of Task Instructions and Brief Breaks on Brainstorming , 2006 .

[34]  P. Paulus,et al.  Performance and Perceptions of Brainstormers in an Organizational Setting , 1995 .

[35]  R. Gallupe,et al.  Unblocking brainstorms. , 1991, The Journal of applied psychology.

[36]  Mohamed A. Mughal,et al.  A General Problem Solving Approach for Wicked Problems: Theory and Application to Chemical Weapons Verification and Biological Terrorism , 2002 .

[37]  D. Madsen,et al.  Comparison of a written feedback procedure, group brainstorming, and individual brainstorming. , 1978 .

[38]  R. Spears,et al.  Knowing Me, Knowing You: Anonymity Effects on Social Identity Processes within Groups , 2001 .

[39]  Marie Christine Roy,et al.  Electronic Group Brainstorming , 1996 .

[40]  B. Baltes,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis , 2002 .

[41]  J. Valacich,et al.  Computer brainstorms: More heads are better than one. , 1993 .

[42]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group processes in computer-mediated communication☆ , 1986 .

[43]  M. Diehl,et al.  Idea Production in Nominal and Virtual Groups: Does Computer-Mediated Communication Improve Group Brainstorming? , 2000 .

[44]  K. Dugosh,et al.  Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[45]  K. Williams,et al.  Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing , 1979 .

[46]  David A. Kravitz,et al.  Ringelmann rediscovered: the original article , 1986 .

[47]  Jeff Conklin,et al.  Dialogue Mapping: Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems , 2005 .

[48]  R. Gallupe,et al.  Some Liberating Effects of Anonymous Electronic Brainstorming , 1998 .

[49]  A Gibson Running as fast as we can , 1993, British Dental Journal.

[50]  Vincent R. Brown,et al.  Enhancing ideational creativity in groups: Lessons from research on brainstorming. , 2003 .

[51]  I. Mostert,et al.  Creativity and Sex Composition: An Experimental Illustration , 1997 .

[52]  A. Pinsonneault,et al.  Small Group Brainstorming and Idea Quality , 2001 .

[53]  Donald A. Hantula,et al.  The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the electronic group brainstorming literature , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[54]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Is Out of Sight, Out of Mind? An Empirical Study of Social Loafing in Technology-Supported Groups , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[55]  J. Valacich,et al.  Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story , 1994 .

[56]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .