Creative Team Paper
University of Phoenix
COM/420 Creativity and Communication
April 27, 2012
Counter perspectives exist between those who argue that team creativity is enhanced through the convergence of experience and knowledge, and those who reason that team formalization actually constrains creativity (Hirst, Van Knippenberg, Chin-Hui, & Sacramento, 2011). This paper takes into account both viewpoints to explore how creativity can be useful in computer-mediated learning environments. Furthermore, this paper will focus on the interrelationship between creativity and communication, and how the understanding of said association can be implemented to benefit learning teams.
Creativity in Teams: Opposing Viewpoints
According to Hirst, Van Knippenberg, Chin-Hui, & Sacramento (2011), two aspects in which team environments hurt creativity is through the formalization and centralization of decision making. Such bureaucratic practices are examples of how individual freedom – which is a direct attribute of creativity – is restricted and controlled. The reasoning is that formalization normally dictates procedures and concurrently guides people’s course of action. On the other hand, centralization refers to a hierarchy or distribution of power; which in creative team scenarios, means a group leader or decision maker takes charge. This point of view is an important reminder of how certain conventional team protocols actually impair an individual’s creativity.
In contrast, Capozzi, Dye, & Howe (2011), offer a more business-specific perspective when they highlight particular benefits to team creativity. Countering the widely-held idea that only a select few are creatively endowed, Capozzi, Dye, & Howe (2011), illustrate a seemingly trivial – yet helpful – technique for cultivating ingenuity in teams. Specifically, they propose that to overcome orthodoxies or core beliefs, it is...