Publish at February 12 2025 Updated February 12 2025
Between the "all creative" injunction issued by innovation consultants and the deterministic assumption that creativity is a gift reserved for a select few, a critical space is emerging.
A company producing silicon compounds faced a major industrial challenge: to understand the causes of the number of scraps on a production line and reduce them significantly. Management decided to call in a consultant specialized in problem-solving methodology, and a recognized expert in group facilitation and innovation.
After several hours of group meetings devoted to analyzing the situation and generating solutions, the consultant observes a disappointing phenomenon: the group's proposals are sorely lacking in originality and depth. The participants seemed trapped in their habitual thought patterns, incapable of proposing a real breakthrough, despite the tried-and-tested divergence exercises proposed to the group. Faced with this impasse, the consultant made a decision: to interrupt the group session and ask each participant to reflect individually, with the sole instruction to transmit their new ideas within 48 hours.
The result was striking: the individual proposals turned out to be far more innovative, creative and relevant than those produced collectively. This experiment raises a crucial question: are our traditional methods of creativity really effective?
A study (1) published in the magazine Gestion 2000 sheds some astonishing light: in a sample of nine workgroups using creativity techniques, two-thirds (i.e. six groups) failed to produce truly original ideas.
It seems that in groups, a conformity bias predominates: each participant develops an unconscious filter that prevents him or her from proposing ideas that are too marginal or that upset the established order. The collective dynamic thus becomes a cognitive trap. The search for social validation drives conformity, and the individual prefers to put forward a conventional idea rather than a daring suggestion. The risk of standing out becomes more threatening than the recognition of having produced an innovative idea.
Moreover, the summons to suddenly become creative in record time goes against our natural functioning. We need time to develop different ideas. All the work and examples of the great innovators show that the disruptive idea only comes about after a great deal of work, multiple attempts and discouraging failures.
There's another factor that sabotages innovation when you're part of a think-tank. The work of Irving Janis (2) on "groupthink" highlights a disturbing phenomenon: the more tightly knit a group is, the less capable it is of generating diverse perspectives. The mechanisms at work include a tendency to seek consensus, minimize disagreement, self-censor divergent opinions, and the illusion of collective invulnerability.
Social psychology research shows that human beings tend to adjust their behavior and thinking to match the perceived expectations of the group (3). This dynamic becomes particularly prevalent in professional contexts where cohesion and alignment are valued.
Contrary to popular belief, traditional individual creativity is no miracle solution either. Traditional personal brainstorming methods come up against equally complex cognitive obstacles.
Our brains function by habit and cognitive economy. It naturally tends to reproduce tried-and-tested thought patterns, minimizing the effort required to construct new representations, and favoring speed over originality.
The linear approach becomes a trap we all fall into when we want to use a creative method. De Bono's "hats" method, for example, requires us to successively don these hats as "brain masks" that would blind others. Have you ever tried to look only at the right side of a room? Your gaze will inevitably turn to the left.
Problem-solving too often follows a rational, sequential model that stifles creativity: problem identification, information gathering, solution generation, evaluation and selection. This methodical approach, while reassuring, drastically limits the emergence of truly innovative solutions.
John Cleese offers a fascinating insight, based on the work of Guy Claxton. He distinguishes two fundamentally different ways of thinking:
True creativity requires privileging this second mode, allowing time for daydreaming and undirected reflection. Bathroom ablutions or a walk in the woods are often activities in which new ideas emerge, and it's important to capture them.
Genuine creativity is cultivated in everyday life, not in formatted methods. It is nourished by three fundamental dimensions: openness to difference, doubt of established patterns, and productive curiosity.
Techniques do not create creativity. They can at best provide a framework, but never guarantee it. Innovation is born of the encounter between an open mental posture, time for reflection and the ability to welcome the unexpected.
Creativity is not an instruction manual. It's a state of mind, a way of being in the world, a unique relationship to knowledge and experience (5).
References
1. Étude Gestion 2000 : Référence complète : Article "Méthodes de créativité et amélioration des projets entrepreneuriaux" Revue : Gestion 2000 - 2013- Numéro : Volume 30, n°5
https://shs.cairn.info/revue-gestion-2000-2013-5-page-93
2. John Cleese and Guy Claxton - Reference work: "Hare Brain, Tortoise Mind" by Guy Claxton. Year of publication: 1997. Publisher: HarperCollins - https://amzn.to/3Eyiwwo
Works on "Groupthink"- Author: Irving Janis "Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes" - 1982. Publisher: Houghton Mifflin - https://amzn.to/3EK8ZCk
3. "Is the group more creative than the isolated individual?" Article in Management et Avenir magazine - 2005
https://shs.cairn.info/revue-management-et-avenir-2005-2-page-71
4. Le Mag du ciné. Jean-Baptiste Adamsberg, or the art of "shoveling clouds".
https://www.lemagducine.fr/a-lire/analyse-litteraire/jean-baptiste-adamsberg-romans-policiers-critique-fred-vargas-10014968/
5. "Les 5 clés pour être créatif au quotidien" Yann Coirault - Ed Dunod- Reédition 2024. - https://tidd.ly/40OOFr7
You might also like:
Learning to connect with nature
An ecopsychological approach developed by Joana Macy that helps pedagogy to integrate the challenges of life. Moving from the closed spaces of the school as a monofunctional place of transmission from brain to brain to open spaces of relationship of the whole being in connection with its environment.
Revaluing and teaching historical figures through mock trials
The mock trial is in essence an exercise in conflict, and therefore promotes pedagogy through debate and, by extension, cognitive conflict. This cognitive conflict arises from the debates and exchanges generated by the group exercise.
From management education to innovative learning
A contradiction to traditional management teaching, combined with 4 innovative proposals for learning management.
Teaching practices - An attempt at classification
An inventory and classification of over 200 teaching approaches, methods and practices.
"I Can't Write Anymore, My Hand Hurts"
It is normal to have cramps or pain in the hand when writing for long hours, these are called "writer's cramps". On the other hand, it is much less so when it involves young children or students in full physical and mental health. If we find the source, it will be most of the time quite possible to remedy it, in particular by graphotherapy and find a beautiful handwriting.
