One of the strongest characteristics of creative people is that they spend considerable time and effort into developing their expertise. For instance, Heinzen, Mills and Cameron (1993) found that early intense curiosity about a subject was one of the strongest predictors for becoming a successful scientist.
Other scholars have found that extensive practice and involvement in the work at hand predicts creative achievement (Sternberg, 1999). These findings are not very counterintuitive, since creativity in its most basic sense is the combination of two or more elements of information. The more knowledge a person has, the better the chances are for novel and useful ideas and solutions.
Innovative work requires expertise, both from individual team members and team leaders. In fact, it has been shown time and time again that in order to solve the kind of problems that crop up in innovative work, leaders and members need vast knowledge and experience (Mumford, Scott, Gaddis & Strange, 2002). The problems of innovative work are unique in that they are often novel to the person who encounters them, ill-defined in that they are ambiguous and hard to understand, and complex in that they may well have several different solutions (Reiter-Palmon & Ilies, 2004).
The problem solver must therefore begin to structure or make sense of the problem by identifying goals, conflicts, procedures, restrictions and information needed to solve the problem. In some cases, problem construction is a relatively straightforward and quick process, after which the problem solver can begin to collect information, and generate ideas. In other cases however, the problems are so complex that successful problem construction is paramount for solving the problem in an innovative way.
When people spend more time formulating and constructing a problem, they generate better and more original solutions.
Several studies have shown that when people spend more time formulating and constructing a problem, they generate better and more original solutions (e.g. Redmond, Mumford & Teach, 1993). An individual’s expertise, i.e. knowledge and experience, is a strong factor that decides the ability to both comprehend and generate innovative solutions to a novel and complex problems.
Expertise can of course be cultivated by granting time and freedom for organizational members to develop their skills and knowledge, and by offering opportunities for attending courses and seminars. However, one way to use an organization’s existing expertise is to compose teams that consists of several different competences, since research has shown that team heterogeneity is positively linked to successful innovation (e.g. Hülsheger, Anderson & Salgado, 2009, see also this previous blog post).
Different competences in a team broadens the knowledge base. Second, see to that organizational members have ample opportunities for networking and interchange with external contacts. This was apparent in a Swedish study by Hemlin and Olsson (2011), who interviewed 75 scientists from 34 different R&D organizations. The scientists reported that the input and ideas from external exchange and collaboration helped to advance their research. Thus, external networking may prompt new insights and perspectives that would otherwise not be considered.
By Leif Denti
Heinzen, J. E., Mills, C., & Cameron, P. (1993). Scientific innovation potential. Creativity Research Journal, 6, 261-270.
Hemlin, S., & Olsson, L. (2011). Creativity-stimulating leadership: A critical incident study of leaders’ influence on creativity in research groups. Creativity and Innovation Management, 20, 49-58.
Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 705–730.
Redmond, M. R., Mumford, M. D., & Teach, R. (1993). Putting creativity to work: Effects of leader behavior on subordinate creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 120–151.
Reiter-Palmon, R., & Illies, J. J. (2004). Leadership and creativity: Understanding leadership from a creative problem-solving perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 55–77.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Leif Denti is pursuing his doctoral degree of Psychology at the University of Gothenburg, Department of Psychology. His main research venue is how project leaders stimulate creativity and innovation in their project teams (project name: Management for Sweden). Leif Denti is also involved in a research project at the School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, studying organizational factors that may influence problem solving in project teams. Leif Denti holds a licentiate degree in Psychology at the University of Gothenburg.