Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle.

1987; American Psychological Association; Volume: 53; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497

1939-1315

Michael Diehl, Wolfgang Stroebe,

Complex Systems and Decision Making

We conducted four experiments to investigate free riding, evaluation apprehension, and production blocking as explanations of difference in brainstorming productivity typically observed between real and nominal groups. In Experiment 1, we manipulated assessment expectations in group and individual brainstorming. Although productivity was higher when subjects worked under personal rather than collective assessment instructions, type of session still had a major impact on brainstorming productivity under conditions that eliminated temptation to free ride. Experiment 2 demonstrated that inducing evaluation apprehension reduced productivity in individual brainstorming. However, failure to find an interaction between evaluation apprehension and type of session in Experiment 3 raises doubts about evaluation apprehension as a major explanation of productivity loss in brainstorming groups. Finally, by manipulating blocking directly, we determined in Experiment 4 that production blocking accounted for most of productivity loss of real brainstorming groups. The processes underlying production blocking are discussed, and a motivational interpretation of blocking is offered. In his influential book, Osborn (1957) suggested brainstorming as a method of group problem solving that considerably increases quality and quantity of ideas produced by group members. Brainstorming groups are traditionally given instructions designed to free individual members from inhibiting effects of self-criticism and criticism by others during problem-solving session. The rules behind brainstorming are as follows: keep in mind that more ideas better and wilder ideas better, improve or combine ideas already suggested; and do not be critical. Osborn (1957) claimed that if these rules are followed the average person can think up twice as many ideas when working with a group than when working alone (p. 229).