Turns out that brainstorming–that go-to approach to generating new ideas since the 1940s–isn’t the golden ticket to innovation after all. Both Jonah Lehrer, in a recent article in The New Yorker, and Susan Cain, in her new book Quiet, have asserted as much. Science shows that brainstorms can activate a neurological fear of rejection and that groups are not necessarily more creative than individuals. Brainstorming can actually be detrimental to good ideas.
But the idea behind brainstorming is right. To innovate, we need environments that support imaginative thinking, where we can go through many crazy, tangential, and even bad ideas to come up with good ones. We need to work both collaboratively and individually. We also need a healthy amount of heated discussion, even arguing. We need places where someone can throw out a thought, have it critiqued, and not feel so judged that they become defensive and shut down. Yet this creative process is not necessarily supported by the traditional tenets of brainstorming: group collaboration, all ideas held equal, nothing judged.
-
Recent Posts
- Team unearths what may be secret weapon against antibiotic resistance
- Hazing: How to hide in nearly plain sight | Student Science
- 3quarksdaily: Philosophy is a Bunch of Empty Ideas: Interview with Peter Unger
- Thirst for water moves and shakes California | Student Science
- Digital displays get flexible | Student Science
Recent Comments
- Jeff Ollerton on 56 Indicators of Impact
- Jodie on 56 Indicators of Impact
- Brigitte on From Peer Review to the Wisdom of Crowds? Open Access & Peer Review | History Workshop
- Adam on Scenes from another academic conference
- Altmetrics: achieving and measuring success in communicating research in the digital age | Hazel Hall on 56 Indicators of Impact
Archives
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
Categories
- Accountability
- Basic News
- Broader Impacts
- Calls for papers
- Climate Change
- Conferences Upcoming
- Convergence
- Creative & Visual Science
- CSID Publications
- Degrowth Economics
- Economics & STEM Research
- Environmental policy
- Field Philosophy
- Future of the University
- Gas Fracking
- Globalization
- Graduate Studies
- Innovation
- institutionalizing interdisciplinarity
- Interdisciplinarity
- Libraries
- Metrics
- Multidisciplinarity
- NASA
- New Books
- New Lexicon
- NIH
- NOAA
- NSF
- Occupy Wall Street
- Open Access
- Peer Review
- Philosophy & Politics
- Public Pedagogy
- Public Philosophizing
- Science and technology ramifications
- STEM Policy
- Sustainability, Risk Management, & Long-Term Security
- TechnoScience & Technoscientism
- Transdisciplinarity
- Transformative Research
- Uncategorized
- US Science Agencies
Meta