We now move past the individual and considering what stops innovation in groups. Given the descriptions below, which of these three types of imagination do you practice most readily in groups? Which of the three types do you think is most deadly to a group's brainstorming efforts? Why?
Descriptive Imagination not only reveals what is happening in the oft-confusing world "out there," but it enables us to make sense of it and to see new possibilities and opportunities. It evokes images that describe a complex and confusing world "out there." This is the imagination that identifies patterns and regularities in the mass of data generated by rigorous analysis and informed by judgment based on years of experience.
Creative Imagination allows us to see what isn't there. It evokes new possibilities from the combination, recombination or transformation of things or concepts. It is the essential feature of visioning, "skunk works," brainstorming, and thinking "out of the box." Whereas Descriptive Imagination enables us to see what is there in a new way, creative imagination allows us to see what isn't there; that is, to create something really new, something totally different.
Challenging Imagination starts from scratch and assumes nothing. It overturns all the rules and wipes the slate clean. It is with challenging imagination that we negate, contradict and even destroy what currently exists in order to make space for something new. It is different from the other two kinds in that it does not merely add on a new element to what's already there.
Excerpted from the Reading: The Science of SeriousPlay. (www.seriousplay.com)
Given my talented classmates and their ability to create and translate data in order for me to build upon their thoughts, I often find myself practicing Descriptive Imagination in groups. Locating patterns in consumer behavior and then articulating how new needs or products might affect a specific group has happened several times in various marketing groups I've had while at Owen. This type of imagination permits me to make sense of what's going on - it helps identify "a method to the madness."
ReplyDeleteThe type of imagination I believe most stifles group brainstorming is Challenging Imagination. Although this method may be effective in refining and polishing innovative ideas, I think it's extremely detrimental during brainstorming sessions. When brainstorming, I've found it to be essential that no thought is disregarded, negated, or rejected. So, sarcasm and deconstruction are counterproductive with groups that intend to brainstorm.
Of the three types of innovation listed above, I, like Elizabeth, practice "descriptive innovation" most regularly in groups. I find that its easist for my mind to brainstorm if there is something basic from which I can work. The other two types listed require a lot more imagination...starting with a blank canvas and creating...and I don't do this very well. I like having a little bit of structure when I work alone or in groups.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of which of the three types most stifle group innovation, I think descriptive imagination is probably most deadly in circumstances where "great" innovation is meant to take place. I say "great" because I think the nature of descriptive imagination (using what's already there in new ways) automatically blocks out certain cool new innovations because it is only using what is already there. This can work in certain circumstances when you're not looking for some really great, big innovation, but I think it has the tendancy to squash other potential innovations in a group because it automatically presents constraints through what already exists.
I probably most readily practice descriptive imagination when I work in groups. I like to summarize data and put information into bulleted lists. However, sometimes, when I am not completely convinced about the viability of a project, I can and do practice challenging imagination. Of the three types of imagination, challenging imagination is the most deadly to a group’s brainstorming efforts. I do believe that challenging imagination is a valuable part of the creative process but when groups are brainstorming, you want quantity not necessarily quality and sarcasm and shooting down projects works against quantity.
ReplyDeleteFor me, it is a much easier task to practice descriptive imagination than creative or challenging imagination in groups. Most of the times in the past, I’ve practiced descriptive imagination in groups though I would find it much more challenging and interesting to practice creative or challenging imagination. Creating something radically new (disruptive innovation) is what really changes human behavior and moves us forward.
ReplyDeleteThe most deadly to a group’s brainstorming efforts will depend upon the goal of the brainstorming exercise. If the goal is to improve upon existing products or services then descriptive imagination is the way to achieve the same. Otherwise, I think descriptive imagination is most deadly to a group’s brainstorming efforts as group member are then confined to what is already out there. To create something completely new creative or challenging imagination must be used.
I tend to practice creative imagination in groups. I find that throwing out ideas outside of the realm of an assignment or the conversation can draw out thoughts that might otherwise not be considered. I am probably guilty of descriptive imagination at times when I'm not feeling especially creative.
ReplyDeleteAll three types of imagination can be detrimental in a brainstorming session if they are not appropriate for the task at hand. If the group is developing a totally new product, descriptive imagination is most likely going to be less helpful than challenging imagination. In order to improve upon an existing product within the constraints of what already exists, the opposite is true.
I think in most cases I would follow descriptive imagination. I would look at the facts and data then mix the experiences and points made by the group. Usually this is the most safe way to brainstorm. But there would be challenging imagination from time to time when some group member suddenly have some wild or crazy idea. However in most cases the deeper the discussion goes, the more constraints and problems appear. Then the group would go back to the descriptive one. But still, if the project is closely related to innovation, that would not be very hard.
ReplyDeleteI think the the type that is most deadly to the group brainstorming effort is creative imagination. I feel it is very hard and not productive, especially after some time of group discussion about the existed facts, constraints and data. The ideas are easily submerged by the descriptive imagination which are seemingly more reasonable and feasible.
The type of imagination I use depends largely on the topic. Generally, the descriptive imagination is the easiest method of ideation in a group because it is based on common topics that we all can communicate on. It provides a platform for collaboration that are more difficult to achieve with the other innovation methods. However, I can easily jump into a creative imagination mindset when I let my mind wander and explore new ideas. I know groups appreciate this creative input when a project calls for it.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it may be the easiest to use in a group setting, descriptive imagination comes with many restraints. It doesn't allow for the slate to be wiped clean and eliminate assumptions; it doesn't encourage the freedom to explore untouched ideas. The other methods, in my opinion, are more profitable for innovative objectives, but amongst most business professionals, are unnatural to use.
I think a combination of these styles could be extremely productive; if each group member could contribute to the ideation with their most natural method and explain their creative process, the group overall would benefit and the quality of work would be excellent.
The type of imagination that I use most readily in groups is Descriptive Imagination, although I wish I more often used Creative Imagination. Often, when a problem is placed in front of me, or me and a group, it is difficult to think “outside of the box” and easy to get stuck simply trying to re-invent something that already exists. I think it is also easier to share patterns in existing information rather than take a chance sharing a completely new idea in a group.
ReplyDeleteThe type of imagination that is most deadly to brainstorming ideas is Challenging Imagination. While I think it sometime can be helpful to “wipe the slate clean” and start fresh, the notion of sarcasm is hurtful to group creativity and brainstorming. In addition, in rejecting and negating everything, you do not allow the group to formulate ideas at all, let alone something new and creative.
The type of imagination I practice more in groups is creative imagination. There is always a better way of doing things. If this was not the case, we would not drive cars, talk on cell phones, have internet, or be able to fly around the world in a day. Human nature engraves in us the ability and desire to make systematic improvements. Certain dramatic changes from the norm help us leap forward as a society; however, even the most insignificant ideas add to the overall growth of people.
ReplyDeleteThe most deadly form of imagination to group’s brainstorming efforts is challenging imagination. However, it is not the challenging imagination itself that is detrimental, but the degree to which it is used. A healthy devil’s advocate role is essential in imagination, but consistent “nay saying” will surely stifle creativity and curb the imagination.
I definitely find myself practicing descriptive imagination most readily in groups. I think steams from a heavy quantitative background, as I enjoy sorting through data and finding/solving for solutions and new conclusions. Additionally I like working and creating within constraints and with a basic structure. However, I think this tends to result in continued innovation rather than truly new to the world innovation.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I think it’s the descriptive imagination that can be the most detrimental to a group’s brainstorming effort. While the other types of imagination risk the group becoming too distracted or off track, the descriptive imagination can severely limit the creative process by failing to think about truly new to the world ideas. I think good and effective brainstorming comes from a mix of all three as each type has its own advantages and disadvantages.
I most readily practice Descriptive Imagination in a group brainstorm. I find it challenging and frustrating to start from scratch or to assume nothing. I can be creative and add to the group brainstorm when I have something to start from and work with. This is why I like working in and brainstorming in groups when I am trying to come up with a new idea or do something really different than what has been thought of or done before.
ReplyDeleteI think that identifying which type of imagination is most detrimental to a group brainstorm depends on the goal of the group brainstorm or the dynamic of the group. It seems that a group may never stop brainstorming if there weren’t someone practicing descriptive imagination in the group. However, without any group members practicing creative or challenging imagination, idea generation would likely be stifled.
I tend to follow a mix of two:
ReplyDeleteFirst, Challenging Imagination: I like to question my assumptions and beliefs and hence the natural progression to others. FACT: Our thinking is limited by our biases and we can do nothing about it because as an inteligent animal that is our natural behaviour.
I deem it essential to bring out those assumptions and beliefs because it helps me truly appreicate the perspectives the group has. In addition, when in a group bringing out assumptions and beliefs helps uncover patterns of group bias which might tilt the innovative tought one way or the other. An understanding of this bias helps me respond to it in a group.
Second, Descriptive imagination: I am comfortable in taking the pieces available and making something new out of it. I use a lot of visuals during ideation and I think that comes from being able to take what I see around me and use it to express my ideas.
The Killer - I don't feel any one technique kills innovation more than the other. MBA answer 'it depends'. I feel, two things kill group innovation: first is an ovrbearing personality aka jerk; second is degree of similarity between people of the group.
Brainstorming and creativity can be hard; in a group setting I often find myself working in the Creative Imagination space. While the thought of being creative in through Challenging Imagination it is often near impossible to completely start from scratch with no assumptions. A group that can successfully achieve and duplicate Challenging Imagination is truly an asset.
ReplyDeleteIn a group, the most deadly form of imagination is Descriptive Imagination. Brainstorming successes are a function of a group considering as many possibilities as it can and coming up with, building on each other’s ideas, and accumulating many diverse ideas that will lead to a single compilation of ideas to solve the original problem. Descriptive Imagination takes what is currently present and essentially repurposes it. For example, while this leads to 18 different ways to use baking soda, one is as deodorizer for a litter box, it does not go beyond that baking soda. Challenging Imagination would have started with a problem of a smelly litter box and consider the question of “what should a cat do when it needs to poop?” It would have scrapped the standard solutions for the problem and started from scratch. An example of Challenging Imagination is the vast number of mouse traps patents (4400 according to one source), while the standard spring on a plank of wood works very well, Challenging Imagination allows others to think that there must be a better way to rid your home of vermin. Descriptive Imagination in a group setting kills brainstorming, it does not get to all the ideas that make brainstorming a useful exercise.
Of the three types of imagination we read about, I practice creative most in groups. I find I am best at "thinking outside the box" and creating new concepts and ideas that my group members may not consider. I feel creative imagination allows one to explore a world of endless possibilities and truly create an innovative product or service. In my last position with Nissan NA, I used creative imagination to create new methods and ways of improving the operations at the dealerships I managed. Instead of employing the same methods used by my peers and expecting grandiose results, I challenged myself to improve the business through unconventional means (customer surveys, mystery shops, alot of observation, and social media). In addition, I find myself using creative imagination when I analyze financial statements and competitive analysis when working in groups.
ReplyDeleteThe type of imagination that is most deadly to a groups brainstorming efforts is challenging imagination. Although challengine imagination can reap enormous longterm rewards, I feel the deconstruction and sarcasm aspects of it could stifle members in a group. If I was working in a group with a timid person he/she may be unwilling to create new ideas if other members are constantly challenging their ideas and/or giving them sarcastic feedback. In order for a group to thrive its members need to work together and feed off of eachothers ideas. I also feel that challenging imagination leaves a team leader with the responsibility of accepting or rejecting ideas. This is deadly in brainstorming sessions since a large number of good ideas could be rejected since someone in the group did not accept the concept.
Practicing Challenging imagination in groups is critical. The purpose is to throw everything out the window and start from scratch. As such, one would need a representative with regards to each aspect of the process or product. Not only are many inputs needed, but ideas regarding the uses of the final input are critical too. It would be nearly impossible to partake in Challenging Imagination as an individual.
ReplyDeleteDescriptive imagination seems to be the most deadly for a brainstorming session. I consider brainstorming to be an early part aspect of innovation. Brainstorming seems to be too early for descriptive imagination since it tries to make sense of something that already exists or is going on. I more so associate brainstorming sessions with the creation of processes or products that don't exist.
In groups at business school, my experience is that I have practiced descriptive imagination the most. This is likely due to our focus on distilling large amounts of information quickly and arriving at a solution rapidly.
ReplyDeleteThis approach is likely also the most deadly for brainstorming sessions as we often overestimate our knowledge and experience and skip over the necessary analysis to identify patterns. The article states that an important part of descriptive imagination is identifying "patterns and regularities in the mass of data generated by rigorous analysis." Based on work in business school groups, I believe this requirement is often not met in our haste to accomplish tasks quickly.
In groups, I have a tendency towards challenging imagination. I am very readily oriented towards assuming that existing solutions are likely to be fundamentally flawed in some way or another, and that a desirable outcome often involves throwing out both the baby and the bathwater (except in literal circumstances involving actual babies, of course). However, in order for this side of myself to come out, I generally need to feel very engaged with the topic at hand and comfortable with my surroundings. Perhaps ironically, I have found myself acting in a challenging imagination light more frequently outside of the business school world and in actual professional settings, where I am more engaged by the real impact decisions and creations have.
ReplyDeleteI believe descriptive imagination to be by far the most "deadly" to a group brainstorming effort. Because descriptive imagination typically offers seductively easy solutions to problems, a group my be all-too-quickly drawn away from more challenging, fundamental solutions that may ultimately be more impactful (or, in and of themselves, drive more creative but realistic solutions). That said, I can't imagine a group brainstorming effort without anybody who engages in descriptive imagination having much practical success.
My response to this question is 'it depends' -- it depends on the makeup of the group.
ReplyDeleteI think that I am most prone to practice descriptive imagination; however, if that role is currently occupied then I may consider alternative roles. The business school curriculum places a premium on rigorous analysis and deduction within a series of frameworks -- descriptive imagination -- as these options are demonstrated to yield the highest results with the greatest frequency, etc.
I think it is important that all types of imagination exist within the same brainstorming session. If they do not, and a group engages solely on a descriptive, challenging, or creative perspective then they will likely not emerge with a product that is viable or meaningful; in this way, a myopic perspective from any one angle would be 'deadly' for a brainstorming session.
Descriptive imagination is the most prevalent and most deadly to group brainstorming efforts. True innovation rarely comes from groups focused solely on descriptive imagination without breaking down constraints and adding challenging and creative imagination to the mix. True innovation from group think, comes when a team starts entirely from scratch and lets the brainstorming drive the innovation.
ReplyDeleteI tend to practice descriptive imagination in groups because of group think and the frameworks/processes we have learned in b-school. It tends to give me structure while at the same time offering constraints. I think that groups should get into the practice of fighting group think and start with the challenge imagination. The ideas might be radical but they can definitely challenge the norms.
ReplyDeleteOverall i believe that the descriptive imagination is most deadly to groups because it gives them a starting point and subconsciously limits a groups creativity.
Anyone who has worked with me knows that I LOVE to work in a process, which is a sure sign of a descriptive imaginer, trying to make sense from the chaos. I would love to say that I am a creative imaginer, and sometimes I do go a little stir-crazy when we cannot break out of one small idea area, forcing me to push beyond what we are seeing for some larger meaning or idea. It’s usually just is an aspiration, though.
ReplyDeleteIt’s easy to argue the descriptive imagination is a killer of innovative ideas, because it keeps you from really pushing the forefront. However, I think you have to have elements of all three in your group. You need the visionary to tear down preconceptions and the creative type to mold it into a new form. But you also need the descriptive imaginer to put it back into a context and see how the innovation fits with the rest of the world.
In groups I tend to practice Challenge Imagination because I'm naturally sarcastic, skeptical of existing ideas, and tend to take things too far.
ReplyDeletePerhaps this isn't always the most successful approach, but it does make meetings more fun.
The most deadly approach in groups is Creative Imagination. Why? Because creative people must be stopped. Sure it's great when working on your own or with equally creative minded individuals, but in a group setting it leads to conflict. People have trouble accepting new ideas, and creating something truly new can lead to arguing rather than productivity because most people don't have the same type of imagination.
I tend to have a Descriptive Imagination. I love to create opportunities from chaos. I think in a complex, challenging situation, there are several ways to re-think what's already there and make it work. I have a difficult time getting past my biases - I am deeply rooted in things that already exist. I look for inspiration to things that are around me. When I need to ideate, I take a walk and let things around me spark ideas. Coming from a marketing background, this type of creativity was really helpful when dealing with creative and challenging imaginations. I can filter through the "crazy" ideas and find the core sense in them.
ReplyDeleteI think descriptive imaginations are the biggest buzz-kill. I think there should be more creatives and challengers than descriptors. As I stated above, the best scenario is too have just a couple descriptors who ground the group. Any more and you'll end up with the same ol' ideas.
Definitely descriptive one. A heated and confrontational discussion may provoke some emotional issues among ideation but it is the ordinary way of thinking drags everyone down. The descriptive imagination keeps people in an ordinary habit of thinking and creats the inertia to be in that shackle. People will be shut of their creativity inside the box without knowing it.
ReplyDeleteI consider myself an analytical person and I avoid confrontation like the plague. I tend to fall into the normal distribution curve in my behavior and opinions. All of these characteristics point to a descriptive imagination perspective. The method of analysis and synchronization, a natural strength of mine,is critical in the process of making sense of a large amount of information. I also would not characterize myself as particularly creative. I think and act in the same way as the majority of people. In order to truly bring creative imagination into the conversation, the group needs a person who lies on the outskirts of the "normal" way thinking about a problem.
ReplyDeleteI like to challenge the status quo - ask people to dig deeper into their ideas and understand the "why" in the process. However, I tend to avoid a conversation where I tell people to start from scratch. That would likely bring to light defensiveness over the current system and their own ideas, and I don't like group tension. Others have said that "challenging" would be destructive, but I actually think this may be the most productive form of group imagination. For a problem to truly be solved, you must throw away the norms, standards, and current barriers to uncover solutions. Once these solutions are identified, the group can have a truly productive conversation about how to apply the tenets of that solution within the constraints of the situation.
Descriptive and creative immagination are more commonly used when discussing in a group. Descriptive imagination seems to be more 'practical' as it is built on what we already know (and we know if it works). In groups we are also more comfortable to throw out ideas based on our experience as we are more confident in them. Creative imagination are also widely used in group discussion as it offers a new way to look at ordinary things and can generate great ideas in an unconventional ways of thinking.
ReplyDeleteDescriptive imagination can be a killer of ideas as it is based on what we already know and therefore, keep us away from 'true' imagination (which should have no border). When brainstorming in groups descriptive imagination from some members can also intimidate others from going to creative or challenging direction. Descriptive imagination comes naturally to everyone, creative and challenging imagination are not always there and need to be encouraged to come out. Therefore, I think in group discussion it is neccessary to have a free-thinking, maybe a bit wild facilitator, who would generate unconventional ideas himself and is open to any school of thinking.
The box has got to think outside of you. Yeah… so, I most commonly practice descriptive imagination in group settings at school these days. My attempts to express some modicum of creative imagination have not been well received because of their disruptive nature, and because, let’s face it, most of our assignments don’t require new thinking but merely the application of certain frameworks and processes to reach prescribed solutions.
ReplyDeleteDeadliest for brainstorming efforts? Really? I’d say that too heavy a concentration of any one type of imagination can be ‘deadly,’ especially here in b-school. I personally think we have too few creatives and challengers among us. I can’t help but feel that our classmates actively discourage the application of creative and challenging imagination; we’re just focused on swimming our way through this seemingly endless stream of assignments, while simultaneously obsessing about finding jobs that, deep down, we know won’t make us happy. Or maybe it's just me.
Am I just the salmon, fighting my way upstream, fated to leap into a bear’s mouth?
I tend to have descriptive imagination in my groups. It seems to be the type of imagination that doesn’t risk going too far and possibly to the extreme of “offending” anyone. As we talked about in class on Tuesday, we seem to be generally positive and encouraging within out groups so having descriptive imagination is accepted. Due to this “norm” throughout my groups, I feel that, as Brian Bellinger mentioned, being “disruptive” isn’t readily accepted amongst peers. I’m not saying that that is right, but seems to be what I see in a lot of my groups.
ReplyDeleteAfter saying that, it seems that descriptive imagination can actually be a killer in groups. It doesn’t allow for “off the wall” thinking where new ideas can be generated and assessed. I got to experience a lot of amazing creative this summer with Accelerator and really enjoyed watching the undergrads I worked with using both creative imagination and challenging imagination. So much more came from these groups in regards to their projects than I ever saw with my class groups. Maybe that’s something we, as a class, should be challenged to do.
I most commonly practice descriptive imagination, simply because group work here typically has the objective of getting it done, and getting it done the right way. With that objective in mind, I often try to use data to arrive at the final thoughts and recommendations - more time efficient, and more "productive."
ReplyDeleteHowever, descriptive imagination may be the most deadly as well. With our thinking confined to status quo and a limited scope based purely on the past, we do not allow ourselves to create. Instead of working from scratch or trying to bring a vision to reality, we are merely being progressive. While derivative/tactical innovation can come out of this pattern, it is unlikely for disruptive/breakthrough innovation to be generated.
I most readily practice descriptive imagination in group settings. This stems from my strong analytical background and my desire to understand and interpret data. I know that I am typically much more successful starting with some baseline data and assumptions than starting from nothing. With this in place, I am a very confident in my ability to set objective goals and lead my team in outlining the steps we need to execute and pursue them. While these experiences don't lead to earth-shattering ideas, many will uncover new opportunities and lead to additional insights.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the most deadly imagination form to a group's brainstorming process depends entirely on the context of the the team's goals. If the context of the team is to develop an entirely new, innovative concept, then descriptive imagination types will be most detrimental. If a team is brainstorming less earth-shattering concepts under a tight time-frame, then individuals possessing challenging imaginations could prove detrimental. In short, the imagination composition of teams should be tailored to the specific tasks at hand.
I believed I was not a creative person. Surprisingly, however, most of my colleagues in my company said I always practiced creative imagination. I assume the reason why people said so was that my way of thinking was different from theirs. Peers said I always pointed out “what isn’t there” which they were never able to find. Then I often requested to join meetings for creating new ideas.
ReplyDeleteGiven that experience, I would say descriptive imagination can be the most deadly one to a group’s brainstorming efforts. Most of colleagues in my company were smart. But, for me, they always tried to practice descriptive imagination (that seems like a typical character of Japanese “diligent” businessperson), and could not come up with any “innovative” ideas (even though they could find some “new” ways).
I think that it highly depends on the team dynamics and goal of the project for which imagination method I use most frequently. I think my default is to use Creative Imagination as I tend to think about what is not visible or currently being done. However, I would say I use Descriptive Imagination more in school for assignments which have “an answer,” creative imagination in work projects where I’m focused on a strategy or new development, and Challenging Innovation when working with engineers/technical components.
ReplyDeleteI agree with many of the folks that there is not one most detrimental method and all three are necessary for effective imagination. However, any overuse of one method singularly in a group environment would be the most detrimental. Challenging Imagination also has its limitations, as there is always something negative to say about new ideas and if we only employed Challenging Imagination, nothing would ever happen.
I feel that, in my experience, most business school students (myself included) practice descriptive imagination rather than creative or challenging imagination. Given the amount of data which business school students analyze in our coursework and through our internships, we have been trained as analytical thinkers who find hidden patterns and trends in piles of numbers, and then hopefully use that data and knowledge to make decisions which will positively support our companies and individual stakeholders. That said, I also feel that this type of imagination is also the most deadly to a group’s brainstorming efforts because it is more constrained and practical, and may limit a group’s ability to truly create innovative and new ideas. By benchmarking from current practices and ideas, safe success can be attained with little risk, but I do feel that more creative and “out there” ideas may also fall to the wayside in the interest of practicality and feasibility. Such exercises as brainstorming individually before collaborating seem to help mitigate the practicality dilemma.
ReplyDeleteI think I am most likely to employ descriptive imagination in groups. In group settings, you are constantly looking for some way to validate your thoughts and ideas in your head, and grounding them in an experience that you have had that is similar or relevant is an easy way to express your ideas and move forward.
ReplyDeleteI think that while I am most likely to use descriptive imagination in groups, it may also be the most deadly. When brainstorming, using this type of imagination is similar to suggesting incremental innovation. You base your ideas on something already in existence, lending practicality and feasibility to whatever your idea is. The reason this is dangerous is because convincing others of your ideas is easy. If you stop people from questioning ideas and refining them, because you have just told an elaborate story about why it’s worked, you may in fact convince them to move forward with it and ignore better ideas.
The one I practice most readily in groups is creative imagination. For example when my group met for top 25 ideas from the team, we began by reviewing each member’s ideas and then practiced combination, recombination and transformation of all the concepts.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that’s the most practical method for a group since descriptive imagination works better for individual work to ensure all the important aspects are covered. For example when I worked on my individual 101 ideas, I came up with all the ideas according to school's layout and composition of student life. Challenging imagination is perceived to be too radical to work in group which is expected to be accompanied by inefficiency and conflict.
Comparing the two methods, I vote descriptive imagination as the most deadly to a group’ brainstorming efforts. All kinds of patterns and regularities identified beforehand will exert the constraints on group’s efforts in coming up with something really creative and unique.
Innovating in groups seems to be a fine art. It can be somewhat easy if you can jive and flow with your group members, or it might be somewhat difficult if you don’t feel comfortable enough with your group to express your ideas or let your creative juices flow. Regardless of how easy or difficult it is, you don’t want to fall prey to groupthink, because this is where ideas go to die! It is also the place, more often than not, where creativity is not fostered.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the imagination that I most often use in groups tends to vary depending on the situation we are trying to solve, I think that I tend to use Descriptive Imagination more often. I’ve always thought of myself as a creative person and I like to think of new ways of doing things that haven’t been imagined before, but in business school I find myself more of a descriptive imaginer. I’m not sure if it’s because of the way we are trained, taught to do things, and solve problems, but I feel like this type of creative thinking is somewhat the norm in the business school. We have to make sense of complex situations, look at what has been done in the past and make it better, building upon what has already been done. In situations outside of school, I tend to lean towards Creative Imagination as I like to come up with new ideas and visions that are exciting and unique.
All types of imagination can be detrimental to a group, but I think that the one that might be most detrimental is Descriptive Imagination. This type of imagination can be relatable to just following the status quo and it doesn’t really allow for challenging the norm, rather it just builds on ideas that have already been thought of. If groups tend to all think this way, then we would never have new inventions or innovations, everything would just be a newer version of the old. I think if you want to be truly innovative you have to learn to be able to combine all types of thinking, and learn what works best for certain situations in order to achieve certain goals.
Generally, I feel like I lean towards descriptive imagination. Most of my ideas are built off of what's existing, making improvements. It becomes much harder work to employ creative or challenging imagination. For creative imagination to work, you need to feel unconstrained by acceptance, which may be why I (and many others) lean more towards a descriptive imagination, it's safer and you don't have to work as hard for buy in on something totally new and/or different. A challenging imagination can also be draining to group as it requires looking at the fundamentals of a process, which all are accustomed to and comfortable with, making change hard.
ReplyDeleteFor the purposes of the 101 ideas deliverable, I was forced to employ all three forms of imagination to meet the 101 idea requirement. I had to improve what was existing, think of totally new and different approaches, and break down the process from the beginning and challenge the current methods. Perhaps you'll use all three if you're really forced to.
I generally operate with a creative imagination. My creative imagination has on occasion allowed me to add new levels of depth to group work but it has also been the source of unrealistic ideas that have led entire teams down a rabbit hole. Sometimes out of the box isn't feasible and in those instances a creative imagination is little more then a distraction from feasible solutions.
ReplyDeleteA challenging imagination is the greatest deterrent to successful group work and that's precisely what makes it so valuable. While a challenging imagination stagnates idea development and can erase significant amounts of progress, it forces a group to refine their ideas. A challenging imagination offers a gut check of sorts where other group members must see if they truly believe in the direction they have taken or if they, like the challenging imagination, want to start from scratch.
I would say that I have practiced all three types of imagination depending on the goal of the project. In groups where we are trying to get to the end goal quickly, I've used descriptive. But I've also worked on projects in my work experience where we needed to think of a completely different approach and throw out all of the old ways of doing things. In that situation, I practiced Challenging Imagination.
ReplyDeleteI honestly don't think there is one particular imagination that is deadly to a group because again, it depends on the situation. If a group is trying to think of a completely new way of doing something, descriptive imagination would be deadly because you most likely would build off what already exists, which is not the goal.
I utilize the Challenging Imagination process most in group settings. I thrive in an environment where there are little ground rules and the task is to assume nothing. Being able to break down the walls of “normal” and see how far you can stretch an idea is exciting to me. Go as far out of you way as you can first, and then scale it back from there. It is much easier to decide on an idea within the scope of reality once you have first gone so far beyond that you can see the darkness of what will not work on the other side. It allows you to properly determine the framework you are working in.
ReplyDeleteHowever, problems with this arise when the group typically is not told to think in these terms, and only one person (or none) is pulling from Challenging Imagination. This person’s ideas are usually blown off, thought of too crazy, or too unrealistic that they are silenced and the group falls back on stereotypical norms. If the group’s goal is to create a new package design for a product, if they don’t first question what the definition of a “package” is, then they will most likely just think only in terms of new graphics. When in reality, they could use a drawstring sack, a stand, just the product itself, etc. as a package that could truly differentiate their product and exponentially solve the main issue at hand (most likely revenue or share). While the typical end product may be successful, they could be missing out on a huge chuck of the pie, and without first challenging your imagination and stretching the boundaries, you will never be able to be truly innovative.
In Japan where I live, descriptive imagination is the smartest way for team brainstorming process. Therefore, they used to have descriptive imagination in their group to avoid conflict and then everything keeps going very smoothly. However, I used to have creative imagination in group settings when I worked in France. I was not sure they were really creative or they tried to be creative way. We could have many creative insights and ideas but it was difficult to facilitate or narrowed down the ideas. As some people said, it depends. It depends on the group members, goals and sometimes deadline. Considering the dynamic of the group, I try to be descriptive, creative or challenging.
ReplyDeleteWhen you work in Japan, you do not have to be descriptive. Now they are changing…
I have usually practiced Descriptive Imagination. When I worked as a mechanical engineer in Japan, identifying problems was the first important ability for engineers to rapidly solve technical problems. As Tom mentioned above, descriptive one has been regarded the best way in Japan. But when I was trying to come up with ideas for patents, I had to change way of thinking. I think it is required to change the way according to purposes or stages of development.
ReplyDeleteI think that the type of imagination I practice most when I’m in a group is Creative Imagination. I like to see how I can improve on things or different ways which I can use something. Oftentimes in a group setting, I don’t have the time to ‘wipe the slate clean’ and start completely from scratch because we all have other things to do.
ReplyDeleteTo me, the most deadly type of imagination is descriptive imagination because a group can get too caught up in the minutiae of data and forget to see the bigger picture of what they are really trying to do. However, there is a precarious balance because rigorous analysis and years of experience are often crucial to solving an issue. I think the hardest part is figuring out when to step back and analyze the process of imagination.
I practice descriptive imagination most readily in groups. I think this is because I believe I am more skilled at this type of imagination than the others, and I want to contribute effectively. I am a fairly analytical person and favor speaking on subjects I am experienced with, so this type of imagination lends itself to my natural personality and preferences. Similarly, I am more adept at trying to find a new way of looking at existing things rather than trying to think up new things entirely (like with creative imagination). Lastly, for better and worse, I am generally one to follow rules closely, so overturning all the rules in brainstorming is not something that comes easily to me (like with challenging imagination).
ReplyDeleteAs others have said, I think any of the three types of imagination can be deadly to a group’s brainstorming efforts if any single type is present in excess and/or in the absence of the other two types. In the same way that it is important to have individuals with different styles, strengths, and weaknesses on a given team, it is important to have different types of imagination at work in a given brainstorm.
I think I practice a variation of descriptive Imagination because I tend to try to make sense of the imperfections of reality and improving it accordingly. I guess my background in analysis has created this bias so its hard for me to ignore the realities and "wipe the slate clean" to start from scratch. In rare occasions, I may do some creative imagination but i need a mediator who challenges me into that direction.
ReplyDelete