Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

inc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#11

Post by danieltillett »

averagewall wrote: post #10
jondubois wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most wealthy people are moderately intelligent. Really intelligent people often are poor... Once you get rich, you get lazy because your money starts working for you and people around you constantly feed you with false confidence and optimism and this makes you even lazier. The smartest people I know are all poor in terms of wealth but sometimes they have high incomes. Intelligence is not a single thing because there…

Most(all?) types of intelligence are positively correlated. So if you have a natural ability at one of those things, then you're more likely to be high in the others too. Even something as simple as reaction time is correlated with IQ.

This is the most amazing thing about intelligence - that there is a g factor [0].

0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#12

Post by icebraining »

staunch wrote: post #8

Creativity seems unimpeded when the one being creative is at the very top of the hierarchy. It doesn't really work for anyone else unless they have a direct contribution and connection to the dictator though. Any requirement that new stuff be reviewed by committee (e.g. a board of directors) will tend to destroy anything truly innovative. Why? Because the creative people can see much further than the (much less invol…

Elon Musk does have oversight, in the form of his investors. His creative vision had to pass through the scrutiny of the boards of those companies and individuals which invested in Tesla and SpaceX.

There's also plenty of cases of actual employees being innovative. The work produced by employees of SRI (e.g. Douglas Engelbart's team) and of Bell Labs eclipses Tesla and SpaceX in terms of innovation.

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#13

Post by nabla9 »

staunch wrote: post #8

Creativity seems unimpeded when the one being creative is at the very top of the hierarchy. It doesn't really work for anyone else unless they have a direct contribution and connection to the dictator though. Any requirement that new stuff be reviewed by committee (e.g. a board of directors) will tend to destroy anything truly innovative. Why? Because the creative people can see much further than the (much less invol…

Very good point.

Good creative collaboration is never democratic or equal (counterexamples?). Great projects must have a lead architect. The innovation must fit inside one head that balances all aspects and makes the decisions. 'The lone contemplation' works in all levels if you have good hierarchy. You don't need to fit your ideas to everyone else's and compromise.

Creative collaboration and innovation has always existed and flourished in hierarchical settings. Architectural firms, advertisement agencies, industrial design firms, and scientific and technical R&D labs all have group of creative people working together in groups.

In my personal experience it's easier to convey idea first to the lead, then you both explain it to the whole group for the feedback. Eventually the lead decides what happens. Pitching to the group usually waters down the idea (brainstorming is different).

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#14

Post by b0rsuk »

What about brainstorming, the phenomenon where people inspire each other by building upon each others' ideas ? For me it tends to result in solutions neither of us would come up with alone. Sometimes it even comes out of misunderstanding of another person's intention - like, you read a forum thread title, an issue or a newspaper headline and think it implies something else.

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#15

Post by b0rsuk »

staunch wrote: post #8

Creativity seems unimpeded when the one being creative is at the very top of the hierarchy. It doesn't really work for anyone else unless they have a direct contribution and connection to the dictator though. Any requirement that new stuff be reviewed by committee (e.g. a board of directors) will tend to destroy anything truly innovative. Why? Because the creative people can see much further than the (much less invol…

This old blog post argues that wisdom of crowds works well for estimating facts, but poorly for creative thinking, even so far as to say: "Votes become vetoes". Because people don't choose what they like the most, they choose against thing they like the least.

"Ignoring the wisdom of crowds" https://blog.asmartbear.com/ignoring-the-wisdom-of-crowds.ht...

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#17

Post by mamon »

b0rsuk wrote: post #14

What about brainstorming, the phenomenon where people inspire each other by building upon each others' ideas ? For me it tends to result in solutions neither of us would come up with alone. Sometimes it even comes out of misunderstanding of another person's intention - like, you read a forum thread title, an issue or a newspaper headline and think it implies something else.

There's some evidence that brainstorming is less effective than telling people to prepare a list of few ideas before the meeting and then merging those lists [1]. During brainstorming sessions people's creativity seem to be limited by other people ideas, not inspired by them.

[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/brainstorming-3-reasons-why-e... (sorry, couldn't hunt down original paper mentioned in the article)

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#18

Post by yujbbg666 »

bwasti wrote: post #2

Where’s the evidence? Self reported happiness of intelligent people in those situations does not prove anything with regard to collaboration killing creativity. What if creativity tends to come with unhappiness?

If you think of “loneliness” as “unhappiness due to being alone”, and if “creativity tends to come with unhappiness”, wouldn’t that prove the argument?

The conclusion doesn’t seem to be the people in groups are unhappy, just that the output isn’t as novel in contrast.

Maybe being happy stifles our deeper creative powers?

If creating is a reflexive behavior for adapting to circumstance, we need to be less creative on our own when we’re in a group.

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#19

Post by fsloth »

icebraining wrote: post #12
staunch wrote: post #8

Creativity seems unimpeded when the one being creative is at the very top of the hierarchy. It doesn't really work for anyone else unless they have a direct contribution and connection to the dictator though. Any requirement that new stuff be reviewed by committee (e.g. a board of directors) will tend to destroy anything truly innovative. Why? Because the creative people can see much further than the (much less invol…

Elon Musk does have oversight, in the form of his investors. His creative vision had to pass through the scrutiny of the boards of those companies and individuals which invested in Tesla and SpaceX. There's also plenty of cases of actual employees being innovative. The work produced by employees of SRI (e.g. Douglas Engelbart's team) and of Bell Labs eclipses Tesla and SpaceX in terms of innovation.

"There's also plenty of cases of actual employees being innovative." Uh, I don't think that was being questioned here. Englebart did not have a committee to gauge his budget, only the low-bureaucratic ARPA system where he had to convince only one technical person, and not a commitee of generals to get his funding. I presume ARPA itself was under more traditional guidance.

The question was not that there can always be only one protean creator in an organization. The point was that a crowd adds no value to the divergent thought process of innovation. Only a productizes output can be sanely evaluated by a large group. At this point the question is not 'could this work' but rather, does it. The former is subject to mere opinions, whereas the latter is more or less a matter of objective measurement (if done honestly).

Re: Evidence that collaboration results in group-think and mediocrity

#20

Post by giggidygig »

staunch wrote: post #8

Creativity seems unimpeded when the one being creative is at the very top of the hierarchy. It doesn't really work for anyone else unless they have a direct contribution and connection to the dictator though. Any requirement that new stuff be reviewed by committee (e.g. a board of directors) will tend to destroy anything truly innovative. Why? Because the creative people can see much further than the (much less invol…

Is there such a thing as a non-creative person? I.e a person who actually thinks/knows/conscientiously decides they are not creative?
Post reply on HN