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

21–30 of 63 posts

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

#21

Post by yujbbg666 »

rlv-dan wrote: post #3

A problem is that systems today are too big and complicated for a single person to build and manage. What's the best way to collaborate without loosing the creativity needed to push forward making the system better?

But do we need those big systems? My laptop and phone are powerful enough to generate valuable info from my data sets alone

This always on nonsense is not economical

Have large data sets? BOINC

The only reason the cloud is cool is because corporate says so. ISPs have blocked home services, pay corporate for hosting!

Surely we don’t need databases running 24/7 crunching every persons data to find valuable applications in medicine for example?

Why can’t our computing look more personalized: I collect my data offline via whatever special gadgets I need ( blood sugar monitor for example) or professional help (doctors, etc) and share as it needed.

We don’t need Google Photos operating 24/7 when laptops and phones and a small dedicated backup device can do the same

It doesn’t seem all that efficient to have huge data centers around the globe on all day when lower power, less complicated infra could do the work only as needed

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

#23

Post by ztjio »

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?

What if said creativity is garbage?

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

#24

Post by Quanttek »

Article seems pretty bad. It already starts of horrendously when they call the journal "ScienceDirect.com". That's just Elsevier's site. The journal is called "Personality and Individual Differences."

Furthermore, this is how the study assessed creativity:

> creativity was assessed with 10 items (e.g., “I have a vivid imagination”) from the International Personality Item Pool [...]. Participants rated the accuracy of the items as they applied to themselves on a 5-point scale (1 = Very inaccurate, 5 = Very accurate).

Meaning that they self-assessed how creative they currently feel. It was not measured how creative they actually are (though I wouldn't know how you could do that)

And these are the findings:

> shyness was related positively to both types of aggression, anxiety sensitivity, and social anhedonia, and was related negatively to creativity. Avoidance was related positively to both types of aggression and social anhedonia, and was related negatively to creativity. Of note, unsociability was related negatively to both types of aggression, and was related positively to creativity.

This directly contradicts the article's claims of "the character traits of 'shyness, avoidance, [and] unsociability' [...] are positively associated with creativity."

And, as others pointed out happiness != creative output as implied in the article: "Furthermore, intelligent people are happier when they have less social interaction, even with their friends"

So it seems like it's not as clear cut as they make it out to be.

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

#25

Post by js8 »

nabla9 wrote: post #13
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 ex…

> Good creative collaboration is never democratic or equal (counterexamples?). Great projects must have a lead architect.

Funny, I think it's precisely the opposite. I don't think most creative people can thrive under a strict hierarchy (some famous creative people had even trouble to keep a normal job).

It's true that groups of creative people sometimes cooperate, but almost always like equals. One of the famous counterexamples I can give you is the Monty Python collaboration, which was strictly democratic. There are also plenty examples of creative collaborations between two people.

In open source software, where there is a hierarchy, it is rather informal. Linus is not a single "lead architect" of Linux; would he enforce a bad decision that most developers would disagree with, he would be forked away. He has no choice than to respect meritocratic wishes of other developers, if he wants to stay "in charge".

There were open source projects that tried a more heavy handed way of architectural management, and they failed - such as GCC or XFree86.

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

#26

Post by js8 »

giggidygig wrote: post #20
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?

I think there are plenty people like that. In open source software, we see lot of people writing "exact clone" of some software (usually a game). And often, they get the job done.

They decidedly don't want to be creative, they just want the clone of the thing. Actually, it's often how you get the work done. Too much creativity is a problem. Linus started his work on Linux kernel because he wanted a Minix clone. It was as creative-less act as it gets.

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

#27

Post by nova22033 »

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 is doing so well

Is he though?

http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-model-3-issues-causing-...

"Tesla is spending more than $1 billion per quarter to sustain its existing business and ramp up production of its troubled Model 3. "

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

#28

Post by feikname »

js8 wrote: post #25
nabla9 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ex…

> Good creative collaboration is never democratic or equal (counterexamples?). Great projects must have a lead architect. Funny, I think it's precisely the opposite. I don't think most creative people can thrive under a strict hierarchy (some famous creative people had even trouble to keep a normal job). It's true that groups of creative people sometimes cooperate, but almost always like equals. One of the famous cou…

> There were open source project that tried a more heavy handed way of architectural management, and they failed - such as GCC

A lot of people have been moving to clang, but I'm quite sure GCC is still strong. What do you mean by failed?

A link backing this claim would be nice too, as I couldn't find any (although I just probably didn't search it right).

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

#29

Post by dEnigma »

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?

There is some research in that direction. Some of it with the result, that sadness/unhappiness actually feeds creativity.

https://www.wired.com/2010/10/feeling-sad-makes-us-more-crea...

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

#30

Post by hawski »

giggidygig wrote: post #20
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?

It's a spectrum. Some people are on one end and others on the opposite. Some in the middle.
Post reply on HN