How Power Affects Group Creativity and Innovation in Business


The Role of Psychological Safety

One crucial factor in the power-creativity dynamic is psychological safety — the shared belief that team members can take interpersonal risks without fear of negative consequences. When power is wielded in a way that creates psychological safety, it can significantly boost group creativity.

Google’s Project Aristotle, a comprehensive study of team effectiveness, found that psychological safety was the most important factor in high-performing teams. In environments where power dynamics allow for open communication and risk-taking, team members are more likely to share novel ideas, challenge assumptions, and engage in the kind of divergent thinking essential for innovation.

Consider the contrasting examples of two tech giants: Apple under Steve Jobs and Gore-Tex under Bill Gore. Jobs was known for his autocratic leadership style, which, while producing groundbreaking innovations, also created a high-pressure environment where many employees felt unable to speak up. On the other hand, Bill Gore fostered a culture of “lattice organization” at Gore-Tex, where hierarchy was minimized and employees were encouraged to communicate directly with anyone in the company. This approach led to a stream of innovations in materials science and a consistently high ranking as one of the best places to work.

The Influence of Power Distance on Innovation

Power distance, a concept introduced by social psychologist Geert Hofstede, refers to the extent to which less powerful members of organizations accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. This cultural dimension can significantly impact how power affects group creativity.

In low power distance cultures, such as those found in Scandinavian countries, there’s often a more egalitarian approach to decision-making. This can foster an environment where ideas are more freely shared across hierarchical levels. The Swedish furniture giant IKEA exemplifies this approach, with its flat organizational structure and culture of “democratic design” contributing to its reputation for innovative, affordable home solutions.

Conversely, high power distance cultures, common in many Asian and Middle Eastern countries, may face unique challenges in fostering group creativity. However, it’s important to note that high power distance doesn’t necessarily preclude innovation. These cultures often develop unique mechanisms to balance respect for authority with the need for creative input.

For instance, in Japan, the concept of “nemawashi” (根回し) — the practice of informally laying the groundwork for a proposal by talking to the people concerned — allows for ideas to be shared and refined before they’re formally presented. This approach respects hierarchical structures while still allowing for input from various levels of the organization.

The Double-Edged Sword of Expertise Power

Another interesting aspect of power in creative groups is the role of expertise power. While having subject matter experts can greatly enhance a team’s creative potential, it can also inadvertently stifle innovation if not managed carefully.

Expertise power can lead to what psychologists call the “curse of knowledge” — where experts have difficulty imagining what it’s like not to know something. This can result in teams overly relying on established knowledge and failing to explore truly novel solutions.

The development of the Swiffer offers an instructive example. Procter & Gamble’s cleaning experts had been trying to develop a better mop for years without success. It wasn’t until they brought in a diverse team of non-experts, including artists and designers, that they came up with the revolutionary idea of a disposable cleaning cloth attached to a simple sweeper.

This case highlights the importance of balancing expertise power with fresh perspectives. Organizations that can create environments where expert knowledge is valued but not overly dominant are often more successful at fostering group creativity and innovation.

The Impact of Shared Leadership

An emerging area of research in this field is the concept of shared leadership, where leadership responsibilities are distributed among team members rather than concentrated in a single individual. This approach can significantly alter power dynamics and potentially enhance group creativity.

A study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that teams engaging in shared leadership exhibited higher levels of team creativity and innovation, particularly when dealing with complex, knowledge-intensive tasks. This approach allows for a more dynamic flow of ideas and leverages the diverse skills and perspectives within a team.

Companies like W.L. Gore & Associates (makers of Gore-Tex) and Morning Star (the world’s largest tomato processor) have successfully implemented versions of shared leadership. At Morning Star, for example, there are no managers in the traditional sense. Instead, employees negotiate responsibilities with their peers and are accountable to their commitments. This radically flat structure has contributed to the company’s reputation for operational innovation in a traditionally conservative industry.

The Role of Power in Creative Conflict

While we often think of harmony as conducive to creativity, a certain level of conflict can actually enhance group innovation — if managed correctly. Power plays a crucial role in how this creative conflict unfolds.

When power is distributed in a way that allows for constructive disagreement, it can lead to what researchers call “creative abrasion” — the friction that helps refine and improve ideas. However, if power dynamics suppress dissent or lead to personal conflicts, creativity suffers.

Pixar’s “Braintrust” meetings, mentioned earlier, provide an excellent example of how to harness creative conflict productively. In these sessions, filmmakers present their work-in-progress and receive candid feedback from their peers. The key is that while the feedback can be brutally honest, the power to make final decisions remains with the film’s director. This balance of open critique and clear decision-making authority has been crucial to Pixar’s consistent production of critically acclaimed films.

The Influence of Power on Risk-Taking and Innovation

Power dynamics significantly influence an organization’s appetite for risk, which in turn affects its capacity for innovation. When power is concentrated at the top, it can lead to either excessive risk-aversion (if leaders are focused on maintaining the status quo) or reckless risk-taking (if leaders are insulated from the consequences of failure).

On the other hand, when power is more distributed, it can lead to a more balanced approach to risk. Google’s famous “20% time” policy, where engineers were encouraged to spend a fifth of their time on side projects, is a prime example. This distribution of creative power led to the development of some of Google’s most innovative products, including Gmail and AdSense.

However, it’s worth noting that Google has since moved away from this formal policy, highlighting the ongoing challenge of balancing structure and freedom in fostering innovation.

The Future of Power and Creativity

Looking ahead, several trends are likely to shape the relationship between power and group creativity:

  1. Artificial Intelligence and Decision-Making: As AI becomes more integrated into organizational decision-making, it could fundamentally alter power dynamics. AI might serve as an impartial arbiter of ideas, potentially reducing biases that can stem from traditional power structures.
  2. The Rise of the Gig Economy: With more people working as independent contractors or in temporary roles, traditional hierarchical power structures may become less relevant. This could lead to more fluid, project-based power dynamics that could enhance creativity.
  3. Generational Shifts: As millennials and Gen Z become dominant in the workforce, their preference for flatter hierarchies and more collaborative work environments may reshape how power operates in creative settings.
  4. Global Challenges: Complex global issues like climate change and pandemics require unprecedented levels of collaboration and innovation. This may drive a shift towards more distributed power structures that can harness collective creativity on a global scale.

In conclusion, the relationship between power and group creativity is complex and continually evolving. While there’s no one-size-fits-all solution, organizations that can create flexible power structures, foster psychological safety, embrace constructive conflict, and adapt to changing technological and social landscapes will be best positioned to unleash the creative potential of their teams. As we face increasingly complex challenges, mastering this delicate balance will be crucial not just for organizational success, but for solving the pressing issues of our time.