toward the management of design creativity: personal creativity modes, design activity, and team...

Design Management Journal 45

AbstractCognitive preferences can be related tothe creativity required for design tasks.In this paper, personal creativity modesare described from a cognitive preferencetheory perspective, and the design activi-ty characteristics related to personal cre-ativity modes are identified. Personalcreativity modes are further explainedusing the way individuals in designteams perceive their own characteristics.In addition, the nature of team interac-tion is analyzed and compared using adesign team of students of diverse per-sonal creativity modes and a design teamof students with similar modes. Fromthis, we conclude that design team cre-

ativity can be constructed and managedby exploiting the personal creativitymodes of team members.

IntroductionCreativity is central to achievements ineconomic value creation and in manyof the arts.We often define creativity asthe development of useful originalideas. Creative activities reflect an indi-vidual’s cognitive, emotional, and cul-tural characteristics. Among these, cog-nitive characteristics could be related totask-related creativity, as in the case ofdesign tasks. In this paper, we showhow personal creativity characteristicscan be described by cognitive prefer-ence theory. Furthermore, we suggestthat their relationship to design activi-ties deserves systematic study so thatmethods to enhance and manage per-sonal design creativity, as well as designteam creativity, could be devised.The field of research on creativity

began as the study of individual cogni-tive and personality traits, then slowlyexpanded to include more-dynamic andinterconnected social systems, such asthe work group (Kurtzberg and

C R E AT I V I T Y A N D D E S I G N C A PA B I L I T I E S

Toward the Management ofDesign Creativity: PersonalCreativity Modes, DesignActivity, and Team Interactionby Yong Se Kim, Myung Sook Kim, and Douglass J. Wilde

Yong Se Kim,Creative Design Institute,Sungkyunkwan University,Korea

Myung Sook Kim,Creative Design Institute,Sungkyunkwan University,Korea

Douglass J. Wilde,Design Division,Stanford University, USA

46 Design Management Journal

Managing Design in Global Environments

Amabile, 2001; Kurtzberg, 2005). As team inter-action becomes an increasingly important part ofcreative organizational life, with the explosion ofinformation and dynamic social environments, itis critical to discover the underlying factors thatlead team members to perceive themselves andtheir group as creative and to produce creativeoutcomes. Ideas begin at the level of the individ-ual, although these ideas are shared and devel-oped in a team (Kurtzberg, 2005). Thus, it isvalid that research on team creativity should startwith individual characteristics and then explorehow these individual aspects combine to formteam-level creativity. The study of interactionsamong individuals in creative team activities canalso expand our understanding of both creativityand team management.Personal creativity modes could be exploited

to enhance individual and team creativity. Thecharacteristics of design activities that reflectpersonal creativity modes have been identified(Y.S. Kim, et al., 2006). Also, a design creativitytraining program reflecting an individual learn-er’s creativity mode has been devised and itseffectiveness confirmed in an experimental set-ting (M.S. Kim, et al., 2006). Design team inter-actions have also been analyzed from the per-spective of personal creative modes (Kim, et al.,2007). In this paper, design creativity from theperspective of personal creativity mode is brieflyintroduced and we describe a study of how suchpersonal creativity modes are reflected in designactivities and in design team interaction.

Personal creativity modesAccording to Jung’s cognitive theory, there arefour aspects to personal cognitive preferences.These are factual or conceptual perception,thinking or feeling judgment, as well as introvert-ed or extroverted cognitive motivation. Thesefour aspects can be deployed into eight differentmodes of creativity (Wilde, 1999), as shown inTable 1. The characteristics of each personal cre-

ativity mode are described as follows.A synthesizing creativity mode, which com-

bines extroversion and intuition, focuses on theexternal environment and prefers to integratevarious things into new entities. The trans-forming creativity mode, with a combination ofintroversion and intuition, prefers to imaginehard-to-describe images. The experiential cre-ativity mode, a combination of extroversionand sensing, prefers to discover new ideas fromexperiences, without deep consideration. Theknowledge-based mode, combining introver-sion and sensing, prefers to get or to have exist-ing facts and know-how and to find a solutionfrom books.The organizing creativity mode, which com-

bines extroversion and thinking, prefers toorganize and manage people and projects toachieve creative outcomes. People in this grouplike to set deadlines, define procedures, andbreak through bottlenecks. The analyzing cre-ativity mode, combining introversion and think-ing, prefers to clarify ideas through internal rea-soning and to solve problems in a logical andobjective way. The teamwork creativity mode,which combines extroversion and feeling, focus-es on people and feelings, and prefers to detectand fix interpersonal problems and to encourageharmonious teams. The evaluating creativitymode, with introversion and feeling, involves thecomparison of perceived information andpotential actions against an internal value systemdistinguishing good and bad. Further interpreta-tion and explanations on these personal creativi-ty modes are found in Wilde and Labno (2001)and in Levesque (2001).Personal creativity modes can be identified

by means of questionnaires, such as thePersonal Creativity Mode Test (PCMT) (Wilde,1999) developed at Stanford University in 1999.More recently, a refined and simpler question-naire was introduced in the web bookTeamology (Wilde, 2007).

Perception Judgement

Conceptual (Intuitive) Factual (Sensing) Objective (Thinking) Subjective (Feeling)

Extroverted Synthesizing Experiential Organizing Teamwork

Introverted Transforming Knowledge-based Analyzing Evaluating

Table 1. Eight Personal Creativity Modes


Toward the Management of Design Creativity: Personal Creativity Modes, Design Activity, and Team Interactio

Perceived creativityAs a way of understanding design team interac-tion, we conducted an experiment in which sixstudent team members self-described their char-acteristics prior to undertaking team activities.Then we compared their personal creativitymodes and their self-descriptions.We found agood deal of correspondence between perceivedpersonal characteristics and the personal creativ-ity modes identified through the PCMT, as sum-marized in Table 2. As a result of the PCMT,each participant had a few primary modesaccording to his/her preferences; we presentedall their primary modes. Note that each creativi-

ty mode is denoted by an abbreviation, as indi-cated in Table 2. The interpretation of the self-descriptions relied on Levesque (2001) and onWilde and Labno (2001).

Member A: Evaluating and AnalyzingCreativityThe evaluating creativity mode compares per-ceived information and potential actionsagainst an internal value system distinguishinggood and bad. This comparison is governed bythe person’s own values—aesthetic, ethical,moral, and spiritual (Wilde and Labno, 2001).Member A’s self-descriptions in Table 2 show

Student PCMT Results Self-descriptions

Table 2. PCMT Result and Self-Descriptions

A

Evaluating & AnalyzingCreativity

Introverted, feeling

• If something attracts me, I buy it without hesitation (Ev).• I am the kind of person who listens to other people when I do a group assignment ortask (Ev).

• I buy things on the spot rather than prepare all the necessary items for traveling inadvance (Ev).

B

Knowledge-based, Analyzing,& Evaluating Creativity

Introverted, thinking, factual& feeling

• I try to have know-how (Kb).• When I prepare for my travels, I always buy books and read them (Kb).• I feel impatient when I see other’s idle behavior (Ev).• I only tend to summarize the essential points when I study for an exam (Kb).

C

Transforming & AnalyzingCreativity

Introverted, conceptual& thinking

• It is hard to define myself (Tr).• When I write reports, I just write anything that flashes into my mind without thinkingfirst about the whole contents. After that, I organize that sequence and finish thereport (Tr & An).

• I assume a skeptical attitude toward a problem and I try to solve it by analyzing it (An).

D

Teamwork, Evaluating, &Experiential Creativity

Extroverted, feeling & factual

• I do not like hanging around alone wherever I go (Tw).• I am only comfortable when I am satisfied with the feeling that I did my assignmentperfectly (Ev).

• When I go to the theater, I reserve the tickets if it is an important event. If not impor-tant, I just go to the theater and buy a ticket at the ticket box (Ep).

E

Synthesizing, Transforming,& Teamwork Creativity

Extroverted, conceptual& feeling

• I regard figuring out information or surrounding as important (Sn).• I consider various experiences and thinking important (Sn).• I try to think over every possibility and be open to them (Sn & Tr).• I am defiant and have lots of curiosity (Sn).• I like changes (Sn).• I put the priority on meanings (Tr).

F

Knowledge-based,Transforming, &Experiential Creativity

Introverted, factual & conceptual

• I compare things carefully and get information in various ways when I shop (Kb).• When I write reports, I refer to the original material rather than to my opinions (Kb).• When I buy a new product, I read first through the instructions (Kb).• I enjoy searching for information more than playing games when using computers (Kb).

An = Analyzing creativity Sn = Synthesizing creativity Kb = Knowledge-based creativity Ev = Evaluating creativity Tr = Transforming creativityTw = Teamwork creativity Ep = Experiential creativity



his/her own values:• If something attractsme, I buy it without asecond thought.

Those characterized by the evaluating modehave difficulty preparing and organizing thingsin advance because they lack elements of theorganizing mode (Levesque, 2001):• I buy something necessary on the spot ratherthan prepare in advance all the necessaryitems for traveling.

Member A also has introversion and feelingtraits:• I am the kind of person who listens to otherpeople when I do a group assignment or task.

However, A did not have many of the character-istics of the perception domain, and did not usesensation and intuition for taking in and pro-cessing data and information:• I commit tomemory when studying.

Member B: Analyzing, Knowledge-Based, andEvaluating CreativityPeople using the knowledge-based mode preferto get or to have access to existing facts andknow-how, and to find solutions from books:• I try to have know-how.• When I prepare for my travel, I always buybooks and read them.• I tend to summarize only the essential pointswhen I study for an exam.

B demonstrated the evaluating mode whenjudging something in terms of his own values:• I feel impatient when I see other people’s idlebehavior.

Member C: Transforming and AnalyzingCreativityPeople with preferences of the transformingmode prefer to imagine hard-to-describeimages and combine this with intuition andintroversion:• It is hard to definemyself.• When I write reports, I write anything thatflashes into my mind, without thinking firstabout the whole content. After that, I organizethe sequence and finish the report.

People who prefer the analyzing mode like toclarify ideas through internal reasoning and tosolve problems in a logical and objective way:

• I assume a skeptical attitude toward a prob-lem and I try to solve it by analyzing it.• I don’t even window-shop when I have nomoney.

Member D: Teamwork, Evaluation, andExperiential CreativityPeople using the teamwork mode focus on peo-ple and feelings; they prefer to detect and fix theteam’s interpersonal problems; and they try tocreate harmony within the team:• I do not like hanging around alonewherever I go.

Member D also demonstrates the evaluatingmode, judging something in terms of his ownvalues:• I am only comfortable when I am satisfiedwith the feeling that I did my assignmentperfectly.

People preferring the experiential mode like todiscover new ideas by direct experience and inan unplanned, impromptu, fashion:• When I go to the theater, I only reserve thetickets if it is an important event. If it is notimportant, I just go to the theater and buy aticket at the box office.

Member E: Synthesizing, Transforming, andTeamwork CreativityPeople with a preference for the synthesizingmode focus on the external environment andprefer to combine various things to generate anew one:• I regard figuring out information and my sur-roundings as important.• I am defiant and have lots of curiosity.• I like changes.• I consider various experiences and thinking asimportant.

People with a preference for the transformingmode prefer to focus on future possibilities:• I try to think over every possibility and be opento them.• I put priority on meanings.

Member E showed only a weak preference forthe teamwork mode.

Member F: Knowledge-Based, Transforming,and Experiential CreativityMember F showed a typical knowledge-based



mode, which prefers to get or to have existingfacts and know-how and to find solutions frombooks or catalogs:• I compare things carefully and get informa-tion in various ways when I shop.• When I write reports, I refer to the originalmaterial rather than to my opinions.• When I buy a new product, I read through theinstructions first.• I enjoy searching more than playing gameswhen using computers.• I follow a pre-planned schedule when traveling.

Member F who did not prefer the judgmentdomain, as in the transforming or experientialmodes, showed hesitation when makingdecisions:• I hesitate when I have to make an importantdecision.

Our findings demonstrate that perceived creativi-ty is well related to PCMT results. The personalcreativity modes and self-descriptions of six par-ticipants were categorized using the characteris-tics of each mode. Participants’ self-perceptionscorresponded with the creativity mode measuredby the PCMT. Based on these results, PCMT canbe an effective test in identifying personal cre-ativity modes, and used to select and form teams.We confirmed the usefulness of the PCMT toachieve balanced and diverse design teams atStanford and at Sunkyunkwan University, wherewe distributed the various personal creativitymodes as evenly as possible across a number ofdesign teams.

Design team creativityProduct design and development processes relyon the work of teams with diverse expertise andknowledge. A team is a group of individuals whocollaborate to perform a specific task. Teamswork together and share understanding of theirwork together. Diversity can help the creativeprocess by providing the team with heteroge-neous perspectives for consideration and byincreasing the potential for new ideas and cre-ative production (Kurtzberg and Amabile, 2001;Kurtzberg, 2005). Diversity also has a positiveeffect on group decision performance(Hambrick, et al., 1996). However, diversity in ateam does not always contribute positively toteam processes. Diversity or heterogeneity in the

composition of a group may have a negativeeffect on the members’ initial degree of satisfac-tion with the group. Therefore, studies of per-sonal creativity characteristics and other individ-ual differences can supply important insights inthe understanding and enhancement of team-level creativity.In order to analyze the effect of team activi-

ties and to explore team interaction from theperspective of personal creativity modes, anexperiment was conducted using the PCMT(M.S. Kim, et al., 2007). In this experiment, teamactivities that promote self-awareness of one’screativity and the self-description of perceivedpersonal characteristics were devised. Beforeconducting a conceptual design task, partici-pants went through training activities. Teamperformances in the conceptual design task wereevaluated using the novelty and resolution cate-gories of the Creative Product Semantic Scale(CPSS) (Besemer, 1998). The conceptual designtask was to design concepts that could improvethe subway system in Korea.To analyze the effect of team interaction

activity, we did a t-test, the results of which areshown in Table 3 on the next page. In ourresults, the mean total of CPSS showed signifi-cantly higher scores in the experimental groupthan in the control group (t=2.31, p=.029). Thisresult confirms that the performance of theexperimental group, which received a teaminteraction activity immediately following a self-awareness activity, was better than the perform-ance of the control group. More specifically, thenovelty category showed no difference betweenthe experimental and the control group (t=1.64,p=.113). In detail, the surprising and originalresults showed no training effect (t=1.76,p=.900; t=1.50, p=.147). However, the resolutioncategory showed the effect of the team interac-tion activity training (t=2.70, p=.012). In allfacets of the resolution, the scores were signifi-cantly higher in the experimental group than inthe control group (t=2.48, p=.020; t=2.83,p=.009; t=2.33, p=.028; t=2.71, p=.012). Thisresult implies that team interaction activity ismore effective in improving practical and criticalthinking ability to develop useful and under-standable ideas than in promoting originality.From those results, we verified that teamwork

practice activity immediately following self-



awareness of creativity modes improved teamcreativity.We could imagine that self-awarenessof creativity modes leads to an understanding ofone’s own and others’ personal creativity charac-teristics and of their strengths and weaknesses.This understanding could aid in the develop-ment of team creativity.

Design team interactionWe conducted a detailed analysis of team inter-actions in two design teams whose participantshad different characteristics. A diverse team wascomposed of students all of whom had differentprimary personal creativity modes. Personal cre-ativity modes of the diverse team are shown inTable 4. A uniform team was composed of stu-dents with similar personal creativity modes, asshown in Table 5. The teams’ conceptual designsessions were videotaped and analyzed usingInteraction Process Analysis (Bale, 1950).Weidentified 12 categories in three areas: the posi-tive social-emotional area (categories of “showssolidarity,”“shows tension release,”“agrees”), the

task area (categories of “gives suggestions,”“givesopinions,”“gives orientation,”“asks for orienta-tion,” “asks for opinion,”“asks for suggestions”),and the negative social-emotional area (cate-gories of “disagrees,”“shows tension,”“showsantagonism”). A more detailed discussion onteam interaction behaviour characteristics andpersonal creativity modes can be found in M S.Kim, et al., (2007).The difference in interactions between these

two teams can be illustrated in the comparisonof each member’s interaction activity percentageas shown in Figure 1a and 1b. In the diverseteam, the patterns of each member’s team inter-actions are different from each other, conform-

CPSS Factors t df p

Novelty 1.64 26 .113Surprising 1.76 26 .900Original 1.50 26 .147

Resolution 2.70 26 .012Valuable 2.48 26 .020Logical 2.83 26 .009Useful 2.33 26 .028Understandable 2.71 26 .012

CPSS Mean Total 2.31 26 .029

Table 3. T-test for CPSS of Team Design Task

Person Creative mode 1 Creative mode 2

Person 1 knowledge-based transformingPerson 2 synthesizing transformingPerson 3 organizing analyzingPerson 4 analyzing knowledge-basedPerson 5 experiential teamworkPerson 6 evaluating analyzing

Table 4. Personal Creativity Modes – Diverse Team

Person Creative mode 1 Creative mode 2

Person 1 evaluating teamworkPerson 2 evaluating teamworkPerson 3 evaluating teamworkPerson 4 evaluating teamworkPerson 5 evaluating teamworkPerson 6 evaluating teamwork

Table 5. Personal Creativity Modes – Uniform Team

Figure 1a. Personal team interaction in diverse team. Figure 1b. Personal team interaction in uniform team.



ing to their personal creativity modes, but theyare similar in the uniform team. In other words,this difference can be attributed to the differencein the personal creativity modes of individualteam members.It was also observed that the team members

who had the introversion trait showed very lowparticipation in the team interaction whenundertaking the conceptual design activity com-pared with those who were more extroverted.On the other hand, in the case of the team inwhich all members had the introversion trait,they participated in the team’s interactions moreevenly. Therefore, it is confirmed that the per-sonal creativity modes are reflected in the waythe conceptual design activity is performed.The immediate response of a team member

to a statement of another team member wouldindicate the most primitive interaction betweenthe two members.We call this transition. Ananalysis of transition is helpful in understandingteam interaction.When person A makes animmediate response after person B makes astatement, we count that the transition from Ato B is increased by 1. The interpersonal andintrapersonal transition behaviors in both thediverse and the uniform teams were analyzed.The interpersonal and intrapersonal transi-

tion results can be seen in Figure 2a and 2b.Height refers to frequency of transition from theperson on the left side to the person on the rightside. In the case of the diverse team, the highestinterpersonal transition counts are seen in thecase of person 5 to person 3 and from person 3to person 5. The next highest interpersonal tran-

sition counts were observed in the case of per-son 2 and person 3. The interpersonal transitioncounts between person 2 and person 5 were thethird highest. Therefore, we can conclude thatthe transitions among person 2, person 3, andperson 5 occur mostly in team interactions. Thepersonal creativity modes of person 2, person 3,and person 5 are synthesizing, organizing, andexperiential creativity, respectively. Note thatthese are all extroverted. In the case of the uni-form team, the transition counts are lower ingeneral than in the diverse team. This supportsthe uniform nature of the team, as the interac-tions are even throughout all the pairs of teammembers.In summary, in a diverse team, the interper-

sonal transitions occur most frequently amongthose having extrovert traits, such as synthesiz-ing, organizing, and experiential creativity. Onthe other hand, the interpersonal transitions inthe uniform team are more even than in the caseof the diverse team. Therefore, we suggest thatthe personal creativity modes in a team have asignificant influence on the characteristics ofinterpersonal transitions.

ConclusionIn this paper, we argued that the creativity ofdesigners reflects their personal characteristics.As design tasks require diverse creativity aspects,personal creativity modes as described in thispaper could be used as a framework for cus-tomizing design education and for composingand managing design teams. As improving thecreativity of design teams could be a key require-

Figure 2a. Transition of diverse team. Figure 2b. Transition of uniform team.



ment for design competitiveness, interdiscipli-nary research on this topic should receive moreattention.Personal creativity modes and cultural back-

grounds would also be an important issue inmanaging design creativity in global designteams. In the collaborative design project inwhich Korean, Japanese, and Chinese studentswork in teams to develop global products (Y.S.Kim, et al., 2007), team composition based onpersonal creativity modes is used so that mostwell-balanced teams are composed with regardto students’ cultural background, gender, disci-plines, as well as their personal creativity modes.Analysis of such international design teamscould help in understanding the relationbetween personal creativity modes and culturalbackgrounds. �

Reprint #08032KIM45

ReferencesBales, R.F. (1950). Interaction Process Analysis: A

Method for the Study of Small Groups,Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Press.

Besemer, S.P. (1998). “Creative Product AnalysisMatrix: Testing the Model Structure and aComparison Among Products—Three NovelChairs,”Creativity Research Journal, 11(4), pp.333-346.

Hambrick, D.C., Cho, T.S., Chen, M-J. (1996).“The Influence of Top Management TeamHeterogeneity on a Firm’s CompetitiveMoves,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 41,pp. 659-684.

Kim, M.S., Kim, Y.S., Lee, H.S. (2006). “PersonalCreativity Mode and Perceived Creativity,”Proc. of the International Design ResearchSymposium, Seoul, Nov. 10-11.

Kim, M.S., Kim, Y.S. Kim, T.H. (2007). “Analysisof Team Interaction and Team Creativity ofStudent Design Teams Based on PersonalCreativity Modes,” Proc. ASME InternationalConference on Design Theory andMethodology, Las Vegas.

Kim, Y.S., Jin, S.T., Lee, S.W. (2006). “DesignActivities and Personal CreativityCharacteristics: A Case Study of DualProtocol Analysis Using Design Informationand Process,” Proc. ASME InternationalConference on Design Theory andMethodology, Philadelphia.

Kim, Y.S., Kang, M.J., Lee, S.W. (2007). “Buildingthe East-Asia Network for CollaborativeCapstone Design Education,” Science of theMachine, Jan. 59(1), pp. 163-165.

Kurtzberg, T.R. (2005). “Feeling Creative, BeingCreative: An Empirical Study of Diversity andCreativity in Teams,”Creativity ResearchJournal, 17, pp. 51-65.

Kurtzberg, T.R. and Amabile T.M. (2001). “FromGuilford to Creative Synergy: Opening theBlack Box of Team Level Creativity,”Creativity Research Journal, 13, pp. 285-294.

Levesque, L.C. (2001). Breakthrough Creativity:Achieving Top Performance Using the EightCreative Talents, Palo Alto, Davies-Black.

Wilde, D.J. (1999). “Design Team Roles,” Proc.ASME International Conference on DesignTheory and Methodology, Las Vegas.

Wilde, D.J. and Labno, D.B. (2001). “Personalityand the Creative Impulse,” unpublished man-uscript.

Wilde, D. J. (2007) Teamology: The Constructionand Organization of Effective Teams, StanfordUniversity, wikibox.stanford.edu:8310/06-07/Public/ Leifer_Supporting_Literature/Wilde_Teamology_2007.pdf.

toward the management of design creativity: personal creativity modes, design activity, and team...

Documents