Discussion: Creative Teams and Creative Conflicts
Have you ever worked on a team that struggled to complete a project? In the course, Dynamic Leadership, students learn about the “big five” personality traits that can potentially lead to conflicts in the workplace; but differences in creative thinking styles can also keep a team from functioning effectively. The major thinking styles you will learn about this week can provide insight into the reasons why conflicts can arise among individuals and teams trying to innovate.
For example, perhaps you have worked on a team with someone who you thought asked too many questions or focused on what appeared to you to be insignificant details. As a leader, you need to learn how to accommodate a diversity of creative thinking styles in effective ways.
For this Discussion, you will consider your own creative thinking styles and how they differ from others in your current (or a past) workplace environment. Consider how different creative thinking styles can potentially create conflict among teams. You can review the five personality traits that were covered in a previous course by referring to the Digman article in the Optional Resources this week.
With these thoughts in mind, review this week’s reading paying particular attention to:
· Weis, D. (2018, June 21). Giving employees permission to fail is a formula for innovation at 3M. Retrieved January 30, 2019, from https://www.aem.org/news/giving-employees-permission-to-fail-is-a-formula-for-innovation-at-3m/
· Grivas, C., & Puccio, G. J. (2012). The innovative team: Unleashing creative potential for breakthrough results. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
· Part 1
· Prichard, S. (n.d.) What creative style are you? Retrieved October 5, 2013, from http://www.skipprichard.com/which-creative-style-are-you/
Post a cohesive analysis using the scenario presented in this week’s media piece, Creative Teams and Creative Conflicts, in which a team is unable to make progress on a project. In your post, incorporate the following:
· An analysis of the barriers that prevented the group from leveraging their differences and creating innovative ideas by asking yourself what the relationship of failure to innovation is.
· Three suggested ways that their process could be improved, despite their different styles.
· An explanation of how you would approach the scenario differently and lead the group towards success if you were asked to lead the team.
· A description of how you would implement the three ways you identified above to help the group improve.
· Finally, include an explanation of how you could use the strategies described in this week’s chapter from Creative leadership: Skills that drive change to accommodate the diversity of thinking styles to lead the group in a unified direction.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.
Respond to two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:
· Sharing an insight you gained from reading your colleagues’ postings and exploring how you will apply this insight to your professional career and managerial practices.
· Based on details of a colleague’s analysis, sharing from your own observations or experiences related to the challenges of successfully leading a diverse group in a unified direction and offering lessons you learned from those observations or experiences.
· Suggesting an alternate or modified approach to leading diverse groups towards success and illustrating why those might work better.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
Assignment: Individual Reflection: Your Creative Thinking Profile
Understanding your own creative thinking profile provides a framework for the way you think about the creative challenges and opportunities you face every day. In the next few weeks of this course, you will work with a number of techniques that will help you develop and refine your approaches to creativity. It is important to reflect deeply on your identified creative style and understand what it means in terms of leadership, responsibility, and managerial functions and decisions.
For this Assignment, address the following:
· First, describe your personal creative thinking profile using the course text and “Tapping into Our Creative Thinking Skills to Manage Complex Problems” from this week’s Resources. You may find you identify with more than one style. Identify your first and second preferences and validate those preferences with examples that illustrate the two styles. In your descriptions, include insights you gained about your creative thinking preferences and skills.
· Based on careful reflection on your current or most recent professional role or a role you would aspire to have, describe the aspects of your work that align well with your profile, as well as those that do not.
· Explain how you, as a colleague or manager, will respect, learn from, and collaborate with individuals with similar or different creative thinking styles.
· Propose how organizations can best use differences in creative thinking to create sustainable, competitive advantages.
Guidance on Assignment Length: Your Week 2 Individual Reflection assignment should be 2–4 pages (1–2 pages if single spaced), excluding a title page and references.
AssgnRUBRIC
| Exemplary | Very Good | Proficient | Opportunity for Improvement | Unacceptable | |
| Element 1: Personal Creative Thinking Profile | 10 (20%)
Student provides a thorough and detailed analysis of his/her personal creative thinking profile, identifies at least first and second preferences with strong supporting rationales, provides four or more relevant examples from experiences to validate preferences, and provides salient insights as to how career and work performance are impacted. |
9.3 (18.6%)
Student provides an analysis of his/her personal creative thinking profile, identifying at least first and second preferences with supporting rationales, provides three or four examples from experiences to validate preferences, and provides insights as to how career and work performance are impacted. |
8.5 (17%)
Student provides a reflective description of his/her personal creative thinking profile, identifying at least first and second preferences with two illustrative examples to validate the style choices, and provides some insights gained about his/her creative thinking preferences and skills. |
7.5 (15%)
Student provides a cursory description of his/her personal creative thinking profile, identifying at least one preferences with one example and/or insight about his/her creative thinking preferences and skills. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
| Element 2: Alignment of Profile with Work | 7.5 (15%)
Student provides a thorough and detailed evaluation of the alignment of the various aspects of his/her work (or desired work) with his/her profile including areas where there is close alignment and areas where there may be little to no alignment, and thoroughly assesses the impact of the degree of alignment to his/her work success or future work aspirations. |
6.97 (13.95%)
Student provides an evaluation of the alignment of the various aspects of his/her work (or desired work) with his/her profile including areas where there is close alignment and areas where there may be little to no alignment, and assesses the impact of the degree of alignment to his/her work success or future work aspirations. |
6.38 (12.75%)
Student provides a description of the aspects of his/her work (or desired work) that align well with his/her profile and areas where there may be little to no alignment. |
5.62 (11.25%)
Student provides a cursory description with few details of how well his/her work aligns with his/her profile. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
| Element 3: Using Difference and Similarities in Styles | 10 (20%)
Student provides a thorough and detailed analysis of how he/she as a colleague or manager will collaborate with individuals having similar and different creative styles, defining specific strategies to enable successful outcomes, and includes a robust evaluation of how organizations can best use differences in creative thinking styles to create sustainable, competitive advantages. Response is supported with specific examples. |
9.3 (18.6%)
Student provides an analysis on how he/she as a colleague or manager will collaborate with individuals having similar or different creative thinking styles and evaluates how organizations can best use differences in creative thinking styles to create sustainable, competitive advantages. |
8.5 (17%)
Student provides a description of how he/she as a colleague or manager will collaborate with individuals having similar or different creative thinking styles and explains how organizations can best use differences in creative thinking styles to create sustainable, competitive advantages. |
7.5 (15%)
Student provides a cursory description of how he/she will collaborate with others who may have similar or different creative thinking styles and provides a cursory overview of how organizations can use creative thinking. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
| Element 4: Critical Thinking, Analysis, and Synthesis | 5 (10%)
Writing exhibits strong evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking; careful examination is made of assumptions and possible biases, with detailed supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New questions may be presented based on synthesis of ideas and input. |
4.65 (9.3%)
Writing exhibits evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking. Examination is made of assumptions and possible biases, with supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New questions are presented based on synthesis of ideas and input. |
4.25 (8.5%)
Writing exhibits some evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking. Examination is made of assumptions and possible biases, with some supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments adequately, but not superbly. New questions are not presented based on synthesis of ideas and input. |
3.75 (7.5%)
Writing exhibits little or no evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and thinking. Examination is not made of assumptions and possible biases. Writing neither synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; nor analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice. Logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments are not exhibited. New questions are not presented based on synthesis of ideas and input. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
| Element 5: Written Communications | 5 (10%)
Writing is clear, logical, well-organized and appropriate. Work is free from spelling and grammar/syntax errors. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). There are no errors. |
4.65 (9.3%)
Writing is mostly clear, logical, and organized. Few, if any spelling and grammar/syntax issues are noted. Overall, a few sections need additional editing, but generally, work appears proofread. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). There are one or two minor errors. |
4.25 (8.5%)
The main points are clear and organized. Some spelling, grammar/syntax issues are noted. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). |
3.75 (7.5%)
There are key sections that lack organization or logical flow. Many spelling, grammar/syntax issues are noted. Work requires additional proofreading. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
| Element 6: Relevance | 7.5 (15%)
Student effectively and directly integrates discussion/assignment content with relevant and compelling personal experiences, additional research, or current events from credible news sources. Specifically adds a new and/or different insight or perspective on the subject area(s) being discussed or treated in the assignment. |
6.97 (13.95%)
Student offers personal experiences, additional research, or current events from credible news sources, discussing their relevance, but does not specifically add new or different insights or perspectives on the subject areas(s) being discussed or treated in the assignment. |
6.38 (12.75%)
Student offers some examples of how the content of the discussion/application applies to real-world scenarios with general discussion of why those examples are relevant. |
5.62 (11.25%)
Student offers brief or cursory descriptions of personal experiences, additional research, or current events from credible news sources. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
| Element 7: Formal and Appropriate Documentation of Evidence, Attribution of Ideas (APA Citations) | 5 (10%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to scholarly or credible reference requirements and adheres to APA style with respect to source attribution and references. There are no APA errors. |
4.65 (9.3%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to scholarly or credible reference requirements and adheres to APA style with respect to source attribution and references. There are one or two minor errors in APA style or format. |
4.25 (8.5%)
Student addresses guidelines for scholarly or credible references and/or APA style with respect to source attribution and references. Some errors in APA format and style are evident. |
3.75 (7.5%)
Student demonstrates inconsistent adherence to scholarly reference requirements and/or inconsistent adherence to APA style with respect to source attribution and references. Significant and/or numerous errors in APA format and style are evident. |
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the criterion. |
