Innovation Teams Research

Currently, we investigate the related issues in three streams of research:

The paradox of diversity
The more diverse the members of a team are, the more diverse the perspectives that a team can muster to tackle problems and therefore the more potential the team has to be creative. In other words, team diversity may provide a more diverse set of perspectives that may be crucial for team innovative performance. However, individuals that differ significantly (are diverse) tend not to be willing and able to communicate. In other words, team diversity may hamper communication and subsequent innovative performance. This is the antithesis of diversity: Diversity both benefits and hampers innovative performance. In this stream we aim to show that this antithesis is actually a paradox: Diversity can benefit innovation, but it requires specific managerial and structural practices to do so. The research question in this stream of research is:
How can the hampering effect of diversity for innovation be subdued, while the benefits of diversity for innovation are maintained?

The paradox of leadership
In theory, innovative teams and organizations require leadership that is inspirational, charismatic, persuasive and empowering. In other words innovation requires strong leader-like people. However, practice has shown that such leaders are often not capable of fostering creativity! The very qualities that make strong leaders so inspiring (their persuasiveness, their self-confidence) apparently cause their subordinates to withhold critique and stimulate them to follow orders instead of thinking for themselves! This is the antithesis of leadership: Leader-like behaviour both benefits and hampers innovative performance. In this stream we aim to show that this antithesis is actually a paradox: Leader-like behaviour can benefit innovation, but it requires specific managerial and structural practices to do so. The research question in this stream of research is:
How can the hampering effect of leader-like behaviour for innovation be subdued, while the benefits of leader-like behaviour for innovation are maintained?

The paradox of the collective
A feeling of cohesion and a sense of common identity are crucial for cooperation and communication between team members. Teams that cohesive foster cooperation and subsequently are able to perform better and more creatively. However, cohesion and team identity induce norms about what is appropriate behaviour in the team. The more cohesive the team, the stronger the team norms, and the less open the team is to deviant behaviour. Deviant behaviour, however, is crucial for innovation! This is the antithesis of the collective: Cohesion both benefits and hampers innovative performance. In this stream we aim to show that this antithesis is actually a paradox: Cohesion can benefit innovation, but it requires specific managerial and structural practices to do so. The research question in this stream of research is: How can the hampering effect of cohesion for innovation be subdued, while the benefits of cohesion for innovation are maintained?

Research Projects
With Unilever we are developing research on topics such as crowdsourcing, computer-mediated communication methods, and training of R&D teams. Through this research we use Unilever as a research setting for our investigation and at the same time we provide consulting and training for Unilever.