In her widely discussed January 15 New York Times opinion piece, “The Rise of the New Groupthink,” Susan Cain champions the introvert, and reveals the need for workplaces, schools and other organizations to foster solitude. “Solitude is out of fashion,” Cain states. “Most of us work in teams, in offices without walls, for managers who prize people skills above all. Lone geniuses are out. Collaboration is in.” She continues, “But there’s a problem with this view. Research strongly suggests that people are more creative when they enjoy privacy and the freedom from interruption.”

Her article goes on to discuss how collaboration — and all the associated meetings, brainstorming sessions, and team interactions — may actually limit talented individuals and prevent them from generating truly innovative ideas. “Decades of research show that individuals almost always perform better than groups in both quality and quantity, and group performance gets worse as group size increases.” In particular, she calls out brainstorming sessions: “The reasons brainstorming fails are instructive for other forms of group work, too. People in groups tend to sit back and let others do the work; they instinctively mimic others’ opinions and lose sight of their own; and often succumb to peer pressure.”

No person, no matter how brilliant, is an island.

Is there truth to this? Absolutely. Most of us know from experience that forced collaboration among too large and wide a group can be unproductive, disruptive and sometimes downright painful. And creative thinkers — spanning a range of personality types — all require some level of privacy and interruption-free time to develop and work through ideas.

However, teamwork and collaboration may be getting a bad rap. Even the most brilliant individuals are limited by the sum of their experience and knowledge. They need the varied viewpoints and experiences of others to evolve their ideas.

Tightly knit creative teams have the advantage of cross-referencing and leveraging their combined knowledge and talents to produce results. And larger groups, when successfully executed, leverage and exploit collective knowledge and experience to not only generate ideas, but also quickly improve upon them. Wikipedia and Quirky are examples of successful group innovation.

It’s all about your culture.

So, what does this all mean for those of us for whom creativity and innovation are our competitive edge? First and foremost, you have to carefully consider your organization’s culture. Here are a few points we should all think about:

• Is our organization balanced? Are team members’ days packed with meetings, or is there time set in which each person can think through issues. On the flip side, is there active effort made to ensure all employees are able to share ideas, provide feedback, and get needed support and perspective?

• Does every person work toward a common goal? Does each person know what the organization is working toward? Do they take pride in it, and see the benefit of pushing beyond just their individual part?

• What’s the role of ego? Ego is that sense of “I” or “me” that separates, judges, competes, dominates and seeks approval. This attitude creates a closed, defensive, exclusionary, resistant and intolerant culture that can dampen creativity and innovation.

• Are team members comfortable with one another? Is your team actually, well… a team? Individuals who feel comfortable with one another can think freely and speak more openly. But if a person is reluctant to add ideas to the mix for fear of being shot down or criticized, eventually they’ll simply shut down and let someone else do the thinking.

So here’s what it boils down to: When done wrong, collaboration can be the New Groupthink. But when done right, it can be a differentiating advantage that drives an organization forward.

By the way… This Carpenter Thinks post was a successful creative collaboration between Amy and Cathy!