Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea

References

• Amabile T. M.Creativity in Context (1996) (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) Google Scholar
• Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational Psych. Measurement (1960) 20(1):37–46Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coles S.An Introduction to Statistical Modeling of Extreme Values (2001) (Springer Verlag, London) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dahan E., Mendelson H. An extreme value model of concept testing. Management Sci. (2001) 47(1):102–116Link, Google Scholar
• Diehl M., Stroebe W. Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1987) 53(3):497–509Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diehl M., Stroebe W. Productivity loss in idea-generating groups—Tracking down the blocking effect. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1991) 61(3):392–403Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gwet K.Handbook of Inter-Rater Reliability (2002) (STATAXIS Publishing, Gaithersburg, MD) Google Scholar
• Jamieson L., Bass F. Adjusting stated purchase intentions measures to predict trial purchase of new products. J. Marketing Res. (1989) 26(3):336–345Crossref, Google Scholar
• Janis I. L.Groupthink (1982) (Houghton Mifflin, Boston) Google Scholar
• Kavadias S., Sommer S. C. The effects of problem structure and team diversity on brainstorming effectiveness. Management Sci. (2009) 55(12):1899–1913Link, Google Scholar
• Kornish L. K., Ulrich K. T. Characterizing opportunity spaces in innovation: Evidence from large samples of ideas in five domains. (2009) . Working paper, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1503103Google Scholar
• Mullen B., Johnson C., Salas E. Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic Appl. Soc. Psych. (1991) 12(1):3–23Crossref, Google Scholar
• Osborne A. F.Applied Imagination (1957) (Charles Scribner's Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Paulus P. B., Brown V., et al., Pursuer R. E., Montuori A. Group creativity. Social Creativity in Organizations (1996) (Hampton, Creskill, NJ) Google Scholar
• Pugh S. Concept selection: A method that works. Proc. Internat. Conf. on Engrg. Design, Rome (1981) 9–13Google Scholar
• Robbins S. P., Judge T. A.Organizational Behavior (2006) (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ) Google Scholar
• Singh J., Fleming L. Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Sci. (2010) 56(1):41–56Link, Google Scholar
• Stroebe W., Diehl M. Why are groups less effective than their members: On productivity losses in idea generation groups. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psych. (1994) 5:271–303Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutton R. I., Hargadon A. Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1996) 41(4):685–718Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor A., Greve H. R. Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Acad. Management J. (2006) 49(4):723–740Crossref, Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C., Loch C. H. Collaborative prototyping and the pricing of custom-designed products. Management Sci. (2004) 50(2):145–158Link, Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C., Ulrich K. T.Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities (2009) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston) Google Scholar
• Ulrich K. T., Eppinger S.Product Design and Development (2007) (McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New York) Google Scholar
• Van de Ven A. H. Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Sci. (1986) 32(5):590–607Link, Google Scholar
• Wageman R. Interdependence and group effectiveness. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1995) 40(1):145–180Crossref, Google Scholar