There are no absolutes. Too often we wish for simple straightforward answers to the question “How do we help our people achieve more creative results?” This is not an unanswerable question, but there is no single right answer for everyone.

In the long history of humanities pursuit to accelerate the pace of creativity innovation and change researchers, pundits, and authors have continually sought to bring to the forefront their latest theory or tear down the accepted truths. Too often this results in confusion around important concepts such as collaboration, brainstorming, incubation and many other successful tools associated with generating creative results. This confusion is what truly hinders creativity and innovation. Imagine the confusion faced by the business leader trying to create the next iPod, or the school administrator trying to transform the way students learn, or the medical researcher trying to find a cure for diabetes. Our belief is that organizations and individuals who are looking to increase the rate of creativity and innovation in their world should consider these three simple truths as the first step in the process of accelerating innovation.

Every person (and every organization) is different: People have different preferences and working styles. Some do well alone others are most productive with a team. There are countless assessments that help us gain insight into our own preferences and those of our employees. By leveraging these preferences and letting individuals work with their strengths we can get the best results and create the most satisfying work environments.

Creativity & Innovation happen as part of a process. It is naive to think that innovation happens in a flash of inspiration or insight. Powerful innovations require extended effort while they undergo the transformation from challenge to change and creativity is required all along the way. During this process many types of skills are required, some work best in solitude, others in teams or groups. Defining an innovation process for your organization or team will help you determine the type of working arrangement that is best for each stage.

Expertise makes the biggest difference in these studies: A deeper look at the research reveals that the level of expertise a group has in collaboration skills has a much greater impact on the results than whether or not they were working along or in a team. Studies have demonstrated that groups un-trained in collaboration do underperform individuals. However, groups trained in collaboration consistently outperform individuals by a very large margin. In fact, trained individuals even outperform untrained individuals when working alone. Perhaps, the more important take away is if you want groups to be good at collaborating, teach them how to collaborate.