Comment by ThalesX | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ThalesX | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Our data suggest that this physical difference in shared space compels virtual communicators to narrow their visual field by concentrating on the screen and filtering out peripheral visual stimuli that are not visible or relevant to their partner.

Yeah... how about creative idea generation gets written down somehow and expanded? I've yet to find in my life, a worthwhile creative idea, that can't be written down for dissemination and expansion. What I have found is snake oil peddlers that like to hear themselves speak and throw around 'creative' ideas that get lost in a sea of dialogue.

> Here we show that virtual interaction uniquely hinders idea generation—we find that videoconferencing groups generate fewer creative ideas than in-person groups due to narrowed visual focus, but we find no evidence that videoconferencing groups are less effective when it comes to idea selection.

I don't disagree with the results of this paper, but I disagree with the premise that creative idea generation is something that should get done in a physical huddle.

In my experience the best ideas come about when a group of competent people each go off on their own and think deeply about a problem, then talk to each other afterwards about what ideas they have. Often good ideas, particularly to complex problems, come about as fusion of a couple good idea-lets.

>Often good ideas, particularly to complex problems, come about as fusion of a couple good idea-lets.

This has been the case in my experience as a researcher. My collaborators and I tend to have various seeds of ideas that aren't much more than just "it could be interesting to look at X." But when we sit down at a bar to shoot the shit around some drinks, that's when those ideas combine into something really promising, and we feed off each other's excitement. Hard to have that in a virtual setting.

> What I have found is snake oil peddlers that like to hear themselves speak and throw around 'creative' ideas that get lost in a sea of dialogue.

What’s the real story here? Why characterize them as “snake oil peddlers who like to hear themselves speak?”

Anyone who makes a creative attempt to improve the workplace gets a gold star in my book.

Negativity is contagious, and I wouldn’t want an underminer on my team who characterizes other peoples’ ideas as “snake oil.”

> What’s the real story here? Why characterize them as “snake oil peddlers who like to hear themselves speak?”

I’ve worked in government, academia and private. I’ve been an IC, a CTO and general manager. I’ve never heard a truly creative idea result from a huddle, usually it’s what other commenters say in that someone comes with a well thought of creative idea that gets thrown around in the huddle, but never as a source of a truly creative idea. That’s my n=1 and that’s the real story.

> Negativity is contagious, and I wouldn’t want an underminer on my team who characterizes other peoples’ ideas as “snake oil.”

I guess we’re both lucky in this sense that chances are we won’t end up working together so I can infect with my negativity.

For myself I know how I prefer novel / creative ideas to get presented, disseminated and discussed, I like to think I reward those properly and encourage them, at the same time reducing the amount of bullshit snake oil. I can’t do that without acknowledging the situations that cause these time wasters.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com