By Ilya Leybovich

Innovation and creative thinking are highly valued in many work environments, but concentration is still king. In fact, some researchers suggest that "breakthroughs" can actually hinder the problem-solving process.

Some thinkers are able to approach dilemmas from a non-traditional route. They look at seemingly unrelated aspects of a problem and bridge multiple gaps to reach a solution. Neuroscientists and psychologists have been developing ways to track this insight process, and new research has ventured some theories on how innovative thinking is accomplished, as well as how it affects a larger organization or team.

The Downside of Good Ideas
An original idea is not necessarily a positive contribution, especially when viewed in terms of long-term project goals. A recent study published in the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science examines the "compromises between individuals using their own innovations and using innovations obtained from their peers." Its findings: new ideas can inhibit progress by distracting other team members from developing their own solutions.

The researchers set up an experiment involving multiple teams attempting to solve a series of problems using numerical values. Some of the teams were given access to all the other teams' information, while other groups only had knowledge of what their own partners were doing. The results were somewhat surprising.

"It turns out not to be effective if different inventors and labs see exactly what everyone else is doing because of the human tendency to glom onto the current 'best' solution," Robert Goldstone, one of the study's researchers, says at Science Blog.

In other words, having total access to data can impede progress because it allows one pioneering idea to influence or override all the others. Goldstone recommends the "small world network," in which "the group as a whole is searching the problem space more effectively." Small, cohesive teams preserve variety in thinking and reduce the chances of one big idea drowning out long-term progress.

The Business of Big Ideas
Good managers devote time and resources to cultivating inventive solutions from their employees. According to AMR Research, American companies in 2007 spent an estimated $73 billion on methods of harvesting, organizing and implementing innovative ideas from workers.

This "knowledge management" focuses on applying structure to new information and ways of channeling ideas from a handful of innovative thinkers into the collective mindset of the organization.

As noted in The New Learning Playbook, "[u]nlocking the knowledge of your 'stars' for the purpose of building collective intelligence seems to be the goal" for an increasing number of companies. But what conditions are necessary for these "stars" to develop their ideas in the first place?

The Inspiration Process
An insight seems to bypass the step-by-step analytical procedure, arriving at an answer without relying on any apparent methodology. In many respects, inventive thinking is a mysterious process, but advances in neuroscience have shed light on some of its fundamental aspects.

In a study published by the Public Library of Science Biology, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and electroencephalography (EEG) technology revealed that the brain uses its left hemisphere for definitions and deductive problem analysis, while the right hemisphere handles connotative, or "big picture" reasoning. Insight occurs when left hemisphere data find a corollary in the right hemisphere, which targets a more remote association that applies to the dilemma. In short, "solvers engage distinct neural and cognitive processes that allow them to see connections that previously eluded them."

Rather than concentrating on the problem at hand, the brain apparently benefits from a relaxed, wandering state in order to make these elusive connections. "The big ideas seem to always come when people are sidetracked, when they're doing something that has nothing to do with their research," cognitive psychologist Jonathan Schooler told The New Yorker.

But not all researchers agree with the wandering mind theory.

A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, for instance, indicates that work-related mistakes tend to occur when "participants shift their brain activity from effortful motivated involvement in the task toward a mental state more similar to resting conditions." While a relaxed state may be conducive to generating original ideas, it also increases the likelihood of committing workplace errors.

The issue for both managers and employees seems to be about striking a balance between concentration and innovation. It may be important to stay focused enough on the task to avoid making blunders, but not focused to the point of preventing remote associations that can aid in the thinking process. Put simply, it's OK to stray, but not too far.