**1. Introduction**

Creativity emerges in day-to-day practice in the space between what is and what is to come, it is, therefore, vital to define creativity as the collective realization of ideas in meaningful ways within social practices [1]. Coworkers' collaboration is important for developing workplaces, therefore we need to understand in what ways creativity in social groups can increase exchange and deepen the interaction quality.

With the aim of developing a conceptual framework for research at the group level, the concept of group idea was defined with inspiration from Mary Parker Follett (e.g., circular responses) [2] and Ludwig Fleck (e.g., thought collective) [3]. In studies on creative processes in social groups' interaction, exchange of ideas, and intersubjective knowledge development, the concept of group idea is central to understanding how emergent content and structures can covary for creativity productivity and performance. This chapter thus scrutinizes the function of and consequences for creativity in social interaction—the exchange between group members' different opinions and perspectives. This, in turn, contributes to better conditions and enable continuous development of knowledge and competencies in relation to both group and individual levels.

Conceptual frameworks for research on social groups' creative processes are often characterized as group dynamics [4–6]. What is denoted dynamics is the ongoing alteration between divergence and convergence as well as the thought ideal of iterations between individual level (group members) and the group level cohesiveness supporting the development of group ideas. However, these kinds of frameworks or models do not describe and explain what constitutes the collaborative situation/ group-level state that makes the activities described in these models possible. That is, using the concept of "group dynamics" tends to establish another black box hiding what specific factors of social interaction enable collaborative creativity, for example, emergent outcomes characterized as original.

Instead, researchers (as well as practitioners!) should pay serious attention to creativity research where broadened thinking supports integration of different ideas and perspectives, as well as to social interaction, that is, intensity of dialog and quantity of exchange as drivers of self-organization and development of group maturity. After all, the purpose of developing divergent thinking may not primarily have the goal of efficient individual idea generation. What should be regarded as higher value and relevance of divergent thinking capabilities, is the activation of the so-called executive functions in relation to self-efficacy on an individual level and self-organization on group level.

Expressions such as 'teams are made, not born' are based on the belief that social interaction, dialog, exchange of views, and shifts in perspective can be trained and developed [7], that is, constructive integration of divergent propositions does not just happen "by itself". In other words, groups' collaborative creativity can be strategically trained and given appropriate conditions (i.e., prerequisites). From the perspective of facilitation of creative collaboration, there are two prominent categories of interrelated prerequisites [8]: personal and behavioral characteristics. The level of these prerequisites should be considered in relation to each other as this correlation should guide the direction and scope of training.

Personal characteristics may for ethical reasons not be affected other than by the individual's initiative, for example, motivation to belong and contribute to the group's development. Behavioral characteristics such as attitudes, increased awareness, as well as aptitude, can be influenced through training and knowledge development [4].

In this chapter, the line of reasoning is structured in two main steps (1) that creativity enables social interaction and exchange, and (2) that social interaction drives creativity. **Figure 1** visualizes the potentially mutually reinforcing, iterative correlation between, interaction and creativity, conditioned by certain prerequisites that can be assessed and as well as other types of factors that can be trained and thus predict creativity.

#### **Figure 1.**

*Visualization of the iterative reinforcing correlation between interaction and creativity conditioned by certain prerequisites and predictors.*

*Collaborative Creativity DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.110608*

This chapter thus investigates how social interaction and exchange can be conceptualized in terms of creativity and what factors (predictors) in social interaction support creativity as well as what factors (prerequisites) emerge in creative processes that enable social interaction and establish the quality of creativity.

Formulated as research questions: *How can social interaction and exchange be understood in terms of creativity? By which research design can predictors and prerequisites for collaborative creativity be related, assessed, and analyzed*?
