560 HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / October 2003 Idea-Generation in Naturally Occurring Contexts Complex Appropriation of a Simple Group Procedure MICHELE H. JACKSON University of Colorado at Boulder MARSHALL SCOTT POOLE Texas A&M University This study examined naturally occurring idea-generation in organizational groups completing an extended problem-solving task. Meetings held by 11 groups engaged in a quality improvement process in a governmental agency were analyzed to identify 37 idea-generation episodes. All groups had available a group decision support system (GDSS), although some opted not to use it. Across all groups, idea productivity was low though fairly efficient, but GDSS-supported idea-generation produced significantly fewer ideas. In general, idea-generation as a process appears to be more complex than has been thought; observed deviations from idealized idea-generation norms were not necessarily dysfunctional. The findings encourage reassessment of the assumptions underlying existing normative models of idea-generation. T he process of drawing together ideas from individual group mem- bers into one list serves important functions across many group activities, including problem solving, decision making, negotia- tion, planning, and innovation. In most contemporary group research, idea-generation is regarded as a distinctive creative task that should be guided by procedural norms and undertaken during a bounded period of interaction (e.g., Ellis & Fisher, 1994; Jarboe, 1996; McGrath, 1984; Pinsonneault, Barki, Gallupe, & Hoppen, 1999; Poole & Baldwin, 1996). The procedural norms for idea-generation aim to maximize the number and quality of ideas and to create an open and participative climate in Michele H. Jackson (Ph.D., 1994, University of Minnesota) is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Marshall Scott Poole (Ph.D., 1980, University of Wisconsin-Madison) is a professor in the Department of Speech Communication, Texas A&M University. Preparation of this article was supported by National Science Foundation Grant SES-8715565 and by a grant from the University of Colorado. Any conclusions drawn here are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions of the grantors. A previous version was presented at the 2001 conference of the National Communication Association. We thank Sian Owen-Cruise for assistance in cod- ing, Gerardine DeSanctis for discussions during the planning of this study, and April Trees, Amy Grim, and Nancy Mann for their comments and suggestions. Correspondence con- cerning this article should be addressed to Michele H. Jackson, Department of Communica- tion, UCB 270, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309–0270; email: Jackson@colorado.edu. Human Communication Research, Vol. 29, No. 4, October 2003 560–591 © 2003 International Communication Association