A basic requirement for creative problem solving is some form of ‘mapping tool’. This is because we first need to identify all the relevant factors of the problem and then we play with them to see the relationships that exist or may be created between them.
Mapping is a key tool for tackling difficult problems. It is the basis for a number of data analysis tools and provides a variety of benefits:
1. A meaningful symbolic model can be constructed
2. Complex information can be summarized effectively
3. A variety of information types can be accommodated
4. Areas of confusion or disagreement are can be identified
5. Creates a record that people can agree upon
6. Establishes relationships between elements
7. Key factors can be identified and highlighted
8. Complex interactions can be identified
9. Acts as a prompt to further discussion
10. The multi-dimensional nature of problems can be meaningfully captured
Whiteboards and flipcharts are typical tools for this.
In addition, there are a number of software tools, many of them free of charge. However, probably the majority of them have a drawback when it comes to mapping ideas. These products force you to start with an initial idea and then relate all subsequent ideas to it in a ‘parent, child, sibling’ structure. The problem is that a strict hierarchy of ideas may not be appropriate, obvious, fixed or even desirable - it may even be advantageous NOT to have ANY implied relationship imposed on the factors, as the relationship between the factors is what you want to discover. Simply noting the relevant factors and establishing the relationship between them provides much more flexibility.
With this in mind, the product I would recommend is VUE (Visual Understanding Environment), from Tufts University (http://vue.tufts.edu/index.cfm). However, should you require it, VUE also offers you a Parent, child, Sibling structure. VUE has too many additional features to be listed here, but a key benefit is that it is completely free of charge.
Monday, 21 February 2011
Monday, 7 February 2011
Divergent Thinking
Convergent thinking is that which we use to find a single solution to a problem. Conversely, divergent thinking is that which we use to find many possible answers to a problem. When trying to find a solution to a difficult problem, it is divergent thinking that is required.
Unfortunately, as we get older, our aptitude for it disappears. Some years ago a study* involving 1600 schoolchildren assesed their ability for divergent thinking. they tested the kids in later years and found that the decline was quite alarming. Perhaps this is due to our society’s emphasis on convergent thinking processes. (Email subscribers can see the graphic via this link)
There is a way to get a measure of a group, department, organisation’s divergent thinking ability. What’s more, it provides a concrete, numerical measure.
You need 6-12 representative individuals with paper and pencils. You ask them to write down as many items as possible that are’ blue’, or ‘round’, for example - a simple, general question which doesn’t require special knowledge.
It should be simple enough to enable the group get around 100+ ideas (for statistical significance). It should not take more than 5-10 minutes.
You then go through the lists to count the items that are on everybody’s list, then items that are on all but one lists, then on all but two lists and so on. Finally, you count the total number of unique items.
If everybody basically has the same list then they are not good at divergent thinking – great team players perhaps, but not an original thought between them. On the other hand, if all the lists have completely different items, then they are all fabulously original, but are probably all highly individual
and will barely be able to communicate with each other. A strong, creative team lies somewhere between the two.
Hopefully, the person that doesn’t get any unique ideas isn't the boss.
*Land & Jarman "Breakpoint & Beyond, - Mastering the Future Today" 1993, Hapercollins
Unfortunately, as we get older, our aptitude for it disappears. Some years ago a study* involving 1600 schoolchildren assesed their ability for divergent thinking. they tested the kids in later years and found that the decline was quite alarming. Perhaps this is due to our society’s emphasis on convergent thinking processes. (Email subscribers can see the graphic via this link)
There is a way to get a measure of a group, department, organisation’s divergent thinking ability. What’s more, it provides a concrete, numerical measure.
You need 6-12 representative individuals with paper and pencils. You ask them to write down as many items as possible that are’ blue’, or ‘round’, for example - a simple, general question which doesn’t require special knowledge.
It should be simple enough to enable the group get around 100+ ideas (for statistical significance). It should not take more than 5-10 minutes.
You then go through the lists to count the items that are on everybody’s list, then items that are on all but one lists, then on all but two lists and so on. Finally, you count the total number of unique items.
If everybody basically has the same list then they are not good at divergent thinking – great team players perhaps, but not an original thought between them. On the other hand, if all the lists have completely different items, then they are all fabulously original, but are probably all highly individual
and will barely be able to communicate with each other. A strong, creative team lies somewhere between the two.
Hopefully, the person that doesn’t get any unique ideas isn't the boss.
*Land & Jarman "Breakpoint & Beyond, - Mastering the Future Today" 1993, Hapercollins
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
