Mycoted - User contributions [en]

Category:Creativity Techniques

2011-06-14T11:56:32Z

Andy: changed intro

[[Category:Categories]]
=Creativity and Innovation Techniques - an A to Z=
{{category note}}
This A to Z of Creativity and Innovation Techniques, provides an introduction to a range of tools and techniques for both idea generation (Creativity) and converting those ideas into reality (Innovation). Like most tools these techniques all have their good and bad points. I like to think of these creativity and innovation techniques as tools in a toolbox in much the same way as my toolbox at home for DIY. It has a saw, spanner, hammer, knife and all sorts of other things in it, they are all very useful, but you have to pick the right tool (creativity / Innovation technique) for each job. This site will try and provide a little guidance along with each tool to let you know whether it's best used for cutting paper or putting in nails.

For the future, the aim is to also have sub-categories which will identify Techniques for;

* [[:Category:Problem_Definition|Problem Definition]] - including problem analysis, redifinition, and all aspects associated with defining the problem clearly.
* [[:Category:Idea_Generation|Idea Generation]] - The divergent process of coming up with ideas.
* [[:Category:Idea_Selection|Idea Selection]] - The convergent process of reducing all the many ideas into realistic solutions
* [[:Category:Idea_Implementation|Idea Implementation]] - Turning the refined ideas in reality.
* [[:Category:Processes|Processes]] - Schemes and techniques which look at the overall process from start to finish (or at least 3 of the above 4 areas)..

Special thanks to the Open University for their kind permission to use material from their publication B822.

Mycoted:Current featured article

2011-03-24T15:15:36Z

Andy: /* Current featured article */ asses to assess

==Current featured article==
'''Synectics'''

[[Synectics]] is, in our experience, one of the most useful systems for creative problem solving. It is based on a simple concept for problem solving and creative thinking - you need to generate ideas, and you need to evaluate ideas. Whilst this may be stating the obvious the methods used to perform these two tasks are extremely powerful.

Keys to a successful outcome are;
* Pre-planning ( check that the problem owner has the desire and authority to solve the problem, and also that they are solving the right problem)
* Use a facilitator to control the process, and ensure that the correct language is used ( 'I wish' to enable more diverse thinking).
* separate out the divergent and convergent phases of problem solving ( don't try and assess ideas during during the 'brainstorming / idea generation phase )

Have a look at the [[synectics]] pages for more information.

Mycoted:General disclaimer

2010-09-29T10:29:27Z

Andy: Added general disclaimer

The information contained in this website is for general information purposes only. The information is provided by Mycoted and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

In no event will we be liable for any loss or damage including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage whatsoever arising from loss of data or profits arising out of, or in connection with, the use of this website.

Through this website you are able to link to other websites which are not under the control of Mycoted. We have no control over the nature, content and availability of those sites. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, Mycoted takes no responsibility for, and will not be liable for, the website being temporarily unavailable due to technical issues beyond our control.

Using Crazy Ideas

2010-07-11T12:40:49Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|Using Experts}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

When ideas cease to flow, the use of ‘crazy’ ideas can inspire far sighted, original possibly ingenious concepts, possible methods:
* [[Free Association]]
* [[Bunches of Bananas]]

Unified Structured Inventive Thinking

2010-07-11T12:40:24Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Tug of War|Using Crazy Ideas}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

'''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking''' (USIT) is a structured, problem-solving methodology for finding innovative solution concepts to engineering-design type problems. Historically, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is related to [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]], which originated in Israel and is related to [[TRIZ]], the Russian methodology. It differs from [[TRIZ]] in several ways, but most importantly it is a simpler methodology, which makes it quicker to learn and easier to apply. It requires no databases or computer software.

The goal of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is to enable a problem solver to invent multiple solution concepts in as short a time as possible for real-world problems (day-to-day technical problems in all fields). Key to this methodology is its ability to establish, quickly, unusual perspectives of a problem situation. Innovative results are achieved using tools (heuristics) designed to elicit complementary contributions from both cerebral hemispheres, generating logical and creative concepts. USIT tools and methods began their development in the Ford Motor Company Research Laboratory in a training program called structured inventive thinking that continues to be taught and applied in Ford Motor Company worldwide engineering locations (see History and Industrial Experience).

== Introduction ==

Problem solving is most commonly used in professions such as, engineers, scientists, mathematicians, all of which have diplomas, and inventors who bear patents as proof to their talent.

Engineering and science are mostly based on an algorithmic-type of problem solving developed by applied mathematicians. Inventing is not an algorithmic process; it is a result of unrestricted creative thinking—inspiration. Lacking in algorithmic processes, inventive-type problem solving methodology has eluded much of academia. Many methodologies have been developed and marketed for filling this gap. Though they may or may not involve algorithms, they often entail structured methodology. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has structure, but no algorithms.

== History ==

The methodology known as [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]] (SIT), now known as advanced systematic thinking (ASIT), was brought into Ford Motor Company in 1995. Dr. Roni Horowitz and colleagues developed [[Systematic Inventive Thinking|SIT]] in the early 1990’s with the goal of simplifying [[TRIZ]]. It was introduced into Ford by Dr. Ed Sickafus who modified the methodology for adaptation into an automotive environment and named it "structured inventive thinking", retaining the acronym SIT in honor of the earlier work. In 1997, Ford Motor Company approved the publication of a textbook, ''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – How to Invent'' by Dr. Ed. Sickafus.

Since 2000, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has been taught outside of the company to non-Ford interests. It has been introduced to individuals, companies, and institutions in Africa, Asia, the Americas, Australia, and Europe. A newsletter containing mini-lectures on [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is sent to 43 countries and is translated into three languages (see Resources).

== Overview of USIT ==

It is recommended that one turn to [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] after conventional methodologies have waned. This encourages the rapid application of intuitive problem solving called [[brainstorming]] (in which technologists excel) and the quick collection of “low hanging fruit”. It also sets the stage for beginning unconventional methodology that stresses left-brain/right-brain participation in problem solving (logic/creativity).

[[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] fits between problem identification and the selection of solution concepts found for a problem; both involve engineering and business decisions. Between these engineering-filtering events, a problem solver is free of such filters while searching solution concepts to be engineered. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] emphasizes this distinct division enabling a problem solver to spend time focused on creative thinking without psychologically inhibiting filters—a problem simplification strategy.

All aspects of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] are derived from a unifying theory based on three fundamental components: objects, attributes, and the effects they support. Effects may be beneficial, called "functions", or not beneficial, called "unwanted effects".

The methodology consists of three common phases: "problem definition", "problem analysis", and "application of solution concepts" with equal time spent in each phase.

;Problem definition: A well-defined problem is formulated in an iterative process, described in terms of objects, attributes, and a single unwanted effect. Objects are reduced to a minimum number required to ''contain'' the problem (not to "explain" the problem situation). Multiple root causes are discovered using the plausible root causes heuristic. Abstraction of the problem statement is achieved using verbal and graphic metaphors. Exercise of the "plausible root causes heuristic" carries the problem solver well into problem analysis.

;Problem analysis: Following plausible root causes analysis one of two lines of thinking is followed: 1) a “closed-world” analysis of the problem to understand intended functional connectivity of objects when no problem existed or 2) a "particles method" that begins from an ideal solution and works back to the problem situation.

;Solution techniques: Three strategies for problem solving are based on the metaphorical interaction of objects, attributes, and effects: "utilization", "nullification", and "elimination" of the unwanted effect (see ''Heuristics for Solving Technical Problems — Theory, Derivation, Application'').

;;;;object – attribute
;;;;;;;;\
;;;;;;;;effect – attribute – object
;;;;;;;;/
;;;;object – attribute

;;Graphic metaphor for the interaction of objects and attributes.

Five solution heuristics are used to support these strategies.

1) "Dimensionality" focuses on the "attributes" available and new ones discovered during problem analysis.

2) "Pluralization" focuses on "objects" being multiplied in number or divided into parts, used in different ways, and carried to extremes.

3) "Distribution" focuses on "functions" being distributed differently among objects in the problem situation.

4) "Transduction" uses "attribute-function-attribute links" to reach new solution concepts. This is modeled metaphorically after transducers, which convert information from one form to another.

5) "Uniqueness" characterizes effects of a problem according to their activity in "space" and "time". Each technique is logically tied to one or more of the underlying features in the well-defined problem: objects, attributes, and effects.

== Industrial experience ==

Beginning in 1995, the problem-solving methodology has been taught to Ford’s corporate technologists and management in monthly three-day classes. Weekly User-group meetings allow continued development of skills. A team of specialists was organized to apply the methodology to corporate problems worldwide. Their ideal goal was three 3-hour sessions, one for each phase of problem solving. Before starting a team program, the customer would be involved with the team in gathering necessary background information. Some of this experience can be read in ''Injecting Creative Thinking Into Product Flow'' (see Resources).

Many Japanese companies are having their technologists trained in [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]], especially because of its streamlined nature and ease of understanding.

A reward of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is its ability to enable a technologist to begin solving a problem so poorly worded as, “This gismo doesn’t work. Fix it!” and, “Our competition just lowered their price. Now what?”

== Resources ==

http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm provides free ebooks and newsletters on USIT and reprints of papers and essays. It also gives information on the [http://www.u-sit.net USIT Textbook]. The newsletter is translated into three languages: Japanese, Spanish, and Korean.

Tug of War

2010-07-11T12:39:22Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Trigger Sessions|Unified Structured Inventive Thinking}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Tug-of-War is a [[Force-Field Analysis]] technique by [[Michael Michalko]] and is defined in detail in his book [[Thinkertoys]].

The process is;

# State the problem
# Describe the best case scenario
# Describe the worst case scenario
# List the consitions for each scenario
#* for each case, what are some of the things that help / hinder that outcome
# Not the "Tug-of-War"
#* try and look at the opposing forces that can help / hinder, and see which can be modified.

Unified Structured Inventive Thinking

2010-07-11T12:22:30Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

'''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking''' (USIT) is a structured, problem-solving methodology for finding innovative solution concepts to engineering-design type problems. Historically, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is related to [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]], which originated in Israel and is related to [[TRIZ]], the Russian methodology. It differs from [[TRIZ]] in several ways, but most importantly it is a simpler methodology, which makes it quicker to learn and easier to apply. It requires no databases or computer software.

The goal of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is to enable a problem solver to invent multiple solution concepts in as short a time as possible for real-world problems (day-to-day technical problems in all fields). Key to this methodology is its ability to establish, quickly, unusual perspectives of a problem situation. Innovative results are achieved using tools (heuristics) designed to elicit complementary contributions from both cerebral hemispheres, generating logical and creative concepts. USIT tools and methods began their development in the Ford Motor Company Research Laboratory in a training program called structured inventive thinking that continues to be taught and applied in Ford Motor Company worldwide engineering locations (see History and Industrial Experience).

== Introduction ==

Problem solving is most commonly used in professions such as, engineers, scientists, mathematicians, all of which have diplomas, and inventors who bear patents as proof to their talent.

Engineering and science are mostly based on an algorithmic-type of problem solving developed by applied mathematicians. Inventing is not an algorithmic process; it is a result of unrestricted creative thinking—inspiration. Lacking in algorithmic processes, inventive-type problem solving methodology has eluded much of academia. Many methodologies have been developed and marketed for filling this gap. Though they may or may not involve algorithms, they often entail structured methodology. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has structure, but no algorithms.

== History ==

The methodology known as [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]] (SIT), now known as advanced systematic thinking (ASIT), was brought into Ford Motor Company in 1995. Dr. Roni Horowitz and colleagues developed [[Systematic Inventive Thinking|SIT]] in the early 1990’s with the goal of simplifying [[TRIZ]]. It was introduced into Ford by Dr. Ed Sickafus who modified the methodology for adaptation into an automotive environment and named it "structured inventive thinking", retaining the acronym SIT in honor of the earlier work. In 1997, Ford Motor Company approved the publication of a textbook, ''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – How to Invent'' by Dr. Ed. Sickafus.

Since 2000, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has been taught outside of the company to non-Ford interests. It has been introduced to individuals, companies, and institutions in Africa, Asia, the Americas, Australia, and Europe. A newsletter containing mini-lectures on [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is sent to 43 countries and is translated into three languages (see Resources).

== Overview of USIT ==

It is recommended that one turn to [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] after conventional methodologies have waned. This encourages the rapid application of intuitive problem solving called [[brainstorming]] (in which technologists excel) and the quick collection of “low hanging fruit”. It also sets the stage for beginning unconventional methodology that stresses left-brain/right-brain participation in problem solving (logic/creativity).

[[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] fits between problem identification and the selection of solution concepts found for a problem; both involve engineering and business decisions. Between these engineering-filtering events, a problem solver is free of such filters while searching solution concepts to be engineered. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] emphasizes this distinct division enabling a problem solver to spend time focused on creative thinking without psychologically inhibiting filters—a problem simplification strategy.

All aspects of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] are derived from a unifying theory based on three fundamental components: objects, attributes, and the effects they support. Effects may be beneficial, called "functions", or not beneficial, called "unwanted effects".

The methodology consists of three common phases: "problem definition", "problem analysis", and "application of solution concepts" with equal time spent in each phase.

;Problem definition: A well-defined problem is formulated in an iterative process, described in terms of objects, attributes, and a single unwanted effect. Objects are reduced to a minimum number required to ''contain'' the problem (not to "explain" the problem situation). Multiple root causes are discovered using the plausible root causes heuristic. Abstraction of the problem statement is achieved using verbal and graphic metaphors. Exercise of the "plausible root causes heuristic" carries the problem solver well into problem analysis.

;Problem analysis: Following plausible root causes analysis one of two lines of thinking is followed: 1) a “closed-world” analysis of the problem to understand intended functional connectivity of objects when no problem existed or 2) a "particles method" that begins from an ideal solution and works back to the problem situation.

;Solution techniques: Three strategies for problem solving are based on the metaphorical interaction of objects, attributes, and effects: "utilization", "nullification", and "elimination" of the unwanted effect (see ''Heuristics for Solving Technical Problems — Theory, Derivation, Application'').

;;;;object – attribute
;;;;;;;;\
;;;;;;;;effect – attribute – object
;;;;;;;;/
;;;;object – attribute

;;Graphic metaphor for the interaction of objects and attributes.

Five solution heuristics are used to support these strategies.

1) "Dimensionality" focuses on the "attributes" available and new ones discovered during problem analysis.

2) "Pluralization" focuses on "objects" being multiplied in number or divided into parts, used in different ways, and carried to extremes.

3) "Distribution" focuses on "functions" being distributed differently among objects in the problem situation.

4) "Transduction" uses "attribute-function-attribute links" to reach new solution concepts. This is modeled metaphorically after transducers, which convert information from one form to another.

5) "Uniqueness" characterizes effects of a problem according to their activity in "space" and "time". Each technique is logically tied to one or more of the underlying features in the well-defined problem: objects, attributes, and effects.

== Industrial experience ==

Beginning in 1995, the problem-solving methodology has been taught to Ford’s corporate technologists and management in monthly three-day classes. Weekly User-group meetings allow continued development of skills. A team of specialists was organized to apply the methodology to corporate problems worldwide. Their ideal goal was three 3-hour sessions, one for each phase of problem solving. Before starting a team program, the customer would be involved with the team in gathering necessary background information. Some of this experience can be read in ''Injecting Creative Thinking Into Product Flow'' (see Resources).

Many Japanese companies are having their technologists trained in [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]], especially because of its streamlined nature and ease of understanding.

A reward of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is its ability to enable a technologist to begin solving a problem so poorly worded as, “This gismo doesn’t work. Fix it!” and, “Our competition just lowered their price. Now what?”

== Resources ==

http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm provides free ebooks and newsletters on USIT and reprints of papers and essays. It also gives information on the [http://www.u-sit.net USIT Textbook]. The newsletter is translated into three languages: Japanese, Spanish, and Korean.

Unified Structured Inventive Thinking

2010-07-11T12:11:44Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

'''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking''' (USIT) is a structured, problem-solving methodology for finding innovative solution concepts to engineering-design type problems. Historically, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is related to [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]], which originated in Israel and is related to [[TRIZ]], the Russian methodology. It differs from [[TRIZ]] in several ways, but most importantly it is a simpler methodology, which makes it quicker to learn and easier to apply. It requires no databases or computer software.

The goal of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is to enable a problem solver to invent multiple solution concepts in as short a time as possible for real-world problems (day-to-day technical problems in all fields). Key to this methodology is its ability to establish, quickly, unusual perspectives of a problem situation. Innovative results are achieved using tools (heuristics) designed to elicit complementary contributions from both cerebral hemispheres, generating logical and creative concepts. USIT tools and methods began their development in the Ford Motor Company Research Laboratory in a training program called '''structured inventive thinking''' that continues to be taught and applied in Ford Motor Company worldwide engineering locations (see History and Industrial Experience).

== Introduction ==

Problem solving is most commonly used in professions such as, engineers, scientists, mathematicians, all of which have diplomas, and inventors who bear patents as proof to their talent.

Engineering and science are mostly based on an algorithmic-type of problem solving developed by applied mathematicians. Inventing is not an algorithmic process; it is a result of unrestricted creative thinking—inspiration. Lacking in algorithmic processes, inventive-type problem solving methodology has eluded much of academia. Many methodologies have been developed and marketed for filling this gap. Though they may or may not involve algorithms, they often entail structured methodology. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has structure, but no algorithms.

== History ==

The methodology known as [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]] (SIT), now known as advanced systematic thinking (ASIT), was brought into Ford Motor Company in 1995. Dr. Roni Horowitz and colleagues developed [[Systematic Inventive Thinking|SIT]] in the early 1990’s with the goal of simplifying [[TRIZ]]. It was introduced into Ford by Dr. Ed Sickafus who modified the methodology for adaptation into an automotive environment and named it "structured inventive thinking", retaining the acronym SIT in honor of the earlier work. In 1997, Ford Motor Company approved the publication of a textbook, ''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – How to Invent'' by Dr. Ed. Sickafus.

Since 2000, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has been taught outside of the company to non-Ford interests. It has been introduced to individuals, companies, and institutions in Africa, Asia, the Americas, Australia, and Europe. A newsletter containing mini-lectures on [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is sent to 43 countries and is translated into three languages (see Resources).

== Overview of USIT ==

It is recommended that one turn to [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] after conventional methodologies have waned. This encourages the rapid application of intuitive problem solving called [[brainstorming]] (in which technologists excel) and the quick collection of “low hanging fruit”. It also sets the stage for beginning unconventional methodology that stresses left-brain/right-brain participation in problem solving (logic/creativity).

[[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] fits between problem identification and the selection of solution concepts found for a problem; both involve engineering and business decisions. Between these engineering-filtering events, a problem solver is free of such filters while searching solution concepts to be engineered. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] emphasizes this distinct division enabling a problem solver to spend time focused on creative thinking without psychologically inhibiting filters—a problem simplification strategy.

All aspects of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] are derived from a unifying theory based on three fundamental components: objects, attributes, and the effects they support. Effects may be beneficial, called "functions", or not beneficial, called "unwanted effects".

The methodology consists of three common phases: "problem definition", "problem analysis", and "application of solution concepts" with equal time spent in each phase.

;Problem definition: A well-defined problem is formulated in an iterative process, described in terms of objects, attributes, and a single unwanted effect. Objects are reduced to a minimum number required to ''contain'' the problem (not to "explain" the problem situation). Multiple root causes are discovered using the plausible root causes heuristic. Abstraction of the problem statement is achieved using verbal and graphic metaphors. Exercise of the "plausible root causes heuristic" carries the problem solver well into problem analysis.

;Problem analysis: Following plausible root causes analysis one of two lines of thinking is followed: 1) a “closed-world” analysis of the problem to understand intended functional connectivity of objects when no problem existed or 2) a "particles method" that begins from an ideal solution and works back to the problem situation.

;Solution techniques: Three strategies for problem solving are based on the metaphorical interaction of objects, attributes, and effects: "utilization", "nullification", and "elimination" of the unwanted effect (see ''Heuristics for Solving Technical Problems — Theory, Derivation, Application'').

;;;;object – attribute
;;;;;;;;\
;;;;;;;;effect – attribute – object
;;;;;;;;/
;;;;object – attribute

;;Graphic metaphor for the interaction of objects and attributes.

Five solution heuristics are used to support these strategies.

1) "Dimensionality" focuses on the "attributes" available and new ones discovered during problem analysis.

2) "Pluralization" focuses on "objects" being multiplied in number or divided into parts, used in different ways, and carried to extremes.

3) "Distribution" focuses on "functions" being distributed differently among objects in the problem situation.

4) "Transduction" uses "attribute-function-attribute links" to reach new solution concepts. This is modeled metaphorically after transducers, which convert information from one form to another.

5) "Uniqueness" characterizes effects of a problem according to their activity in "space" and "time". Each technique is logically tied to one or more of the underlying features in the well-defined problem: objects, attributes, and effects.

== Industrial experience ==

Beginning in 1995, the problem-solving methodology has been taught to Ford’s corporate technologists and management in monthly three-day classes. Weekly User-group meetings allow continued development of skills. A team of specialists was organized to apply the methodology to corporate problems worldwide. Their ideal goal was three 3-hour sessions, one for each phase of problem solving. Before starting a team program, the customer would be involved with the team in gathering necessary background information. Some of this experience can be read in ''Injecting Creative Thinking Into Product Flow'' (see Resources).

Many Japanese companies are having their technologists trained in USIT, especially because of its streamlined nature and ease of understanding.

A reward of USIT is its ability to enable a technologist to begin solving a problem so poorly worded as, “This gismo doesn’t work. Fix it!” and, “Our competition just lowered their price. Now what?”

== Resources ==

A key website provides free ebooks and newsletters on USIT and reprints of papers and essays. It also gives information on the [http://www.u-sit.net USIT Textbook]. The newsletter is translated into three languages: Japanese, Spanish, and Korean.

=== Textbook ===
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – How to Invent (click on Publications)]'''” by Dr. Ed. N. Sickafus, ISBN 0-9659435-0-X, Ntelleck, LLC, 1997

=== Ebooks ===
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – an Overview]'''”
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net Heuristics for Solving Technical Problems – Theory, Derivation, Application (click on Publications)]'''”

=== Newsletter ===
*'''[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm U-SIT and Think Newsletter]''' with mini-lectures on USIT

=== Reprints/essays ===
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/PapersEssays/InjectUpdateWeb.htm Injecting Creative Thinking Into Product Flow]'''”
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/PapersEssays/ProblemStmnt.htm Problem Statement]'''”
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/PapersEssays/MetaphoricalObsrvtns.htm Metaphorical Observations]'''”

Unified Structured Inventive Thinking

2010-07-11T12:02:44Z

Andy: Created page with '{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}} Category:Creativity Techniques '''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking''' (USIT) is a structured, problem-solving methodology for finding inn…'

{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

'''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking''' (USIT) is a structured, problem-solving methodology for finding innovative solution concepts to engineering-design type problems. Historically, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is related to [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]], which originated in Israel and is related to [[TRIZ]], the Russian methodology. It differs from [[TRIZ]] in several ways, but most importantly it is a simpler methodology, which makes it quicker to learn and easier to apply. It requires no databases or computer software.

The goal of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is to enable a problem solver to invent multiple solution concepts in as short a time as possible for real-world problems (day-to-day technical problems in all fields). Key to this methodology is its ability to establish, quickly, unusual perspectives of a problem situation. Innovative results are achieved using tools (heuristics) designed to elicit complementary contributions from both cerebral hemispheres, generating logical and creative concepts. USIT tools and methods began their development in the Ford Motor Company Research Laboratory in a training program called '''structured inventive thinking''' that continues to be taught and applied in Ford Motor Company worldwide engineering locations (see History and Industrial Experience).

== Introduction ==

Problem solving is most commonly used in professions such as, engineers, scientists, mathematicians, all of which have diplomas, and inventors who bear patents as proof to their talent.

Engineering and science are mostly based on an algorithmic-type of problem solving developed by applied mathematicians. Inventing is not an algorithmic process; it is a result of unrestricted creative thinking—inspiration. Lacking in algorithmic processes, inventive-type problem solving methodology has eluded much of academia. Many methodologies have been developed and marketed for filling this gap. Though they may or may not involve algorithms, they often entail structured methodology. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has structure, but no algorithms.

== History ==

The methodology known as [[Systematic Inventive Thinking]] (SIT), now known as advanced systematic thinking (ASIT), was brought into Ford Motor Company in 1995. Dr. Roni Horowitz and colleagues developed [[Systematic Inventive Thinking|SIT]] in the early 1990’s with the goal of simplifying [[TRIZ]]. It was introduced into Ford by Dr. Ed Sickafus who modified the methodology for adaptation into an automotive environment and named it "structured inventive thinking", retaining the acronym SIT in honor of the earlier work. In 1997, Ford Motor Company approved the publication of a textbook, ''Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – How to Invent'' by Dr. Ed. Sickafus.

Since 2000, [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] has been taught outside of the company to non-Ford interests. It has been introduced to individuals, companies, and institutions in Africa, Asia, the Americas, Australia, and Europe. A newsletter containing mini-lectures on [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] is sent to 43 countries and is translated into three languages (see Resources).

== Overview of USIT ==

It is recommended that one turn to [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] after conventional methodologies have waned. This encourages the rapid application of intuitive problem solving called [[brainstorming]] (in which technologists excel) and the quick collection of “low hanging fruit”. It also sets the stage for beginning unconventional methodology that stresses left-brain/right-brain participation in problem solving (logic/creativity).

[[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] fits between problem identification and the selection of solution concepts found for a problem; both involve engineering and business decisions. Between these engineering-filtering events, a problem solver is free of such filters while searching solution concepts to be engineered. [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] emphasizes this distinct division enabling a problem solver to spend time focused on creative thinking without psychologically inhibiting filters—a problem simplification strategy.

All aspects of [[Unified Structured Inventive Thinking|USIT]] are derived from a unifying theory based on three fundamental components: objects, attributes, and the effects they support. Effects may be beneficial, called "functions", or not beneficial, called "unwanted effects".

The methodology consists of three common phases: "problem definition", "problem analysis", and "application of solution concepts" with equal time spent in each phase.

;Problem definition: A well-defined problem is formulated in an iterative process, described in terms of objects, attributes, and a single unwanted effect. Objects are reduced to a minimum number required to ''contain'' the problem (not to "explain" the problem situation). Multiple root causes are discovered using the plausible root causes heuristic. Abstraction of the problem statement is achieved using verbal and graphic metaphors. Exercise of the "plausible root causes heuristic" carries the problem solver well into problem analysis.

;Problem analysis: Following plausible root causes analysis one of two lines of thinking is followed: 1) a “closed-world” analysis of the problem to understand intended functional connectivity of objects when no problem existed or 2) a "particles method" that begins from an ideal solution and works back to the problem situation.

;Solution techniques: Three strategies for problem solving are based on the metaphorical interaction of objects, attributes, and effects: "utilization", "nullification", and "elimination" of the unwanted effect (see ''Heuristics for Solving Technical Problems — Theory, Derivation, Application'').

;;;;object – attribute
;;;;;;;;\
;;;;;;;;effect – attribute – object
;;;;;;;;/
;;;;object – attribute

;;Graphic metaphor for the interaction of objects and attributes.

Five solution heuristics are used to support these strategies.

1) "Dimensionality" focuses on the "attributes" available and new ones discovered during problem analysis.

2) "Pluralization" focuses on "objects" being multiplied in number or divided into parts, used in different ways, and carried to extremes.

3) "Distribution" focuses on "functions" being distributed differently among objects in the problem situation.

4) "Transduction" uses "attribute-function-attribute links" to reach new solution concepts. This is modeled metaphorically after transducers, which convert information from one form to another.

5) "Uniqueness" characterizes effects of a problem according to their activity in "space" and "time". Each technique is logically tied to one or more of the underlying features in the well-defined problem: objects, attributes, and effects.

== Industrial experience ==

Beginning in 1995, the problem-solving methodology has been taught to Ford’s corporate technologists and management in monthly three-day classes. Weekly User-group meetings allow continued development of skills. A team of specialists was organized to apply the methodology to corporate problems worldwide. Their ideal goal was three 3-hour sessions, one for each phase of problem solving. Before starting a team program, the customer would be involved with the team in gathering necessary background information. Some of this experience can be read in ''Injecting Creative Thinking Into Product Flow'' (see Resources).

Many Japanese companies are having their technologists trained in USIT, especially because of its streamlined nature and ease of understanding.

A reward of USIT is its ability to enable a technologist to begin solving a problem so poorly worded as, “This gismo doesn’t work. Fix it!” and, “Our competition just lowered their price. Now what?”

== Resources ==

A key website provides free ebooks and newsletters on USIT and reprints of papers and essays. It also gives information on the [http://www.u-sit.net USIT Textbook]. The newsletter is translated into three languages: Japanese, Spanish, and Korean.

=== Textbook ===
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – How to Invent (click on Publications)]'''” by Dr. Ed. N. Sickafus, ISBN 0-9659435-0-X, Ntelleck, LLC, 1997

=== Ebooks ===
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm Unified Structured Inventive Thinking – an Overview]'''”
**[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm Spanish translation]
**[http://www.osaka-gu.ac.jp/php/nakagawa/TRIZ/ Japanese translation]
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net Heuristics for Solving Technical Problems – Theory, Derivation, Application (click on Publications)]'''”
**[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm Spanish translation]

=== Newsletter ===
*'''[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm U-SIT and Think Newsletter]''' with mini-lectures on USIT
**[http://www.u-sit.net/Publications.htm Spanish translation]
**[http://www.osaka-gu.ac.jp/php/nakagawa/TRIZ/ Japanese translation]
**[http://www.ktriza.com Korean translation]

=== Reprints/essays ===
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/PapersEssays/InjectUpdateWeb.htm Injecting Creative Thinking Into Product Flow]'''”
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/PapersEssays/ProblemStmnt.htm Problem Statement]'''”
*“'''[http://www.u-sit.net/PapersEssays/MetaphoricalObsrvtns.htm Metaphorical Observations]'''”

Creative Problem Solving - CPS

2010-07-11T11:21:19Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Crawford Slip Writing|Criteria for idea-finding potential}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]][[Category:Processes]]

[[Osborn's Checklist]] the origin of [[Classic Brainstorming|Classical Brainstorming]] is the root of creative problem solving (CPS). There are a variety of general structures: ‘define problem, generate possible solutions, select and implement the best’ which can be found extensively, in several different academic traditions.

However, the account illustrate here was formulated by [[Sidney Parnes]] in the 1950’s<ref> http://creativeproblemsolving.com/</ref> and has been build upon continuously since then by various authors, e.g. Isakesen and Treffinger (1985) Isaksen, Dorval and Treffinger (1994 and 1998).

The method can be used as a training programme and has a very extensive track record linked particularly with the Centre for Studies in Creativity of the State University College at Buffalo, New York, the Buffalo Creative problem Solving Group, and with the Centre for Creative Learning in Sarasota, Florida.

In it’s most extended and formalised form it has the six stages shown below, each with a divergent and a convergent phase. However, more recent publications seem more interested in focusing on procedure and technique issues, with less weight on the full elaboration of this structure.

The following, based on Van Gundy (1988’s) description, is a very brief skeleton of a very rich process, showing it in its full ‘6 x 2 stages’ form:

# ''Stage 1: Mess finding:'' Sensitise yourself (scan, search) for issues (concerns, challenges, opportunities, etc.) that need to be tackled.
#* Divergent techniques include ‘Wouldn’t It Be Nice If…’ (WIBNI) and ‘Wouldn’t It Be Awful If…’ (WIBAI) – [[brainstorming]] to identify desirable outcomes, and obstacles to be overcome.
#* Convergent techniques include the identification of hotspots ( [[Highlighting]] ), expressed as a list of IWWMs (‘In What Ways Might…’), and selection in terms of ownership criteria (e.g. problem-owner’s motivation and ability to influence it) and outlook criteria (e.g. urgency, familiarity, stability).
# ''Stage 2: Data finding:'' Gather information about the problem.
#* Divergent techniques include Five Ws and H (Who, Why, What, When, Where and How) and listing of wants, sources and data: List all your information ‘wants’ as a series of question; for each, list possible sources of answers; then follow these up and for each source, list what you found.
#* Convergent techniques again include: identifying hotspots ([[Highlighting]]); Mind-mapping to sort and classify the information gathered; and also restating the problem in the light of your richer understanding of it.
# ''Stage 3: Problem finding:'' convert a fuzzy statement of the problem into a broad statement more suitable for idea finding.
#* Divergent techniques include asking ‘Why?’ etc. – the repeatable questions and [[Five Ws and H|Five W's and H]].
#* Convergent techniques include Highlighting again, reformulation of problem-statements to meet the criteria that they contain only one problem and no criteria, and selection of the most promising statement (but NB that the mental ‘stretching’ that the activity gives to the participants can be as important as the actual statement chosen).
# ''Stage 4: Idea Finding:'' generate as many ideas as possible
#* Divergence using any of a very wide range of idea-generating techniques. The general rules of [[Classic Brainstorming]] (such as deferring judgement) are likely to under-pin all of these.
#* Convergence can again involve hotspots or mind-mapping, the combining of different ideas, and the short-listing of the most promising handful, perhaps with some thought for the more obvious evaluation criteria, but not over-restrictively.
# ''Stage 5: Solution finding:'' Generate and select obvious evaluation criteria (using an expansion/contraction cycle) and develop (which may include combining) the short-listed ideas from Idea Finding as much as you can in the light of these criteria. Then opt for the best of these improved ideas (e.g. using Comparison tables).
# ''Stage 6: Acceptance finding:'' How can the suggestion you have just selected be made up to standard and put into practice? Shun negativity, and continue to apply deferred judgement – problems are exposed to be solved, not to dishearten progress. Action plans are better developed in small groups of 2 – 3 rather than in a large group (unless you particularly want commitment by the whole group). Particularly for ‘people’ problems it is often worth developing several alternative action plans. Possible techniques include – [[Five Ws and H|Five W's and H]], [[Implementation Checklists]], [[Consensus Mapping]], [[Potential Problem Analysis|Potential-Problem Analysis (PPA)]]

<references/>

Bodystorming

2010-07-11T11:08:00Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Backwards Forwards Planning|Boundary Examination}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]
'''Bodystorming''' is a technique sometimes used in interaction design or as a creativity technique.

The idea is to imagine what it would be like if the product existed, and act as though it exists, ideally in the place it would be used.

The proponents of this idea like to point out the fact that you get up and move, trying things out with your own body, rather than just sitting around a meeting table. The most common critique seems to be that it is not really a proper user-centred method, since it is more often carried out by the designers than the users of the final product.

==References==
Oulasvirta, A., Kurvinen, E., & Kankainen, T. (2003). Understanding contexts by being there: case studies in bodystorming. Personal Ubiquitous Comput., 7(2), 125-134.

Bodystorming

2010-07-11T11:07:30Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Backwards Forwards Planning|next}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]
'''Bodystorming''' is a technique sometimes used in interaction design or as a creativity technique.

The idea is to imagine what it would be like if the product existed, and act as though it exists, ideally in the place it would be used.

The proponents of this idea like to point out the fact that you get up and move, trying things out with your own body, rather than just sitting around a meeting table. The most common critique seems to be that it is not really a proper user-centred method, since it is more often carried out by the designers than the users of the final product.

==References==
Oulasvirta, A., Kurvinen, E., & Kankainen, T. (2003). Understanding contexts by being there: case studies in bodystorming. Personal Ubiquitous Comput., 7(2), 125-134.

Backwards Forwards Planning

2010-07-11T11:07:13Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Attribute Listing|Bodystorming}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]][[Category:Problem Definition]]

Backwards forwards planning is a process to help ensure you start your exploration of ideas from the most appropriate place. The process is appropriate to open ended problems; where there is no right or correct answer. The intention is to help you gain perspective and to develop a gut feeling of the avenue to start your exploration. For example, if you come out of your house and your car does not start the logical answer is deductive analysis. Check the fuel,electrics,mechanical to find where there is something that was working and is now not working. However, that process will not get you to the meeting on time. You may need to call a taxi or borrow your a car or put your running shoes on! If you are in a creative process defining the problem is going to put you in a box. You want to define wishes and outcomes and then figure out how to achieve them.

The process has three stages.

# Write down the short version of the problem, preferably starting with "How to…"
# If you were to solve the problem in statement 1, what higher level problem would it also solve? Write this down. Continue asking what higher level problem it solves and writing them down. Try to obtain at least 3 statements.
# Going back to statement 1, ask what other benefits would flow from it, if it were a solution. Make sure these are different from those in stage 2.
You can then look at the various definitions and decide which is the most appropriate statement of the problem.

As an example, you are at home, your car is at the garage for repairs and you feel you really need to go and do the food shopping. Your first statement might be;

"How to get into the shops."

If you were to work down the list of additional problems this would solve you might write down

"I could get all the food and drink for the week"

Followed by

" I could relax and not worry any more about where the food was"

Which may lead you to

" I could finish that painting I want to hang in the living room"

Working the other way, what benefits would you also have if you could get to the shops may lead to;

" I could have a look at some clothes whilst I was there."
" I could enjoy some retail therapy" and
" I could call in on my friend for a chat since they live near the shop."

Place the words "how to or I wish" in front of each of these plusses and they become new potential places to start problem solving from

It may be that your original statement is the problem to be solved, or it may be that "How to find time to complete the picture I'm painting" is more important to you. Using this process with literally hundreds of people I have found that about 80% of the time they choose a new task headline

See also [[Chunking]]

Boundary Examination

2010-07-11T11:06:32Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Bodystorming|Boundary Relaxation}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]][[Category:Problem Definition]]

Boundary examination, described by Rickards (1974) and [[VanGundy]] (1981) offers a refinement of problem definition. It is similar to paraphrasing key words and [[Boundary Relaxation|Boundary Relaxation]]. Defining a problem gives a clear task to focus on. The definition highlights some features of the situation as being particularly relevant, and plays down others as largely irrelevant. The problem boundary is the notional 'container', which separates highly relevant features (inside the boundary) from less relevant ones (outside the boundary).

The problem definition, and what is relevant or not, often evolves as your understanding of the situation develops. If the boundary has been provided for you (e.g. because someone else has defined the problem for you) it will reflect their biases and concerns as well as your own, and the boundary setting may itself be part of the problem. It is easy for the area outside the boundary to become ignored ‘background’. This simple method from [[De Bono]] (1982) is designed to bring potentially relevant aspects back into awareness.
# Write down an initial statement of the problem.
# Underline key words
# Examine each key word for hidden assumptions. A good way to do this is to see how the meaning of the statement changes if you replace a key word by a synonym or near synonym.
# Having explored how the particular choice of key words affects the meaning of the statement, see if you can redefine the problem in a better way.
# The aim is not necessarily to change the position of the boundary but rather to understand more clearly how the wording of the problem is affecting our assumptions about the boundary.

Bodystorming

2010-07-11T11:05:51Z

Andy: Created page with '{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}} Category:Creativity Techniques '''Bodystorming''' is a technique sometimes used in interaction design or as a creativity technique. The idea …'

{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]
'''Bodystorming''' is a technique sometimes used in interaction design or as a creativity technique.

The idea is to imagine what it would be like if the product existed, and act as though it exists, ideally in the place it would be used.

The proponents of this idea like to point out the fact that you get up and move, trying things out with your own body, rather than just sitting around a meeting table. The most common critique seems to be that it is not really a proper user-centred method, since it is more often carried out by the designers than the users of the final product.

==References==
Oulasvirta, A., Kurvinen, E., & Kankainen, T. (2003). Understanding contexts by being there: case studies in bodystorming. Personal Ubiquitous Comput., 7(2), 125-134.

Morphological Analysis

2010-07-11T10:54:52Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Mind Mapping|Morphological Forced Connections}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Morphological Analysis was developed by [[Fritz Zwicky]]<ref>Zwicky, Fritz & Wilson A. (eds.) (1967), New Methods of Thought and Procedure: Contributions to the Symposium on Methodologies. Berlin: Springer. Reprint available at [http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html www.swemorph.com/ma.html]</ref><ref>Zwicky, Fritz (1969), Discovery, Invention, Research - Through the Morphological Approach, Toronto: The Macmillian Company. </ref> (the Swiss astrophysicist and aerospace scientist based at the California Institute of Technology) in the 1940's and 50's as a method for systematically structuring and investigating the total set of relationships contained in multi-dimensional, usually non-quantifiable, problem complexes.

Morphological Analysis is an extension of [[Attribute Listing]]. Imagine you have a product that could be made of 3 types of material, in 6 possible shapes, and with 4 kinds of mechanism. Theoretically there are 72 (3x6x4) potential combinations of material, shape and mechanism. Some of these combinations may already exist; others may be impossible or impractical. Those left over may represent prospective new products. This method of can be extended to virtually any problem area that can be structured dimensionally.

==Identifying Suitable Dimensions and Options==
One possible approach is to use group techniques. Brainstorm issues, ideas, facts aspects, etc. associated with your problem, put each piece of information or suggestion on individual cards or Post-it, then group them and label the group (or arrange them using [[Mind Mapping|mind mapping]]). Iterate over and over again until you have condensed your information to a small quantity of labelled groups each of which constitutes an understandable element, and has only a small number of items inside it, each of which is a clear option, written on a card or Post-it.

'''Up to 7 dimensions of 7 values''', gives up to nearly a million potential arrangements, making systematic examination out of the question without the use of computers to assist. However, devices are available to make it easier to study multiple re-combinations. An illustration of this taken from Allen’s Morphologiser a vertical strip is produced for each dimension, with the name of the dimension at the top, the options spaced one under the other below it (e.g. as Post-its stuck one under the other, edge to edge). Place the strips sis by side and slide them up and down to create different horizontal combinations.

'''Up to, say, 50-100''' possible combinations, is a workable range with the aid of a computer to systematically go through every combination.

'''Upto, say, 3-400 combinations''', various techniques/devices can narrow down this larger set of combinations. You could try eliminating less functional dimensions (or options) (e.g. a dimension such as ‘colour’ may well be of only minor significance). An alternative approach (see [[AIDA]]) is to recognize pairs of options that are clearly not of use, by eliminating a pair; exclusion is automatic for other combinations that involved that pair.

'''For still larger numbers''', no systematic investigation is probable. Revert to [[Attribute Listing]], using arbitrarily chosen permutations to stimulate ideas.

== Computer Aided Morphological Analysis ==

Advanced Computer-Aided Morphological Analysis was developed in 1995-96 by Tom Ritchey, then at the Department of Technological Foresight and Assessment, at the Swedish National Defence Research Agency in Stockholm<ref>Ritchey, Tom (2002). General Morphological Analysis: A general method for non-quantified modelling. Available at http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html</ref>. MA/Casper is a dedicated software system which supports an extended form of Morphological Analysis. It serves as a development platform for creating scenario and strategy laboratories, and morphological inference models <ref>Ritchey, Tom (2003). MA/Casper: Advanced Computer Support for General Morphological Analysis. Available at http://www.swemorph.com/macasper.html</ref>. It is presently in its 4th programming version.

With dedicated computer support, far more than 7 variables, and many millions of configurations, can be treated quite rigorously. When a solution space is synthesized, the resultant morphological field becomes an inference model, in which any parameter (or multiple parameters) can be selected as "input", and any others as "output". Thus, with computer support, the morphological field can be turned into a laboratory with which one can designate initial conditions and examine alternative solutions.

==References==

<references/>

== Further reading ==
* Ayres, R.U. (1969). Technological Forecasting and Long-Time Planning. McGraw-Hill.
* Jones, J.C. (1981). Design Methods. Wiley.
* Levin, Mark Sh. (1998). Combinatorial Engineering of Decomposable Systems, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
* Levin, Mark Sh. (since 2004) [http://www.mslevin.iitp.ru Course on system design by Mark Sh. Levin including extension of morphological analysis as Hierarchical Morphological Multicriteria Design (HMMD) approach].
* Levin, Mark Sh. (2006). Composite Systems Decisions. New York: Springer.
* Ritchey, T. (2006). "Problem Structuring using Computer-Aided Morphological Analysis". Journal of the Operational Research Society (JORS), Vol. 57, No. 7.

==External links==
*[http://www.swemorph.com/ Swedish Morphological Society]
*[http://www.swemorph.com/it-art.html Modelling Complex Socio-Technical Systems using Morphological Analysis] Adapted from an address to the Swedish Parliamentary IT Commission, Stockholm, December 2002.

Collective Notebook

2010-07-11T10:30:10Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Cognitive Acceleration|Comparison tables}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

==Haefele’s Original Version==

According to [[VanGundy]] (1981; 1988), John Haefele (1962) of Proctor and Gamble devised CNB to encourage idea generation within an organisation. A key advantage is that since the idea generation is extended over several weeks, the opportunity for incubation and exposure to a wide range of stimuli is readily available. Unfortunately the workload on the co-ordinator can be high if numerous people are taking part, however, that on the participants is very low.

Each participant is provided with a notebook (by the co-ordinator) describing the course of action and giving a broad problem statement. The notebook also contains some suggestions for generating ideas, such as:
* Transformation methods (reverse, expand, minimise)
* Exploration methods (listing problem characteristics or similar problems)
* Seeking remote associations (random stimuli from all five senses; unusual properties of other substances).
# Every day, for one month each participant writes one idea in the notebook.
# At regular periods during the month, participants are given further related information from the experts, the literature and colleagues.
# After four weeks, the participants present a brief written summary, giving:
#* Their best idea to solve the problem
#* Ideas for further investigations that might help solve the problem
#* Any completely new ideas about issues unconnected to the problem.
# The notebooks are collected (by the co-ordinator), where the ideas are categorised and summarised.
# Participants can then view all the notebooks and the co-ordinator's report, after which there may be a general group discussion.

==Pearson’s Variant==

Pearson’s (1979) report is built on the basic structure of Haefel’s original version, but brings his version closer to the Delphi technique.

Participants are drawn from several organisations all over the country and provided with notebooks describing the procedure and giving a broad scenario-prediction task (e.g. about the factors likely to affect managers in the short, medium and long term and their possible consequences)

For up to 2 weeks each participant writes one idea per day in the notebook and then exchanges their notebook with a pre-assigned partner, reads the partner’s ideas, and then continues adding one idea a day to the partner’s book for a further week.

The notebooks are then collected and divided between a team of 3 co-coordinators (to reduce the administrative load) who highlight the key ideas. Responses are categorised (e.g. into issues vs. consequences) and recorded onto index cards. Alternative storyline scenarios are then developed (e.g. round one set of grouping in terms of political, social, technical, economic, personal and resource consequences and another in terms of short- medium- and long-term futures).

The scenarios are compared and discussed to generate further ideas.

Classic Brainstorming

2010-07-11T10:29:43Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Clarification|Cognitive Acceleration}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

# Arrange the meeting for a group of the right size and makeup (typically 4-8 people)
# Write the initial topic on a flipboard, whiteboard or other system where everyone can see it. The better defined, and more clearly stated the problem, the better the session tends to be.
# Make sure that everyone understands the problem or issue
# Review the ground rules
#* Avoid criticising ideas / suspend judgement. All ideas are as valid as each other
#* Lots, Lots & Lots - a large number of ideas is the aim, if you limit the number of ideas people will start to judge the ideas and only put in their 'best' or more often than not, the least radical and new.
#* Free-wheeling. Don't censor any ideas, keep the meeting flow going.
#* Listen to other ideas, and try to piggy back on them to other ideas.
#* Avoid any discussion of ideas or questions, as these stop the flow of ideas.
# Have someone facilitating to enforce the rules and write down all the ideas as they occur (the scribe can be a second person)
# Generate ideas - either in an unstructured way (anyone can say an idea at any time) or structure (going round the table, allowing people to pass if they have no new ideas).
# Clarify and conclude the session. Ideas that are identical can be combined, all others should be kept. It is useful to get a consensus of which ideas should be looked at further or what the next action and timescale is.

Cognitive Acceleration

2010-07-11T10:29:13Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Classic Brainstorming|Collective Notebook}}
'''Cognitive acceleration''' describes a lesson style originally developed by Michael Shayer and Philip Adey at King's College London which is designed to promote student's thinking from "concrete" to "formal", abstract thinking.

The first series used a secondary science context: CASE (Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education). Students experienced 16 Cognitive Acceleration lessons per year for two years. These replaced some of their normal sciences lessons, they were not extra lessons. As a comparison, a similar "control" group did not experience the CASE lessons, but had their usual conventional science lessons instead.

Compared to the control group, the CASE students not only scored about one grade better in their GCSE science, but their Maths and English GCSE grades were also improved by about the same amount. <ref>Adey, P. S..(1993). ''Accelerating the development of formal thinking in Middle and High school students IV: three years on after a two-year intervention'' . Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 4, 351-366. </ref> It is very rare to see such ‘transfer’ of learning to other subjects in educational research which suggests that something very deep is happening. Cognitive Acceleration appears to ‘teach intelligence’.

More recent developments have used primary and secondary Maths (CAME), with similarly successful research evidence. These resources are: Thinking Maths (KS3), Primary CAME (Cognitive Acceleration in Maths Education) for years 5 and 6, and Let's Think! resources for Early Years to Year 5.

Resources have also been produced for technology (CATE), Literacy, Art, Drama and Music.

==Structure of the lessons==
CA acknowledges that there are a set of subskills which underpin abstract thinking. Early lessons focus on these 'schemata' which vary for subjects and age ranges.

While facts and descriptions can be learned, CA shares with Constructivism the view that concepts cannot be learned in the same way. The learner needs to "construct" the meaning for themselves. CA lessons centre on a challenge which can only be explained through an abstract idea.

===The role of the Mediator. ===
If the learner is simply given the challenge they will probably fail. If the teacher simply gives the answer, the learner can only take it in as a fact to be learned. Understanding does not automatically occur. An Instructor tells the learners what he thinks they ought to know. A Mediator sets up a good learning-context and intervenes only to guide the learners toward the learning goal (a touch on the tiller). The mediator asks probing questions: "What do you think?", "Which one is a more likely solution?" "What do you think about Fred's idea?" gradually leading the learner to discover the answer themselves.
They can also offer clues which send the learner off in the right direction, improving the chance of successful thinking.

Lessons which develop abstract thinking directly have the following structure:
# An introduction which sets the scene (concrete preparation)
# A puzzle or challenge which needs to be solved (cognitive conflict)
# Group-work and discussion where pupils share ideas for solutions (social construction)
# Explaining the thinking which gave the answer (metacognition)
# Making links to everyday applications of the ideas discussed (bridging)

=== Setting the Scene===
"Concrete preparation" serves a similar purpose to the final "bridging" section: it links the activity to current knowledge, explains the task and checks vocabulary.

===The Challenge===
This must be set just above the current level of secure knowledge - hard enough to be a challenge, but not so hard as would make the learners "switch off". In a science lesson this can take the form of a demonstration with an unexpected effect. In English it could be reading a text which has an implied meaning.

=== Group-work. ===
Clearly the classroom teacher cannot be the Mediator for every child in the class. If pupils work in groups and discuss their ideas (social construction) there are several benefits:
# group members act as mediators for each other, suggesting solutions, trying out ideas.
# individuals feel less vulnerable and more able to participate.
# random ideas from group-members act as the clues offered by the mediator.
Once the groups have discussed their answers, the class is brought together to share their ideas. Again the teacher does not give the answer. They ask one group for their solution, then ask another if they agree or disagree and why. The discussion continues until there is wide agreement in the group. the teacher leads the group towards the answer through questioning.

===Metacognition===
During group-work and discussions, the teacher (mediator) asks questions designed to reveal the thinking process. This process - metacognition - has been shown to be highly effective in securing the knowledge. The learner has to put into words the line of thinking - which makes the process more available both to others listening and the learner.

===Bridging===
Knowledge learned in isolation from the learner's secure knowledge is usually lost. The learner needs to link (bridge) the new learning to existing experiences. CA lessons conclude with a discussion about where these ideas could be used in everyday life. (This is the same as the concept of "scaffolding" in constructivism.)

==Theoretical background==
The approach builds on work by Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky and Reuven Feuerstein and takes a constructivist approach.

From Piaget, CA recognises that there are stages in intellectual development. At school the most important transition is from concrete thinking - which deals with facts and descriptions, to abstract thinking - any thinking which involves a mental process.

From Vygotsky, CA takes the concept of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD): the difference between what a learner can do without help and what he or she can do with help.

From Feuerstein CA takes the concept that intelligence is not fixed, but is plastic and can be developed. This requires the help of a Mediator: someone who asks questions and allows "guided self-discovery". This mediation can often be done better by peers than by a teacher and so promotes the idea of pupils working in groups to solve a problem.

==References==
<references/>

==Bibliography==
*Adey, P. & Shayer, M. (1994) ''Really Raising Standards.'' London: Routledge
*Adey, P. (Ed.) (2008, forthcoming). ''Let's Think! Handbook: A Guide to Cognitive Acceleration in the Primary School''. London: GL Assessment
*Shayer, M. & Adey, P.S, (2002) (eds.). ''Learning Intelligence: Cognitive Acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 years.'' Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

For CASE
*Adey, P. S..(1993). ''Accelerating the development of formal thinking in Middle and High school students IV: three years on after a two-year intervention'' . Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 4, 351-366.
*Shayer, M., (1999). ''Cognitive acceleration through science education II: its effects and scope. '' International Journal of Science Education, 21, (8), 883-902.
*Adey, P.S., Shayer, M. & Yates, C.(1989). ''Thinking Science: Student and Teachers' materials for the CASE intervention.'' London: Macmillan

For CAME
*Adhami, M., Johnson, D.C. & Shayer, M. (1995). '' Thinking Maths: The curriculum materials of the Cognitive Acceleration through Mathematics Education (CAME) project - Teacher's Guide.'' London: CAME Project/King's College.
*Adhami, M., Robertson, A., & Shayer, M.(2004). ''Let's Think Through Maths!: Developing thinking in mathematics with five and six-year-olds.'' London: nferNelson
*Adhami, M., Shayer, M., & Twiss, S.(2005). ''Let's Think through Maths! 6-9.'' London: nferNelson

== External links ==
* [http://www.cognitiveacceleration.co.uk/ www.cognitiveacceleration.co.uk] The website for CAME (Cognitive Acceleration in Maths Education) and CA in other subjects. Information on theoretical and research background, resources for KS 1-3, teacher and student responses, and professional development courses.

[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Cognitive Acceleration

2010-07-11T10:28:02Z

Andy: Created page with '{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}} '''Cognitive acceleration''' describes a lesson style originally developed by Michael Shayer and Philip Adey at King's College London which is desi…'

{{Techniques-atoz|prior|next}}
'''Cognitive acceleration''' describes a lesson style originally developed by Michael Shayer and Philip Adey at King's College London which is designed to promote student's thinking from "concrete" to "formal", abstract thinking.

The first series used a secondary science context: CASE (Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education). Students experienced 16 Cognitive Acceleration lessons per year for two years. These replaced some of their normal sciences lessons, they were not extra lessons. As a comparison, a similar "control" group did not experience the CASE lessons, but had their usual conventional science lessons instead.

Compared to the control group, the CASE students not only scored about one grade better in their GCSE science, but their Maths and English GCSE grades were also improved by about the same amount. <ref>Adey, P. S..(1993). ''Accelerating the development of formal thinking in Middle and High school students IV: three years on after a two-year intervention'' . Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 4, 351-366. </ref> It is very rare to see such ‘transfer’ of learning to other subjects in educational research which suggests that something very deep is happening. Cognitive Acceleration appears to ‘teach intelligence’.

More recent developments have used primary and secondary Maths (CAME), with similarly successful research evidence. These resources are: Thinking Maths (KS3), Primary CAME (Cognitive Acceleration in Maths Education) for years 5 and 6, and Let's Think! resources for Early Years to Year 5.

Resources have also been produced for technology (CATE), Literacy, Art, Drama and Music.

==Structure of the lessons==
CA acknowledges that there are a set of subskills which underpin abstract thinking. Early lessons focus on these 'schemata' which vary for subjects and age ranges.

While facts and descriptions can be learned, CA shares with Constructivism the view that concepts cannot be learned in the same way. The learner needs to "construct" the meaning for themselves. CA lessons centre on a challenge which can only be explained through an abstract idea.

===The role of the Mediator. ===
If the learner is simply given the challenge they will probably fail. If the teacher simply gives the answer, the learner can only take it in as a fact to be learned. Understanding does not automatically occur. An Instructor tells the learners what he thinks they ought to know. A Mediator sets up a good learning-context and intervenes only to guide the learners toward the learning goal (a touch on the tiller). The mediator asks probing questions: "What do you think?", "Which one is a more likely solution?" "What do you think about Fred's idea?" gradually leading the learner to discover the answer themselves.
They can also offer clues which send the learner off in the right direction, improving the chance of successful thinking.

Lessons which develop abstract thinking directly have the following structure:
# An introduction which sets the scene (concrete preparation)
# A puzzle or challenge which needs to be solved (cognitive conflict)
# Group-work and discussion where pupils share ideas for solutions (social construction)
# Explaining the thinking which gave the answer (metacognition)
# Making links to everyday applications of the ideas discussed (bridging)

=== Setting the Scene===
"Concrete preparation" serves a similar purpose to the final "bridging" section: it links the activity to current knowledge, explains the task and checks vocabulary.

===The Challenge===
This must be set just above the current level of secure knowledge - hard enough to be a challenge, but not so hard as would make the learners "switch off". In a science lesson this can take the form of a demonstration with an unexpected effect. In English it could be reading a text which has an implied meaning.

=== Group-work. ===
Clearly the classroom teacher cannot be the Mediator for every child in the class. If pupils work in groups and discuss their ideas (social construction) there are several benefits:
# group members act as mediators for each other, suggesting solutions, trying out ideas.
# individuals feel less vulnerable and more able to participate.
# random ideas from group-members act as the clues offered by the mediator.
Once the groups have discussed their answers, the class is brought together to share their ideas. Again the teacher does not give the answer. They ask one group for their solution, then ask another if they agree or disagree and why. The discussion continues until there is wide agreement in the group. the teacher leads the group towards the answer through questioning.

===Metacognition===
During group-work and discussions, the teacher (mediator) asks questions designed to reveal the thinking process. This process - metacognition - has been shown to be highly effective in securing the knowledge. The learner has to put into words the line of thinking - which makes the process more available both to others listening and the learner.

===Bridging===
Knowledge learned in isolation from the learner's secure knowledge is usually lost. The learner needs to link (bridge) the new learning to existing experiences. CA lessons conclude with a discussion about where these ideas could be used in everyday life. (This is the same as the concept of "scaffolding" in constructivism.)

==Theoretical background==
The approach builds on work by Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky and Reuven Feuerstein and takes a constructivist approach.

From Piaget, CA recognises that there are stages in intellectual development. At school the most important transition is from concrete thinking - which deals with facts and descriptions, to abstract thinking - any thinking which involves a mental process.

From Vygotsky, CA takes the concept of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD): the difference between what a learner can do without help and what he or she can do with help.

From Feuerstein CA takes the concept that intelligence is not fixed, but is plastic and can be developed. This requires the help of a Mediator: someone who asks questions and allows "guided self-discovery". This mediation can often be done better by peers than by a teacher and so promotes the idea of pupils working in groups to solve a problem.

==References==
<references/>

==Bibliography==
*Adey, P. & Shayer, M. (1994) ''Really Raising Standards.'' London: Routledge
*Adey, P. (Ed.) (2008, forthcoming). ''Let's Think! Handbook: A Guide to Cognitive Acceleration in the Primary School''. London: GL Assessment
*Shayer, M. & Adey, P.S, (2002) (eds.). ''Learning Intelligence: Cognitive Acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 years.'' Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

For CASE
*Adey, P. S..(1993). ''Accelerating the development of formal thinking in Middle and High school students IV: three years on after a two-year intervention'' . Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 4, 351-366.
*Shayer, M., (1999). ''Cognitive acceleration through science education II: its effects and scope. '' International Journal of Science Education, 21, (8), 883-902.
*Adey, P.S., Shayer, M. & Yates, C.(1989). ''Thinking Science: Student and Teachers' materials for the CASE intervention.'' London: Macmillan

For CAME
*Adhami, M., Johnson, D.C. & Shayer, M. (1995). '' Thinking Maths: The curriculum materials of the Cognitive Acceleration through Mathematics Education (CAME) project - Teacher's Guide.'' London: CAME Project/King's College.
*Adhami, M., Robertson, A., & Shayer, M.(2004). ''Let's Think Through Maths!: Developing thinking in mathematics with five and six-year-olds.'' London: nferNelson
*Adhami, M., Shayer, M., & Twiss, S.(2005). ''Let's Think through Maths! 6-9.'' London: nferNelson

== External links ==
* [http://www.cognitiveacceleration.co.uk/ www.cognitiveacceleration.co.uk] The website for CAME (Cognitive Acceleration in Maths Education) and CA in other subjects. Information on theoretical and research background, resources for KS 1-3, teacher and student responses, and professional development courses.

[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Circle Time

2010-07-11T10:11:52Z

Andy: Created page with '{{Techniques-atoz|Circle of Opportunity|Clarification}} '''Circle Time''', also called group time, refers to any time that a group of people are sitting togeth…'

{{Techniques-atoz|Circle of Opportunity|Clarification}}

'''Circle Time''', also called [[Group therapy|group time]], refers to any time that a group of people are sitting together for an activity involving everyone.

The method is now in widespread use in schools across the UK. In Scotland many primary schools use the method regularly and it is starting to be introduced into secondary schools. It’s a special time to share fingerplays, chants and rhymes, songs, play rhythm instruments, read a story, and participate in movement games and relaxation activities. Circle time provides a time for listening, developing attention span, promoting oral communication, and learning new concepts and skills. It’s a time for auditory memory, sensory experiences, socialization, and a time for fun. Circle time can be a complex, dynamic interaction among adults, children, and resources used. Teachers have the power to make group time more effective and enjoyable for all involved. It also has roots in social group work and in solution focused therapeutic approaches.

Use of circle time in schools developed from the [[Quality Circles]] used in industry for many years.

==Organization==
The ideal number of people to be involved is between 6 and 18 because any more than that and it becomes difficult for everyone to take a full part in proceedings.

An open circle is made of chairs or cushions (there should not be any tables or desks which could act as a barrier), allowing everyone to face each other clearly.

Many schools also use a `talking object` to facilitate discussion. The talking object can be anything (a stuffed toy, a cushion or a decorated piece of wood or plastic). This talking object is then passed around the circle and only the person who has the talking object is allowed to speak.

The teacher sits on the same type of chair or cushion as everyone else. This helps to signal that what is happening is a special kind of classroom activity in which the teacher is a facilitator rather than a director. The teacher has a special responsibility to make sure that structured rules of the Circle Time are kept, that everyone's emotions are protected and that suitable activities are prepared. The teacher must also be ready to draw a session to a close if students are persistently breaking the rules.

==Rules==
The most important thing about the rules for circle time is that they should be discussed and agreed by all members. This is one of the first activities that should take place. The three basic rules which should be discussed are:

==Quality Circle Time==
Quality Circle Time is a democratic and creative approach used to consider a wide range of issues affecting the whole school community.

It was developed in response to England's Primary schools' need for a whole school Behaviour Policy as a part of Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE). Quality Circle Time is based on the promotion of self-discipline and self-esteem. Students learn and understand the consequences of their behaviour and begin to take on responsibility for themselves and their immediate and wider community. This has been shown to gradually shift responsibility for discipline from the teacher to the children themselves.

At the heart of the Circle Time Model is a class meeting which involves the whole class sitting in a circle to look at issues relating to personal, social, moral and health education. The circle meetings aim to encourage the development of positive relationships, self-discipline, conflict resolution, assertive communication and democratic group processes alongside the skills of speaking, listening, observing, thinking and concentrating.

Circle Time follows a clear structure over half an hour:

*Opening game: pulls the group together, provides a sense of fun and enjoyment, used to teach learning skills, moral values and codes of conduct
*Round Table: gives everybody a chance to speak. A speaking object such as a conch can be used to enable a focus on the speaker and indicate that all others must listen. It is this section of Circle Time where scripted sentences are often used. Examples might include: I find it easiest to work in class when…I get fed up when... I was pleased with myself when...
*Open Forum: an open, free discussion phase which can be used to discuss and solve problems and set targets
*Celebration of successes: a chance for pupils to thank others, both children and adults, for acts of kindness etc. during the past week
*Closing game: brings a sense of closure and bridges into the next part of the school day

The structure is designed to build a sense of class community and the teacher acts as a non-authoritarian facilitator, encouraging co-operation and creating a climate of emotional safety.

==Problem solving==
Circle time can be used to help solve problems which have been identified by either the teacher or students. Issues and problems can be identified by brainstorming or by rounds such as, "the best thing about this school is..." and "the worst thing about this school is...". Then the idea is to make sure that if a real problem is identified at least one positive suggestion is agreed on before the session ends. (e.g. The teacher will arrange for Jack and Jill to have a meeting with the Principal/Headteacher to discuss the bathrooms).

Games and activities can be engaged in and are designed to promote trust, respect, empathy and understanding which offers participants the security and freedom to explore issues and find ways forward.

==Evaluation and assessment opportunities==
As a well established model used in many Primary schools throughout the UK much evaluation has taken place on the effects of the model in schools. In addition to positive assessment by OFSTED, various studies have evaluated the impacts of the model, e.g. A report on the use of Circle Time in Wiltshire Primary Schools and A report on the use of Jenny Mosley's Whole School Quality Circle Time Model in Primary Schools in the UK (1999) commissioned by All Round Success Charity

Headteachers have expressed concerns about lack of resources and training. They also emphasise the importance of the adult who conducts Circle Time. Without adequate training, the process can become diluted and ineffectual. In untrained or inexperienced hands, Circle Time can be disappointing or even destructive. At its worst, it can be misused by teachers to try and shame children publicly and coerce them into 'behaving'. Or, it can be simply mediocre, where it can become boring and repetitive.

Furthermore, there is the danger of an appreciable gulf between the values demonstrated in Circle Time and the reality witnessed around the school in terms of teachers' attitudes towards each other or towards children. If this is so obviously apparent children can become demoralised and lose faith in the moral values. In many cases the school fails to act on the listening, i.e. they fail to incorporate many of the management issues raised by children into their subsequent action plans. Children can then become cynical and apathetic towards the process, detecting a divide between values and action and may come to see it as little more than another control mechanism.

Much emphasis is placed on the mental health of adult teams in the school and on training. It is impossible to expect adults to respond positively, warmly and calmly if they themselves are emotionally and physically exhausted and /or lacking in team support.

Effective training is seen as vital to the success of Circle Time. Measures include:

*The introduction of the model at teacher training level
*Local Authorities (formerly LEA (Local Education Authorities)) personnel and advisors/inspectors
*Local Authorities programmes involving a number of schools and/or whole school INSET (in-service education and training program) led by accredited Trainers. Demonstration Circle Time sessions involving a specialist and a group of children is often included as part of the INSET
*Research suggests that headteachers consider on-going training an essential pre-requisite for the success of Circle Time and it is strongly advised that schools undergo a process of training from accredited trainers.

==In popular culture==
Circle time is a concept that seems to have spread beyond the U.K. and is sometimes used to indicate simply a form of "show and tell".

*Circle time is mentioned in ''Emily's First 100 Days of School,'' a book by Rosemary Wells. In the entry for number 47, the title character states that she read a book out loud with forty-seven words during circle time.
*Circle time was featured in an episode of ''Blue's Clues'' titled "Blue Takes You to School".
*In the "Cassie the Green Eyed Dragon" story of ''Dragon Tales'', Cassie brings her little brother Finn to school for circle time.
*In its early years, Playhouse Disney used to air a live-action mini show called "Circle Time," where a man would tell a story during Circle Time that related to an issue one of the children was having. Such a story included "The Lion and the Mouse."

==External links==
*[http://csauth.ccny.cuny.edu/current/cwe/Circle-Time-Newsletter.cfm Circle Time Newsletter]
*[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/localauthorities/ Department for Education and Skills]
*[http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/ Ofsted] - is the inspectorate for children and learners in England
*[http://www.circle-time.co.uk/site/home/ Circle Time website] - Jenny Mosley Consultancies & Positive Press Ltd.

==References==
*Mosley, J. (1993) Turn Your School Round LDA: Wisbech, Cambridgeshire
*Mosley, J. and Tew, M. (1999) Quality Circle Time in the Secondary School - A Handbook of Good Practice. David Fulton Publishers: London
*Lloyd, G. and Munn, P. (eds) (1998) Sharing Good Practice: Prevention and Support for Pupils with Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. Moray House Publications: Edinburgh
*Sharp S & Smith PK (1994) Tackling Bullying in Your School - A Practical Handbook for Teachers Routledge: London

Titles produced by Lucky Duck Publishing at 34 Wellington Park, Clifton, Bristol, BS8 2UW are:

*Six Years of Circle Time - a Primary Curriculum (spiral bound activity file)
*Magic Circles - Building Self Esteem through Circle Time (a handbook)
*Picture This - Guided Imagery for Circle Time (audio tape and activity booklet)
*Circle Time Resources (copiable materials)
*Circle Time - An Activity Book for Teachers
*Developing Circle Time (book including worksheets)
*Coming Round to Circle Time (video)

[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Advantages, Limitations and Unique Qualities

2010-07-11T09:52:33Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Adaptive Reasoning|Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

This is a relatively straightforward idea evaluation technique, although it can be used in idea generation.

# Select one of the ideas / possible solutions.
# [[Brainstorming|Brainstorm]] as many advantages of this as you can
# Once you have got to a limit oon advantages, try and [[Brainstorming|Brainstorm]] all the dissadvantages
# Swap mindset again, to try and find all the unique, new or unusual qualities about this idea / solution.

See also [[Plusses Potentials and Concerns]] and [[Receptivity to Ideas]]

==References==

* Creative approaches to Problem Solving, S.G. Isaksen, K.B. Dorval and D.J. Treffinger (1994)

AIDA

2010-07-11T09:51:45Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|7 Step Model|Adaptive Reasoning}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]
AIDA (Analysis of Interactive Decision Areas - Luckman, Operational Research Quarterly, 1967; Friend and Hickling, [[Planning Under Pressure: The Strategic Choice Approach]] by John Friend and Allen Hickling, 1987) is used when you have several inter-connected problems where the solution choices for one will affect the solution choices for another. You therefore need to evaluate the solutions as a group, but the number of theoretically possible group combinations may be large. AIDA identifies combinations that cannot coexist and can therefore be eliminated, hence substantially reducing the number of combinations you need to compare.

Assuming that you have already got a list of problems, and have identified possible solutions for each. Then:

# Identify any problems that do not interact: Draw a matrix with the problem names on each axis (e.g. 5 problems need a 5x5 matrix); delete the diagonal and the bottom triangle, to leave one cell for each different problem pair. Mark each cell 'X' if any of the solutions in the pair of problems the cell represents cannot co-exist. Remove from AIDA any problems with a blank row in this matrix; these have no interactions, and you can work with them independently.

{| border="1" cellpadding="2" align="center"
| ||P1||P2||P3||P4||P5
|-
|P1 ||x|| || || ||
|-
|P2 || ||x|| || ||
|-
|P3 || || ||x|| ||
|-
|P4 || || || ||x||
|-
|P5 || || || || ||x
|}

# Identify incompatible pairs of solutions: Write each remaining problem with its solutions, on a large Post-it slip (e.g. 4 problems give four slips). Stick them on a large working area (e.g. a white-board). Go through each solution on each slip, checking it against every solution on all the other slips to identify any pairs of solutions that cannot coexist. Draw a 'bar-line' linking the two members of each such incompatible pair of solutions. Then all solutions in different problems that are not barred are free to be combined.
# Create a solution tree: Create a tree-diagram that displays all compatible combinations of solution options. Remove any incompatible branches. The remaining solutions can now be compared against agreed criteria like any other set of solutions.

Adaptive Reasoning

2010-07-11T09:50:44Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|AIDA|Advantages, Limitations and Unique Qualities}}
'''Adaptive reasoning''' refers to a problem solving strategy that adapts thinking to address a problem as it changes and evolves.

Adaptive reasoning may also refer to the adaption of thought processes problem solving strategies, conceptual framework, in response and anticipation of the changing nature of the problem being considered.

* "Adaptive reasoning refers to the capacity to think logically about the relationships among concepts and situations and to justify and ultimately prove the correctness of a mathematical procedure or assertion. Adaptive reasoning also includes reasoning based on pattern, analogy or metaphor." (Kilpatrick, p. 170)<ref>Adding it Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics By Jeremy Kilpatrick, Jane Swafford, Bradford Findell, National Research Council (U.S.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2001 ISBN 0309069955, 9780309069953</ref>

* "Capacity for logical thought, reflection, explanation and justification." (Donovan and Bransford, p. 218)<ref>How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom By National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, Suzanne Donovan, John Bransford Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2005 ISBN 0309089492, 9780309089494</ref>

* "The ability of an agent to intelligently adapt its behavior, both short-term and long-term in response to the changing needs of its problem-solving situation" (Turner, p. 4)<ref>Adaptive Reasoning for Real-world Problems: A Schema-based Approach By Roy M. Turner Edition: illustrated Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994 ISBN 0805812989, 9780805812985</ref>

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Template:Reflist

2010-07-11T09:34:38Z

Andy:

<div class="references-small
{{#if: {{{colwidth|}}}
| references-column-width
| {{#iferror: {{#ifexpr: {{{1|1}}}>1
| references-column-count references-column-count-{{{1}}} }} }} }}"
{{#if: {{{colwidth|}}}
| style="-moz-column-width:{{{colwidth}}}; column-width:{{{colwidth}}};"
| {{#if: {{{1|}}}| style="-moz-column-count:{{{1}}}; column-count:{{{1}}};" }} }}>
{{#tag:references|{{{refs|}}}|group={{{group|}}}}}
</div>

Adaptive Reasoning

2010-07-11T09:33:12Z

Andy:

Template:Reflist

2010-07-11T09:31:57Z

Andy:

Adaptive Reasoning

2010-07-11T09:29:31Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|AIDA|Advantages, Limitations and Unique Qualities}}
'''Adaptive reasoning''' refers to a problem solving strategy that adapts thinking to address a problem as it changes and evolves.

==Some definitions==
Adaptive reasoning may also refer to the adaption of thought processes problem solving strategies, conceptual framework, in response and anticipation of the changing nature of the problem being considered.

* "Adaptive reasoning refers to the capacity to think logically about the relationships among concepts and situations and to justify and ultimately prove the correctness of a mathematical procedure or assertion. Adaptive reasoning also includes reasoning based on pattern, analogy or metaphor." (Kilpatrick, p. 170)<ref>Adding it Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics By Jeremy Kilpatrick, Jane Swafford, Bradford Findell, National Research Council (U.S.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2001 ISBN 0309069955, 9780309069953</ref>

* "Capacity for logical thought, reflection, explanation and justification." (Donovan and Bransford, p. 218)<ref>How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom By National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, Suzanne Donovan, John Bransford Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2005 ISBN 0309089492, 9780309089494</ref>

* "The ability of an agent to intelligently adapt its behavior, both short-term and long-term in response to the changing needs of its problem-solving situation" (Turner, p. 4)<ref>Adaptive Reasoning for Real-world Problems: A Schema-based Approach By Roy M. Turner Edition: illustrated Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994 ISBN 0805812989, 9780805812985</ref>

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Adaptive Reasoning

2010-07-11T09:15:49Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|AIDA|Advantages, Limitations and Unique Qualities}}
'''Adaptive reasoning''' refers to a [[problem solving]] [[strategy]] that adapts [[thinking]] to address a problem as it changes and evolves.

==Some definitions==
Adaptive reasoning may also refer to the adaption of thought processes problem solving strategies, [[conceptual framework]], in response and anticipation of the changing nature of the problem being considered.

* "Adaptive reasoning refers to the capacity to think logically about the relationships among concepts and situations and to justify and ultimately prove the correctness of a mathematical procedure or assertion. Adaptive reasoning also includes reasoning based on pattern, analogy or metaphor." (Kilpatrick, p. 170)<ref>Adding it Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics By Jeremy Kilpatrick, Jane Swafford, Bradford Findell, National Research Council (U.S.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2001 ISBN 0309069955, 9780309069953</ref>

* "Capacity for logical thought, reflection, explanation and justification." (Donovan and Bransford, p. 218)<ref>How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom By National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, Suzanne Donovan, John Bransford Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2005 ISBN 0309089492, 9780309089494</ref>

* "The ability of an agent to intelligently adapt its behavior, both short-term and long-term in response to the changing needs of its problem-solving situation" (Turner, p. 4)<ref>Adaptive Reasoning for Real-world Problems: A Schema-based Approach By Roy M. Turner Edition: illustrated Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994 ISBN 0805812989, 9780805812985</ref>

==Bibliography==
(please add content here)

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Template:Reflist

2010-07-11T09:13:21Z

Andy: Created page with '<div class="references-small {{#if: {{{colwidth|}}} | references-column-width | {{#iferror: {{#ifexpr: {{{1|1}}}>1 | references-column-count references-column-count-{{{1}}} }} }}…'

<div class="references-small {{#if: {{{colwidth|}}} | references-column-width | {{#iferror: {{#ifexpr: {{{1|1}}}>1 | references-column-count references-column-count-{{{1}}} }} }} }}" {{#if: {{{colwidth|}}}| style="-moz-column-width:{{{colwidth}}}; column-width:{{{colwidth}}};" | {{#if: {{{1|}}}| style="-moz-column-count:{{{1}}}; column-count:{{{1}}};" }} }}>
{{#tag:references|{{{refs|}}}|group={{{group|}}}}}</div><noinclude>
{{documentation}}</noinclude>

Adaptive Reasoning

2010-07-11T09:12:53Z

Andy: Created page with ''''Adaptive reasoning''' refers to a problem solving strategy that adapts thinking to address a problem as it changes and evolves. ==Some definitions== Adaptive reas…'

'''Adaptive reasoning''' refers to a [[problem solving]] [[strategy]] that adapts [[thinking]] to address a problem as it changes and evolves.

==Some definitions==
Adaptive reasoning may also refer to the adaption of thought processes problem solving strategies, [[conceptual framework]], in response and anticipation of the changing nature of the problem being considered.

* "Adaptive reasoning refers to the capacity to think logically about the relationships among concepts and situations and to justify and ultimately prove the correctness of a mathematical procedure or assertion. Adaptive reasoning also includes reasoning based on pattern, analogy or metaphor." (Kilpatrick, p. 170)<ref>Adding it Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics By Jeremy Kilpatrick, Jane Swafford, Bradford Findell, National Research Council (U.S.). Mathematics Learning Study Committee Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2001 ISBN 0309069955, 9780309069953</ref>

* "Capacity for logical thought, reflection, explanation and justification." (Donovan and Bransford, p. 218)<ref>How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom By National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on How People Learn, A Targeted Report for Teachers, Suzanne Donovan, John Bransford Edition: illustrated Published by National Academies Press, 2005 ISBN 0309089492, 9780309089494</ref>

* "The ability of an agent to intelligently adapt its behavior, both short-term and long-term in response to the changing needs of its problem-solving situation" (Turner, p. 4)<ref>Adaptive Reasoning for Real-world Problems: A Schema-based Approach By Roy M. Turner Edition: illustrated Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994 ISBN 0805812989, 9780805812985</ref>

==Bibliography==
(please add content here)

==References==
{{Reflist}}

Reframing Values

2010-06-29T21:40:53Z

Andy: Updated A-Z

{{Techniques-atoz|Reciprocal Model|Relational Words}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

[[Reframing Values]] is about re-opening choices – for instance much of what we see, as ‘the way that things are’ is really just ‘the way that we choose to see them’. This method could be very useful in reframing [[SWOT Analysis]] evaluations.
* Recognize a concern or issue that you want to work on (e.g. ‘How to improve our school’)
* [[Brainstorming|Brainstorm]] bipolar strategic concepts relevant to the concern e.g.
** Stagnate/innovate
** Grow/decline
** Compete/collaborate
* Select just one of these bipolar concepts that comes across to you as interesting or relevant (e.g. stagnate/innovate)
* Identify firm examples of each pole from your area of concern – e.g. ‘We haven’t changed our teaching methods for some time’ (stagnate); ‘We have developed the new science hour’ (Innovate).
* Try to restate each example so that your evaluation of it is reversed but still true for instance:
** The unchanged teaching methods could be re-stated as: ‘We have a stable and well understood teaching practise’
** The new science hour could become: ‘We have created a science hour, that we don’t have the time to fit into the timetable’.
* As both evaluations are true, you can choose which to focus on at any one time. What are the implications of taking the alternative evaluations seriously?
* Return to Step 3 again, ad lib.
===The following Zen story (adapted from Vaughan, 1979) demonstrates this theory succinctly:===
A farmer who had just acquired a stallion came to the Zen master in distress, saying: ‘Master, the horse is gone the horse is gone!’ for the stallion had run away. The master replied: ‘Who know if it is good or bad?’ The farmer returned to his work feeling sad and miserable. Two days later the stallion turned up and brought with him two mares. The farmer was overjoyed and went back to the master, saying: ‘The horse is back and has brought two mares with him!’ The master replied: ‘Who know is it is good or bad?’ Three days later the farmer was back crying, because his only son, his only helper on the farm, had been thrown by one of the mares, and his back had been broken. He was now in plaster and could do no work. Again the master replied: ‘Who know if it is good or bad?’ A few days later, soldiers came conscripting all the young men in the area. But they left the son because he was in plaster…

Receptivity to Ideas

2010-06-29T21:40:12Z

Andy: updated A-Z

{{Techniques-atoz|Rawlinson Brainstorming|Reciprocal Model}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

This technique suggests that you turn around your traditional way of approaching ideas offered from other people that may initially seem ‘half baked’ ‘off the wall’ or naïve. The method recommends that you be more receptive to such ideas as they could contain the seed of a ‘prize’ idea.

This thought process is particularly relevant when responding to non-experts, whilst it is accepted that they do not understand the area they are talking about, similarly they are not indoctrinated by conventional wisdom about ‘what cant be done’. Harriman (1988) describe two [[Synectics]] techniques to improve receptivity:
===Paraphrasing===
* Once the speaker has offered his thoughts, repeat them back to him using your own words, but keeping as close as possible to the essence of their idea, for instance you could say ‘If I understand this you are suggesting that…’ Do not evaluate or give an opinion on his thoughts, you are trying to establish a mutual starting point and understanding, evaluation comes at a later stage.
* If the speaker agrees that what you have repeated, then you can move swiftly on to the next stage. However if this is not the case, get the speaker to explain further, and try again saying something like ‘Ok, let try again, am I right in saying that the core of your idea is that…’ Continue with this paraphrasing until the speaker confirms your understanding. This stage is essential because it double checks you understanding of what is being suggested, but more subtly shows you are interested in what the speaker is saying.
===Developmental Response===
* After the paraphrasing you need to work towards transforming the idea into a workable solution. Divide your response into positive elements (pros), and negative elements (cons)
** '''Pros''' should be precise and genuine; listing at least one more pro than come easily, often a valuable avenue of thought is opened by that last, hard-to-give pro. This acknowledges the contribution of the speaker and creates better understanding of the problems components
** '''Cons''' should be looked at one at a time, phrasing each one so that it encourages solutions; start with ‘how to’, redirecting discussion toward solving the problem. For example if the con is ‘its expensive’ try saying ‘how can we make it less expensive?’ As you consider each con in turn, correcting it will transform the original idea. The final solution may barely resemble the original thought.
* '''A developmental response''' centres attention on the parts of the idea to be preserved, those ideas often overlooked in the initial rush to identify imperfections. It is a process of transformation, going from constructing fresh ideas into ultimate concepts, motivating participants along the way. It expresses a manager’s intention to resolve the problem and aims discussion to what needs to be accomplished, dismissing nobody in the process.

Reciprocal Model

2010-06-29T21:39:59Z

Andy: Added A-Z

{{Techniques-atoz|Receptivity to Ideas|Reframing Values}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]][[Category:Processes]]

==Uses==
The Reciprocal Model describes creative work (and, arguably, all work) as a cyclical four-step process. It is useful as a descriptive and prescriptive tool for leaders who want to direct individual, group, organizational, or community efforts in a more creative direction. Aspects of it have been taught in the Pacific Northwest at workshops for project managers, sustainability coordinators, and organizational development professionals.

==The Process==

The process consists of these four stages:
*'''Appreciate''' what is
*'''Explore''' what could be
*'''Challenge''' what should be
*'''Produce''' what will be

And each stage ends with a decisive transition:
*Appreciate end with '''Acceptance'''
*Explore ends with '''Focus'''
*Challenge ends with '''Commitment'''
*Produce ends with '''Delivery'''

==The Recipe==
The model can be used as guide for action.

====''Appreciate'' What Is====
*Stop work
*Find a safe environment where work distractions are minimized
*Understand the material impacts on all stakeholders of what has been done so far
*Understand the non-material impacts (emotional, spiritual, etc)
*Don't forget to understand the impacts on you and your colleagues!
*Make peace with the situation as it is (i.e. '''Accept''')

====''Explore'' What Could Be====
*Let go of any feelings of responsibility for changing things or making things happen
*Engage with the environment in which you're operating
*Indulge your curiosity and playfulness - enjoy yourself!
*Come to a realization about what is really important (i.e. '''Focus''')

====''Challenge'' What Should Be====
*Re-engage with your feelings of responsibility for making change happen
*Identify strategies to bring what is really important into being
*Ruthlessly but respectfully challenge each strategy, using appropriate criteria
*Don't forget what is really important!
*Settle on one strategy that you will follow and that you can believe in (i.e. '''Commit''')

====''Produce'' What Will Be====
*Be clear on the description of your work product
*Assemble the necessary resources, support, and influence
*Take whatever steps you seem necessary to plan, execute, manage, and assure quality
*Adjust plans on-the-fly as necessary to accommodate reality on the ground
*Keep your benefactors and supporters well-informed!
*Come to closure with a work product that is complete (i.e. '''Deliver''')

==The Model==
The Reciprocal Model was inspired by the career experiences of Bob Lieberman, a professional musician, writer, and software technology professional who teaches and consults in the Portland, Oregon area. It takes its name from the reciprocal attention we tend to give to our conflicting (but complementary) human needs for survival and fulfillment. As the pendulum of attention swings first one way and then the other, it drives us through the circular progression of activities.

We engage in the '''Appreciate''' and '''Explore''' activities when we're meeting our fulfillment needs, and the '''Challenge''' and '''Produce''' activities when we're meeting our survival needs. The continuity of the four activities permits us to remain connected to both sides of our humanity as we work.

The process itself is deceptively simple, often leading to the mistaken conclusion that it is already being followed. But in most situations, we barely visit one or more of the activities. The key to the creativity in the process is that all four activities must be given their full due, with no skipping or rushing. Any delays introduced by that approach are more than outweighed by the dramatic improvement in the innovation, quality, and suitability of the work products and in the enjoyment and satisfaction of the participants.

==Further Reading==
[http://www.cultivatingcreativity.net Cultivating Creativity – Leadership Development For The Creative Economy]

Creativity Quotes

2010-06-11T06:42:24Z

Andy: removed comments which some people might find offensive

The quotations here fall into two main categories.

The first category is from people who have had a very restricted vision, with hindsight their comments can be used as powerful examples of what can happen if you don't allow creative thoughts to flourish.

The second category is from people who have had a much more creative, open view of life.

==1==

* "Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons." --Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949

* "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." --Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

* "I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." --The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957

* "But what ... is it good for?" --Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.

* "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." --Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977

* "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." --Western Union internal memo, 1876.

* "The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" --David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.

* "The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible." --A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)

* "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --H. M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927.

* "I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary Cooper." --Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With the Wind."

* "A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make." --Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.

* "We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." --Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.

* "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." --Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.

* "If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this." --Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads.

* "So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't got through college yet.'" --Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and H-P interested in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer.

* "Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily in high schools." --1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary rocket work.

* "You want to have consistent and uniform muscle development across all of your muscles? It can't be done. It's just a fact of life. You just have to accept inconsistent muscle development as an unalterable condition of weight training." --Response to Arthur Jones, who solved the "unsolvable" problem by inventing Nautilus.

* "Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy." --Drillers who Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859.

* "Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." --Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University, 1929.

* "Aeroplanes are interesting toys but of no military value." --Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre.

* "Everything that can be invented has been invented." --Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

* "Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction". --Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872

* "The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon". --Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873.

* "640K ought to be enough for anybody." -- Bill Gates, 1981

== 2 ==

* "Innovation is the central issue in economic prosperity" -- Michael Porter, Harvard Business School

* "There is no such thing as a failed experiment, only experiments with unexpected outcomes." -- Buckminster Fuller

* "If at first, the idea is not absurd, there is no hope for it." -- [[Albert Einstein]]

* "Whenever you see a successful business someone once made a courageous decision" - - Peter F Drucker.

* "Standing still is the fastest way of moving backwards in a rapidly changing world. Imagination is the highest kite one can fly" -- Lauren Bacall.

* "The ability to learn faster than the competition is often the only sustainable competitive advantage a company can have" -- Arie de Geus

* "In the long history of humankind (and animalkind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed." -- Charles Darwin.

* "Just as energy is the basis of life itself, and ideas the source of innovation, so is innovation the vital spark of all human change, improvement and progress" -- Theodore Levitt

* "Backwards understood be only can but, forwards lived be must life." -- Kierkegaard Soren

* "Instead of pouring knowledge into people's heads, we need to help them grind a new set of eyeglasses so that we can see the world in a new way." -- J S Brown.

* "And the trouble is, if you don't risk anything, you risk even more." -- Erica Jong.

* "Come to the edge. We might fall. Come to the edge. It's too high! Come to the edge! And they came, and he pushed...... and they flew." -- Christopher Logue

* "The 'silly' question is the first intimation of some totally new development." -- Alfred North Whitehead.

* "Someone once said that for every problem there is a solution that is simple, attractive ... and wrong." -- Arthur C Clarke.

* The opposite of creativity is cynicism. -- Esa Saarinen

* "Problems cannot be solved by thinking within the framework in which the problems were created." -- [[Albert Einstein]].

* "As long as you keep a person down, some part of you has to be down there to hold him down, so it means you cannot soar as you otherwise might." -- Marian Anderson

* "Since finding out what something is is largely a matter of discovering what it is like, the most impressive contribution to the growth of intelligibility has been made by the application of suggestive metaphors." -- Jonathan Miller.

* "The metaphor is probably the most fertile power possessed my men." -- Ortega Y Gassett.

* "The greater the emphasis on perfection the further it recedes" -- Haridas Chaudhuri.

* "When a finger points to the moon the imbecile looks at the finger" -- Chinese proverb.

* "Go some distance away because the work appears smaller and more of it can be taken in at a glance, and a lack of harmony of proportion is rapidly seen." -- Leonardo da Vinci.

* "The aspects of things that are most important for us are hidden because of their simplicity and familiarity." -- Ludwig Wittgenstein.

* "Some people will like me and some won't. So I might as well be myself, and then at least I'll know that the people who like me, like me." -- Hugh Prather.

* "You see things: you say 'Why?' But I dream things that never are: and say 'Why not?'" -- George Bernard Shaw in Back to Methuselah

* "Exhilaration is that feeling you get just after a great idea hits you and just before you realise what's wrong with it." -- Anonymous.

* "Creativity is the ability to see relationships where none exist." -- Thomas Disch

* "A problem is a chance for you to do your best." -- Duke Ellington.

* "When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before." -- Mae West.

* "As soon as you have made a thought, Laugh at it." -- Lao Tzu, Chinese philosopher.

* "Curiosity has its own reason for existing." -- [[Albert Einstein]].

* "All great discoveries are made by people whose feelings run ahead of their thinking." -- C H Oakhurst.

* "If you can dream it, you can do it." -- Walt Disney.

* "If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them." -- Henry David Thoreau.

* "Analysis kills spontaneity. The grain once ground into flour, springs and germinates no more." -- Henri Frederic Amiel.

* "An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come." -- Victor Hugo.

* "Discovery consists of looking at the same thing as everyone else and thinking something different." -- Albert Szent Gyorgi.

* "Think before you speak is criticism's motto; speak before you think, creation's." -- E M Forster.

* "Life does not consist mainly, or even largely, of facts and happenings. It consists mainly of the storm of thoughts that is forever blowing through one's head." -- Mark Twain.

* "There are some things that are so serious you have to laugh at them." --Niels Bohr.

* "I pressed down on the mental accelerator. The old lemon throbbed fiercely. I got an idea." -- P G Wodehouse.

* "Between the idea and the reality falls the shadow." -- T S Eliot.

* "Launching a breakthrough idea is like shooting skeet. People's needs change, so you must aim well ahead of the target to hit it." -- Raymond Kurzweil.

* "Half the failures in life arise from pulling on one's horse as it is leaping." -- Julius Hare, 1795 1855.

* "Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger." -- Franklin P Jones.

* "None of us are as smart as all of us." -- Japanese proverb

* "Tread softly because you tread on my dreams." -- W B Yeates.

* "Never forget that only dead fish swim with the stream." -- Malcolm Muggeridge.

* "There is no limit to what a man can achieve as long as he doesn't care who get's the credit" -- Bob Woodruff. Coca Cola.

* "Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself." -- Doris Lessing.

* "Many ideas grow better when transplanted into another mind than in the one where they sprang up." -- Oliver Wendell Holmes.

* "Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves." -- Carl Jung.

* "Without problems there would be no reason to improve." -- Benjamin C Jones.

* "CREATIVITY is everyone's ABILITY, but, its COMPLEXITY lies in its USAGE." --CreativeCupid aka Madhan Neelapu

* "Thinking CREATIVELY makes you know your actual ability to think"--CreativeCupid aka Madhan Neelapu

* "CREATIVITY is the HEART of every ART"--CreativeCupid aka Madhan Neelapu

* "CREATION is the DIVINE art"--CreativeCupid aka Madhan Neelapu

* "None can confiscate CREATIVITY..........."--CreativeCupid aka Madhan Neelapu

* "CREATIVITY is not just the way I like to think, its the way I like to live in"--CreativeCupid aka Madhan Neelapu

Productive Thinking Model

2010-04-20T13:22:00Z

Andy: correct typos

{{Techniques-atoz|Problem Reversal|Progressive Hurdles}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]][[Category:Processes]]

The '''Productive Thinking Model''' (sometimes also known as '''thinkx''') was developed by [[Tim Hurson]], a Canadian author, speaker, and creativity theorist. It is a structured approach to solving problems or generating creative ideas that is based in part on [[Creative Problem Solving - CPS|Creative Problem Solving]] (CPS) and NASA's [[IDEF]]. The Productive Thinking Model is a framework rather than a technique; that is, various creativity techniques such as [[brainstorming]] and [[Lateral Thinking|lateral thinking]] can be applied at different stages of the process.

==Uses==

The model is used in groups, businesses, non-profits as well as by individuals. Aspects of it are taught at various creativity conferences including Mindcamp in Canada, CREA Conference in Europe, and ACRE in South Africa. The non-profit group Facilitators Without Borders uses the Productive Thinking Model to facilitate problem-solving in communities in need.

==The process==

Like CPS, the Productive Thinking Model has six steps. They are:

====Step 1: "What's Going On?====
Establishes a context for the problems or opportunities being addressed, exploring different ways of stating the so-called "itch", exploring what factors, circumstances, and entities are involved, and what a solution might look like.

There are actually five sub-steps to this phase:

*"What's the Itch?", generating a long list of perceived problems or opportunities, often re-stating similar ones in several different ways, and then looking for patterns and clusters with the mass in order to select one key "problem" to address

*"What's the Impact?", digging deeper into the issue and identifying how it affects the world

*"What's the Information?", describing various aspects of the problem in detail

*"Who's Involved?", identifying other stakeholders in the issue

*"What's the Vision?", identifying what would be different if the issue were resolved, in the form of a "wish" statement (e.g., "If only my dog didn't run away when I let him outside.")

====Step 2: "What's Success?"====
The second step establishes a vision for a future with the problem solved or the opportunity exploited. In this stage often active imagination is used to imagine, explore, and describe how things would be if the issue were resolved. This vision then informs a process of creating a clearly articulated view of the future, using a tool called "DRIVE", short for:
*Do - what do you want the solution to do?
*Restrictions - what must the solution NOT do?
*Investment - what resources can be invested?
*Values - what values must you live by? (e.g. environmentally friendly, etc.)
*Essential outcomes - what are the essential outcomes?

====Step 3: "What's the Question?"====
The third step frames the challenge by turning it into a question. This is accomplished through brainstorm-like techniques eliciting as many questions as possible, and then clustering, combining, and choosing the question or questions that seem most stimulating.

====Step 4: "Generate Answers"====
Through the use of [[brainstorming]] and other idea-generating techniques, the fourth step is designed to create a long list of possible solutions problem question. One of those solutions (or several, combined) is selected for further development.

====Step 5: "Forge the Solution"====
Uses a specific tool called "POWER" to develop the selected solution into something more robust. POWER is short for:
*Positives - what's good about the idea?
*Objections - what's bad about it?
*What else? - what does it remind you of?
*Enhancements - how can what's good about it be made better?
*Remedies - how can the things that are bad about it be corrected?

====Step 6: "Align Resources"====
The final step translates the selected, developed solution into an action plan that may include, among other things:
*to do lists
*time-lines and milestones
*lists of people who need to get involved
*lists of issues that need further work

==Further reading==
*[[Tim Hurson|Hurson, Tim]] (2007). ''[[Think Better]]: An Innovator's Guide to Productive Thinking.'' New York, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cherry Split

2010-04-20T13:03:14Z

Andy: change links

{{Techniques-atoz|Charrette|Chunking}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Cherry Split is an "[[Attribute Listing|attribute listing]]" technique by [[Michael Michalko]], explained in his book ''[[Thinkertoys]].''

The process is

# State the challenge - in two words.
# Split the challenge into two separate attributes.
# Split each attribute into two further attributes.
# Continue splitting each attribute into 2 more attributes, until you have enough to work with.
# Look at each attribute and think of ways to change or improve it.
# Re-assemble the attributes.

'''Watch a demonstration of this technique by UC Berkeley Students''':
# http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V9TgYYDuZM
# http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vs9nId3AhE

Causal Mapping

2010-04-20T13:02:32Z

Andy: change links

{{Techniques-atoz|Cartoon Story Board|Charrette}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

Causal mapping (also known as cognitive mapping) helps you create a structure for messy or complex data.

The resulting structure is a kind of map that is discussable and shareable.

Eden, C. (1992). On the nature of cognitive maps. Journal of Management Studies, 29, 261-265.

Charette

2010-04-20T13:01:06Z

Andy: moved Charette to Charrette: Spelling

#REDIRECT [[Charrette]]

Charrette

2010-04-20T13:01:06Z

Andy: moved Charette to Charrette: Spelling

{{Techniques-atoz|Causal Mapping|Cherry Split}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

This technique originated in the US in the 1960s.

[[Charrette]] involves an intensive on-site consultation process with a community, usually preceded by a massive public relations campaign.

The goal is to develop social, economic and physical plans combining the resources of a number of local groups, integrated as a prioritized action program.

The resource people (consultants, experts, professionals), usually out-of-towners, bring fresh minds to the problems. The Charrette building must accommodate large evening forums and small group discussions during the day as well as secretarial services, the press, television, child care, lunch and light meals. It becomes a ‘live-in, work-in, 24-hour facility’.

A charrette typically proceeds in stages:

# A large public relations campaign (often including a questionnaire and several pre-Charrette workshops to give the community a chance to discuss the problem and to introduce it to the dynamics of Charrette.
# Introductory speeches
# Split into sub-groups
# Sub-group brainstorms, to help build key relationships and to identify community objectives and goals.
# Sub-groups explored possible solutions to agreed issues, with public and private officials being available to discuss the impact of resource limitations and political climate, and to establish responsibility and accountability.
# A detailed implementation strategy and action plan was then produced, with models, drawings, reports, graphics, etc.
# The final proposals were presented before top-ranking officials, the media and the whole community, in a climate of strong community commitment.
# A report was produced so that anyone could discover what happened. Local newspapers, TV and radio were usually closely involved.

Card Story Boards

2010-04-20T12:58:31Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|CATWOE|Cartoon Story Board}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

This technique, although similarly named, differs from the [[Cartoon Story Board]] technique. It is an ‘idea’ organizing’ method using tree logic (c.f. [[Mind Mapping]], and other hierarchical diagrams and outlines, and Venn-convention methods such at [[Snowball Technique]], and [[KJ-Method]] ).

With card story boards, the facilitator can concentrate on idea-generation of particular topics and sub-topics much more closely than typically possible in open-ended methods (c.f. [[BrainWriting|Constrained BrainWriting]] as another way to achieve this).

Cards are arranged in a tabular format – a simple row of header cards (or possibly header and sub-header cards as in the example below), each with a column of idea cards below it, perhaps with added action or comment notes attached (index cards or Post-it slips could be used):

[[Image:cardstory.gif|center]]

Different-shaped or coloured header cards look more striking. If you want to use non-sticky cards, you can make a re-stickable display area by spraying flip-chart paper with low-tack adhesive (available in spray cans). Then the cards can be positioned, rearranged or removed as you wish.

One possible approach is as follows:

# The group leader describes the problem to the participants; they then suggest possible categories of solutions. These are written on cards and displayed as a row of ‘headers’.
# The group leader selects a particular ‘header’ and participants write ideas relating to that header on cards. These idea-cards are displayed under the relevant header, followed by the leader posing provocative questions to prompt further idea-cards under that header. This process is repeated with other headers, until there is an adequate supply of ideas. If necessary, return to Step 1 to generate further headers, and/or add sub-header cards under a particular header card
# Now, rank the idea cards via a suitable voting method and prioritize them under each header (or sub-header). The best three in each category are discussed further, and ranked amongst themselves

Smithers (1984), of the Creative Thinking Centre, adds a introductory problem clarification stage by initially putting up a header saying ‘Purpose’ and then getting the group to develop idea-cards under this header for different aspects of the ‘Purpose’ of solving the problem. The headers for the idea-generation stage are then created as a result of this initial stage, one group member writes the cards, another member pins them up, allowing the group leader to concentrate on facilitation.

FASTTRACK, a fully developed problem-solving process devised by Bauer and Associates (1985), makes extensive use of card story boards. They use a

* ‘Why?’ header (equivalent to Smithers’ ‘Purpose’),
* ‘Miscellaneous’ header (for use where there is disagreement about the category of an idea)
* ‘Wild Card’ header (where all rejected ideas are stored)
* ‘Causes’ header (for evaluation)
* ‘Consequences’ header (for evaluation)
* ‘Essential Criteria’ header (for evaluation)
* ‘Solution ideas’ header (for evaluation)
* ‘Selected solution(s)’ header (for evaluation)
* ‘Action Steps’ header (for evaluation)
* ‘Assessment Steps’ header (for evaluation)

This process compactly summarizes the problem and lists current ideas for addressing it, in a system that is easily adjusted.

You can also use header cards to represent steps or procedural elements (instead of idea categories) with the idea-cards showing the results of each step.

Bunches of Bananas

2010-04-20T12:55:32Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|BulletProofing|CATWOE}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

The Bunches of Bananas technique is one of lateral thinking, reducing excessive left-brain attention (which may be fueling a closed mindset). For example, there are people who instinctively liven up a sluggish meeting by being provocative, or ‘throwing in a bunch of bananas’. Such actions can help spur others' creativity.

Here are some tips:

# Consider the mood and atmosphere: are there any signs of ‘stuckness, sluggishness, and inertia’?
# What could you say or do to assist the group out of that state of ‘stuckness’. Create ‘bunches of bananas’ to suit your own character and style.
# Bear in mind in mind that you are engaging in a ‘whole-brain’ activity. Just as with a comedian, it is as much the delivery as the idea, which brings about the effect.
# If the group is inexperienced, the approach may have to be appropriately signalled: ‘I know this is going to sound a little crazy, but bear with me a minute or so. Sometime you can get out of a rut in the most unexpected ways…’
# For example, a group wanting to market goods from the UK to Australia exhausted all the obvious possibilities and seemed to be ‘stuck’. Then someone said:
** ‘We don’t seem to be getting very far. What I’d like to do would be to find a product that every Australian sheep would be clamouring to buy’.
** Although this comment could have been met with disapproval or polite silence, the timing of his ‘bunch of bananas’ was just right and someone picked up the idea:
** ‘Sheep? Oh, you mean for us find large numbers of customers who can be influenced easily. Perhaps we have been concentrating too hard on too few clients’.
** The discussion this idea triggered, eventually led to a new product being marketed to Australia.
** 'Bunches of bananas’ can come in a variety of forms – any well placed joke or image that captures attention when appropriate. The simple use of Random Stimuli of Various Kinds can often have the same effect.

In many ways, the actual content of the intervention is not important. It is concerned more with mood than with correctness of content, although it does involve some risk and uncertainty, as you can never foresee the consequence the intervention will have.

Brainwriting

2010-04-20T12:53:44Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Brainstorming|Browsing}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

BrainWriting is a technique similar to [[Brainstorming]] and [[Trigger Sessions]]. There are many varieties, but the general process is that all ideas are recorded by the individual who thought of them. They are then passed on to the next person who uses them as a trigger for their own ideas. Examples of this include;
==BrainWriting Pool==

Each person, using Post-it notes or small cards, writes down ideas, and places them in the centre of the table. Everyone is free to pull out one or more of these ideas for inspiration. Team members can create new ideas, variations or piggyback on existing ideas.
==BrainWriting 6-3-5==

The name Brainwriting 6-3-5 comes from the process of having 6 people write 3 ideas in 5 minutes. Each person has a blank 6-3-5 worksheet (below)

{| width="75%" border="1" align="center" bgcolor="#FFFF99"
| colspan="4" | '''Problem Statement: How to...'''
|-
| width="10%" |
| width="30%" |Idea 1
| width="30%" |Idea 2
| width="30%" |Idea 3
|-
|1 || || ||
|-
|2 || || ||
|-
|3 || || ||
|-
|4 || || ||
|-
|5 || || ||
|-
|6 || || ||
|}

Everyone writes the problem statement at the top of their worksheet (word for word from an agreed problem definition). They then write 3 ideas on the top row of the worksheet in 5 minutes in a complete and concise sentence (6-10 words). At the end of 5 minutes (or when everyone has finished writing) pass the worksheet to the person on your right. You then add three more ideas. The process continues until the worksheet is completed.

There will now be a total of 108 ideas on the 6 worksheets. These can now be assessed.
==Idea Card Method==

Each person, using Post-it notes or small cards, writes down ideas, and places them next to the person on his or her right. Each person draws a card from there neighbours pile as needed for inspiration. Once the idea has been used, it is passed on to the person on the right along with any new, variations or piggybacked ideas.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

==BrainWriting Game==

This method is set in the form of a light-hearted competitive game. Creativity methods normally avoid competition because it tends to be divisive. However, as long as the game atmosphere is fun rather than overly competitive, and the facilitator ensures that there are no significant losers, the game format might be useful, particularly in training contexts where winning and losing are likely to be less of an issue and both can be used to provide teaching material.

The game will take a little longer than some other brainwriting techniques. Very little facilitation skill is needed. The structure is as follows:

# Display the problem statement, and explain that the winner of the game is the one who devises the most unlikely solution.
# The facilitator sells each group member an agreed number (say 10) of blank, serially numbered cards at, say, 10p each, pooling the money to form the prize. Each group member signs a receipt that records the serial numbers of their set of cards.
# Members try to think of utterly implausible solutions, writing one per card. The cards are then put up on a display board.
# Members now have (say) 15 minutes to silently read all the solutions, and to append to them (on further un-numbered cards or Post-its) ways in which they could be converted into a more practical way of solving the problem (so reducing that ideas’ chances of winning).
# Each member then has two votes (e.g. two sticky stars) to vote for what s/he now considers to be the most improbable idea on the numbered cards. The idea that attracts most votes wins the pooled money.
# Form two sub-groups, give half the cards to each, and give each group (say) 15 minutes to develop six viable solutions from their cards.
# Each sub-group tries to ‘sell’ their ideas to the other sub-group.
# Everyone comes together and agrees on the best ideas overall.

==Constrained BrainWriting==

On a number of occasions you may want to constrained ideas around pre-determined focus, rather than ranging freely. The versions described here use the standard Brainwriting pool technique, but bias the idea generation by using brain-writing sheets prepared in advance.

# Present starter ideas: The leader initiates the process by placing several prepared sheets of paper in the pool in the centre of the table (see note below).
# Private brainwriting: Each group member takes a sheet, reads it, and silently adds his or her ideas.
# Change sheet: When a member runs out of ideas or wants to have the stimulation of another’s ideas, s/he puts one list back in the centre of the table and takes one returned by another member. After reviewing this new list s/he has just selected, s/he adds more ideas.
# Repeat until ideas are exhausted. No discussion at any stage.

==Varying the level of constraint==

Cued brainwriting: For mild constraint, the sheets are simply primed with one or more starting ideas (e.g. SWOT's, issues) in the required area.

Structured brain-writing: For a stronger constraint the sheets can be formally headed, each sheet relating to a particular issue or theme, with participants being asked to keep the ideas they contribute on each sheet relevant to the issue in the heading on that sheet.

See [[Card Story Boards]], for another way of directing idea generation.

Brainwriting

2010-04-20T12:52:42Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Brainstorming|Browsing}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

[[BrainWriting]] is a technique similar to [[Brainstorming]] and [[Trigger Sessions]]. There are many varieties, but the general process is that all ideas are recorded by the individual who thought of them. They are then passed on to the next person who uses them as a trigger for their own ideas. Examples of this include;
==BrainWriting Pool==

Each person, using Post-it notes or small cards, writes down ideas, and places them in the centre of the table. Everyone is free to pull out one or more of these ideas for inspiration. Team members can create new ideas, variations or piggyback on existing ideas.
==BrainWriting 6-3-5==

The name Brainwriting 6-3-5 comes from the process of having 6 people write 3 ideas in 5 minutes. Each person has a blank 6-3-5 worksheet (below)

{| width="75%" border="1" align="center" bgcolor="#FFFF99"
| colspan="4" | '''Problem Statement: How to...'''
|-
| width="10%" |
| width="30%" |Idea 1
| width="30%" |Idea 2
| width="30%" |Idea 3
|-
|1 || || ||
|-
|2 || || ||
|-
|3 || || ||
|-
|4 || || ||
|-
|5 || || ||
|-
|6 || || ||
|}

Everyone writes the problem statement at the top of their worksheet (word for word from an agreed problem definition). They then write 3 ideas on the top row of the worksheet in 5 minutes in a complete and concise sentence (6-10 words). At the end of 5 minutes (or when everyone has finished writing) pass the worksheet to the person on your right. You then add three more ideas. The process continues until the worksheet is completed.

There will now be a total of 108 ideas on the 6 worksheets. These can now be assessed.
==Idea Card Method==

Each person, using Post-it notes or small cards, writes down ideas, and places them next to the person on his or her right. Each person draws a card from there neighbours pile as needed for inspiration. Once the idea has been used, it is passed on to the person on the right along with any new, variations or piggybacked ideas.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

==BrainWriting Game==

This method is set in the form of a light-hearted competitive game. Creativity methods normally avoid competition because it tends to be divisive. However, as long as the game atmosphere is fun rather than overly competitive, and the facilitator ensures that there are no significant losers, the game format might be useful, particularly in training contexts where winning and losing are likely to be less of an issue and both can be used to provide teaching material.

The game will take a little longer than some other brainwriting techniques. Very little facilitation skill is needed. The structure is as follows:

# Display the problem statement, and explain that the winner of the game is the one who devises the most unlikely solution.
# The facilitator sells each group member an agreed number (say 10) of blank, serially numbered cards at, say, 10p each, pooling the money to form the prize. Each group member signs a receipt that records the serial numbers of their set of cards.
# Members try to think of utterly implausible solutions, writing one per card. The cards are then put up on a display board.
# Members now have (say) 15 minutes to silently read all the solutions, and to append to them (on further un-numbered cards or Post-its) ways in which they could be converted into a more practical way of solving the problem (so reducing that ideas’ chances of winning).
# Each member then has two votes (e.g. two sticky stars) to vote for what s/he now considers to be the most improbable idea on the numbered cards. The idea that attracts most votes wins the pooled money.
# Form two sub-groups, give half the cards to each, and give each group (say) 15 minutes to develop six viable solutions from their cards.
# Each sub-group tries to ‘sell’ their ideas to the other sub-group.
# Everyone comes together and agrees on the best ideas overall.

==Constrained BrainWriting==

On a number of occasions you may want to constrained ideas around pre-determined focus, rather than ranging freely. The versions described here use the standard Brainwriting pool technique, but bias the idea generation by using brain-writing sheets prepared in advance.

# Present starter ideas: The leader initiates the process by placing several prepared sheets of paper in the pool in the centre of the table (see note below).
# Private brainwriting: Each group member takes a sheet, reads it, and silently adds his or her ideas.
# Change sheet: When a member runs out of ideas or wants to have the stimulation of another’s ideas, s/he puts one list back in the centre of the table and takes one returned by another member. After reviewing this new list s/he has just selected, s/he adds more ideas.
# Repeat until ideas are exhausted. No discussion at any stage.

==Varying the level of constraint==

Cued brainwriting: For mild constraint, the sheets are simply primed with one or more starting ideas (e.g. SWOT's, issues) in the required area.

Structured brain-writing: For a stronger constraint the sheets can be formally headed, each sheet relating to a particular issue or theme, with participants being asked to keep the ideas they contribute on each sheet relevant to the issue in the heading on that sheet.

See [[Card Story Boards]], for another way of directing idea generation.

Brainstorming

2010-04-20T12:51:32Z

Andy: correct typos

{{Techniques-atoz|BrainSketching|Brainwriting}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]][[Category:Idea Generation]]

Brainstorming was introduced by [[Alex Osborn]], founder of the [[Creative Education Foundation]] and co-founder of the ad firm [[BBDO]]. The term Brainstorming has become a commonly used word in the English language as a generic term for creative thinking. The basis of Brainstorming is a generating ideas in a group situation based on the principle of suspending judgement - a principle which scientific research has proved to be highly productive in individual effort as well as group effort. The generation phase is separate from the judgement phase of thinking.

One of the problems I find, is that there are many variants of Brainstorming, although the basic rules are the same.

* [[Classic Brainstorming]] goes over the typical rules and method of brainstorming. Others include;
* [[Rawlinson Brainstorming]]
* [[Imaginary Brainstorming]]
* [[Trigger Sessions]]
* [[Brainwriting]]

Boundary Relaxation

2010-04-20T12:50:42Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Boundary Examination|BrainSketching}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

The problem boundary is defined here as the imaginary line between what a problem is, must be, should be, or could be, and what it isn’t, mustn’t be, shouldn’t be, or couldn’t be. This approach works in two stages: first, by identifying the elements of the boundary; then seeing how far they can be loosened.

See also [[Multiple Redefinition]] and [[Boundary Examination]].
==Identifying the boundary==
The boundary can be identified and defined by a number of different techniques;
* By stating what the issues isn't: Take each significant term in a problem statement and define it more clearly by saying what it is not, for example:
How to design not guess, make up, draw…
a handset not hands free, remote…
to replace not alter, modify, change colour..
the telephone not the radio, pager, computer...
* Research: Boundary conditions not mentioned in the problem statement may often be found by researching or generally ‘asking around’. Sometimes you may need to ‘read between the lines’.
* Checklists: Similar problems often share similar boundaries, so checklists can be helpful. For instance, most managerial problem solving has to work within upper (and sometimes lower) limits of:
** approval authorization, legality, regulations, due process …
** resources money, skill, people, time, equipment …
** prior investments structure, plant, suppliers, markets, image …
** Acceptability levels of intrusion, change, spread of information…
** Involve mentor non-alienation staff, customers, stakeholders, etc.
* Boundary Brainstorming: You can use brainstorming and nominal group methods to generate lists of issues or components that might be inside the problem boundary, outside it but in the near environment, and remoter from it. Check them with people involved in the problem, and define the boundary by sorting these items into those definitely inside the boundary, definitely outside it and possibly negotiable.

==Relaxing the boundaries==
Once a boundary feature has been identified clearly, then it is usually relatively simple to ask yourself and/or others involved: ‘Would it help if this part of the boundary could be altered in some way – and if so, how and when?’

It may be easier to get temporary shifting of a boundary by discreetly ‘bending’ it and making sure nothing goes wrong, than by trying to get formal permission to alter it. As is often the case ‘ it is easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission.’

Boundary Relaxation

2010-04-20T12:49:52Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Boundary Examination|BoundarySketching}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

The problem boundary is defined here as the imaginary line between what a problem is, must be, should be, or could be, and what it isn’t, mustn’t be, shouldn’t be, or couldn’t be. This approach works in two stages: first, by identifying the elements of the boundary; then seeing how far they can be loosened.

See also [[Multiple Redefinition]] and [[Boundary Examination]].
==Identifying the boundary==
The boundary can be identified and defined by a number of different techniques;
* By stating what the issues isn't: Take each significant term in a problem statement and define it more clearly by saying what it is not, for example:
How to design not guess, make up, draw…
a handset not hands free, remote…
to replace not alter, modify, change colour..
the telephone not the radio, pager, computer...
* Research: Boundary conditions not mentioned in the problem statement may often be found by researching or generally ‘asking around’. Sometimes you may need to ‘read between the lines’.
* Checklists: Similar problems often share similar boundaries, so checklists can be helpful. For instance, most managerial problem solving has to work within upper (and sometimes lower) limits of:
** approval authorization, legality, regulations, due process …
** resources money, skill, people, time, equipment …
** prior investments structure, plant, suppliers, markets, image …
** Acceptability levels of intrusion, change, spread of information…
** Involve mentor non-alienation staff, customers, stakeholders, etc.
* Boundary Brainstorming: You can use brainstorming and nominal group methods to generate lists of issues or components that might be inside the problem boundary, outside it but in the near environment, and remoter from it. Check them with people involved in the problem, and define the boundary by sorting these items into those definitely inside the boundary, definitely outside it and possibly negotiable.

==Relaxing the boundaries==
Once a boundary feature has been identified clearly, then it is usually relatively simple to ask yourself and/or others involved: ‘Would it help if this part of the boundary could be altered in some way – and if so, how and when?’

It may be easier to get temporary shifting of a boundary by discreetly ‘bending’ it and making sure nothing goes wrong, than by trying to get formal permission to alter it. As is often the case ‘ it is easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission.’

Boundary Relaxation

2010-04-20T12:49:13Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Boundary Examination|Boundary relaxation}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

The problem boundary is defined here as the imaginary line between what a problem is, must be, should be, or could be, and what it isn’t, mustn’t be, shouldn’t be, or couldn’t be. This approach works in two stages: first, by identifying the elements of the boundary; then seeing how far they can be loosened.

See also [[Multiple Redefinition]] and [[Boundary Examination]].
==Identifying the boundary==
The boundary can be identified and defined by a number of different techniques;
* By stating what the issues isn't: Take each significant term in a problem statement and define it more clearly by saying what it is not, for example:
How to design not guess, make up, draw…
a handset not hands free, remote…
to replace not alter, modify, change colour..
the telephone not the radio, pager, computer...
* Research: Boundary conditions not mentioned in the problem statement may often be found by researching or generally ‘asking around’. Sometimes you may need to ‘read between the lines’.
* Checklists: Similar problems often share similar boundaries, so checklists can be helpful. For instance, most managerial problem solving has to work within upper (and sometimes lower) limits of:
** approval authorization, legality, regulations, due process …
** resources money, skill, people, time, equipment …
** prior investments structure, plant, suppliers, markets, image …
** Acceptability levels of intrusion, change, spread of information…
** Involve mentor non-alienation staff, customers, stakeholders, etc.
* Boundary Brainstorming: You can use brainstorming and nominal group methods to generate lists of issues or components that might be inside the problem boundary, outside it but in the near environment, and remoter from it. Check them with people involved in the problem, and define the boundary by sorting these items into those definitely inside the boundary, definitely outside it and possibly negotiable.

==Relaxing the boundaries==
Once a boundary feature has been identified clearly, then it is usually relatively simple to ask yourself and/or others involved: ‘Would it help if this part of the boundary could be altered in some way – and if so, how and when?’

It may be easier to get temporary shifting of a boundary by discreetly ‘bending’ it and making sure nothing goes wrong, than by trying to get formal permission to alter it. As is often the case ‘ it is easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission.’

Alternative Scenarios

2010-04-20T12:42:02Z

Andy: correct typos

{{Techniques-atoz|Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving|Analogies}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]
Scenarios are qualitatively different descriptions of plausible futures. They can give you a deeper understanding of potential environments in which you might have to operate and what you may need to do in the present. Scenario analysis helps you to identify what environmental factors to monitor over time, so that when the environment shifts, you can recognize where it may be headed.

Thinking through scenarios, while it may seem an exercise in speculation to some, is a less risky, more conservative approach to planning than relying on standard business forecasts and trend analyses. The latter have their place, but often do not employ sufficient imagination to discover how circumstances will change. Good scenario thinking helps management to take more innovative actions, and prevent undesirable outcomes. Scenarios can explore general alternative futures and specific problems or strategies.

Both '''Factors-Based''' and '''Growth-Based''' methods may be used in alternative scenario development.

1. To develop '''Alternative Factors Scenarios (AFS)''':

# State the specific decision that needs to be made.
# Identify the major environmental factors (forces, drivers, trends, limits, etc.) that impact on the decision. For example, suppose you need to decide how to invest R & D funds in order to be positioned for opportunities that might emerge by the year 2010. The major environmental factors might include social values, economic growth world-wide and international trade access (tariffs etc.).
# Build four scenarios based on the principal factors. To do this, use information available to you to identify four (or more) plausible and qualitatively different possibilities for each force. Alternatively, identify the two most important and most uncertain factors that are outside the control of organizational strategy (eg., high/low economic growth, good/bad weather, etc.) and develop a matrix of four outcomes based on the two factors. Assemble the alternatives for each factors outcome into internally consistent 'stories', with both a narrative and a table of key factors and scenarios. Build your scenarios around these factors. For instance, a mid-western bank used scenarios to stimulate new ideas for maintaining a strong consumer-lending business in upcoming deregulation. Scenario story lines emerged for 'As at present', 'Heated', 'Belt Tightening' and 'Isolation'.
# With the scenarios in hand, identify business opportunities and risk management strategies within each scenario.
# Examine the links and synergies of opportunities and risk abatement across the range of scenarios. This would help you to formulate more realistic and robust strategy.

For more on AFS:
* See Wikipedia's entry on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scenario_planning Scenario Planning].
* See [http://www.infinitefutures.com/aboutif.shtml Wendy Shultz's] summary of the [http://www.infinitefutures.com/tools/sbschwartz.shtml Peter Schwartz/GBN scenario building approach].

2. To develop '''Alternative Growth Scenarios (AGS)''':

Beginning in the mid-1970's, after analysing images of the future in many cultures, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Dator Jim Dator] of the [http://www.futures.hawaii.edu Hawaii Research Center for Futures Studies], proposed that all futures stories can be categorized into "Four Futures", or '''Generic Alternative Scenarios (GAS)'''[1]:
# '''Continuation''' (usually "continued economic growth")
# '''Collapse''' (from one or more of a variety of different reasons)
# '''Disciplined Society''' (in which society in the future is seen as organized around some set of overarching values, ancient, traditional, natural, ideologically-correct, or God-given)
# '''Transformational Society''' (usually either "high tech" or "high spirit," or both, with the end of some current patterns/values, and emergence of new ones, rather than the return to older traditional patterns/values)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Smart_%28futurist%29 John Smart] of the [http://www.accelerating.org Acceleration Studies Foundation] proposes that Dator's Four Futures can also be interpreted as four classic alternatives to growth, or '''Alternative Growth Scenarios (AGS)''':
# '''Continuation''' (A future in which current key conditions persist, including continued historical exponential growth in certain domains (economics, science and technology (S&T), cultural complexity, etc.) This marginal rate of growth increases the longer S&T have been in use by a civilization. Also known as PTE "present trends extended")
# '''Limits and Discipline''' (A future in which we encounter resource-based or values-based limits to PTE. A saturation or "sustainability" regime emerges, slowing previous growth and organizing around values that are ancient, traditional, natural, ideologically-correct, or God-given)
# '''Decline and Collapse''' (A future in which at least some conditions deteriorate from their present favorable levels, and at least some critical systems fail, due to either probable, possible, or wildcard factors)
# '''Transformation''' (A future of disruptive emergence, "high tech," "high spirit" (consciousness, complexity), or both, with the end of some current patterns/values, and the development of new ones, rather than the return to older traditional ones. This is a transition to an "innovation" regime of new and even steeper growth, rather than the "Continuation" regime)

The baseline scenario expects continuation of the historical (and usually low) exponential growth in select domains, as well as the stably (regular or irregular) cyclic behaviour that is a feature of most environments. Growth/transformation/non-cyclic change always occurs in complex systems, even when conditions appear to be unchanging or cyclic over very long periods.

Because we live in a complex and pluralistic world, all four AGS are likely to occur in some form in the future for any issue, each in various enclaves, under differing circumstances and contexts. To maximize the AGS's value as thinking and planning tools, scenarios for each of the four growth conditions should be written to represent the key opinions that can presently be found for each, treated as independent "schools of thought." For example, if there are presently three significant (and potentially conflicting) schools of thought on the way an institution/strategy/society might Decline and Collapse (i.e., via economics, resources, or values), one or more may be chosen by the scenario writer as key to the Decline and Collapse story, but the other types of declines and those who currently propose them as risks should also be briefly mentioned, with short reasons given as to why those particular factors did not end up being as important as their advocates had expected.

With proper development, the four classic AGS provide a rich set of alternative futures, each of which are likely to transpire, to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the circumstances and stakeholders being described.

==References==
1. Dator, Jim. "The futures of culture/cultures of the future," in Anthony Marsella, et al., eds., ''Perspectives in Cross-Cultural Psychology.'' Academic Press, 1979. This is Dator's first publication of his Four Futures/GAS model. See also [http://www.futures.hawaii.edu/dator/futures/behind.html "The Future Lies Behind! Thirty Years of Teaching Futures Studies,"] ''American Behavioral Scientist,'' Nov 1998, for more recent discussion.

7 Step Model

2010-04-20T12:40:03Z

Andy: correct typos

{{Techniques-atoz||AIDA}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

This is a modified version of [[PDCA]]

===Plan===
* The problem is that you must take a risk and convert your cash money in property of some production factors if you would like to look for something to '''make plus-values''' for your own.
* Currently when you buy an object in order to purchase a plus-values the biggest problem is that you must put in your cash and keep a risk. This cash cannot serve your savings needs. This cash cannot serve your future needs.
But if you want to make plus-values can you do it in a cash basis (cash keeping) and risk free ?

* Identify and verify the root causes Construct a cause & effect diagram, review and identify the root cause.

* Yes, you can, but we must enlarge the Classical Economy. Here we will see the concept of a new action over the money, it means '''to date-value''' it, like if you spend it, like if you save it or like if you invest it.
And as this '''date-valuation action produces plus-values''', the process is the first substitute of the investment. It must be one solution to the John-Maynard Keynes question to resolve crisis's causes.

Develop a solution and action plan Generate potential solutions, rank these and then generate the tasks to deliver the solution.Construct a details plan

===Do===
* Implement the solution Communicate the plan and review the plan regularly amongst all concerned.
===Check===
* Review and Evaluate Use the performance measures identified in step 2 to review and evaluate the results of the change
===Act===
* Reflect and act on what you have learnt Assess the problem solving process to obtain lessons learnt.Continue the improvement process where needed.

Disney Creativity Strategy

2010-04-20T12:13:25Z

Andy:

{{Techniques-atoz|Dimensional Analysis|Drawing}}
[[Category:Creativity Techniques]]

This technique was developed by Robert Dilts, a pioneer in [[NLP]], by looking at the way Walt Disney was so successful at turning fantasies into reality.

The strategy separates out the three vital roles in the process;

'''Dreamer:'''

This is the visionary big picture is produced. With no boundaries, limitations or restraint. The dreamer position typically uses the visual representation.
Ask yourself "What do I really want, in an ideal world"

'''Realist:'''

This is where the plans are organised, and evaluated to determine what is realistic. Think constructively and devise an action plan. Establish time frames and milestones for progress.
Make sure it can be initiated and maintained by the appropriate person or group.
Ask Yourself "What will I do to make these plans a reality?"

'''Critic'''

This is where you test the plan, look for problems, difficulties and unintended consequences. Think of what could go wrong, what is missing, what the spins-offs will be. Remember that a critic is someone who should evaluate - not just point out what is wrong.
Ask yourself "What could go wrong?"

See [[Robert Dilts]] (1994) and his book [[Strategies of Genius]]