Creativity

Abstract

The board member of POLYM AG Alexander H. sits with his assistant Walter K. in his office.

Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

The drama “ Being Innovative ” — Act 3, Scene 1

The board member of POLYM AG Alexander H. sits with his assistant Walter K. in his office.

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Alexander H.:

Our innovation project seems to be developing quite well. And with it, we will enter entirely new markets, and we need this. Have you ever thought about how we, if our innovation project is successful, could develop this new business?

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Walter K.:

No, up to now I haven’t thought of it yet. So far, we have enough to do to bring the innovation project to track. Don’t you think that it’s a little too early for these considerations?

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Alexander H.:

The early bird catches the worm. I’ve a gut feeling that tells me that there is even more in it than we think. So far, I could always rely on that. We should definitely to think about it. We have people who know how to do this. If we take Thomas’ innovation as a crystallization nucleus—as a manner of speaking—around which we can build a completely new business area—even more products and especially services. Don’t you have an idea?

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Walter K.:

I don’t have a clue right now; I believe that I’m not getting much farther just on my own. It’s simply too big. We’ll need experts and generalists. Loads of expertise we need to acquire and learn first.

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Alexander H.:

Honestly, I have some doubts whether we have this sort of expertise in our company. Most certainly, a number of issues will come up that we just can’t handle with our know-how as of now. Technically, we are doing just fine; no one can really compete with us there. Nevertheless, for us to develop a new business in a new market, that’s a different league. When we create a business area, to a certain extent we commit ourselves to this new market. That would be a bold step, which we need consider and plan carefully. We must develop scenarios, what this new business area means for our company—now and especially in the future. We need creative ideas on how we can manage that, without exposing ourselves up to the point where the existence of our company is in danger. I wouldn’t want to answer the owners and employees that we may perish, even if we do so in style. We must be fully aware of the risks. For this, we should shop for know-how in the market, at least until we feel secure enough to go the rest alone.

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Walter K.:

I think that as a first step it will be most useful, if we organize a workshop in which we discuss the issues once across all potential departments and try to work out some solutions. Then we’ll see what skills we need in addition.

FormalPara POLYM Inc. Alexander H.:

That’s a good idea. Let us think about who should attend. In any case, Thomas E. and John G. Because of the innovation project, those two know most about this business. Think about it, who else should be attending otherwise. I try to figure out, how others have done it in a similar situation.

The drama “ Being Innovative ” — Act 3, Scene 2

Inventor Thomas E. and decision-maker John G. sit in John G.’s office.

FormalPara Inventor Thomas E.:

Did Walter K. approach you because of the workshop? It’s to be held next Tuesday. They even have a moderator who works with creativity techniques. This really makes me curious. This get more and more exciting. Building a new business area is a great idea. I’m still convinced that my invention is to fly. The business case shows that crystal clear. I am really looking forward to the workshop.

FormalPara Decision-Maker John G.:

Yes, I am also invited and will attend. We both are so far the only ones who know a bit of it. But, to develop a new business area is not an easy catch. I just hope the management board doesn’t leave us alone with it. I don’t know anyone in the company who could really think of such a plan so that we could foresee all risks. I’m fairly convinced we need some outside help. Let’s see what we will accomplish in the workshop.

7.1 Creativity: Selected Topics

7.1.1 Creative Process

“Creativity is the ability for evolution.”¹ Thus defines the Nobel laureate Gerd Binnig creativity. In Chap 4, variation has been identified as an essential element in an evolutionary process, which again and again causally triggers the eternal evolutionary process (see Fig. 7.1). Evolution, at least in its purest sense, has neither an inner cause nor a specific goal—variation as a result of chance drives it. It is by nature contingent—it may be this way or quite as well some other different way.

Fig. 7.1

Evolutionary process. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

One can escape the mere random chance that a variation happens, if one provides “creativity” with a task and a target such as satisfying (target) a need (task):

Creativity

is the ability to create something new from something already known, which has not yet been conceived in such a way (see Fig. 7.2).

Fig. 7.2

Creative process. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

The creative process involves the identification of a task and a solution process. Accepting a task triggers the solution process with the proviso to find a solution achieving a certain objective. Thus, from referring between the familiar and known, new insights and a deeper understanding can result such that by establishing a theory new relationships are discovered, or such that by combination new qualities are produced. Supportive skills are the ability of association and, of course of imagination.

Perhaps already the creative process itself, but in any case its result, is in terms of the evolutionary process from Fig. 7.1 a variation, upon which the system responds in its specific own way. Moreover, systems have—depending on your personal disposition pleasant or unpleasant—the ability of emergence. This means that in the first step with the solution derived in the creative process the intended target is possibly achieved, initiating however a new irritation/distortion, to which the system reacts. Eventually, if there is a final state of equilibrium, it will try to reach it. In the end the result achieved has—hopefully—sufficiently much in common with the intended target, so it can be considered as success (see Fig. 7.3).

Fig. 7.3

Creative process and emergence. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Creativity and chance punish the Laplacian demon (Prigogine and Stengers 1980), who wants to create the future by executing a causal chain, with oblivion and with non-compliance, and render naught all the demon’s troubles to create an order in his deterministic sense. And mind you, every human being, whether creative or not, welcomes this demon now and then.

Being creative is a game—a game (Eigen and Winkler 1987) in which one discovers by skillfully selecting individual moves in the perceived infinity of available possibilities the one that fulfills the purpose and that feels good. “All the insights, noble thoughts, and works of art that the human race has produced in its creative eras, all that subsequent periods of scholarly study have reduced to concepts and converted into intellectual property—on all this immense body of intellectual values the Glass Bead Game player plays like the organist on an organ. And this organ has attained an almost unimaginable perfection; its manuals and pedals range over the entire intellectual cosmos; its stops are almost beyond number. Theoretically this instrument is capable of reproducing in the Game the entire intellectual content of the universe” (Hesse 1943).

Being creative means acting—acting as shown in Fig. 7.3 implies that the result of the creative process in the sense of achieving goals will cause that a change happens. Peter Graeser puts it this way: “Creativity only shows in acting; it is the creative force and is awarded to the one, who has shown it, who has thus created something” (Gräser 2012).

7.1.2 Bohm’s Dialogue as Creative Process

… and they met without encountering each other.

Mercier (2007).

According to the American quantum physicist and philosopher David Joseph Bohm, matter and thought have a common basic structure. The starting point is the phenomenon of quantum entanglement (Zeilinger 2007), which Einstein called “spooky action at a distance,” demonstrated experimentally in macroscopic dimensions. Quantum entanglement is the cause that the state of an entangled system is not localized, but extends over the entire spatially distributed macroscopic system. This shows that the three dimensions of space and time actually receives inadequate importance, and that there are phenomena that transcend space-time². Many prominent physicists such as Sir Roger Penrose among others see in quantum theories that explain these phenomena, possible explanations for the physical causes of consciousness and for exerting intent and free will (Zohar 1997).

Inspired and ultimately driven by these considerations, Bohm designed a worldview in a holistic, indivisible, and processual perspective (Bohm 1980). Additionally the holistic aspects of Buddhism, the pantheistic ideas of Hegel and Whitehead , as well as the ideas (“Truth is a pathless land”) of Jiddu Krishnamurti (Krishnamurti 1982) influenced him. As Rilke said in the poem:

Once, at the edge of the grove,

we stand together alone

and are festive, like flames—

feeling: All is one. Rilke (1897/1898)

(Einmal, am Rande des Hains,

stehn wir einsam beisammen

und sind festlich, wie Flammen—

fühlen: Alles ist Eins.)

According to Bohm, the all-pervasive incoherence in human thought processes is the real cause of the endless crises that concern us. Thinking generally conceals this incoherence from the own immediate consciousness and pretends successfully that one’s own interpretation of the world is the only one reasonable. Attentiveness is necessary to notice this incoherence.

Bohm developed “Dialogue,” (Bohm 1996) a method that, as an alternative to purposeful discourse, targets for developing mutual understanding, coherence, from which by common exchange something new is created. In a group, Dialogue is a conscious questioning of one’s own knowledge, of one’s own beliefs, and of what is believed to be at all possible, as a starting point for thinking in new directions. By connecting different perspectives, entirely new ideas often develop in the group.

In Dialogue³, it is possible for a group to explore individual and collective requirements, ideas, beliefs and feelings that in a rather subtle way influence interactions. Dialogue is a way to observe together how hidden values and tacit intentions determine behavior, and how unnoticed, cultural differences collide, without noticing what is actually happening. Dialogue is like a stage, on which collective learning takes place and on which a feeling of increasing harmony, collegiality and creativity can be created (see Fig. 7.4).

Fig. 7.4

Dialogue according to David Bohm. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Dialogue is in essence reconnoitering learning —to be considered not just a result of acquiring information or doctrines and also not a means, to verify or criticize a particular theory or program, but part of an ongoing process of creative interaction among peers. It creates a space in which attentiveness is given, and allows spreading ideas and interpretations, which enables a kind of collective proprioception (self-perception) or immediate mirroring of two aspects: the content of thought and the less apparent, the dynamic structures that dominate thinking.

Dialogue has no goals that go beyond the interest in the development and discovery of common meaning, of coherence. The four basic principles of Dialogue are:

• Suspension : To hold own and others’ thoughts, impulses, judgments, etc. in balance, requires both real attentiveness in one’s own process as well as in the group’s process and is essential for exploring. Keeping in suspension is, to disclose reactions, impulses, feelings, and opinions so that others in the group can see, feel, and mirror them.

• Honesty and transparency: If a participating person has a good, perhaps controversial idea, he shares it with the group.

• Building on one another: People participating try to build on the ideas of others. Groups often develop ideas that go much farther than what the individuals could ever have imagined.

• No decisions: During Dialogue, no decisions needs to be taken about anything. Absolutely necessary are Freiraeume ⁴, where nothing needs to be done, nor a result is to be reached nor something is to be said or not said.

Practical Issues

Dialogue works best with 20 to 40 persons sitting in a simple circle. If one invites for a Dialogue, it is useful to agree at the outset on the duration of the meeting and to have someone to look after the time. An optimal time is 2 h. Dialogue is a conversation between equals; hierarchy has no place in Dialogue. Initially, an introduction is necessary, one or two experienced facilitators are essential, who support the process of collective self-perception from the background. Dialogue can begin with any topic. No topic should be excluded.

Dialogue as Creative Process

Dialogue is a way to encourage and to enrich the creativity of the organization. Members of an organization relate in different relationships to each other and to their organization. There may be fears to formulate ideas that can be perceived as a criticism of higher ranks or norms within the organizational culture in a process that emphasizes transparency, openness, honesty, spontaneity, and a deep mutual interest. In an organization, Dialogue must begin with an investigation in all those doubts and fears. For this, it is convenient to begin the Dialogue with a precise agenda. However, no topic is excluded; even the impulse to exclude is certainly a topic that ultimately provides rich material for further exploration.

Most organizations often have predetermined goals and objectives that are rarely questioned, and at first glance, this does not seem to match with a free and open play of thought, which is so essential to the Dialogue process. However, the creative potential of Dialogue is large enough and allows the temporary suspension of all structures and relationships that make up the organization. Modern methods for business management take advantage of Bohm’s Dialogue principles (Senge 2011; Scharmer 2011).

7.2 Creativity: Concepts and Contexts

7.2.1 The Thinking Creative Human

The British physician and psychologist Edward de Bono has developed a variety of techniques that support breaking the normal thinking patterns and finding new ideas. He distinguishes between vertical and lateral thinking. Table 7.1 lists the most important characteristics.

Table 7.1 Characteristics of vertical and lateral thinking

Everyone who had a training or studied has some practice in vertical thinking. Vertical thinking ensures that the world functions in its expected routine; while lateral thinking ensures that the world even in its routine remains unexpectedly exciting (see Fig. 7.5 and Fig. 7.6).

Fig. 7.5

Vertical thinking. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Fig. 7.6

Lateral thinking. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

To overcome ingrained thinking patterns the control mechanisms of vertical thinking must first be understood and then somehow relaxed. Only then, one can embark on the quest for truly new ways of consideration.

Lateral thinking is often used as a creative technique in accordance with the following principles:

• Information will be assessed and used subjectively and intuitively.

• Initial situation and binding conditions can be changed.

• Mental leaps and associations are allowed and even encouraged, not every intermediate result must be correct.

• Every solution, even if it cannot be implemented, leads to a better understanding of the problem. Ideas are not discarded.

• Conventional thinking patterns are questioned, e.g., by consciously seeking the most unlikely solution to a problem.

For this purpose, the following techniques are used:

• Changing and reversing the viewpoint

• Visualizing thoughts

• Decomposing a problem into smaller and smaller units, and then experimenting with new compositions (morphology)

• Reversing relations deliberately, i.e., looking for the opposite

• Searching for analogies, transferring the relations from one situation to another, easier-to-use or already known situation

• Shifting attention from the apparently significant to the less obvious aspects.

When thinking vertically every step must be right, not so when thinking laterally. By suspending contradictions and open points, the thinking patterns of the mind are dissolved, judgments are delayed and postponed to let new information interact and thus create Freiraeume ⁵ for new ideas (see also David Bohm’s Dialogue in the previous Sect. 7.1.2).

Each person has the skills of vertical and lateral thinking; the proportions however, differ individually. Creative thinking combines vertical and lateral thinking in a dialectical process (see Fig. 7.7).

Fig. 7.7

Creative thinking. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

The following properties characterize creative personalities (Nöllke 2010):

• Problem awareness: They identify problems and tasks as such.

• Flexibility: They “see” the variety of options and possibilities based on comprehensive learnings.

• Originality: They introduce unusual aspects.

• Fun: They are driven by the “passion” for the subject matter and by self-motivation.

• Know-how: They contribute knowledge and expertise.

• Endurance: They can stand frustrations and are not easily satisfied.

• Sound judgment: They detect (intuitively) viable solutions and promising approaches.

Different people developed these properties to different degrees.

7.2.2 Tasks and Goals

Usually tasks in an organization stem from the normal business areas in which the organization operates. They are identified, and appropriate goals (see below) will be derived and then executed. This is part of the daily business. In this process the full efficiency, power, and force of vertical thinking unfolds.

Creative people have the ability to identify tasks that are not (yet) perceived as such by others by questioning the ordinary and penetratingly exploring new opportunities. The question behind the task, i.e., what actually is to be achieved, determines the space of options, in which solutions are sought and developed. Very creative persons can open this space widely.

Thus, Pablo Picasso did not ask himself, “How can I improve my portraits?” or “How could I better use acrylic paint?” Would he not rather have asked himself the question, “How can I display multiple three-dimensional perspectives on a two-dimensional canvas?” The result was cubism, one of the most revolutionary novelties in art in the twentieth century.

Albert Einstein did not ask himself, “How could I improve mechanics?” but he wondered: “How could I combine Newton’s mechanics and Maxwell’s electromagnetic fields?” The result was the theory of relativity, a cornerstone of modern physics.

The further the creative spark leaps (see Fig. 7.8), the unspecific and diffuse the task is, and, for the uninitiated, the more difficult it is to understand. Nevertheless, it is only a matter of time until contemplating and pondering allows describing a task precisely enough that it can be communicated. Often conceiving the tasks goes hand in hand with developing the goals.

Fig. 7.8

Identifying challenges. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Goals have already been dealt with in some contexts. Sect. 5.1.1 is more about the personal goals of an individual, in Sect. 5.1.2 goals helped to restrict the emerging options to those that are relevant. Goals as a cornerstone of organizational culture, as guidelines for corporate and innovation strategy, and as desired outcome of change processes were discussed in Chap. 5. Goals formed the basis for inventing stories and the business cases in Chap. 6.

Goals (Probst 2007) are defined and sought after potential and achievable endpoints of processes and in general refer to future states, which are different from the current and can and should be reached within a given period.

A goal is formulated in three steps:

• 1. Find objective: What are the desired goals? (“If the good fairy came, then…”).

• 2. Analyze situation: What are the strengths, weaknesses, conditions? How does one know the goal is achieved?

• 3. Formulate goal: What are the goals of action?

A goal is effective if it is SMART:

S :

Specific (concrete, precisely and clearly formulated)

M :

Measurable (quantitatively or qualitatively)

A :

Attainable (positively formulated, motivating)

R :

Realistic (goal must be reachable)

T :

Time-bound (until when…?)

Specific: What is to be achieved must be specified clearly. If necessary, differing objectives must be identified, discussed and resolved in consensus. Unresolved conflicts would be a significant burden for further work.

Measurable: The goal must be formulated in such a way that in a later stage it is objectively evident whether it has been achieved or not. When naming the exact measures, differing expectations can be identified, constructively discussed and resolved in consensus.

Attainable: When formulating the goal the intended final state is to be described positively. Negative goal formulation hampers any motivational effect. The same applies to “better”/“more” wordings, since these already express a negative opinion of the current situation.

Realistic: Goals shall be formulated in such a way that even ambitious goals can be achieved through own activities.

Time-bound: When formulating the goal it is determined, at which point in time the goal is to be achieved.

Task and goal being formulating work can begin. The goal emerged from some wishful thinking and is smart, measurable, attainable, realistic, and time-bound (SMART). However, not yet considered, and thus still open are some “what if” questions, upon which some light will be shed with the help of scenarios .

7.2.3 Scenarios

Imagine, there is war and nobody goes there.⁶

Creative people often imagine the future in scenarios. Scenarios (Fahey and Randall 1998; Gassmann and Sutter 2011) draw pictures, images of the future, as it could occur, if this or that would happen. Now the “this or that” are exactly, what cause the uncertainties inherent in these forward-looking images. In Sect. 3.1.3, it was discussed that the perpetuation of the past into the future can lead to cognitive fallacies and delusions. With scenarios, the path of simple perpetuation is left. Different images are drawn based on different assumptions about the factors that are believed to fundamentally shape this future. Depending on how many factors are influential, a variety of scenarios will emerge. Most of the time these can be grouped so that one ends up with a much smaller number of substantially differing, meaningful scenarios (see Fig. 7.9).

Fig. 7.9

Horizons of scenarios. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

In Sect. 3.1.3, scenarios were discussed that are extremely unlikely, but cause an extremely large effect. They are called Black Swans . If as shown Fig. 7.10 an unlikely disruptive event occurs, then many of the assumptions and considerations of the preceding scenarios are no longer valid and applicable.

Fig. 7.10

Black Swans. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Due to this fundamental change, new scenarios have to be developed. Because these events are highly unlikely, one will not expend too much effort. However, the resulting scenarios are elaborated to the extent that opportunities and options are uncovered enabling to deal with the corresponding consequences—“Fluctuat nec mergitur.”⁷

When developing scenarios one proceeds as described in the following (see Fig. 7.11):

Fig. 7.11

Developing scenarios. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

• 1. Describe the new situation in the future, create an image of the future (see also Sect. 6.1.1).

• 2. Analyze the current situation and identify the most influential factors.

• 3. Show the path that leads from the current to the future situation, which changes of these factors determine the path, and which changes in the problem space may thereby arise.

It is amazingly difficult to establish good scenarios. Scenarios are inherently contingent, i.e., it may be so, but could quite as well be completely different. However, scenarios avoid developing an over-dependence on the supposed reliability of different forecasts. However, the process of developing scenarios is extremely helpful for asking the right questions and thus preparing for the unexpected. Scenarios offer many benefits. However, they can also lead one astray, if not used with the necessary awareness and care.

Scenarios have four characteristics that make them a powerful tool for understanding the uncertainties of the future developments:

• They expand horizons of thinking.

• They reveal the (almost) inevitable in future projections.

• They prevent groupthink.

• They challenge traditional wisdoms.

Expanded Horizons of Thinking

When contemplating possible images of the future together with a coherent sequence of events that can lead to this future, the thinking horizon expands. If it is shown, how and especially why images of the future could change very quickly from bad to good and vice versa, one can prepare oneself to sudden, disruptive changes . Thus, this process sets limits to the human inclination of perpetuating the past (see Sect. 3.1.6).

The process of developing scenarios clears the view upon the fundamental factors of change. It ultimately requires to coherently describing ways to the possible visions/images of the future. For this, some of the assumptions and beliefs accepted as true have to be questioned and hypothetically adapted leading to a differentiation of those which bring about real change, and those that show little effect and negligible impact.

The (Almost) Inevitable Revealed

In the course of the development process, fundamental factors may show that there are inevitable consequences either of past events or of very profound trends. These factors unveil particularly important new insights, especially of those causes that lead supposedly improbable consequences.

Broadly speaking there are four types of inevitable factors:

• Demographic development

• Limits to growth and market saturation

• Basic economic laws

• Scheduled events

The demographic development is almost fatally predictable. The population of the Western industrial nations is almost everywhere constant or declining, while rapidly increasing in developing and emerging countries. In 1960, there were about 3 billion people in the world; by the end of 2011, the 7 billionth human child was welcomed. By 2030 there will be well over 8 billion. Each country or region has its own demographics. It is obvious that no spontaneous changes can be expected. Some of the resulting effects may be so far in the future that they hardly play a role in an image of the future within a foreseeable time horizon.

There are basic economic laws that can be considered immutable. If demand increases, then the prices will increase. If a company does not generate profits in long run, it will eventually disappear.

Limits to growth and market saturation are often insufficiently taken into account in business plans. When a new market is developed or the business model is new, forecasts are often too optimistic. Ignoring limits to growth or market saturation makes these future projections appear much rosier than it can really be possible. These effects lead to speculative bubbles that eventually burst sooner or later—economic history is full of them. Unfortunately, even prudent new business models suffer such damage.

Scheduled events are often beyond the time horizon, but already cast their shadows, so that one is well advised to consider them. Typical scheduled events are, e.g., the expiration of long-term credit lines, both on a small scale between banks and enterprises as well as in the large scale between states and nations. In 1898, the British Empire leased Hong Kong for 99 years from China—the termination of the lease did not come all of a sudden. At the latest when the People’s Republic of China was founded it became clear that Hong Kong has to be returned to China.

Almost inevitably, mistakes will creep in when considering these effects. Thus, the uncertainties of the timing remain. For example, financial services cannot grow forever proportionally to the gross domestic product. When will the point in time of saturation come? Although there are significant uncertainties here, it is important to include these factors in the scenarios.

Prevented Groupthink

Power structures in organizations often prevent the free flow in a discussion. In many cases especially in highly hierarchically oriented organizations, the highest-ranking person sets the opinion. When developing scenarios, these mechanisms are disrupted. Scenarios offer a “safe harbor” for contrarian and unconventional thinking.

Challenged Traditional Wisdoms

In large organizations, the status quo has a particularly high inertia. A lot of money and some managerial careers flowed into the core assumptions of the organization, which supports the status quo inertia. Developing scenarios also provides a “safe harbor” for opinions where even the foundations of the status quo are no longer valid.

Dangers and Pitfalls When Working with Scenarios

As mighty and powerful scenarios are, they still pose a few dangers in their application, which are addressed briefly below.

The Risk of Non-choice

If only one possible future scenario is considered, it is easier for the leadership team of an organization to make decisions. This is classic management executed with the appropriate methodological skills and self-confidence. However, if the leadership team must choose between several possible scenarios, it may happen (and this is often the case) that the decision for one scenario and thus against the others is postponed—in the hope that the one scenario reveals to be the one. From this procrastination, the aforementioned classical management suffers. Important decisions are taken (too) late or not at all. In addition, the leadership team becomes disoriented and acts accordingly. This leads to confusion throughout the organization and to a lack of alignment.

Selecting the most likely scenario for further considerations avoids this. However, arrangements are made for the case that a different scenario or one that one has not even imagined emerges. Finally, one can make decisions such that they are not wrong at least in several scenarios.

The Danger of Scenarios that Simplify Too Much

If one has developed a number of scenarios, then one is inclined to develop the feeling that one has actually covered one’s back in all directions. Usually one falls into the trap that a downturn as well as a recovery is estimated weaker than in reality (and also often has been). In both cases, one should expand the horizon of thinking and leave the comfort zone. Even small changes in the environment can affect large impacts. To keep these scenarios and the corresponding factors in mind is important.

In addition, one should pay attention that the considered variable factors have the MECEness property (see Sect. 6.1.4). Usually three to five factors are considered unreliable. If for instance scenarios with three determining factors, which can take the values “good,” “medium”, and “bad,” are examined then there are already 27 different scenarios. The number of scenarios but will be reduced to four to five, because certain combinations will turn out to be almost impossible or can be subsumed under others.

The Risk of Erroneous Communication Using Scenarios

The leadership of an organization is not credible when communicating the possible scenarios, without opting for one. Credible leadership is characterized in that a clear goal is communicated, but that the associated uncertainties are also addressed.

Working with Scenarios

From the developed scenarios, one usually crystallizes, which is considered as the most likely and which inspires upcoming decisions. One must however be aware that this scenario is fraught with uncertainties, and that there are alternative scenarios. In addition, the scenarios should be thoroughly checked on a regular basis.

The development of scenarios is a truly creative process that requires imagination and resourcefulness. Scenarios cannot provide answers to all questions, but they help to ask better questions and to adjust to the unexpected, which make them a valuable tool.

7.3 Creativity: Tools

7.3.1 Time to be Creative—Preface

One wants to be creative and to find new solutions—but the head is empty, and just nothing crosses one’s mind at all. A number of beliefs prevent creative development. These include:

• “I can’t change anything.”

• “I do not have time to be creative.”

• “Why change anything? Everything still works fine as it is.”

• “What will others think of me?”

• “I don’t dare.”

• “Imagination and creativity are for children.”

• “My idea is still good.”

• “I can’t do it anyway.”

• “I’ll never be able to do this.”

In a creative process, one has to get involved, for it to be successful. The stakes are relatively small compared to the gains, which can be achieved. Submitting to the creative process is facilitated by a creative tension and mood generated by

• Pleasant atmosphere—pleasant ambiance, color, music, and many others create new impressions

• Adequate exercise—stand-points become go-points, which support a change in perspectives, ways of thinking and patterns of behavior

• Stimulation of the senses—also the task can possibly be perceived with other senses which can extend the “view” on the task,

• Humor —humorous and creative people think outside and beyond the usual tracks and can make surprising connections.

Visualizations support the creative process. It is always about imagining, what one wants, as vividly and in as much detail as possible. Concretely and with many details one imagines how the result eventually should look like.

Intuition is acting “from the gut.” The creative process is by definition determined by intuitive contributions that do not arise from an if-then causal chain. In any case, intuitive solutions can be a valuable contribution.

The following creative techniques are often applied in practice. Which of these are used or whether some of them are combined, depends on the specific case. A variety of other techniques and methods may prove useful.

7.3.2 Brainstorming

Brainstorming sessions generate many new ideas and proposals in a short time.

Group

• Group of 4 to 8, a maximum of 12 participants

• Moderator

Aids

• Pin board

Duration: A total of 45–60 min

• Phase Finding Ideas: 15–20 min

• Phase Assessment: 30–40 min

Execution

Phase Finding Ideas : The task is clearly identified and understood by the participants. The participants express what comes to their mind on this topic. The facilitator writes the ideas down. During brainstorming sessions, there is no discussion and criticism. The ideas of other participants can be developed further.

Phase Assessment : The collected ideas are discussed and evaluated. The following questions should be answered:

• Can the idea ever be implemented?

• Is it possible to immediately implement the idea?

• How far the idea needs to be elaborated?

Advantages

• Is very suitable for group processes

• Provides solutions to a clearly defined task

• Can also be done individually

Disadvantages

• Is less suitable for large-scale tasks

• Is not suitable for very shy participants

• Is difficult when the participants have hierarchically different functions

Software-based electronic support

Using computers can support brainstorming electronically. Thus, this technique can also be applied to larger groups. The electronic support also provides the ability to involve participants in different locations (Computer Supported Collaborative Work —CSCW ).

7.3.3 Brainwriting

As with brainstorming, brainwriting sessions generate many new ideas and proposals in a short time.

Group

• Group with ideally six participants, the group size is variable

Aids

• Prepared sheets with the task and six rows of three boxes each for filling in

Duration: A total of 60–90 min

• Phase Finding Ideas: 30 min

• Phase Assessing: 30–60 min

Execution

Phase Finding Ideas : The task is clearly identified and understood by the participants. The participants write ideas for solving the problem in a row of the sheet. After 5 min, the sheet is passed on to another participant. There are six such rounds. During brainwriting, there is no discussion or criticism. Ideas from other participants can be developed further.

Phase Assessment : The 6 sheets have 18 ideas each for a total of 108 ideas that are discussed and evaluated. The evaluation is done as in brainstorming

Advantages

• Is also very good for larger groups

• Provides many solutions to a clearly defined task

• Can also be done as an individual

Disadvantages

• Is less suitable for large-scale problems

• Often not enough time to clearly explain ideas

Variation

The problem of the participants not being in the same location can be addressed as follows: Each participant will receive a notebook in which he records his ideas. After a predefined period, the notebooks will be exchanged. After a certain time the notebooks will be collected and evaluated. A group of persons so far not involved in the process, but familiar with the problem space evaluates the ideas.

Software-based electronic support

Again, computers can support this process electronically, which eases the process with participants at different locations (CSCW ).

7.3.4 Mind Map

Information evolves from a central concept in the middle of a sheet of paper, not vertically from top left to bottom right. Thus, a task can be penetrated from many directions in many aspects (see Fig. 7.12)⁸.

Fig. 7.12

Example: Mind map created with FreeMind (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Group

• Suitable for individual work or very small groups up to four persons

Aids

• A large sheet of paper or software support

Duration

• 20–30 min, varies depending on the complexity of the task

Execution

The task, the subject matter is written in one word in the center of the sheet and circled. Only keywords are used. Block letters makes it easier for the brain to take words as images and keep them in mind. From the center, lines (main branches) are drawn to other associations. Off the main branches, other side branches bifurcate on which further subpoints are noted. The words are to be written on lines, each line being connected to another. Every word gets a line.

Advantages

• Analyzes the task

• Collects the various aspects, e.g., for planning or strategy

• Can also be performed individually

Disadvantages

• Can only be done as an individual or in very small groups of up to four people

• Requires experience

• Reduces complex issues

Variation

A larger group can also use mind maps. Participants create without time constraints one or more mind maps on posters hung up in a room. Wandering around the room creates additional dynamics in which the participants are continually changing their perspective on the problem. The joint work on the task lets new associations and possible solutions emerge.

7.3.5 Bisociation

Bisociation refers to pictorial comparisons. Even small children are familiar with the language of images; in fairy tales, animals are often associated with certain characteristics: poor as a church mouse, sly as a fox, hungry as a wolf. Pictorial language makes it easier to imagine something.

Group

• Groups of between 10 and 25 people

• One or two facilitators depending on group size

Aids

• Some interesting images to choose from

Duration

• Approximately 45 min

Execution

Phase Detecting Analogies : The task is clearly defined and understood by the participants. Then the participants select from a number of images, photos, newspaper clippings, or the likes just one. Close inspection of the item inspires to find analogies or common principles. The ideas are noted.

Phase Transfer : The listed ideas are assessed with respect to their usefulness and applicability regarding the task.

Advantages

• Produces unusual ideas and solutions

• Well-suited for technical tasks

Disadvantages

• Can be tedious if no time frame is agreed

• Produces many ideas, but few of them are suitable

Variation

Instead of images, one can also work with words.

7.3.6 Morphological Analysis

In the morphological analysis, the characteristics of relevant categories are differently combined in a systematic way. This results in combinations that have not yet been thought of, but have great potential.

Group

• Groups between one and six people

Aids

• A large sheet of paper, preferably with a table prepared for entries into rows and columns

Duration

• About 120 min

Execution

Phase Defining Categories : Define categories such as shape, color, materials and dimensions that are relevant for the task. The categories are listed in the first column of the table.

Phase Defining Relevant Characteristics : For each category, potential characteristics are sought and entered in the corresponding row in the table.

Phase Combination : The solution variants are analyzed. For a variant, a characteristic from each category is selected and evaluated.

Advantages

• Uncovers a large number of variants by systematic combination

• Well-suited for technical tasks

Disadvantages

• None known

Example

Task: Developing an electric car (see Table 7.2).

Table 7.2 Morphological analysis

7.3.7 Osborn Method

Alex F. Osborn was an American advertising executive, who had developed brainstorming already in the 1950s. He designed a questionnaire, which covers various aspects.

Group

• Groups between one and six people

Aids

• No special aids or tools required

Duration

• About 120 min

Execution

The task is clearly defined and understood by the participants. The task is analyzed with respect to the following headings, the order of the questions is not important:

• Substitute: What can be substituted? Which conditions can be changed?

• Combine: Can ideas be combined and connected?

• Adapt: Does the problem point somehow to other ideas? Is it similar to something else?

• Modify: What can be changed? Which properties can be remodeled?

• Magnify: Can something be increased, added, multiplied?

• Minify: Can something be decreased, taken away, shortened?

• Put to other uses: What can it also be used for? Are there other uses for it?

• Eliminate: What can be eliminated? Which conditions can be changed?

• Rearrange: Can the order or structure be changed?

• Reverse: Can the idea be turned into its opposite? Can the process be reversed?

• Transform: Can ideas be transformed?

Advantages

• Creates new options through systematic analysis

• Well-suited for product development and technical challenges

Disadvantages

• None known

7.3.8 Reversal Method

In the reversal method, the problem is turned upside down. The central idea is to think about what you have to do or omit to achieve just the opposite. Creativity also means being out of one’s mind (in the sense of moving away) and adopt positions that allow viewing a task from different angles. If for example revenue is to be raised, then consider effects, which would lead to a reduction. If you want to attract more customers, you wonder what to do to lose customers.

Group

• Group of 4 to 12 participants

• Moderator

Aids

• Pin board

Duration

• About 90 min

Execution

The problem is reformulated into its opposite. With for example brainstorming solutions to this problem are sought, which in turn can be reversed into its opposite. These solutions are analyzed with respect to the original task.

Advantages

• Stimulates unexpected solutions by systematically analyzing the contrary

Disadvantages

• None known

7.3.9 Six Thinking Hats

This method developed by de Bono encourages working on a task under different aspects. The participants play different roles and try to work on the task in the specified role.

Group

• Group with up to 30 participants

• Moderator

Aids

• Six colored hats or other colored symbols

Duration

• About 120 min (depending on group size)

Execution

The task is clearly defined and understood by the participants. There are six symbolic hats available. Each of these hats stands for a certain mind set. As the participants feel like they can wear one of the hats making the corresponding hat’s disposition their own. It is possible that for many participants, the hats are distributed to subgroups. The facilitator writes down the statements.

The white hat represents objectivity and neutrality. Information is collected without being assessed. There are only facts and figures, not emotions and judgments. Personal opinions are totally unimportant.

The red hat stands for personal feelings and subjective opinion. All feelings, both positive and negative, are admitted without having to justify them.

The black hat denominates all factual arguments expressing doubts, concerns, risks, but no negative feelings.

The yellow hat denominates the objectively positive characteristics, i.e., opportunities and benefits, hopes and goals, so all aspects are in favor of a decision.

The green hat leads to new ideas. It stands for creativity and alternatives, and is a symbol for thinking beyond the usual. It allows for provocation and conflict and can formulate everything that leads to new ideas, no matter how crazy or unfeasible these ideas may be. Critical remarks are not allowed.

The blue hat stands for control and organization. With the blue hat, one looks at the overall process from a higher perspective, keeps track and consolidates individual results.

Advantages

• Suitable for complex problems

• Captures different perspectives

• Does not regard tensions in the group (roles)

Disadvantages

• Stays close to conventional thinking

Variation

Disney method : The task is viewed from the perspective of a dreamer (great ideas), a realist (pragmatic solutions) and a critic (unsparing criticism).

7.3.10 Syntegration

The cyberneticist Stafford Beer coined the term syntegration from synergy and integration. Using the method of syntegration existing but dispersed knowledge is used and integrated into a common solution. The perspectives of the participants are networked in minimum time such that maximum information is transferred. As the basic structure for effective communication, Beer identified the icosahedron, the Platonic solid with 12 vertices and 30 edges (see Fig. 7.13). The 12 vertices represent the relevant aspects of the task and the 30 edges represent the people participating. The icosahedron maximizes the efficiency of cooperation by optimally utilizing the maximum possible relationships. It minimizes the information distance between the participants, resulting in the integration and integrity of knowledge, opinions and viewpoints.

Fig. 7.13

Icosahedron. (Source: Bernd X. Weis)

Group

• Group of 30 (up to 42) participants

• At least two facilitators

Aids

• Two rooms corresponding to the group size

Duration: A total of 3.5 days

• Phase defining the task and role assignments 0.5 days

• Phase Syntegration (3 iterations per day) 3 days

Execution

Phase Definition of Task and Role Assignments: The participants cooperatively divide the task into 12 relevant aspects. The participants prioritize the issues for themselves. Each participant has three roles:

• Participant

• Critic

• Observer

Each participant will be assigned a role—participant, critic and observer—with respect to each of the 12 relevant aspects has to be taken.

Phase Syntegration: Two topical groups at a time meet in parallel to work on the assigned topic. A topical group consists of the participants who are driving the issue, the critics who question the solutions, and the observers who only watch and do not contribute. In 1 day, a topical group meet once. This process is repeated on three consecutive days. The moderators record the results of each topical group meeting. At the end of each day, the results will be presented to the plenary.

Advantages

• Well-considered division of labor or division of topics

• Extreme discipline through strict timing and role allocation

• No group dynamics at the expense of results

Disadvantages

• Very time consuming

• Large preparatory work

7.3.11 World Café

The world café enables creative work in large groups. In the world café, people can work simultaneously on individual facets of large tasks or several tasks.

Group

• Group of 12 to many more participants

• Host for each bar table

Aids

• A room appropriate for group size, bar tables with paper tablecloths

Duration

• About 120–180 min

Execution

The task is clearly defined and understood by the participants. Participants choose a table and contribute their ideas to the solution of (sub-) task of this bar table. After 15–30 min, the participants except the hosts will move to other tables. The hosts ensure an open friendly atmosphere. The world café closes with a phase of reflection.

Advantages

• Stimulates many participants to contribute.

Disadvantages

• None known

7.3.12 Scenario Technique

For scenarios , refer to Sect. 7.2.3 in this chapter.

Creativity: Summary

Being creative means acting—acting implies that the result of the creative process in the sense of achieving goals will cause that a change happens.

In Dialogue according to David Bohm, it is possible for a group to explore individual and collective requirements, ideas, beliefs, and feelings, which in a rather subtle way influence interactions. Dialogue is a way to observe together how hidden values and tacit intentions determine behavior, and how unnoticed cultural differences collide, without noticing what is actually happening. By connecting different perspectives, entirely new ideas often develop in the group.

Vertical thinking ensures that the world functions in its expected routine, while lateral thinking ensures that the world even in its routine remains unexpectedly exciting.

The following properties characterize creative personalities: problem awareness, flexibility, originality, fun, know-how, endurance, and sound judgment.

Usually tasks in an organization stem from the normal business areas in which the organization operates. Creative people have the ability to identify tasks that are not (yet) perceived as such by others.

A goal is effective if it is SMART, i.e. Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-bound.

Scenarios draw images of the future, as it could occur, if this or that would happen. The development of scenarios is a truly creative process that requires imagination and resourcefulness. Scenarios cannot provide answers to all questions, but they help to ask better questions and to adjust to the unexpected, which make them a valuable tool.