This is a great article about the law of unintended consequences, and the lack of good creative process. Prior to the advent of the term “Design Thinking” the most broadly accepted creative process method was “Creative Problem Solving” or CPS. It still remains the most widely used method, but is often re-branded for proprietary reasons. The folks who articulated the process chose to keep it open source, however, and as such, it is a only process that has been explored for over 50 years and is supported via a peer reviewed, academic research journal. In CPS, there are four spots in the process which cause the thinker, the problem solver, the designer, to NOT make the mistake of the case example above.

In CPS, we expand our thinking of the “Inspiration” stage to include “Identify the Goal” , “Gather Data”, and “Clarify the Problem(s).”

It sounds like the Goal in the example was closer (perhaps unconsciously) to something like “It would be great if we had a water treatment plant” than it was to “It would be great if we could assure that all of our people were using safe water.” Think what would have happened with that change in perspective. It is far more likely that the full range of thinking needed would have been uncovered. But how do you get that more robust starting point? I’ll share that answer shortly. PART of the solution is perhaps a treatment plant, but it would be obvious that that was not ALL of the solution.

In the second stage, “Gather Data” we make sure that we look widely at the information, facts, feelings, social dynamics, customer use patterns etc. that should inform our work going forward. It sounds like in the case example above, the problem solvers did to narrow a job of exploring the domain, and seeking wide inspiration.

In the third stage, “Clarify the Problem(s)” we create a divergent list of every possible problem we can think of, prioritizing and solving them in turn. Notice that phrase: “every possible problem we can think of”. This is the real key to the Creative Problem Solving process or any of its progeny, whether it be Design Thinking, Synectics, Kepner-Tregoe, Debono’s methods, TRIZ, Systematic Inventive Thinking or others. Each of the six stages of the Creative Problem Solving Process call for wide, extensive divergence before the choosing and narrowing process of convergence. Had the designers working on the potable water challenge used better creative process, they might well have dug deeply enough to assure a more successful adoption of the new water source. (Pun intended)

After the ideation stage, which includes this same divergence/convergence requirement, we have the stage PRIOR  to the Implementation stage of Design Thinking as articulated in the article above. We call it “Strengthening Solutions” and once again we have an opportunity to look for missed issues and lack of elegance in a solution. Over the years, I’ve grown to love this stage as it really can punch up an idea to something incredible. Read about a tool to help with this stage at the newsletter section of the New & Improved, LLC website. Searcgh POINt in the newsletters. 

Here’s my worry.

We have over 50 years of research helping us improve the Creative Problem Solving process, and there are no proprietary barriers to entry for those wishing to use, and learn about the process. I think the improvement that design thinking brings to the overall creative process is (or can be) the drive for elegance, the drive for beauty. But if we are going to go from design thinking as a tool to create more elegant and responsive objects, to a tool to create more elegant and responsive social solutions, we’d be well served to point our creative brains to learning about Creative Problem Solving. As a person who has worked in and studied both models, I’d assure that we heed designs’ call for elegance in CPS, rather than try to reinvent creative process by using the simplified language of Design Thinking. We’ll end up with unintended holes in our solutions from another direction, and our social challenges are such that we need to get things as right as possible first time through.

The Six Stages:
1) Identify A Goal, Wish or Challenge (Look at many possibilities, pick one)
2) Gather Data (Look at lots of data, especially for things that are not immediately obvious)
3) Clarify the Problems(s) (Attempt to see the problems in the way of goal achievement from as many perspectives as possible)
4) Generate Ideas (for each problem in turn -- generating many ideas, then picking the best of the many)
5) Strengthen Solutions (looking for what is great -- and weak-- about the solution so far, fixing the weaknesses)
6) Plan for Action (and Implement)
 

Verify Code: