CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

1. Introduction

In managing organisational changes the change agents are often confronted with problems which look so insurmountable that one feels like having reached the dead end of a road. An ordinary mind may become paralysed in such situations, but not the one trained in creative problem solving. Creative problem solving approach helps in development of a number of alternative solutions, one or more of which may fit in the problem situation properly. Some of the solutions may go even beyond meeting the minimum requirements of the problem, provide additional benefits or advantage, or may even change the very complexion of the problem situation, from that of an extremely threatening to the one which is full of opportunities. The approach may even lead to redefinition of the problem itself in terms of emphasis and scope. In nut shell the approach may completely change the outcome of decision making process in favour of improved organisation performance.

To achieve such an objective, it is important to first understand the convergent and divergent thinking processes and their relevance to the creative problem solving. In the literature, the word vertical thinking is also used to refer convergent thinking and lateral thinking (1) to the divergent thinking process.

2. Convergent and Divergent Thinking

Creative problem solving is the process of decision making that utilises divergent thinking also, besides the convergent thinking. Convergent thinking is the traditional, logical thinking, moving from one state of information to another. Continuity is a feature of convergent thinking. The formal education generally leads to convergent thinking. Divergent thinking, on the other hand is a thought process in which the mind has to go into the uncharted areas, draw heavily on imagination and adopt new frames of references (2). The advantages of divergent thinking depend on how much one escapes from the rules of convergent thinking. It is pertinent to mention here that once a solution is reached by divergent thinking it is always possible to reach it by convergent thinking also.

There are two different kinds of decisions made in any organisations, which may be called the first and second stage decisions(3). The first stage decisions are of the ones which address to the issue of deciding what is to be done, while the second stage decisions focus upon how to effect first stage decisions. For example if one has to perform a journey the first question is whereto ? The issues of mode and time, arrangement of transport etc. are the second stage questions. Deciding the objectives and strategies for future are typically the first order decision. Deciding venders for regular purchase is the second order decision.

Convergent thinking, relevant for second stage of decisions is concerned with techniques of logic & mathematics and is never applied directly to a problem situation. It is always preceded by dividing the situation into concepts, features, factors, effects and other perceptual parcels. We are generally overly concerned with second stage thinking. For example it is the questions which are asked and data that is fed which is more important than the processing by the computer to determine the usefulness and relevance of the output. Mathematics can get to work once we have chosen to look at the problem in a particular way, it can not tell the way of looking at it. At times sheer

1

availability of second stage processing is a disadvantage because search for new ways is abandoned in the presence of a particular solution. The basic features of divergent thinking, in contrast to the convergent thinking are depicted in the table 1.

Table 1Convergent vs. Divergent Thinking

CONVERGENT THINKING DIVEREGENT THINKING

- Judges, seeks relationships - Never any attempt to prove, explore, generate alternatives

- Uses yes/ no system. - Does not- Uses information for meaning - Uses information for its effect on setting of

new ideas - Analytical - Provocative- One thing must follow another - Jumps deliberately- Consider only what is relevant - Welcomes chance intrusions- Moves in most likely directions - Explores least likely- Closed procedure - Open ended

Source: Lateral (convergent) Thinking Edward, DeBono p.

Divergent thinking improves the quality of decision making through improvement in the problem analysis and by generating larger number of qualitatively different solutions. Convergent thinking eliminates consideration of many possible alternatives by pre-deciding scope of search. This happens due to assumptions of constraints, by allowing functional biases to profoundly influence the thinking process, by force fitting standard solutions to a problem situation or by hurrying through the search process. The same factor also influences the problem analysis process, leading to inadequate, incomplete and at times incorrect analysis.

Laying emphasis on divergent thinking in problem solving should not be misunderstood as one under emphasising the importance of convergent thinking. Decision -making would have been extremely complicated, inefficient and difficult without convergent thinking process. What is being pointed out is that often there are problem situations when a person may feel to have reached a dead end if the convergent thinking mode alone was used. The divergent thinking can be of immense use to overcome this. Besides, it can also improve upon the quality of decision- making by developing a larger array of alternative solutions. It may be mentioned here, however, that not all the problems require divergent thinking or equal amounts of convergent and divergent thinking. Before going into details of the use of the techniques of creative problem solving, therefore, it is important to understand the different types of organisational problems.

3 Types of Organisational Problems

Organisational problem differ quite widely in terms of nature, some are simple, some are difficult. Some have single solutions, some may have multiple solutions. Problem may also differ in clarity about the correctness of the solutions reached, the approach for reaching the solutions and even the

2

understanding of the problem itself. Table 2 gives the variety or types of problems (4). Looking at the nature of the problems it would be realised that divergent thinking is complimentary to convergent thinking rather than being substitute or contrary to it.

Creative problem solving using both types of thinking, not only improves the quality of solutions to a problem , but also boosts the confidence of the decision maker for handling multitude of complex problems and cope with many problems as they crop up. This becomes all the more important for a change agent as rarely one could anticipate at the planning stage itself, all the problems which may arise when implementation starts, especially in case of major and mega changes.

4 The Creative Problem Solving Skills Creative problem solving requires certain skills that enhance one's ability to analyse the problem comprehensively and completely and generate a large number of alternative solutions, one or more of which may fit in the problem situation appropriately. Khandwalla (5) has identified seven such skills as discussed below.

4.1 Problem Sensitivity

Problem sensitivity is one's ability to observe, feel or notice something unusual, uncommon or to notice incongruance in a series of actions or snapshots of events which are not visible to others. The ability to notice triggers an enquiry which helps the person in realising or sensing those problems in advance, which would appear as a surprise to many others at a later stage. Excessive familiarity with situations leads to indifference to notice unusual. Sensitivity also helps in identifying opportunities to improve the state of affairs. Sensitivity is one of the primary ability for the creative problem solver. It is this ability that helps one behave proactively, as he is able to sense the problems before they actually materialise or precipitate as a crisis and thus initiate advance action to avert a possible crisis situation.

4.2 “Cause Guessing" Ability

The "cause guessing" ability is a very important ability in dissection of an problem. Organizational problems rarely have a single cause. With multiple causes, a solution identified may either only partially solve the problem, solve it temporarily or may not solve it at all. How effectively a problem is solved depends to a large extent on the understanding of the causes. The cause(es) could be concrete, physical or visible ones like the lack of infrastructure facilities, technology or the physical setting, or it may be soft ones, related to behaviour, attitude, orientation or the mindsets which are shaped by strong local or general forces of culture.

The "cause guessing" ability is highly experiential in nature. It depends upon the number of diverse problem situations one has experienced. It also depends upon one's cultivated ability to look the problem from different angles, instead of rushing to conclude the cause(s) of a problem.

"Cause guessing" ability considerably enhances the quality of problem analysis, overcoming functional and cultural biases and is helpful in obviating premature conclusion of analysis.

3

4.3 Fluency

"Fluency" is the ability to generate large number of ideas quickly. It is very useful in developing alternative solutions to a problem. It is an ability of application of a solution to different situations or solutions fitting several solutions to a problem. For example the application of chalk stick is generally for writing on a black board. But it can be used for number of other applications e.g., for counting, for drawing one' attention, for absorbing liquid or to be used as a paperweight.

The fluency or idea generation ability varies a lot from one person to another. The variation may be of the order as high 1:20 or even more. The fluency score of a group may be even higher, of the order of 1:50 or more.

A high fluency can drastically improve the quality of solutions and cost effectiveness of resource utilisation by finding out new uses of a resource which were initially acquired for some other purposes, e.g., waste recycling for paper, fertiliser etc.

4.4 Flexibility

Flexibility refers to the ability to draw upon from the experiences of other fields and situations, which are different from the one of the problem situation being faced. It is the ability to search different class of solutions. In any exercise of fluency it would be noticed that there is a tendency to generate more of small variants within a class of solutions or applications. Flexibility, on the other hand helps in finding different classes of solutions. For example brainstorming session on "how to increase sale of three wheeler tempos" lead to many modifications to the improve appearance, comfort, aerodynamic characteristics, etc. A diversion was then brought in by asking the members to define the product. It came out as a "passenger transport vehicle". The next round brought up many new uses by considering non-passenger applications. A further diversion was then introduced by underlining the word "Transport" on the blackboard. The next round then led to identification of many non-transport applications, going to the extent of increasing sale by selling even the components.

A high fluency gradually increases flexibility also. However, it can also be enhanced independently, by bringing deliberate diversions in the thinking process and by pushing a person to think differently.

A high flexibility can considerably improve problem analysis increase the number of alternative solutions to a problem, improve the cost effectiveness of the solutions, provide very simple solutions to apparently unmanageable problems, at times convert a threatening situation into opportunities and even change a perceived weakness into an strength. This happens because the flexibility skills can makes one tear off the barriers created by self-imposed constraints in the search of alternative solutions. This is done by change of vantage points for looking at the problem, redefining the problem or retitling the constraints as the problems to be solved.

4.5 Originality

Originality refers to developing solutions or finding applications, which have novelty value, something that is refreshingly different, something that would generally not strike an ordinary mind. The higher the originality, the higher the uniqueness of the end result of the thought process, and the

4

higher its value. Originality provides cutting edge for meeting competition, enables undertaking bigger tasks with limited resources and help in becoming leader in the territories of giants. It is a higher order of constraint-free thinking. The original thinking ability has an added advantage. It provides enormous confidence to the person for coping with challenges, as the ability provides a psychological support that one would be able to find out some solutions to the problems one faces or would face. It is particularly more important for change agents who also assume responsibility of implementing the change. Not all the problems that would crop up during implementation could be anticipated while planning for a change. "Many small, albeit dangerous bridges may have to be crossed as they come" when implementation starts.

4.6 Consequence Guessing Ability

An equally important ability is the consequence guessing ability. This ability comes to the fore, once alternative solutions have been generated for solving the problems. Like the cause guessing ability, the consequence guessing ability also depends upon diversity of one's experiences and consciously cultivated multidisciplinary perspective. This is one of the crucial factors for a change agent when the implementation of change programme is being considered to take care of various issues that emerge at the implementation stage.

4.7 Elaboration Ability

This refers to one's ability to think, visualise and draw-up minute details of the implementation of the solution identified. The original idea may got developed and modified. This ability is useful in realising the tasks involved in effecting the solution, in assessing the resources required and in judging one's competence to go for the solution, in making sound comparison between the alternative solutions considered (in terms of implementation issues) before a particular solution is selected. Lack of elaboration skills leave many gaps in the analysis of implementations tasks, leading to poor selection of the solution from among the available alternatives and result in "many more bridges to be crossed as they come" at the implementation stage. The consequence of the poor quality of decision taken in selecting the alternative is thus passed on to the change implementer to face, in terms of baffling encounters with prepondiously too many, too difficult and unforeseen implementation problems. The lack of this ability also increases the risk and chances of the change proceeding on the unwanted tracks (6) during implementation. This may result in change objectives either not achieved, or achieved partially not fully.

5 Techniques of Creative Problem Solving

The problem solving comprises two distinct aspects, namely the problem analysis and solution finding. While the techniques may be used even by individual, the quality of solution considerably improves if group was involved in problem solving process. The techniques of creative problem solving can be classified into two broad categories namely, the problem analysis and problem solving techniques. Problem solution has two distinct stages, one is generating large number of solutions and then visualising the consequences of each solutions, working out minutes details of them and finally selecting one (or more as contingency) solution.

5

5.1 Problem Analysis Techniques

Among the many problem analysis techniques two are extremely powerful ones, namely the fish-bone diagram and the stream analysis, each one of which is described below.

a) The Fish-bone Diagram

This analysis uses the cause guessing ability of a person or the group of persons. Extensively used in the quality circles working, the process involves stating the problem as clearly and specifically as possible, stated in such terms that allows the person or the group to think of various possible causes due to which the problem may exist. The problem is not to be stated in form of inviting suggestions for solution. For example, if the problem is non-achievement of budgeted targets, repeatedly, it should be stated as "why are targets not achieved" rather than "how to achieve the targets". This is useful in situation where there is problem in "clarity of problem" and the problem itself may have to be redefined or restructured.

Figure 7.1 Fishbone diagram completed in relation to the problem: "Switchboard Incompetent"

Source: Simon Majaro, The Creative Gap p.135

Once the problem is stated the people involved in the problem solving exercise are asked to assign possible causes. It is done in brainstorming mode (to be discussed later). No evaluation at this stage is to be done. At least 2-3 rounds have to be conducted. A group of 15-20 persons is considered reasonable for such exercises. The causes are listed out one by one in the form of arrows to the main line. Often the problems also have sub-problems. These sub-problems are also allowed

6

to be listed, by drawing arrows on to the relevant problem. The final diagram, assumes the shape of skeleton of a fish (see figure 1), hence the name fishbone diagram (7).

A variation of the fishbone diagram is what is known as "why-why" diagram (8). It pushes the people to go deeper into causes, to identify multilevel causes. Problems vary considerably in terms number and levels of causes. Asking why to every cause gives better insight in identifying causes. While inviting to list the cause does elicit response from an active group, it can further easily facilitated by stressing "why"s. Once the causes are identified it is necessary to check their validity. Measurement of actual occurrence through observation or soliciting views of the informed observers through interviews can be used for the purpose. The problem-solving group then divides itself to collect data on occurrence of each of the factors identified as a cause to the problem and a frequency distribution table is drawn for various causes. The frequency distribution assigns weights or importance of the cause to the occurrence of problem. If quantification is not possible, the weights can be assigned based upon the assessment of the informed observers. Once the cause identification is done, one can proceed to generate alternative solutions.

(b) Identifying Core Problems- The Stream Analysis

Identification of significant factors presents a complex problem situation (9) in which the problem itself is not clear. In strategic management terms (10) the problem could be related to strategy, structure, system, skills and styles, or more deep rooted, invisible but powerful dimension of culture. An analysis of such complex problems requires enormous problem structuring.

Stream analysis is an extremely powerful approach to simplify the process of problem restructuring. Although the approach was developed primarily to address organisational problems, the basic conceptual framework is sound enough to be used for addressing even larger, societal level problems as well. The framework of analysis, which can be better used in a workshop mode, involves the following steps:

1. Drawing an Stream Analysis chart, pictorially representing the organisational problems.2. The problems are identified by wellinformed persons in the organisation through a

workshop or through interviews.2. Each problem is then categorised in one or the other organisational dimension considered as

basic by the user of the chart.3. The next step is to specify the key interconnection that might exist among the categories of

problems.4. Analysis of these interconnections results in arrows drawn on the chart, to represent all the

important relationships identified.5. These yield insight into the problems as well as their centrality i.e., whether they are

symptomatic or the core problems

The aim of the problem solver should be to target at the core problems. Solving them would fetch higher returns as compared to the symptomatic ones. These problems are often related to culture, although in symptomatic manifestations they take the shape of behavioural problems, conflicts and precipitated crises. Persistence of core problems often frustrate technically sound solutions to symptomatic problems.

7

The problem analysis following stream analysis approach is a way to overcome the difficulty of problem clarity . After such analyses often the problems gets redefined or restructured for the purpose of generating solution. This happens because during the problem analysis stage the process modifies the perception and alters the scope of initial inquiry. To find the solution of a problem it is necessary to arrive at a clear statement of the problem before starting the search for alternative solutions.

5.2 Generating Alternative Solutions

This phase of the problem solving is the most important and exciting. It is as much of fun, in a relaxed atmosphere, as the task itself. It is this part of the creative problem solving where the creativity of people come to the fore and divergent thinking alone is used. This phase of the creative problem solving process requires enormous patience and tolerance on the part of the leader as well as the group members to withstand and sustain what may look to be "rubbish" ideas, ability to sustain interest when no "concrete" progress is visible or output has resulted. One may keep it in mind that the success rate of ideas generated in this phase is very low, close to 1-2 percent, but it may fetch extremely high return on the efforts made.

There are several techniques available for idea generation. These are Brainstorming, Morphological Analysis, Metaphorical Analogy and Synecties. We discuss below the salient features of each of these techniques.

a) Brainstorming

The brainstorming is the pioneer among the techniques of creativity (11). It is a session conducted with a group of people who are invited to suggest solution that come to their mind, one by one, in round-robin manner. The group size should be preferably between 6-15 persons. The effectiveness declines with larger groups and group size beyond 20-25 is not advisable at all. There are few other rules to be made clear to the brainstorming group. The judgement or evaluation of any idea is kept in abeyance, even if it does not make sense or looks impossible to some, so long as it is clear and specific. Each of the group members should be encouraged to give a solution when his turn comes, although pressure on individual should not be created which may create anxiety or embarrassment. A lot depends upon the rapport the group leader has been able to strike with the members of the group. Two, three or even more rounds should be carried out, each of which may last for about 15-30 min. depending upon the group size. Hitch-hiking of ideas should be allowed and encouraged. All the ideas should be recorded except those, which are clearly the repeat ones. It would be preferable to let the suggester himself decide the exclusion. Nothing would be lost if it is not excluded. All the ideas should be recorded on blackboard, flipcharts or by other means and should be shared with every participant during the session.

A variant of the above method is called trigger session (12). In this method each person is asked to think on his own, independently and list down all the ideas that occurred to him. After 3 or 5 minutes each one is asked to read out, loudly, to the group the ideas he has enlisted. The ideas that are common are struck off by others from their list. The person who has maximum ideas is asked to read out his ideas first, followed by the person who has next lower number of ideas and so on.

8

b) Morphological Analysis

Morphological analysis (13) is an approach of finding solution or generating innovative ideas which appeals even to a very conservative mind, fond of convergent thinking, because the technique allows explorations in highly structured manner. It is extremely useful for improving a product or service by modifying some of the attributes of existing product or service and adding some more or deleting some of the existing ones. The technique, therefore, helps immensely in sharpening competitive edge by "adding value”, or improving cost effectiveness by reducing attributes not valued by the customers and thus enhance returns.

The essential step in this technique is to first list different, distinct attributes of the product or service. The attributes or properties should be described in as specific, abstract and modifiable form as possible. For example, if one has to improve upon a bathing soap, the properties may be described as shape (rather than rectangular shape), colour (rather than red colour) and odour (rather than good odour). Other properties in such a example could be the weight, grip, state (solid, liquid or gas). Yet another property, which may look as a wild idea is the sound they produce (silent vs. talkative soaps). Further variations in attributes could be thought of in terms of the period over which a property remain constant, e.g., blue colour in the morning and pink at night and so on.

Once the properties are listed, alternatives are generated for each of the property. For example there could be five colours, six shapes, three different sizes, four different odours, two different weights, so on. This gives a 5x6x3x4x2 = 720 possible set of alternative designs. Adding one more feature (say silent or talkie) takes the number 1440. Considering three different states takes the number to 4320. It may be noted that this number is also reached by forcing a limited range, for example only few colours, sizes etc. Further variation may be brought by one time use vs multiple uses.

Once different ideas are generated, the properties that provide advantage over competing products can be selected. Several combination can be tried as a new or differentiated product and market response can be tested.

Figure 2 Force-field analysis of a project to improve the packaging of an existing product the sales of which are declining

9

c) Metaphorical Analogy and Synecties

This technique draws solution from other fields or even other worlds (14). The key to this is use of analogies. Once a problem has been properly stated, the members of problem solving group are requested to draw an analogy between the problem and the way it is solved in another field or world. For example while thinking of safety, the analogy can be drawn as to how animals and other species save themselves. Different species use different method, some run away, some bark, some bite, some use horns, some change colours, some kick out, some release stinch odour. Using these analogies individually or in combination, one may generate number of alternative solutions.

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

TECHNIQUE PROCESS CREATIVE THINKING SKILLS

Fishbone/ Identification Problem SensitivityWhy-Why Diagram of Problem !Stream Analysis ! ! ! ! ! ! Problem Analysis Cause Guessing Ability ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Restatement/ ! ! Restructuring ! ! the problems ! ! ! ! ! ! / \ ! ! / \ ! ! / \ ! ! / \Brainstorming Generating Fluency FlexibilityMorphological Analysis alternative \ / Metaphorical Analogy/ Solution \ /Synecties ! \ / ! ! \ / ! ! ! ! ! Originality ! ! !Force field Analysis Analysing Consequence Guessing Mc Kinsey's 7s' Model Implication Ability ! ! !Cost-benefit Analysis Evaluation of Elaboration Alternatives _________________________________________________________________________ Figure 3 Relevance of various skills and techniques for different stage of the creative problem solving process(Source: Khandwalla, Fourth Eye, p. and Simon, Majaro Creativity Gap p.

10

Synectics (15) is a more advanced version of metaphorical analogy in which repeated cycles of brainstorming sessions using analogies are conducted. The purpose is to let the mind more into highly diverse fields, draw upon varied experiences, especially from other fields. Deliberate diversions are introduced by the leader to push the divergent thinking. Once a solution to problem situation is seen on the horizon, force-fit to the problem is attempted. The number of rounds are to be conducted depend upon the complexity of the problem.

5.3 Analysis of Implication

Once the problem has been identified and the alternative solution generated, the next stage is analysis of the implications and the evaluation of the alternative solutions. The analysis of implications is in terms of visualising the task involved in effecting the solution and in terms of consequences, especially those that have potential to thwart implementation. Rarely a solution fits the problem so squarely that it achieves the limited objectives aimed by solving a problem. Solutions tend to have other associated features too. The McKinsey's 7S (16) model could be very well used to identify the tasks involved. The model, however, needs to be supplemented with the components reflecting monetary, technological and other inputs necessary for implementing a solution. Having identified the tasks the next thing is to analyse consequence. Force-field Analysis technique (17) could pretty well be used to visualise the consequences (see figure 8.2). The elaboration and consequences guessing ability come to the fore at this stage of problem solving.

On the basis of the above, a set of alternatives solution, which are within the reach as perceived by the group, are identified. These solutions are further refined by convergent thinking, collecting necessary quantitative and qualitative data for evaluation of the alternatives. It may be noted that out of a large number of alternatives generated, finally only a very small number, less than half a dozen or so, remain intact after implication analysis for further evaluation and selection.

From the foregoing discussions it would be realised that while there are several skills and techniques that influence the quality of solution by found using the creative problem solving approach, they are relevant for different stage of the creative problem solving process as depicted in figure 3.

6 Barriers to Creative Problem Solving

There are two different kinds of barriers to creative problem solving. One set is related to the personality of individuals and the other to the organisational aspects, which may foster or inhibit creative problem solving.

6.1 Individual Barriers to Creativity

The barriers related to individuals’ personality are known as blocks to creativity (18). Davis has identified them as fear of failure, allergy to ambiguity, conformity, touchiness, resource myopia, rigidity and starved sensibilities.

11

a) Fear of Failure:

Fear of failure is a trait that inhibits people from trying out new things. New things, not being proven ones, have a higher chance of failure. It is not that the risk is too high in absolute terms. But it is the way one perceives it, so much so that he is not even ready to give it a fair try. The people with high fear of failure avoid taking a risk and if insisted upon would take a very high risk, only to prove that although he tried, but failed because the task was too difficult and chances of success low. Fear of failure develops from repeated incidences of failure experiences from early childhood. A high degree of fear of failure results in one missing out a lot of opportunities that could have been capitalised if only one had sincerely tried out.

The way to overcome the problem of high fear of failure is to take challenges, however small they may be, but which call for stretching out, making extra efforts and face them squarely. Repeated experience of success, in small but reasonably tough assignments, could restore one's confidence and reduce the fear of failure.

b) Touchiness

Many people are extremely sensitive to adverse comments or outbursts of others. They would avoid facing situations where there is a chance of comparison being made with others as that may emotionally hurt or upset them. They would be more comfortable while moving in the company of known people as compared to strangers. Creative problem solving involves large number of people, meetings in an informal setting and at times making the wildest possible suggestions in the idea generation phase of the creative problem solving. It also involves meeting a number of people in the fact finding and implementation stages, both of them are potentially risky in terms of receiving adverse and often hostile comments. A person high on touchiness may simply not join the creativity session and avoid implementing solutions because it would imply meeting large number of different people.

c) Allergy to Ambiguity:

Many people are averse, almost allergic to hazy situations, where it may be difficult to see or comprehend what was the problem, what was appropriate approach to finding the solution and the criteria to be used for evaluating solutions. They would avoid facing such hazy situations, even if they provided good opportunity. Unfortunately the innovation involves typically the situations, which are full of confusion and lack of clarity. Those who are averse to ambiguous situations may reduce themselves to addressing only the second stage decisions, missing out opportunities of making significant impact in the functioning of the organisations, by keeping distance from the first stage decision- making.

The way to overcome this inability is to deliberately take up assignments that involve ambiguity, howsoever small they may be. Gradually the situation would start becoming clear like what happens after the light in a room is suddenly switched off. Repeated experiences of this kind would gradually reduce one's allergy to ambiguity.

12

d) Conformity:

Conformity is orientation to abide by the rules of normative or expected behaviour. It may be organisational policies, rules and procedures or the do's and don'ts in the society. A person high on conformity does not feel like questioning them even if he feels that the prescriptions were not correct. Conformity can develop by experiences of overpowering surroundings in a highly conformist society. Repeated experiences of rejection of suggestions made to change the system and practices may increase conformity if pointing out such things had invited penalties or resulted in deprivation of some kind. The disadvantage of conformity is that the person and the organisation miss out a number of opportunities of bringing improvement through exploratory creativity. Indeed, conformity may not even move a person to point out some problem unless asked for, making both him and the organisation incur an avoidable loss.

The approach to improve upon one's conformity is to indulge in problem identification, take a small problem and develop complete solution with all the details and highlighting significant improvements it could bring in the existing situation. The best way is to start with problems, which are not likely to give rise to any controversies. Successive experiences will give confidence to take initiative and realise that there is scope for change and one does not need to treat everything as given and not ought to behave necessarily as per the expectations of the others.

e) Resource Myopia

Resource myopia is one of the biggest blocks to creativity, which moulds one's thinking to a very narrow area and limited range, by prescribing number of self imposed constraints. Indeed one does not even realise that he was putting the cart before the horse when trying to find solution to a problem. The resource myopia develops on account of considering standard solutions and applying thumb rules. This leads to a weird understanding of the word "Resource". Long established organisations practices tend to define resources in a concrete, iron-cast manner. While considering increase in students intake in a business school, in its formative years, several resource constraints were cited, namely the lack of faculty, dining facilities, class rooms and so on. It was not realised that the faculty member could teach more instead of self inflicted norm of teaching only two courses. The dining hall could meet the requirement by staggering of the class hours and serving meals in two shifts rather than the existing single shift. The large common room could be converted into a classroom or serve even twin purpose of class room as well as common room. After all common room was needed outside class hours. The physical facilities could be augmented by further construction. Money could be arranged by approaching industry rather than banking on government funds which were becoming difficult to get in view of serious resource crunch.

The best way of overcoming resource myopia is to take-up exercises on finding alternative uses of an item, addressing resource constraints as a problem to be solved rather than taking them as given, looking around to see how many resources are lying unutilised etc. One would surely be surprised with abundance of resources that have remained under or unutilised. One could also think of inadequacies in the organisational arrangements, which have resulted in the situation of this type.

(f) Rigidity

It refers to a persons' holding a particular view even in the face of patently opposite evidences. Such people do not entertain the suggestion that alternative explanations may also be possible to a

13

problem or alternative solutions may also exist. Rigidity develops due to one's past experiences, due to lack of exposure of variety of situations, on account of one's tendency to overrate himself or his experiences. The most unfortunate part is that this happens when a person has been highly successful in the past, albeit, in a very narrow field or area of operation. There are innumerable cases of disaster been wrought on the organisations by the people with "rich experiences", who tried to replicate their experiences gained in a particular field to another. People often forget that it is the transfer of the lesson learnt, if relevant, that has to be done, not the replication of policies, systems or practices of the previous organisation, that will bring benefit to the organisation in the form of experience.

Rigidity results in one shying away from carrying out the problem analysis adequately and shunning away a number of alternative solutions, some of which might be even better from the limited number considered or the one which has been considered for implementation on adhoc basis.

Rigidity can be improved if one consciously holds himself from rejecting other's views, listens others views, properly and critically evaluates various suggestions rather than rushing to a conclusion.

g) Starved Sensibilities

Because of convergent thinking, repeated reprimands like "be rational", "stop day dreaming", one gradually loses his ability to fantacise and imagine. The mind gets trained for wandering only on the beaten tracks, not ready to move to the uncharted areas. It does not allow the person to explore and enjoy things that are outside the routine ones. The person loses the capacity to notice things, which were unusual, incongruent and inexplicable. It seriously incapacitates one in sensing the impending problems until they bite. It also disables him for searching solutions elsewhere, in other fields, in the other world. He overlooks resources that lie around, as they do not fit into the rigid concept of resource as defined by him.

The way to enhance one's sensibilities is to deliberately indulge in fanaticizing, imagining, searching for unusual but better solutions even if some easy solutions were already available, which at best would have met the minimum requirement of the problem situation.

6.2 Organisational Barriers to Creativity

Besides the individual related barriers to creativity, there are several organisational barriers to creativity; these are lack of slack in the organisation, bureaucracy and the organisation structure (19).

a) Lack of Organisation Slack

Organisations, more often than not face, resource constraints of various types. The managers are under pressure to improve productivity and utilisation of available resources. Under such circumstances it is too difficult to provide or spare resources, especially the human resources to indulge in "time wasting" activities of "thinking loudly", rather than doing something concrete i.e, the operational tasks. Rare are the organisations where it is encouraged, especially the exploratory creativity related activities. This holds people from indulging in divergent thinking and thus develop proposal, which may bring improvements in the organisational performance.

14

b) Bureaucracy and Structure

"Bureaucracy can be scourge of creativity and innovation" (20). Bureaucracy uses set rules, procedures and systems for efficient discharge of tasks. However, the same becomes an impediment to creative thinking, because it creates enormous constraints by virtue of qualifying criteria defined in terms of the set rules, procedures etc. Creative problem solving involves considering alternative solutions for which the rules and procedures are not geared to give a "go ahead" signal. The decision makers at different levels of bureaucracy are baffled when faced with situations for which there are hardly any decision rules that could be referred to. Occasionally the time, comprehension or degree of thinking required is so high that the decision makers tend to either reject the new or unusual solution outright or sleep over them. The net result is that the creative ideas get killed and with repeated occurrences, the new ideas stop coming up on account of the demoralising effect the killing has on the idea generators.

The way to overcome bureaucracy massacring the idea generation is to separate out the task of new idea generation, evaluation and exploitation from the task of managing routine operations. These can be headed by people who themselves have been idea generators or product champions (21). Only after an idea is fully developed and tried and detailed system and procedures are outlined, these should be passed on to the bureaucratic operational task heads. Even they should be exposed to the benefits of explorations and innovations to help them in ensuring that they do not become idea killers.

7 Summary

Management of Change requires the ability to develop a large number of solutions. Creative problem solving is an approach that helps in problem analysis, generating a large number of potential solutions and developing detailed plan of implementation. The ability of creative problem solving also helps in confidence building for the change agent that he could develop solutions for smaller problems as they arise. There are several skills required by creative problem solving like problem sensitivity, cause guessing ability, fluency, flexibility, originality, consequence guessing and elaboration abilities. Several individual related barriers (such as fear of failure, allergy to ambiguity, conformity, touchiness, resource myopia, rigidity and starved sensibilities) and organisational barriers (like lack of slack and bureaucracy) which have to be overcome to let creative problem solving flourish in any organisation. There are several techniques available, which facilitate problem analysis, finding solutions and developing detailed plan.

8 Review Questions

Q1. What is lateral or divergent thinking? In what way it differs from the convergent or convergent thinking? What is the relevance of divergent thinking for a change agent?

Q2. How do the problems differ in terms of their nature? What is the importance of understanding this difference from the viewpoint of approach to finding the solutions?

Q3. Creative problem solving requires certain specific skills. Explain them highlighting their utility in solving the problems?

Q4. Enumerate various techniques used in creative problem solving. Compare their uses in the problem solving process.

15

Q5. Discuss the barriers that inhibit the use of creative problem solving in an organisation. How can they be overcome?

9 References

1. Bono, Edward D., Lateral Thinking2. Guilford J.P and Merrifield P.R. The Structure of Intellect Models. Its uses and

Implication Los Angles (1960) University of California3. DeBono, Edward. op.cit. p 4. Khandwalla, Pradip N., Fourth Eye, Allahabad (1984) A.H. Wheeler.5. ibid p. 1366. Hinnings, C.R. The Dynamics of Strategic Change7. Majaro Simon, The Creative Gap, London (1988) Longman op.cit p. 1358. ibid. p. 1379. Porras, Jerry.I, Stream Analysis, Reading Massachusetts (1987) Addison. Wisley Inc.10. Glueck, Sl Business Policy & Strategic Management11. Osborn, Alex F. Applied Imagination New York (1963 Scribner's.12. Major, Simon, op cit, p. 14413. Arnold, John F., "Useful Creative Techniques" in Parnes & Harding: A source Book of

Creative Thinking, New York (1972) Scribner's14. Major, Simon op cit p 14315. Gordon W.J.J. Synetics: The Development of Creative Capacity New York (1961)

Harper & Row16. Peters, Thomas and Waterman, Robert E.Business Horizon17. Majaro Simon, op cit p 15018. Davis, Sonia M., Eliott R. Danzig and Edivin C. Nevis Blocks to Creativity Cleveland

(1970) Danzing-Nevis International and Gillespie, Robert J., "Roadblocks to Creativity" in Angels M. Biondi (Ed.) The Creative Process Buffalo (1972) D.O.K Publishers.

19. Majaro, Simon The Creative Gap London (1988) Longman20 Peters, Thomas and Waterman, Robert R. In Search of Excellence

10 Discussion Questions/ Exercises

Q1. Sit out with 5-6 or more of your colleagues (but not more than 15) and try out some of the following exercises.

a) Take-up any item lying around there and list down, individually, how many uses of it occur to each one of you in five minutes. Do not discuss. At the end of the time, share it among your colleagues by asking them to readout, starting with the person who has listed the maximum number of uses then the next and so on. Tally your scores with the total number of different uses listed. Are you surprised? Repeat the exercise once again in the next five minutes. Compare the finding of the two rounds? Did you observe something? Does it surprise you?

b) Consider a major problem that is creating anxiety and nightmares in your organisation (for example steep fall in sales, drastic reduction in government grants or so on). State the problem in clear terms to the members of the group (not in terms of how to solve it). Write it down on the centre of right, convergent side of the black board (or flip chart if you are using the flip chart instead). Draw an arrow from the problem to the left side centre. Request one

16

member of the group to write down the points to be given by each member of the group, on the blackboard. Now ask each member of the group to give, one by one, the cause which he felt was responsible for the problem. Only one cause to be given by each person when his turn comes. No one is allowed to skip when his turn comes. An arrow (at 135 degrees to the horizontal centre line) is drawn for every cause given and the cause mentioned is written at the tail of the arrow (in abbreviated form if necessary). Repeat the round. After two or three rounds check if anybody has some more points, add them also. Do not indulge in evaluation or giving judgement on any cause given by a member, allow anyone else to do so. Do you find you have drawn skeleton of a fish at the end of the exercise? Well, you have drawn the fish-bone diagram.

Having listed out various causes, divide the work of collect the data among the members of the group to ascertain how many times each of the cause has contributed to the problem over a period of time that may be decided by the group. Draw the frequency distribution of causes by number of occurrences of the problem on account of each cause. The cause is contributing to that extent to the problem, and hence its importance for finding the solution. If such quantification of importance is not possible, ban on the experience of the group or the other informed persons to attach weightage to each cause.

You have identified the problem to be attacked to improve the situation.

c) Look around the problem you face from time to time. List them down over a period of fortnight or a month. At the end of the period, take one problem and classify into one or the other of the streams, namely., the organisational arrangements, the social factors and physical setting. (You may decide some other suitable way of classifying if you feel that will help although the above should suffice in most cases). Repeat this for all the other problems that you have listed. Now, connect the problem with each other with the help of unidirectional arrows. Re-arrange the problems by shuffling them up and down so that all the arrows flow only downwards. Distinguish the problems in which many arrows are going in (these are symptomatic problems) from the ones from which a number of arrows are coming out (these are core problems). Do you think these are the underlying causes to many problems that are faced in the organisations and which render efforts to solve the problems ineffective. Attack these problems, there will be higher returns.

17