DESCRIPTION |
Osborn’s original classical brainstorming is
the root of creative problem solving (CPS). There are a variety of general
structures: ‘define problem, generate possible solutions, select
and implement the best’ which can be found extensively, in several
different academic traditions.
However, the account illustrate here was formulated
by Sidney J. Parnes in the 1950’s and has been build upon continuously
since then by various authors, e.g. Isakesen and Treffinger (1985) Isaksen,
Dorval and Treffinger (1994 and 1998).
The method can be used as a training programme and
has a very extensive track record linked particularly with the Centre
for Studies in Creativity of the State University College at Buffalo,
New York, the Buffalo Creative problem Solving Group, and with the Centre
for Creative Learning in Sarasota, Florida.
In it’s most extended and formalised form it
has the six stages shown below, each with a divergent and a convergent
phase. However, more recent publications seem more interested in focusing
on procedure and technique issues, with less weight on the full elaboration
of this structure.
The following, based on Van Gundy (1988’s) description,
is a very brief skeleton of a very rich process, showing it in its full
‘6 x 2 stages’ form:
- Stage 1: Mess finding: Sensitise yourself (scan,
search) for issues (concerns, challenges, opportunities, etc.) that
need to be tackled.
- Divergent techniques include ‘Wouldn’t It Be
Nice If…’ (WIBNI) and ‘Wouldn’t It Be
Awful If…’ (WIBAI) – brainstorming to identify
desirable outcomes, and obstacles to be overcome.
- Convergent techniques include the identification of hotspots
(Highlighting),
expressed as a list of IWWMs (‘In What Ways Might…’),
and selection in terms of ownership criteria (e.g. problem-owner’s
motivation and ability to influence it) and outlook criteria
(e.g. urgency, familiarity, stability).
- Stage 2: Data finding: Gather information about
the problem.
- Divergent techniques include Five Ws
and H (Who, Why, What, When, Where and How) and listing
of wants, sources and data: List all your information ‘wants’
as a series of question; for each, list possible sources of
answers; then follow these up and for each source, list what
you found.
- Convergent techniques again include: identifying hotspots
(Highlighting);
Mind-mapping to sort and classify the information gathered;
and also restating the problem in the light of your richer understanding
of it.
- Stage 3: Problem finding: convert a fuzzy statement
of the problem into a broad statement more suitable for idea finding.
- Divergent techniques include asking
‘Why?’ etc. – the repeatable questions
and Five Ws and H.
- Convergent techniques include Highlighting
again, reformulation of problem-statements to meet the criteria
that they contain only one problem and no criteria, and selection
of the most promising statement (but NB that the mental ‘stretching’
that the activity gives to the participants can be as important
as the actual statement chosen).
- Stage 4: Idea Finding: generate as many ideas
as possible
- Divergence using any of a very wide range of idea-generating
techniques. The general rules of classical
brainstorming (such as deferring judgement) are likely to
under-pin all of these.
- Convergence can again involve hotspots or mind-mapping, the
combining of different ideas, and the short-listing of the most
promising handful, perhaps with some thought for the more obvious
evaluation criteria, but not over-restrictively.
- Stage 5: Solution finding: Generate and select
obvious evaluation criteria (using an expansion/contraction cycle)
and develop (which may include combining) the short-listed ideas
from Idea Finding as much as you can in the light of these criteria.
Then opt for the best of these improved ideas (e.g. using Comparison
tables).
- Stage 6: Acceptance finding: How can the suggestion
you have just selected be made up to standard and put into practice?
Shun negativity, and continue to apply deferred judgement –
problems are exposed to be solved, not to dishearten progress. Action
plans are better developed in small groups of 2 – 3 rather
than in a large group (unless you particularly want commitment by
the whole group). Particularly for ‘people’ problems
it is often worth developing several alternative action plans. Possible
techniques include – Five W’s and
H, Implementation Checklists,
Consensus Mapping, Potential-Problem
Analysis (PPA).
[Source: www.mycoted.com] |