what are the six stages of creative problem solving

• Board of Directors

What is CPS?

Cps = c reative p roblem s olving, cps is a proven method for approaching a problem or a challenge in an imaginative and innovative way. it helps you redefine the problems and opportunities you face, come up with new, innovative responses and solutions, and then take action..

Why does CPS work?

CPS begins with two assumptions:

• Everyone is creative in some way.
• Creative skills can be learned and enhanced.

Osborn noted there are two distinct kinds of thinking that are essential to being creative:

Divergent thinking.

Brainstorming is often misunderstood as the entire Creative Problem Solving process.   Brainstorming is the divergent thinking phase of the CPS process.   It is not simply a group of people in a meeting coming up with ideas in a disorganized fashion. Brainstorming at its core is generating lots of ideas.  Divergence allows us to state and move beyond obvious ideas to breakthrough ideas. (Fun Fact: Alex Osborn, founder of CEF, coined the term “brainstorm.” Osborn was the “O” from the ad agency BBDO.)

Convergent Thinking

Convergent thinking applies criteria to brainstormed ideas so that those ideas can become actionable innovations.  Divergence provides the raw material that pushes beyond every day thinking, and convergence tools help us screen, select, evaluate, and refine ideas, while retaining novelty and newness.

To drive a car, you need both the gas and the brake.

But you cannot use the gas and brake pedals at the same time — you use them alternately to make the car go. Think of the gas pedal as Divergence , and the brake pedal as Convergence . Used together you move forward to a new destination.

Each of us use divergent and convergent thinking daily, intuitively. CPS is a deliberate process that allows you to harness your natural creative ability and apply it purposefully to problems, challenges, and opportunities.

The CPS Process

Based on the osborn-parnes process, the cps model uses plain language and recent research., the basic structure is comprised of four stages with a total of six explicit process steps. , each step uses divergent and convergent thinking..

Learner’s Model based on work of G.J. Puccio, M. Mance, M.C. Murdock, B. Miller, J. Vehar, R. Firestien, S. Thurber, & D. Nielsen (2011)

Explore the Vision.   Identify the goal, wish, or challenge.

Gather Data.   Describe and generate data to enable a clear understanding of the challenge.

Formulate Challenges. Sharpen awareness of the challenge and create challenge questions that invite solutions.

Explore Ideas. Generate ideas that answer the challenge questions.

Formulate Solutions. To move from ideas to solutions. Evaluate, strengthen, and select solutions for best “fit.”

Formulate a Plan.  Explore acceptance and identify resources and actions that will support implementation of the selected solution(s).

Explore Ideas. Generate ideas that answer the challenge question

Core Principles of Creative Problem Solving

• Everyone is creative.
• Divergent and Convergent Thinking Must be Balanced.  Keys to creativity are learning ways to identify and balance expanding and contracting thinking (done separately), and knowing  when  to practice them.
• Ask Problems as Questions.  Solutions are more readily invited and developed when  challenges and problems are restated as open-ended questions  with multiple possibilities. Such questions generate lots of rich information, while closed-ended questions tend to elicit confirmation or denial. Statements tend to generate limited or no response at all.
• Defer or Suspend Judgment.  As Osborn learned in his early work on brainstorming, the  instantaneous judgment in response to an idea shuts down idea generation . There is an appropriate and necessary time to apply judgement when converging.
• Focus on “Yes, and” rather than “No, but.”  When generating information and ideas, language matters.  “Yes, and…” allows continuation and expansion , which is necessary in certain stages of CPS. The use of the word “but” – preceded by “yes” or “no” – closes down conversation, negating everything that has come before it.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to header right navigation
• Skip to site footer

High Performance. Innovation. Impact.

What is Creative Problem Solving?

“Every problem is an opportunity in disguise.” — John Adams

Imagine if you come up with new ideas and solve problems better, faster, easier?

Imagine if you could easily leverage the thinking from multiple experts and different points of view?

That’s the promise and the premise of Creative Problem Solving.

As Einstein put it, “Creativity is intelligence having fun.”

Creative problem solving is a systematic approach that empowers individuals and teams to unleash their imagination , explore diverse perspectives, and generate innovative solutions to complex challenges.

Throughout my years at Microsoft, I’ve used variations of Creative Problem Solving to tackle big, audacious challenges and create new opportunities for innovation.

I this article, I walkthrough the original Creative Problem Solving process and variations so that you can more fully appreciate the power of the process and how it’s evolved over the years.

On This Page

Innovation is a Team Sport What is Creative Problem Solving? What is the Creative Problem Solving Process? Variations of Creative Problem Solving Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving Criticisms of Creative Problem Solving Creative Problem Solving 21st Century FourSight Thinking Profiles Basadur’s Innovative Process Synetics SCAMPER Design Thinking

Innovation is a Team Sport

Recognizing that innovation is a team sport , I understood the importance of equipping myself and my teams with the right tools for the job.

By leveraging different problem-solving approaches, I have been able to navigate complex landscapes , think outside the box, and find unique solutions.

Creative Problem Solving has served as a valuable compass , guiding me to explore uncharted territories and unlock the potential for groundbreaking ideas.

With a diverse set of tools in my toolbox, I’ve been better prepared to navigate the dynamic world of innovation and contribute to the success and amplify impact for many teams and many orgs for many years.

By learning and teaching Creative Problem Solving we empower diverse teams to appreciate and embrace cognitive diversity to solve problems and create new opportunities with skill.

Creative problem solving is a mental process used to find original and effective solutions to problems.

It involves going beyond traditional methods and thinking outside the box to come up with new and innovative approaches.

Here are some key aspects of creative problem solving:

• Divergent Thinking : This involves exploring a wide range of possibilities and generating a large number of ideas, even if they seem unconventional at first.
• Convergent Thinking : Once you have a pool of ideas, you need to narrow them down and select the most promising ones. This requires critical thinking and evaluation skills.
• Process : There are various frameworks and techniques that can guide you through the creative problem-solving process. These can help you structure your thinking and increase your chances of finding innovative solutions.

Benefits of Creative Problem Solving:

• Finding New Solutions : It allows you to overcome challenges and achieve goals in ways that traditional methods might miss.
• Enhancing Innovation : It fosters a culture of innovation and helps organizations stay ahead of the curve.
• Improved Adaptability : It equips you to handle unexpected situations and adapt to changing circumstances.
• Boosts Confidence: Successfully solving problems with creative solutions can build confidence and motivation.

Here are some common techniques used in creative problem solving:

• Brainstorming : This is a classic technique where you generate as many ideas as possible in a short period of time.
• SCAMPER: This is a framework that prompts you to consider different ways to Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Magnify/Minify, Put to other uses, Eliminate, and Rearrange elements of the problem.
• Mind Mapping: This technique involves visually organizing your ideas and connections between them.
• Lateral Thinking: This approach challenges you to look at the problem from different angles and consider unconventional solutions.

Creative problem solving is a valuable skill for everyone, not just artists or designers.

You can apply it to all aspects of life, from personal challenges to professional endeavors.

What is the Creative Problem Solving Process?

The Creative Problem Solving (CPS) framework is a systematic approach for generating innovative solutions to complex problems.

It’s effectively a process framework.

It provides a structured process that helps individuals and teams think creatively, explore possibilities, and develop practical solutions.

The Creative Problem Solving process framework typically consists of the following stages:

• Clarify : In this stage, the problem or challenge is clearly defined, ensuring a shared understanding among participants. The key objectives, constraints, and desired outcomes are identified.
• Generate Ideas : During this stage, participants engage in divergent thinking to generate a wide range of ideas and potential solutions. The focus is on quantity and deferring judgment, encouraging free-flowing creativity.
• Develop Solutions : In this stage, the generated ideas are evaluated, refined, and developed into viable solutions. Participants explore the feasibility, practicality, and potential impact of each idea, considering the resources and constraints at hand.
• Implement : Once a solution or set of solutions is selected, an action plan is developed to guide the implementation process. This includes defining specific steps, assigning responsibilities, setting timelines, and identifying the necessary resources.
• Evaluate : After implementing the solution, the outcomes and results are evaluated to assess the effectiveness and impact. Lessons learned are captured to inform future problem-solving efforts and improve the process.

Throughout the Creative Problem Solving framework, various creativity techniques and tools can be employed to stimulate idea generation, such as brainstorming, mind mapping, SCAMPER (Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate, Reverse), and others.

These techniques help break through traditional thinking patterns and encourage novel approaches to problem-solving.

What are Variations of the Creative Problem Solving Process?

There are several variations of the Creative Problem Solving process, each emphasizing different steps or stages.

Here are five variations that are commonly referenced:

• Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving : This is one of the earliest and most widely used versions of Creative Problem Solving. It consists of six stages: Objective Finding, Fact Finding, Problem Finding, Idea Finding, Solution Finding, and Acceptance Finding. It follows a systematic approach to identify and solve problems creatively.
• Creative Problem Solving 21st Century : Creative Problem Solving 21st Century, developed by Roger Firestien, is an innovative approach that empowers individuals to identify and take action towards achieving their goals, wishes, or challenges by providing a structured process to generate ideas, develop solutions, and create a plan of action.
• FourSight Thinking Profiles : This model introduces four stages in the Creative Problem Solving process: Clarify, Ideate, Develop, and Implement. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the problem, generating a range of ideas, developing and evaluating those ideas, and finally implementing the best solution.
• Basadur’s Innovative Process : Basadur’s Innovative Process, developed by Min Basadur, is a systematic and iterative process that guides teams through eight steps to effectively identify, define, generate ideas, evaluate, and implement solutions, resulting in creative and innovative outcomes.
• Synectics : Synectics is a Creative Problem Solving variation that focuses on creating new connections and insights. It involves stages such as Problem Clarification, Idea Generation, Evaluation, and Action Planning. Synectics encourages thinking from diverse perspectives and applying analogical reasoning.
• SCAMPER : SCAMPER is an acronym representing different creative thinking techniques to stimulate idea generation. Each letter stands for a strategy: Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate, and Rearrange. SCAMPER is used as a tool within the Creative Problem Solving process to generate innovative ideas by applying these strategies.
• Design Thinking : While not strictly a variation of Creative Problem Solving, Design Thinking is a problem-solving approach that shares similarities with Creative Problem Solving. It typically includes stages such as Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, and Test. Design Thinking focuses on understanding users’ needs, ideating and prototyping solutions, and iterating based on feedback.

These are just a few examples of variations within the Creative Problem Solving framework. Each variation provides a unique perspective on the problem-solving process, allowing individuals and teams to approach challenges in different ways.

Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving (CPS)

The original Creative Problem Solving (CPS) process, developed by Alex Osborn and Sidney Parnes, consists of the following steps:

• Objective Finding : In this step, the problem or challenge is clearly defined, and the objectives and goals are established. It involves understanding the problem from different perspectives, gathering relevant information, and identifying the desired outcomes.
• Fact Finding : The objective of this step is to gather information, data, and facts related to the problem. It involves conducting research, analyzing the current situation, and seeking a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing the problem.
• Problem Finding : In this step, the focus is on identifying the root causes and underlying issues contributing to the problem. It involves reframing the problem, exploring it from different angles, and asking probing questions to uncover insights and uncover potential areas for improvement.
• Idea Finding : This step involves generating a wide range of ideas and potential solutions. Participants engage in divergent thinking techniques, such as brainstorming, to produce as many ideas as possible without judgment or evaluation. The aim is to encourage creativity and explore novel possibilities.
• Solution Finding : After generating a pool of ideas, the next step is to evaluate and select the most promising solutions. This involves convergent thinking, where participants assess the feasibility, desirability, and viability of each idea. Criteria are established to assess and rank the solutions based on their potential effectiveness.
• Acceptance Finding : In this step, the selected solution is refined, developed, and adapted to fit the specific context and constraints. Strategies are identified to overcome potential obstacles and challenges. Participants work to gain acceptance and support for the chosen solution from stakeholders.
• Solution Implementation : Once the solution is finalized, an action plan is developed to guide its implementation. This includes defining specific steps, assigning responsibilities, setting timelines, and securing the necessary resources. The solution is put into action, and progress is monitored to ensure successful execution.
• Monitoring and Evaluation : The final step involves tracking the progress and evaluating the outcomes of the implemented solution. Lessons learned are captured, and feedback is gathered to inform future problem-solving efforts. This step helps refine the process and improve future problem-solving endeavors.

The CPS process is designed to be iterative and flexible, allowing for feedback loops and refinement at each stage. It encourages collaboration, open-mindedness, and the exploration of diverse perspectives to foster creative problem-solving and innovation.

Criticisms of the Original Creative Problem Solving Approach

While Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving is a widely used and effective problem-solving framework, it does have some criticisms, challenges, and limitations.

These include:

• Linear Process : CPS follows a structured and linear process, which may not fully capture the dynamic and non-linear nature of complex problems.
• Overemphasis on Rationality : CPS primarily focuses on logical and rational thinking, potentially overlooking the value of intuitive or emotional insights in the problem-solving process.
• Limited Cultural Diversity : The CPS framework may not adequately address the cultural and contextual differences that influence problem-solving approaches across diverse groups and regions.
• Time and Resource Intensive : Implementing the CPS process can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, requiring significant commitment and investment from participants and organizations.
• Lack of Flexibility : The structured nature of CPS may restrict the exploration of alternative problem-solving methods, limiting adaptability to different situations or contexts.
• Limited Emphasis on Collaboration : Although CPS encourages group participation, it may not fully leverage the collective intelligence and diverse perspectives of teams, potentially limiting the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving.
• Potential Resistance to Change : Organizations or individuals accustomed to traditional problem-solving approaches may encounter resistance or difficulty in embracing the CPS methodology and its associated mindset shift.

Despite these criticisms and challenges, the CPS framework remains a valuable tool for systematic problem-solving.

Adapting and supplementing it with other methodologies and approaches can help overcome some of its limitations and enhance overall effectiveness.

Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

Roger Firestien is a master facilitator of the Creative Problem Solving process. He has been using it, studying it, researching it, and teaching it for 40 years.

According to him, the 21st century requires a new approach to problem-solving that is more creative and innovative.

He has developed a program that focuses on assisting facilitators of the Creative Problem Solving Process to smoothly and confidently transition from one stage to the next in the Creative Problem Solving process as well as learn how to talk less and accomplish more while facilitating Creative Problem Solving.

Creative Problem Solving empowers individuals to identify and take action towards achieving their goals, manifesting their aspirations, or addressing challenges they wish to overcome.

Unlike approaches that solely focus on problem-solving, CPS recognizes that the user’s objective may not necessarily be framed as a problem. Instead, CPS supports users in realizing their goals and desires, providing a versatile framework to guide them towards success.

Why Creative Problem Solving 21st Century?

Creative Problem Solving 21st Century addresses challenges with the original Creative Problem Solving method by adapting it to the demands of the modern era. Roger Firestien recognized that the 21st century requires a new approach to problem-solving that is more creative and innovative.

The Creative Problem Solving 21st Century program focuses on helping facilitators smoothly transition between different stages of the problem-solving process. It also teaches them how to be more efficient and productive in their facilitation by talking less and achieving more results.

Unlike approaches that solely focus on problem-solving, Creative Problem Solving 21st Century acknowledges that users may not always frame their objectives as problems. It recognizes that individuals have goals, wishes, and challenges they want to address or achieve. Creative Problem Solving provides a flexible framework to guide users towards success in realizing their aspirations.

Creative Problem Solving 21st Century builds upon the foundational work of pioneers such as Osborn, Parnes, Miller, and Firestien. It incorporates practical techniques like PPC (Pluses, Potentials, Concerns) and emphasizes the importance of creative leadership skills in driving change.

Stages of the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

• Clarify the Problem
• Generate Ideas
• Develop Solutions
• Plan for Action

Steps of the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

Here are stages and steps of the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century per Roger Firestien:

CLARIFY THE PROBLEM

Start here when you are looking to improve, create, or solve something. You want to explore the facts,  feelings and data around it. You want to find the best problem to solve.

IDENTIFY GOAL, WISH OR CHALLENGE Start with a goal, wish or challenge that begins with the phrase: “I wish…” or “It would be great if…”

Diverge : If you are not quite clear on a goal then create, invent, solve or improve.

Converge : Select the goal, wish or challenge on which you have Ownership, Motivation and a need for Imagination.

GATHER DATA

Diverge : What is a brief history of your goal, wish or challenge? What have you already thought of or tried? What might be your ideal goal?

Converge : Select the key data that reveals a new insight into the situation or that is important to consider throughout the remainder of the process.

Diverge : Generate many questions about your goal, wish or challenge. Phrase your questions beginning with: “How to…?” “How might…?” “What might be all the ways to…?” Try turning your key data into questions that redefine the goal, wish or challenge.

• Mark the “HITS” : New insight. Promising direction. Nails it! Feels good in your gut.
• Group the related “HITS” together.
• Restate the cluster . “How to…” “What might be all the…”

GENERATE IDEAS

Start here when you have a clearly defined problem and you need ideas to solve it. The best way to create great ideas is to generate LOTS of ideas. Defer judgment. Strive for quantity. Seek wild & unusual ideas. Build on other ideas.

Diverge : Come up with at least 40 ideas for solving your problem. Come up with 40 more. Keep going. Even as you see good ideas emerge, keep pushing for novelty. Stretch!

• Mark the “HITS”: Interesting, Intriguing, Useful, Solves the problem. Sparkles at you.
• Restate the cluster with a verb phrase.

DEVELOP SOLUTIONS

Start here when you want to turn promising ideas into workable solutions.

DEVELOP YOUR SOLUTION Review your clusters of ideas and blend them into a “story.” Imagine in detail what your solution would look like when it is implemented.

Begin your solution story with the phrase, “What I see myself doing is…”

PPCo EVALUATION

PPCo stands for Pluses, Potentials, Concerns and Overcome concerns

Review your solution story .

• List the PLUSES or specific strengths of your solution.
• List the POTENTIALS of your solution. What might be the result if you were to implement your idea?
• Finally, list your CONCERNS about the solution. Phrase your concerns beginning with “How to…”
• Diverge and generate ideas to OVERCOME your concerns one at a time until they have all been overcome
• Converge and select the best ideas to overcome your concerns. Use these ideas to improve your solution.

PLAN FOR ACTION

Start here when you have a solution and need buy-in from others. You want to create a detailed plan of action to follow.

Diverge : List all of the actions you might take to implement your solution.

• What might you do to make your solution easy to understand?
• What might you do to demonstrate the advantages of your solution?
• How might you gain acceptance of your solution?
• What steps might you take to put your solution into action?

Converge : Select the key actions to implement your solution. Create a plan, detailing who does what by when.

Credits for the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

Creative Problem Solving – 21st Century is based on the work of: Osborn, A.F..(1953). Applied Imagination: Principles and procedures of Creative Problem Solving. New York: Scribner’s. Parnes, S.J, Noller, R.B & Biondi, A. (1977). Guide to Creative Action. New York: Scribner’s. Miller, B., Firestien, R., Vehar, J. Plain language Creative Problem-Solving Model, 1997. Puccio, G.J., Mance, M., Murdock, M.C. (2010) Creative Leadership: Skills that drive change. (Second Edition), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Miller, B., Vehar J., Firestien, R., Thurber, S. Nielsen, D. (2011) Creativity Unbound: An introduction to creative process. (Fifth Edition), Foursight, LLC., Evanston, IL. PPC (Pluses, Potentials & Concerns) was invented by Diane Foucar-Szocki, Bill Shepard & Roger Firestien in 1982

Where to Go for More on Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

Here are incredible free resources to ramp up on Creative Problem Solving 21st Century:

• PDF of Creative Problem Solving 21st Edition (RogerFirestien.com)
• PDF Worksheets for Creative Problem Solving (RogerFirestien.com)
• Video: Roger Firestien on 40 Years of Creative Problem Solving

Video Walkthroughs

• Video 1: Introduction to Creative Problem Solving
• Video 2: Identify your Goal/Wish/Challenge
• Video 3: Gather Data
• Video 4: Clarify the Problem: Creative Questions
• Video 5: Clarify the Problem: Why? What’s Stopping Me?
• Video 6: Selecting the Best Problem
• Video 7: How to do a Warm-up
• Video 8: Generate Ideas: Sticky Notes + Forced Connections
• Video 9: Generate Ideas: Brainwriting
• Video 10: Selecting the Best Ideas
• Video 11: Develop Solutions: PPCO
• Video 12: Generating Action Steps
• Video 13: Create Your Action Plan
• Video 14: CPS: The Whole Process

FourSight Thinking Profiles

The FourSight Thinking Skills Profile is an assessment tool designed to measure an individual’s thinking preferences and skills.

It focuses on four key thinking styles or stages that contribute to the creative problem-solving process.

The assessment helps individuals and teams understand their strengths and areas for development in each of these stages.

Why FourSight Thinking Profiles?

The FourSight method was necessary to address certain limitations or challenges that were identified in the original CPS method.

• Thinking Preferences : The FourSight model recognizes that individuals have different thinking preferences or cognitive styles. By understanding and leveraging these preferences, the FourSight method aims to optimize idea generation and problem-solving processes within teams and organizations.
• Overemphasis on Ideation : While ideation is a critical aspect of CPS, the original method sometimes focused too heavily on generating ideas without adequate attention to other stages, such as problem clarification, solution development, and implementation. FourSight offers a more balanced approach across all stages of the CPS process.
• Enhanced Problem Definition : FourSight places a particular emphasis on the Clarify stage, which involves defining the problem or challenge. This is an important step to ensure that the problem is well-understood and properly framed before proceeding to ideation and solution development.
• Research-Based Approach : The development of FourSight was influenced by extensive research on thinking styles and creativity. By incorporating these research insights into the CPS process, FourSight provides a more evidence-based and comprehensive approach to creative problem-solving.

Stages of FourSight Creative Problem Solving

FourSight Creative Problem Solving consists of four thinking stages, each associated with a specific thinking preference:

• Clarify : In this stage, the focus is on gaining a clear understanding of the problem or challenge. Participants define the problem statement, gather relevant information, and identify the key objectives and desired outcomes. This stage involves analytical thinking and careful examination of the problem’s context and scope.
• Ideate : The ideation stage involves generating a broad range of ideas and potential solutions. Participants engage in divergent thinking, allowing for a free flow of creativity and encouraging the exploration of unconventional possibilities. Various brainstorming techniques and creativity tools can be utilized to stimulate idea generation.
• Develop : Once a pool of ideas has been generated, the next stage is to develop and refine the selected ideas. Participants shift into a convergent thinking mode, evaluating and analyzing the feasibility, practicality, and potential impact of each idea. The emphasis is on refining and shaping the ideas into viable solutions.
• Implement : The final stage is focused on implementing the chosen solution. Participants develop an action plan, define specific steps and timelines, assign responsibilities, and identify the necessary resources. This stage requires practical thinking and attention to detail to ensure the successful execution of the solution.

Throughout the FourSight framework, it is recognized that individuals have different thinking preferences. Some individuals naturally excel in the Clarify stage, while others thrive in Ideate, Develop, or Implement.

By understanding these preferences, the FourSight framework encourages collaboration and diversity of thinking styles, ensuring a well-rounded approach to problem-solving and innovation.

The FourSight process can be iterative, allowing for feedback loops and revisiting previous stages as needed. It emphasizes the importance of open communication, respect for different perspectives, and leveraging the collective intelligence of a team to achieve optimal results.

4 Thinking Profiles in FourSight

In the FourSight model, there are four preferences that individuals can exhibit. These preferences reflect where individuals tend to focus their energy and time within the creative problem-solving process.

The four preferences in FourSight are:

• Clarifier : Individuals with a Clarifier preference excel in the first stage of the creative problem-solving process, which is about gaining clarity and understanding the problem. They are skilled at asking questions, gathering information, and analyzing data to define the problem accurately.
• Ideator : Individuals with an Ideator preference thrive in the second stage, which involves generating a wide range of ideas. They are imaginative thinkers who excel at brainstorming, thinking outside the box, and generating creative solutions. Ideators are known for their ability to explore multiple perspectives and come up with diverse ideas.
• Developer : Individuals with a Developer preference excel in the third stage of the process, which focuses on refining and developing ideas. They are skilled at evaluating ideas, analyzing their feasibility, and transforming them into actionable plans or solutions. Developers excel in taking promising ideas and shaping them into practical and effective strategies.
• Implementer : Individuals with an Implementer preference shine in the final stage of the process, which is about planning for action and executing the chosen solution. Implementers are skilled at organizing tasks, creating action plans, and ensuring successful implementation. They focus on turning ideas into tangible outcomes and are known for their ability to execute projects efficiently.

It’s important to note that while individuals may have a primary preference, everyone is capable of participating in all stages of the creative problem-solving process.

However, the FourSight model suggests that individuals tend to have a natural inclination or preference towards one or more of these stages. Understanding one’s preferences can help individuals leverage their strengths and work effectively in a team by appreciating the diversity of thinking preferences.

Right Hand vs. Left Hand

The FourSight model is a way to understand how people approach the creative process. It measures our preferences for different stages of creativity.

A good analogy for this is writing with your right or left hand. Think about writing with your right or left hand. Most of us have a dominant hand that we use for writing. It’s the hand we’re most comfortable with and it comes naturally to us. But it doesn’t mean we can’t write with our non-dominant hand. We can still do it, but it requires more effort and focus.

Similarly, in the creative process, we have preferred stages or parts that we enjoy and feel comfortable in. These are our peak preferences. However, it doesn’t mean we can’t work on the other stages. We can make a conscious effort to spend time and work on those stages, even if they don’t come as naturally to us.

Combinations of FourSight Profiles

Your FourSight profile is determined by four scores that represent your preferences in the creative process. Your profile reveals where you feel most energized and where you may struggle.

If you have a single peak in your profile, refer back to the description of that preference. If you have two or more peaks, continue reading to understand your tendencies when engaging in any kind of innovation.

Here are how the combinations show up, along with their labels:

2-Way Combinations

• High Clarifier & High Ideator = “Early Bird
• High Clarifier & High Developer = “Analyst”
• High Clarifier & High Implementer = “Accelerator”
• High Ideator & High Developer = “Theorist”
• High Ideator & High Implementer = “Driver”
• High Developer & High Implementer = “Finisher”

3-Way Combinations

• High Clarifier, Ideator & Developer = “Hare”
• High Clarifier, Ideator & Implementer = “Idea Broker”
• High Clarifier, Developer & Implementer = “Realist”
• High Ideator, Developer & Implementer = “Optimist”

4-Way Combination Nearly Equal for All Four Preferences = “Integrator”

Where to Go for More On FourSight

• FourSight Home
• FourSight Thinking Profile Interpretive Guide PDF
• FourSight Technical Manual PDF

Basadur’s Innovative Process

The Simplex Process, developed by management and creativity expert Min Basadur, gained recognition through his influential book “The Power of Innovation” published in 1995.

It consists of a sequence of eight steps organized into three distinct stages:

• Problem Formulation
• Solution Formulation
• Solution Implementation

You might hear Bsadur’s Innovative Process referred to by a few variations:

• Simplex Creative Problem Solving
• Basadur SIMPLEX Problem Solving Process
• Basadur System of innovation and creative problem solving
• Simplexity Thinking Process

What is Basadur’s Innovative Process

Here is how Basadur.com explains Basadur’s Innovation Process :

“The Basadur Innovation Process is an innovative thinking & creative problem solving process that separates innovation into clearly-defined steps, to take you from initial problem-finding right through to implementing the solutions you’ve created.

Its beauty is that it enables everyone to participate in an unbiased, open-minded way.

In the absence of negativity, people can think clearly and logically, building innovation confidence. A wide range of ideas can be proposed and the best ones selected, refined and executed in a spirit of openness and collaboration.

“That’s a great idea, but…”

How often have you heard this phrase? In most group decision-making processes, ideas are killed off before they’ve even got off the ground. With The Basadur Process on the other hand, judgment is deferred. Put simply, opinions on ideas don’t get in the way of ideas.”

3 Phases and 8 Steps of Basadur’s Innovative Process

The Basadur’s Innovative Process consists of three phases, subdivided into eight steps:

Phase 1: Problem Formulation

Problem Formulation : This phase focuses on understanding and defining the problem accurately. It involves the following steps:

• Step 1 : Problem Finding . Actively anticipate and seek out problems, opportunities, and possibilities. Maintain an open mind and view problems as opportunities for proactive resolution. Identify fuzzy situations and recognize that they can open new doors.
• Step 2 : Fact Finding . Gather relevant information and facts related to the fuzzy situation. Seek multiple viewpoints, challenge assumptions, listen to others, and focus on finding the truth rather than personal opinions. Utilize different lines of questioning to clarify the situation.
• Step 3 : Problem Definition . Define the problem accurately and objectively. View the problem from different angles and consider new perspectives. Uncover fresh challenges and recognize that the perceived problem might not be the real issue.

Phase 2: Solution Formulation

Solution Formulation . Once the problem is well-defined, this phase revolves around generating and evaluating potential solutions.  The steps involved are:

• Step 4 : Idea Finding . Generate ideas to solve the defined problem. Continuously seek more and better ideas, build upon half-formed ideas, and consider ideas from others. Fine-tune seemingly radical or impossible ideas to make them workable solutions.
• Step 5 : Evaluate & Select . Evaluate and select the most promising ideas to convert them into practical solutions. Consider multiple criteria in an unbiased manner, creatively improve imperfect solutions, and re-evaluate them.

Phase 3: Solution Implementation

Solution Implementation . In the final phase, the focus shifts to implementing and executing the selected solution effectively. The steps in this phase include:

• Step 6 : Plan Devise specific measures and create a concrete plan for implementing the chosen solution. Visualize the end result and motivate others to participate and support the plan.
• Step 7 : Acceptance Gain acceptance for the solutions and plans. Communicate the benefits of the solution to others, address potential concerns, and continuously revise and improve the solution to minimize resistance to change.
• Step 8 : Action Implement the solutions and put the plan into action. Avoid getting stuck in unimportant details, adapt the solutions to specific circumstances, and garner support for the change. Emphasize the need for follow-up to ensure lasting and permanent changes.

The SIMPLEX process recognizes that implementing a solution can reveal new problems, opportunities, and possibilities, leading back to Step 1 and initiating the iterative problem-solving and innovation cycle again.

Where to Go for More on Basadur’s Innovation Process

• Basadur’s Innovative Process Home
• Simplexity Thinking Explained
• Ambasadur Affiliate Program

Synectics is a problem-solving and creative thinking approach that emphasizes the power of collaboration, analogy, and metaphorical thinking. It was developed in the 1960s by George M. Prince and William J.J. Gordon.

Synectics is based on the belief that the most innovative ideas and solutions arise from the integration of diverse perspectives and the ability to make connections between seemingly unrelated concepts.

The Story of Synetics

Here is the story of Syentics according to SyneticsWorld.com:

“Back in the 1950s, our founders Bill Gordon, George Prince and their team studied thousands of hours of tape recorded innovation sessions to find the answer to

‘What is really going on between the people in the group to help them create and implement successfully?’

They called the answer the Synectics Creative-Problem-Solving Methodology, which has expanded into the Synecticsworld’s expertise on how people work creatively and collaboratively to create innovative solutions to some of the world’s most difficult challenges.

The unique Synecticsworld innovation process to the art of problem solving has taken us to many different destinations. We have worked on assignments in both the public and private sectors, in product and service innovation, business process improvement, cost reduction and the reinvention of business models and strategies.

It is our on-going goal to guide and inspire our clients to engage the Synectics innovation process to create innovative ideas, innovative solutions, and activate new, powerful, and innovative solutions.”

Why Synetics?

Synectics addresses challenges of the original Creative Problem Solving process by introducing a unique set of tools and techniques that foster creative thinking and overcome mental barriers.

Here’s how Synectics addresses some common challenges of the original Creative Problem Solving process:

• Breaking Mental Barriers : Synectics recognizes that individuals often have mental blocks and preconceived notions that limit their thinking. It tackles this challenge by encouraging the use of analogies, metaphors, and connections to break through these barriers. By exploring unrelated concepts and drawing parallels, participants can generate fresh perspectives and innovative solutions.
• Promoting Divergent Thinking : The original CPS process may sometimes struggle to foster a truly divergent thinking environment where participants feel comfortable expressing unconventional ideas. Synectics creates a safe and non-judgmental space for participants to freely explore and share their thoughts, regardless of how unusual or unconventional they may seem. This encourages a wider range of ideas and increases the potential for breakthrough solutions.
• Enhancing Collaboration : Synectics emphasizes the power of collaboration and the integration of diverse perspectives. It recognizes that innovation often emerges through the interaction of different viewpoints and experiences. By actively engaging participants in collaborative brainstorming sessions and encouraging them to build upon each other’s ideas, Synectics enhances teamwork and collective problem-solving.
• Stimulating Creative Connections : While the original CPS process focuses on logical problem-solving techniques, Synectics introduces the use of analogy and metaphorical thinking. By encouraging participants to find connections between seemingly unrelated concepts, Synectics stimulates creative thinking and opens up new possibilities. This approach helps overcome fixed thinking patterns and encourages participants to explore alternative perspectives and solutions.
• Encouraging Unconventional Solutions : Synectics acknowledges that unconventional ideas can lead to breakthrough solutions. It provides a framework that supports the exploration of unorthodox approaches and encourages participants to think beyond traditional boundaries. By challenging the status quo and embracing innovative thinking, Synectics enables the generation of unique and impactful solutions.

Synectics complements and expands upon the original CPS process by offering additional tools and techniques that specifically address challenges related to mental barriers, divergent thinking, collaboration, creative connections, and unconventional solutions.

It provides a structured approach to enhance creativity and problem-solving in a collaborative setting.

Synetic Sessions

In the Synectics process, individuals or teams engage in structured brainstorming sessions, often referred to as “synectic sessions.”

These sessions encourage participants to think beyond conventional boundaries and explore novel ways of approaching a problem or challenge.

The approach involves creating an open and non-judgmental environment where participants feel free to express their ideas and build upon each other’s contributions.

Synectics incorporates the use of analogies and metaphors to stimulate creative thinking. Participants are encouraged to make connections between unrelated concepts, draw parallels from different domains, and explore alternative perspectives.

This approach helps to break mental barriers, unlock new insights, and generate innovative ideas.

Steps of the Synetics Process

The Synectics process typically involves the following steps:

• Problem Identification : Clearly defining the problem or challenge that needs to be addressed.
• Idea Generation: Engaging in brainstorming sessions to generate a wide range of ideas, including both conventional and unconventional ones.
• Analogy and Metaphor Exploration : Encouraging participants to explore analogies, metaphors, and connections to stimulate new ways of thinking about the problem.
• Idea Development: Refining and developing the most promising ideas generated during the brainstorming process.
• Solution Evaluation : Assessing and evaluating the potential feasibility, effectiveness, and practicality of the developed ideas.
• Implementation Planning : Creating a detailed action plan to implement the chosen solution or ideas.

Synectics has been used in various fields, including business, design, education, and innovation. It is particularly effective when addressing complex problems that require a fresh perspective and the integration of diverse viewpoints.

Example of How Synetics Explores Analogies and Metaphors

Here’s an example of how Synectics utilizes analogy and metaphor exploration to stimulate new ways of thinking about a problem:

Let’s say a team is tasked with improving customer service in a retail store. During a Synectics session, participants may be encouraged to explore analogies and metaphors related to customer service. For example:

• Analogy : The participants might be asked to think of customer service in terms of a restaurant experience. They can draw parallels between the interactions between waitstaff and customers in a restaurant and the interactions between retail associates and shoppers. By exploring this analogy, participants may uncover insights and ideas for enhancing the customer experience in the retail store, such as personalized attention, prompt service, or creating a welcoming ambiance.
• Metaphor : Participants could be prompted to imagine customer service as a journey or a road trip. They can explore how different stages of the journey, such as initial contact, assistance during the shopping process, and follow-up after purchase, can be improved to create a seamless and satisfying experience. This metaphorical exploration may lead to ideas like providing clear signage, offering assistance at every step, or implementing effective post-purchase support.

Through analogy and metaphor exploration, Synectics encourages participants to think beyond the immediate context and draw inspiration from different domains .

By connecting disparate ideas and concepts , new perspectives and innovative solutions can emerge.

These analogies and metaphors serve as creative triggers that unlock fresh insights and generate ideas that may not have been considered within the confines of the original problem statement.

SCAMPER is a creative thinking technique that provides a set of prompts or questions to stimulate idea generation and innovation. It was developed by Bob Eberle and is widely used in problem-solving, product development, and brainstorming sessions.

SCAMPER provides a structured framework for creatively examining and challenging existing ideas, products, or processes.

Recognizing the value of Alex Osterman’s original checklist, Bob Eberle skillfully organized it into meaningful and repeatable categories. This thoughtful refinement by Eberle has made SCAMPER a practical and highly effective tool for expanding possibilities, breaking through creative blocks, and sparking new insights.

By systematically applying each prompt, individuals or teams can generate a wide range of possibilities and discover innovative solutions to problems or opportunities.

What Does SCAMPER Stand For?

Each letter in the word “SCAMPER” represents a different prompt to encourage creative thinking and exploration of ideas.

Here’s what each letter stands for:

• S – Substitute : Consider substituting a component, material, process, or element with something different to generate new ideas.
• C – Combine : Explore possibilities by combining or merging different elements, ideas, or features to create something unique.
• A – Adapt : Identify ways to adapt or modify existing ideas, products, or processes to fit new contexts or purposes.
• M – Modify : Examine how you can modify or change various attributes, characteristics, or aspects of an idea or solution to enhance its functionality or performance.
• P – Put to another use : Explore alternative uses or applications for an existing idea, object, or resource to uncover new possibilities.
• E – Eliminate : Consider what elements, features, or processes can be eliminated or removed to simplify or streamline an idea or solution.
• R – Reverse or Rearrange : Think about reversing or rearranging the order, sequence, or arrangement of components or processes to generate fresh perspectives and uncover innovative solutions.

Example of SCAMPER

Let’s take a simple and relatable challenge of improving the process of making breakfast sandwiches. We can use SCAMPER to generate ideas for enhancing this routine:

• S – Substitute : What can we substitute in the breakfast sandwich-making process? For example, we could substitute the traditional bread with a croissant or a tortilla wrap to add variety.
• C – Combine : How can we combine different ingredients or flavors to create unique breakfast sandwiches? We could combine eggs, bacon, and avocado to create a delicious and satisfying combination.
• A – Adapt: How can we adapt the breakfast sandwich-making process to fit different dietary preferences? We could offer options for gluten-free bread or create a vegan breakfast sandwich using plant-based ingredients.
• M – Modify : How can we modify the cooking method or preparation techniques for the breakfast sandwich? We could experiment with different cooking techniques like grilling or toasting the bread to add a crispy texture.
• P – Put to another use : How can we repurpose breakfast sandwich ingredients for other meals or snacks? We could use the same ingredients to create a breakfast burrito or use the bread to make croutons for a salad.
• E – Eliminate : What unnecessary steps or ingredients can we eliminate to simplify the breakfast sandwich-making process? We could eliminate the need for butter by using a non-stick pan or omit certain condiments to streamline the assembly process.
• R – Reverse or Rearrange : How can we reverse or rearrange the order of ingredients for a unique twist? We could reverse the order of ingredients by placing the cheese on the outside of the sandwich to create a crispy cheese crust.

These are just a few examples of how SCAMPER prompts can spark ideas for improving the breakfast sandwich-making process.

The key is to think creatively and explore possibilities within each prompt to generate innovative solutions to the challenge at hand.

Design Thinking

Design thinking provides a structured framework for creative problem-solving, with an emphasis on human needs and aspirations .

It’s an iterative process that allows for continuous learning , adaptation , and improvement based on user feedback and insights.

Here are some key ways to think about Design Thinking:

• Design thinking is an iterative and human-centered approach to problem-solving and innovation. It’s a methodology that draws inspiration from the design process to address complex challenges and create innovative solutions.
• Design thinking places a strong emphasis on understanding the needs and perspectives of the end-users or customers throughout the problem-solving journey.
• Design thinking is a collaborative and interdisciplinary process . It encourages diverse perspectives and cross-functional collaboration to foster innovation. It can be applied to a wide range of challenges, from product design and service delivery to organizational processes and social issues.

What is the Origin of Design Thinking

The origin of Design Thinking can be traced back to the work of various scholars and practitioners over several decades.

While it has evolved and been influenced by multiple sources, the following key influences are often associated with the development of Design Thinking:

• Herbert A. Simon : In the 1960s, Nobel laureate Herbert A. Simon emphasized the importance of “satisficing” in decision-making and problem-solving. His work focused on the iterative nature of problem-solving and the need for designers to explore various alternatives before arriving at the optimal solution.
• Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber : In the 1970s, Rittel and Webber introduced the concept of “wicked problems,” which are complex and ill-defined challenges that do not have clear solutions. They highlighted the need for a collaborative and iterative approach to tackling these wicked problems, which aligns with the principles of Design Thinking.
• David Kelley and IDEO : Design firm IDEO, co-founded by David Kelley, played a significant role in popularizing Design Thinking. IDEO embraced an interdisciplinary and human-centered approach to design, focusing on empathy, rapid prototyping, and iteration. IDEO’s successful design projects and methodologies have influenced the development and adoption of Design Thinking across various industries.
• Stanford University : Stanford University’s d.school (Hasso Plattner Institute of Design) has been instrumental in advancing Design Thinking. The d.school has developed educational programs and frameworks that emphasize hands-on experiential learning, collaboration, and empathy in problem-solving. It has played a significant role in spreading the principles of Design Thinking globally.

While these influences have contributed to the emergence and development of Design Thinking, it’s important to note that Design Thinking is an evolving and multidisciplinary approach.

It continues to be shaped by practitioners, scholars, and organizations who contribute new ideas and insights to its principles and methodologies.

Key Principles of Design Thinking

Here are key principles of Design Thinking:

• Empathy : Design thinking begins with developing a deep understanding of the needs, emotions, and experiences of the people for whom you are designing solutions. Empathy involves active listening, observation, and engaging with users to gain insights and uncover unmet needs.
• Define the Problem : In this phase, the problem is defined and reframed based on the insights gained through empathy. The focus is on creating a clear problem statement that addresses the users’ needs and aspirations.
• Ideation : The ideation phase involves generating a wide range of ideas without judgment or criticism. It encourages divergent thinking, creativity, and the exploration of various possibilities to solve the defined problem.
• Prototyping : In this phase, ideas are translated into tangible prototypes or representations that can be tested and evaluated. Prototypes can be physical objects, mock-ups, or even digital simulations. The goal is to quickly and cost-effectively bring ideas to life for feedback and iteration.
• Testing and Iteration : Prototypes are tested with end-users to gather feedback, insights, and validation. The feedback received is used to refine and iterate the design, making improvements based on real-world observations and user input.
• Implementation : Once the design has been refined and validated through testing, it is implemented and brought to life. This phase involves planning for execution, scaling up, and integrating the solution into the intended context.

Where to Go for More on Design Thinking

There are numerous resources available to learn more about design thinking. Here are three highly regarded resources that can provide a solid foundation and deeper understanding of the subject:

• “Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work” (Book) – Nigel Cross: This book offers a comprehensive overview of design thinking, exploring its history, principles, and methodologies. Nigel Cross, a renowned design researcher, delves into the mindset and processes of designers, providing insights into their approaches to problem-solving and creativity.
• IDEO U : IDEO U is an online learning platform created by IDEO, a leading design and innovation firm. IDEO U offers a range of courses and resources focused on design thinking and innovation. Their courses provide practical guidance, case studies, and interactive exercises to deepen your understanding and application of design thinking principles.
• Stanford d.school Virtual Crash Course : The Stanford d.school offers a free Virtual Crash Course in design thinking. This online resource provides an introduction to the principles and process of design thinking through a series of videos and activities. It covers topics such as empathy, ideation, prototyping, and testing. The Virtual Crash Course is a great starting point for beginners and offers hands-on learning experiences.

These resources offer diverse perspectives and practical insights into design thinking, equipping learners with the knowledge and tools to apply design thinking principles to their own projects and challenges.

Additionally, exploring case studies and real-life examples of design thinking applications in various industries can further enhance your understanding of its effectiveness and potential impact.

Dr. John Martin on “Psychological” vs. “Procedural” Approach

Dr. John Martin of the Open University in the UK offers an insightful perspective on how various Creative Problem Solving and Brainstorming techniques differ.

In his notes for the Creative Management module of their MBA Course in 1997, he states:

“In practice, different schools of creativity training borrow from one another. The more elaborate forms of creative problem-solving, such as the Buffalo CPS method (basically brainstorming), incorporate quite a number of features found in Synectics.

However there is still a discernible split between the ‘psychological’ approaches such as Synectics that emphasize metaphor, imagery, emotion, energy etc. and ‘procedural’ approaches that concentrate on private listings, round robins etc.. Of course practitioners can combine these techniques, but there is often a discernible bias towards one or other end of the spectrum”

Brainstorming was the original Creative Problem-solving Technique, developed in the 1930s by Alex Osborn (the O of the advertising agency BBDO) and further developed by Professor Sidney Parnes of the Buffalo Institute.

The Osborn-Parnes model is the most widely practised form of brainstorming, though the word has become a generic term for any attempt to generate new ideas in an environment of suspending judgement. It may include elements of other techniques, such as de Bono’s Lateral Thinking.”

Creative Problem Solving vs. Brainstorming vs. Lateral Thinking

Creative Problem Solving, brainstorming, and lateral thinking are distinct approaches to generating ideas and solving problems. Here’s a summary of their differences:

Creative Problem Solving:

• Involves a systematic approach to problem-solving, typically following stages such as problem identification, idea generation, solution development, and implementation planning.
• Focuses on understanding the problem deeply, analyzing data, and generating a wide range of potential solutions.
• Encourages both convergent thinking (evaluating and selecting the best ideas) and divergent thinking (generating multiple ideas).
• Incorporates structured techniques and frameworks to guide the problem-solving process, such as the Osborn-Parnes model.

Brainstorming:

• A specific technique within Creative Problem Solving, developed by Alex Osborn, which aims to generate a large quantity of ideas in a short amount of time.
• Involves a group of individuals openly sharing ideas without judgment or criticism.
• Emphasizes quantity over quality, encouraging participants to build upon each other’s ideas and think creatively.
• Typically involves following guidelines, such as deferring judgment, encouraging wild ideas, and combining and improving upon suggestions.

Lateral Thinking (Edward de Bono’s Lateral Thinking):

• Introduced by Edward de Bono, lateral thinking is a deliberate and structured approach to thinking differently and generating innovative ideas.
• Involves deliberately challenging traditional thinking patterns and assumptions to arrive at unconventional solutions.
• Encourages the use of techniques like random stimulation, provocative statements, and deliberate provocation to shift perspectives and break fixed thought patterns.
• Focuses on generating out-of-the-box ideas that may not arise through traditional problem-solving methods.

While there can be overlaps and combinations of these approaches in practice, each approach has its distinct emphasis and techniques.

Creative Problem Solving provides a structured framework for problem-solving, brainstorming emphasizes idea generation within a group setting, and lateral thinking promotes thinking outside the box to arrive at unconventional solutions.

Creative Problem Solving Empowers You to Change Your World

The Creative Problem Solving process is a valuable framework that enables individuals and teams to approach complex problems with a structured and creative mindset.

By following the stages of clarifying the problem, generating ideas, developing solutions, implementing the chosen solution, and evaluating the outcomes, the process guides participants through a systematic and iterative journey of problem-solving.

Throughout this deep dive, we’ve explored the essence of Creative Problem Solving, its key stages, and variations. We’ve seen how different methodologies, such as Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving, FourSight Thinking Profiles, Basadur’s Innovative Process, Synectics, SCAMPER, and Design Thinking, offer unique perspectives and techniques to enhance the creative problem-solving experience.

By embracing these frameworks and techniques, individuals and teams can tap into their creative potential , break free from conventional thinking patterns, and unlock innovative solutions.

Creative Problem Solving empowers us to approach challenges with curiosity, open-mindedness, and a collaborative spirit , fostering a culture of innovation and continuous improvement.

Remember, creative problem solving is a skill that can be developed and honed over time. By adopting a flexible and adaptable mindset , embracing diverse perspectives, and applying various creativity tools, we can navigate the complexities of problem-solving and uncover solutions that drive positive change.

Let’s enjoy our creative problem-solving journey by embracing the unknown and transforming challenges into opportunities for growth and innovation.

You Might Also Like

Frameworks Library 10 Best Change Management Frameworks 10 Best Go-to-Market Frameworks 10 Best Innovation Frameworks 10 Best Marketing Frameworks Appreciative Inquiry vs. Problem Solving Orientation

About JD Meier

I help leaders change the world.

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Creating Brand Value
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

What Is Creative Problem-Solving & Why Is It Important?

• 01 Feb 2022

One of the biggest hindrances to innovation is complacency—it can be more comfortable to do what you know than venture into the unknown. Business leaders can overcome this barrier by mobilizing creative team members and providing space to innovate.

There are several tools you can use to encourage creativity in the workplace. Creative problem-solving is one of them, which facilitates the development of innovative solutions to difficult problems.

Here’s an overview of creative problem-solving and why it’s important in business.

Access your free e-book today.

What Is Creative Problem-Solving?

Research is necessary when solving a problem. But there are situations where a problem’s specific cause is difficult to pinpoint. This can occur when there’s not enough time to narrow down the problem’s source or there are differing opinions about its root cause.

In such cases, you can use creative problem-solving , which allows you to explore potential solutions regardless of whether a problem has been defined.

Creative problem-solving is less structured than other innovation processes and encourages exploring open-ended solutions. It also focuses on developing new perspectives and fostering creativity in the workplace . Its benefits include:

• Finding creative solutions to complex problems : User research can insufficiently illustrate a situation’s complexity. While other innovation processes rely on this information, creative problem-solving can yield solutions without it.
• Adapting to change : Business is constantly changing, and business leaders need to adapt. Creative problem-solving helps overcome unforeseen challenges and find solutions to unconventional problems.
• Fueling innovation and growth : In addition to solutions, creative problem-solving can spark innovative ideas that drive company growth. These ideas can lead to new product lines, services, or a modified operations structure that improves efficiency.

Creative problem-solving is traditionally based on the following key principles :

1. Balance Divergent and Convergent Thinking

Creative problem-solving uses two primary tools to find solutions: divergence and convergence. Divergence generates ideas in response to a problem, while convergence narrows them down to a shortlist. It balances these two practices and turns ideas into concrete solutions.

2. Reframe Problems as Questions

By framing problems as questions, you shift from focusing on obstacles to solutions. This provides the freedom to brainstorm potential ideas.

3. Defer Judgment of Ideas

When brainstorming, it can be natural to reject or accept ideas right away. Yet, immediate judgments interfere with the idea generation process. Even ideas that seem implausible can turn into outstanding innovations upon further exploration and development.

4. Focus on "Yes, And" Instead of "No, But"

Using negative words like "no" discourages creative thinking. Instead, use positive language to build and maintain an environment that fosters the development of creative and innovative ideas.

Creative Problem-Solving and Design Thinking

Whereas creative problem-solving facilitates developing innovative ideas through a less structured workflow, design thinking takes a far more organized approach.

Design thinking is a human-centered, solutions-based process that fosters the ideation and development of solutions. In the online course Design Thinking and Innovation , Harvard Business School Dean Srikant Datar leverages a four-phase framework to explain design thinking.

The four stages are:

• Clarify: The clarification stage allows you to empathize with the user and identify problems. Observations and insights are informed by thorough research. Findings are then reframed as problem statements or questions.
• Ideate: Ideation is the process of coming up with innovative ideas. The divergence of ideas involved with creative problem-solving is a major focus.
• Develop: In the development stage, ideas evolve into experiments and tests. Ideas converge and are explored through prototyping and open critique.
• Implement: Implementation involves continuing to test and experiment to refine the solution and encourage its adoption.

Creative problem-solving primarily operates in the ideate phase of design thinking but can be applied to others. This is because design thinking is an iterative process that moves between the stages as ideas are generated and pursued. This is normal and encouraged, as innovation requires exploring multiple ideas.

Creative Problem-Solving Tools

While there are many useful tools in the creative problem-solving process, here are three you should know:

Creating a Problem Story

One way to innovate is by creating a story about a problem to understand how it affects users and what solutions best fit their needs. Here are the steps you need to take to use this tool properly.

1. Identify a UDP

Create a problem story to identify the undesired phenomena (UDP). For example, consider a company that produces printers that overheat. In this case, the UDP is "our printers overheat."

2. Move Forward in Time

To move forward in time, ask: “Why is this a problem?” For example, minor damage could be one result of the machines overheating. In more extreme cases, printers may catch fire. Don't be afraid to create multiple problem stories if you think of more than one UDP.

3. Move Backward in Time

To move backward in time, ask: “What caused this UDP?” If you can't identify the root problem, think about what typically causes the UDP to occur. For the overheating printers, overuse could be a cause.

Following the three-step framework above helps illustrate a clear problem story:

• The printer is overused.
• The printer overheats.
• The printer breaks down.

You can extend the problem story in either direction if you think of additional cause-and-effect relationships.

4. Break the Chains

By this point, you’ll have multiple UDP storylines. Take two that are similar and focus on breaking the chains connecting them. This can be accomplished through inversion or neutralization.

• Inversion: Inversion changes the relationship between two UDPs so the cause is the same but the effect is the opposite. For example, if the UDP is "the more X happens, the more likely Y is to happen," inversion changes the equation to "the more X happens, the less likely Y is to happen." Using the printer example, inversion would consider: "What if the more a printer is used, the less likely it’s going to overheat?" Innovation requires an open mind. Just because a solution initially seems unlikely doesn't mean it can't be pursued further or spark additional ideas.
• Neutralization: Neutralization completely eliminates the cause-and-effect relationship between X and Y. This changes the above equation to "the more or less X happens has no effect on Y." In the case of the printers, neutralization would rephrase the relationship to "the more or less a printer is used has no effect on whether it overheats."

Even if creating a problem story doesn't provide a solution, it can offer useful context to users’ problems and additional ideas to be explored. Given that divergence is one of the fundamental practices of creative problem-solving, it’s a good idea to incorporate it into each tool you use.

Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a tool that can be highly effective when guided by the iterative qualities of the design thinking process. It involves openly discussing and debating ideas and topics in a group setting. This facilitates idea generation and exploration as different team members consider the same concept from multiple perspectives.

Hosting brainstorming sessions can result in problems, such as groupthink or social loafing. To combat this, leverage a three-step brainstorming method involving divergence and convergence :

• Have each group member come up with as many ideas as possible and write them down to ensure the brainstorming session is productive.
• Continue the divergence of ideas by collectively sharing and exploring each idea as a group. The goal is to create a setting where new ideas are inspired by open discussion.
• Begin the convergence of ideas by narrowing them down to a few explorable options. There’s no "right number of ideas." Don't be afraid to consider exploring all of them, as long as you have the resources to do so.

Alternate Worlds

The alternate worlds tool is an empathetic approach to creative problem-solving. It encourages you to consider how someone in another world would approach your situation.

For example, if you’re concerned that the printers you produce overheat and catch fire, consider how a different industry would approach the problem. How would an automotive expert solve it? How would a firefighter?

Be creative as you consider and research alternate worlds. The purpose is not to nail down a solution right away but to continue the ideation process through diverging and exploring ideas.

Continue Developing Your Skills

Whether you’re an entrepreneur, marketer, or business leader, learning the ropes of design thinking can be an effective way to build your skills and foster creativity and innovation in any setting.

If you're ready to develop your design thinking and creative problem-solving skills, explore Design Thinking and Innovation , one of our online entrepreneurship and innovation courses. If you aren't sure which course is the right fit, download our free course flowchart to determine which best aligns with your goals.

About the Author

What is creative problem-solving?

Table of Contents

An introduction to creative problem-solving.

Creative problem-solving is an essential skill that goes beyond basic brainstorming . It entails a holistic approach to challenges, melding logical processes with imaginative techniques to conceive innovative solutions. As our world becomes increasingly complex and interconnected, the ability to think creatively and solve problems with fresh perspectives becomes invaluable for individuals, businesses, and communities alike.

Importance of divergent and convergent thinking

At the heart of creative problem-solving lies the balance between divergent and convergent thinking. Divergent thinking encourages free-flowing, unrestricted ideation, leading to a plethora of potential solutions. Convergent thinking, on the other hand, is about narrowing down those options to find the most viable solution. This dual approach ensures both breadth and depth in the problem-solving process.

Emphasis on collaboration and diverse perspectives

No single perspective has a monopoly on insight. Collaborating with individuals from different backgrounds, experiences, and areas of expertise offers a richer tapestry of ideas. Embracing diverse perspectives not only broadens the pool of solutions but also ensures more holistic and well-rounded outcomes.

Nurturing a risk-taking and experimental mindset

The fear of failure can be the most significant barrier to any undertaking. It's essential to foster an environment where risk-taking and experimentation are celebrated. This involves viewing failures not as setbacks but as invaluable learning experiences that pave the way for eventual success.

The role of intuition and lateral thinking

Sometimes, the path to a solution is not linear. Lateral thinking and intuition allow for making connections between seemingly unrelated elements. These 'eureka' moments often lead to breakthrough solutions that conventional methods might overlook.

Stages of the creative problem-solving process

The creative problem-solving process is typically broken down into several stages. Each stage plays a crucial role in understanding, addressing, and resolving challenges in innovative ways.

Clarifying: Understanding the real problem or challenge

Before diving into solutions, one must first understand the problem at its core. This involves asking probing questions, gathering data, and viewing the challenge from various angles. A clear comprehension of the problem ensures that effort and resources are channeled correctly.

Ideating: Generating diverse and multiple solutions

Once the problem is clarified, the focus shifts to generating as many solutions as possible. This stage champions quantity over quality, as the aim is to explore the breadth of possibilities without immediately passing judgment.

Developing: Refining and honing promising solutions

With a list of potential solutions in hand, it's time to refine and develop the most promising ones. This involves evaluating each idea's feasibility, potential impact, and any associated risks, then enhancing or combining solutions to maximize effectiveness.

Implementing: Acting on the best solutions

Once a solution has been honed, it's time to put it into action. This involves planning, allocating resources, and monitoring the results to ensure the solution is effectively addressing the problem.

Techniques for creative problem-solving

Solving complex problems in a fresh way can be a daunting task to start on. Here are a few techniques that can help kickstart the process:

Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a widely-used technique that involves generating as many ideas as possible within a set timeframe. Variants like brainwriting (where ideas are written down rather than spoken) and reverse brainstorming (thinking of ways to cause the problem) can offer fresh perspectives and ensure broader participation.

Mind mapping

Mind mapping is a visual tool that helps structure information, making connections between disparate pieces of data. It is particularly useful in organizing thoughts, visualizing relationships, and ensuring a comprehensive approach to a problem.

SCAMPER technique

SCAMPER stands for Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate, and Reverse. This technique prompts individuals to look at existing products, services, or processes in new ways, leading to innovative solutions.

Benefits of creative problem-solving

Creative problem-solving offers numerous benefits, both at the individual and organizational levels. Some of the most prominent advantages include:

Finding novel solutions to old problems

Traditional problems that have resisted conventional solutions often succumb to creative approaches. By looking at challenges from fresh angles and blending different techniques, we can unlock novel solutions previously deemed impossible.

Enhanced adaptability in changing environments

In our rapidly evolving world, the ability to adapt is critical. Creative problem-solving equips individuals and organizations with the agility to pivot and adapt to changing circumstances, ensuring resilience and longevity.

Building collaborative and innovative teams

Teams that embrace creative problem-solving tend to be more collaborative and innovative. They value diversity of thought, are open to experimentation, and are more likely to challenge the status quo, leading to groundbreaking results.

Fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement

Creative problem-solving is not just about finding solutions; it's also about continuous learning and improvement. By encouraging an environment of curiosity and exploration, organizations can ensure that they are always at the cutting edge, ready to tackle future challenges head-on.

Get on board in seconds

Join thousands of teams using Miro to do their best work yet.

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Creative Problem Solving

DOI link for Creative Problem Solving

Get Citation

• easy-to-follow instructions for using Creative Problem Solving;
• practical tools for understanding the challenge, generating ideas, and preparing for action;
• expanded guidelines for planning your approach to Creative Problem Solving;
• strategies that ensure successful group dynamics;
• the latest trends in creative thinking and group problem solving; and
• practical suggestions for those new to Creative Problem Solving.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter chapter 1 | 13  pages, introduction, chapter chapter 2 | 6  pages, cps overview, chapter chapter 3 | 11  pages, planning your approach: the management component of cps, chapter chapter 4 | 20  pages, understanding the challenge, chapter chapter 5 | 9  pages, generating ideas, chapter chapter 6 | 13  pages, preparing for action, chapter chapter 7 | 8  pages, applying cps.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Taylor & Francis Online
• Taylor & Francis Group
• Students/Researchers
• Librarians/Institutions

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited

• Reviews / Why join our community?
• For companies
• Frequently asked questions

Creative Problem Solving

What is creative problem solving.

Creative problem solving (CPS) is a process that design teams use to generate ideas and solutions in their work. Designers and design teams apply an approach where they clarify a problem to understand it, ideate to generate good solutions, develop the most promising one, and implement it to create a successful solution for their brand’s users.  

© Creative Education Foundation, Fair Use

Why is Creative Problem Solving in UX Design Important?

Creative thinking and problem solving are core parts of user experience (UX) design. Note: the abbreviation “CPS” can also refer to cyber-physical systems. Creative problem solving might sound somewhat generic or broad. However, it’s an ideation approach that’s extremely useful across many industries.  

Not strictly a UX design-related approach, creative problem solving has its roots in psychology and education. Alex Osborn—who founded the Creative Education Foundation and devised brainstorming techniques—produced this approach to creative thinking in the 1940s. Along with Sid Parnes, he developed the Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving Process. It was a new, systematic approach to problem solving and creativity fostering.  

Osborn’s CPS Process.

© IdeaSandbox.com, Fair Use

The main focus of the creative problem solving model is to improve creative thinking and generate novel solutions to problems. An important distinction exists between it and a UX design process such as design thinking. It’s that designers consider user needs in creative problem solving techniques, but they don’t necessarily have to make their users’ needs the primary focus. For example, a design team might trigger totally novel ideas from random stimuli—as opposed to working systematically from the initial stages of empathizing with their users. Even so, creative problem solving methods still tend to follow a process with structured stages. 

What are 4 Stages of Creative Problem Solving?

The model, adapted from Osborn’s original, typically features these steps:  

Clarify: Design teams first explore the area they want to find a solution within. They work to spot the challenge, problem or even goal they want to identify. They also start to collect data or information about it. It’s vital to understand the exact nature of the problem at this stage. So, design teams must build a clear picture of the issue they seek to tackle creatively. When they define the problem like this, they can start to question it with potential solutions.  

Ideate: Now that the team has a grasp of the problem that faces them, they can start to work to come up with potential solutions. They think divergently in brainstorming sessions and other ways to solve problems creatively, and approach the problem from as many angles as they can.  

Develop: Once the team has explored the potential solutions, they evaluate these and find the strongest and weakest qualities in each. Then, they commit to the one they decide is the best option for the problem at hand.  

Implement: Once the team has decided on the best fit for what they want to use, they discuss how to put this solution into action. They gauge its acceptability for stakeholders. Plus, they develop an accurate understanding of the activities and resources necessary to see it become a real, bankable solution.  

What Else does CPS Involve?

© Interaction Design Foundation, CC BY-SA 4.0

Two keys to the enterprise of creative problem solving are:  

Divergent Thinking

This is an ideation mode which designers leverage to widen their design space when they start to search for potential solutions. They generate as many new ideas as possible using various methods. For example, team members might use brainstorming or bad ideas to explore the vast area of possibilities. To think divergently means to go for:  

Quantity over quality: Teams generate ideas without fear of judgment (critically evaluating these ideas comes later). 

Novel ideas: Teams use disruptive and lateral thinking to break away from linear thinking and strive for truly original and extraordinary ideas.  

Choice creation: The freedom to explore the design space helps teams maximize their options, not only regarding potential solutions but also about how they understand the problem itself.  

Author and Human-Computer Interactivity Expert, Professor Alan Dix explains some techniques that are helpful for divergent thinking:  

• Transcript loading…

Convergent Thinking

This is the complementary half of the equation. In this ideation mode, designers analyze, filter, evaluate, clarify and modify the ideas they generated during divergent thinking. They use analytical, vertical and linear thinking to isolate novel and useful ideas, understand the design space possibilities and get nearer to potential solutions that will work best. The purpose with convergent thinking is to carefully and creatively:  

Look past logical norms (which people use in everyday critical thinking). 

Examine how an idea stands in relation to the problem.  

Understand the real dimensions of that problem.    

Professor Alan Dix explains convergent thinking in this video:  

What are the Benefits of Creative Problem Solving?

Design teams especially can benefit from this creative approach to problem solving because it:  

Empowers teams to arrive at a fine-grained definition of the problem they need to ideate over in a given situation.  

Gives a structured, learnable way to conduct problem-solving activities and direct them towards the most fruitful outcomes.  

Involves numerous techniques such as brainstorming and SCAMPER, so teams have more chances to explore the problem space more thoroughly.  

Can lead to large numbers of possible solutions thanks to a dedicated balance of divergent and convergent thinking.  

Values and nurtures designers and teams to create innovative design solutions in an accepting, respectful atmosphere.  

Is a collaborative approach that enables multiple participants to contribute—which makes for a positive environment with buy-in from those who participate.  

Enables teams to work out the most optimal solution available and examine all angles carefully before they put it into action.  

Is applicable in various contexts—such as business, arts and education—as well as in many areas of life in general.  

It’s especially crucial to see the value of creative problem solving in how it promotes out-of-the-box thinking as one of the valuable ingredients for teams to leverage.   

Watch as Professor Alan Dix explains how to think outside the box:  

How to Conduct Creative Problem Solving Best?

It’s important to point out that designers should consider—and stick to—some best practices when it comes to applying creative problem solving techniques. They should also adhere to some “house rules,” which the facilitator should define in no uncertain terms at the start of each session. So, designers and design teams should:  

Define the chief goal of the problem-solving activity: Everyone involved should be on the same page regarding their objective and what they want to achieve, why it’s essential to do it and how it aligns with the values of the brand. For example, SWOT analysis can help with this. Clarity is vital in this early stage.  Before team members can hope to work on ideating for potential solutions, they must recognize and clearly identify what the problem to tackle is.  

Have access to accurate information: A design team must be up to date with the realities that their brand faces, realities that their users and customers face, as well as what’s going on in the industry and facts about their competitors. A team must work to determine what the desired outcome is, as well as what the stakeholders’ needs and wants are. Another factor to consider in detail is what the benefits and risks of addressing a scenario or problem are—including the pros and cons that stakeholders and users would face if team members direct their attention on a particular area or problem.   

Suspend judgment: This is particularly important for two main reasons. For one, participants can challenge assumptions that might be blocking healthy ideation when they suggest ideas or elements of ideas that would otherwise seem of little value through a “traditional” lens. Second, if everyone’s free to suggest ideas without constraints, it promotes a calmer environment of acceptance—and so team members will be more likely to ideate better. Judgment will come later, in convergent thinking when the team works to tighten the net around the most effective solution. So, everyone should keep to positive language and encourage improvisational tactics—such as “yes…and”—so ideas can develop well.  

Balance divergent and convergent thinking: It’s important to know the difference between the two styles of thinking and when to practice them. This is why in a session like brainstorming, a facilitator must take control of proceedings and ensure the team engages in distinct divergent and convergent thinking sessions.  

Approach problems as questions: For example, “How Might We” questions can prompt team members to generate a great deal of ideas. That’s because they’re open-ended—as opposed to questions with “yes” or “no” answers. When a team frames a problem so freely, it permits them to explore far into the problem space so they can find the edges of the real matter at hand.  

UX Strategist and Consultant, William Hudson explains “How Might We” questions in this video:  

Use a variety of ideation methods: For example, in the divergent stage, teams can apply methods such as random metaphors or bad ideas to venture into a vast expanse of uncharted territory. With random metaphors, a team prompts innovation by drawing creative associations. With bad ideas, the point is to come up with ideas that are weird, wild and outrageous, as team members can then determine if valuable points exist in the idea—or a “bad” idea might even expose flaws in conventional ways of seeing problems and situations.  

Professor Alan Dix explains important points about bad ideas:  

• Copyright holder: William Heath Robinson. Appearance time: 1:30 - 1:33 Copyright license and terms: Public domain. Link: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/William_Heath_Robinson_Inventions_-_Page_142.png
• Copyright holder: Rev Stan. Appearance time: 1:40 - 1:44 Copyright license and terms: CC BY 2.0 Link: As yummy as chocolate teapot courtesy of Choccywoccydoodah… _ Flickr.html
• Copyright holder: Fabel. Appearance time: 7:18 - 7:24 Copyright license and terms: CC BY-SA 3.0 Link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hammer_nails_smithonian.jpg
• Copyright holder: Marcus Hansson. Appearance time: 05:54 - 05:58 Copyright license and terms: CC BY 2.0 Link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcus_hansson/7758775386

What Special Considerations Should Designers Have for CPS?

Creative problem solving isn’t the only process design teams consider when thinking of potential risks. Teams that involve themselves in ideation sessions can run into problems, especially if they aren’t aware of them. Here are the main areas to watch:  

Bias is natural and human. Unfortunately, it can get in the way of user research and prevent a team from being truly creative and innovative. What’s more, it can utterly hinder the iterative process that should drive creative ideas to the best destinations. Bias takes many forms. It can rear its head without a design team member even realizing it. So, it’s vital to remember this and check it. One team member may examine an angle of the problem at hand and unconsciously view it through a lens. Then, they might voice a suggestion without realizing how they might have framed it for team members to hear. Another risk is that other team members might, for example, apply confirmation bias and overlook important points about potential solutions because they’re not in line with what they’re looking for.  

Professor Alan Dix explains bias and fixation as obstacles in creative problem solving examples, and how to overcome them:  

Conventionalism

Even in the most hopeful ideation sessions, there’s the risk that some team members may slide back to conventional ways to address a problem. They might climb back inside “the box” and not even realize it. That’s why it’s important to mindfully explore new idea territories around the situation under scrutiny and not merely toy with the notion while clinging to a default “traditional” approach, just because it’s the way the brand or others have “always done things.”   

Dominant Personalities and Rank Pulling

As with any group discussion, it’s vital for the facilitator to ensure that everyone has the chance to contribute. Team members with “louder” personalities can dominate the discussions and keep quieter members from offering their thoughts. Plus, without a level playing field, it can be hard for more junior members to join in without feeling a sense of talking out of place or even a fear of reprisal for disagreeing with senior members.  

Another point is that ideation sessions naturally involve asking many questions, which can bring on two issues. First, some individuals may over-defend their ideas as they’re protective of them. Second, team members may feel self-conscious as they might think if they ask many questions that it makes them appear frivolous or unintelligent. So, it’s vital for facilitators to ensure that all team members can speak up and ask away, both in divergent thinking sessions when they can offer ideas and convergent thinking sessions when they analyze others’ ideas.  

Premature Commitment

Another potential risk to any creativity exercise is that once a team senses a solution is the “best” one, everyone can start to shut off and overlook the chance that an alternative may still arise. This could be a symptom of ideation fatigue or a false consensus that a proposed solution is infallible. So, it’s vital that team members keep open minds and try to catch potential issues with the best-looking solution as early as possible. The key is an understanding of the need for iteration—something that’s integral to the design thinking process, for example.   

Overall, creative problem solving can help give a design team the altitude—and attitude—they need to explore the problem and solution spaces thoroughly. Team members can leverage a range of techniques to trawl through the hordes of possibilities that exist for virtually any design scenario. As with any method or tool, though, it takes mindful application and awareness of potential hazards to wield it properly. The most effective creative problem-solving sessions will be ones that keep “creative,” “problem” and “solving” in sharp focus until what emerges for the target audience proves to be more than the sum of these parts.  

Learn More About Creative Problem Solving

Take our course, Creativity: Methods to Design Better Products and Services . 

Watch our Master Class Harness Your Creativity To Design Better Products with Alan Dix, Professor, Author and Creativity Expert. 

Read our piece, 10 Simple Ideas to Get Your Creative Juices Flowing . 

Go to Exploring the Art of Innovation: Design Thinking vs. Creative Problem Solving by Marcino Waas for further details. 

Consult Creative Problem Solving by Harrison Stamell for more insights.  

Read The Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-Solving Process by Leigh Espy for additional information.  

See History of the creative problem-solving process by Jo North for more on the history of Creative Problem Solving. 

Questions about Creative Problem Solving

To start with, work to understand the user’s needs and pain points. Do your user research—interviews, surveys and observations are helpful, for instance. Analyze this data so you can spot patterns and insights. Define the problem clearly—and it needs to be extremely clear for the solution to be able to address it—and make sure it lines up with the users’ goals and your project’s objectives. 

You and your design team might hold a brainstorming session. It could be a variation such as brainwalking—where you move about the room ideating—or brainwriting, where you write down ideas. Alternatively, you could try generating weird and wonderful notions in a bad ideas ideation session. 

There’s a wealth of techniques you can use. In any case, engage stakeholders in brainstorming sessions to bring different perspectives on board the team’s trains of thought. What’s more, you can use tools like a Problem Statement Template to articulate the problem concisely. 

Take our course, Creativity: Methods to Design Better Products and Services . 

Watch as Author and Human-Computer Interaction Expert, Professor Alan Dix explains important points about bad ideas:  

Some things you might try are:  1. Change your environment: A new setting can stimulate fresh ideas. So, take a walk, visit a different room, or work outside. 

2. Try to break the problem down into smaller parts: Focus on just one piece at a time—that should make the task far less overwhelming. Use techniques like mind mapping so you can start to visualize connections and come up with ideas. 

3. Step away from work and indulge in activities that relax your mind: Is it listening to music for you? Or how about drawing? Or exercising? Whatever it is, if you break out of your routine and get into a relaxation groove, it can spark new thoughts and perspectives. 

4. Collaborate with others: Discuss the problem with colleagues, stakeholders, or—as long as you don’t divulge sensitive information or company secrets—friends. It can help you to get different viewpoints, and sometimes those new angles and fresh perspectives can help unlock a solution. 

5. Set aside dedicated time for creative thinking: Take time to get intense with creativity; prevent distractions and just immerse yourself in the problem as fully as you can with your team. Use techniques like brainstorming or the "Six Thinking Hats" to travel around the problem space and explore a wealth of angles. 

Remember, a persistent spirit and an open mind are key; so, keep experimenting with different approaches until you get that breakthrough. 

Watch as Professor Alan Dix explains important aspects of creativity and how to handle creative blocks: 

Read our piece, 10 Simple Ideas to Get Your Creative Juices Flowing . 

Watch as Professor Alan Dix explains the Six Thinking Hats ideation technique. 

Creative thinking is about coming up with new and innovative ideas by looking at problems from different angles—and imagining solutions that are truly fresh and unique. It takes an emphasis on divergent thinking to get “out there” and be original in the problem space. You can use techniques like brainstorming, mind mapping and free association to explore hordes of possibilities, many of which might be “hiding” in obscure corners of your—or someone on your team’s—imagination. 

Critical thinking is at the other end of the scale. It’s the convergent half of the divergent-convergent thinking approach. In that approach, once the ideation team have hauled in a good catch of ideas, it’s time for team members to analyze and evaluate these ideas to see how valid and effective each is. Everyone strives to consider the evidence, draw logical connections and eliminate any biases that could be creeping in to cloud judgments. Accuracy, sifting and refining are watchwords here. 

Watch as Professor Alan Dix explains divergent and convergent thinking: 

The tools you can use are in no short supply, and they’re readily available and inexpensive, too. Here are a few examples: 

Tools like mind maps are great ways to help you visualize ideas and make connections between them and elements within them. Try sketching out your thoughts and see how they relate to each other—you might discover unexpected gems, or germs of an idea that can splinter into something better, with more thought and development. 

The SCAMPER technique is another one you can try. It can help you catapult your mind into a new idea space as you Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate, and Reverse aspects of the problem you’re considering. 

The “5 Whys” technique is a good one to drill down to root causes with. Once you’ve spotted a problem, you can start working your way back to see what’s behind it. Then you do the same to work back to the cause of the cause. Keep going; usually five times will be enough to see what started the other problems as the root cause. 

Watch as the Father of UX Design, Don Norman explains the 5 Whys technique: 

Read all about SCAMPER in our topic definition of it. 

It’s natural for some things to get in the way of being creative in the face of a problem. It can be challenging enough to ideate creatively on your own, but it’s especially the case in group settings. Here are some common obstacles: 

1. Fear of failure or appearing “silly”: when people worry about making mistakes or sounding silly, they avoid taking risks and exploring new ideas. This fear stifles creativity. That’s why ideation sessions like bad ideas are so valuable—it turns this fear on its head. 

2. Rigid thinking: This can also raise itself as a high and thick barrier. If someone in an ideation session clings to established ways to approach problems (and potential solutions), it can hamper their ability to see different perspectives, let alone agree with them. They might even comment critically to dampen what might just be the brightest way forward. It takes an open mind and an awareness of one’s own bias to overcome this. 

3. Time pressure and resource scarcity: When a team has tight deadlines to work to, they may rush to the first workable solution and ignore a wide range of possibilities where the true best solution might be hiding. That’s why stakeholders and managers should give everyone enough time—as well as any needed tools, materials and support—to ideate and experiment. The best solution is in everybody’s interest, after all.  

It takes a few ingredients to get the environment just right for creative problem solving:  

Get in the mood for creativity: This could be a relaxing activity before you start your session, or a warm-up activity in the room. Then, later, encourage short breaks—they can rejuvenate the mind and help bring on fresh insights.  

Get the physical environment just right for creating problem solving: You and your team will want a comfortable and flexible workspace—preferably away from your workstations. Make sure the room is one where people can collaborate easily and also where they can work quietly. A meeting room is good as it will typically have room for whiteboards and comfortable space for group discussion. Note: you’ll also need sticky notes and other art supplies like markers. 

Make the atmosphere conducive for creative problem solving: Someone will need to play facilitator so everyone has some ground rules to work with. Encourage everyone to share ideas, that all ideas are valuable, and that egos and seniority have no place in the room. Of course, this may take some enforcement and repetition—especially as "louder" team members may try to dominate proceedings, anyway, and others may be self-conscious about sounding "ridiculous." 

Make sure you’ve got a diverse team: Diversity means different perspectives, which means richer and more innovative solutions can turn up. So, try to include individuals with different backgrounds, skills and viewpoints—sometimes, non-technical mindsets can spot ideas and points in a technical realm, which experienced programmers might miss, for instance. 

Watch our Master Class Harness Your Creativity To Design Better Products with Alan Dix, Professor, Author and Creativity Expert. 

Ideating alone? Watch as Professor Alan Dix gives valuable tips about how to nurture creativity: 

• Copyright holder: GerritR. Appearance time: 6:54 - 6:59 Copyright license and terms: CC-BY-SA-4.0 Link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blick_auf_das_Dylan_Thomas_Boathouse_und_die_Trichterm%C3%BCndung_des_Taf,_Wales.jpg

Research plays a crucial role in any kind of creative problem solving, and in creative problem solving itself it’s about collecting information about the problem—and, by association, the users themselves. You and your team members need to have a well-defined grasp of what you’re facing before you can start reaching out into the wide expanses of the idea space.  

Research helps you lay down a foundation of knowledge and avoid reinventing the wheel. Also, if you study existing solutions and industry trends, you’ll be able to understand what has worked before and what hasn't.  

What’s more, research is what will validate the ideas that come out of your ideation efforts. From testing concepts and prototypes with real users, you’ll get precious input about your creative solutions so you can fine-tune them to be innovative and practical—and give users what they want in a way that’s fresh and successful. 

Watch as UX Strategist and Consultant, William Hudson explains important points about user research: 

First, it’s crucial for a facilitator to make sure the divergent stage of the creative problem solving is over and your team is on to the convergent stage. Only then should any analysis happen.  

If others are being critical of your creative solutions, listen carefully and stay open-minded. Look on it as a chance to improve, and don’t take it personally. Indeed, the session facilitator should moderate to make sure everyone understands the nature of constructive criticism.  

If something’s unclear, be sure to ask the team member to be more specific, so you can understand their points clearly. 

Then, reflect on what you’ve heard. Is it valid? Something you can improve or explain? For example, in a bad ideas session, there may be an aspect of your idea that you can develop among the “bad” parts surrounding it. 

So, if you can, clarify any misunderstandings and explain your thought process. Just stay positive and calm and explain things to your critic and other team member. The insights you’ve picked up may strengthen your solution and help to refine it. 

Last—but not least—make sure you hear multiple perspectives. When you hear from different team members, chances are you’ll get a balanced view. It can also help you spot common themes and actionable improvements you might make. 

Watch as Todd Zaki Warfel, Author, Speaker and Leadership Coach, explains how to present design ideas to clients, a valuable skill in light of discussing feedback from stakeholders. 

Lateral thinking is a technique where you approach problems from new and unexpected angles. It encourages you to put aside conventional step-by-step logic and get “out there” to explore creative and unorthodox solutions. Author, physician and commentator Edward de Bono developed lateral thinking as a way to help break free from traditional patterns of thought. 

In creative problem solving, you can use lateral thinking to come up with truly innovative ideas—ones that standard logical processes might overlook. It’s about bypassing these so you can challenge assumptions and explore alternatives that point you and your team to breakthrough solutions. 

You can use techniques like brainstorming to apply lateral thinking and access ideas that are truly “outside the box” and what your team, your brand and your target audience really need to work on. 

Professor Alan Dix explains lateral thinking in this video: 

1. Baer, J. (2012). Domain Specificity and The Limits of Creativity Theory . The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), 16–29.   John Baer's influential paper challenged the notion of a domain-general theory of creativity and argued for the importance of considering domain-specific factors in creative problem solving. This work has been highly influential in shaping the understanding of creativity as a domain-specific phenomenon and has implications for the assessment and development of creativity in various domains. 

2. Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The Standard Definition of Creativity . Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96.   Mark A. Runco and Gerard J. Jaeger's paper proposed a standard definition of creativity, which has been widely adopted in the field. They defined creativity as the production of original and effective ideas, products, or solutions that are appropriate to the task at hand. This definition has been influential in providing a common framework for creativity research and assessment. 

1. Fogler, H. S., LeBlanc, S. E., & Rizzo, B. (2014). Strategies for Creative Problem Solving (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall. 

This book focuses on developing creative problem-solving strategies, particularly in engineering and technical contexts. It introduces various heuristic problem-solving techniques, optimization methods, and design thinking principles. The authors provide a systematic framework for approaching ill-defined problems, generating and implementing solutions, and evaluating the outcomes. With its practical exercises and real-world examples, this book has been influential in equipping professionals and students with the skills to tackle complex challenges creatively. 

2. De Bono, E. (1985). Six Thinking Hats . Little, Brown and Company.   

Edward de Bono's Six Thinking Hats introduces a powerful technique for parallel thinking and decision-making. The book outlines six different "hats" or perspectives that individuals can adopt to approach a problem or situation from various angles. This structured approach encourages creative problem-solving by separating different modes of thinking, such as emotional, logical, and creative perspectives. De Bono's work has been highly influential in promoting lateral thinking and providing a practical framework for group problem solving. 

3. Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem-Solving (3rd ed.). Charles Scribner's Sons.  

Alex F. Osborn's Applied Imagination is a pioneering work that introduced the concept of brainstorming and other creative problem-solving techniques. Osborn emphasized how important it is to defer judgment and generate a large quantity of ideas before evaluating them. This book laid the groundwork for many subsequent developments in the field of creative problem-solving, and it’s been influential in promoting the use of structured ideation processes in various domains. 

Answer a Short Quiz to Earn a Gift

What is the first stage in the creative problem-solving process?

• Implementation
• Idea Generation
• Problem Identification

Which technique is commonly used during the idea generation stage of creative problem-solving?

• Brainstorming
• Prototyping

What is the main purpose of the evaluation stage in creative problem-solving?

• To generate as many ideas as possible
• To implement the solution
• To assess the feasibility and effectiveness of ideas

In the creative problem-solving process, what often follows after implementing a solution?

• Testing and Refinement

Which stage in the creative problem-solving process focuses on generating multiple possible solutions?

Better luck next time!

Do you want to improve your UX / UI Design skills? Join us now

Congratulations! You did amazing

You earned your gift with a perfect score! Let us send it to you.

Check Your Inbox

We’ve emailed your gift to [email protected] .

Literature on Creative Problem Solving

Here’s the entire UX literature on Creative Problem Solving by the Interaction Design Foundation, collated in one place:

Learn more about Creative Problem Solving

Take a deep dive into Creative Problem Solving with our course Creativity: Methods to Design Better Products and Services .

The overall goal of this course is to help you design better products, services and experiences by helping you and your team develop innovative and useful solutions. You’ll learn a human-focused, creative design process.

We’re going to show you what creativity is as well as a wealth of ideation methods ―both for generating new ideas and for developing your ideas further. You’ll learn skills and step-by-step methods you can use throughout the entire creative process. We’ll supply you with lots of templates and guides so by the end of the course you’ll have lots of hands-on methods you can use for your and your team’s ideation sessions. You’re also going to learn how to plan and time-manage a creative process effectively.

Most of us need to be creative in our work regardless of if we design user interfaces, write content for a website, work out appropriate workflows for an organization or program new algorithms for system backend. However, we all get those times when the creative step, which we so desperately need, simply does not come. That can seem scary—but trust us when we say that anyone can learn how to be creative­ on demand . This course will teach you ways to break the impasse of the empty page. We'll teach you methods which will help you find novel and useful solutions to a particular problem, be it in interaction design, graphics, code or something completely different. It’s not a magic creativity machine, but when you learn to put yourself in this creative mental state, new and exciting things will happen.

In the “Build Your Portfolio: Ideation Project” , you’ll find a series of practical exercises which together form a complete ideation project so you can get your hands dirty right away. If you want to complete these optional exercises, you will get hands-on experience with the methods you learn and in the process you’ll create a case study for your portfolio which you can show your future employer or freelance customers.

Your instructor is Alan Dix . He’s a creativity expert, professor and co-author of the most popular and impactful textbook in the field of Human-Computer Interaction. Alan has worked with creativity for the last 30+ years, and he’ll teach you his favorite techniques as well as show you how to make room for creativity in your everyday work and life.

You earn a verifiable and industry-trusted Course Certificate once you’ve completed the course. You can highlight it on your resume , your LinkedIn profile or your website .

All open-source articles on Creative Problem Solving

10 simple ideas to get your creative juices flowing.

• 4 years ago

Open Access—Link to us!

We believe in Open Access and the  democratization of knowledge . Unfortunately, world-class educational materials such as this page are normally hidden behind paywalls or in expensive textbooks.

If you want this to change , cite this page , link to us, or join us to help us democratize design knowledge !

Privacy Settings

Our digital services use necessary tracking technologies, including third-party cookies, for security, functionality, and to uphold user rights. Optional cookies offer enhanced features, and analytics.

Experience the full potential of our site that remembers your preferences and supports secure sign-in.

Governs the storage of data necessary for maintaining website security, user authentication, and fraud prevention mechanisms.

Enhanced Functionality

Saves your settings and preferences, like your location, for a more personalized experience.

Referral Program

We use cookies to enable our referral program, giving you and your friends discounts.

Error Reporting

We share user ID with Bugsnag and NewRelic to help us track errors and fix issues.

Optimize your experience by allowing us to monitor site usage. You’ll enjoy a smoother, more personalized journey without compromising your privacy.

Analytics Storage

Collects anonymous data on how you navigate and interact, helping us make informed improvements.

Differentiates real visitors from automated bots, ensuring accurate usage data and improving your website experience.

Lets us tailor your digital ads to match your interests, making them more relevant and useful to you.

Advertising Storage

Stores information for better-targeted advertising, enhancing your online ad experience.

Personalization Storage

Permits storing data to personalize content and ads across Google services based on user behavior, enhancing overall user experience.

Advertising Personalization

Allows for content and ad personalization across Google services based on user behavior. This consent enhances user experiences.

Enables personalizing ads based on user data and interactions, allowing for more relevant advertising experiences across Google services.

Receive more relevant advertisements by sharing your interests and behavior with our trusted advertising partners.

Enables better ad targeting and measurement on Meta platforms, making ads you see more relevant.

Allows for improved ad effectiveness and measurement through Meta’s Conversions API, ensuring privacy-compliant data sharing.

LinkedIn Insights

Tracks conversions, retargeting, and web analytics for LinkedIn ad campaigns, enhancing ad relevance and performance.

LinkedIn CAPI

Enhances LinkedIn advertising through server-side event tracking, offering more accurate measurement and personalization.

Google Ads Tag

Tracks ad performance and user engagement, helping deliver ads that are most useful to you.

Share Knowledge, Get Respect!

or copy link

Cite according to academic standards

Simply copy and paste the text below into your bibliographic reference list, onto your blog, or anywhere else. You can also just hyperlink to this page.

New to UX Design? We’re Giving You a Free ebook!

Download our free ebook The Basics of User Experience Design to learn about core concepts of UX design.

In 9 chapters, we’ll cover: conducting user interviews, design thinking, interaction design, mobile UX design, usability, UX research, and many more!

• Idea Generation: What is Creative Problem Solving?

Featured in:

© Shutterstock.com | alphaspirit

Creative Problem Solving (CPS) is a key idea generation technique. Currently, though better service quality is important, it is not enough on its own. Without combining it with innovation and creativity, one cannot expect to achieve lasting success at the international level. Reading this article, you’ll learn these aspects about CPS: 1) definition , 2) Osborn-Parnes CPS , 3) stages and models of creative problem solving (CPS) , and 4) some techniques .

In simple words, Creative Problem Solving may be defined as a problem solving technique that addresses a challenge or problem in a creative manner. The solution is creative because it is not obvious. To meet the criteria for solving a problem in a creative manner, the solution should resolve the declared problem in an original manner with the solution being reached independently. This idea generation strategy usually incorporates a team approach. This is owing to the fact that people inside the workplace are allowed to engage in the process of change in their search for creative solutions.

Coming to the more specific use of the term, Creative Problem Solving refers to the trademark Osborn-Parnes (CPS) process of creatively solving problems. The process was crafted by Dr. Sidney J. Parnes and Alex Osborn in the 1950s. The difference between this process and other CPS strategies is that there is utilization of both convergent and divergent thinking in the course of each process step, and not only when coming up with ideas to fix the problem. Each step starts with divergent thinking, an extensive search for multiple alternatives. After this comes convergent thinking that involves evaluating and selecting. This strategy is taught at the Creative Problem Solving Institute, the International Center for Studies in Creativity, and the CREA conference. It is particularly recognized as an important influence on the Productive Thinking Model.

OSBORN-PARNES CPS – A FEW MODELS

When describing the Osborne-Parnes process of Creative Problem Solving, one can think of no less than four models. Here, three are discussed.

In the linear model, each of the six stages of the Creative Problem Solving process is represented by a diamond shape. This shape signifies first, generating or diverging options, followed by a selection of a refreshed focus and then, moving on. Thinking was in straight lines, moving just one step at a time for the sake of maintaining order, channeling freedom. This model came out in the 1970s.

In the 1990s, the diamond shapes changed into connected bubbles representing attitude shifts towards directed and meaningful connectedness. Channeled freedom gets wider birth. There are three unique stages in the bubble model. Visually, this indicates authorization to enter not solely at the first stage (as was the case in the 1970s model), but at any stage of the process. The linear model has diamond shapes with smoother edges, and there are arrows to give directions. The three bubbles in the bubble model let you know exactly what you should do.

3. Systemic

The Thinking Skills Model is a system with many entry points determined by the task at hand (center hub) or situation. The construction in this model is in agreement with our current web-like interrelated view of the world. It depicts the distinctive core of each stage by renaming. While the bubble and accordion (diamond) CPS models offer rational, logical approaches to CPS, providing an overt course of action, this model tells you what happens. It outlines the three key phases and charts the thinking processes utilized for each. You can see the diamonds remain, the three key focus points join in fluid colors with the beginning point varying with the situational requirement.

STAGES AND MODELS OF CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING (CPS)

There are six stages in the Osborn-Parnes process of creative-problem solving. Here, the six stages are described with two examples of questions for some of the stages, to stimulate your thinking.

1. Objective Finding

Pinpointing the challenge or goal and delineating your preferred output is the basis of the CPS strategy. At times, people pay no heed to certain essential aspects about the problem or take something for granted to solve it rapidly. This causes an obscurement of the thought process, and the person fails to take note of the big picture. Delineating the goal or objective provides a lucid idea pertaining to the problem that facilitates the investigation of various possible solutions to it.

Questions : What bottlenecks or barriers exist? What is it that you wish to be better organized?

2. Fact Finding

Collecting information pertaining to the problem and associated data is essential for comprehending the problem. At this stage, make a list of key details such as what and who is involved, assumptions and perceptions, viewpoints of interested parties, feelings and facts, and so on so that you may begin the process of crafting ideas.

Questions : Who should be or is already involved? Why doesn’t/does it happen?

3. Problem Finding

Using the problem objective and gathered data as a basis, determine possible challenges that may come about and the possible opportunities that are present inside of it. This would assist you with concentrating on the problem. It is so simple to move your attention away from the aim and to come up with answers to the incorrect problems.

Questions : What is the actual problem? What is the key objective?

4. Idea Finding

Reusing a solution when we come across a problem that we possibly encountered before, is a very easy process. Our mind detects ‘conceptual blocks’ that comprise hurdles such as commitment, complacency, compression, and constancy. These hinder us from thinking creatively and developing fresh concepts or ideas. Thus, it is essential to investigate, brainstorm and determine as many probable solutions as you can.

5. Solution Finding

After you’ve done with coming up with new ideas and noting down probable solutions in list fashion, assess them to determine whether they meet your specification for success and can be executed. Improvise, reinforce and select the best idea. Make sure that the solutions are not only creative, but also useful. At times, will power is the sole solution.

Questions : Will it work? Are the technology and materials available?

6. Acceptance Finding

You have selected the best probable solution that is both actionable and satisfies the requirements for success. The next thing to do is to plan your steps for action by lucidly describing responsibilities and determining the best method to utilize the available resources. The calls for action that you put out should be comprehended by all associated with the problem solving process so that it becomes an accepted solution.

SOME TECHNIQUES

1. synectics.

Synectics is usually classified as a Creative Problem-Solving (CPS) Technique along with Brainstorming and Lateral Thinking. This problem solving methodology inspires thought processes that the subject might not be aware of. The credit for developing the technique that had its beginnings in the 1950s in the Arthur D. Little Invention Design Unit goes to George M. Prince and William J.J. Gordon.

The process was gathered from tape recorded (starting with audio with video coming later) meetings, assessment of the outcomes, and experiments with other methods of coping with the barriers to achievements, in the meeting.

The term “Synectics” has its origins from the Greek language and means the combining of different and supposedly irrelevant elements. Though Synectics is a trademarked name, it has turned into a standard word for delineating Creative Problem Solving that takes place in groups. This idea generation technique approaches problem solving and creativity in a rational manner.

In Gordon’s opinion, Synectics research has to do with three key assumptions:

• It is possible to describe and teach the creative process;
• Invention processes in science and arts are analogous and propelled by the same “psychic” processes;
• Creativity at the level of individual and group is analogous.

In short, if people comprehend the working of creativity, they can improve their ability to be creative.

2. TRIZ methodology

TRIZ (or TIPS – Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) was created by Genrich Altshuller and his coworkers. It is a Russian method of problem solving. This strategy is meant to cultivate the creation of patentable inventions. However, the technique is also helpful for developing non-product solutions.

In the beginning, following the invention of bulletproof glass, a trade off happened. Though the glass would prevent the bullet from entering, the former would crack to such an extent that the vision of the pilot or driver behind the glass would be obscured. TRIZ has a considerable list of principles for settling trade offs. In this particular case, the pertinent principle was segmentation for which the solution was to create a huge pane of glass from smaller panes. This was to ensure that the cracks were limited to the one small pane. If you are capable of articulating your trade off, the chances are high that TRIZ has methods to triumph over it that have proved successful with respect to other problems.

3. Brainstorming

Brainstorming is an individual or group activity by which attempts are made to determine a conclusion for a particular problem by collecting a list of ideas that its members spontaneously contributed. Alex Faickney Osborn popularized the term in Applied Imagination, a 1953 book.

4. Mindmapping

This creativity technique both reframes the situation and cultivates creativity. A mind map is a representation of concepts and ideas in a graphical manner. This visual thinking tool assists with structuring information, assisting with better analysis, synthesis, comprehension, recall and engendering of new ideas. The power of the mind map is traceable to its simplicity.

5. Reversal of problem

This approach is about coming up with ideas to solve problems by way of a different/opposite perspective (turning it around: upside-down, inside-out or back to front).

6. Look beyond something’s common function

Split an object into all its individual parts. If you have a description suggesting a function (just like the function of a prong is transporting electricity), describe it in a more generic manner by way of shape, size and the make-up of the material (such as rectangular, flat, small piece of metal). If you call an item an electric plug’s prong, the description may conceal the fact that the item could also turn into a screwdriver if required.

Here’s an example of looking beyond a thing’s common function: Imagine that the passengers of the luxury liner Titanic had considered the iceberg to be a huge floating surface instead of an object that hits ships. If they had thought so, perhaps many lives could have been saved by using the ship as a lifeboat because the iceberg would not sink.

7. Lateral thinking

Lateral thinking is a manner of thinking that looks for a solution to an obstinate issue through unorthodox elements or methods that would usually be disregarded by logical thinking. To be more precise, “lateral thinking” may be defined as a way to solve problems by a creative or indirect approach, utilizing reasoning that may not be obvious straight away or incorporating ideas that cannot be gathered by utilizing only conventional step-by-step logic. The term was coined by Edward de Bono , a foremost creativity practitioner, in 1967. De Bono created two different models pertaining to creativity thinking namely “parallel thinking” and lateral thinking. The creativity practitioner created the two models over many years with “Mechanism of the Mind” – his book, coming out in print in 1969.

Parallel thinking has to do with pondering over an issue in a single state of mind at a time as against confusing ourselves by attempting to process several issues differently in a single go. Coming back to lateral thinking, the concept makes you realize that coming up with breakthrough ideas doesn’t necessarily have to spring from a shotgun effort or luck. The method provides a systematic and most importantly, deliberate process for which the outcome is innovative thinking.

Creative thinking is no talent but rather, a learnable skill. It empowers those who adopt it by strengthening their natural abilities, which enhances innovation and creativity, which in turn leads to a boost in efficiency and profit.

Challenge, alternatives, and provocation and movement are three examples of lateral thinking techniques.

The basis for SCAMPER is the belief that everything new is a variation of something already in existence. SCAMPER is an acronym, and each letter indicates a different method by which the person can toy around with the features of whatsoever it is that is challenging him to come out with new ideas. The letters and their full forms are as follows:

S  = S ubstitute

C  = C ombine

A  = A dapt

M  = M agnify

P  = P ut to Other Uses

E  = E liminate (alternative is Minify)

R  = R earrange (alternative is Reverse)

To utilize the SCAMPER technique, start by stating the problem you wish to solve or the thought you wish to develop. This thought/idea can be anything: a product, process or service you wish to improve, a challenge in business, or other problem. Once you have identified the challenge, you need to come up with questions. Utilize the SCAMPER checklist for guidance. Here’s a sample:

S : What to substitute in my process of selling?

C : How do I blend selling with other activities?

A : What to copy or adapt the selling process of another person or company?

M : What do I put more weight on or magnify when selling?

P : What other uses can I put my selling to?

E : What do I eliminate or make easier in my process of selling?

R : How do I change, reverse or reorder my manner of selling?

With the help of these questions, you are pushed to a different viewpoint with respect to your problem and ultimately come up with original solutions.

Whether at business or in your personal life, Creative Problem Solving can help you see aspects and solutions that you may never have realized when you only permitted your mind to move the conventional path. So embrace it!

Comments are closed.

Related posts

What to Do When You Have No Friends and Feel Lonely

Thanks to the internet and social media, the world has never been so connected. You can keep up with …

7 Actions You Can Take Every Day to Build Your Self-Confidence

Have you ever wanted to achieve something so bad but were not sure whether you could, despite …

How to Recognize and Escape Emotional Vampires (It’s Easier than You Think)

Barely 60 seconds after meeting someone, you’re probably able to decide whether you like to spend …

408,000 + job opportunities

Not yet a member? Sign Up

join cleverism

Find your dream job. Get on promotion fasstrack and increase tour lifetime salary.

Post your jobs & get access to millions of ambitious, well-educated talents that are going the extra mile.

First name*

Company name*

Company Website*

E-mail (work)*

Login or Register

Password reset instructions will be sent to your E-mail.

Project Bliss

The osborn parnes creative problem-solving process.

The Osborn Parnes creative problem-solving process is a structured way to generate creative and innovative ways to address problems.

If you want to grow in your career, you need to show you can provide value. This is true no matter where you sit in an organization.

You likely do this in your day-to-day activities.

But if you want to stand out, or do better than the minimum required for your job, you need to find ways to be more valuable to your company.

Problem-solving skills are a great way to do this.

And there are many problem-solving approaches you can use.

By bringing creativity into the approach, you can get an even better variety of potential solutions and ideas.

Benefits of Using Creative Problem Solving  

Using a creative problem-solving approach has multiple benefits:

• It provides a structured approach to problem-solving.
• It results in more possible solution options using both divergent and convergent approaches.
• You create innovative approaches to change.
• It’s a collaborative approach that allows multiple participants.
• By engaging multiple participants in finding solutions, you create a positive environment and buy-in from participants.
• This approach can be learned.
• You can use these skills in various areas of life.

Origin of the Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-solving Process

Alex Osborne and Sidney Parnes both focused much of their work on creativity. Osborn is credited with creating brainstorming techniques in the 1940s. He founded the Creative Education Foundation, which Parnes led.

The two collaborated to formalize the process., which is still taught today.  

“Creativity can solve almost any problem. The creative act, the defeat of habit by originality, overcomes everything.” – George Lois

What is the Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-solving Process

The Osborn Parnes model is a structured approach to help individuals and groups apply creativity to problem-solving. 

There are 6 steps to the Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-Solving Process.

1.    Mess-Finding / Objective Finding

During the Objective-Finding phase, you determine what the goal of your problem-solving process will be.

What’s the intent of carrying out your problem-solving process? Get clear on why you’re doing it. This helps ensure you focus your efforts in the right area.

Knowing your goals and objectives will help you focus your efforts where they have the most value.  

2.    Fact-Finding

The Fact-F inding phase ensures you gather enough data to fully understand the problem.

Once you’ve identified the area you want to focus on, gather as much information as you can. This helps you get a full picture of the situation.

Collect data, gather information, make observations, and employ other methods of learning more about the situation.

You may wish to identify success criteria for the situation at this step, also.

3.    Problem-Finding

The Problem Finding phase allows you to dig deeper into the problem and find the root or real problem you want to focus on. Reframe the problem in order to generate creative and valuable solutions.

Look at the problem and information you’ve gathered in order to better clarify the problem you’ll be solving.

Make sure you’re focusing on the right problem before moving forward to develop a solution.

Personal example: you may think you want to get a second job so you can have more money to take your family on vacations. Upon deeper exploration, you realize your real desire and goal is to find ways to spend more time with your family . That’s the real problem you wish to solve.

Work example: your team has too much work to do and doesn’t have the time to create new software features that customers want. By digging in and reframing the problem you realize the team is more focused on handling support calls. You need to find a solution to handling the support calls, which would free up time for the team to focus on new development. You dig even deeper and learn the support calls are primarily focused on one problem that could be fixed to solve the problem.

“If you define the problem correctly, you almost have the solution.” – Steve Jobs

4.    Idea-Finding

The Idea-F inding phase allows your team to generate many options for addressing the problem.

Come up with many different potential ideas to address the problem.

Don’t judge the suggestions. Instead, welcome even crazy ideas. Unexpected or odd ideas may help others generate great ideas.

Use brainstorming techniques, affinity mapping and grouping, and other tools to organize the input.

Use “yes, and…” statements rather than “No, but…” statements to keep ideas flowing and avoid discouraging participants from contributing.

5.    Solution-Finding

The Solution Finding phase allows you to choose the best options from the ideas generated in the Idea Finding phase. 

Set selection criteria for evaluating the best choices in order to select the best option. You can weight your criteria if needed to place more emphasis on criteria that may be more important than others. 

Create a prioritization matix with your criteria to help you choose what to focus on.

6.    Action-Finding

In the Action-Finding phase, develop a plan of action to implement the solution you’ve settled on as the best choice. 

Depending on how complex the solution is, you may need to create a more complex plan of action. Your work breakdown structure of activities may be complex or simple.

When creating your action plan, identify who’s responsible for each of the activities, dependencies, and due dates.

If your chosen solution will impact many people or teams, you may need to do an impact analysis, create a communication plan , and get buy-in or participation from more groups. If your solution is simple, you will most likely have a much simpler plan. 

“Creativity involves breaking out of established patterns in order to look at things in a different way.” – Edward de Bono

Creative Problem-Solving Categories

Osborn and Parnes started working on creative problem-solving approaches in the 1950s. Since then, the process has evolved, but the focus on using creativity still remains important.

More recent modifications group the activities into four categories: 

Each of these categories contain the steps listed above to carry out the problem-solving process.

As you can see, the steps are still there, but the grouping helps provide a bit more structure to the way teams can think about it.

Divergent and Convergent Thinking

The creative problem-solving process uses two thinking styles: divergent thinking and convergent thinking. 

“Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, the just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while” – Steve Jobs

Divergent Thinking

Divergent  thinking is the creative process of generating multiple possible solutions and ideas. It’s usually done in a spontaneous approach where participants share multiple ideas, such as in a brainstorming session.

This approach allows more “out of the box” thinking for creative ideas. 

Once ideas are generated via creative, free-flowing divergent approach, you then move onto convergent thinking. 

Use questions to stimulate creative thinking.

When conducting divergent thinking sessions, don’t criticize suggestions. Instead, welcome ideas. Build on ideas that have been presented and even improve them if possible. 

Instead of saying “No, but…” welcome ideas with responses such as “Yes, and…”

“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” – Albert Einstein

Convergent Thinking

Convergent thinking is the process of evaluating the ideas, analyzing them, and selecting the best solution.

It’s the process of taking all the information gathered in divergent thinking, analyzing it, and finding the single best solution to the problem. 

Determine screening criteria for evaluating ideas. Spend time evaluating the options, and even improve suggestions if possible or needed. 

If an idea seems too crazy, don’t immediately dismiss it. A friend told me once he thought the Bird or Lime scooter business models would never work. If it had been pitched to him, his response would have been “People won’t use them. They’ll destroy them. People won’t be allowed to use them without helmets and won’t be permitted to leave them on the sidewalk.” But it’s turned out in many cities to be a great mode of short-distance transportation. 

Someone taking a strictly convergent approach to problem-solving might skip a creative brainstorming session and instead try to think of a straightforward answer to the problem. 

However, it’s useful to employ both approaches to come up with more options and creative solutions to problems. 

“You can’t use up creativity. The more you use, the more you have.” – Maya Angelou

Running Your Problem-Solving Sessions

When using these techniques, use your great facilitation and leadership skills to keep the group focused and moving forward.

For the best meetings possible, follow the guidance in my book Bad Meetings Happen to Good People: How to Run Meetings That Are Effective, Focused, and Produce Results .

Problem-solving skills and tools are useful both at work and other areas of life.

It’s liberating to know you don’t have to have all the answers to make improvements.

Instead, knowing how to lead and collaborate with others to find solutions will help you stand out as a strong leader and valuable team member to your employer.

Don’t shy away from leading an improvement effort when faced with challenges. Doing so will give you greater confidence to search for solutions in other situations.

And you’ll be known as someone who can tackle challenges and make improvements in the organization. Creating this reputation will be great for your career.

“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try” – Dr. Seuss

Related Posts

Leigh Espy is a project manager and coach with experience working in startups, government, and the corporate world. She works with project managers who want to improve their skills and grow in their career, and entrepreneurs and small businesses to help them get more done. She also remembers her early career days and loves working with new project managers and those who want to make a career move into project management.

I’m glad ‘problem finding’ is the basis for this. However, I think this is still reductive and presumes a ‘problem’ to be ‘solved’. I see ‘problem solving’ as a long way down the path in creativity. Creativity starts with an objective, a challenge, an opportunity. Not a ‘problem’. A problem gets an answer. A challenge gets possibilities.

am a university student from kenya and my lecturer gave us a question on how to use osbons model to systemtically analyze how to find solutions about corruption in our country and i think the info i got here will help me tackle that question alot

Great reading – it helped me with my Creativity Tools homework

creativiteach

Creativity for 21st century classrooms, creative problem solving.

Because CPS is complex, teachers of young children may wish to teach and use single parts of the process separately or to use them in a simplified fashion. Students of any age will need many varied experiences with CPS to master the stages and be able to apply them to varied situations. But the time and trouble required to teach CPS can be worth the effort. With CPS, students have a powerful process for attacking school, social, and personal problems from elementary grades into adulthood. Although early practice activities may focus on fantasy situations or fairy tales, CPS is most potent when used to interact with the real world.

Remember, the following brief overview of the components of CPS is not intended to suggest they should all be used, or that they should be used in order, but to present the tools available.

Exploring the Challenge involves selecting a broad goal, opportunity, or challenge and setting the principal direction for work. It has three sub-components, with names that vary slightly depending on whose version of the process you are using. See the Creative Education Foundation for another popular option.

Explori ng the Challenge

Objective Finding ( also called Constructing Opportunities). In this stage, students identify a problem or opportunity to address. One of my favorite CPS experiences started with a student who discovered, on reading a historical marker, that we were approaching the town’s 250 th anniversary. It was not a “problem” in the sense that there was any difficulty, but it was an opportunity. One of the benefits of teaching CPS is that students can be taught to look for problems and opportunities that will allow them to take action.

Fact Finding (E xploring D a t a) In Fact Finding, students learn as much about the situation as possible. For the 250th anniversary group, the curious students read town history, talked to local officials about planned celebrations (there were none), and spoke to community members about town activities during the 1976 national bicentennial.

Problem Finding (F r amin g P r ob l ems) Problem finding in CPS has a very particular definition, as opposed to the more global use of the same term. In CPS, problem finding is a stage in which problem solvers identify potential sub- problems in their challenge. Problems usually start with IWWMW (“In what ways might we?”). Students should list as many problem statements as possible before choosing the one (or a combination) that best expresses the dilemma they choose to address. The anniversary group’s problem was something like “In what ways might we celebrate the town’s 250th anniversary so that it will be remembered?”

Ge n e r a ting Ideas

In the Generating Ideas stage, problem solvers generate as many varied and unusual ideas as possible for solving the problem. At this stage of the CPS process, many other tools for divergent thinking can be useful. Attribute listing, SCAMPER, morphological synthesis, metaphorical thinking, and others all can be used to increase the number and diversity of solutions put forth. After the group has produced as many ideas as needed, a smaller number of ideas usually is selected to continue the CPS process. The 250th anniversary group suggested numerous ideas for a community celebration: a town festival, articles in the paper, commemorative souvenirs, a new time capsule, and a variety of school projects.

Preparing fo r Action

Solution Finding (De v e l opin g S olut i o ns) In Solution Finding, the short list of ideas is evaluated using criteria determined by the group. The number of criteria and the sophistication of the evaluation will vary with grade level. If students use CPS in real-world contexts, they probably will soon determine that the point totals may not always identify the best idea. Sometimes an idea may rank high but be impossible to carry out. For example, if the 250th anniversary group had an idea that was ranked high on every criterion except “Will the principal let us do it?” the high rankings probably will not be sufficient to make it a viable idea.

In other cases, students may realize that they omitted an important criterion (e.g., money or time available), or that some criteria simply are more important than others. In the actual 250th anniversary group, building a time capsule did not outrank all other ideas, especially those concern- ing community involvement, but the group really wanted to build a time capsule. The enthusiasm of many class members was much greater for that project idea than for any other. They determined that for this project, class interest was particularly important, so they gave it additional weight.

Ideas do not have to be mutually exclusive. The 250th anniversary group demonstrated this diversity. They divided in half, with one half planning to build and bury the time capsule while the other half, who had been studying the stock market, decided to create a business to produce and market commemorative souvenirs. They planned to market company stock to finance their venture and, rather than plan a town celebration, to incorporate sale of their souvenirs into the town’s annual spring festival.

Acceptance Finding (Bu il din g Acceptance)   The final stage of the CPS process asks problem solvers to create a plan of action. They are to determine what needs to be done, decide who will be responsible for each task, and plan reasonable time frame. In addition, those involved in planning attempt to identify in advance what the major stumbling blocks might be. These barriers could be difficult parts of the plan or they could be individuals or groups who oppose the plan. If planners can identify the problem are as in advance and develop strategies for avoiding or minimizing them, their chances of success are increased.

In real-world applications of CPS, Building Acceptance becomes particularly important. The 250th anniversary group needed detailed plans to realize their ideas. This stage of the process, in which they thought about the details of cost, timing, and responsibilities for each project, allowed them to plan ahead, thus avoiding many difficulties later on.

If you’d like to pursue CPS with students, one good place to start is with Prufrock Press .

Share this:

4 thoughts on “ creative problem solving ”.

Pingback: Design Thinking 1: What is it? | creativiteach

Pingback: Food Gathering for a Better Earth Day | creativiteach

Pingback: Creativity, Flexibility, and Critical Thinking: Sometimes There is No Other Hand | creativiteach

Pingback: “Kid-Created” Can Differentiate It: Creating for a Purpose and an Audience – Big Ideas for Little Scholars

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Creative Problem-Solving Approach: Skills, Framework, 3 Real-life Examples

What is creative problem-solving, creative problem-solving framework, 3 real-life examples of creative problem solving:, skills to develop for creative problem-solving.

Other Related Blogs

• Finding a new solution for a recurring issue at work
• Generating new marketing ideas for an upcoming product launch
• Coming up with unique ways to engage employees during meetings 

• Identifying the Real Problem : Imagine you wake up to a cold shower. The obvious problem? No hot water! But before you start dismantling the showerhead, take a step back. Is it a faulty heating element, a low thermostat setting, or a bigger issue with the building’s plumbing? This initial step is crucial. Ask yourself questions like “What are the symptoms?” and “When did this problem start?”. In our shower scenario, identifying the root cause (a faulty heating element) saves you time and unnecessary tinkering.
• Generating Wild Ideas : Now, it’s time to unleash your creativity! Remember that brainstorming session in school where every idea, no matter how wacky, was welcome? That’s the spirit! Back to our chilly shower situation, ideas might include: boiling water on the stove for a makeshift bath (not ideal!), calling the landlord for repairs (the most likely solution!), or – if you’re feeling adventurous – installing a solar water heater (hey, it could work!).
• Evaluating Ideas: Okay, so you have a list of ideas, from the practical to the downright peculiar. Here comes the filter. Evaluate each idea based on realistic criteria. For the shower scenario, fixing the heating element is likely the most feasible and impactful solution. While a solar water heater might be innovative, the cost and practicality might not make it the best choice at this moment.
• From Idea to Action Plan: We’ve identified the best course of action (fixing the heating element). Now, it’s time to develop a concrete solution. This might involve calling a plumber, gathering the necessary tools, or researching DIY repair tutorials (if you’re handy!). The key is to create a clear plan that addresses the problem directly.
• Putting Your Solution to the Test : The plan is in place, it’s time to implement! In our case, this means calling the plumber and getting that heating element fixed. Once the repair is done, take a celebratory hot shower! But remember, even the best plans can have hiccups. If the hot water issue persists, you might need to re-evaluate your initial diagnosis or call the plumber back for further troubleshooting.
• 6 Best Growth Mindset Interview Questions (with Sample Answers)
• Scaling a team: Learn how to create a plan to grow and expand successfully
• Boosting Performance With Self Managing Teams Understand With 3 Examples
• How To Deal With Toxic People At Work? 7 Proven Tips For Managers
• Guide To Nonverbal Communication For Managers: Types & How To Improve
• Hiring Manager Interview Training Made Easy
• Excel in Customer Service: Mastering the Top 11 Call Center Skills
• Coaching for Motivation in the Workplace 5 Effective Tips
• 8 Major Distractions in Workplace That You Need To Avoid
• 8 Introduction To New Team Email Templates For New Managers
• Netflix:  The company revolutionized how we watch TV shows and movies. However, when the company started, it faced a big challenge – getting people to watch their content when they were not a well-known brand. Instead of relying on traditional advertising, Netflix used creative problem-solving to develop a unique solution. They created an algorithm recommending TV shows and movies based on a user’s viewing history, leading to a highly personalized viewing experience. This recommendation engine became a critical factor in the company’s success, helping them attract and retain customers.
• NASA:  NASA had to devise an instant solution to save the Apollo 13 mission and their team. Their spacecraft was damaged, and they needed a solution to bring their astronauts safely back to Earth. The team fitted a square CO2 filter into a round hole using available materials on the spacecraft; the team used creative problem-solving to develop this approach. This innovative solution allowed the astronauts to return safely to Earth and set this incident as a classic creative solving example.
• IKEA:  IKEA makes stylish and affordable furniture and is a well-versed company. However, they faced significant challenges entering the Japanese market. Japanese apartments are comparatively smaller than the rest of the world, so the regular product range was irrelevant to Japanese customers. So, IKEA used creative problem-solving to develop a solution appealing to the Japanese market. They launched a variety of products specially created for smaller spaces that are easy to assemble and disassemble—they also introduced a range of futons designed to look like beds, appealing to Japanese customers who prefer sleeping on the floor. This innovative and creative approach helped IKEA successfully enter the Japanese market.

• Flexibility:  Being able to adapt to changing circumstances and consider multiple perspectives.
• Open-mindedness:  Being open to new ideas and willing to challenge assumptions.
• Curiosity:  Seek more information by questioning and better understanding the problem.
• Persistence:  If a solution does not work, apply another solution, but continue until the problem is solved.
• Divergent thinking:  Generating multiple ideas and exploring different possibilities.
• Convergent thinking:  Evaluating and selecting the best ideas based on specific criteria.
• Visualization:  Using mental imagery to explore solutions and ideas.
• Collaboration:  Working with others to combine different perspectives and knowledge.
• Risk-taking:  Being willing to take calculated risks and try new approaches.
• Innovation:  Combining ideas and approaches in novel ways to create new solutions.

Evaluate your problem-solving skills for free now

Take the free problem-solving assessment by Risely to get started on your journey.

What are the five steps in creative problem-solving?

What are the 4 ps of creative problem solving, is creative problem solving a skill, how is creative problem solving a logical process.

Top 15 Tips for Effective Conflict Mediation at Work

Top 10 games for negotiation skills to make you a better leader, manager effectiveness: a complete guide for managers in 2024, 5 proven ways managers can build collaboration in a team.

How you can use creative problem solving at work

Reading time: about 4 min

How many times have you tried to solve a problem only to get stuck in the process? In a business setting, this is a common occurrence. You’re faced with issues that traditional problem solving methods can’t solve. But you still need to find a way to fix the issue to move a project forward or resolve a conflict. This is when you may need to get creative to solve the problem at hand.

What is creative problem solving?

The definition of creative problem solving (CPS) will vary between organizations. At its core, CPS involves approaching a problem in an imaginative, innovative, and unconventional way. The process encourages you to find new, creative ways of thinking that can help you overcome the issue at hand more quickly.

7 steps of the creative problem solving process

The CPS process can be broken down into seven steps.

1. Identify the goal

Before solving the problem, you need to fully understand the problem you’re trying to solve. You may have overlooked or misunderstood some details. Take some time to analyze the conflict and clear up any confusion.

2. Gather data

Once you know what the problem is, you need to learn all you can about it. Who does the problem affect? Who is involved in solving the issue? Gather all the knowledge you can to gain a better understanding of the issue and to solve it.

3. Formulate challenge questions

After you’ve gathered the details, turn the problem into a question. Word the question in a way that encourages suggestions or ideas. It should be short, concise, and only focus on a single issue. Once you’ve created one or two questions, start trying to answer them.

4. Explore ideas

This step is where the brainstorming begins. You’ll be creating possible ideas or solutions to the problem you’re facing. This is usually when the creativity really starts to flow. With so many ideas flowing, it’s crucial that you write each of them down—even the stupid ones. Even if the idea you come up with has little to no chance of working, write it down. Trying to sort out bad ideas from the good ones during this step can squash creativity.

5. Come up with solutions.  

Weed out the average ideas from the winners by testing each one. See if the possible solution actually solves the problem and if you can implement it successfully. If the potential solution doesn’t resolve the issue, move on to the next idea. Evaluating each idea will help you zero in on the perfect solution.

6. Create an action plan 

Now that you have the perfect solution, you’ll need to create an action plan outlining implementation steps. Consider what resources you’ll need and how long it will take. Then write it all down. Once you create the plan, communicate the approach to the rest of the team so they’re aware of what’s happening.

To help you create an organized and detailed plan, you can use swimlanes in Lucidchart.

7. Take action

With your plan created and your team on board, it’s time to implement your solution and resolve the problem.

CPS techniques

Just knowing the process behind CPS isn’t enough. You’ll want to know about the common creative problem solving ideas or techniques that you can use to be more successful during each phase. Below are a few of the techniques you can use to help you through the CPS process:

Synectics:  This technique helps to inspire thoughts that you might not be aware of. It is a way to approach creativity in a logical, rational manner.

TRIZ methodology (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving):  This problem solving methodology is based on logic, data, and research—not intuition. It involves adapting existing solutions to your particular problem.

Brainstorming:  Using this technique allows you to collect a number of ideas that can be a potential solution to a problem and can be used in either a group or individual setting.

Mind mapping:  Mind mapping helps keeps your ideas organized by representing them in a graphical manner.

Reversal of problem:  Trying to solve a problem using traditional problem solving methods can sometimes end in roadblocks.This technique forces you to think about a problem from a new perspective.

Looking beyond something’s function:  Thinking about how you can use something beyond its typical function is a common CPS technique.

SCAMPER:  This acronym can help you come up with new ideas. Each letter stands for a way you can manipulate an original idea to come up with something new:

• S ubstitute
• P ut to other uses

Why use CPS

No matter what profession you’re in, you will face challenges. There will be times when traditional problem solving techniques just don’t do the trick. That’s when you can take advantage of CPS to help uncover the best solution to your problem.

About Lucidchart

Lucidchart, a cloud-based intelligent diagramming application, is a core component of Lucid Software's Visual Collaboration Suite. This intuitive, cloud-based solution empowers teams to collaborate in real-time to build flowcharts, mockups, UML diagrams, customer journey maps, and more. Lucidchart propels teams forward to build the future faster. Lucid is proud to serve top businesses around the world, including customers such as Google, GE, and NBC Universal, and 99% of the Fortune 500. Lucid partners with industry leaders, including Google, Atlassian, and Microsoft. Since its founding, Lucid has received numerous awards for its products, business, and workplace culture. For more information, visit lucidchart.com.

Related articles

How to brainstorm: 4 ways to get the creative juices flowing.

Brainstorming can promote problem-solving and innovative thinking to bring the best ideas forward. Follow these four steps and learn how to brainstorm ideas like a pro.

Affinity Diagrams: Your Key to More Creative Problem Solving

No matter the situation, affinity diagramming will help you to organize your thoughts and overcome your workplace challenges. Use these tips and templates to get started.

Bring your bright ideas to life.

or continue with

By registering, you agree to our Terms of Service and you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy .

• Creative Problem Solving Tutorial
• Creative Problem Solving - Home
• Introduction
• Creativity in Business
• Creative Skills of a Manager

Creative Problem Solving - Stages

• Paradigm Shift in Problem Solving
• Characteristics
• Qualities of a Creative Person
• Blocks to Innovative Ideas
• Creative Problem Solving Resources
• Quick Guide
• Selected Reading
• UPSC IAS Exams Notes
• Developer's Best Practices
• Questions and Answers
• Effective Resume Writing
• HR Interview Questions
• Computer Glossary

There are six stages of creative problem solving , where both divergent and convergent thought processes are used. These steps are essential for the search for data and then the narrowing of data.

During the convergence, the data that is very close to the point of issue or close enough to warrant further consideration are selected. Specific related and relevant items are individually known as hits and a cluster of such hits are known as ‘hotspots’.

The Objective Finding Stage

This stage employs divergent thinking to list the problems. Convergence is then used to identify the relevant areas for further discussion. ‘Hits’ and ‘hotspots’ are identified finding priorities, importance of the problem, its urgency, and its nature.

The Fact Finding Stage

Next is the fact-finding stage, where understanding of the problem is increased by collating of relevant information. This also helps new ideas to be generated. ‘Hits’ and ‘hotspots’ help to see the problem in a new light.

The Problem Finding Stage

In this stage, all the previous-stage ‘hits’ are used to identify the most productive problem listings.

The Idea Finding Stage

In this stage, creative problem solving teams look for potential solutions. Mainly divergent activity is used to bring out many ideas using idea-generation aids.

The Solution Finding Stage

All the implementable ideas are filtered out and their feasibilities are checked.

The Acceptance Finding Stage

It is a divergent activity that helps to implement solutions successfully via −

• Listing possible hurdles and ways to overcome them
• Developing implementation and contingency plans
• Generating Action Plans for working

Many people get used to traditional ideas, and this is often one of the main barriers to creative problem solving. Because of this thought, people and organizations tend to fall into a variety of traps when trying to become more innovative.

Arranging for group sessions where individuals brainstorm on ideas reduce the risk of making mistakes as individuals and it will also reduce personal prejudices. By sharing a problem with people or by making our ideas heard, we will be getting the chance to understand other people’s reactions and suggestions.

Creative Problem-Solving

• First Online: 29 January 2023

Cite this chapter

• Terence Lee 4 ,
• Lauren O’Mahony 5 &
• Pia Lebeck 6  

803 Accesses

This chapter presents Alex Osborn’s 1953 creative problem-solving (CPS) model as a three-procedure approach that can be deployed to problems that emerge in our everyday lives. The three procedures are fact-finding, idea-finding and solution-finding, with each step carefully informed by both divergent and convergent thinking. Using case studies to elaborate on the efficacy of CPS, the chapter also identifies a few common flaws that can impact on creativity and innovation. This chapter explores the challenges posed by ‘wicked problems’ that are particularly challenging in that they are ill-defined, unique, contradictory, multi-causal and recurring; it considers the practical importance of building team environments, of embracing diversity and difference, and other characteristics of effective teams. The chapter builds conceptually and practically on the earlier chapters, especially Chapter 4 , and provides case studies to help make sense of the key principles of creative problem-solving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Creative Thinking, Problem Solving and Ideation Tools

The creative problem-solving process explored in this chapter is not to be confused with the broader ‘creative process’ that is presented in Chapter 2 of this book. See Chapter 2 to understand what creative process entails.

A general online search of the Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem-Solving (CPS) process will generate many results. One of them is: https://projectbliss.net/osborn-parnes-creative-problem-solving-process/ . Osborn is largely credited as the creator of CPS, hence references are largely made to him (Osborn 1953 , 1957 ).

Founded in 2002, Fahrenheit 212 described itself as “a global innovation consultancy delivering sustainable, profitable growth for companies by pairing business acumen and consumer empathy.” It merged with Capgemini Consulting in 2016 and remains based in New York City, USA. ( https://www.capgemini.com/in-en/news/press-releases/capgemini-acquires-innovation-and-design-consultancy-fahrenheit-212-to-drive/ ).

More information on the NeoNurture incubator can be found in the Design That Matters website ( https://www.designthatmatters.org/ ) and in a TEDx presentation by Timothy Prestero ( https://www.ted.com/talks/timothy_prestero_design_for_people_not_awards ) (Prestero 2012 ).

For more information on the Embrace infant warmer, see Embrace Global: https://www.embraceglobal.org/ .

See also David Alger’s popular descriptions of the ‘Rules of Improv’ (Parts 1 and 2): https://www.pantheater.com/rules-of-improv.html ; and, ‘How to be a better improvisor’: https://www.pantheater.com/how-to-be-a-better-improvisor.html .

For more information about the Bay of Pigs, visit the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum at Columbia Point, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Online information can be accessed here: https://www.jfklibrary.org/learn/about-jfk/jfk-in-history/the-bay-of-pigs .

Bhat, R. 2021. Solving Wicked Problems Is What MBA Programs Need to Prepare the Students For? Business World Education . May 20. Available: http://bweducation.businessworld.in/article/Solving-Wicked-Problems-Is-What-MBA-Programs-Need-To-Prepare-The-Students-For-/20-05-2021-390302/. Accessed 30 August 2022.

Bratton, J., et al. 2010. Work and Organizational Behaviour , 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Book   Google Scholar  

Buzan, T. 1974. Use Your Head . London: BBC Active.

Google Scholar  

Cohen, A.K., and J.R. Cromwell. 2021. How to Respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic with More Creativity and Innovation. Population Health Management 24 (2): 153–155.

Article   Google Scholar  

Cunningham, E., B. Smyth, and D. Greene. 2021. Collaboration in the Time of COVID: A Scientometric Analysis of Multidisciplinary SARSCoV-2 Research. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications. 8 (240): 1–8.

Cunningham, S. 2021. Sitting with Difficult Things: Meaningful Action in Contested Times. Griffith Review 71 (February): 124–133.

De Bono, E. 1985. Six Thinking Hats . Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

Dutta, K. 2018. Solving Wicked Problems: Searching for the Critical Cognitive Trait. The International Journal of Management Education 16 (3): 493–503.

Elia, G., and A. Margherita. 2018. Can we Solve Wicked Problems? A Conceptual Framework and a Collective Intelligence System to Support Problem Analysis and Solution Design for Complex Social Issues. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 133: 279–286.

Engler, J.O., D.J. Abson, and H. von Wehrden. 2021. The Coronavirus Pandemic as an Analogy for Future Sustainability. Sustainability Science 16: 317–319.

Grivas, C., and G. Puccio. 2012. The Innovative Team: Unleashing Creative Potential for Breakthrough Results . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Holmes, K. 2021. Generation Covid: Crafting History and Collective Memory. Griffith Review 71 (February): 79–88.

Kapoor, H., and J.C. Kaufman. 2020. Meaning-Making Through Creativity During COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology 18 (December): 1–8.

Kelley, T. 2001. The Art of Innovation: Lessons in Creativity from IDEO, America’s Leading Design Firm . New York, NY: Random House.

Kite-Powell, J. 2014. Simple Tech Creates Infant-Warmer to Save Lives in Developing Countries. Forbes , 29 January. Available: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferhicks/2014/01/29/simple-tech-creates-infant-warmer-to-save-lives-in-developing-countries/?sh=df540aa758c1. Accessed 31 August 2022.

May, M. 2009. In Pursuit of Elegance . NY: Broadway Books.

McShane, S., M. Olekalns, and T. Travaglione. 2010. Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim , 3rd ed. Sydney: McGraw Hill.

Osborn, A. 1953. Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking . New York: Scribners.

Osborn, A. 1957. Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking , 10th ed. New York: Scribners.

Page, S.E. 2007. The Difference: How the power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Page, S.E. 2011. Diversity and Complexity . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Page, S.E. 2012. The Hidden Factor: Why Thinking Differently Is Your Greatest Asset . Chantilly, Virginia: The Great Courses.

Payne, M. 2014. How to Kill a Unicorn: How the World’s Hottest Innovation Factory Builds Bold Ideas That Make It to Market . New York: Crown Business.

Potter, A., M. McClure, and K. Sellers. 2010. Mass Collaboration Problem Solving: A New Approach to Wicked Problems. Proceedings of 2010 International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems . IEEE Explore, Chicago, Illinois. May 17–21: 398–407.

Prestero, T. 2012. Design for People, Not Awards. TEDxBoston . Available: https://www.ted.com/speakers/timothy_prestero. Accessed 30 August 2022.

Proctor, T. 2013. Creative Problem Solving for Managers: Developing Skills for Decision Making and Managers , 4th ed. New York: Routledge.

Puccio, G.J. 2012. Creativity Rising: Creative Thinking and Creative Problem Solving in the 21st Century . Buffalo, NY: ICSC Press.

Rittel, H.W.J., and M.M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences 4 (2), June: 155–169.

Roberto, M. 2009. The Art of Critical Decision Making: The Great Courses. Chantilly, Virginia: The Teaching Company.

Roy, A. 2020. Arundhati Roy: “The Pandemic is a Portal”. Financial Times , April 4. Available: https://www.ft.com/content/10d8f5e8-74eb-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca . Accessed 28 February 2022.

Ruggiero, V.R. 2009. The Art of Thinking: A Guide to Critical and Creative Thought , 9th ed. New York: Longman.

Sawyer, K. 2007. Group Genius: The Creative Power of Collaboration . New York: Basic Books.

Schuelke-Leech, B. 2021. A Problem Taxonomy for Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society 2 (2), June: 105.

Stellar, D. 2010. The PlayPump: What Went Wrong? State of the Planet, Columbia Climate School. Columbia University. Available: https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2010/07/01/the-playpump-what-went-wrong/. Accessed 30 August 2022.

Surowiecki, J. 2004. The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Businesses, Economies, Societies and Nations . New York: Anchor Books.

Sweet, C., H. Blythe, and R. Carpenter. 2021. Creativity in the Time of COVID-19: Three Principles. The National Teaching and Learning Forum. 30 (5): 6–8.

Taibbi, R. 2011. The Tao of Improv: 5 Rules for Improvising Your Life. Psychology Today , 25 January. Available: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/fixing-families/201101/the-tao-improv-5-rules-improvising-your-life. Accessed 1 September 2022.

Walton, M. 2010. Playpump is Not a Panacea for Africa’s Water Problems. Circle of Blue , July 24. Available: http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/2010/world/playpump-not-a-panacea-for-africas-water-problems/. Accessed 30 August 2022.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2022. Child Mortality (Under 5 Years). Available: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/levels-and-trends-in-child-under-5-mortality-in-2020. Accessed 28 February 2022.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Humanities and Social Sciences, Sheridan Institute of Higher Education, Perth, WA, Australia

Terence Lee

Media and Communication, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia

Lauren O’Mahony

Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terence Lee .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Lee, T., O’Mahony, L., Lebeck, P. (2023). Creative Problem-Solving. In: Creativity and Innovation. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8880-6_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8880-6_5

Published : 29 January 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-8879-0

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-8880-6

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

This web app uses cookies to compile statistic information of our users visits. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. If you wish you may change your preference or read about cookies

Discover the 5 Stages of Creative Problem Solving

Have you ever faced a problem that felt too hard to fix? Creative problem-solving is a skill that can help you deal with tough situations. By understanding the five stages of creative problem-solving, you can learn how to approach problems differently and find new solutions. Each stage plays an important role in solving problems, from coming up with ideas to evaluating solutions. Let’s look at the five stages of creative problem-solving and how they can help you tackle everyday challenges.

What is Creative Problem Solving?

Creative problem-solving means finding unique solutions in a new and inventive way. Unlike traditional methods, it encourages thinking outside the box and exploring unconventional ideas. There are five stages: preparation, incubation, insight, evaluation, and elaboration. These stages guide individuals through a structured process, encouraging the exploration of ideas, refinement of concepts, and assessment of solutions.

They provide a framework for transitioning between stages, allowing flexibility and iteration. For instance, in the preparation stage, individuals gather information and explore potential approaches. Then, in the insight stage, they have a “eureka” moment, leading to the evaluation of ideas. This transition allows for continuous idea generation and refinement, leading to innovative outcomes.

What are the 5 stages of creative problem solving?

Preparation: understanding the issue.

The preparation stage of creative problem-solving is essential. It helps to define the problem clearly, enabling individuals to identify the main components that need attention.

For example, when creating a new marketing campaign, defining the target audience and campaign objectives is essential in the preparation stage. Gathering information is also crucial at this stage. It helps to understand the issue comprehensively and identify potential solutions. For instance, if a company wants to improve customer satisfaction , gathering feedback from current customers will provide valuable insights. Therefore, the preparation stage is vital in laying the groundwork for the creative problem-solving process.

Define the Problem

The problem is that creative problem-solving is unclear and ineffective. It’s caused by a lack of structure and guidance and a misunderstanding of the stages of creative problem-solving. This problem impacts the situation by hindering the ability to approach challenges creatively and limiting the potential for innovative solutions.

Gather Information

Gathering information is essential in the creative problem-solving process. It helps individuals understand and define the problem effectively. Obtaining relevant data and insights allows individuals to gain a deeper understanding of the issue, identify obstacles, and recognize opportunities for innovation.

Incubation: Letting Ideas Marinate

During the incubation stage of creative problem-solving, individuals can benefit from techniques such as taking a break and doing other activities. This helps their ideas develop and marinate.

Taking a mental break or focusing on less demanding tasks can help the subconscious mind work on the challenges one might face. Allowing ideas to incubate enables individuals to think about the problem from different angles and perspectives, increasing the likelihood of finding a creative solution .

This stage gives the brain a break from intense thinking and brainstorming during preparation, contributing to creative problem-solving. Allowing ideas to marinate during the incubation stage can lead to improved insight and evaluation of the problem-solving process. It can also reduce the likelihood of burnout and fatigue, enhancing the overall quality of the solution developed during the elaboration stage.

Set Problem Aside

It’s helpful to set a problem aside during the creative problem-solving process. Engaging in different activities can allow new ideas to develop and provide a fresh perspective on the issue.

For example, taking a walk or working on an unrelated project can give the mind a break and allow ideas to develop. Setting a problem aside during the creative problem-solving process has many benefits. It can lead to a more innovative approach , spark new ideas, and prevent frustration and burnout. This approach provides space for insight and leads to a more successful creative problem-solving process.

Engage in Different Activities

Engaging in different activities can help with creative problem-solving.

For example, going for a walk, cooking, or playing a musical instrument can stimulate the brain and generate innovative ideas.

During the incubation stage, these activities can give the mind a break from the problem, allowing the unconscious to work on finding a solution.

This can lead to sudden moments of insight and creativity.

To transition between stages of problem-solving, individuals can push their limits by attending workshops or collaborating with others.

These activities can offer a fresh perspective and encourage the brain to think differently, leading to more effective problem-solving strategies.

Insight: The Aha Moment

“The Insight: The Aha Moment” is a big part of solving problems. It’s when a solution suddenly becomes clear. This can happen because of different things, like experiences, observations, or past problem-solving attempts. Being open to new ideas helps make these “Aha Moments” happen. Creating a creative environment, like making time for brainstorming and seeing things from different angles, can also help.

The “Insight: The Aha Moment” helps solve problems by giving clarity and pointing to the next steps. It helps focus on the best solutions, leading to better and faster problem-solving.

Wait for the Spark

Creative problem-solving involves waiting for the spark. It lets individuals take time to understand the issue before finding a solution, which helps ensure the solution is effective. Recognizing the solution leads to the insight stage by providing a sudden understanding or realization of the problem. It often feels like an “aha!” moment where ideas come together.

For instance, a graphic designer may be stuck on a project, but after a break, they may suddenly see a solution, leading to project completion.

Recognize the Solution

Recognizing the solution is an integral part of creative problem-solving. It is the final stage of finding a resolution. People can identify the solution by being open to new ideas and looking at the problem from different perspectives.

Recognizing the solution impacts the overall outcome of the process by providing closure and allowing for the implementation of the resolved issue. This helps to conclude the problem-solving process successfully.

Evaluation: Testing Solutions

It’s vital to assess ideas effectively during the evaluation stage of creative problem-solving. This can be done by setting clear criteria for success, defining specific goals, considering feasibility, and evaluating potential impact.

For example, before launching a new product, a company might evaluate market demand, production costs, and potential profitability based on consumer trends and competition.

During the evaluation stage, gathering feedback from relevant stakeholders, conducting user testing, and making necessary adjustments based on the results is crucial. In software development, this may involve seeking user feedback through beta testing to identify and address potential issues or areas for improvement.

Evaluating ideas rigorously before implementation reduces the risk of investing time and resources into ineffective solutions. It significantly contributes to the process of finding practical solutions.

Assess Ideas

During the creative problem-solving process, it’s vital to assess ideas effectively. Factors like feasibility, relevance, and potential impact should be considered. This helps evaluate each idea’s originality and practicality to determine the most suitable ones for the problem.

In the assessment stage, criteria such as cost-effectiveness, alignment with objectives, and adaptability to change should be used to prioritize ideas. This ensures that the chosen concepts are innovative, feasible, and beneficial.

Thorough evaluation and prioritization of ideas in the assessment stage play a crucial role in guiding the successful resolution of the problem at hand.

Refine Solution

To refine a solution, you can:

• Address potential flaws or weaknesses by seeking feedback from others and conducting thorough testing.
• This helps identify any overlooked issues and ensures the solution is robust and effective.

Specific steps to further improve the proposed solution include:

• Conducting additional research
• Brainstorming alternative approaches
• Seeking inspiration from unrelated fields or industries.

Expanding the exploration scope makes the creative problem-solving process more dynamic and diverse, leading to more innovative and impactful solutions.

Additional criteria or considerations during the refinement of the solution are:

• Ethical implications
• Potential impact on different stakeholders
• Long-term sustainability of the solution.

By considering these factors, the refined solution can be more comprehensive and responsible, meeting the needs of all parties involved.

Elaboration: Applying the Solution

The elaboration stage in the creative problem-solving process involves expanding and refining the potential solution to ensure its successful implementation.

To achieve this, intensive research, brainstorming, and collaboration with others are essential. These help identify any potential flaws and address them effectively.

For example, a marketing team may further develop a new advertising campaign concept by gathering feedback from focus groups and adjusting the messaging accordingly.

To effectively apply the solution, specific action steps, such as creating a prototype, conducting feasibility studies, and obtaining user feedback, can be taken.

Transitioning from the previous stages of creative problem-solving to the elaboration stage means moving from generating potential solutions to working on the details of the most promising ideas.

This requires shifting from broad creativity to focused implementation, ensuring the idea is refined, practical, and ready for execution. For instance, after generating various design concepts for a new product, the transition to the elaboration stage involves selecting the most viable option and developing detailed specifications for prototyping and testing.

Develop Action Steps

During the insight stage of creative problem-solving, you can develop specific action steps by identifying the key components of the solution and breaking them down into achievable tasks.

For instance, if the problem concerns improving workplace morale, you might find that introducing team-building activities could help. The action steps could include researching suitable team-building exercises, seeking employee feedback on preferred activities, and planning the implementation logistics.

To ensure the action steps are practical and effective, you can conduct a small-scale trial of the proposed solution or seek input from relevant stakeholders. For example, if the action involves implementing a new software system, performing a trial run with a small team can help identify potential issues before full-scale implementation.

To move from the elaboration stage to implementation, you can create a detailed timeline and assign specific responsibilities to team members. For instance, when developing a marketing campaign, you must finalize the campaign elements and set clear deadlines for the design, content creation, and distribution stages.

Implement the Solution

The 5 stages of creative problem-solving are:

• Preparation : Gathering information, doing research, and identifying the problem.
• Incubation : Subconsciously working on a solution.
• Insight : The “aha” moment when the solution presents itself.
• Evaluation : Critically analyze the solution to determine its effectiveness.
• Elaboration : Refine and develop the solution further.

Each stage has a specific role in the creative process. Transitioning from one stage to the next requires a shift in thinking and approach. For example, transitioning from preparation to incubation may involve taking a break or engaging in an unrelated activity to allow the mind to work on the problem subconsciously. Similarly, transitioning from insight to evaluation may include testing the solution in different scenarios or seeking feedback from others.

Each stage of creative problem-solving is essential and contributes to the overall process.

How Each Stage Fits Into the Creative Process

Link between stages.

Transitioning from the Incubation stage to the Insight stage in creative problem-solving is essential. It allows the individual to step back from the problem. This mental break lets new perspectives and ideas emerge, leading to the “Aha!” moment and triggering creativity to move forward.

The Evaluation stage also plays a role. It connects the Insight and Elaboration stages by providing a platform for examining ideas in a structured manner. It rules out unfeasible ones and retains the best ones. This stage also helps identify potential roadblocks that could arise during implementation.

The transition from the Preparation to the Incubation stage significantly impacts the overall link between stages. It lays the groundwork for creative problem-solving. This stage is also a time to identify the problem, gather necessary information, and define the constraints before consciously moving the problem to the back of the mind. This process allows the subconscious to chip away at the problem, giving new insight.

Transition from One Stage to Next

Transitioning from the Preparation stage to the Incubation stage in creative problem-solving encourages individuals to take a break from the problem and let their minds wander. This allows them to think creatively and approach the problem from different angles. By doing so, the subconscious mind can work on the issue, often leading to unexpected “aha” moments.

For example, individuals may take a walk or engage in physical activity while incubating a problem, transcending traditional problem-solving thinking.

Using critical analysis tools, creative problem-solving can be achieved from the insight stage to the evaluation stage. Individuals should objectively review their ideas and consider key questions like, “Does this idea align with the problem I am trying to solve?” Group evaluations can also aid in this transition, as receiving feedback from others can help refine and improve ideas.

The transition from the Evaluation stage to the Elaboration stage is essential for implementing successful solutions. Elaboration involves fleshing out the best ideas generated during the evaluation phase, allowing for refinement and iteration. Teams may engage in brainstorming sessions, create prototypes, or conduct small-scale trials to test the solution’s feasibility. This process paves the way for implementing the most suitable solution to the problem at hand.

Vizologi is a revolutionary AI-generated business strategy tool that offers its users access to advanced features to create and refine start-up ideas quickly. It generates limitless business ideas, gains insights on markets and competitors, and automates business plan creation.

+100 Business Book Summaries

We've distilled the wisdom of influential business books for you.

Zero to One by Peter Thiel. The Infinite Game by Simon Sinek. Blue Ocean Strategy by W. Chan. …

Students Win with Creative Problem-Solving

How creative problem solving works in schools.

A generative AI business strategy tool to create business plans in 1 minute

FREE 7 days trial ‐ Get started in seconds

Generate limitless business ideas, gain insights on markets and competitors, and automate business plan creation

Try it Free

Supercharge Your Business Strategy!

Before you download our exclusive content Subscribe to Vizologi’s FREE newsletter. Join 50k+ innovators shaping success with curated content. No spam, just pure value! @vizologi

Thanks for joining us!

Your exclusive content is on the way to your inbox. Ready to elevate your business with Vizologi?

Creative Problem Solving in Large Language and Vision Models – What Would it Take?

We advocate for a strong integration of Computational Creativity (CC) with research in large language and vision models (LLVMs) to address a key limitation of these models, i.e., creative problem solving. We present preliminary experiments showing how CC principles can be applied to address this limitation. Our goal is to foster discussions on creative problem solving in LLVMs and CC at prestigious ML venues.

Lakshmi Nair Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA, USA                        Evana Gizzi Tufts University Medford, MA, USA                        Jivko Sinapov Tufts University Medford, MA, USA

1 Introduction

Creativity is “ …the ability to come up with an idea which, relative to the pre-existing domain-space in one’s mind, one could not have had before. Whether any other person (or system) has already come up with it on an earlier occasion is irrelevant. ” Boden ( 1998 ) , p.216. For artificial agents, Computational Creativity (CC) is a multi-disciplinary field (spanning Philosophy, Psychology, Neuroscience, and Computer Science) that seeks to develop computational methods capable of generating creative outcomes reminiscent of creative processes in humans Gizzi et al. ( 2022 ) . Within CC, creative problem solving is a sub-area that requires an agent to discover – from its perspective – novel and previously unseen ways to accomplish a task. For example, in the absence of a ladle to scoop ingredients, an agent might creatively choose to substitute a bowl in place of the ladle. In this sense, creative problem solving encompasses creativity that is specifically task-oriented , as opposed to the generation of creative artifacts e.g., music or images.

While recent state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs) have demonstrated competency in artistic endeavours Rombach et al. ( 2021 ); Copet et al. ( 2023 ) , creative problem solving continues to be a shortcoming of these models (we use LLVM to denote the umbrella of both LLMs and VLMs). For instance, in Bubeck et al. ( 2023 ) , the authors point out that “discontinuous tasks” that require a certain “Eureka” idea, i.e., creative problem solving, is currently a limitation of models like GPT-4. Similar observations have been made in follow up work showing that state-of-the-art LLMs inherently possess poor creative problem solving capabilities compared to humans Tian et al. ( 2023 ); Naeini et al. ( 2023 ) . Given this obvious limitation, ongoing research in Machine Learning should seek to address the gap between LLVMs and creative problem solving, to further enhance the intelligent capabilities of these models. As defined in prior work, “ Intelligence is the ability to work and adapt to the environment with insufficient knowledge and resources. ” Pennachin and Goertzel ( 2007 ) , p.10. Demonstrated in hallmark examples of human ingenuity, like the makeshift C ⁢ O 2 𝐶 subscript 𝑂 2 CO_{2} italic_C italic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT filter built onboard the Apollo-13 Cass ( 2005 ) , or the makeshift medical devices used to offset equipment shortages during COVID-19 Turner et al. ( 2020 ) , creative problem solving is especially important when dealing with resource-critical scenarios. Since humans may tend to “choke” under high pressure situations DeCaro et al. ( 2011 ) often limiting their CPS skills, autonomous agents equipped with LLVMs that have similar capabilities would be highly assistive and transformative to humans in high-stake environments. These include situations like rescue missions BBC ( 2012 ) or autonomous operation in human-inaccessible environments (e.g., space or underwater exploration) with limited resources Atkeson et al. ( 2018 ) . However, the exceptional degree of creative problem solving necessary for such assistance remains beyond the scope of LLVMs today, limiting their intelligence (See Appx. B.1 ).

We believe that a discussion of Computational Creativity is essential to addressing this limitation. It is our position that Machine Learning and Computational Creativity should be strongly integrated in research to enable effective creative problem solving in LLVMs and push the frontiers of their ingenuity.

2 Two Cultures Problem: Why does CC not receive a wider reception in ML?

Even though creative problem solving (CPS) is a shortcoming of existing LLVMs, Computational Creativity seldom finds its way into mainstream ML research. We believe this discrepancy aligns with the “two cultures” problem Hammond et al. ( 2013 ) (also corroborated in Van Heerden and Bas ( 2021 ); Lahikainen et al. ( 2024 ) ), and is motivated by three aspects of CC literature as it relates to creative problem solving: a) the lack of a precise definition of CPS makes it challenging to identify how existing approaches in LLVMs are deficient in CPS skills; b) the somewhat “abstract” computational descriptions of CPS in Computational Creativity is challenging to connect to practical algorithms in LLVMs; and c) the lack of standardized benchmarks make it harder to evaluate LLVMs for CPS. In our discussions relating to a) in Section 3.1 , b) in Section 4 , and c) Section 5 , we hope to address these gaps and encourage the ML community to think about how LLVMs can be augmented with creative problem solving skills through a deeper discussion of Computational Creativity.

To emphasize the applicability of principles from CC for creative problem solving in LLVMs, we discuss the seminal work of Margaret A. Boden from CC literature that introduces three forms of creativity, namely, “ exploratory ”, “ combinational ”, and “ transformational ” Boden ( 1998 ) . Prior work has discussed the extension of Boden’s forms of creativity to creative problem solving in AI Gizzi et al. ( 2022 ) , however, their work does not include recent advances in LLVMs nor how Boden’s principles can be extended to specific approaches for LLVMs.

Ongoing discussions by leading ML experts like Dr. Shane Legg, co-founder of DeepMind, have suggested that “search” could help such models perform creative problem solving, quote, “ … these foundational models are world models of a kind, and to do really creative problem solving, you need to start searching ” Patel ( 2023 ) . There has also been speculation that OpenAI’s Q ∗ superscript 𝑄 Q^{*} italic_Q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT search (described as a “significant breakthrough” in popular media) could be targeting a similar approach Wang ( 2023 ); Anna Tong and Hu ( 2023 ) . Interestingly, we note that “search” as described here, can be linked to Boden’s proposed “exploratory” approach (Section 4.1.1 ). However, in Section 4 , we posit that “combinational” and “transformational” modes should be equally emphasized to achieve creative problem solving in LLVMs.

Although we choose to expand on Boden’s work as the focal point to drive our arguments in the main paper, it is not the only theory in CC that is relevant to this discussion. For completeness, we elaborate on additional CC theories and their applicability to creative problem solving in LLVMs in Appx. B .

3 From Task Planning to Creative Problem Solving

Creative problem solving can be broadly described as the process through which agents discover novel ways of accomplishing a task that, prior to the discovery, was unsolvable. Computationally, creative problem solving can be achieved through planning, learning, or hybrid approaches Gizzi et al. ( 2022 ) . Following a review of the different definitions of creative problem solving that have been proposed (Appx. A ), we believe the following most closely connects to existing formalisms in ML.

3.1 Definition of Creative Problem Solving

Gizzi et al. ( 2022 ) define the notion of a concept , as a state (of the environment and/or agent) or action. More generally, the authors denote C X subscript 𝐶 𝑋 C_{X} italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as the set of all concepts relating to X 𝑋 X italic_X ( X 𝑋 X italic_X denotes environment states S 𝑆 S italic_S or actions A 𝐴 A italic_A ). Hence, C S subscript 𝐶 𝑆 C_{S} italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the set of all environmental states, and C A subscript 𝐶 𝐴 C_{A} italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the set of agent actions. Formally, the authors state their definition as (Page 7, (Gizzi et al., 2022 ) ):

Given an un-achievable goal due to an insufficient conceptual space, CPS refers to the process by which the agent discovers a new conceptual space C X ′ ⊈ C X not-subset-of-nor-equals subscript superscript 𝐶 ′ 𝑋 subscript 𝐶 𝑋 C^{\prime}_{X}\nsubseteq C_{X} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊈ italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , such that C X ′ = f ⁢ ( C X ) subscript superscript 𝐶 ′ 𝑋 𝑓 subscript 𝐶 𝑋 C^{\prime}_{X}=f(C_{X}) italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f ( italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is the result of applying some function f 𝑓 f italic_f on the current conceptual space, enabling the agent to solve the previously unsolvable task by using C X ′ subscript superscript 𝐶 ′ 𝑋 C^{\prime}_{X} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

As a simplified example, let us assume a robot that has a goal G 𝐺 G italic_G of transferring beans from a jar to a cooker: G = 𝐺 absent G= italic_G = { i ⁢ n 𝑖 𝑛 in italic_i italic_n (beans, cooker)}. Here, the initial state is defined as C S = subscript 𝐶 𝑆 absent C_{S}= italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { i ⁢ n 𝑖 𝑛 in italic_i italic_n (beans, jar), h ⁢ a ⁢ s ⁢ C ⁢ o ⁢ n ⁢ t ⁢ a ⁢ i ⁢ n ⁢ a ⁢ b ⁢ i ⁢ l ⁢ i ⁢ t ⁢ y ℎ 𝑎 𝑠 𝐶 𝑜 𝑛 𝑡 𝑎 𝑖 𝑛 𝑎 𝑏 𝑖 𝑙 𝑖 𝑡 𝑦 hasContainability italic_h italic_a italic_s italic_C italic_o italic_n italic_t italic_a italic_i italic_n italic_a italic_b italic_i italic_l italic_i italic_t italic_y (spoon)}. Let the actions be defined as C A = subscript 𝐶 𝐴 absent C_{A}= italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { s ⁢ c ⁢ o ⁢ o ⁢ p 𝑠 𝑐 𝑜 𝑜 𝑝 scoop italic_s italic_c italic_o italic_o italic_p (beans, X 𝑋 X italic_X , l ⁢ o ⁢ c s 𝑙 𝑜 subscript 𝑐 𝑠 loc_{s} italic_l italic_o italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , l ⁢ o ⁢ c d 𝑙 𝑜 subscript 𝑐 𝑑 loc_{d} italic_l italic_o italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )}, where, X 𝑋 X italic_X refers to an object that satisfies h ⁢ a ⁢ s ⁢ C ⁢ o ⁢ n ⁢ t ⁢ a ⁢ i ⁢ n ⁢ a ⁢ b ⁢ i ⁢ l ⁢ i ⁢ t ⁢ y ⁢ ( ⋅ ) ℎ 𝑎 𝑠 𝐶 𝑜 𝑛 𝑡 𝑎 𝑖 𝑛 𝑎 𝑏 𝑖 𝑙 𝑖 𝑡 𝑦 ⋅ hasContainability(\cdot) italic_h italic_a italic_s italic_C italic_o italic_n italic_t italic_a italic_i italic_n italic_a italic_b italic_i italic_l italic_i italic_t italic_y ( ⋅ ) (e.g., spoon), to scoop beans from l ⁢ o ⁢ c s 𝑙 𝑜 subscript 𝑐 𝑠 loc_{s} italic_l italic_o italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to l ⁢ o ⁢ c d 𝑙 𝑜 subscript 𝑐 𝑑 loc_{d} italic_l italic_o italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . If the robot has access to a spoon, the robot can use it to scoop the beans from the jar to the cooker. However, what if the robot did not have a spoon, but had a glass instead? By the definition of C S subscript 𝐶 𝑆 C_{S} italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , the agent is unaware that h ⁢ a ⁢ s ⁢ C ⁢ o ⁢ n ⁢ t ⁢ a ⁢ i ⁢ n ⁢ a ⁢ b ⁢ i ⁢ l ⁢ i ⁢ t ⁢ y ℎ 𝑎 𝑠 𝐶 𝑜 𝑛 𝑡 𝑎 𝑖 𝑛 𝑎 𝑏 𝑖 𝑙 𝑖 𝑡 𝑦 hasContainability italic_h italic_a italic_s italic_C italic_o italic_n italic_t italic_a italic_i italic_n italic_a italic_b italic_i italic_l italic_i italic_t italic_y (glass) is true, making the goal un-achievable. By our definition, creative problem solving is the process by which the agent uses some function f ⁢ ( ⋅ ) 𝑓 ⋅ f(\cdot) italic_f ( ⋅ ) to discover a new conceptual space: f ⁢ ( C S ) = C S ′ = C S ⁢ ∪ 𝑓 subscript 𝐶 𝑆 subscript superscript 𝐶 ′ 𝑆 subscript 𝐶 𝑆 f(C_{S})=C^{\prime}_{S}=C_{S}\mathop{\cup} italic_f ( italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∪ { h ⁢ a ⁢ s ⁢ C ⁢ o ⁢ n ⁢ t ⁢ a ⁢ i ⁢ n ⁢ a ⁢ b ⁢ i ⁢ l ⁢ i ⁢ t ⁢ y ℎ 𝑎 𝑠 𝐶 𝑜 𝑛 𝑡 𝑎 𝑖 𝑛 𝑎 𝑏 𝑖 𝑙 𝑖 𝑡 𝑦 hasContainability italic_h italic_a italic_s italic_C italic_o italic_n italic_t italic_a italic_i italic_n italic_a italic_b italic_i italic_l italic_i italic_t italic_y  (glass)}. This would allow the agent to solve the previously unsolvable task by using the glass to scoop the beans instead.

Boden’s three forms of creativity denote three plausible functions for f ⁢ ( C X ) 𝑓 subscript 𝐶 𝑋 f(C_{X}) italic_f ( italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . CPS arises when the agent uses what it knows, to discover something new and the newly discovered knowledge is applied to solve a previously impossible task. We revisit the notion of conceptual spaces in Section 3.

In the remainder of this section, we discuss how typical task planning is achieved with LLVMs. We divide the discussion into three subsections based on the level of task planning abstraction where LLVMs are applied: a) high-level task planning, b) low-level task planning, and c) hybrid task planning. While not exhaustive, our review is meant to offer a general insight into how LLVMs are used for task planning, to identify entry points for introducing creative problem solving capabilities.

3.2 LLVMs for high-level task planning

Approaches for high-level task planning often involve using LLVMs to identify high-level goals for accomplishing a task. Some approaches to task planning with LLMs often take a user input specifying the task, and generate high-level task plans for accomplishing it. These approaches often use LLMs as a form of “knowledge base”, to extract actionable task plans from the models via appropriate prompting Huang et al. ( 2022 ) , further iterating over the generated task plan with repeated calls to the LLM as needed Prasad et al. ( 2023 ) .

In the context of Reinforcement Learning (RL), prior work has focused on using LLMs to suggest high-level goals for an RL agent Du et al. ( 2023 ) . Dubbed as ELLMs (Exploring with LLMs), an RL agent provides its current state to an LLM via a prompt, and receives a goal suggestion from the LLM that is then used to shape the reward and the agent exploration. Further work has extended this approach to incorporate the use of experience memory Zhang et al. ( 2023a ) . Existing approaches have also used LLMs to generate directed acyclic graphs composed of sub-goal states to aid the exploration of an RL agent Shukla et al. ( 2023 ) .

3.3 LLVMs for low-level task planning

Approaches for low-level task planning involve using LLMs to generate low-level code for performing a task. In contrast to high-level planning, where high-level goals and sub-goals are generated, these approaches use LLMs to directly generate low-level execution code via appropriate API calls Liang et al. ( 2023 ) . Other approaches have also investigated the capacity of LLMs to generate task plans via a low-level planning language such as PDDL Silver et al. ( 2023 ) , including iterating over the generated plan descriptions in case of errors Guan et al. ( 2023 ) . In terms of low-level planning using VLMs, prior work has introduced an approach that uses a diffusion model to generate robot trajectories conditioned on language and the current visual state of the robot Chen et al. ( 2023 ) .

3.4 Hybrid high and low-level planning with LLVMs

Hybrid approaches use LLVMs both for high-level goal generation as well as low-level planning. For instance, in Li et al. ( 2023 ) , user inputs are passed as LLM prompts to generate high-level plans. The high-level plans are then converted to low-level plans for robot execution via LLMs specialized for coding. Other approaches have used a high-level LLM planner, a VLM perceiver, and a low-level LLM planner for re-planning with both visual and language inputs Skreta et al. ( 2024 ) .

3.5 Summary

Given this overview, we see that LLVMs both at the high-level and low-level, can be modified to incorporate creative problem solving into task planning. For instance, the high-level task plans generated can encompass a novel substitution for a missing object, whereas the low-level task plan can generate an appropriate trajectory for creatively using the object. While the above approaches could, in principle, be studied within the framework of creative problem solving, that is not usually how the problem is formulated; there is a lack of paradigms for studying creative problem solving beyond just, “do you solve the problem or not?” . Creative problem solving needs a fundamental rethinking of the typical problem formulations and approaches in ML. The next section is aimed at ways in which ML approaches in LLVMs can be reformulated from the perspective of CC.

4 Augmenting LLVM embedding spaces for creative problem solving

In this section, we discuss how principles from CC can be extended to LLVMs for creative problem solving. We begin with Boden’s definition of “conceptual spaces” as “ [conceptual space] is the generative system that underlies the domain and defines a certain range of possibilities: chess moves, or molecular structures, or jazz melodies ” Boden ( 2005 ) , p.18 and “ … in short, any reasonably disciplined way of thinking ” Boden ( 1998 ) , p.214. By this definition, the embedding space of an LLVM describes its conceptual space or “ its way of thinking ”. Some evidence for this also comes from existing work that introduces an approach for enabling LLMs to interpret continuous embedding spaces via natural language. Given an embedding vector representing an interpolation of different concepts, the model is able to interpret a text prompt in the context of the supplied embedding Tennenholtz et al. ( 2023 ) . The embedding thus determines the model’s way of thinking. Hence, a discussion of enabling creative problem solving in LLVMs should target their embedding space. To this end, we explore two questions: a) how can LLVM embedding spaces be augmented to achieve creative problem solving, and b) what information should they be augmented with? Aligning with our original position, we show that CC literature can offer insights into these questions.

4.1 How can LLVM embedding spaces be augmented?

In this section, we draw parallels between Boden’s three forms of creativity and existing approaches in LLVMs. We further elaborate on how the three forms of creativity may enhance the potential of LLVMs to perform creative problem solving. We note that the ML approaches discussed in this section do not specifically perform creative problem solving. However, we discuss how they could potentially be extended to do so, by leveraging references from the CC literature.

4.1.1 Exploratory Creativity

Exploratory approaches involve exploration within the conceptual or equivalently, the embedding space of the model, and most closely relates to “search”. Note that the term “exploration” here differs from its usage in RL, instead referring to exploration through the model’s embedding space . Several existing approaches in the ML literature involve searching the output space of LLMs with the goal of improving the performance of these models. The “tree-of-thought” model generates a “tree” of next possible LLM outputs, and searches through the states via Breadth-first or Depth-first search to reach the desired goal state, often guided by heuristics Yao et al. ( 2023 ) . Numerous other approaches have built upon a similar strategy, such as using Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) Zhou et al. ( 2023 ); Feng et al. ( 2023 ) , beam search Zhang et al. ( 2023b ) or integrating pruning to remove sub-par candidates Golovneva et al. ( 2023 ) .

Extension of exploratory creativity to LLVMs: An important point to note here is that these approaches involve searching exclusively within the output “solution space” of the LLMs rather than directly operating in the embedding space itself. In contrast to operating in the solution space of the LLM, exploratory approaches directly within the LLMs’ embedding space would not be limited by what the LLM can generate as output – “ Some exploration merely shows us the nature of the relevant conceptual space that we had not explicitly noticed before ” Boden ( 2005 ) , p.18. To effectively reveal the full extent of the conceptual space for creative problem solving, the approach should not be limited by the outputs the LLVM can generate. Rather, the generated (creative) outputs itself should be the result of heuristic or non-heuristic based search within the model’s embedding space. However, to the best of our knowledge current approaches have not focused on LLVMs from this perspective, and have also not applied search to embedding spaces of Vision-LMs. Regardless, exploratory approaches are still limited by the dimensions of the model’s embedding space. “ To overcome a limitation in the conceptual space, one must change it in some way ” Boden ( 2005 ) , p.18 - this leads us to combinational and transformational creativity.

4.1.2 Combinational Creativity

Combinational approaches involve combining two concepts to create something new - “ A novel combination of two familiar ideas is something which did not happen before. ” Boden ( 1998 ) , p.213. We can broadly translate this to a function that takes in multiple concepts within an LLVM’s embedding space to output a novel concept.

One way of extending this definition to LLVMs involves applying cross-attention layers. The attention operation is defined as Vaswani et al. ( 2017 ) :

where, Q 𝑄 Q italic_Q , K 𝐾 K italic_K and V 𝑉 V italic_V denote query, keys and values respectively, and d k subscript 𝑑 𝑘 d_{k} italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the dimensionality of the keys. Cross-attention involves passing K 𝐾 K italic_K and V 𝑉 V italic_V from a different model, e.g., in Flamingo Alayrac et al. ( 2022 ) , the keys and values represent visual input (from a separate vision encoder) and queries represent a language input. By applying cross attention in this manner, the embedding space of a model can be extended with capabilities of another model. In Bansal et al. ( 2024 ) the authors show that using cross-attention layers can help augment an anchor LLM with an augmenting LLM’s capabilities to perform a task that the anchor LLM was incapable of achieving before - hinting at some creative possibilities of this method.

Other approaches in LLVMs, while using “combinations” in some way, do not conform to the notion of combinational creativity . This includes, for instance, approaches that perform arithmetic combination of LLM weights to enhance the model performance Matena and Raffel ( 2022 ); Ilharco et al. ( 2022 ) . Or approaches that combine image and text embeddings via concatenation Kim et al. ( 2021 ) or a scaled dot product at the output Radford et al. ( 2021 ) . While these approaches may be useful in imparting multi-modal capabilities, however, they do not lead to combinational creativity since the combination occurs external to the models as opposed to within the model’s embedding space.

Extension of Combinational Creativity to LLVMs: The ML approaches described here involve combining embedding spaces across models. Existing approaches have not looked at combining concepts within the same model’s embedding space. The extension of combinational creativity to LLVMs is much more apparent in the sense of conceptual blending Fauconnier and Turner ( 2003 ) for generation of creative artifacts, e.g., via blending of artistic styles. However, the extension of combinational creativity to creative problem solving is less obvious, and CC literature offers us further insights for making this connection. Typical conceptual blending corresponds to a form of “aesthetic combination”, whereas creative problem solving would benefit from “functional combinations” Chen et al. ( 2018 ) . Functional combination combines the functions (as opposed to aesthetic) of two components, e.g., a coin combined with pliers could function as a makeshift screwdriver. The authors extend this framework to a combination of two nouns with a “base” noun (e.g., “pliers”) and “additive” noun (e.g., “coin”). An interesting possibility stems from this notion: Can a combination of embeddings of the same LLVM, corresponding to “base” and “additive” nouns (perhaps with some prior denoting the task), enable the LLVM to generate creative combinations of objects for solving a task? This question remains unexplored, and points to a potential research direction for LLVMs inspired by CC.

4.1.3 Transformational Creativity

Transformational approaches involve transforming existing conceptual spaces to produce new ones. Transforming conceptual spaces can involve “ altering existing rules ” Boden ( 1998 ) , p.216. One way of transforming a model’s embedding space involves fine-tuning or training Franceschelli and Musolesi ( 2023 ) . However, additional insight into transformational creative problem solving comes from prior work in CC, that describes creative problems as those with a poorly defined structure where a solution is not immediately apparent Olteteanu ( 2014 ) . And in such cases, “… re-representation being the process which transforms an ill-structured problem into a well-structured one with direct inference to a problem solution ” Olteteanu ( 2014 ) , p.1. The notion of “re-representing” or “redefining” the problem can be best captured in the input prompts provided to an LLVM. This most closely connects to prompt engineering and in-context learning (ICL).

Prompt engineering augments LLVMs with task specific hints, called prompts, to adapt the LLVM to new tasks Gu et al. ( 2023 ) . Relatedly, in-context learning is a prompting method that provides the LLVM with instructions for solving a new task without requiring additional training. Prior work has shown that in-context learning and gradient-based optimization are equivalent Von Oswald et al. ( 2023 ) , thus connecting ICL to training or fine-tuning.

Extension of transformational creativity to LLVMs: Task re-representations for creative problem solving, through prompting or ICL, has not been well explored within ML. Prompt engineering and ICL is a challenging task, since model performance depends strongly on the chosen prompts Rubin et al. ( 2021 ) , further compounded by the fact that creative problems are inherently poorly defined Olteteanu ( 2014 ) . However, useful insights can be derived from CC literature. For instance, regarding problems that require creatively re-purposing objects, the Object-replacement-object-composition (OROC) framework Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) illustrates re-representations of tasks, that can be translated into prompts. The paper defines three different types of creative tasks involving objects, and their task re-representations as (from Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) , p.16):

Replace an unfound object needed for a task with other objects present in the environment: “If I do not have an object X, which I would normally use because of its affordance 1 1 1 Affordance is defined as the relation between an agent, action and object, e.g., bowls have the “contain” affordance for humans. A ⁢ f X 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑋 Af_{X} italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , what other object Y could I use, so that I can get a similar affordance, A ⁢ f X ≈ A ⁢ f Y 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑋 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑌 Af_{X}\approx Af_{Y} italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ? ”

𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑌 1 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑌 2 … 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑌 𝑛 Af_{X}\approx Af_{X^{\prime}},Af_{X}\approx Af_{Y1}+Af_{Y2}+...+Af_{Yn} italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + … + italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ? ”

• subscript 𝑌 1 subscript 𝑌 2 … subscript 𝑌 𝑛 Y_{1};Y_{2};...;Y_{n} italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; … ; italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT which are components of object Y 𝑌 Y italic_Y could I use to obtain an object Y i ′ subscript superscript 𝑌 ′ 𝑖 Y^{\prime}_{i} italic_Y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with an equivalent or similar affordance, A ⁢ f X ≈ A ⁢ f Y ′ ⁢ i 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑋 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 superscript 𝑌 ′ 𝑖 Af_{X}\approx Af_{Y^{\prime}i} italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ? ”

For task re-representation, affordances can refer to object properties that are relevant to the task, e.g., in some cases the shape may be relevant and in other cases, the material Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) . Within LLVMs, the affordances A ⁢ f X 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑋 Af_{X} italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT or A ⁢ f Y 𝐴 subscript 𝑓 𝑌 Af_{Y} italic_A italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be defined via natural language, or other modalities such as images. In the following section, we present preliminary experiments on using LLVMs for object replacement, with prompts that are inspired by the above task re-representations. However, an in-depth application of these re-representations as defined in CC to in-context learning in LLVMs remains unexplored.

4.1.4 Summary

In the previous sections, we drew parallels between Boden’s three forms of creativity and approaches in LLVMs, further emphasizing how principles from CC can potentially help enable creative problem solving skills in these models.

Integration with task planning: Given the three methods, we see that transformational and combinational approaches may be especially aligned with LLVMs for high-level task planning. In contrast, exploratory methods may be suited to low-level planning, e.g., trajectory generation.

Creative problem solving as a combination of the three methods: An effective approach to creative problem solving may require all the three methods described in this section. While papers have explored chaining of LLMs within frameworks (often via prompts) Karpas et al. ( 2022 ); Ling et al. ( 2023 ) , the individual LLMs themselves do not exhibit the characteristics described here. Existing frameworks in CC have shown that achieving creative problem solving would take a combination of all three methods, each of which is triggered in different contexts Olteteanu ( 2014 ) . This presents potential opportunities for ML approaches that develop frameworks using multiple LLVMs, e.g., extending CC frameworks such as “ CreaCogs ” Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) can be highly beneficial for productive developments in ML.

4.2 What information should LLVM embeddings be augemented with?

In the previous section, we discussed three methods for augmenting LLVM embedding spaces. In this section, we explore the question: “What information should be targeted by the three methods when augmenting the embedding space for creative problem solving?”. In the previous section, we discussed this in the context of OROC. According to the OROC framework Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) , information about object affordances could enable models to re-represent the task, such that the solution becomes evident. We propose a small experiment to validate whether the principles of transformational creativity from OROC are useful to LLVMs. We note that creativity can occur in various contexts, e.g., creatively solving a math problem or creatively playing a chess move, each of which would require different information. However, to facilitate the discussion in this paper, we focus our scope on tasks that require innovatively replacing missing objects (OROC Task #1).

Note on embeddings vs. concepts: Our work connects “conceptual spaces” (or “concepts”) as defined in Computational Creativity literature, to “embedding spaces” (or “embeddings”) as defined in typical LM literature. We use “concepts” and “embeddings” interchangeably in this context. We make this connection to note that existing methods in Computational Creativity that operate on conceptual spaces translate to ML algorithms that operate on the LM’s embedding space. In this section, we connect the concept of “affordances” to the “embeddings” of the LLVMs in our experiments. Our goal is to show how the model can be prompted via an approach inspired by transformational creativity, to connect affordances of two seemingly distinct objects, e.g., a bowl and a spoon that appear distinct, but share the containability affordance.

4.2.1 Experiment Setup

We create a simple experiment setup that tests the “object replacement” principle from OROC, where we create test sets composed of images of objects for replacing one of five core objects: “Scoop”, “Hammer”, “Spatula”, “Toothpick”, and “Pliers”. We create two groups of tests: a) a nominal group where the actual object itself is available in each test set and requires no replacement (which serves as a form of baseline), and b) an object replacement group, where the nominal tool is missing and a creative replacement object should be chosen.

For each group, we create test sets with 4 objects each, chosen from a set of RGB images of 16 objects (Appendix Figure 3 ). We create 10 such test sets per core object (total 50 samples per model). Each test set only includes one ground truth object, along with three other random objects that will not suit as an appropriate replacement. In the nominal group, the ground truth is the actual object itself. In the object replacement group, the replacements are chosen based on self-assessment of the authors as (core object → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW replacement): “Scoop” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Bowl”; “Hammer” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Saucepan”; “Spatula” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Knife”; “Toothpick” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Safety pin”; “Pliers” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Scissors”. For each test case, we pass the images in the test set along with a prompt. We record whether the ground truth object image was chosen by the model for the prompt (i.e., assigned highest output probability) 2 2 2 CLIP generates probabilities that given images correspond to a text. ViLT and LLaVA respond with a text, and we evaluate if the model responded “yes” with a high probability for the ground truth. .

The nominal group is subjected to one type of prompt: “ Can this object be used as a ⟨ c o r e _ o b j e c t ⟩ ? \bigl{\langle}core\_object\bigl{\rangle}? ⟨ italic_c italic_o italic_r italic_e _ italic_o italic_b italic_j italic_e italic_c italic_t ⟩ ? ”. In the object replacement group, each test case is subjected to four types of prompts:

Baseline (regular) prompt: Same prompt as used in the nominal cases to obtain a baseline.

Prompt prepended with affordance information: the prompt includes additional information about the desired object affordances specified as object features.

Prompt prepended with task information: the prompt includes additional information about the desired task.

Prompt prepended with task and affordance information: the prompt includes additional information on the task and object affordance.

Case #2 aligns with task re-representations of OROC, and we explore cases #3 and #4 for comparison. We formulate our affordance prompts as brief versions of OROC’s task re-representations. According to Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) affordances can be defined using shape features, which we apply to the prompts here. The full set of prompts is shown in Appendix Table 2 . The models that we explore include versions of CLIP Radford et al. ( 2021 ) , LLaVA Liu et al. ( 2024 ) , and ViLT Kim et al. ( 2021 ) obtained from HuggingFace. We use different model sizes ( B ase, L arge, H uge) and patch sizes (14, 16, 32). The open-source code for reproducing our experiment results (including our dataset and test cases) is available at: https://github.com/lnairGT/creative-problem-solving-LLMs . Appendix C includes more details on the experiments.

4.2.2 Results

In Table 1 , we see the performances of the different models in the nominal test group, where the object requires no creative replacement. The models perform > 90 % absent percent 90 >90\% > 90 % in such cases (except for ViLT). In Figure 2 , we see the performances (accuracy shown on a 0.0 − 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0-1.0 0.0 - 1.0 scale) of the models in the object replacement test cases, where the object requires a creative replacement. For reference, a model that randomly picks an object achieves about 30% overall accuracy. Figure 2 shows average accuracies for the different prompting strategies across random test sets. From Table 1 to Figure 2 (“regular”), the models perform poorly when they need to creatively reason about object replacements, highlighting their limitation. Comparing the “Regular” tab in Figure 2 to “Affordance”, we see a general improvement in model performances, when object affordance information is provided , consistent with description of the OROC framework Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) . However, information about the task (Figure 2 , “Task” ) leads to mostly detrimental results. Information about task and affordances (Figure 2 , “Task + Affordance”) does not lead to substantial improvements either, and is also detrimental in certain cases. We note that there is quite a variance in performances across the different models, which may be partially attributed to the original training datasets of the models. These observations warrant further exploration beyond the scope of this paper. Appendix D includes a detailed, class-wise breakdown of the results.

4.2.3 Summary

While the experiments that we conducted are only preliminary, they offer some validity that the extension of principles in Computational Creativity can help overcome limitations of LLVMs in creative problem solving. The notion of task re-representation via improved prompting warrants further investigation in LLVMs, with regards to how the prompts can be generated automatically based on the creative task.

The models used in our experiments have all been trained jointly in visual and text domains. Multi-modal prompting capabilities may be useful for achieving creative problem solving. It can be quite challenging to describe affordances in words (example of “hammers” in our tests) and they may be better described through other means, e.g., images or depth maps or spectral data for material properties Erickson et al. ( 2020 ) . This would require application of multi-modal LLVMs that can process a variety of data types Girdhar et al. ( 2023 ); Han et al. ( 2023 ) . Computational creativity can offer insights into meaningful representations of these different modalities that would help achieve creative problem solving, e.g., whether object material or shape matters more for one task vs. another Olteţeanu and Falomir ( 2016 ) .

It is also worth noting that the creative problem solving examples in our experiments are human-centric. For instance, robots may not have similar capabilities as humans to manipulate bowls for scooping. In such cases, LLVMs need to account for the affordances as described with respect to the agent , in order to derive creative solutions. However, that adds another level of complexity, yet to be explored, since these models are typically trained on human-centric data.

5 Evaluation of Creativity

An important discussion in the context of creative problem solving is, how can creative problem solving be evaluated? . Prior work has proposed that creativity necessitates both novelty and value Boden ( 1998 ); Runco and Jaeger ( 2012 ) , where the former guarantees that the generated outputs of a creative process are original, and the latter ensures that the generated outputs are useful. In the context of CPS, novelty refers to the discovery of new concepts (as defined in section 3.1 ), whereas value insists that the newly discovered concepts successfully solve the task. Hence, benchmarks for CPS should specifically evaluate how the task was solved (novelty and value) rather than the typical ML evaluation of whether the task was successful or not (value only). Some existing approaches that make this distinction describe problem settings that can be used to measure CPS skills of LLMs through the implicit integration of novelty and value measurements Tian et al. ( 2023 ); Naeini et al. ( 2023 ); Bisk et al. ( 2020 ); Talmor et al. ( 2022 ) . In Tian et al. ( 2023 ) , the authors create a dataset of 1600 real-world problems that necessarily involve creative reasoning abilities. Their proposed benchmark involves identifying novel approaches that can accomplish the given task (value). Similarly, in Naeini et al. ( 2023 ) , the authors introduce the Only-Connect-Wall (OCW) dataset to measure CPS capabilities of LLMs. The authors in Bisk et al. ( 2020 ) explore physical commonsense reasoning that is more generally applicable, beyond object-based creative problems. The authors introduce Physical Interaction: Question Answering, or PIQA consisting of 16,000 QA pairs where each question is paired with two possible common-sense solutions with a ground truth. In Talmor et al. ( 2022 ) , the authors introduce CommonSenseQA 2.0 (CSQA2) dataset consisting of both object-based and non-object based creative problems. The dataset consists of 14,343 questions distributed across 1,868 distinct topics. Currently, to the best of our knowledge, there are no standard benchmarks available to measure CPS skills of VLMs, although our preliminary experiments show one way to measure this using the task of object substitution.

6 Conclusion and Future Work

In this paper, we argued that an effective approach for enabling creative problem solving – currently a key limitation of LLVMs – should derive from Computational Creativity literature. To emphasize this at each juncture, we discussed the specific principles from CC that can be extended to achieve creative problem solving in LLVMs, describing the potential for further research with these insights. It is rare to see special tracks or workshops targeted at Computational Creativity within more prestigious ML conferences. These programs typically focus on creative artifact generation and art (such as the NeurIPS Workshop on Machine Learning for Creativity and Design NeurIPS ( 2022 ) or the recent tutorial at EMNLP on Creative Natural Language Generation Chakrabarty et al. ( 2023 ) ), but do not discuss CPS, thus failing to bridge the gap between CC and ML. We hope to see a deeper integration of the CC communities at such strong ML venues. We hope to encourage the reader to view creative problem solving and ML holistically, through the lens of Computational Creativity.

7 Limitations

Literature outside of Computational Creativity that enables CPS is unexplored: Our paper predominantly focuses on CC literature. This work does not cover literature beyond CC that can potentially inform creative problem solving in LLVMs. Although CC literature broadly encompasses psychology, neuroscience and philosophy, our future work seeks to explore specific literature within these sub-domains and discuss their applicability to creative problem solving and ML.

Lack of an explicit creative problem solving algorithm for LLVMs: Since the scope of our work aligns with a position paper, we have not focused on developing a concrete algorithm for creative problem solving in LLVMs. The prompting strategies explored in our preliminary experiments are manually specified, and our work does not elaborate on how these prompts may be automatically discovered. While our paper seeks to address some of the key gaps that prevent the application of CC literature to ML, there are still several unanswered questions when it comes to the practical implementation of an ML approach: e.g., what is a good representation for concepts that facilitate creative problem solving (symbolic, non-symbolic, or hybrid)? What is a good problem formulation for a given creative problem solving task (planning or learning)? etc. However, these questions are not directly answered within the scope of our work.

8 Ethical Considerations

The authors do not have specific ethical considerations to be highlighted with respect to this work.

• Alayrac et al. (2022) Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Jeff Donahue, Pauline Luc, Antoine Miech, Iain Barr, Yana Hasson, Karel Lenc, Arthur Mensch, Katherine Millican, Malcolm Reynolds, et al. 2022. Flamingo: a visual language model for few-shot learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 35:23716–23736.
• Anna Tong and Hu (2023) Jeffrey Dastin Anna Tong and Krystal Hu. 2023. Openai researchers warned board of ai breakthrough ahead of ceo ouster, sources say. https://www.reuters.com/technology/sam-altmans-ouster-openai-was-precipitated-by-letter-board-about-ai-breakthrough-2023-11-22/. [Online; accessed 19-Jan-2024].
• Atkeson et al. (2018) Christopher G Atkeson, PW Babu Benzun, Nandan Banerjee, Dmitry Berenson, Christoper P Bove, Xiongyi Cui, Mathew DeDonato, Ruixiang Du, Siyuan Feng, Perry Franklin, et al. 2018. What happened at the darpa robotics challenge finals. The DARPA robotics challenge finals: Humanoid robots to the rescue , pages 667–684.
• Bansal et al. (2024) Rachit Bansal, Bidisha Samanta, Siddharth Dalmia, Nitish Gupta, Shikhar Vashishth, Sriram Ganapathy, Abhishek Bapna, Prateek Jain, and Partha Talukdar. 2024. Llm augmented llms: Expanding capabilities through composition. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.02412 .
• BBC (2012) BBC. 2012. Us navy funds ’macgyver’ robot that can create tools. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19902954 . [Online; accessed 9-April-2024].
• Bisk et al. (2020) Yonatan Bisk, Rowan Zellers, Jianfeng Gao, Yejin Choi, et al. 2020. Piqa: Reasoning about physical commonsense in natural language. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume 34, pages 7432–7439.
• Boden (1998) Margaret A. Boden. 1998. Creativity and Artificial Intelligence. Artificial Intelligence , 1-2:347–356.
• Boden (2005) Margaret A. Boden. 2005. What is creativity? Creativity in human evolution and prehistory .
• Bubeck et al. (2023) Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lundberg, et al. 2023. Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12712 .
• Cass (2005) Stephen Cass. 2005. Apollo 13, we have a solution. IEEE Spectrum On-line, 04 , 1.
• Chakrabarty et al. (2023) Tuhin Chakrabarty, Vishakh Padmakumar, He He, and Nanyun Peng. 2023. Creative natural language generation. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Tutorial Abstracts , pages 34–40.
• Chen et al. (2023) Lili Chen, Shikhar Bahl, and Deepak Pathak. 2023. Playfusion: Skill acquisition via diffusion from language-annotated play. In Conference on Robot Learning , pages 2012–2029. PMLR.
• Chen et al. (2018) Liuqing Chen, Pan Wang, Feng Shi, Ji Han, Peter Childs, et al. 2018. A computational approach for combinational creativity in design. In DS 92: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 15th International Design Conference , pages 1815–1824.
• Copet et al. (2023) Jade Copet, Felix Kreuk, Itai Gat, Tal Remez, David Kant, Gabriel Synnaeve, Yossi Adi, and Alexandre Défossez. 2023. Simple and controllable music generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05284 .
• DeCaro et al. (2011) Marci S DeCaro, Robin D Thomas, Neil B Albert, and Sian L Beilock. 2011. Choking under pressure: multiple routes to skill failure. Journal of experimental psychology: general , 140(3):390.
• Du et al. (2023) Yuqing Du, Olivia Watkins, Zihan Wang, Cédric Colas, Trevor Darrell, Pieter Abbeel, Abhishek Gupta, and Jacob Andreas. 2023. Guiding pretraining in reinforcement learning with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.06692 .
• Erickson et al. (2020) Zackory Erickson, Eliot Xing, Bharat Srirangam, Sonia Chernova, and Charles C Kemp. 2020. Multimodal material classification for robots using spectroscopy and high resolution texture imaging. In 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages 10452–10459. IEEE.
• Fauconnier and Turner (2003) Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner. 2003. Conceptual blending, form and meaning. Recherches en communication , 19:57–86.
• Fei et al. (2022) Nanyi Fei, Zhiwu Lu, Yizhao Gao, Guoxing Yang, Yuqi Huo, Jingyuan Wen, Haoyu Lu, Ruihua Song, Xin Gao, Tao Xiang, et al. 2022. Towards artificial general intelligence via a multimodal foundation model. Nature Communications , 13(1):3094.
• Feng et al. (2023) Xidong Feng, Ziyu Wan, Muning Wen, Ying Wen, Weinan Zhang, and Jun Wang. 2023. Alphazero-like tree-search can guide large language model decoding and training. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17179 .
• Franceschelli and Musolesi (2023) Giorgio Franceschelli and Mirco Musolesi. 2023. On the creativity of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.00008 .
• Gilhooly (2016) Kenneth J Gilhooly. 2016. Incubation and intuition in creative problem solving. Frontiers in psychology , 7:1076.
• Girdhar et al. (2023) Rohit Girdhar, Alaaeldin El-Nouby, Zhuang Liu, Mannat Singh, Kalyan Vasudev Alwala, Armand Joulin, and Ishan Misra. 2023. Imagebind: One embedding space to bind them all .
• Gizzi et al. (2022) Evana Gizzi, Lakshmi Nair, Sonia Chernova, and Jivko Sinapov. 2022. Creative problem solving in artificially intelligent agents: A survey and framework. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , 75:857–911.
• Goertzel (2014) Ben Goertzel. 2014. Artificial general intelligence: concept, state of the art, and future prospects. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence , 5(1):1.
• Golovneva et al. (2023) O. Golovneva, S. O’Brien, R. Pasunuru, T. Wang, L. Zettlemoyer, M. Fazel-Zarandi, and A. Celikyilmaz. 2023. Pathfinder: Guided search over multi-step reasoning paths. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.05180 .
• Grudin and Jacques (2019) Jonathan Grudin and Richard Jacques. 2019. Chatbots, humbots, and the quest for artificial general intelligence. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems , pages 1–11.
• Gu et al. (2023) Jindong Gu, Zhen Han, Shuo Chen, Ahmad Beirami, Bailan He, Gengyuan Zhang, Ruotong Liao, Yao Qin, Volker Tresp, and Philip Torr. 2023. A systematic survey of prompt engineering on vision-language foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.12980 .
• Guan et al. (2023) Lin Guan, Karthik Valmeekam, Sarath Sreedharan, and Subbarao Kambhampati. 2023. Leveraging pre-trained large language models to construct and utilize world models for model-based task planning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14909 .
• Guilford (1967) Joy P Guilford. 1967. Creativity: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. The Journal of Creative Behavior , 1(1):3–14.
• Hammond et al. (2013) Adam Hammond, Julian Brooke, and Graeme Hirst. 2013. A tale of two cultures: Bringing literary analysis and computational linguistics together. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Literature , pages 1–8.
• Han et al. (2023) Jiaming Han, Kaixiong Gong, Yiyuan Zhang, Jiaqi Wang, Kaipeng Zhang, Dahua Lin, Yu Qiao, Peng Gao, and Xiangyu Yue. 2023. Onellm: One framework to align all modalities with language .
• Hélie and Sun (2010) Sebastien Hélie and Ron Sun. 2010. Incubation, insight, and creative problem solving: a unified theory and a connectionist model. Psychological review , 117(3):994.
• Huang et al. (2022) Wenlong Huang, Pieter Abbeel, Deepak Pathak, and Igor Mordatch. 2022. Language models as zero-shot planners: Extracting actionable knowledge for embodied agents. In International Conference on Machine Learning , pages 9118–9147. PMLR.
• Ilharco et al. (2022) Gabriel Ilharco, Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Mitchell Wortsman, Suchin Gururangan, Ludwig Schmidt, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, and Ali Farhadi. 2022. Editing models with task arithmetic. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.04089 .
• Karpas et al. (2022) Ehud Karpas, Omri Abend, Yonatan Belinkov, Barak Lenz, Opher Lieber, Nir Ratner, Yoav Shoham, Hofit Bata, Yoav Levine, Kevin Leyton-Brown, Dor Muhlgay, Noam Rozen, Erez Schwartz, Gal Shachaf, Shai Shalev-Shwartz, Amnon Shashua, and Moshe Tenenholtz. 2022. Mrkl systems: A modular, neuro-symbolic architecture that combines large language models, external knowledge sources and discrete reasoning .
• Kim et al. (2021) Wonjae Kim, Bokyung Son, and Ildoo Kim. 2021. Vilt: Vision-and-language transformer without convolution or region supervision. In International Conference on Machine Learning , pages 5583–5594. PMLR.
• Lahikainen et al. (2024) Joonas Lahikainen, Nadia M Ady, and Christian Guckelsberger. 2024. Creativity and markov decision processes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14966 .
• Li et al. (2023) Boyi Li, Philipp Wu, Pieter Abbeel, and Jitendra Malik. 2023. Interactive task planning with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.10645 .
• Liang et al. (2023) Jacky Liang, Wenlong Huang, Fei Xia, Peng Xu, Karol Hausman, Brian Ichter, Pete Florence, and Andy Zeng. 2023. Code as policies: Language model programs for embodied control. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 9493–9500. IEEE.
• Ling et al. (2023) Zhan Ling, Yunhao Fang, Xuanlin Li, Tongzhou Mu, Mingu Lee, Reza Pourreza, Roland Memisevic, and Hao Su. 2023. Unleashing the creative mind: Language model as hierarchical policy for improved exploration on challenging problem solving .
• Liu et al. (2024) Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, and Yong Jae Lee. 2024. Visual instruction tuning. Advances in neural information processing systems , 36.
• Ma et al. (2023) Yuxi Ma, Chi Zhang, and Song-Chun Zhu. 2023. Brain in a vat: On missing pieces towards artificial general intelligence in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.03762 .
• Matena and Raffel (2022) Michael S Matena and Colin A Raffel. 2022. Merging models with fisher-weighted averaging. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 35:17703–17716.
• Moor et al. (2023) Michael Moor, Oishi Banerjee, Zahra Shakeri Hossein Abad, Harlan M Krumholz, Jure Leskovec, Eric J Topol, and Pranav Rajpurkar. 2023. Foundation models for generalist medical artificial intelligence. Nature , 616(7956):259–265.
• Moruzzi (2020) Caterina Moruzzi. 2020. Artificial creativity and general intelligence. Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts .
• Naeini et al. (2023) Saeid Naeini, Raeid Saqur, Mozhgan Saeidi, John Giorgi, and Babak Taati. 2023. Large language models are fixated by red herrings: Exploring creative problem solving and einstellung effect using the only connect wall dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.11167 .
• NeurIPS (2022) NeurIPS. 2022. Workshop on machine learning for creativity and design. https://nips.cc/virtual/2022/workshop/49965. [Online; accessed 19-Jan-2024].
• Olteteanu (2014) Ana-Maria Olteteanu. 2014. Two general classes in creative problem-solving? an account based on the cognitive processess involved in the problem structure-representation structure relationship. Publications of the Institute of Cognitive Science .
• Olteţeanu and Falomir (2016) Ana-Maria Olteţeanu and Zoe Falomir. 2016. Object replacement and object composition in a creative cognitive system. towards a computational solver of the alternative uses test. Cognitive Systems Research , 39:15–32.
• Patel (2023) Dwarkesh Patel. 2023. Llms need search for problem solving - shane legg (deepmind founder). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qulfo6-54k0. [Online; accessed 19-Jan-2024].
• Pennachin and Goertzel (2007) Cassio Pennachin and Ben Goertzel. 2007. Contemporary approaches to artificial general intelligence. In Artificial general intelligence , pages 1–30. Springer.
• Prasad et al. (2023) Archiki Prasad, Alexander Koller, Mareike Hartmann, Peter Clark, Ashish Sabharwal, Mohit Bansal, and Tushar Khot. 2023. Adapt: As-needed decomposition and planning with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.05772 .
• Radford et al. (2021) Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. 2021. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In International conference on machine learning , pages 8748–8763. PMLR.
• Rombach et al. (2021) Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. 2021. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. 2022 ieee. In CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 10674–10685.
• Rubin et al. (2021) Ohad Rubin, Jonathan Herzig, and Jonathan Berant. 2021. Learning to retrieve prompts for in-context learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.08633 .
• Runco and Jaeger (2012) Mark A Runco and Garrett J Jaeger. 2012. The standard definition of creativity. Creativity research journal , 24(1):92–96.
• Sarathy and Scheutz (2018) Vasanth Sarathy and Matthias Scheutz. 2018. Macgyver problems: Ai challenges for testing resourcefulness and creativity. Advances in Cognitive Systems , 6:31–44.
• Shevlin et al. (2019) Henry Shevlin, Karina Vold, Matthew Crosby, and Marta Halina. 2019. The limits of machine intelligence: Despite progress in machine intelligence, artificial general intelligence is still a major challenge. EMBO reports , 20(10):e49177.
• Shukla et al. (2023) Yash Shukla, Wenchang Gao, Vasanth Sarathy, Alvaro Velasquez, Robert Wright, and Jivko Sinapov. 2023. Lgts: Dynamic task sampling using llm-generated sub-goals for reinforcement learning agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.09454 .
• Silver et al. (2023) Tom Silver, Soham Dan, Kavitha Srinivas, Joshua B Tenenbaum, Leslie Pack Kaelbling, and Michael Katz. 2023. Generalized planning in pddl domains with pretrained large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11014 .
• Skreta et al. (2024) Marta Skreta, Zihan Zhou, Jia Lin Yuan, Kourosh Darvish, Alán Aspuru-Guzik, and Animesh Garg. 2024. Replan: Robotic replanning with perception and language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04157 .
• Talmor et al. (2022) Alon Talmor, Ori Yoran, Ronan Le Bras, Chandra Bhagavatula, Yoav Goldberg, Yejin Choi, and Jonathan Berant. 2022. Commonsenseqa 2.0: Exposing the limits of ai through gamification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.05320 .
• Tennenholtz et al. (2023) Guy Tennenholtz, Yinlam Chow, Chih-Wei Hsu, Jihwan Jeong, Lior Shani, Azamat Tulepbergenov, Deepak Ramachandran, Martin Mladenov, and Craig Boutilier. 2023. Demystifying embedding spaces using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.04475 .
• Tian et al. (2023) Yufei Tian, Abhilasha Ravichander, Lianhui Qin, Ronan Le Bras, Raja Marjieh, Nanyun Peng, Yejin Choi, Thomas L Griffiths, and Faeze Brahman. 2023. Macgyver: Are large language models creative problem solvers? arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09682 .
• Turner et al. (2020) MC Turner, LV Duggan, BA Glezerson, and SD Marshall. 2020. Thinking outside the (acrylic) box: a framework for the local use of custom-made medical devices. Anaesthesia .
• Van Heerden and Bas (2021) Imke Van Heerden and Anil Bas. 2021. Ai as author–bridging the gap between machine learning and literary theory. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , 71:175–189.
• Vaswani et al. (2017) Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems , 30.
• Ventura (2014) Dan Ventura. 2014. Can a computer be lucky? and other ridiculous questions posed by computational creativity. In Artificial General Intelligence: 7th International Conference, AGI 2014, Quebec City, QC, Canada, August 1-4, 2014. Proceedings 7 , pages 208–217. Springer.
• Von Oswald et al. (2023) Johannes Von Oswald, Eyvind Niklasson, Ettore Randazzo, João Sacramento, Alexander Mordvintsev, Andrey Zhmoginov, and Max Vladymyrov. 2023. Transformers learn in-context by gradient descent. In International Conference on Machine Learning , pages 35151–35174. PMLR.
• Wallas (1926) Graham Wallas. 1926. The art of thought . 24. Harcourt, Brace.
• Wang (2023) Brian Wang. 2023. Openai q* could be based upon a* search without expansions. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/11/openai-q-could-be-based-upon-a-search-without-expansions.html. [Online; accessed 19-Jan-2024].
• Wiggins (2006) Geraint A Wiggins. 2006. A preliminary framework for description, analysis and comparison of creative systems. Knowledge-based systems , 19(7):449–458.
• Xi et al. (2023) Zhiheng Xi, Wenxiang Chen, Xin Guo, Wei He, Yiwen Ding, Boyang Hong, Ming Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Senjie Jin, Enyu Zhou, et al. 2023. The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.07864 .
• Yao et al. (2023) Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, Thomas L Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. 2023. Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10601 .
• Zhang et al. (2023a) Danyang Zhang, Lu Chen, Situo Zhang, Hongshen Xu, Zihan Zhao, and Kai Yu. 2023a. Large language model is semi-parametric reinforcement learning agent. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.07929 .
• Zhang et al. (2023b) Shun Zhang, Zhenfang Chen, Yikang Shen, Mingyu Ding, Joshua B Tenenbaum, and Chuang Gan. 2023b. Planning with large language models for code generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.05510 .
• Zhou et al. (2023) Andy Zhou, Kai Yan, Michal Shlapentokh-Rothman, Haohan Wang, and Yu-Xiong Wang. 2023. Language agent tree search unifies reasoning acting and planning in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.04406 .

Appendix A Alternate Definitions of Creative Problem Solving

Prior work by Olteţeanu Olteteanu ( 2014 ) defines CPS from an object affordance perspective, where affordances broadly refer to action possibilities for objects, e.g., cups are pour-able and doors are open-able. The authors in Olteteanu ( 2014 ) define creative problems as nominal problem solving tasks that have a poor representational structure, and as “ the ability of a cognitive, natural, or artificial system to use new objects to solve a problem, other than the ones that have been stored in its memory as tools for that specific purpose (if any), or to create those objects by putting together objects or parts of objects the system has access to. Depending on the problem, objects can be either physical or abstract/informational (concepts, problem templates, heuristics or other forms of representations) ”. However, this definition is primarily object-creativity centered, and does not cover a wider range of creative problems.

Follow-up work by Sarathy and Scheutz Sarathy and Scheutz ( 2018 ) , define “ Macgyver-esque ” creativity as a planning task that involves “ generating, executing, and learning strategies for identifying and solving seemingly unsolvable real-world problems ”. They introduce the “ MacGyver Problem ” (MGP) as a planning problem with an unreachable goal state. Through the modification of the agent’s domain knowledge (through domain expansion and domain contraction ), the agent must discover new information and incorporate it into its existing domain knowledge, allowing the agent to accomplish the task. The domain expansion and contraction processes align with the divergent-convergent model of creative problem solving Guilford ( 1967 ) . The definition of an MGP aligns well with the formulation of planning problems in ML, but less with learning or hybrid planning-learning approaches.

Appendix B Alternate theories on creative problem solving and their applications to ML

While there is exhaustive literature regarding theories on general creativity, we focus specifically on creative problem solving, with three well received works: Divergent-Convergent Thinking Guilford ( 1967 ) , Explicit-Implicit Interaction Theory Hélie and Sun ( 2010 ) , and the Creative Systems Framework Wiggins ( 2006 ) . We discuss their applicability to ML in addition to the literature discussed in the main body of this paper. Our goal in this section is to further widen the discussion on integrating CC and ML to achieve creative problem solving in LLVMs, with additional literature.

B.0.1 Divergent-Convergent Thinking

In Guilford ( 1967 ) , the authors discuss the notion of “divergent-convergent” thinking. Divergent thinking or “divergent-production” (DP) abilities involve a more open-ended generation of a variety of ideas, whereas convergent thinking focuses on applying specific ideas to solve the problem.

Applicability to CPS in LLVMs: Prior work by Tian et al. ( 2023 ) have demonstrated the applicability of “divergent-convergent” thinking towards solving Macgyver problems. Similar in spirit to our experiments with VLMs in Section 4.2.1 , the authors prompt LLMs with descriptions of objects to enable the LLMs to reason about solving the task. Their work is, to the best of our knowledge, the only direct example demonstrating the value of CC literature in enabling CPS in LLMs.

B.0.2 Explicit-Implicit Interaction Theory

In Hélie and Sun ( 2010 ) , the authors introduce the Explicit-Implicit Interaction (EII) theory, building upon the seminal work in Wallas ( 1926 ) , that describes four stages of creativity: Preparation, incubation, illumination (i.e., insight), and verification. Preparation refers to the initial stage of searching in many different directions, which may fail to find a solution (i.e., impasse) in case of ill-defined problems (as is the case with CPS). Following an impasse, the incubation phase begins, where attention is not devoted to solving the problem. Over a period of time, illumination is the manifestation of the solution to the problem within the conscious thought (i.e., “Aha” moment). Finally, verification involves using deliberative thinking to assess if the solution indeed solves the problem.

Applicability to CPS in LLVMs: The authors in Hélie and Sun ( 2010 ) incorporate the four stages via a concrete computational method into the CLARION cognitive architecture. Prior work has also introduced a CPS framework for ML approaches inspired by the four stages Gizzi et al. ( 2022 ) . In their work, “preparation” aligns with problem formulation, either task learning or planning. Incubation and illumination aligns with knowledge representation (symbolic, non-symbolic, or hybrid), and knowledge manipulation (functions that manipulate the conceptual space). Lastly, verification aligns with evaluation (via simulation, real-world platforms, or benchmarks). Although these works do not explicitly cover LLVMs and related algorithms, they demonstrate the value of integrating CC literature in ML, and can serve as useful starting points for ML approaches towards creative problem solving in LLVMs.

B.0.3 Creative Systems Framework

In Wiggins ( 2006 ) , the author expands on Boden’s levels further in the context of a framework that formalizes creative systems. The paper defines: a) creative system, b) creative behavior, c) novelty, and d) value. The paper also discusses formalized notion of a universe of possibilities , and conceptual spaces . Crucially, the work describes the characteristics of a creative agent, that can help distinguish modes of failures within a creative system, namely: a) hopeless uninspiration – where there are no valued concepts within the universe; b) conceptual uninspiration – where there are no valued concepts within the conceptual space of the agent; and c) generative uninspiration – where an agent is unable to find a valued concept owing to the specific method (e.g., search) employed.

Applicability to CPS in LLVMs: While the discussion of novelty, value and conceptual spaces in Wiggins ( 2006 ) aligns with our descriptions in Section 4 , the different modes of uninspiration offers potential ways to assess failure modes in LLVMs. This allows agents to distinguish between systems where creative problem solving is not possible (hopeless uninspiration), as compared to systems where the conceptual space or the methodology for searching the conceptual space, may be at fault (conceptual or generative uninspiration). Although this approach has not been expanded in existing literature, it presents a promising direction for an evaluation framework that can distinguish CPS from non-CPS problems.

B.1 A potential link between creative problem solving and general intelligence

Existing literature hints at a potential link between creative problem solving and Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - systems that are broadly capable of solving almost all tasks that humans can Shevlin et al. ( 2019 ) . For instance, in Moruzzi ( 2020 ) , p.85., the author argues that there exists a strong correlation between creativity and AGI: “ … features that systems need to develop in order to achieve general intelligence are aspects that they need to possess also to earn the attribute creative ”. In Goertzel ( 2014 ) , the author compiles a list of competencies deemed essential for achieving AGI, including creative capacities like “ conceptual invention ” and “ creative constructive play with objects ”. The processes of “insight” or “incubation” often associated with creative problem solving Hélie and Sun ( 2010 ); Gilhooly ( 2016 ) is also considered important for AGI Ventura ( 2014 ) . Taken together, it is likely that any promising vision of AGI would be incomplete without creative problem solving .

Alongside the heavy ongoing discussion of AGI surrounding LLVMs Bubeck et al. ( 2023 ); Fei et al. ( 2022 ); Ma et al. ( 2023 ); Xi et al. ( 2023 ); Moor et al. ( 2023 ); Grudin and Jacques ( 2019 ) , there is often little to no discussion of creative problem solving or Computational Creativity within mainstream ML. As described in Moruzzi ( 2020 ) , p.96, “ The investigation on the nature of creativity and on how it manifests itself not only in human but also in animal and artificial systems should, thus, not be intended as a niche discussion but, rather, as a fundamental research which can lay the foundations for further studies in artificial intelligence and its relation to humans ”. We hope that this work will encourage discussions of creative problem solving and Computational Creativity alongside discussions on AGI.

Appendix C Experiment Settings

Prompt type

Prompt

Regular

“can this object be used as a scoop?” “can this object be used as a hammer?” “can this object be used as a spatula?” “can this object be used as a toothpick?” “can this object be used as pliers?” “scoops must be concave and hollow. can this object be used as a scoop?” “hammers must be heavy and have a handle attached to a cylinder at the end. can this object be used as a hammer?” “spatulas must have a handle attached to a flat surface at the end. can this object be used as a spatula?” “toothpicks must have a pointed tip. can this object be used as a toothpick?” “pliers must have two-prongs. can this object be used as pliers?” “scoops can transfer beans from one jar to another jar. can this object be used as a scoop?” “hammers can hit a nail into the wall. can this object be used as a hammer?” “spatulas can spread butter onto a pan. can this object be used as a spatula?” “toothpicks can pick food caught between the teeth. can this object be used as a toothpick?” “pliers can grab a coin. can this object be used as pliers?” “scoops can transfer beans from one jar to another jar. scoops are concave and hollow. can this object be used as a scoop?” “hammers can hit a nail into the wall. hammers have a handle attached to a cylinder at the end. can this object be used as a hammer?” “spatulas can spread butter onto a pan. spatulas have a handle attached to a flat surface at the end. can this object be used as a spatula?” “toothpicks can pick food caught between the teeth. toothpicks have a pointed tip. can this object be used as a toothpick?” “pliers can grab a coin. pliers have two-prongs. can this object be used as pliers?” C.1 Data: Test images Figure 3 shows the test set of 16 RGB images of objects used for the object substitution task. From the shown image dataset, we create test sets with 4 objects each, chosen from the set of 16 object images. We create 10 such test sets per core object (total 50 samples per model). Each test set only includes one ground truth object, along with three other random objects that will not suit as an appropriate replacement. In the nominal group, the ground truth is the actual object itself. In the object replacement group, the replacements are chosen based on self-assessment of the authors as (core object → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW replacement): “Scoop” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Bowl”; “Hammer” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Saucepan”; “Spatula” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Knife”; “Toothpick” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Safety pin”; “Pliers” → absent → \xrightarrow{} start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW “Scissors”. C.2 Model: Checkpoints For all the models, we use pre-trained HuggingFace checkpoints, with no additional training or fine-tuning. The models are of different architecture sizes and patch sizes: “CLIP-B-32” uses the “openai/clip-vit-base-patch32” which is a base model with a patch size of 32. “CLIP-B-16” uses “openai/clip-vit-base-patch16” – a base model with patch size of 16. “CLIP-L-14” uses “openai/clip-vit-large-patch14” – a large model with patch size of 14. “CLIP-H-14” uses “laion/CLIP-ViT-H-14-laion2B-s32B-b79K” which is a “huge” model, with a patch size of 14. This model is trained with the 2 billion sample English subset of LAION-5B. For LLaVA, we use the “llava-hf/llava-1.5-7b-hf” with 7B parameters, version 1.5. Lastly, “VILT-B-32” uses “dandelin/vilt-b32-finetuned-vqa” trained for visual question answering. However, there is limited data available on HuggingFace regarding the model. C.3 Prompts used in testing In this section, we discuss the prompts used in the different testing conditions (see Table 2 ). We explore four classes of prompts for the creative object substitution task: “Regular”, “Affordance”, “Task” and “Task and affordance”. Regular prompts involve a direct prompt as to whether a given object will suffice as a substitute for the missing object. Affordance prompts, adds information about the desired affordances that are essential for replacing the missing object. Task prompts adds additional information on the task to be performed as context for whether a given object can be used as replacement for the missing object. Lastly, task and affordance prompts combine the task and object affordance information within the prompt. C.4 Testing Procedure For each test case, we pass the images in the test set along with a prompt belonging to one of the four classes described in Table 2 . We record whether the ground truth object image was chosen by the model for the prompt (i.e., assigned highest output probability). CLIP generates probabilities that given images correspond to a text. ViLT responds with a text, and we evaluate if the model responded “yes” with a high probability for the ground truth. C.5 Testing Infrastructure We used NVIDIA-A100 GPUs to run the evaluation. However, the models are not too large and we have tested and confirmed that the code can be executed on CPU only as well. Appendix D Continued Experiment Results In this section, we show the class-wise breakdown of the different models for the different prompting strategies (Figures 4 - 7 ). We note that “hammers” present a particularly challenging case for all the models, perhaps due to the fact that correlating affordance of a hammer to a saucepan textually is difficult. In contrast, all models with the augmented prompts typically perform well in the case of creatively replacing “toothpick” with “safety pin” – presumably indicating that specifying the relevant affordance textually in this case provides sufficient information. We repeated each experiment across multiple random seeds and found similar performances, showing that our general findings hold across different random cases. Generally, specifying object affordance information in the prompts leads to improved model performance. 393 IMAGES Creative Problem-Solving Process Stages of creative problem solving 6 steps of the problem solving process steps of creative problem solving Creative Problem-Solving Process Creative Problem Solving Framework COMMENTS PDF Creative Problem Solving CPS is a comprehensive system built on our own natural thinking processes that deliberately ignites creative thinking and produces innovative solutions. Through alternating phases of divergent and convergent thinking, CPS provides a process for managing thinking and action, while avoiding premature or inappropriate judgment. It is built upon a ... What is CPS? S. olving. CPS is a proven method for approaching a problem or a challenge in an imaginative and innovative way. It helps you redefine the problems and opportunities you face, come up with new, innovative responses and solutions, and then take action. If you search the Internet for "Creative Problem Solving," you'll find many variations ... Creative Problem Solving Key Points. Creative problem solving (CPS) is a way of using your creativity to develop new ideas and solutions to problems. The process is based on separating divergent and convergent thinking styles, so that you can focus your mind on creating at the first stage, and then evaluating at the second stage. PDF Creative Problem Solving (CPS): The 5‐Minute Guide situation, you may not use all the stages, and may not use them in the order shown. Facilitate G o alf thi sg e: b n prc ,d my uw k; process decisions. D escr ip ton: am ‐ u d hg CPS k l w, move to the next step. This oversight is the responsibility of the problem's owner What is Creative Problem Solving? Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving: This is one of the earliest and most widely used versions of Creative Problem Solving. It consists of six stages: Objective Finding, Fact Finding, Problem Finding, Idea Finding, Solution Finding, and Acceptance Finding. It follows a systematic approach to identify and solve problems creatively. What Is Creative Problem-Solving & Why Is It Important? Creative problem-solving primarily operates in the ideate phase of design thinking but can be applied to others. This is because design thinking is an iterative process that moves between the stages as ideas are generated and pursued. This is normal and encouraged, as innovation requires exploring multiple ideas. What is Creative Problem-Solving? Creative problem-solving is an essential skill that goes beyond basic brainstorming. It entails a holistic approach to challenges, melding logical processes with imaginative techniques to conceive innovative solutions. As our world becomes increasingly complex and interconnected, the ability to think creatively and solve problems with fresh ... PDF Creative Problem Solving (CPS Version 6.1™) A ... Creative Problem Solving (CPS)— Components and Stages This pamphlet provides a concise summary of and guide to Creative Problem Solving (CPS Ver-sion 6.1™)— the latest version of our framework for solving problems and managing change. This summary of CPS Version 6.1™ includes our latest work and draws upon our texts Creative Problem Creative problem-solving Creative problem-solving (CPS) [1] is the mental process of searching for an original and previously unknown solution to a problem. To qualify, the solution must be novel and reached independently. [1] [2] The creative problem-solving process was originally developed by Alex Osborn and Sid Parnes.Creative problem solving (CPS) is a way of using creativity to develop new ideas and solutions to ... Creative Problem Solving Creative Problem Solving is a process that allows people to apply both creative and critical thinking to find solutions to everyday problems. Creative Problem Solving eliminates the tendency to approach problems in a haphazard manner and, consequently, prevents surprises and/or disappointment with the solution. Creative Problem-Solving Technique The following creative problem solving diagram is designed to guide you through the process of understanding the problem, generating ideas, and planning for action. The problem-solving process is broken down into six stages, each of which has a creative and a critical 'phase'. Start with step 1 in the creative phase, then move across to ... What is Creative Problem Solving? Creative problem solving (CPS) is a process that design teams use to generate ideas and solutions in their work. Designers and design teams apply an approach where they clarify a problem to understand it, ideate to generate good solutions, develop the most promising one, and implement it to create a successful solution for their brand's users. Idea Generation: What is Creative Problem Solving? In the linear model, each of the six stages of the Creative Problem Solving process is represented by a diamond shape. This shape signifies first, generating or diverging options, followed by a selection of a refreshed focus and then, moving on. Thinking was in straight lines, moving just one step at a time for the sake of maintaining order ... The Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-Solving Process The creative problem-solving process uses two thinking styles: divergent thinking and convergent thinking. "Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn't really do it, the just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while". (PDF) Creative Problem Solving (CPS Version 6.1™) A Contemporary The Creative Problem Solving Model created with these processes consists of five stages: finding facts, explaining problems, finding ideas, producing solutions and finding acceptance These stages ... Creative Problem Solving The most recent model of Creative Problem Solving divides the creative problem solving process into three general areas: Exploring the Challenge, Generating Ideas, and Preparing for Action. Two of the stages of the model have multiple components. Creative Problem Solving appears complicated, but it is intended to be very flexible. Creative Problem-Solving Approach: Skills, Framework, 3 Real-life Alex Osborn and Sydney Parnes originated the creative problem-solving approach in the 1940s. The approach involves three main steps: problem identification, ideation, and implementation. Firstly, it is essential to identify the specific problem or issue that needs solving. Then, once you have identified the problem, it's time for ideation ... How you can use creative problem solving at work The CPS process can be broken down into seven steps. 1. Identify the goal. Before solving the problem, you need to fully understand the problem you're trying to solve. You may have overlooked or misunderstood some details. Take some time to analyze the conflict and clear up any confusion. 2. Creative Problem Solving Creative Problem Solving - Stages. There are six stages of creative problem solving, where both divergent and convergent thought processes are used. These steps are essential for the search for data and then the narrowing of data. During the convergence, the data that is very close to the point of issue or close enough to warrant further ... Creative Problem-Solving The creative problem-solving process Footnote 1 is a systematic approach to problem-solving that was first proposed by Alex Osborn in 1953 in his landmark book Applied Imagination.The approach went through several refinements over a period of five years. Osborn began with a seven-step model that reflected the creative process (orientation, preparation, analysis, hypothesis, incubation ... Discover the 5 Stages of Creative Problem Solving The 5 stages of creative problem-solving are: Preparation: Gathering information, doing research, and identifying the problem. Incubation: Subconsciously working on a solution. Insight: The "aha" moment when the solution presents itself. Evaluation: Critically analyze the solution to determine its effectiveness. 6 Stages of Creative Problem Solving The document outlines the 6 stages of Creative Problem Solving (CPS): 1. Mess finding: Identify issues, concerns, opportunities through divergent and convergent techniques. 2. Data finding: Gather information about the problem through divergent and convergent techniques. 3. Problem finding: Refine a broad problem statement suitable for idea finding through divergent and convergent techniques ... Six Stages of Creative Problem Solving - Creative Problem Solving is a proven method for approaching a problem or a challenge in an imaginative and innovative way. It's a tool that helps people re-define the problems they face, come up with breakthrough ideas and then take action on these new ideas. Six Stages of Creative Problem Solving in Large Language and Vision Models Creative problem solving can be broadly described as the process through which agents discover novel ways of accomplishing a task that, prior to the discovery, was unsolvable. Computationally, creative problem solving can be achieved through planning, learning, or hybrid approaches Gizzi et al. . Following a review of the different definitions ... assignment essay homework phd report resume review speech thesis