Thinking Tools for Creativity

and Innovation

The Little Handbook of Innovation Methods

Florian Rustler

Translated from the German by Andrew Schlademan

THINKING TOOLS
The Little Handbook of Innovation Methods

5. Auflage, aktualisiert und erweitert

© 2017 Midas Management Verlag AG

ISBN 978-3-907100-81-3
eISBN 978-3-03876-520-2

Florian Rustler
Denkwerkzeuge der Kreativität und Innovation –
Das kleine Handbuch der Innovationsmethoden
Zürich: Midas Management Verlag AG

Lektorat: Gregory C. Zäch

Korrektorat: Kathrin Lichtenberg
Layout und Illustrationen: Isabela Plambeck

Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Die Verwendung der Texte und Bilder, auch auszugsweise, ist
ohne schriftliche Zustimmung des Verlages urheberrechtswidrig und strafbar. Dies gilt
insbesondere für die Vervielfältigung, Übersetzung oder die Verwendung in
Seminarunterlagen und elektronischen Systemen.

Midas Management Verlag AG, Dunantstrasse 3, CH 8044 Zürich

Website: www.midas.ch / Mail: kontakt@midas.ch / Social Media: midasverlag
OVERVIEW

Chapter 1
THE FUNDAMENTALS

Chapter 2
PROCESS MODELS OF CREATIVITY

Chapter 3
THE THINKING TOOLS

Chapter 4
GENERAL CONVERGENT TOOLS

Chapter 5
FURTHER REFERENCES AND LITERATURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Forward to the 5th Edition

Forward to the First Edition
How Do I Use This Book?

1 THE FUNDAMENTALS
Definitions of Creativity and Innovation

The 4P Model of Creativity

Can You Nurture and Encourage Creativity?

The Levels of Innovation

Social Innovation

Different Types of Innovation

The Dynamic Balance: Divergent and Convergent Thinking

Divergent Thinking – Developing Options

Convergent Thinking – Selecting Options

The Environment for Creativity and Innovation

Innovation Teams

12 Strategic Action Areas for Innovation in Companies

2 PROCESS MODELS OF CREATIVITY

 Creative Problem Solving

Design Thinking

Systematic Creative Thinking

3 THE THINKING TOOLS

Visionary Thinking
Wishful Thinking
OMIPC Selection Criteria
Newspaper Article from the Future
Storyboarding
Success Zones
DRIVE

Diagnostic Thinking
5 W‘s and an H
Status Quo Diagram
Resource Analysis
Observation Guidelines
Semantic Analysis
Customer-User-Stakeholder Map
Storytelling

Strategic Thinking
Framework Visualization
Personas
Point of View Statement
Question Starters
Web of Abstraction
SWOT Analysis
Component Analysis
Force-field Analysis

Thinking in Ideas
Techniques for Developing Ideas – Many Paths Lead to the
Goal

Brainstorming
Brainwriting
Wild Idea Question
Morphological Box
SCAMPER
Escape Method
Forced Connections
Stepping Stone Method
Analogies
Elementary Transformations
Special Tools for Customer Acquisition
Four Actions Framework
Pattern for Business Model Development

Evaluative Thinking
The Role of Intuition
Tools for Selecting Ideas
COCD Box
Selection of Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Matrix
2x2 Matrix
SCRUM Matrix
Paired Comparison Analysis
Tools for the Development of Solutions
Prototyping
Proto-Case
Zen Statement
Crazy 8
PPCO
NABC
Business Model Canvas
 Contextual Thinking
Assisters and Resisters
Pre-Mortem
Stakeholder Analysis
Assumption Testing Canvas

Tactical Thinking
How-How Diagram
Developing Action Steps
Momentum Matrix

4 GENERAL CONVERGENT TOOLS

Telescoping
Clustering
Mind Mapping

5 FURTHER REFERENCES AND LITERATURE

 Denkwerkzeuge als Firmenausgabe
Sie erhalten diesen Titel direkt beim Verlag in Großmengen
oder als Sonderausgabe mit Firmenlogo. Wahlweise mit
Prägung und/oder mit eigener Banderole. Das perfekte
Geschenk für Ihre Kunden und Mitarbeiter. Fragen Sie unseren
Vertrieb nach attraktiven Konditionen. E-Mail an:
kontakt@midas.ch
FORWARD TO THE FIFTH EDITION

I am pleased to present a considerably revised and updated fifth

edition of Thinking Tools. Fortunately, due to its Amazon bestseller
status, the recent editions appeared in relatively short succession;
each one sold out quickly.

This fifth edition has additional new thinking tools that considerably
expand upon the existing toolbox, especially in the areas of
diagnostic thinking and thinking in solutions.
A significant change from the creaffective perspective is the addition
of a third process model for systematic creative thinking that builds
on and unites both Creative Problem Solving and Design Thinking
into one model just as we have been practicing it with our clients for
years. We call this third model the Systematic Creative Thinking
Process.
It doesn’t matter which model you use, Creative Problem Solving,
Design Thinking or the newer Systematic Creative Thinking Process.
All of the thinking tools are described in the same way as they
always have been.

I would like to thank my colleagues at creaffective for their

contribution to the development of this new process and the thinking
tools expanded upon here.

Wishing you an inspirational reading experience,

Florian Rustler
Munich, Spring 2017
FORWARD TO THE FIRST EDITION

Innovation – unfortunately for many, this word is received as a tired

cliché, or as lip service that appears in every company description
and is announced from every political platform. Still, innovation is
truly an important factor for every company‘s success, especially
today. It is more than just an empty platitude.
Organizations must constantly be making multiple, simultaneous
adjustments to keep producing new products regularly. This book
helps you do that. We present 12 strategic areas of activity and
describe them to make their application available for you.

The adage, “Innovation starts with an I,” identifies its starting point:
There are individuals whose motivation, expertise, knowledge and
skills with regard to creativity and innovation are present at the
beginning of every innovation and are present in every culture of
innovation. Unfortunately, skills for creativity and innovation are not
actively included in the curriculum of our school and university
systems. This is where this handbook comes into play. The amount
that every individual in your organization can contribute to its
success is influenced by various factors including a conscious
awareness of creativity and innovation, personal attitude toward it,
and systematic creative thinking skills. My hope is that this book will
be able to make a helpful contribution to the development of these
elements.

Based on 60 years of academic research in the field of creativity and

innovation and ten years of practical experience with creaffective, my
goal is to provide an aid for practical and application-oriented
thought and action. As with books on physical fitness and changing
personal habits, one thing is imperative: At the end of the day, you
have to make a conscious decision to put the tools and concepts
described in this book to good use.
This responsibility lies in your hands!

Participants who have been in our trainings and workshops receive

this book and have been able to put many of the techniques
described here into practice. These techniques are not only helpful in
the context of innovation within organizations, they are also helpful in
all areas of life in which new perspectives, ideas and courses of
action are required… so basically everywhere!

Wishing you happiness and success!

Florian Rustler
Munich, August 2014
HOW DO I USE THIS BOOK?

Optically this book is based on the well-known Moleskine notebook

cherished by many. Its handy format makes it possible for you to
keep this book tucked away and then, as the need may be, take it
out to jot notes, thoughts and ideas, look something up or find
inspiration.

This book is arranged so that most of the sections can be read

independently of one another. Further, you don’t have to read the
book all at once, from A-Z. Just the opposite. I hope this book will be
so helpful to you that you keep reaching for it, flipping through it
regularly.
Thinking Tools for Creativity and Innovation contains the important
fundamentals, which should be considered in all cases. The majority
of the content consists of brief, practice-oriented descriptions of
various thinking tools. The tools are arranged according to seven
thinking skills relevant to innovation. In turn, these thinking skills form
the basis of various process models for creative problem solving,
which are also introduced in this handbook.

You can flip to chapters and techniques described that fit the type of
thinking or aspect of a creative problem solving process is relevant
to you at the moment.

This book is designed to give you a manageable, practice-oriented

introduction to creative and innovative processes. References to
additional source materials and literature at the end of each chapter
are provided for those who would like to delve deeper into the
subject.
 1
THE FUNDAMENTALS

This book presents a list of simple and versatile thinking tools that
can be used in a creative process.
That being said, this book contains more than a collection of
methods. There are a few fundamentals that will facilitate your
understanding of using these tools to your advantage, and will help
you recognize that techniques and methods are only aspects on the
road to creating something new.
Creativity and innovation are dependent on a host of other factors as
well, which we will touch upon while explaining these fundamentals.
Before this, we want to arrive at a common understanding of what
we are talking about when we use the words creativity and
innovation.

Particularly important and in the truest sense of the word

fundamental, the foundation for using all thinking tools is this: an
understanding of the dynamic balance between divergent and
convergent thinking and the separation of these two phases of
thinking. If you do not take this fundamental principal into account,
then all of the techniques will be limited in their effectiveness.
Definitions of Creativity and Innovation
Research into creativity as a scientific discipline began in the 1950s,
as a subdiscipline of psychology. The initial impulse for doing so was
created by J.P. Guilford with his 1949 lecture on the “Structure of
Intellect.” J.P. Guilford was the president of the American
Psychological Association. In his lectures, he argued that creativity is
a resource that everyone has at their disposal, and therefore,
everyone can also use it to make an enormous contribution to
society. At the time this stood in stark contrast to the widespread
notion of a general intelligence that underlies every intelligent act.
Unfortunately, there is not just one definition of creativity that is
accepted by all researchers. There are as many definitions of
creativity as there are scientists occupied with the subject; each
definition reflects their scientific background and contains differing
aspects. To have one definition capture the multi-faceted complexity
of creativity is a challenge. We will focus on a categorization of these
multiple facets, because they can be very helpful to provide
understanding of systematic creativity. Nevertheless, there is
something akin to a lowest common denominator definition that can
serve as a working definition for the purposes of this book.

Some Definitions of Creativity:

“Creativity is a process that results in novelty which is accepted as
useful, tenable or satisfying by a significant group of others at some
point in time.” M. Stein (1953)

“Creativity is an ability to come up with new and different viewpoints

on a subject. It involves breaking down and restructuring our
knowledge about a subject in order to gain new insights into its
structure.” T. Proctor (2005)
“The intersection of two ideas for the first time.“ O.A. Keep (1957)

For creaffective, the working definition that we use in our workshops

and seminars is:
“Creativity is the ability to come up with something new that is
useful.”

The term “new” does not say anything, perse, about the degree of
originality or how fresh something is. The term “useful,” in our
definition, also does not state for how many people it has to be
useful as opposed to Stein’s example.
The Relationship between Creativity and Innovation
The terms creativity and innovation are often used as synonyms for
one another. Creativity and innovation are, in fact, closely related to
one another, and there are differences, primarily with respect to
usefulness and the extent of the newness.

Some Definitions of Innovation:

“The process of translating and idea or invention into a good or
service that creates value or for which customers will pay.” (Business
Dictionary)

“Invention plus exploitation (or implementation).” E. Roberts

(Professor, MIT)

Here, I would also like to offer creaffective’s working definition:

“Innovation is the introduction of something new into a market,
an organization or a society that is useful.”

It is obvious how far innovation goes beyond creativity. Innovation is

about how far the fruits of creativity can be introduced into the larger
context. From a company’s perspective, this larger context can be a
market where the product will be offered or it can be internal to the
organization.

Usefulness stands in the foreground of innovation as a criterion. The

innovation must be recognized by others as being useful. In the case
of a new product or service, this can be seen in the demand for the
new product or process.

No Innovation without Creativity

Creativity is present at the beginning of and is central to every
innovation, as is made clear in the above definitions and in the
following illustration. Innovation is the introduction or the extension of
a creative result into a greater context. For this, you first need to
achieve something new that will be deemed useful enough to be
integrated into a larger context.
A creative result that is introduced into a larger context goes far
beyond an initial idea. It must also be precise enough and thought
out well enough that you can act upon it. Creativity is thus more than
having (raw) ideas; creativity also means developing these ideas far
enough, so that you are able to do something with them.
Even though coincidences can play a role and shouldn’t be taken for
granted, creativity is not just a sudden realization that can come out
of nowhere. Creativity is, among other things, a process that can be
consciously and systematically steered so to achieve a result that
can then be introduced into a larger context.
CREATIVITY AND
INNOVATION
The 4P Model of Creativity
Systematic creativity can be a catalyst for innovation.

We presented a few definitions of creativity and the difference

between creativity and innovation. We can already see considerable
differences in their unique emphasis.

An American psychology professor, Mel Rhodes, in the mid 1950’s,

analyzed various aspects of creativity, categorized them and
provided their summary in a 4P Model of Creativity. Rhodes believed
that classifying the components of creativity provided a helpful
framework to further develop this line of research.

The 4P Model of Creativity is a helpful model that remains useful

today. With it, you can identify the various factors that influence
creativity and understand where adjustments can and must be made
to generate more creativity as an individual, as a team, and as an
organization.
The 4 Ps stand for: Person, Process, Press (environment) and
Product.

Person
Creativity arises in people. Creative results are achieved through
people’s actions and interactions. Individuals have unique qualities,
values, attitudes, ways of thinking and patterns of behavior, which, in
turn, influence the creative process, the creative environment and
thus, in the end, a novel and useful, or creative result.

Process
A creative solution doesn’t just fall from the sky; it follows a process
from the emergence of an initial question or stimulus all the way
through to the rise of a new solution. By nature all people implicitly
use some kind of structured process for problem solving. Explicit
models of the creating process were developed through the
observation of and interviews with known creative people over the
last 60 years. Step by step, they have been refined and improved.
Creative process models are used in many organizations today.
They are and can be applied as strategies for effective new thinking
by individuals and with groups.

Press (environment)
Rhodes derived this term, press, from the Latin pressus, which can
mean a box or container. The environment is thus the container or
context in which the person(s) and processes are located. The
quality of the context has a direct effect, positive or negative, on how
participants behave and how the processes unfold. We have all
experienced a situation, for example, where it seemed impossible to
come up with anything creative. On the other hand, in other
situations being creative seemed very easy. Environments having a
creative climate or a creative culture have certain characteristics that
can be influenced by people.

Product
Where the three circles, person, process and environment overlap,
you see the product of creativity.
Product here refers to the result or outcome of the process and is not
the same as the product we know of as a sales object. The product
can either be material or immaterial, like a poem, a procedure or a
theory. Important to understand is that creativity leads to a product
and this is only achieved through using creative thinking.
Creative thinking is a natural prerequisite for a new product that
provides value. At some point however, the focus turns toward doing
something with the ideas.
Each of the other aspects has a direct influence on the creative
product/outcome. Different people give rise to individual outcomes
and each contributes in a variety of ways to the creative process of a
group. The creative process can have a decisive influence on
whether or not a product emerges at all and if so, what kind and
quality of product it will be. More on this later. In turn, the
environment influences the ways in which the people, processes and
product/outcomes are able to develop.
4P-MODELL
Can You Nurture and Encourage Creativity?
Many people believe that creativity is an inherent ability. Either
you’re blessed with a lot of it or you’re unfortunately not. That’s just
your fate. Based on this set of beliefs, some people can be heard
saying, “I’m just not a creative person.”
Still, creativity research shows that creativity is an inherent ability,
one that everyone possesses. That means that all people can be
creative. It’s true, people do have inborn talents. Every person has
unique gifts and different people have different specialties. This
means that every person can be creative, and different people are
creative in different ways: some will be especially creative in the
areas where they can build on their given talents.
On the other hand, creativity is a skill that you can actively practice
and improve. In the section on the 4P Model, we see there are
various aspects that steer creativity and they, in turn, can be partially
influenced by every single person involved.
In this way, every person can change their approach and, for
example, become more open to new ideas. There are certain basic
skills of creative thinking, like divergent and convergent thought, that
everyone can (re)learn and by doing so increase their creative
thinking abilities. Furthermore, there are systematic processes
(process models) that can help individuals and groups channel and
structure their creativity to a certain degree.
After all, everyone can make even a minor change to their
surroundings and consciously create an atmosphere that is more
conducive to creativity.

Creativity – spontaneous or intentional?

Many people experience creativity as something spontaneous, like
having a flash of inspiration that seems to happen when you’re
kissed by the muse. We all know these moments, and they are an
aspect of creativity that is hard to control. We happily welcome them
when they arrive.
Researchers in the field of creativity studies speak of a continuum
between absolute spontaneity (on the left side of the following
illustration) as in the flashes of inspiration mentioned above, and
conscious and intentional creativity (on the right side of the
illustration) where one tries to be creative “at the flip of a switch.” We
often practice this active form of creativity of in our facilitated
creativity sessions: we inspire and support participants with
techniques to give their creativity a jumpstart. You can also call this
the “make it happen” approach. In between and before the “make it
happen” approach can work, there is the “let it happen” phase. Here,
it’s all about establishing the conditions in which creativity can
flourish. This is where environmental factors often play a role. The
factors can be modified so creativity arises more easily. This can
mean, for example, ensuring ample time, freedom from constant
interruptions, and/or having pleasant workspaces where people feel
comfortable.
Many companies, for example, deliberately provide tea or coffee
areas where people can mingle freely and talk with one another.
Often, innovations arise as a result of these chance meetings. These
are all examples of the “let it happen” school of thought. Building on
the „let it happen“ strategy, you can go a step further to actively
promote creativity and make a conscious effort to try and be creative
(make it happen).

A common example of spontaneous creativity is the proverbial

“standing under the shower” story. Many people report inspiration
comes to them spontaneously while they are in the shower or on the
toilet when their mind is at ease. This type of insight is good, and
also important, though it usually isn’t sufficient. As a participant in
one of our workshops said so well, “Showering is great, but it isn’t
enough.”
PROMOTING AND
SUPPORTING CREATIVITY
The Levels of Innovation
When you ask people in a company to name examples of innovation,
various categories based on the type of company you are in usually
get mentioned. In a company focused on technology, for instance,
you will likely get examples of new products and technologies. An
automobile manufacturer will emphasize one or more technical
details from a new generation of vehicles. The innovation examples
mentioned by people working in consulting or in the insurance
industry will likely be very different. The innovation examples people
cite tend to come from their direct experience, such as according to
their job or the industry in which they work.
When it comes to categorizing innovations there are levels of
differentiation. Below I cover important distinctions for classifying
kinds of innovations, in three levels: Product, Process and
Business Model.

Product/Service Level
Product/service level innovation uses new technologies that are
protected by patents and are frequently reported on in the media.
These technologies can be utilized in new products offered on the
market. Examples include a higher-performance mobile telephone or
a new software. Also, flowing into this level are new services, like a
new banking or insurance service.

Process Level
Process level innovation relates to an organization’s internal and
external environment, as in finding a new or better way to produce or
implement something. For example, process level innovation can be
seen in a new method to manufacture aircraft parts faster and
cheaper, or in a new procedure to optimize internal processes such
as scheduling or inventory. Airlines that only use one type of aircraft
– to simplify their maintenance and loading procedures – have
experienced process level innovation. Another example of process
innovation is subcontracting a part of a process to someone else like
IKEA, for example, who came up with the crazy idea (at the time) of
letting their customers assemble furniture for themselves!

Business Model Level

“A business model describes the rationale of how an organization
creates, delivers and captures value” (A. Osterwalder, Y. Pigneur).
Often, value for a user and an organization is not created through
technology, but through a new method of operating. With the help of
an existing technology, value is created by making a product or
service available to the customer. The car-sharing model developed
in Germany by the large auto manufacturers in recent years provide
an example. Instead of buying a car, I can drive a car whenever I
want by paying a user fee. I don’t have to go to a specific rental
location like I do when I want to rent a car; I can use the car-sharing
cars parked in my neighborhood. The auto makers have not
changed anything with respect to the vehicle’s technology (product
level), they created a new business model for generating value and
tapping into new customer groups.
Through this car-sharing model, it is possible to generate revenue
from people who have no interest in owning a car.
Another example in business model innovation are direct banks.
They arrived at the unique idea of offering banking services
exclusively over the phone or via the internet rather than in specific
buildings or offices. The products are the same as what are found at
the banks’ various street level branches. Many innovations represent
a combination of these three levels – Product/Service, Process and
Business Model Innovation.

Cost-effective Innovation Opportunities for Entrepreneurs on

the Non-Technological Level
Innovations that require relatively little capital are now conceivable,
particularly in Process and Business model levels by making clever
combinations of what already exists or by building on freely available
technologies. Most e-commerce business models provide examples
of this.

Günter Faltin characterizes this as ‘concept creative’ innovation in

his book, Brains versus Capital. The company mymuesli allows its
users to create their own custom muesli online from over 70
ingredients and the custom product is delivered to them in the mail.
Three students founded the company in 2007 with a total investment
of barely 4,000 euros. Today, mymuesli is the undisputed market
leader in this segment in Germany and employs over 100 people.
LEVELS OF INNOVATION
Product example: Higher-performance
PRODUCTS
mobile telephone; software Service
example: new bank/insurance service
/ SERVICES

Process example: IKEA customers have to

PROCESS
build their furniture themselves.

Business model example: Car-sharing; BUSINESS

direct banking. MODEL
Social Innovation
In the last 20 years another aspect of innovation has been moving
into focus: social innovation. Social innovation solves social
problems or articulates needs of the society or community, it creates
something new from which society as a whole or a certain group
within the society benefits.
The profit of this type of innovation is measured with regard to the
positive change it has on society. It is not measured financially, as in
a corporate context. For this reason charities or state institutions can
play important roles making necessary financial means available.
The importance of social innovation continues to grow in public
discourse, alongside economic and technical innovation. Technical
innovation can however also serve as an important basis for building
capacity to take the next step toward social innovation.
Closely related to social innovation is the concept of social
entrepreneurship. In social entrepreneurship social needs and
problems are addressed through the functional principle of a
company, often because the state cannot adequately serve these
societal needs by being too slow, or inefficiently structured. Social
enterprises often have a non-profit legal status: the business model
must be economically sound, and they may not record any profits.

The processes and techniques covered in this book can be applied

to all these forms and all levels of innovation. Even though in specific
cases the evaluation criteria are often different, the fundamental
principles are the same.
SOCIAL INNOVATION
Different Types of Innovation
Along with the levels of innovation - product/service technology,
process and business model - we must also pay attention to the type
of innovation. According to Davila, Epstein and Shelton, innovation
can be classified into three types (see illustration): incremental
innovation, semi-radical (evolutionary) innovation and radical
(revolutionary) innovation. Technology and business model aspects
serve as the criteria for this classification (the technological aspect
includes the process level).
An innovation is deemed incremental when it is very similar to the
existing technology and business model. An example could be an
auto manufacturer that releases a new version of a model already in
production.
An innovation is deemed semi-radical when it is new and has only
minor changes with respect to the technology (or the process) or to
the business model.
Let’s look at more examples from the automobile industry: The car-
sharing model previously mentioned represents a semi-radical
innovation for the auto manufacturer (driven by the business model).
The electric engine also represents a semi-radical (technology-
driven) innovation.
Radical innovations are also known as game-changers: these
normally bring a complete change to the market environment.
Radical innovation, as you can surely understand, is the rarest and
most difficult to create. Davila, Epstein and Shelton cite the
introduction of the disposable diaper in the 1970s as an historic
example. This innovation utilized a new technology -disposable
diapers made from a different material than the traditional cotton
diapers - and it also introduced a new business model with far-
reaching consequences for the producers of the time. Suddenly
consumers could buy disposable diapers at the supermarket and
throw them away instead of having them laundered, causing the
collapse the diaper laundering and delivery business model.
Companies should strive for all three types of innovations to survive
over the long-term. Incremental innovations with low risk act as a
cash cow for the existing business. Semi-radical innovations help
over the mid- and long-term and risky, radical innovations can create
an immense competitive advantage over a certain period of time.
Radical innovations can also force entire business models and the
companies that practice them out of the market.
Many authors stress that companies cannot survive if they only rely
upon one type of innovation. Incremental innovation is not enough to
ensure long-term success. To wager everything on radical innovation
is too risky and the danger of the entire company failing is too high.
The more radical the innovation, the higher the risk of failure. This is
why radical innovation projects have to be balanced with safe,
incremental projects.

Different Requirements on the Company Side

These various types of innovation also pose different requirements
for a company. This is one reason why many organizations struggle
bringing forth semi-radical and radical innovation.
Here, Govindarajan and Trimble speak about fundamental
incompatibility between the so-called performance engine and
(radical and semi-radical) innovation. The performance engine
represents the defined business operations, how they are run and
standardized. Here the focus is efficiency and the goal is to reliably
provide the current product/service portfolio at the lowest possible
cost. The central focus is on repeatability and predictability. The
performance engine ensures the company’s bread and butter
business and provides continued income. Interventions and changes
cause confusion in this efficient structure and are therefore
troublesome.
As a result most companies are well attuned to incremental
innovation within their existing processes and operating procedures.
They are able to deal with minimal changes to their processes,
technologies and markets.
Semi-radical or radical innovations are not compatible with
performance engine processes, organizational structures and
thought and behavior practices. Low predictability characterizes both
these types of innovation, thus many uncertainties arise. It is not
clear – particularly at the beginning – where the journey will end. It is
even more profound with radical innovation, than it is with semi-
radical innovation. With semi-radical innovation, there is a certain
degree of compatibility with what presently exists because the
market or the technology remains the same. When it comes to
radical innovation, everything is new. From the perspective of the
performance engine thought paradigm, these innovation projects are
disruptive, throw established operations into confusion and have an
impact on income. Radical innovations can even be perceived as
useless at first, because most don‘t share any points of contact with
anything in normal, present experience. Often these projects are
unable to be handled within the existing structures and divisions of
an organization (including the departmental thinking that goes along
with this). For this reason semi-radical and radical innovation need
different structures, metrics and criteria for success. They also need
distinctive incentives and teams (many also with external personnel)
than those the performance engine can offer.
Some companies take the step of establishing a kind of spin-off
organization that can operate outside of the performance engine’s
existing rules. Buying innovative companies is also used as a
strategy to bring more radical innovations on board.
The systematic creativity that we are dealing with in this handbook is
applicable and relevant to all types of innovation.
TYPES OF INNOVATION
The Dynamic Balance: Divergent and
Convergent Thinking
Systematic creative thinking consists of two distinct thought phases
that should always (!) take place separately from one another:
divergent thinking and convergent thinking.

Divergent Thinking means a broad search for many new and

different alternatives. Alternatives can be ideas, information, ways to
formulate the problem, action steps, etc.

Convergent thinking describes a focused, positive and affirmative

evaluation of the alternatives.

The strict separation of these two phases constitutes the basic

principle of creative thinking. Without this separation, the creative
process and the creativity techniques are worthless. Therefore when
we are developing options (divergent thinking) at first, it’s all about
gathering as many ideas, options, possibilities, points of view etc., as
possible, without immediately (possibly still just in your thoughts)
evaluating them (convergent thinking).

Why is this important?

Creative thinking brings together thoughts that haven’t been linked
before and creates something new. For this purpose it is important to
leave the area of the known and consciously go forth into an area of
discovery, the unknown. We need divergent thinking to do this.
Convergent thinking is applied after the new ideas have been
gathered. It is used to filter out interesting, new aspects from the
divergent partial unknowns, to expand the area of the known. The
newness that results often seems obvious and logical (“Why didn‘t I
think of that before?”). Beforehand it is anything but obvious. The
newness cannot be reached through pure, logical contemplation.
This is why it is important to first to diverge and then to converge.

Speaking from experience this simple, theoretical principle is often

challenging for people to put into practice. Often, people don’t allow
divergent thinking to take its course and they immediately place a
convergent filter on every thought while it’s still in their head. Before
an idea can be considered through to its conclusion, a “yeah, but…”
argument already rejects it. The longer we think about something,
the more likely it is that divergent and convergent thinking are going
to get mixed-up in the process.

Systematic creative thinking is a balance between both these

independent phases. As a result of separating these two phases of
thinking, you will realize that:

• a subject will really be able to be investigated and considered

from different angles.
• all of the factors relevant for a topic will literally be seen and
taken into account.
• new alternatives will be found that were not considered
beforehand. This increases the probability of finding new and
functional solutions.
• thinking is structured in a considerably more effective way,
since we allow ourselves to keep our mental framework open
before prematurely putting restrictions on it once again.
Divergent Thinking – Developing Options
Divergent thinking always comes before convergent thinking. Its
purpose is to form various alternatives.
Alex Osborn, the “inventor” of brainstorming, developed the rules for
this technique in the 1950s. These rules are still with us today, albeit
in a slightly modified form, and they are not limited to brainstorming.
They can always be used for generating and exploring options.

The rules for divergent thinking are:

1. Defer judgment
Every form of evaluation (positive and negative) is suspended - it
doesn’t matter if you say it out loud or it’s still inside your head.
Judgment takes place in the convergent thinking phase. There is a
reason why an evaluating thought crosses your mind, even if you
can’t possibly see a reason for it. Often you will hear a little, internal
critic in your head, who sometimes whispers and sometimes shouts
why something won’t work or isn’t possible. This internal critic may
advise against even considering or saying the new thought out loud.
It’s exactly at this moment that the rule “defer judgment” comes into
play. When your inner creativity is activated, push judgmental
thoughts aside and hold onto the idea nevertheless. We don’t know
how this new idea can be developed in the positive sense and can
often be surprised at how important this thought will become further
down the line. Suspending judgment doesn’t mean that we never
evaluate, it only means that we don’t do it now, at this exact moment;
we postpone the assessment to a later point in time. On one hand,
this is done to prevent premature negative judgments, which happen
most often and are usually related to why something isn’t relevant or
won’t work. On the other hand, this rule also deals with positive
judgments. Just like we should be keeping ourselves from rejecting
thoughts too quickly, we should also be careful not to fall in love with
ideas right away or focus on any of their aspects too soon. Doing this
can blind us to the discovery of other, equally relevant points or keep
us from generating even better ideas.

2. Strive for quantity

We defined creativity as the development of something new. In
hindsight, this newness is often logical and obvious. Sometimes we
wind up holding our head in both hands and asking ourselves, “Why
didn’t we come up with that sooner?” Beforehand, this new idea is
anything but obvious; we don’t discover it through logical thought
alone. This is why we use the principle of divergent thinking: to be
able to increase the chances of finding good options and discovering
something new. First and foremost, we need to develop a variety of
options. Quantity of ideas is important at the beginning. Finding
quality among this quantity will be discussed during the convergent
thinking step. The more options that are on the table, the better the
chances are to find good options among them. Before we get
started, we don’t have any ability to say which of these many options
are going to be useable choices. Deciding whether an option is good
or not is not a part of divergent thinking.

3. Seek wild ideas

Many people find it helpful to consciously seek out wild, unusual and
far-out notions to break out of their conventional train of thought for
the purpose of gaining new ideas and perspectives. A seemingly
senseless idea, one that at first appeared like it would be impossible
to implement, can become relatively easy to develop into a usable
solution, step-by-step, though modifying and developing it further.
Often, ideas that seem “irrational” in the beginning actually have
great potential that can be harnessed later.
Furthermore, these outrageous ideas can be provide a launching
pad for developing additional, perhaps not so wild ideas. In this case,
the wild idea is only a (necessary) intermediate step to escape from
entrenched, conventional thinking (see rule #4).
I ran into a nice example of the value of off the wall ideas a few
years ago when working with a traditional, conservative Bavarian
company. In searching for a practice topic for divergent thinking, a
training group identified the subject “a more open atmosphere in
meetings”. The group began to develop the idea of how the company
could create a more relaxed atmosphere in their meetings by using
the four basic rules of divergent thinking.
One person suspended their judgment, consciously sought out a wild
idea and said, “We could pass out drugs at the beginning of every
meeting and then the atmosphere would be really relaxed.” You can
imagine the initial reaction among this group of conservative
participants!
However, another member, who had also suspended their judgment,
applied rule #4 and said, “When I heard drugs, I thought about
chocolate. It’s also a kind of drug. We could really all eat some
chocolate before every meeting.” At this point, all of the participants
had to admit that the second idea was certainly possible. Without the
drug idea though, this chocolate idea wouldn’t have arisen.

4. Build on other ideas

Interesting solutions often arise through the development and
combination of existing elements. In creative thinking, to create more
alternatives, every thought should be taken as a starting point that
can be combined with other elements and developed further. This
means that every idea, every perspective, regardless of where it
comes from, serves as a starting point for divergent thinking. You
can build on it and modify the idea, cultivate it further and in doing
so, create more ideas, just as what occurred in the example of
distributing drugs at meetings. You can build upon existing ideas that
are yours, or are contributed by other people. This principle can be
especially effective in groups and can lead to a multitude of ideas if a
group’s participants really acknowledge the other members’ ideas
and build on them. A few mental questions can help you to consider
ideas. When you come up with an idea yourself or get one from
someone else, use the following suggestions to build on it:
• “How can I actively build on this idea and expand it?”
• “What can I tweak or modify about it?”
• “How could I make this idea better?”

Don’t only practice divergent thinking when you are developing

ideas, there are other uses for it as well.
Sometimes there’s an impression that divergent and convergent
thinking are related only to idea development. This is not the case.
As we will see in the section on creative processes, there are
additional steps before and after. For example, when you try to
understand a situation by collecting data and information you can
apply divergent thinking to list all the data that is (possibly) related to
the situation, regardless of whether it seems like it is relevant at first
glance or not. Aspects that turn out to be very important for
understanding the situation that weren’t even on your radar before
are often discovered through using divergent thinking.
Convergent Thinking – Selecting Options
Convergent thinking describes a focused, positive/affirmative
evaluation of alternatives. Selecting the most relevant alternatives
from the divergent collection of options is what this phase is about.
When divergent thinking, we consciously generate many options,
knowing all the while that only some will be remaining at the end.
The survivors are what we are looking for with convergent thinking.
This phase is as important as divergent thinking and is to be carried
out just as carefully. It is of no use when you develop many
interesting and creative possibilities in the divergent phase when
these don’t survive judgment and are discarded too quickly.

This is why there are also rules for convergent thinking:

1. Apply affirmative judgment
Newness, according to a definition, cannot be a 100% match with
what we already know. Our brains have a remarkable capacity for
making constant comparisons to see if something is consistent with
our existing experience. This ability, however, can be detrimental to
creativity. When something isn’t consistent with our experience (and
with new ideas, this is always the case), among other reactions, the
part of the brain responsible for interpreting danger is activated. It
has to check and see if this unknown newness could pose a threat.
This tendency often leads to people to automatically direct their
attention to where a potential problem might occur or why something
might not work. Within this reaction lies the danger that we could
reject ideas too quickly because they don’t fit within our existing
paradigm of experience. Everybody knows the common phrases for
expressing these thoughts: “That won’t work because…” “We’ve
never done it like that before…” and “Yeah, but…” Fortunately, we
humans aren’t complete slaves to this patterning in our brains. The
first rule of convergent thinking is aimed at breaking through this
“problem detection behavior” and looking at ideas for their potential
instead of their problems. While evaluating of options, we first focus
on what is good about an idea and wherein lies its potential instead
of where a challenge might arise. Using a positive attitude toward
our options ensures we are more likely to process ideas further
instead of rejecting them immediately. Ideas are never perfect at
first; there will always be “problems.”

2. Be deliberate
The time and care used for developing options should also be
applied when evaluating them. Every option developed is considered
and possibly tested by some criteria. Here, you should avoid falling
in love with or rejecting any options too quickly. Additionally, take the
time to review all the possibilities a second time and then make your
choice(s).

3. Keep your goal in mind

Creativity always has something to do with finding an answer to a
problem. In the divergent phase, options are generated for a specific
goal and all of them do not answer the particular question. During
divergent thinking, we don’t want to stifle these ideas. When you
evaluate individual ideas, it is important to constantly remind yourself
of your goal and to consider if an idea can help you reach that
purpose, and if it is relevant to your goal at all.

4. Keep novelty alive

Divergent thinking takes place to explore and create new ideas
because the possibilities for a solution that have already been
considered are no longer satisfactory. When you are selecting ideas,
it is important to treat new and unconventional ideas carefully and
not reject them prematurely. In rule #1 apply affirmative judgment,
we saw that people have a tendency to make premature judgments
on things they find unfamiliar. This rule explicitly stresses the fact
again: new ideas, because of their novelty value, need to be
weighed carefully before they are rejected.

5. Improve ideas
An idea is rarely a prepackaged solution, rather it is more like a seed
that needs time and attention before it can mature.
During evaluation, keep in mind that an idea doesn’t always
represent a complete solution ready for immediate use. On the
contrary, it will likely have to be developed for its purpose. This
principle is important during this convergent phase. Rather than
making final judgments on the options presented try to accentuate
what’s positive about these and develop that. Like divergent thinking,
convergent thinking is not only related to the idea development
stage, it also is in the stages before and after idea development.
The Environment for Creativity and
Innovation
You are surely familiar with situations in which it is very comfortable
to be creative and then again other situations in which it is very
challenging. The difference between the two is not necessarily that
something about you has changed, instead, it is that your
environment is different. We find it easy to give free reign to our
thoughts in the presence of some people, while in the presence of
other people we feel inhibited.
In short: Whether you like it or not, the environment, the people and
the locations where you find yourself have an influence on your level
of creativity. The good news is you can try to structure your
surroundings in a way that boosts your creativity.

You have to feel comfortable

On the personal level, this simple rule of thumb applies: You have to
feel comfortable. This is a basic requirement to use your creativity
effectively. Here is a list of factors that can influence your well-being:

Location
Where you find yourself. You can be in a room that is pleasant and
inspirational, which aids creativity. You may be in a another room
that is cold and oppressive, conditions which have an adverse effect
on creativity.

Time
People have preferences about the time of day for when they are
most active and can concentrate best. For some individuals this is in
the early hours of the morning, for others, a later start in the day is
ideal. The important thing is that you are aware of your preferences
and don’t ignore them.

Alone or with Others

Most innovations are result from teamwork. The world today is much
too complex for any one person to be in the position to find the
answers to everything. Nevertheless, a person isn’t always in a team
and there are times when you have to rely on yourself.
When we ask the participants in our creativity trainings, in which
situations they come up with good ideas, we hear a lot of very
different answers. Many say they like to be left alone in peace, while
others report needing, to have interactions and exchanges with
people. Perhaps it is not a strict either/or, but rather a both/and.

Tension or Tranquility
Constant high levels of stress are bad for creativity. This is confirmed
by all scientific studies on the subject, bar none. Nevertheless, there
are also different tension/tranquility preferences when it comes to
creativity. For many people, pressure has a purely negative effect;
they need the feeling of time and freedom. Other people are most
productive when they are under the pressure of a tight deadline.
Without the element of pressure, these never get in gear. This is
another a situation where everyone should find the proper balance
for themselves. What we know for sure is: we shouldn’t be under too
much or too little pressure.

The creative climate in organizations

Methods and processes of creativity are helpful and valuable.
However, for these to bear fruit in any organization, there needs to
be a culture of creativity and innovation.
Culture is hard to measure directly. Researchers in this field can
merely measure artifacts, and other tangible indications of the
organization’s culture. Swedish researcher, Gören Ekvall, spent
many years studying which factors make up a creative climate. He
identified 10 climate dimensions whose presence or absence gives
an indication of how creative the people in an organization can be.

The 10 dimensions identified by Ekvall are:

• Challenge
Challenge describes the emotional investment members of a group
have in the group tasks and goals. A climate in which the
“challenge” dimension is clearly present can be recognized in
people who experience joy and a sense of purpose in their activity
and invest a lot of energy in it.

• Freedom
Freedom is present when the people in an organization can
influence how they achieve their goals and operate independently.
The opposite is the case when every action is prescribed in detail
ahead of time.

• Idea Support
This dimension describes the ways in which new ideas from
colleagues and management are treated. Are new ideas shown
appreciation and do people take a chance to talk about them? Or,
are new ideas only dealt with as annoying, additional work that you
would like to avoid?

• Trust and Openness

How safe people in an organization feel in their relationships with
others is another factor. In a climate of openness, people have
confidence to share new ideas and opinions. In a climate of trust,
no one has to be afraid of exposing themselves to ridicule or
making “mistakes.”
• Dynamism and Liveliness
This factor indicates how energetic the life in an organization or a
team is. Do unexpected things sometimes happen? Are there
surprises (in the positive sense) or can you make a pretty accurate
prediction on Monday morning about what is going to happen the
whole week up until Friday afternoon?

• Playfulness and Humor

When playfulness and humor are present, an atmosphere arises in
which people don’t take themselves so seriously, and a certain
sense of ease prevails. Laughter is heard and is allowed.

• Debate
Ekvall defines debate as a clash of views and ideas. Understood in
this way, people have self-confidence in a climate that allows
debate. They articulate their differing viewpoints and seek better
solutions together leveraging this broad diversity of views.

• Risk Taking
Rick taking occurs in a climate where there is tolerance for
insecurity and ambiguity. Decisions are made relatively quickly, and
experiments, with their lessons learned, are given priority over
lengthy analysis and planning. In a climate where few risks are
taken, people try to do everything on the safe side. Instead of
making decisions, committees are established in which topics are
discussed at great length and in the end, there is still no one who
wants to take any risk responsibility.

• Idea Time
Idea time shows the amount of time people in an organization use
to develop new ideas or to develop existing ideas further. The
development of newness is often not very efficient because nobody
 knows beforehand which option represents the solution. Therefore,
time is needed to find a way that works.

• Conflict
Ekvall defines conflict as the presence of personal and emotional
tension, as opposed to the presence of differences in opinion at the
content level as in discussions.
In a climate of conflict, ideas are often rejected based on the
people or groups that come up with them and not their merit. This
can waste a lot of time and energy.

Except for conflict, all the other nine dimensions have a positive
effect on the climate for creativity and innovation. Conflict is a
dimension whose presence negatively influences that climate.
In turn, it is also possible to have too much of any one dimension; in
this sense, you can also overdo it.

Each individual’s awareness of the above-mentioned climate

dimensions has a direct influence on how these people work
together on a daily basis.
The Central Role of Leadership
The good news is you can consciously impact the climate for
creativity in an organization. You can actively do something so that
the positive dimensions are more pronounced.
The behavior and attitude of management staff has a particularly
strong influence on a team and even on an entire organization.
Leaders actions and mindsets have a very powerful effect on
climate. Although a leader can’t enact creativity by decree, their
status alone puts them in a position that makes it possible for them
to initiate changes, take chances, and provide either a positive or a
negative vibe for a team.

In our client work we have come to realize that few if any managers
want to consciously and intentionally inhibit a climate of creativity.
More often, this usually occurs due to their having a lack of
understanding about conditions for creativity and innovation which
influences their actions and subsequently impacts the climate. We
also see that leaders who improve their knowledge concerning
creativity and innovation and increase their capacity for conscious,
creative thinking can make a visible, positive difference.
CREATIVITY AND
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT
Innovation Teams
Innovation teams are teams that are specially trained to solve tasks
related to innovation and operate either full-time or part-time.

Like with other project teams, the professional background of team

members plays a central role in their selection. Can the team
member contribute something to the success of the project based on
their knowledge and previous experience?

The work of innovation teams, however, often differs from other

project teams concerning the way they have to work.
• The team is charged with creating something new, which
deviates from existing standards. Innovation differentiates itself
from how the status quo is managed and uses different
thought and action processes. Innovation stresses thinking in
possibilities.
• Innovation challenges are involve open-ended processes. We
don’t know precisely what is going to come at the other end.
• Innovation processes are characterized by ambiguity,
uncertainty and require many course corrections along the
way.
• Innovation also comes with the possibility of failure.
• Innovation is, per se, a less efficient process, because we
must try out many approaches, consider different directions,
and then possibly reject them again.
The impact of the effort depends on the type of innovation you’re
trying to achieve. For radical innovation, some of the aspects
mentioned above will be more strongly pronounced.
From this, we can derive a few additional requirements for innovation
teams:

• Innovation teams should be mixed crews and not purely made

up of “experts” from the same field. In this sense, “mixed”
relates to several characteristics:
− The team should bring together people from different
professional backgrounds. So far, so good.
− However, team members should also be mixed for their
styles of thinking. Today, individual preferences for the
creative thinking process can be measured rather well
(creaffective uses the Foursight Assessment, which
delivers valid and reliable results). Most people have
particular cognitive preferences that they tend to favor
particularly during the course of an innovation process
(these are: identifying the problem, developing ideas,
developing solutions and implementing plans). All
preferences are used in the innovation process and are
important. It is best when a team’s style of thinking isn’t
one-dimensional. For example, it isn’t to your advantage
when there are only wild, idea developers that have
difficulty being specific or also when the team is composed
of primarily fact-oriented analysts who find it hard to think
in terms of possibilities. The mixture of styles is important.
You can place a lot of value on this when you are putting a
team together.
− A special note when it comes to (semi-)radical innovation.
It is not advisable to compose a team of only “old boys,”
that is, people with long years of experience in the
company. For certain subject fields, it can be
advantageous to integrate or bring outside people on
board who possibly come from other industries, and have a
connection to the subject. People who have worked in the
company for a long time get used to thinking and acting in
 a certain way and often cannot reflect the inner logic of the
firm in proportions necessary for the creation of something
new.

• Innovation teams should have sufficient time resources

available. According to the assignment, not all members of the
team have to always be working full-time on an issue.
However, some probably should. Nevertheless, it is important
the team is allotted enough time to deal with the matter. As
mentioned, innovation has limits to its efficiency per se. People
working on innovation need time to make discoveries and
conduct experiments. You shouldn’t expect the team will only
be able to meet now and again and “on top of” their daily
business. From our experience, the constant pressure of daily
business is the reason the team has to have time allotted for
this purpose.

Sources: Brown; Govindarajan, Trimble

Mixed, interdisciplinary
innovation team
12 Strategic Fields of Action for Innovation in
Companies
In 2014, our American partner, New & Improved, published a white
paper titled “Demystifying Innovation Culture Efforts” with
contributions from us at creaffective.
The white paper presents a summary of findings of over 50 years of
research and decades of practice from New & Improved and
creaffective on the question: What adjustments does a company
need to make to be able to innovate on a continual and regular
basis? Twelve areas are identified that businesses have to consider
simultaneously to create a culture that makes repeated innovations
possible.
I would like to introduce key information from this white paper here
briefly.

The 12 Fields of Action

The fields of action can be prioritized uniquely according to
company’s situation, but they are all still relevant.

Skill Development
Innovation and creativity can be learned. There is a specific
knowledge that can be conveyed and skills taught that people can
acquire. For companies this means there is a need for continuous
creativity and innovation trainings at all levels of the hierarchy aimed
at strengthening the organization’s abilities for creativity, creative
collaboration, and innovation.

Accountability & Recognition

Innovation is a buzzword at every company, but not all companies
put their money where their mouth is. In a living culture of innovation,
all employees and especially all leadership staff and managers are
responsible for acting in ways that benefits innovation. Specifically,
this means recognition is given to people who bring in new ideas or
managers who support a climate of creativity.

Key Measurements
The organization understands that value is created through both
incremental improvement and through radical innovation. Value is
placed on both, and both are measured. For this, there are trackable
criteria.

IT Support for Innovation

In today’s age, the knowledge and idea exchange isn’t just
important, it’s technically possible. Computer-supported collaboration
platforms make it possible for employees (and customers) to
participate in idea development and problem solving processes. A
company should have platforms like this in place to allow employees
to get an overview of existing ideas, to see where innovation is being
sought, and to contribute to this development.

Environment
Every room has an influence on the people who spend time in it.
More and more companies are coming to the realization that you can
consciously create offices and spaces that are specifically for
innovation and conducive to more creativity and better teamwork.

Experimentation
At the crux of innovation is the fact that not all ideas are going to
work. We only realize what works and what doesn’t after the fact.
There needs to be a possibility of appropriating venture capital for
experiments to quickly and easily to minimize risk and find out which
direction is most promising.

Focus
A living culture of innovation isn’t imposed by decree and can’t be
installed with the help of a one-time workshop. Much more, creating
and sustaining a living culture of innovation is a process that needs
continuous, conscious guidance. For it to function, there needs to be
a group within the company, also participating in top-management,
that is responsible for actively supporting and maintaining this culture
of innovation.

Strategy
There are various kinds of innovation, from incremental all the way to
radical. For most companies there needs to be a healthy mixture of
both continuous improvement and entirely new approaches. For this
to occur, it is important there is a clear strategy, such as a
determination of how much revenue is expected to be generated
from existing offers, new offers and continuous improvement.

Innovation Governance
A visible innovation pipeline where all projects are arranged in order
and can be tracked is necessary. In most companies, this pipeline is
found in the form of a Stage-Gate innovation process. What’s
important is that there is this kind of oversight.

Leadership
Leadership staff behavior is the at the locus of all endeavors. To
maintain a living culture of innovation, leadership needs to
demonstrate support for activities beneficial to innovation.

Exploration
Innovation is of limited efficiency and needs time. For many
managers, this is hard to swallow because there are many pressing,
short-term matters to deal with on a daily basis. Thus, it is all the
more important that employees get the time and freedom they need
to pursue creative ideas that aren‘t in the scope of their core duties.

Facilitation
Facilitation can also be called process moderation. Innovation often
hides a complexity that can’t be managed by one person alone. The
knowledge and ideas of different participants are needed. Therefore,
for complex issues, it makes sense to organize and carry out
facilitated workshops. These workshops take place under the
direction of a facilitator (process moderator), who supports a group
methodically to arrive at new solutions. This book describes methods
a facilitator can use during the course of a workshop. Most important
is that a company develops an innovative culture, holds regular
workshops, and there are competent facilitators for steering groups’
actions.

You can find details at the creaffective website under the publications
heading.

Sources: Eckert
 2
PROCESS MODELS OF CREATIVITY

Creativity and innovation are, per se, limited in their efficiency!

Creating something new can be very effective, but only rarely is it
very efficient. Why is this so? Innovation is the introduction of
something new, which brings usefulness into a larger context, such
as a market for example. By definition, this newness is different than
everything we have taken for granted up to this point. We don’t know
in advance how it is going to turn out. The process of creating
something new is open-ended. In retrospect, after we have created
this newness, it appears to most people as “logical” and “obvious.”
Admittedly, this is only in retrospect. Beforehand, it is anything but
clear and obvious. That’s what we call “hindsight bias,” a distorted
perception that many people suffer from when it comes to
innovation. When something new is finally developed, then they say,
“I could have thought of that.” When you hear someone say
something like this, you should ask them, “So why didn’t you?” Seen
over time (see illustration), the creative process is more like the
attempt to untangle a massive hairball. Since we don’t know in
advance what the solution is going to look like exactly, we are going
to make a lot of “inefficient” attempts. This includes thinking of
solutions and rejecting them and spending a lot of time “messing
around” to learn what works and what doesn’t. That is the inefficient
nature of the innovation process, even when this truth shakes the
dogmas of efficiency thinking to their foundations.
Nevertheless, there is something like a process model for creativity
and innovation. With it, we can structure and channel this process
that is intrinsically of limited efficiency. This model gives people a
frame of reference to use for creative problem solving. This is
particularly useful for teams, always giving them an idea of where
they are within a creative process. All models work with various
steps to follow that can be repeated as often as necessary and can
help a group can stay on track. Furthermore, it is central to a creative
process that every step is completed before moving on to the next.
This is fundamentally important because questions left open are
often very vague and confusing.

In our innovation workshops, we regularly experience that people

have a tendency to mix the steps together. For example, a group is
initially working on collecting data, facts, and questions about a topic.
In this step we don’t want to be doing anything else. While we are
discussing the points, many people come up with their first ideas,
almost automatically, based on what was said. Generating ideas is
another step in the process, this is not the time for them. These
ideas that are mentioned here should be noted at this point so
they’re not forgotten, but they shouldn’t be discussed. Otherwise the
group is danger of getting into a detailed discussion about random
ideas, without being sure at all if these ideas will even address the
right problem. To avoid situations like this and to bring a little more
structure and efficiency into a process that is inefficient per se,
process models can be beneficial to use.

All models are wrong, but some are helpful

“Every professor at every college needs her own innovation model,”
was once said by a professor chuckling to himself. In their essential
features, all creative process models are similar, but they are
differentiated by their nuances. They also characterize their
individual elements differently.
The core of all these models can be traced to a simple schema
described in the 1920s by Graham Wallas.

A creative process can be divided into four fundamental aspects:

1. Clarify a situation
2. Develop ideas
3. Develop solutions
4. Implement solutions

In the meantime, creativity research and its practice haven’t stood

still, so more detailed models have been developed.
I would like to introduce two models, well-known in both theory and
practice: the Creative Problem Solving Model developed at the
International Center for Studies in Creativity and the Design Thinking
Model derived by the Company IDEO from its original development
at Stanford’s d.school.

creaffective has been working with both models for over ten years
now. In our practical work, we have realized that both models,
Creative Problem Solving and Design Thinking, are essentially
congruent and differ in only a few aspects. We often mix these
models to achieve the best results for our clients. With this in mind,
we have decided to finally synthesize both models and give this new
process model its own name: The Systematic Creative Thinking
Process. All thinking tools presented in this book can be used with all
processes. The models offer a frame of reference for determining
which of the tools makes the most sense to use at any given time
and situation.

In every thinking tool’s description, we have noted the step in which

it can be used in the process models presented here.
Creative Problem Solving
The Creative Problem Solving Model traces its origins back to the
1950s in Buffalo, New York. Its originator, Alex Osborn, also
developed the now world-famous method of brainstorming at the
same time. He created them to improve upon his experiences in
unproductive meetings at the BBDO advertising agency. After
analyzing several audio recordings of these meetings, Osborn
suggested a method, which he named brainstorming, in which idea
development would be separated from idea evaluation and
suggested people follow certain rules. These led to the use of
divergent and convergent thinking principles and now also represent
the central principles for all process models.

Together with Sidney Parnes, Osborn formulated the first version of

the Creative Problem Solving Model. It was built on the
brainstorming method that dealt only with idea development. Osborn
and Parnes described the whole process of creative problem solving
and, in doing so, outlined steps that take place before and after idea
development.
The illustration represents the current version of the Creative
Problem Solving Model as developed by Puccio, Murdock, and
Mance. It shows a flexible model consisting of various steps that
start with the identification of a goal and leads all the way to specific,
actionable steps for implementing a new, creative solution. All of the
steps portrayed in the Creative Problem Solving Model require
different mental abilities and separate phases for divergent and
convergent thinking.

Thinking tools can be used in each step to help reach the step’s goal
more easily. Themed thinking tools are presented in the main section
of this book.
The process is represented as a circle, which is unusual, without a
recognizable starting and ending point and a clearly defined order.
This takes into account that with creative processes, we are dealing
with flexible practices. Depending on the situation, the process may
begin differently. Aside from that, it is possible some steps will need
to be repeated when that step’s desired results do not occur. It is
also possible that some steps can be left out altogether because the
problem doesn’t require these particular steps at all.

Order of the steps

Despite the flexibility of the models, there is an order that often
occurs naturally if a person or a group goes through the process of
creative problem solving:

1. Exploring the Vision

The purpose of this step is to find a worthwhile goal or to
identify a challenge that can be approached creatively. For
 example: “It would be nice if we could create a robust and
durable product that would also pay off for us as a company.”
This step is often skipped because the goal or the challenge is
already defined or is considered as a given. Sometimes,
however, it can be worthwhile to seek out new goals/challenges
consciously.

2. Assessing the Situation

This step is at the core of visualization. As soon as the goal is
identified, assessment of the situation begins. Here, it’s all
about gathering as much data and facts about the subject as
possible so you can get a better understanding of the situation.
With this information you can determine what the next step in
the creative problem solving process will be.

3. Formulating Challenges
As soon as data related to the situation is known, it’s time to
derive the core questions based on this information. These
answers will bring us closer to our goal. Contrary to popular
opinion, analytical thought is needed here, together with a great
deal of creativity. Creativity is required for formulating the
problem and for understanding that new solutions will even be
possible. These core questions are then drawn up in the form of
open questions. To continue with the example mentioned
above: “How can we invoke a feeling change?”

4. Exploring Ideas
In this step many ideas are developed based on the defined
core questions. Exploring Ideas is what most people associate
with creativity and creative techniques. However, you can see
by now that there are important steps that come before it and
after.
 5. Formulating Solutions
Clearly defined solutions result in this step. They are be derived
from the initial ideas; they are fleshed out and then the fat
trimmed off. It often occurs that the original idea must be
modified somewhat before it can be put into practice.

6. Exploring Acceptance
This step can play an important role, but will often already be
considered during the Formulating Solutions step. After
Formulating a Solution, possible factors that can make
implementation of the solution either more difficult or, better yet,
even easier are identified. These factors usually take the form of
people or groups of people. The goal of this step is to identify
these factors in advance so that the implementation of the
solution can proceed with as little friction as possible.

7. Formulating a Plan
The subsequent stages of what needs to be done are outlined
in detail, so the solution can be realized physically. For this, a
plan of action should be created that includes duties and
deadlines.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Design Thinking
Design Thinking, as the name implies, comes out of the design
industry. Its scientific birthplace is the d.school at Stanford University
in California. The name Design Thinking was coined by the
American design company IDEO, which formalized and popularized
Design Thinking in its present form.

In Design Thinking users and their needs stand in the foreground;

they are the starting point of all considerations. The whole process is
oriented towards creating innovations that reflect user needs.
Technical feasibility and economic viability are central evaluation
criteria, but not the starting point. This is why, when it comes to
Design Thinking, carefully observing the user in the context of using
a product or a service is part of the process. From these qualitative
observations, innovative concepts for users can be derived. The
qualitative approaches toward observations in Design Thinking are
clearly different from quantitative approaches, as we know from
classical market research.

The Design Thinking Model is based on users and their needs and is
not as widely applicable as the Creative Problem Solving Model for
creativity.
Creative Problem Solving can deal with questions of a purely
technical nature that also require a lot of creativity and aren’t (or are
only remotely) relevant for the users and their needs. For example:
“What are all the ways of extinguishing an electric arc?” or, “How can
we increase the tire’s surface contact?”

Similar to the Creative Problem Solving Model, the steps in Design

Thinking are iterative. This means that individual steps are repeated
as often as necessary until a satisfactory answer can be found. Also,
the presentation method of the process is linear, to illustrate the way
the process will usually proceed.

The steps of Design Thinking

1. Understand
This step is similar to Assessing the Situation in the Creative
Problem Solving Model. Its purpose is to find as much data,
facts and questions as possible, so you can understand an
issue and address it. This step also serves as preparation for
observing the “right” users and stakeholders in the next step.

2. Observe
Users need to be observed to be able to figure out their
(unaddressed) needs and motivations. A host of qualitative
methods to understand the users is used. Interviews or semi-
structured discussions are one aspect of this. Design Thinking
assumes that many user needs cannot be explicitly stated.
Therefore, it is important to observe users in the context of
using a product or a service.

3. Point of View
Next, sense must be made out of all the data collected from the
Understand and Observe steps; the central challenges have to
be defined. This is similar to the Formulating Challenges step in
the Creative Problem Solving Model. In Design Thinking, a
visualization, also called a framework, is created. It places the
central questions in a holistic, coherent context.

4. Generate Ideas
This step is identical to the Exploring Ideas step from the
Creative Problem Solving Model. The goal is to develop as
 many ideas as possible for the challenges defined, and then
select the ones with the most potential.

5. Prototype
Similar to the Formulating Solutions step in Creative Problem
Solving, the idea is translated into practical terms. Design
Thinking exploits the possibility of creating many simple
prototypes from ideas, to make them tangible for the user. They
are then further developed, step-by-step, into functional
solutions. An idea should be made visible, tangible or otherwise
able to be experienced in some way with very simple means, for
example, with paper, clay, Legos or simple drawings. In doing
this, you can quickly see which ideas work as they were
envisioned and which need to be modified before they can be
realized.

6. Test
To test if the developed solutions will really be understood by
the user, they are actually tested out by the user. Target users
are shown the prototypes to see how well these function and if
the solution meets with their expectations. User feedback can
be used to further refine a solution.
DESIGN THINKING
Systematic Creative Thinking
creaffective has been working for over 12 years with both processes,
Creative Problem Solving (CPS) and Design Thinking (DT). Creative
Problem Solving process has a longer history, Design Thinking has
achieved significantly more publicity of late. Among other reasons,
this is due in part to the influence of the SAP co-founder, Hasso
Plattner.
Both process models use iterative, creative processes for generating
solutions to open-ended challenges. Both processes are weighted
slightly differently, but they use the same principles and similar
thinking tools. Thus, their differences are outweighed by their
common features and similarities. This is why we are increasingly
using a mixture of both processes, orienting the focus of our
methods to our client’s needs. In recent years, the term “design
thinking” has become important to many companies, and we have
noticed the term is currently “in.”
For these reasons, we decided to create an integrated model that
unifies Creative Problem Solving and Design Thinking in one model
(see illustration). We call it the Systematic Creative Thinking
Process.

In naming the steps, we based our names on the CPS model. In the
visualization of the processes, we based our model on the linear
Design Thinking format. Experience has shown us that a linear
representation with a visible beginning and a visible end is easier to
understand for many people than the circular form of the CPS
processes. At the same time, the Systematic Creative Thinking
Process is naturally also an iterative process, and we have mapped
it accordingly.
The steps of the Systematic Creative Thinking Process:
1. Formulating the Vision
This step corresponds to the Exploring the Vision step of the
CPS model. The target is to find a worthwhile goal or identify a
challenge that can be modified creatively. This step is illustrated
with a dotted line because there is often a goal or a problem
present, so you don’t need to go looking for it. In this case, you
can start directly with the next step and determine the situation.
2. Exploring the Situation
This step also corresponds to the Assessing the Situation step
from the CPS model and overlaps with the Understand step
from Design Thinking. It’s used to gather as much data and
facts about an issue as possible so that you can get a better
understanding of the situation.

3. 2a. Observing Users

The observation step is the intermediary step or sub-aspect of
determining the situation. It is used when dealing with a user-
centered problem. This is identical to the Observe step from
Design Thinking.

4. Formulating Challenges
This step corresponds to the Formulating Challenges step from
the CPS model or the Point of View step from the Design
Thinking process. The goal of this step is to formulate the core
questions for finding ideas and then from that, deriving the
angle of approach for the innovation.

5. Exploring Ideas
This step corresponds exactly to the step of the same name
from both the CPS model and Design Thinking.

6. Formulating Solutions
 Here, there are also no changes to the step of the same name
in the CPS process. This step coincides with the Prototype step
from Design Thinking.

7. Exploring Acceptance (internal and external)

This step is a marriage of Exploring Acceptance from the CPS
model and test from Design Thinking. While CPS has a strong
focus here on internal stakeholders, Design Thinking is oriented
toward the end users, i.e. external stakeholders. However, since
both forms of testing are relevant, both can be used together in
one step. So, the goal here is to verify if a found solution finds
acceptance with stakeholders, users and decision makers.

8. Formulating a Plan
Again, this step is compatible with the step of the same name
from the CPS process. The goal is to equip a plan with the
subsequent steps needed for its implementation. If the process
can’t be completed all in one go but is broken-up into many
small sessions, then, after every session, a plan should be
drawn up for how the next steps are going to be carried out.
SYSTEMATIC CREATIVE
THINKING
 3
THE THINKING TOOLS

The main part of this book contains an easily understandable

collection of thinking tools.
A thinking tool is a structured strategy that consciously focuses,
organizes and guides the thinking of an individual or a group. Known
creativity techniques are a subgroup of thinking tools focused on the
development and tselection of ideas. As we saw in the introduction
of the creativity process models, there are additional, important steps
both that occur both before and after idea development. They are
essential for achieving a creative result from the process. One
problem many people have with techniques or thinking tools is the
question of when it makes the most sense to use each.

For this reason, here is a list of questions and criteria that can help
you categorize the thinking tools:
1. Is the tool is for divergent or convergent thought or for a
combination of divergent and convergent thinking?
2. In which step of a creative process it makes the most sense to
use the thinking tool? Every thinking tool presented in this book
can be allocated to individual steps of all three process models,
Creative Problem Solving, Design Thinking and Systematic
Creative Thinking
3. Which kind of thinking is being used with this thinking tool?
Based on the Creative Problem Solving model, the International
Center for Studies in Creativity has derived a list of thinking
skills that are relevant for a creative problem solving process.
 These thinking skills can be allotted to the individual steps of the
Creative Problem Solving model, but they can also be
considered independently of this model.

For the remainder of this book, these thinking tools are categorized
according to seven thinking skills. In the description of every
technique, I also show where they fit into the process models and
indicate whether it is a divergent or a convergent thinking tool or if
both phases of thought play a role.

The Seven Thinking Skills

Seven thinking skills play a role during the creative problem solving
process and can be used as general categories for allocating the
thinking tools.

Visionary Thinking: A vivid picture, a lively

representation that expresses what you want to create.

Diagnostic Thinking: A precise examination of a

situation, describing the nature of a problem and making
decisions for further action.

Strategic Thinking: Identification of critical challenges

and starting points that must be resolved in order to get
closer to the desired outcome.

Thinking in Ideas: Generating original concepts and

thoughts that point toward the answers to important
challenges.

Evaluative Thinking: Evaluating feasibility and quality of

ideas for creating workable solutions.
 Contextual Thinking: Understanding connections and
conditions that can support or hinder successful
implementation.

Tactical Thinking: Developing a plan with specific and

measurable steps to reach the desired goal and
observing the effectiveness of the implementation.

I will explain the meaning of the individual thinking skills in more

detail as we move along and see them in context.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Visionary Thinking:
Visionary thinking means expressing a vivid picture, a living concept
of what you would like to create.

Particularly at the beginning of a creative process, this kind of

thinking plays a significant role. With visionary thinking, we look into
the future (either short-term or long-term) and try to imagine how the
ideal situation might appear. The more vivid and precise your
concept of this ideal condition is, the more energy will be released to
make reaching this condition possible.

Visionary thinking helps us to give direction to our subsequent

thought and action, because only when we know where we want to
go can we plot the best course to get there.

A part of visionary thinking is dreaming. This means imagining a

positive condition without “being realistic” and not having to put limits
on ourselves. Dreaming expands the horizons of what we typically
allow ourselves to think. In doing so, the vision can easily be a big
one. If a vision is big, then even if there are hurdles along the way, it
will remain visible, regardless of any hurdle’s size.
VISIONARY THINKING
Wishful Thinking
Wishful thinking is a divergent thinking tool and serves the purpose
of helping us contemplate the desires, goals, and challenges that are
relevant now or will be in the future. Both desirable and undesirable
results can be considered.

Use:
The goal is to identify possible problems, challenges, goals, and
wishes that can be solved creatively. This means that wishful
thinking helps us to find possible themes before it’s even possible to
delve into the subject.
For example, this can be relevant for strategic situations in a
company if the organization is considering which new products,
services, and markets could be served in the future. Privately,
wishful thinking can come into play, for example, when I’m thinking
about what I or my family wants to continue or do differently in the
coming year.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring the Vision
Design Thinking: before starting the process
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating the Vision

How it works:
1. Compile an extensive list of wishes, goals, problems, and
challenges and then begin every statement with, “I wish …,” “It
would be great if …” or “Wouldn’t it be nice if …”
2. To get your flow of thoughts in gear and identify further goals,
you can work with the guide questions listed below for the
various subject areas. Once again, what’s important is that
 every answer starts with one of the three sentence starters
suggested above. You are not required to process every single
question suggested below. The questions should only serve to
stimulate your flow of thoughts.

Personal questions:
1. What things have you done recently that you wish would have
worked better?
2. What challenges have you been thinking about lately?
3. What would you like to be able to do/control/achieve better?
4. Which people have you been thinking about a lot recently?
5. Why have these people occupied your thoughts?
6. What are some of the goals that you would like to reach?
7. Review/study your life! Which chances or opportunities do you
see that you could use?
8. Imagine that you had the power to fulfill any wish with respect to
any aspect of your life! What would these hopes and dreams
look like for your life?

Professional: Present
1. What small problems now could become larger problems later?
2. What can still be done to continue to improve quality?
3. Which goals are not reached year after year?
4. With existing customers, which chances exist to develop new
products and services?

Professional: Future
1. Which changes, problems, challenges and chances for
improvement do you see in the next one-to-three years?
2. What would help you to make your job even easier in the
future?
3. What are going to be the greatest challenges for your
customers in the coming years?
 4. What do you have to do to position yourself and/or your
organization as an innovation leader?

Tips:
• Use the OMIPC criteria (page 90) for convergent thinking
afterward.
• Use a convergent thinking tool like Success Zones to help you
with the further selection of the most promising challenges.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Example:
The following examples provide a glimpse into the way topics can be
formulated (some of these were real topics in our workshops and
trainings).

• It would be nice if we could shorten the delivery time for our

replacement parts to the authorized workshops.
• It would be nice if we could keep within the stated operational
costs.
• It would be nice to have a noiseless roof system.
• It would be nice if all departments working on our XY project
could all work in harmony.
• It would be great if we could explain our complex system in a
straightforward way to all participants involved.
• It would be nice if we could get more people to take notice of
our issue.
• It would be nice if we had a new principle for guaranteeing the
functional capacity of our system.
• It would be nice to have a functioning system of knowledge
management in our organization.
WISHFUL THINKING
OMIPC Selection Criteria
The OMIPC selection criteria help with the selection of a list of the
most promising issues possible (problems, goals, and challenges)
and thus ensure that we work on issues that have a realistic chance
being implemented.

Use:
The criteria are written down as lists with possible issues, which can
be created with the help of Wishful Thinking, for example.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring the Vision
Design thinking: before starting the process
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating the Vision

How it works:
First, delineate the issues that you would like to consider for further
deliberation. This happens using criteria. In the process, you go
through all the points on your list of issues for every criterion, one
after another, and note which of your points fulfill the respective
criterion.

The criteria:

Ownership:
Do you or you and your team have at least partial influence on
the issue? This means: Can you make decisions? Could you, if
you had the solution, do/initiate something with this solution or
could you merely request that someone at the next level up
takes over the issue?

Motivation:
Can you sense passion and motivation coming from the issue
that helps you really do something to make progress?
Motivation is a central driving force for creativity. If an issue isn’t
interesting, then it will be very hard to be creative. When the
motivation is lacking, it is very likely that even if you come up
with solutions, you won’t wind up implementing them.

Imagination:
Does the issue need imagination and thus creativity and new
ideas to proceed? This is at least important for generating the
questions you would like to work on using the creative methods
at your disposal. This doesn’t mean that issues that don’t
require any imagination aren’t important. For these issues,
however, you don’t have to “waste” any time on creativity; just
implement them.

Alongside these three main criteria, two more criteria have

shown to be useful. They can help you get a better feeling of
whether there is a realistic chance for implementation within an
organization.

Passion:
Passion is the superlative of motivation. On your list, there will
possibly be some issues that motivate you. There will probably
only be a few issues that really excite you. Passion can be a
good indicator for the choice of issues, because during an
 innovative process, a lot of courage, endurance and tenacity
are required not only to develop ideas but also to bring these
ideas to fruition. When you are really passionate about
something, there is a higher probability of bringing it into being,
because you don’t run out of energy along the way.

Champion:
The question, “Is a driving force behind the issue?” is especially
relevant for companies that have a keen interest in finding
solutions for an issue. This already makes it clear, before even
beginning the work, that implementation will be initiated as soon
as solutions are found.

For an issue to come into question for a creative process, at the very
least, the OMI (ownership, motivation, imagination) criteria must be
fulfilled. The PC (passion, champion) criteria represent
reinforcements you can use to prioritize a list of topics further.

Tips:
• Along with these criteria, there can also be another list of
additional criteria that you might like to call upon for logical
reasons. The Success Zones thinking tool provides further
examples.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance; creaffective

SELECTION CRITERIA OMIPC EXAMPLE
It would be nice if we could increase the recognition of our
offers.
This issue always lends
itself to being worked on
creatively.

It would be nice if we could accelerate the production

process.

This issue can also be taken

into consideration. Since no
champion has already
indicated they would like to
get behind this issue, in the
end, it could get buried
again under the pressure of
the daily business routine.
Therefore, it would be
important to clarify once
again in advance, who is
going to be the driving force
behind this issue.
It would be nice if we could go on a tropical vacation for a
week this year.
This issue doesn’t need any
creative process. It is surely
very important. It is enough
to simply do it.
It would be nice if I could change the tax system.
This issue certainly needs
creativity. However, it is a
huge issue, and most of us
would have limited potential
to influence it
Newspaper Article from the Future
The newspaper article from the future exercise describes an
imaginary article from a popular newspaper at a time in the future,
when the goal has already been achieved, or the problem has
already been solved.

Use:
The goal of this exercise is to generate concrete thoughts about an
ideal condition in the future and to make these as vivid and detailed
as possible. This thinking tool helps individuals and groups develop
a common vision and generate a clear idea of their goal. The
exercise is especially suited for the beginning of larger projects or
when the process of founding a company is getting started.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring the Vision
Design thinking: before starting the process
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating the Vision

How it works:
1. From today’s perspective, imagine jumping five years into the
future. You are a journalist at a well-respected magazine.
2. Write a magazine article, maximum one page, that describes
how your problem was solved or your goal was reached. In
doing so, consider both the starting situation at the beginning as
well as the result after a few years.
3. While writing, you continue to add detail and explain what
exactly happened and how the problem was solved. You can
also write about how the goal was reached and what the
 individual people did to contribute to it. There are no limits to
your imagination here.
4. Use quotes and testimonials that you think up from the
perspective of customers or other people who have an external
view of the result.
5. Use pictures to create a real magazine article.
6. When you are finished, read through the article and try to sense
if it gives you the energy and passion you need to get started on
the work. It should.

Tips:
You can rewrite the article as often as you like.
In groups (for example, in a project team or a founders’ team), it is
worth having everyone write an article individually and then compare
the solutions. Everyone can work together to compose a common
text as a next step.

Source: creaffective

Example:
The following example represents an article that was written in the
context of a project idea with an American partner in 2009.

In the last two years, over 10,000 people started their own
businesses and started implementing previously vague business
ideas with a concrete and specific plan. Over 80% of the newly
created ventures have been successful and earn good money today.
All of the founders used the Business Idea Catalyst which they got to
know through a Facebook community with the same name. The
community, as well as the Business Idea Catalyst, were created by
two entrepreneurs and graduates of the International Center of
Studies in Creativity, Stavros and Florian.
Both of them founded companies before and both of them work as
facilitators, helping others to solve problems creatively using a
systematic creativity process. This process can be used whenever
the solution to a problem is unknown and new ideas are required.
Developing feasible and innovative business ideas is one of those
problems.

“When thinking about creating a new business, many people take

the business idea itself for granted and as a given, and just bother
with the technical and financial implementation of that idea. We
believe that spending more time on developing a sound and
innovative business idea is more important than its technical
implementation,” explained Florian. “Even a standard and well-
known product can be sold in a way that creates new value for its
customers.”
Isn’t each case different? How can an automatic process help people
to create an innovative business? “Of course, each case is unique,
however, the thinking process behind finding business ideas and
developing them into feasible concepts is always similar and is
always a creative one. Therefore, our process is helpful for many
entrepreneurs, regardless if they just have a vague vision of what
they want to do or already have a specific idea in mind,” Stavros
continued. “It is then a matter of where people enter the process.”

Answering questions and following specific steps

So how does this miraculous web application work? Florian and
Stavros collected questions and tips from various experts on how to
develop business ideas. They organized this information along a 7-
step process that the users of the Business Idea Catalyst should
follow. Each process step has a certain goal and a defined outcome.
When the outcome is reached, the user can go into the next step of
the process. For example, a person who just wants to create a
business, but is not yet sure what to do, may enter the Formulating a
Vision step of the Business Idea Catalyst. The outcome of this step
is a clear picture of what one is trying to create. So, a potential
entrepreneur would have a general idea in which area in which to
create his business and now he could go into the next step. In each
step, there is a selection of small tools and question banks that help
the user to come up with answers for his specific case. All the work
and the thinking has to be done by the user himself since there are
no ready-made solutions. However, the way the Business Idea
Catalyst is structured guides the thinking of the user, gives him a
sense of direction and asks helpful and important questions.

Using the power of many – group collaboration functions

Doesn’t an entrepreneur need other people to share his thoughts
and get ideas? Also, this aspect is addressed by the Idea Catalyst
and that is one reason a Facebook community was created. Each
project owner (or owner group) can invite other people to join their
project inside Business Idea Catalyst. So, if a person is developing
ideas and needs help, he can recruit interested people to help him
for a few hours. The project owner is in complete control of who sees
what and for how long.
For each registered user of the Idea Catalyst, the account tracks
how many hours he spent on helping other project owners. He can
trade his time with others to help him on the next occasion. Creating
a community of like-minded people from different backgrounds has
been a very powerful catalyst for the Business Ideas Catalyst itself.
What’s next? Already available in English and German, a Chinese
version is now being translated and developed.
NEWSPAPER ARTICLE FROM
THE FUTURE
Storyboarding
Storyboarding is a visual thinking tool that helps create a vivid
picture of a goal. It also takes into consideration the path toward the
goal and possible stumbling blocks along the way. It has been in use
in other fields for a long time, used to communicate a story and to
flesh out a vision.

Use:
Storyboarding is the visual counterpart to the Newspaper Article from
the future thinking tool (page 94). It comes into use when there is
already a chosen goal/challenge/problem and the task is now to get
a more solid idea. It also a good tool to use when one is already
considering first steps for further action.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring the Vision
Design thinking: before starting the process
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating the Vision

How it works:
1. Draw 6-8 boxes about the size of a business card on a piece of
paper or take just as many blank pages.
2. It shouldn’t be less than six elements. This way you can
generate something along the lines of a story. It should also not
be any more than eight boxes, because we’re not going to work
out all the details to the solution for the challenge.
3. In the first box, draw the status quo, the starting situation, just
like it is now.
4. In the last box, draw a future point in time at which you have
reached your ideal solution.
 5. Now complete the story by filling in the central steps in the
remaining boxes on the way from your starting position to the
desired result.
6. Have fun expanding the individual drawings; make these even
more life-like.

Tips:
• Storyboarding can also be combined with the newspaper
article from the future.
• You don’t need an art school degree to be able to work with
this thinking tool. This tool can be especially exciting for
logical-analytical and cerebral people to get into the visionary
thinking mode.
• Capture the essence in every picture. The drawings don’t have
to be very sophisticated.
• If you don’t care to draw, use something else (Legos, clay,
etc.) to visualize your vision and the steps along the way.
• In the course of the creative process, you can use some of the
pictures from between the starting point and your goal over
again. At this point, you will start delving deeper into the
respective issues.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance; creaffective

Example question:
How can I maintain my current standard of living with less money so
that I can save more money?
STORYBOARDING

Starting situation:
The amount of money I have is just enough to be able maintain the standard of living I
desire. However, it’s not enough to save anything for the future.
Step 1:
List expenses and calculate how much money goes where.
Step 2:
Evaluate expenses. Why do I do these things and what’s important to me about
them?

Step 3:
Find alternatives. How do I still fulfill the needs, which actually make up the expenses,
while spending less money?
Where are there possible alternatives for fulfilling the needs that are really important
to me?
Step 4:
If you are having difficulties finding alternatives for the more difficult points, you can
search the internet. Possibly use online offers like coupons or group offers.
Target situation:
I can save money without limiting my lifestyle.
Success Zones
Success Zones also helps with the prioritization of wishes, goals and
challenges, which then can be tackled with a creative process. It is
based on the approaches like the OMIPC selection criteria.

Use:
Success zones are useful when you have to make a choice between
many possible challenges and you have to make a well-founded
decision for where you want to invest your resources.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring the Vision
Design thinking: before starting the process
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating the Vision

How it works:
1. Create a 3x3 table of nine fields and label the two axes
“importance” and “chance of success.” The information
contained in the example illustration is only for orientation
purposes, you don’t need to copy it when you do this for
yourself.
2. Now take your list of topics and beginning with your first option,
make an estimate for it according to its importance. For this, you
can use a 3-point scale (unimportant – neutral – important). If
you are using success zones in a group, the group will have to
come to an agreement.
3. Then you evaluate the options regarding their chance of
success, also on the 3-point scale.
4. Now copy the options into the corresponding fields in the table.
5. Repeat this exercise until all options have been evaluated.
Tips:
• All options that land in the first row should have priority.
You can also think up other evaluation criteria, like e.g., impact
and feasibility.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Example:
At creaffective, we have the following topics to choose from in the
near future:

1. It would be nice if we could publish a book with our methods.

1. It would be great if we could update our website.
1. It would be nice if we could open a branch office in India.
1. It would be nice if we could develop a software product to help
companies to increase their ability to innovate.
DRIVE
DRIVE is an acronym that stands for Do, Restrictions, Investment,
Values and Essential Outcomes. This thinking tool helps with
identifying and defining criteria based on what would be recognized
as a success.

Use:
DRIVE comes into use before finding a creative solution begins, to
define in advance what can be labeled a success at the end. The
points set here serve as an important guidepost so we can always
check if we’re heading in the right direction. Often, we have to know
what success looks like before we can be sure that we’ve been
successful.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring the Vision
Design thinking: before starting the process
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating the Vision

The meaning of the criteria:

Do: What should your final solution do or achieve?

Restrictions: Which changes or results should be avoided?

Investment: What are you willing to invest (in time, money and other
resources)? Where are your limits? Is there, for example, a cap on
the budget?
Values: Which values must be considered in finding the solution,
may not be infringed upon or must be practiced along with the
solution?

Essential Outcomes: Which measurable numbers, data, facts, etc.

have to be achieved? What are the absolute must criteria for
success?

How it works:
1. Make a table listing the five DRIVE criteria.
2. For every column, first, diverge and make as long a list as you
possibly can of possible evaluation criteria for every category. In
doing so, don’t worry about any possible repetitions and similar
names in the various columns.
3. Now use convergent thinking and reduce each list down to
some straightforward key criteria (2-3 per column). It is possible
that you may now realize that some of the points chosen in the
Essential Outcomes column should be shifted, because these
now represent the basis for you.
4. You can now use the completed table as a guideline for
evaluating the results and for judging the direction of the partial
results from your creative processes.

Tips:
• The criteria can represent a mixture of quantitatively and
qualitatively measurable criteria.
• There is no patented recipe for finding the perfect criteria; this
depends on the issue and the group.
• If you use DRIVE in a group, at the beginning of the
convergent phase (step 3), everyone should have a chance to
select the criteria that are important to them.
• The total number of criteria should be limited to 10, because
you don’t want to make the process of evaluation too complex.
Sources: Hurson

Example:
The following example shows the end criteria from a customer’s
project with creaffective. They were working on the development of a
special impact drill for the Chinese market.
DRIVE
Diagnostic Thinking
Diagnostic thinking means examining a situation in detail, describing
the nature of a problem and making decisions about how to proceed.

Diagnostic thinking includes two aspects:

1. A precise examination and description of the current topic and
the data present.
2. Thinking about the thought process itself. This means analyzing
where we find ourselves within the creative problem solving
process, which step lies before us and if a creative problem
solving process is even appropriate to use.

Just like with a good doctor, when we use diagnostic thinking we

make a detailed collection of all the data, facts and open questions
that describe a situation at the beginning.

After all the data has been recorded, an analysis takes place of what
to do next. This can mean, for example, that more data needs to be
collected or it’s time to move on to another step in the creative
process. It’s important to remember the creative processes
presented here don’t always have to be carried out in a pre-defined
order like they’re written in stone. Sometimes we are confronted with
a choice of possible solutions, and processing them is all that’s
needed. In such cases, there’s no demand for developing ideas.
Sometimes an idea is already so obvious or so simple that it can be
implemented easily. If this is the case, you can save the time by not
going into the idea in detail. Diagnostic thinking takes all of these
situations into consideration.
DIAGNOSTIC THINKING
5 W’s and an H
This divergent thinking tool helps you get a fundamental overview of
the data found in connection with a challenge. The information
generated in this way serves as a background so you can put clear
limitations on the problem and derive important key questions.

Use:
The 5 W’s and an H are used at the very beginning, as soon as you
identify a goal or a challenge that needs to be tackled.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Understand
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

How it works:
Use the six questions on your problem. Write down all the answers
to each question and their corresponding sub-categories. If a
subcategory doesn’t apply or make any sense, you can skip it. Try to
record as much information as possible. Diverge and create as
extensive a list of data and facts as possible. Use the questions
below for each of the categories to stimulate your thinking and come
up with further answers.

Who:
• Who are the people involved? How are they involved?
• Who is the decision maker?
• Who is impacted by the situation and how?
What:
• What do you know about the problem?
 • What don’t you know, but would like to know?
• What’s the short history of the situation?
• What has already been tried to solve the problem?
• If the problem was solved, what would the ideal outcome look
like?
• What assumptions are you making that you could question?
When:
• When did the problem begin?
• When do you want to start dealing with it?
• When do you want to see results?
Where?
• Where is the problem to be found?
• Describe the mental and physical factors that surround the
problem!
• Where has this problem already been solved successfully
before? How was it solved?
• Where has there already been similar situations? In what
respects were they similar?
Why:
• Why is the problem important?
• Why has it appeared? Why is the situation a problem?
• Why can’t you solve the problem easily?
How:
• How can this problem present an opportunity?
• How do you feel when you think about the problem?

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Tips:
• You don’t have to work through all the questions. These serve
as examples to get you started. The following list of questions
have shown to be helpful in creaffective projects and we
always ask them:
• What do you know about the problem?
• What don’t you know, but would like to know?
• Why can’t you solve the problem easily?
• What assumptions are you making that you could question?
• For each question you use, try to write down more than one
answer.
• Keep a written record of everything.
• When you are answering a question, don’t worry about if all of
the present information is essential and important. At first, try
to write down as much as you can.
• After you have finished gathering information, use a tool like
the telescope method (page 288), to select the relevant and
valuable information.
Status Quo Diagram
The status quo diagram is a diagnostic tool based on a few key
criteria that helps illustrate the quality of the present situation in
comparison with an ideal situation.

Use:
This thinking tool is used when there is a solution that should be
developed further in the future. Based on a few central evaluation
criteria, you can think about how the solution is structured and where
even more room for improvement can be found. This can be done
individually or in groups. The status quo diagram can also be used
for a competitive comparison.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Understand
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

How it works:
1. Think about a few dimensions you would like to include in your
diagram which would be helpful for evaluating the quality of a
solution.
2. For every dimension, think about a value scale that you would
like to use for the evaluation. These can cover a spectrum from
not developed to fully developed (without connoting a positive or
negative evaluation). You can also have a value scale that goes
from an unsatisfactory solution all the way to the ideal situation,
i.e. you create the values. Choose these values so the status
quo isn’t always placed automatically at the top or the bottom of
the scale.
 3. Choose expressive descriptions for the values on the scale.
4. Make a line away from the status quo for every dimension.
5. Connect the individual ratings as you would in a spider diagram.

Tips:
• For the interpretation: It isn’t necessary to strive for the best
result in every dimension. Solutions can also differentiate
themselves from others by intentionally being
underrepresented in a dimension.
• You can pick the one you would like to get started on from the
dimensions depicted as a next step.

Sources: Kluck, Crea Conference 2009

STATUS QUO DIAGRAM
Resource Analysis
This divergent thinking tool helps to get an overview of available
resources that can be used (as opposed to available resources
which can’t be used) as problem solving input for idea development.
The resource analysis originally comes from TRIZ (Theory of
Inventive Problem Solving) and was developed for technical issues.
However, the process can be expanded and understood in more
general terms.

Use:
The resource analysis can be helpful as an intermediary diagnostic
step for idea development, after the question you are working on has
already been clearly defined. Often you will find “hidden” resources
you don’t realize are available to you. These can sometimes be
derived from a by-product of something that already exists and can
be used creatively.
Especially since the advent of “big data” and the possibility of
virtually unlimited data collection, there is a multitude of
considerations for how you can use the data that has already been
collected.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Understand
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

The resource types:

Use the resource categories below as guiding questions to gather
possible resources for idea development.
Time resources:
• What time resources do you have before you begin
implementing the actual operation?
• What will you have afterward?
• What time resources are possibly still available during the
operation? Are there stoppages? Are there idle times?
• Are there any points in time that are especially suited for
carrying out an operation?

Informational resources:
• What information is available about the properties of the
materials and fields?
• What data would be collected or generated anyway?

Functional resources:
• What main functions does our system have? What does it do?
(For example: It stores water).
• What functions do the subsystems have? (For example:
Pumping water onward).
• What undesirable effects or side-effects does our system
generate or are there any subsystems that we could possibly
use? (For example: Generating heat).

Space resources:
• What space resources are available to us in our system or a
subsystem?
• What space resources are unused?
• Which spaces are only partially used? (For example: Merely
horizontal, not vertical).
• Where are there empty spaces or gaps?
• Are elements nested or is there an opportunity for nesting
elements?
• Where would moving objects give us more space resources?
Material resources:
• What objects, components, or materials found in the vicinity
could we use?
• What material properties do our system’s elements have?
• What waste products, exhaust or emissions arise from our
systems, its elements or the surrounding elements?

Field (energy) resources:

• What energy or power are contained in our system that we
could use?
• What energy and power are there in our system’s
environment?

Human resources:
• What people are there, as a part of our system, who could
help us?
• Who are the stakeholders surrounding the system?
• Are there any other human resources inside or outside of our
system?

How it works:
1. Generate a divergent list of resources using the pattern above.
2. Draw on the list of resources you generate as input for
developing problem solving ideas.

Tips:
• You don‘t have to work through all of the questions. These
only serve as examples to get you started.
• The list doesn’t have to be complete; it should be a source of
suggestions to help find possible solutions.
• Try to think outside of the literal meaning of the questions and
thereby discover additional resources.
Sources: Gundlach, Nähler
RESSOURCE ANALYSIS
Observation Guidelines
These guidelines serve as the foundation and framework for making
user observations. User “observations” can take place as simple
observations, as interviews, and as other types of user interactions.

Use:
An observational guideline is useful when interesting user/customer
groups have already been identified and should be observed in the
context of using a product or a service.
The guidelines can serve as a foundation for various methods of
observation, depending on the situation.
You shouldn’t share your questions with the subjects of your
observations, since some methods of observation take place without
any direct contact.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Observe
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

Possible observation techniques

• Pure observations: Here, there is no interaction with the
user. You only try to observe what happens. (Example: How
people orient themselves in train stations.)
• Interviews with observations: Here, questions about the
observations are also asked. (Example: How laundry is sorted
in a private household.)
• Pure interview: It is also possible to conduct a real interview,
without observing anything so that you can learn more about
user motivations and reasons for action.
 • Why? Questions: Learn more about deep-seated motivations
and reasons for action by asking very specific why? questions
within an interview.
• “Fly on the wall”: In using this technique, you try to observe
without the user realizing they are being watched, so your
presence does not influence their behavior whatsoever.
• Self-immersion: Here, you try to operate or use a product or
a service yourself and experience the impressions and insights
from the users’ perspective.
• Expert interviews: Even though experts are usually not
users, they can deliver background information valuable for
your understanding. Experts can also recommend user
interview questions for you to ask.
• Photo diary: In this technique, you ask the user to take
photos in certain situations and to write a few lines of
commentary to go along with it. This can be interesting and
useful for getting more input over a longer time frame (e.g.
several weeks). (For example, you could ask participants to
take screenshots of their smartphones at the times when their
smartphones frustrate them the most.)

How it works:
1. Always create your observational guidelines with a specific
group of users in mind. If you want to observe multiple, varied
groups, then you should create a corresponding number of
guidelines.
2. First, list your observational goals, independent of which
observational technique you will be using. (Example: Goal:
Understand the process of sorting the laundry and making
decisions.)
3. Then think about which observational and questioning methods
are best suited to achieve your goals.
4. For the methods that are based on questions:
 a. Brainstorm for possible questions. Ideally, these questions
should be formulated so they excite discussion, so avoid
using questions that yield yes or no answers.
b. Select the most important questions.
c. Put them into a logical order for your purposes.

Tips
• Consider the potential questions as a basic framework that
gives you a broad outline. At the same time you should remain
flexible about changing the order of the questions, in case this
is necessary based on the course of the discussion.
• If you don‘t have much experience with user surveys, it can be
helpful to formulate a kind of introduction. This could consist of
background information like names and what the interviewer is
going to do as well as a brief description of the project. In
doing this, the interviewer will feel more comfortable, and
they’ll be able to break the ice easier.

Source: creaffective
Semantic Analysis
Semantic analysis is a simple means to quickly develop a common
understanding of a task within a team or a workshop group and to
discover any gaps in your knowledge.

Use:
The method is used at the beginning of innovation processes for
clarifying the assignment’s tasks. When a team is established at the
beginning of a new project and doesn’t yet have a common
understanding of the subject matter, the semantic analysis can be
constructive for avoiding any future confusion. A prerequisite for
using this tool is a written definition of the tasks or a description of
the project goals. The analysis can be used as the foundation for a
later interview with the client and/or with other stakeholders.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Understand
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

How it works:
1. Take the description of all the tasks and break it up into
individual tasks. Underline all of the parts and terms that have
an important role in the description.
2. Go through the individual parts and terms and try to answer the
following questions as a team:
3. What do we understand this term to be?
4. What expectation(s) could lie behind the way it is formulated?
5. What would we really like to know regarding the individual parts
of the assignment?
 6. Write down the answers to all the questions. If a disagreement
arises within the team concerning any of the specific aspects,
you can allow a brief discussion to clarify the matter. If the
disagreement cannot be resolved, you should also note this in
writing.

Tips:
• It doesn’t usually make sense to carry out a semantic analysis
if an interview with the client has already taken place.
• The main purpose of the semantic analysis is to solidify
common understanding within the team and fill any gaps in
team members’ knowledge. So, no new knowledge is created
in this sense. Depending on the project, the views of the
client/stakeholder and/or the customer/user is what matters,
not the opinions of the team! Nevertheless the team may make
assumptions, but these should be written down and noted as
such.
• A possible follow-up is the 5 W’s and an H as a basis for
interviews with the client and other stakeholders. It may also
make sense to create a Customer-User-Stakeholder Map, to
get an overview of all possible stakeholders and users.

Source: creaffective

EXAMPLE:

„It would be nice to create a

PRODUCT that would be USED
DAILY

by URBAN COMMUTERS.“
Customer-User-Stakeholder Map
A customer-user-stakeholder map (CUS map) is a divergent tool for
getting an overview of all participants in a particular subject area.
When we say subject area, we can be dealing with products and
services, process and delivery chains, business models or even
whole corporations. By using a map-like representation, the behavior
of the various stakeholders and their mutual relationships toward the
subject in question can be visualized.

Use:
This method is primarily used in the clarification phase of innovation
processes. It can be advantageous to get an overview of all possible
circles/groups of people before you get to the point in a project
where you would like to speak with or observe the different
knowledge carriers.
The size and complexity of a CUS map can vary greatly. You can
quickly draw up a map on a standard sheet of paper, design one on
brown paper in a workshop and add details to it or you can work out
a digital variation.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Understand
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

How it works:
1. List all of the possible people or groups of people involved with
the project or topic. These might include: internal and external
stakeholders, customers, suppliers and partners, end users or
consumers.
 2. Identify the ways in which these people/groups are linked to the
topic and to one another. Guiding questions could include: What
interest does this group of people have in the subject? What
use does this group of people derive from the subject? What
does this group of people expect/hope to get from another
group?
3. Visualize all the connections and linkages by arranging the
various groups of people into logical relationships. You can
make the different interests, needs, promised benefits and other
relations clearly visible by drawing arrows and by using other
similar type of connections.

Tips:
• When you are listing all the possible groups of people, you can
use Post-it notes to make the visualization in step 3 easier.
You can easily rearrange the sticky notes until your visual
representation is finished.
• Although arrangement of the groups has convergent elements,
this tool is a divergent one. The map should serve as a basis
for identifying where you can or should start gathering relevant
information in the next step, which in turn, will help with the
subsequent search for solutions.
• In a later step (exploring acceptance), you can build on results
from this thinking tool and apply the Stakeholder Analysis
thinking tool (page 268) to understand and improve the
stakeholders’ position on a found solution.

Source: creaffective
Storytelling
Storytelling is used after you have carried out observations. This tool
helps a group come to a common understanding of the individual
observations for themselves.

Use:
Storytelling comes into play after a series of user observations have
been made, possibly by different people within one working group.
After all of the observations and interviews are finished, members of
the group share their unfiltered transcripts and the results of their
observations.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation
Design Thinking: Observe
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation

How it works:
1. Prepare all of the transcripts and photos from your
observations.
2. Next, individual observers report their observation scenarios,
one after another. All unfiltered transcripts and photos are
presented. A member of the group can take minutes and
transfer the individual points to Post-its and categorize them
according to each observation scenario.
3. Along with explaining the observation scenarios, the following
key questions can be used to steer the storytelling process:
a. What have I discovered?
b. What was especially surprising?
c. Which information was contradictory?
Tips:
• During the storytelling, try not to filter anything out at first and
only present the “important” information. Instead, try to explain
everything as unfiltered as possible. The joint process of
selecting and presenting the details of the core insights then
take place within the group at the end.

Source: creaffective
Observation phase
Strategic Thinking
Strategic thinking means identifying the central themes and
directions for solutions that need to be addressed to approach a
desired outcome or vision.

Like visionary thinking, strategic thinking is aimed toward the future.

However, it is much more specific. While you have the luxury of
dreaming up an attractive goal during visionary thinking, in strategic
thinking you identify a clear path from the present all the way to this
future goal.

Often, many obvious paths could take you to your goal. What
strategic thinking does is help you think up even more alternative
possibilities (to diverge) and then to identify the most promising
direction (to converge).
Thus strategic thinking is concerned with the identification and
definition of problems and opportunities that can close the gap
between the present situation and what you would like to have in the
future.
STRATEGIC THINKING
Framework Visualization
A framework is a graphic representation of the core problems and
the larger, interrelated context in which these core problems are
embedded. Framework visualization is used to represent a situation
in a way that makes these interrelationships understandable.
The result provides a foundation from which you can base the
problem solving steps which follow and make them understandable.

Use:
Framework visualization is generally used before a technique like
Question Starters or Web of Abstraction. It allows you to represent
and describe a situation in a coherent, visual way so that you can
derive core questions from it. In the process, the visualization builds
on the central results of your diagnostic thinking.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Challenges

How it works:
Ideally, this process is carried out in a small group of 3–4 people.
1. Based on the core data that describes a situation, everyone in
the group tries to create a visual representation of the situation
(in the form of diagrams or other types of visualizations). These
representations are considered as first drafts.
2. Then, each participant presents their version and explains it.
3. After everyone is finished presenting, you extract the most
interesting elements of each visualization and put them together
into a combined display. In doing so, you can easily create as
 many versions as you need to until all group members are
satisfied.

Tips:
• The Status Quo Diagram thinking tool introduced in this book
is an example of a framework visualization.
• Situations in which a chronological sequence plays a role can
often be represented with a timeline or a travel metaphor.
• After the visualization, you can formulate the problem as an
open question using techniques like the Question Starters or
Web of Abstraction so you can generate solutions during the
next stage.

Source: creaffective

Example:
The following framework represents the flirting process between two
people from their first meeting to their first date. It compares the
online dating process via dating websites with the “offline process.”
In the example, non-verbal communication is identified as the central
theme that cannot sufficiently take place during the online process.
FRAMEWORK
VISUALIZATION
Personas
A persona is a fictional portrayal of a group of people who possess
similar characteristics or find themselves in a similar situation.
Personas can help to identify main directions for focusing your
innovation when you engage in user-centered innovation processes.

Use:
Personas are used in the same way as methods like Storytelling are
used, to structure and process the information that was gathered
during user observations.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking Process: Formulating Challenges

The general structure of personas:

With personas, there is no one “correct” structure. You can
experiment and find what works best for you. At creaffective, we like
to work with the following approach:

Name: You can create a fictional name that suits the persona.
Short description: Describe the key differentiators about this
persona in one or two sentences.
Quotes: These can be based on actual observations, or they can be
made up, but they have to be realistic for the persona.
General information: List aspects like age, sex, marital status,
place of residence, profession, etc.
Goals and needs: What goals is the persona pursuing - in general
and/or with the use of a product or a service? What needs are
important? These can be emotional, functional or social.
Behavior patterns: What are the persona’s observable behavior
patterns, especially with regard to the use of a certain
product/service?

How it works:
Fill out the persona poster using information based on observations
that were selected, clustered and listed in a process like Storytelling.
1. At first, try to find broad catchwords for all categories.
2. Then go into detail with the contents of the individual categories
until the result is a sufficiently descriptive and realistic persona
picture.

Example:
Persona of a reader of this book: Innovation Manager
Name: Michael
Short description: Michael is working as one of two innovation
managers in a medium-sized company.
Quotes: “Strengthening our culture of innovation is an important
concern of our company.”
General information: Late 30s; entered innovation management
two years ago. Before this, he was involved in product development
for many years at this same organization and knows the company
well.
Goals and needs:
• Michael would like to persuade others to use innovation’s
structured process and to support them in their involvement in
this process.
• Michael would like to be able to show solid, measurable
results from his work to justify the importance of innovation
management.
Behavior patterns: Michael will study this book thoroughly to
discover what he can apply to his work and how these stack up to
the processes he used in the past.
Sources: creaffective, www.creative-companion.com
Point of View Statement
A point of view statement summarizes the core needs and insights
about a persona in one sentence.
The point of view statement can serve as a basis for formulating a
question for brainstorming (with a thinking tool like Question Starters
(page 144).

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Challenges

The general structure:

A point of view statement follows a simple structure that summarizes
all points into one sentence.

<Name of the person or persona> is looking for an opportunity to

<user need> because (or: but, or: surprisingly) <core insight>.

How it works:
Based on the observations selected and clustered and the insight
gained from the Persona poster, you formulate a sentence based on
the above structure.

Example:
Point of view statement for persona: Michael, innovation manager
(see Persona, page 140).
Innovation manager Michael is looking for an opportunity to
introduce the employees of his company to a structured approach for
innovation and, at the same time, he would like to produce
measurable results for this.

Sources: creaffective, https://dschool.stanford.edu

Question Starters
The question starters divergent thinking tool provides you with a
positive, solution-oriented view of challenges by formulating
challenge statements as open questions. This tool turns statements
like, “The process is too complicated,” into ones like, “How might we
simplify the process?” By doing this, the brain switches into solution
mode and the chances of actually achieving solutions increase.

Use:
After we have worked out an overview of the topic and we
understand the relationships, we usually also have an initial
understanding of where the problems lie and what adjustments we
will have to make to arrive at our goal. The question starter tool
helps to formulate the problems in such a way that we can develop
solutions for them. A lot of creativity is required for formulating the
questions, because the way the problem is formulated has an
influence on its solution.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulate Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulate Challenges

The Question Starters:

There are four question starters that all allow a problem to be
formulated as an open question, which then makes a multitude of
answers possible:
• In what ways might I (IWWMI)…?
• How to (H2)…?
• How might (HM)… ?
 • What might be all the (WMBAT)…?

How it works:
1. Gather background information on the challenge by using a
thinking tool like the 5 W’s and an H, for example.
2. Then, based on the most important background information,
develop ways to formulate the challenge as an open question in
as many ways as you can.
In doing so, use the following structure:
Question starter + actor + action + goal?
3. Use the Telescoping technique to select the best of the
questions formulated.

Tips:
• Always try to find more than one way to formulate the
question. You can derive multiple questions from a statement
like, “The process is too complicated.”
• Consciously try to formulate questions that are unusual or
even silly.
• Make sure that you formulate questions based on the question
starters listed above. In this way you will end up with open
questions.
• Open questions are different than research questions, which
usually provide only one answer. E.g. How long does it take?
What does it cost? Who is responsible?

Source: Parnes

Example:
You realize your to-do lists are getting longer, even though you aren’t
working less, you‘re actually working longer hours than before.
Now, use question starters to derive open questions from various
ways of forming or stating the problem.
• How might I shorten my to-do list?
• In what ways might I ignore my to-do list?
• What might be all the ways that I could outsource items on my
to-do list?
• How might I accept fewer tasks?
• What might be all the possibilities for avoiding new tasks?
• How might I prioritize my tasks better?
• How might I work more efficiently?
• How might I work even faster?
• In what ways might I manage without a to-do list?
• How might I arrange it, so that my to-do list takes care of
itself?
QUESTION STARTERS
Web of Abstraction
The web of abstraction is a divergent thinking tool that helps you
visualize a problem from both abstract and action-oriented
perspectives. By using Web of Abstraction you can find problems
that are related to the original problem and you can shift focus and
possibly identify the actual problem.

Use:
The web of abstraction is a complex thinking tool that should only be
used with rather complex questions; ones where it’s important to
identify the true problem.
Before you get started, it’s useful to identify some relevant problems
with the help of the Question Starters technique. These can then be
brought into the larger context by using the web of abstraction to
discover additional perspectives.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Challenges

How it works:
The basic principle is to find abstract/broader questions based on a
standard question with the help of using the question, “why?” and to
find clear/action-oriented questions with the help of using the
question, “What’s stopping me?”
1. Write down the original problem in the form of a, “How might
I/we…?” question on an index card or a Post-it. For example:
“How might I improve my German?”
2. Now work your way up and ask, “Why would I like to…?” or
downwards and ask, “What’s stopping me from …?” For
example: “Why would I like to improve my German?”
3. Answer the question in a simple, yet complete sentence. For
example: “I would like to improve my German because I would
like to do more business with Europe’s leading economic
region.”
4. Change the answer into a “How might I/we…?” question and
write this newly formulated question above or below the original
question.
5. Test the logic of the connection between the two questions by
securing them in “downward” and “upward” directions. Use both
of the following questions - upward: “assuming we had achieved
[lower statement], would that then help us to achieve [upper
statement]?” Downward: “Is one of the reasons that we haven’t
yet [lower statement], a reason that we haven’t yet achieved
[upper statement]?”
6. If you can answer both test questions with “yes,” then connect
both questions with an arrow. If you answered one of the two
test questions with a “no,” then you know the question’s
positioning is incorrect and it needs to be repositioned. You can
find out where the question needs to be positioned by using the
two test questions again.

How might I do more business with Europe’s leading economic

region?

How might I improve my Germna?

7. Starting with your original problem, ask once again with, “Why
else…?” or “What else is stopping me from doing this…?” and
repeat steps 3-6.
8. In this way you will develop a comprehensive map of the
problem.
9. Now consider your web of problems and think about which
problem you would really like to or should solve. In other words,
which problem is most likely the key problem that could have a
positive influence on all of the other problems and help you
reach your goal.
Tips:
• You can use the web of abstraction both alone or in a group.
• When you have generated some questions, check to see if
one of them seems particularly interesting and, based on this
question, develop additional questions.
• Keep writing the questions upwards and downwards until
answers become either too abstract or too detailed.
• Schedule in enough time to properly develop the web of
abstraction, e.g. an hour.

Source: Basadur

Example:
Original problem: How might I (HMI) improve my German?
SWOT Analysis
The SWOT analysis thinking tool helps to visualize a situation with
regard to its positive and negative aspects. It also helps you
visualize the situation in terms of time, about aspects in the present
and in the future. SWOT stands for Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats. SWOT contains both divergent and
convergent elements.

Use:
The SWOT analysis is used to identify current strengths and
weaknesses and to consider possible future opportunities and
dangers. Central strategic questions can be derived from these to
counter the negative aspects and utilize the positive ones.
The SWOT analysis can be applied very broadly across a whole
company or also used very specifically, for example, for a division of
the company or a product.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Challenges

The SWOT questions:

The following key questions can help you perform the analysis.
Strengths (internal):
• What has worked/is working well?
• What are our strengths/the strengths of the product?
• What distinguishes us/the product?

Weaknesses (internal):
 • What is/was difficult?
• What obstacles are holding us back?
• What are our weaknesses?
• What are we lacking?
• What barriers and pitfalls are there?

Opportunities (external):
• What changes do we see in the future?
• What can we develop and expand?
• What chances and opportunities are available?
• What can we utilize from our surroundings?

Risks (external):
• What risks are already visible now?
• What difficulties are we going to encounter?
• What are we going to have to account for in the negative
sense?

How it works:
1. Define the area for which you would like to apply the SWOT
analysis.
2. In the divergent phase, create a broad list of points for each of
the four categories.
3. In the convergent phase, select the most important content from
each category.
4. Determine which of the selected content you would like to
concentrate on using the following steps.
Would you like to:
− reduce present weaknesses?
− avoid future risks?
− expand current strengths?
− take advantage of future opportunities?
 5. You then formulate the selected content as open questions with
the help of the Question Starters thinking tool to generate
solutions in the next step.

Tips:
• The SWOT questions above should serve as inspiration for
generating points; you don’t have to use them all.

Source: creaffective

Example:
The following example shows a SWOT analysis we carried out with a
client for a specific product during an innovation workshop (the
example is simplified for this book). The content selected are
shown in green.

SWOT-ANALYSIS
Component Analysis
Component analysis is part of the TRIZ toolbox. It helps to
differentiate a question into different levels of abstraction and then to
select the right abstraction level for looking at a problem. TRIZ
describes the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving and is primarily
related to mechanical/ technical questions. It uses a logical-rational,
technically oriented language and way of thinking. It almost
represents a polar opposite to the user-based language of Design
Thinking. However, tools used in TRIZ can also be implemented a
with a little more flexibility than how they are prescribed, and can be
used with non-technical questions. I will use a more flexible
interpretation as our basis for understanding it here.

Use:
Component analysis is an analysis tool suited to complex questions.
It also serves as the first step for TRIZ functional analysis.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Challenges

Permissible components:
In any system, there are many elements and influential factors.
Permissible components are:
• In technical systems:
− Elements that have mass, like a spring, a mounting bracket
or a table, for example.
− Fields that make interactions and interdependencies
between components possible, for example, a magnetic
 field.
• In non-technical systems:
− Definable elements, like a department or a person, for
example.
− Fields can have transferred elements like culture, etc.

Not permissible are:

• Software
• Component parameters like speed or humidity

How it works:
1. Develop a hierarchical structure for your system, beginning with
the first level – all the way into more detailed levels (see
illustration). Then, make a list of the individual components for
each level so that this gives you a logical, sensible whole.
2. Now for your question, select the appropriate abstraction level
you would like to observe in more detail and analyze using a
TRIZ functional analysis.

Tips:
• Objectively, there is no right or wrong abstraction level,
however, there are tips for identifying which level may make
sense for your questioning:
− Selecting a level that is too high (too abstract) could be too
broad and abstract and thus too hard to understand. As a
consequence, this also means the ideas that are
generated in the next step will be scattered over a vast
spectrum.
− Selecting an abstraction level that is too low could lead to
getting lost in details and that the ideas in the next step are
not sufficient for solving your problem.
• Fundamentally, it makes sense to consider similar components
as one component, especially in technical systems. If for
 example, a system has multiple springs, you can consider
these to be one component (spring). For human systems with
many people in one department, it might make sense to
consider these people individually.
• The TRIZ tools exceed the scope of this handbook in its
present form due to their complexity. I recommend taking a
look at the expanded sources for further information.

Sources: Adunka, Altschuller

COMPONENT ANALYSIS
Force-field Analysis
Force-field analysis is a strategic thinking tool for identifying the
positive and negative forces of a challenge. It is used to reach a
better definition of the core questions, those questions that will need
to be answered on the way to reaching your goal.

Use:
The force-field analysis is a handy analytical tool that helps to:
• Define the problem more accurately
• Identify strengths that could be further developed
• Find weaknesses that should be minimized

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Challenges
Design Thinking: Point of View
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Challenges

How it works:
1. Describe the goal that you would like to achieve.
2. Formulate a scenario that describes your efforts ending ideally
and ending catastrophically.
3. List the central factors that could influence the situation being
steered toward the positive or the negative result.
4. Write down a description of every influencing factor on the
negative and the positive side.
5. Make a note of the direction in which all these forces are
currently heading.
6. Using this overview, decide if you would like to:
a. Further develop your strengths
b. Minimize your weaknesses
 c. Bring in more positive factors to influence the equation

Tips:
• Try to keep the influential factors limited to their core elements.
The list can always be expanded later.

Sources: Michalko

IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD WIN THE BIG

CONTRACT WITH CUSTOMER XY.

Central question:
How can we use our references from outside the industry to our
advantage?
Thinking in Ideas
Thinking in ideas means developing original mental pictures and
thoughts that could be the answers to pre-defined challenges.

Thinking in ideas doesn’t take place in a vacuum, it is always related

to a predefined question, explicit or implicit. A person can only
develop ideas for a solution when the question or challenge that
needs to be solved is known.

As it is defined here, thinking in ideas is open, divergent. Evaluation

of the ideas takes place during evaluative thinking.
THINKING IN IDEAS
Techniques for Developing Ideas – Many
Paths Lead to the Goal
At present there is an abundance of thinking tools for idea
development and there is an even greater number of names used to
describe similar techniques. There is also no shortage of attempts at
categorizing these techniques. Michalko speaks, for example, of
“linear” and “intuitive“ techniques. Geschka divides them into
association, configuration, confrontation and imagination techniques.
As often is the case, there is no right or wrong. However,
categorization can help us to get a better understanding of the
various methods. Despite the abundance of techniques, most of
them can be traced back to one common, basic principle that has
evolved into many variations with different emphases.

In working with our clients, we like to keep things simple and

differentiate between techniques that are intuitive and ones that are
systematic. Intuitive techniques include completely unstructured
methods like classic Brainstorming (page 166) and Forced
Connections (page 186). The systematic techniques contain
methods like Analogies (page 194), checklist techniques like
SCAMPER (page 180) and confrontational methods like the Escape
Method (page 184).

Our experience with clients over the lastten years has shown us that
a mix of different kinds of thinking tools, intuitive and systematic, is
best for idea development. Different people tend to prefer different
tools. Ultimately, choosing the most useful tool depends on the
question you are asking. There are also methods for configuring
something that exists in a new way. For this reason, such a method
needs an example, like an actual product or process. If you are
developing ideas for a special gift for your partner, you probably
don‘t have a real example you can configure differently.

You’ll find additional tips for using these techniques in the detailed
descriptions of each method that follow.
Brainstorming
Brainstorming describes a group method developed by Alex Osborn
in 1953. The goal of this divergent tool is to find solutions for a
specific problem through the accumulation of ideas.

Use:
Brainstorming can be implemented as a basic technique for finding
ideas. It is usually used at the beginning of an ideation session, so
all participants can start by generating all the ideas off the top of their
heads.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas, Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Write down the initial problem so everyone can see it. Use the
Question Starters. Formulate it as a “How might we…?”
question. Generate ideas. Set a goal of generating at least 30 -
40 ideas.
Even if you have generated a lot of ideas and surpassed your
goal, don’t stop as long as the flow of ideas is still coming.
2. Write every idea on an index card/Post-it note.
3. Hold your note up and say it out loud for all to hear. Then stick it
on a flipchart, wall, etc.
4. Every 15 ideas or so, check to see if these ideas are leading in
the right direction with about your problem or if you should
adjust the focus.
Tips:
• Always write everything down when you’re brainstorming.
• Write down the idea first and then read it out loud to the group.
• Before you start, explain the rules of divergent thinking once
again. This is the only way brainstorming will work.
Brainstorming is a purely divergent tool. Selection and
evaluation take place afterward.
• Gather the ideas in an unstructured way, just as they occur to
the participants. Don’t try to organize them while you are
brainstorming.

Source: Osborn
Does Brainstorming Work?
Every few years you will see articles that claim brainstorming doesn’t
work. In these articles, authors cite scientific studies which
supposedly show that the number of the ideas a group can generate
will be higher if the individuals work alone first, and their independent
results are gathered later. Some claim that one person alone can
generate more ideas than a group of people. My quick opinion of
these claims is: Nonsense!

My opinion in more words:

In 2011, a study appeared (Collaborative Fixation: Effects of Others’
Ideas on Brainstorming, Nicholas W. Kohn and Steven M. Smith,
Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25: 359–371 (2011)) and following
that, more articles were published, repeating the claim that
brainstorming is ineffective. We all have experienced it at least once:
sitting in a brainstorming session where little or nothing was being
generated. Many participants in our creativity trainings report at the
beginning of the training that this has happened to them.
By the end of the training, however, all participants agree with the
professionals in the field of idea development have been saying all
along: Brainstorming works; you have to do it the right way. I
described how to do it in the right way above.

In the technique defined by Osborn, a group should be led by a

facilitator/process moderator.
This last sentence sums up the whole dilemma about whether
brainstorming works or not: so-called brainstorming sessions often
don’t work and don’t get results because they lack a facilitator or
process moderator.
What methods did the scientists use?
For the 2011 study, a first-semester psychology course was used.
Students had to take part in the study in order to pass the course.
Groups of four students were asked to sit in front of a computer and
silently type their ideas into an instant messaging program. They
were prevented from seeing one another. First, there was a brief
explanation of the rules of brainstorming. Then the students were
asked to respond to the question, “How can we improve our
university?”

The result of the experiment: Study participants experienced a

“productivity deficit” and “cognitive fixation” compared with the
nominal group. Students became fixated on other members’ ideas
and generated fewer new and different ideas themselves. Instead,
they generated ideas that were similar to the ones already present.

Brainstorming, when it is used as it is described in this book, is very

different from the scientists’ research method. It is a good way to
generate ideas within a group. In creaffective workshops,
brainstorming is one of many techniques used for developing ideas.
By employing other techniques with the help of a facilitator, you can
avoid the cognitive fixation mentioned above. When brainstorming is
done properly, results are produced that are difficult to match by any
one person alone or by combining results of many individuals. This
has also been proven in a scientific study published in 2005 (A
Reexamination of Brainstorming Research: Implications for
Research and Practice, Scott G. Isaksen and John P. Gaulin, Gifted
Child Quarterly 2005 49: 315).

In the 2005 study, during brainstorming, unmoderated groups, after

the redundant ideas were subtracted, generated 23 ideas, less than
the nominal group. Groups with facilitators generated 143 and
achieved this by using one technique: “…no individual generating
ideas alone outperformed the real, interacting group. Further, the two
real brainstorming groups using facilitators generated an average of
126.5 non-redundant ideas per group compared to 58 for the
nominal group. The two real brainstorming groups using Brainwriting
produced an average of 208 non-redundant ideas per group. This
represents a 400–600% improvement on fluency, clearly illustrating
the impact of having a trained facilitator.” (p. 9)

Conclusion:
Brainstorming works. However, for it to work, it has to be done
properly. This isn’t the case in most laboratory studies. Admittedly
this is also the case in many group situations in companies. Knowing
this helps to explain why people may believe that brainstorming
doesn’t work.
Brainwriting
Brainwriting is a silent brainstorming technique in which every
participant has time to consider several ideas and build on the
thoughts of others. A significant advantage for using the technique is
that all participants generate ideas simultaneously, so a multitude of
ideas can be developed in a short period of time.
When Horst Geschka developed Brainwriting, he called it the 6-3-5
Method. 6-3-5 stands for 6 people, 3 exchanges and a 5-minute time
limit per round.

Use:
Brainwriting can be used as an additional technique within an idea
generating session. The technique is especially well-suited for
participants who prefer introverting or are reluctant to share their
ideas aloud with others (and in some cultures, i.e. Japanese).
The ideal group size is six people, but it’s also possible to work with
a smaller or a larger group.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas, Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Prepare a Brainwriting worksheet (see illustration). This
consists of three rows that each have three fields for writing
down ideas. Alternatively, three rows of Post-it notes can also
be affixed to a page for this.
2. Then, everyone participating thinks up three ideas and writes
these down in the first row.
 3. Next, the worksheets are exchanged. Everyone takes the
worksheet of another participant and, in the second row, tries to
build on and expand on the ideas from the first row.
4. After that, the sheet is exchanged a second time. Now, the third
row is completed. At the end of this process, each person will
have generated nine ideas on three different worksheets.

Tips:
• There is a danger that participants will have too much time to
think and that they’ll use this time to start evaluating/rejecting
ideas. This is why it is beneficial to introduce a time limit and
put participants under a little pressure, as intended in the
original method. However, according to our experience, a five-
minute time limit isn’t always practical, because five minutes
often isn’t enough time for many groups, especially if the
participants lack experience in developing ideas.
• Make sure participants write down more than just keywords in
the designated spaces. This should ensure that the ideas are
self-explanatory, clear, and everyone can work on the following
steps in peace.

Source: Geschka
1 Prepare a worksheet

2 First round
3 Exchange
4 Second round (repeat step
3 & 4)
Wild Ideas Question
The wild ideas question is a very simple method for making it easier
for people to break out of their normal „thought limitations
consciously.“

Use:
The wild ideas question can be used during a brainstorming session
to inspire participants to come up with new and unusual ideas.
Research shows it makes a difference when people are intentionally
challenged to be creative and think outrageously. Many people find it
easier to generate original ideas because they received permission
to be foolish. What’s interesting about this is the ideas that arise from
this method aren’t always senseless in and of themselves and often
can be implemented. Many of the ideas are interesting and, although
they are somewhat more original than the status quo, their
possibilities are easy to imagine.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. First, use other methods, like Brainstorming for example, to
generate some ideas. In this way, participants can unload the
ideas from off the top of their heads.
2. Next, ask participants to write down at least one unusual and
original ideas, one per person. Announce this in the following
way: “What would be a really wacky, outrageous possibility for
 solving our problem? If everything was possible, what would
you do?”
3. Encourage each participant or set an example by writing down
an off the wall idea, regardless of how “sensible” this idea might
appear.

Tips:
• We tend to use this method near the end of an idea
development session to squeeze a few more new ideas out of
participants.

Source: creaffective
WILD IDEAS QUESTION
Morphological Box
The morphological box was created by Fritz Zwicky; it represents a
so-called configuration technique. This technique allows you to
combine different variants of a problem’s existing parameters in a
playful way and in doing so, discover new combinations for them.

Use:
This method can be used during an idea generation session in which
an existing template has been produced. Based on the template, you
can experiment with new combinations of ideas.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Make a detailed description of the challenge that needs a new
idea for it to be solved.
2. Next, select the most important parameters of this challenge.
Every parameter should be selected so that it represents only
one individual element of the challenge.
3. For every parameter selected, make a target list of 3 – 5
possible variations. More than 5 variations will make your
morphological box too complex to work with.
4. Form the combinations. Based on the parameters selected and
the variations you listed, form different combinations that you
can use to derive new ideas.

Tips:
 • Keep in mind that the complexity of this technique increases
exponentially as the number of parameters and variations you
select increases.
• With a small number of parameters and variations (for
example 3 x 3), it is possible to try out all of the combinations.
If the numbers of either increase, you can save time by picking
combinations at random and deriving ideas from these.
• Try to generate more than just one idea from any of the
combinations you choose.

Example:
What are all the possible online marketing tactics that we can
employ? (Thoughts from a company that makes software solutions
for IT security).

Channel Format Content

Blog Article Entertainment

Twitter Video Explanation/Information

Facebook Podcast Test/Quiz

Youtube Game Product Ad

Some ideas derived from a combination:

• A blog series with quiz questions on IT security that can be
introduced in short videos.
• Short videos on IT security followed by quiz questions on our
blog - to check the participants’ understanding.
• A video competition managed on our blog to create an
interesting quiz on the topic of IT security.
 • Test questions about IT security on our blog. The participants
should create a short, self-made video (with their smartphone)
to show the correct answer.

Source: Zwicky
SCAMPER

SCAMPER is an acronym that stands for a series of impulse

questions. These questions provide a specific direction for your
thoughts, so you can find ideas that you haven’t considered up to
this point.

Use:
SCAMPER is especially useful when you use it with the questions
you already created to use for exploring ideas, for example, ideas
that already have an existing version, like a product or procedure.
You can apply the SCAMPER questions to this existing situation to
see what you can do to modify it.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas, Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

SCAMPER means:
The SCAMPER acronym stands for the following terms:
Substitute
Combine
Adapt
Modify
Put to other uses
Eliminate
Rearrange

The SCAMPER questions:

All of the terms listed above allow you to generate a series of sub
questions to stimulate thinking. Depending on the problem you wish
to solve, other questions can also be used:

Substitute
• What can be substituted?
• What can be used instead?
• Who can be incorporated instead?
• Which process can be used instead?
• Which other material can be used instead?

Combine
• What can be combined?
• What can be mixed?
• How can specific parts be connected?
• Which objectives can be combined?

Adapt, adjust, assimilate

• What other ideas suggest this?
• Is there anything that is similar that could be used on or used
to tackle the existing problem?
• Are there any similar situations that happened in the past?

Modify or enlarge
• Which changes can be introduced?
• Can the meaning be changed?
• How could the color or shape be changed?
• What can be modernized?
• What can be made larger or more important?

Put to other uses

• What could it still be used for in its current condition?
• What could it be used for if it is changed?
Eliminate and reduce
• What can be eliminated?
• What can be removed without limiting functionality?
• What can be made smaller or reduced?

Rearrange
• What other design would also function?
• What can be interchanged?
• What can be rearranged (activity, person, process)?

How it works:
1. Ask a series of SCAMPER questions that are appropriate to the
situation and generate further ideas.
2. Keep asking questions until you have created a satisfying
number of ideas.

Tips:
• Use SCAMPER after you have already developed other ideas
using Brainstorming.
• Adapt the questions based on the core issue you are trying to
solve.
• Formulate questions as flexibly as you can, so you can
maintain mental anchor points during your exploration for
ideas. For example: “What could be enlarged? This means,
which element could we generally enlarge, increase in its
importance or expand in terms of time?”

Source: Osborn, Eberle

Example:
How could we the improve the payment process at the supermarket
checkout?
Substitute:
 • Substitute normal checkouts with scanning checkouts.
• Substitute taking a number for waiting in line.
Combine:
• Combine normal checkouts with registers for self-scanning.
• Combine the ability to pay by smartphone, customers can
scan the products in advance with their smartphone and then
pay immediately at checkout.
Adapt, adjust, assimilate:
• Adapt traffic guidance systems and set up a checkout
guidance system that always shows where the fewest people
are in line and where things are backed-up.
Modify or enlarge:
• Modify the shopping carts so that these look like a mobile shelf
and the products can be scanned automatically.
Put to other uses:
• Shelves could be used as product dispensers where the
customers have to pay for the products they take with a
smartcard.
Eliminate or reduce:
• Eliminate the waiting time with VIP cards and exclusive check
out registers.
Rearrange:
• Rearrange the checkout counters physically. E.g. at various
locations in the supermarket.
Escape Method
With this lateral thinking method, you try to identify underlying
assumptions, turn these into questions, and then find other ways
toward a solution. This divergent thinking tool is perfect for coming
up with rather unusual ideas. Lateral thinking means making an
intentional lane change in your perception. Instead of always thinking
deeper in one direction, this is about thinking in directions that
haven’t been explored yet.

Use:
Escape Method is a good tool to use during idea finding sessions
when you have already developed some ideas and the group is
searching for additional, unusual ones.
To be able to apply it, you need to have an existing version of
something whose underlying assumptions can be called into
question.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Analyze your initial topic and think about what aspects you take
for granted. Make a list of these basic properties and
assumptions.
2. Next, for every one of the basic properties, formulate an
opposite: make an escape!
3. Using every opposite as a starting point, consider how each
could help you create a solution to your problem, or think about
 what other ideas you can come up with during this process.

Tips:
• When forming the opposite of an underlying assumption, don’t
think of it in a literal sense. Instead, you should think of it as a
source of inspiration for generating additional ideas.

Source: de Bono

Example: What could a new concept for a restaurant

look like?

Characteristics Opposite New ideas

of a restaurant
There is a waiter A restaurant • Electronic ordering
without system with a touchscreen
waiters in the table
• The food comes on a
conveyor belt to the table
• You have to get the food
yourself

There are tables There are no • Hammocks or deck chairs

and chairs tables and
chairs

There is a kitchen There is no • The cook cooks at the

kitchen table
• No separation between
kitchen and dining area
Forced Connections
Forced connections is an associative, divergent technique that
develops new ideas with the help of external stimulus.
This thinking tool uses random images or objects to generate
additional inspiration about the problem you are addressing.

Use:
Forced connections can be used with all types of questions for
generating more ideas after an initial brainstorming session.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas, Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Select an image or object that doesn’t have anything to do with
the problem.
2. Next, list 4 – 5 properties of the image’s content or the object.
3. Finally, try to force connections and make relationships
between the image/object, its properties, and your question.
With these, you can try to generate ideas for your solution.

Tips:
• Think to yourself, “When I see this picture, what ideas can I
force out of it for a solution of my problem?”
• Try not to become too fixated on the image or object; just think
of it as inspiration for your ideas.
• What’s important is that you develop actual ideas based on the
stimulus that can be used in the solution to your question. You
 don’t want to spend your time considering the input at the level
of slogans or associations.

Sources: de Bono, Gordon, Koestler, Isaksen, Treffinger

Example:
How can we improve a bicycle?

As a forced connection you consider an ice cube.

Characteristics of the object (the ice cube)
• Transparent
• Smooth
• It dissolves
• Cold
• Changes its shape

Ideas for improving a bicycle based on the ice cube that can be
derived from its characteristics:
• A bicycle with a transparent frame that looks extra cool
• A frame with an extra smooth surface, so you don’t have to
clean it as often
• A bicycle with spiked tires so you can ride on smooth or
slippery surfaces
• A bicycle with components that are biodegradable and can be
composted, like the tires or the brake pads, for example
• A bicycle with grip and seat heating for cold temperatures
• A bicycle with wind protection for the cold seasons
• A bicycle with hot tires to melt the snow
• A bicycle that you can adjust the frame’s length and width, so
that different sized people can ride it
• A bicycle that you can easily adjust the handlebars’ shape and
alignment
• A bicycle with a flexible seat that can be adjusted for different
people and has a fold-out backrest
• A bicycle with integrated cooling for drink bottles in the
summer.
1 Select the object/image

2 List the properties of the

object
 • transparent
• smooth
• it dissolves
• cold
• changes its shape

3 Properties transferred to
the question and ideas
generated
Stepping Stone Method
The stepping stone method is a divergent thinking tool.
When using this technique, the initial, predefined question is
modified through various provocations to create a new perspective
on the problem.

Use:
This process can be used in the context of an idea developing
session. It is used after the initial ideas have been developed and
you want to generate additional unusual questions, or if the flow of
ideas has come to a halt.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. The stepping-stone method works with the following
provocations that can be formulated while you’re using it:
Headstand: Turn the question on its head. For example: “How
might we make our product as complicated as possible?”
Exaggerate the question: For example: “How can we make
our product so simple that even a small child could use it?”
Unheard of: Here, the question is distorted or asked in an
absurd way. For example, a health insurer is considering how
they can get people to be more active and engage in more
preventative measures. “How might we issue fines to people
with unhealthy lifestyles?”
 2. Next, ideas are generated based on the provocation question
derived above.
3. Afterward, solutions are derived for the initial problem from
ideas generated in step 2.

Tips:
• If you choose the headstand provocation, first, generate a list
of ideas based on the headstand question. From these, you
can derive possibilities for the solution of the initial question
based on these ideas.

Source: de Bono

Example:
A PR agency considers the question: “How might we make
ourselves more visible in the market?” After generating initial ideas,
the stepping stone method and a corresponding provocation are
selected. “How might we ensure that the whole country will know
about us within two weeks?”

Ideas:
• We run a television ad on every station
• We run whole-page newspaper ads
• We give out t-shirts to runners in several cities and ask them
to wear it while they’re running
• We generate a scandal that all of the media outlets will run
with
• We cover a famous building with a flag bearing our logo
• We ask a famous politician or celebrity to wear our t-shirt
• We send postcards to every company in the country
• We go on tour around the country in an agency tour bus
• We set up open-air events in every large city
• We sponsor open-air events
• We create an interesting billboard campaign with the link to
our website. Whoever wants access has first to send the link
to five other people, and then they all get access at the same
time
STEPPING STONE METHOD
Analogies
The analogy technique is a divergent thinking tool.
With this technique you look for “similar situations” to find solutions
for the problem at hand. Principles from the solutions for the similar
situations are then adapted to your problem.

Use:
The process can be used in the context of an idea finding session
after your initial ideas have already been developed and you want to
generate additional, unusual questions or if the flow of ideas has
come to a halt.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Make a detailed description of the challenge that needs to be
tackled using new ideas.
2. Formulate your challenge in a generalized and abstract way.
3. Next, list at least four other
areas/environments/situations/industries that match the
challenge in its generalized form.
4. 4. For each similar situation you’ve found, consider how the
problem was solved there. Try to find approximately three
alternative solutions from every area.
5. Then, based on the solutions from the other areas, try to adapt
these into actual solutions and develop them into working ideas
for your challenge.
Tips:
• It doesn’t matter if the same solution principle is generated
from different analogies.
• Try making associations with diverse situations/environments
for the analogies you want to consider.
• For every alternative solution from another environment, try to
generate more than one idea for the solution to your specific
problem.

Sources: Gordon, Michalko

Example:
Specific problem: How can we create a stimulating environment in
our office?
Abstract problem: How can we create a stimulating environment?
 SOLUTIONS
SIMILAR IDEAS FOR OUR
FROM THIS
AREA/SITUATION SPECIFIC PROBLEM
AREA
• A choice of different
seating possibilities
• Comfortable (chairs, sofas, exercise
chairs balls)
• Variable • Make flexible,
lighting multicolored lighting
Restaurant environments possible
• Music • Special rooms with
• Food pleasant music for
displayed for thinking
inspiration • Offer fruit and small
snacks for free in the
common areas
• Larger rooms with
empty spaces used for
standing and walking
• Intentionally eclectic
• Large rooms architecture inside and
• Great outside, e.g. with
architecture artificial parks inside
Museum
• Lighting the office building
• Temporary • Different colored light,
exhibitions make different
intensities possible
• Regular art exhibits at
the entrance of the
office
At home • Walls painted • Paint meeting rooms in
different different colors to
 colors stimulate different
• Pictures on thoughts
the wall • Allow emplyees to
• Plants hang personal pictures
• Setting on the walls or display
things that I them on their tables
like • Place trees and plants
in the office
• Allow personal
items/objects in the
offices

ANALOGIES
Elementary Transformations
The principle of elementary transformations comes out of the TRIZ
method’s tool box. TRIZ deals with the Theory of Inventive Problem
Solving and was originally developed for solving
technical/constructive questions. Elementary transformations can be
used to solve so-called physical contradictions. Physical
contradictions are situations where a solution provides two
contradictory characteristics for the same parameters. With a
smartphone, for example, the device should be large enough so as
much as possible fits on the screen and, at the same time, small
enough that it easily fits into your pants pocket. The parameter of
size is thus a self-contradicting parameter based on conflicting
ideals.

Use:
The technique can be used in the context of an idea finding session
if there is a physical contradiction at hand. It is used to find new
ideas on the transformation principle specifically.

The transformation principles:

• Separation in space
The most diverse characteristics of the parameters are
conceptualized in different spatial conditions.

• Separation in time
The most diverse characteristics of the parameters are
conceptualized in different timeframes.

• Separation in condition
 Under certain circumstances, one condition is made possible;
another is made possible under other, different circumstances.

• Separation through parts/whole Here there are also two

possibilities:
a. An object can be assembled out of many smaller objects. The
whole object has a property that the parts don’t have.
b. An object is part of a larger whole and has a certain property that
the larger whole doesn’t have.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Formulate the specific challenge for which you need new ideas
and then consider a precise description of the physical
contradiction.
2. Next, go through the transformation principles and try to derive
ideas from them for the problem at hand.

Tips:
• It’s possible that not all of the principles will work. Should a
principle not apply, move on to the next one.
• Try to generate more than one idea from each principle. You
don’t have to restrict yourself to the exact form of the principle
or test to see if an idea conforms to the original principle. The
principles should act as stimuli for your thoughts.

Sources: Adunka, Altschuller

Example:
How could a smartphone look, one that is small enough to fit
comfortably in every pocket and, at the same time, is large enough
that you can read e-books on it?

Application of the principles:

Separation in space
• A smartphone with a display that folds open so it can either be
small or large.
• A smartphone with an extendable display that can be doubled
in size as necessary.
• A smartphone with a display on the front and backside of the
device.

Separation in time
• A device that’s text size slowly gets smaller the longer the
device is in use so users eyes can get used to it.
• A smartphone that’s resolution and text size adapts to the
mode in use so to optimize available screen space.

Separation in condition
• When displaying books, the text size automatically reduces so
that more text fits onto each page.
• A smartphone that automatically scrolls text when the device
is tilted. When the device is moved to the right, the text scrolls
correspondingly.
• A device that automatically recognizes if it should be larger or
smaller, for example, if pressure is exerted on the sides.

Separation through parts/whole

• A smartphone that can be coupled as necessary with other
screens near to it to increase the screen’s size further.
• A smartphone with an integrated projector that can project the
display onto any surface.
• A display that can be expanded with attachable, additional
screen surface.
• A smartphone that can be coupled with other smartphones to
increase the size of the screen.
ELEMENTARY
TRANSFORMATIONS
Special Tools for Customer Acquisition
A special checklist of questions can help you generate new ideas for
either acquiring new customers or on ways to approach your existing
customers with new offers. When you are working in a group, the
group can use this checklist to get moving in the right direction.

Use:
The questions can be put into play during an idea finding session,
when the topic is acquiring customers.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

The checklist questions:

Offering complimentary products and services
• Which complimentary products or services can you imagine
along with the present products?
• Which products could you offer along with the existing or new
services?
• Which services could you offer along with your existing
products?
• Which additional services could improve the lives of your
customers?
• Which products or services do your customers normally
purchase with your products, but from someone else?
Targeting low-profitability customers
• Which potential customers could have a need for your
product/service, but can’t afford it at the moment? What would
 a product/service or a modified business model look like that
would be attractive to these customers?
• Which potential customers could have a need for your
product/service, but haven’t been attractive enough for you up
to this point (for example, the margin would be too small)?
• What would a modified offer have to look like to make these
customers attractive to you?
Endangered customers
• Which current customers are on the verge of not purchasing
from you any longer? Why would these customers stop/switch
brands?
• What would a modified offer have to look like to maintain these
customers’ loyalty?
• Which potential customers have refused your offers up to this
point? Why?
• What would a modified offer have to look like to make it
attractive to this target group?

How it works:
1. Make a detailed description of the challenge that needs to be
tackled using new ideas.
2. Now go through the checklist above, using one question after
another, and generate ideas.

Tips:
• Try to generate more than one idea for each question.
• If a question doesn’t make any sense in your situation, go on
to the next one.

Sources: Moon, Kim & Mauborgne

Example:
Although creaffective is a small consulting company, we’re
internationally active, and also have a partner in India.
Many potential customers are interested in our innovation services
and especially our trainings, but for the Indian market, our prices are
too high. For some of these potential customers, the main deciding
factor is the price per training participant.
When we asked the question, “What would the service offer have to
look like to be affordable and attractive for this target group?” we
developed a group training for Indian educational institutions that
accommodated up to 80 participants. The price per person is
considerably lower than in Europe. Nevertheless, thanks to the
higher number of participants, creaffective can still reach its target
price. Also, the training is designed differently than for a European
audience. This offer now satisfies the needs of the Indian audiences.
SPECIAL TOOLS FOR
CUSTOMER ACQUISITION
Four Actions Framework
The Four Actions Framework is one of many tools from Blue Ocean
Strategy. This strategy penetrates into “waters” that are as of yet
uncontested or if so, not heavily. With the aid of four questions, the
Four Actions Framework tries to scrutinize the status quo of an
industry and/or a business model to find new, sensible value
propositions for a client. The creators of the Blue Ocean Strategy
operate on the assumption that comparable (benchmarking)
companies are so focused on the competition and their predominant
industry standards that they lose track of their customers’ key values
and the factors that influence their decisions.

Use:
The questions can be used during an idea development session
when the theme specifically addresses acquiring customers.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

The questions of the Four Actions Framework:

1. Eliminate
• Which factors which the industry takes as self-evident, should
be eliminated?

2. Reduce
• Which factors should be lowered significantly under the
industry standard?
 3. Raise
• Which factors should be raised significantly over the industry
standard?

4. Create
• Which factors which haven’t been offered up to now, should be
created?

How it works:
1. Make a detailed description of the challenge that needs to be
tackled using new ideas.
2. Try to list all of the factors, elements and performance features
of your industry so you can get an overview of the situation.
3. Now, go through this list one after another using the four
questions and generate your ideas.

Tips:
• The first two questions help you scrutinize existing cost
structure and to optimize it.
• The last two questions are aimed at increasing the value for
customers and creating new demand.
• As always, try to generate more than one idea from each
question.

Sources: Kim & Mauborgne

Example:
A well-known example of this technique comes from the
technology/entertainment industry: the introduction of the first
Nintendo Wii game console. At the time, the industry standard was
to always offer a higher performance and high resolution console for
its target group: young, male gamers. Nintendo’s market-changing
offer was based on several new aspects:
First, Nintendo lowered the processing and graphics capacity of the
new Wii console significantly below the industry standard which led
to a dramatic reduction in their material costs and subsequently, the
console selling price. The company also integrated motion detectors,
a technology that was new to the console market at that time. In so
doing, Nintendo opened completely new possibilities for games that
could be played with active body motions. Finally, Nintendo
expanded its target group. It intentionally developed games for whole
families and older people. This also set them apart from other
consoles considerably.
FOUR ACTION FRAMEWORK
Patterns for Business Model Development
For a long time, many companies’ attitudes toward innovation have
been purely technical; they have focused solely on technology.
However, especially in markets where there is not much
differentiation through features anymore, an innovation that is only
based on technology has little chance of success. In recent years the
innovation of business models has become much more important. A
business model describes the way in which a company creates
products/services, how this offering makes its way to the customer
and how the company generates value from this transaction.

The TRIZ methodology (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) in the

field of technology, has existed for decades. A central component of
TRIZ are 40 innovation principles based on patent research that
continually come into play when dealing with matters of innovation.
These principles can be targeted specifically on new issues. The
best part about the TRIZ methodology is that it doesn‘t just answer
the question “how?” it also answers the question “what?” The 40
principles contain the results of research into severalthousand
patents.

The University of St. Gallen in Switzerland has created something

similar for the field of business models. In a study of successful
business models over many years, their researchers identified 55
business model patterns. Similar to the TRIZ principles, these
business model patterns can be used for finding ideas to create new
combinations out of existing business model patterns.

For more information, I recommend the book published by the

University of St. Gallen (see appendix). There you will find all the
patterns described in detail. However, you shouldn’t expect that
you’ll learn everything about business model innovation by reading
one book. Nevertheless, this book can be a valuable source of
information.

Use:
To develop initial ideas for new business models.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. First, describe the existing business model. For this, you can
use a visualization tool like the Business Model Canvas (page
254).
2. Next, use some of the St. Gallen business model patterns to
generate model ideas for alternative business models.
3. Generate a selection of various models based on one or more
of the business model patterns.

Tips:
• You can also use business model patterns to intentionally
develop ideas that, at first glance, are far removed from your
company and your industry. Don’t merely concentrate on a
familiar pattern.
• You can use a visualization tool like the Business Model
Canvas to get a quick overview of your possibilities.

Sources: Gassmann
BUSINESS MODEL
DEVELOPMENT
Evaluative Thinking
Evaluative thinking assesses the quality and feasibility of ideas so
that applicable solutions can be developed from them.

Evaluative thinking is primarily a convergent way of thinking; it is

selective and aimed toward a specific objective. Nevertheless
evaluative thinking is also concerned with improving ideas and
refining solutions. For this, it’s important not to make final judgments
about whether something works or doesn’t work too quickly. Instead,
try to see what’s new about an idea and testing things out.

A solution describes an idea that has been worked out and

strengthened to the point that it fits as well as possible into the
context where it will be implemented.

There are two categories of evaluative thinking tools:

1. Selecting the most promising of all ideas generated during
divergent thinking and reducing the number of working options
you have to deal with.
2. Ideas are usually not yet solutions; they will have to be further
developed into a solution step-by-step. A number of different
thinking tools can be used for this.
EVALUATIVE THINKING
The Role of Intuition
You often read or hear about experts who go with their gut feelings
when making decisions or are somehow forced to go with them. The
sheer number of decisions and the complexity of many decisions has
reached a point that strategies for saving time and reducing
complexity have become necessary. The intuitive, gut decision of an
expert is, therefore, a legitimate and helpful approach.
In our work with clients, we have found that it often comes down to
making an assessment of which of the many ideas generated by a
group should be pursued further. For this purpose, there are always
experts present who should be contributing their opinion.

In an exciting joint project, Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman and

his scientific adversary Gary Klein worked out conditions under
which experts should make intuitive decisions and when they
shouldn’t. The central statement that came out of this project was
that, in general, an intuitive approach can’t be justified at all. In
certain cases, it can even be dangerous. Innovation, especially
radical innovation, is one of these cases.

With their definition of expert intuition, Kahneman and Klein are

following in the footsteps of Howard Simon, who wrote about his
experiences with expert intuition as “memory-based recognition.” For
starters, his thesis removes intuition’s veil as something magical and
inexplicable.

An expert is someone who is distinguished from others in their

profession by having the necessary skills and abilities to be able to
perform at the highest levels.
According to Kahneman and Klein, there are two prerequisites
necessary for experts to be able to follow their intuition.

1. The object to be judged is part of a highly valid domain. The

domain has certain regularities that indicate causal
relationships.

2. The person doing the judging has the possibility to determine

these regularities. First of all, these regularities do in fact exist.
Second, that a person has had enough time to figure the
regularities out and thus has enough experience. Third, the
person has received feedback on this behavior, which makes
the testing of their methods and hypotheses possible.

The spread of a fire in a building or how diseases disperse are

examples of highly valid domains. Certain signs in a building can
mean that structural deformation is occurring; certain symptoms in a
person can give an indication of illness.
Middle to long-term forecasts of political and economic
developments take place in a domain of low validity. Experts making
these kinds of forecasts regularly miss the target, although
sometimes they get lucky. There’s just not enough regularity to make
a reliable forecast possible.

For innovation, intuition should never be the only criterion that forms
the basis for making a decision and that experts shouldn’t just follow
a “funny” feeling in their gut. Often this is precisely the reason why
ideas that may have a lot of potential are discarded too quickly or
why other ideas are embraced for longer than they should be.

At the same time, you shouldn’t ignore your intuition all together.
Ideally, ideas should be examined using explicit criteria and
methods, and be worked on a bit longer before we ask the intuition
to tell us in which direction we should go.

I introduce some of these methods over the following pages.

Sources: Kahneman, Klein

Tools for Selecting Ideas
Divergent thinking means developing a multitude of options and
knowing that the majority of these ideas won’t be used. We must go
to these lengths because we can’t know which options are the good
ones, and which are the ones that we are going to end up
developing later.

In convergent thinking, the objective is to select the most promising

options. In the process, there are some general convergent thinking
tools that we will describe in the corresponding section of this book.
During the Generate Ideas step, there are some thinking tools
specially designed for selecting ideas only in this area of application.

Four of these are introduced over the following pages.

COCD Box
Use:
Use the COCD box directly after gathering ideas, to make an initial
selection of the ideas you would like to examine more closely.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

The three categories of the COCD box:

Now ideas: not incredibly original, but good and easy to implement
Wow ideas: easy to implement and highly original
How ideas: highly original and promising, but not so easy to
implement

How it works:
1. Set a maximum number of ideas that you or every participant
may select for each category. For example, two ideas per
category.
2. Out of this mass of ideas, highlight the set number of ideas with
one of three colors. Only select ideas that are exciting to you.
3. Assign a distinct color for each category and highlight the
selected ideas with the corresponding color.
4. Now briefly talk through the ideas you’ve selected by letting
each person explain why they selected that certain idea and
why they assigned it to that specific category.

Tips:
 • If you are conducting the selection process in a group, the set
number of ideas to be chosen should be smaller than when
you are making the selection yourself.
• After the discussion, use a further tool like Clustering to sort
the selected ideas according to content criteria.

Sources: Byttebier, Vullings

COCD BOX
Selection of Evaluation Criteria
Thinking tools like the following techniques described in this book,
the Evaluation Matrix, the 2x2 Matrix and the SCRUM-Matrix, help
you make a detailed assessment of your options.
All these tools need assessment criteria that should be considered
and evaluated based on the ideas in question.
This chapter provides a general description of how you can proceed
with the creation of assessment criteria.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

The three steps of evaluation

From Design Thinking we get three approaches to new solutions:
1. Desirability/customer benefit
Do the users/customers even want the solution?
2. Feasibility/technical viability
Can a solution be implemented technically and carried out at an
acceptable cost?
3. Viability/economic sense
Is the cost worthwhile from an economic perspective?

Design Thinking would see customer benefit as the first priority. If

this isn’t the case, then you needn’t even worry about the other
criteria. There are, however, companies whose first approach is from
the standpoint of technical feasibility. From this perspective, they
look for a suitable problem to fit the technical solution.
Fundamentally it makes sense to take all three steps into account.
Below, I list some possible criteria for all three steps.

Customer benefit
• Is there an improvement of customer benefit with respect to
the status quo?
• Is there an increase in functionality (expressed numerically)?
• Is there a willingness to buy in the target group?
• Is the solution to the problem an exact fit from the customer’s
point of view?
• Is it easy to use the solution?
• Is a cost or a price reduction possible?

Technical feasibility
• Does the technology already exist?
• Is the technical know-how already available in the company?
• How high are the investments needed to master the
technology?
• What are the costs of a transition in terms of time?
• How high is the level of difficulty in terms of development?

Economic sense
• How large is the target group?
• Is there a prospect of savings on the company’s side (time,
money)?
• How high are the margins/the contribution margin?
• Is there a marketing effect?

Tips:
• Try to establish criteria that can be assessed absolutely and
don’t describe any relationships. Efficiency, for example,
describes the relationship between use and cost. Such criteria
are always difficult for a group to assess, because everyone
may have a different understanding of the terms.
 • Establish clear criteria that are related only to one aspect and
aren’t a collection of many individual criteria. A criterion like
“technical feasibility” usually comprises multiple aspects.
During the assessment, individuals in a group will usually
place emphasis on differing aspects. When this happens, the
comparison of the results will be that much more difficult.
• Criteria should always be assessed for one absolute idea,
independent of other ideas. A thinking tool that is intentionally
based on relationships is the Paired Comparison Analysis.

Source: creaffective
Evaluation Matrix
The evaluation matrix is a thinking tool with which you can evaluate
a multitude of options systematically according to relevant criteria
you select yourself. The goal of the evaluation matrix (as opposed to
that of a decision matrix) is not to choose a few select ideas and
then throw the rest away. The goal is to compare ideas
systematically and, in doing so, get an overview of the ideas’
strengths and weaknesses. In a subsequent step, the weak ideas
can be broken down and made stronger and more complete.

Use:
You can use the evaluation matrix to evaluate preselected ideas in
detail and reduce the number of ideas that need to be processed.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Generate evaluation criteria. Make a list of all possible
evaluation criteria (use divergent thinking). Formulate these as
questions (e.g. “Will it cost less than $1000?” “Can we
implement it within two months?”) so they will be answered
positively (yes) when the criteria are fulfilled.
2. Select the most important evaluation criteria based on the one
you would like to evaluate most. This should be specific and
only evaluate one aspect of its content (and not multiple
combinations).
 3. For every criterion, you can use three smileys: a smiley face for
a good evaluation, a neutral face for a medium evaluation and a
frowny face for a poor evaluation. Make an exact definition of
what each face means for evaluating a criterion. A smiley face
for the above criterion, “Will it cost less than $1000?” means, for
example, that the cost of implementation will be less than
$1000, the neutral face for when the cost is between $1000-
1300, and everything over $1300 gets a frowny face.
4. Create the matrix comprised of the ideas (in rows) and the
evaluation criteria (in columns).
5. Now go through the matrix row by row and evaluate all the
ideas according to one criterion before moving on to the next
criterion.

Tips:
• Before evaluating ideas with the evaluation matrix, use a tool
like clustering, so you have similar ideas grouped next to one
another.
• It’s preferable to use smileys instead of numbers when you are
evaluating the ideas. In the end, numbers will lead you to form
average values for every idea, and many people tend to look
only at the total scores. In doing so, ideas that might have
great potential, but, for example, also have a terrible value for
one criterion, could easily be rejected too quickly.
• Keep the number of the criteria manageable: 3 - 4 are
sufficient.
• Afterward, you can always improve the interesting ideas that
have weaknesses in one or two criteria.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance; creaffective

EVALUATION MATRIX
2x2 Matrix
A 2x2 matrix can help to get a visual overview of the quality of a
larger number of ideas relatively quickly based on two criteria of your
choice.

Use:
You can use the 2x2 matrix to evaluate a large amount of
preselected ideas in more detail and to reduce further the number of
ideas that need to be processed.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Draw a 2x2 matrix consisting of four fields.
2. First, determine two criteria (one for the x and one for the y
axis) based on the ideas you would like to evaluate. In doing so,
the meaning of the criteria should be unambiguous and only
measure one aspect of its content.
3. Every criterion now has two grades (relatively weak and
relatively strong). Make a definition of the conditions that a
criterion would have to meet to be considered weak or strong.
Only after doing this should you begin your evaluation.
4. Now, take every idea and test how it stands up to both criteria.
Then, you can visually place the idea in the corresponding field
of the matrix. The results will give you a good overview of which
ideas could be particularly interesting.
Tips:
• There is a series of well-known matrices that are similar to the
2x2 matrix in style. You can define the criteria according to
your own needs.

Source: creaffective
2X2-MATRIX
SCRUM Matrix
The SCRUM matrix is an approach we developed at creaffective that
combines a 2x2 matrix with elements from the SCRUM approach for
software development. When you have a large number of ideas to
evaluate, this tool helps you get a quick overview of the ideas’ quality
based on criteria of your choice.

Use:
You can use the SCRUM matrix in a group (of 2 – 6 people) to make
a detailed evaluation of a large number of preselected ideas. The
SCRUM matrix helps to reduce the number of ideas you need to
process and thus keeps group discussion time to a minimum.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Draw a 2x2 or a 3x3 matrix.
2. Then determine two criteria (one for the x and one for the y
axis) based on the ideas you would like to evaluate. In doing so,
the meaning of the criteria should be unambiguous and only
measure one aspect of its content.
3. Every criterion now has two to three levels (low – medium –
high). Make a definition of the conditions that a criterion would
have to meet to be considered weak, medium or strong.
4. Next, everyone in the group takes some of the preselected
ideas (these should be written on Post-its or index cards) and
places them in the matrix. Based on the understanding of the
 idea, they should be placed where they belong according to the
criteria. This process takes place in silence, nobody says
anything. This phase only lasts as long as it takes to place all of
the ideas into the matrix.
5. Next, the group members read through all of the ideas and
consider their present position in the matrix. If anyone disagrees
with the placement of an idea by another member of the group,
they can flag it by turning the Post-it vertically (90°).
Flagging/turning the idea means that there is a need for
discussion here.
6. When step 5 is complete, the ideas whose placement has
caused a difference of opinion can be discussed by the group.
The person who turned the idea vertically can explain why they
don’t agree with its current placement and where they think it
should be placed in the matrix instead. Afterward, the group can
discuss this and then agree on the idea’s final placement in the
matrix.

Source: creaffective
SCRUM MATRIX
Paired Comparison Analysis
The paired comparison analysis is a useful convergent tool to
compare competing options, especially when all options appear to
be equally important. This technique is valuable as a step-by-step
procedure for reducing complexity and making consensus decisions
easier.

Use:
Use Paired Comparison Analysis when your group is having
difficulties making choices between similarly attractive options.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Ideas
Design Thinking: Generate Ideas
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Ideas

How it works:
1. Identify all of the alternatives/ideas that you want to compare.
2. Make sure that you compare all the alternatives according to
the same criteria, for example: important – unimportant,
possible – impossible. Pay attention that the ideas don’t
overlap; they should be independent of one another.
3. Use the table (see illustration) to compare every idea with all
the other ideas. Proceed row by row through all the columns.
For every comparison of two options, first, determine which of
the two is more important and then determine how much more
important it is (e.g. 1 = slightly more important, 2 = more
important, 3 = significantly more important).
4. Calculate the final rankings by adding up all of the points
awarded to each option.
Tips:
• This tool can be applied to the most diverse situations, e.g. for
the weighting of criteria, choosing problems, selecting ideas,
selecting projects or choosing personnel.

Source: unknown
Example: A company tries to
prioritize different ideas for
marketing activities
Tools for the Development of Solutions
After the most promising ideas have been selected, the next step is
usually to develop these ideas into more concrete solutions. Only
rarely does an idea present a solution you can implement right away.
If this happens to be the case, you can skip directly to Tactical
Thinking and work out your exact next action steps.
An example: You are developing ideas for ways to furnish your home
office to make it more inspiring. One of the ideas you selected is to
paint the walls yellow. In this case, the idea presents a solution you
can implement right away. It’s clear to see how you can carry out the
idea.

In most other cases, you’re going to have to invest a little more

thought on solidifying the idea before starting on its implementation.
Depending on the task at hand, there are also a number of thinking
tools you can use to accomplish this.

These are introduced over the following pages.

Prototyping
Prototypes are physical approximations of an idea, created as a
means of achieving its future, final form. The aim of a prototype is to
make an idea tangible, as quickly and easily as possible to create a
common understanding of an idea that can then be quickly
optimized. Prototypes can have various levels of quality and
sophistication: from simple drawings, Lego blocks or wire models, all
the way to polished versions that are practically indistinguishable
from the final product.

Types of prototypes:
A prototype can either fall into these categories or represent a
combination of these categories.
• Work alike: A prototype that should demonstrate the functional
principle of a product or technology.
• Behave alike: A prototype that illustrates the behavior of a
product, a service or a business model.
• Look alike: A prototype that illustrates the look of a product.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Solutions

How it works:
1. Take your original idea, which may be a few words or a
sentence, and describe or illustrate it with more details (30 – 40
minutes).
2. As with other divergent processes, be sure to create more than
just one version during these first stages so you can get
 feedback as a result of multiple variations.
3. Collect feedback from each variation. Introduce them to other
people and let them test the prototypes. In doing so, you test if
other people understand the principle of your idea rather than
trying to prove that your idea is good.
4. Depending on the type of the idea you’re working with, you can
then decide on the form that would make the most sense for a
detailed prototype: for example, a click dummy for software, a
model for a product, a roleplay for a service, etc.
5. Then you repeat the procedure: testing & refining and based on
the feedback you receive, creating more and more subtle
variations.

Tips:
• In the beginning, don’t be afraid to use basic and simple ways
of making prototypes, e.g. out of clay, arts-and-crafts
materials, or in the form of drawings, etc. In many companies
the concept of a prototype is associated with very elaborate
models. Elaborate models however, only appear at the end of
an innovation process.
• Additionally, you should gather feedback on your prototypes
very quickly and then, based on this feedback, modify the
prototypes accordingly. Prototypes function according to the
principle, “fail fast – fail cheap.”
• You can combine the prototyping process with other
techniques introduced in this chapter, like PPCO (page 248),
to improve your prototypes from iteration to iteration.

Source: creaffective
Proto-Case
Over the years of facilitating our innovation workshops, we have
noticed that groups who haven’t established a mental scaffolding
often have a hard time getting started with the process of working
out their ideas. Over recent years, we have developed some
templates that we use to get the formulation of these solutions
started.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Solutions

General guiding questions

You can use the following list of questions to get a better sense of
almost every type of idea:
• Who are the users/customers?
Describe the target group(s).
• What benefits arise from the solution?
List all of the functions, features, and details.
• How can you represent the solution or how does it function?
Make a sketch of the solution.
• How do the users interact with the solution?
Describe or visualize the interaction as a process, map or
chart.
• What resources will we need for its implementation?
List all of the requirements for implementation.

Specific questions
Depending on the type of idea, there can be an additional series of
supplementary detail questions that help to create a specific solution.

For products and services:

• Describe the market and the market environment.
• What competing products are there?
• Which distribution channels are relevant?
• What might the marketing look like?

For activities and events:

• When and where should the event take place?
• How long should the activities last?
• How many participants will the event have?

For processes and procedures:

• What kinds of internal demands/requirements or hurdles are
there?
• Who are the supporters of the changes?
• Which processes will become unnecessary?

For business models:

• In what ways will revenue be created?
• What are the appropriate marketing and distribution channels?
• Which partnerships could help us?
• (As a method, the Business Model Canvas is particularly well
suited for business models).

How it works:
1. Take your original idea, which may only consist of a few words
or a sentence.
2. Use the general guiding questions to develop your
understanding of the idea. In the process, allow for phases of
both divergent and convergent thinking.
 3. As necessary, use the specific guiding questions to enrich your
concept further.

Tips:
• You can combine this method with other techniques introduced
in this chapter like Zen statement (page 244) and PPCO (page
248) to refine your solution further.

Source: creaffective
Zen Statement
A Zen statement is a short, simple summary of a solution’s main
characteristics and advantages that should excite the interest of
readers or listeners.

Use:
Use this tool when you are working out an idea. Either right at the
beginning, to provide an initial summary of a solution’s direction, or
at the end, to summarize the central aspects of a solution.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Solutions

The basic structure

A Zen statement conforms with this basic structure:
A <product/service description> for <target customers> that
<central benefit> and thus makes <main use> possible as opposed
to/instead of <existing alternative>.

How it works:
1. Write an initial Zen statement for your idea using the basic
structure.
2. Next, try to find a series of alternative ways to express it; play
with each component of the Zen statement (divergent).
3. Compose a final version (convergent) out of the best elements
from the alternatives generated for the different components.
Tips:
• You can use the Zen statement at the beginning of the
formulating solutions step to establish an initial, general
direction for your work. You can once again revise the original
Zen statement to describe your final product at the other end
of the process, after you have worked out the details.

Example:
Here is an example for a Zen statement for Disneyland:

“A theme park for families that provides amusement rides and

food and thus makes entertainment possible as opposed to
public parks and beaches, etc.”

After making modifications by playing with different ways to express

the components and choosing the best ones, the basic structure can
then read something like this:

“An entertainment experience for children of all ages that brings

friends and family closer together and, unlike at other vacation
destinations, you will create memories to last a lifetime.”

Source: https://kickbox.adobe.com/
Crazy 8
The Crazy 8 thinking tool allows a group to generate many possible
solutions for an idea in a short period. What makes this technique
special is not so much its solutions, but its speed.

Use:
Crazy 8 is a good tool to:
• create multiple possible solutions or variants for a rough idea
• flesh out or further improve upon a possible solution in step-
by-step fashion

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Solutions

How it works:
1. Every participant receives a standard sheet of paper and folds it
in half three times. This gives you eight small rectangles where
you can work out eight possible solutions or variants.
2. The timer is set for 5 minutes. Everyone only has 40 seconds
per rectangle. With Crazy 8, it is up to you if you want to
generate the possible solutions as sketches or in written form.
3. When the time is up everyone presents and discusses the
results.

Tips:
• The best ideas can be selected and discussed using a
technique like the Telescoping. In the next step, these can be
 further discussed, worked out, and integrated into an overall
concept as a group.

Source: Knapp
CRAZY 8
PPCO
PPCO is a technique of four steps used for judging and further
developing new ideas. The technique allows you to consider positive
and negative aspects without “destroying” the potential of an idea or
its author. It also keeps you from rejecting a suggestion too quickly.
PPCO stands for Pluses, Potentials, Concerns and Overcome
Concerns.

Use:
PPCO is suitable for:
• analyzing and improving ideas.
• giving other people feedback on their work or their behavior.
• introducing new ideas to others and persuading people to
appreciate these ideas

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Solutions

How it works:
Use these four points for conducting a feedback or presenting an
idea

Pluses:
What do you like about the idea, the suggestion, or the work? Be
honest and specific. Name at least 3 – 5 points.

Potentials:
What could you develop out of this in the future? Which possibilities
do you see?
Name at least 3 – 5 points beginning with, “It might…”

Concerns:
Next list all the concerns you see.
Be sure to formulate each of your concerns as open questions and
not as statements, e.g. “How might we avoid it becoming too
expensive?”

Overcome Concerns:
Single out the most significant concerns and, for each, generate
about ten ideas to overcome the concern or solve the problem.
From the ideas you generated, select the best ones and then
reformulate the original idea.

Sources: Miller, Vehar, Firestien

Example:
Idea: We will create a one-month job rotation program to improve
cooperation between departments.

Pluses:
• Workers get insights into the other departments.
• Participants exchange information about the departments.
• You get to know new colleagues.
• You develop an understanding of the perspectives and
problems of other departments.
• It’s a chance to learn something new.

Potentials: It might…
• Lead to better knowledge management within the company.
 • Lead to new career opportunities in the company for
participants.
• Lead to regular exchanges.
• Lead to new ideas and better solutions for the company.

Concerns: How might we…

• Ensure that departments’ ongoing work doesn’t suffer?
• Find enough motivated participants?
• Be sure that the people take the program seriously?
• Get support of senior management?

Overcome concerns:
Concern #1:
How might we ensure that the departments’ ongoing work doesn’t
suffer?
Ideas:
• Plan the program long-term
• Outsource small, individual tasks to interns
• Schedule a meeting once a week with employees participating
in the exchange to discuss problems
• Give employees their work packages early
• Hire an additional person
• Plan a transition
• Write a Wiki article on the work that needs to be performed
• Let the department head fill in
• Always send only one person from each department into
the program at a time
• Make sure the exchange personnel keep in regular contact
with the people they have replaced

Concern #2:
How might we ensure that the people take the program seriously?
Ideas:
• Participation is voluntary
• Employees must apply to be in the program
• The exchange program takes the participants’ target
agreements into account
• The exchange program takes the departments’ targets into
consideration
• There are selection interviews
• The team decides if it would like to accept a new colleague
• We emphasize why the program exists to make it clear what
type of employee we are looking for
• The participants will have to write a final evaluation report
• A bonus will be available, but only for successful participation
PPCO
NABC
NABC stands for Needs, Approach, Benefits and Competition. This
thinking tool is a process originally developed to help engineers to
think of a solution including technical criteria and to consider other
factors relevant to a solution’s success as well.

Use:
NABC is a good tool to:
• Create well thought-out concepts for products and business
models that take the surrounding environment into
consideration.
• Introduce new ideas to others
• Convince other people of the ideas’ value through using the
NABC visual framework for presentations.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating Solutions

How it works:
You take an existing idea, try to flesh it out, and then improve it step-
by-step using the following questions.

Needs (customers’ perspective):

What critical customer or market need will be satisfied by the
solution?

Approach (solution):
What does the solution’s approach specifically look like in terms of
meeting customer or market need?
Here, for example, you can describe the technical process involved.

Benefits (value):
What quantitative and/or qualitative use does this idea provide to
customers or to us?

Competition:
Who are our competitors?
How will this solution lead to differentiation among the competition?

Tips:
• Work out the precise solution approach first; it represents the
core of the idea. Work out the other aspects afterward.
• Combine with PPCO (page 248)to work out any weaknesses
that may remain.

Source: Carlson

NABC
Business Model Canvas
Business Model Canvas (BMC) is a visual technique used to
analyze, describe and generate new ideas for business models.

Use:
The Business Model Canvas is well suited for describing a business
model quickly and simply, and for establishing a common
understanding of it. This technique provides visual framework for
speaking about and presenting business models.

Location in the process models:

BMC can be used in various steps of the creative process to analyze
a business model and to develop new business model ideas.
Creative Problem Solving: Assessing the Situation, Formulating
Challenges, Exploring Ideas, Formulating Solutions
Design Thinking: Understand, Point of View, Generate Ideas,
Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring the Situation, Formulating
Challenges, Exploring Ideas, Formulating Solutions

How it works:
For a detailed description, I recommend the Business Model
Generation website (www.businessmodelgeneration.com/canvas)
and the book of the same name.
1. Download the BMC template from the website mentioned
above, or use an online tool like the Canvanizer
(http://canvanizer.com/).
2. Fill in the individual sections of the canvas. It’s best to use Post-
its for this so you can easily modify your model.
 3. With the fundamental business model now visible, depending
on your reason for using the BMC, formulate the details
separately. This technique is primarily intended to give you an
overview (not the details) of a business model.

Tips:
• When you use the BMC to develop ideas to create a new
business model, you should come up with multiple options
(divergent) before you decide on developing one or more of
these options in depth (convergent).
• The BMC can be combined beautifully with the Patterns for
Business Model Development (page 210) from the University
of St. Gallen for visualizing the business model patterns.

Sources: Osterwalder, Pigneur

Example:
The following Business Model Canvas visualizes the creaffective
business model.
BUSINESS MODEL CANVAS
Contextual Thinking
Contextual thinking is used to get a grasp on the environment and to
develop an understanding of the conditions that could support or
endanger the success of a project.
This is particularly important when you have been working with an
idea or a solution for a very long time and are so in love with the
concept that you develop a form of mental tunnel vision; you can’t
begin to see why someone else might not find your solution to be a
good idea.

With Contextual thinking you develop a feeling for your surroundings

and the people in them. You can use this boarder perspective to
assess whether the people involved are positively or negatively
disposed toward a new solution. If the attitude coming from your
surroundings isn’t positive, your next step is either going to be to
influence and/or convince the people, or to adapt the solution so it
will be acceptable.

Contextual thinking increases the probability that a new solution will

be able to be successfully implemented.
CONTEXTUAL THINKING
Assisters and Resisters
Assisters and Resisters is a tool used to prepare an action plan by
first making a list of supporting (assisters) and obstructing (resisters)
factors that can impact the implementation of a solution. With the
resisters, you try to find ways of restricting their negative influence.

Use:
Assisters and Resisters is helpful when you have been busy working
out a solution and haven’t spent much time thinking about its larger
context, which is often the case with technical solutions because the
first priority tends to be answering a question on a technical level.
This approach is also beneficial to use in large companies, when a
large number of people and departments are working together to
develop a solution. Using this technique can help anticipate and
reduce friction that may be created during the solution
implementation phase.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Acceptance
Design Thinking: Prototype
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Acceptance

How it works:
1. This approach consists both divergent and convergent parts.
First, diverge with the help of the 5 W’s and an H technique
(page 110) and try to find as many assisters and resisters as
possible.

Assisters Resisters
 Who (individuals and groups)

What (resources, attitudes, procedures,

politics)

When (question of the most opportune

moment)

Where (locations)

Why (reasons to assist or resist the

initiative)

How (actions)

2. After the assisters and resisters have been listed, converge and
select the most significant assisters and the most problematic
resisters.
3. For significant assisters, consider how they could best support
your ends.
4. For problematic resisters, generate more ideas (divergent
thinking) to eliminate their resistance.
5. Use the most helpful ideas to keep these factors in
consideration as you carry out your next steps.

Tips:
• If you used the PPCO technique (page 248) to shape your
idea, it is likely that you identified some resisters during the
“concerns” step who will also come up again here. When you
use this technique, try not to think only in terms of resisters,
but also try to identify positive factors that you could use.
• It is possible that a factor can be both an assister and a
resister.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Example:
I wrote this book and would like to introduce it into the market as
successfully as possible.
Pre-Mortem
The Pre-mortem approach (not postmortem!) was developed from
intuition and decision research. It is used to anticipate potential
problems during the implementation of a plan – before the baby goes
out with the bathwater. Through a type of mental simulation, a plan’s
potential stumbling blocks are identified and then eliminated.

Use:
The pre-mortem approach helps you to consider potentially “fatal”
problems before you give an important project the green light. It
takes these possibilities into account from the beginning. Even
though it’s likely that these problems will never even arise, a pre-
mortem should be carried out by the project team, assuming that up
to this point, they were also involved in the creative and solution-
finding processes.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Acceptance
Design Thinking: Test
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Acceptance

How it works:
Use this framework to conduct a pre-mortem with a group
1. Fiasco:
Imagine you are looking into the future with a crystal ball.
Through the mist, you see that the implementation of the
solution you worked out is a catastrophic disaster. Now ask
yourself the question, “What could have caused this?”
2. Consider the reasons for the disaster:
 Every pre-mortem participant takes a few minutes for
themselves to write down any reasons the project came to such
a catastrophic end. In doing so, each person should listen to
their intuition and write down everything that comes to mind.
3. Compile the reasons:
Next, compile and structure all the participants’ reasons into an
overview. For this, each person reads out the reasons they
found. Don’t start evaluating yet; everyone should be listening to
what the others have to say.
4. Identify the most serious causes:
Use a convergent process to identify the greatest potential
problems.
5. Look for ideas that will solve the identified problems:
The group diverges again and generates ideas for how the
identified problems could be avoided. Distill the options again to
find the most promising ideas.
6. Modify the original plan:
Work the ideas found in Step 5 into the existing plan.

Tips:
• The results of the pre-mortem can be brought up at regular
intervals and reviewed during the course of a project.
• The aim of this technique is not to talk down or destroy a
planned solution, but rather to work constructively on
identifying possible blind spots and being prepared for
contingencies. This should be made clear from the beginning.
• The possible reasons for failure are meant to exclude
quantifying them exactly or determining a precise, probability
of occurrence. Having detailed discussions of statistical
percentages is not the point of step of the process.

Source: Klein
PRE-MORTEM
Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder analysis technique provides a critical analysis of the
position of people with vested interests that could possibly have a
negative influence on the implementation of a developed solution.

Use:
The stakeholder analysis is helpful to use before implementing a
solution, especially for situations where “political” constellations
predominate. This tends to be a case in large organizations,
including, for example, corporations and universities.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Acceptance
Design Thinking: Test
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Acceptance

How it works:
This step-by-step plan will lead you through using the Stakeholder
Analysis thinking too.
1. Develop stakeholder options:
Use divergent thinking to create a list of possible stakeholders.
2. Create the stakeholder list:
Identify the most relevant stakeholders, those whose support
you need or whose opposition could jeopardize the
implementation of the solution.
3. Record the position of each stakeholder:
On a scale of 5, rate every stakeholder’s position based on how
you see them regarding your solution. The scale should range
from “very positive” to “very negative” (see illustration).
4. Record the required position for the stakeholder:
 Next, estimate the minimum position each stakeholder must
have to ensure your solution will proceed according to plan.
5. Develop strategies:
For every stakeholder on the scale where there is a gap
between their actual and required positions, use divergent
thinking again to develop ideas of how you can improve their
standing.
6. Determine your strategy:
Finally, distill your list of ideas to a identify a few core strategies
that you believe will help improve the position of each of these
stakeholders.

Tips:
• Limit yourself to the most relevant stakeholders. Your list
shouldn’t be any longer than 10 people or groups of people.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
Assumption Testing Canvas
The Assumption Testing Canvas is a tool that helps to verify or
discredit central assumption that underlies ideas and solutions. By
using this tool, you can produce a documented record of the testing
process. The approach was originally developed by Eric Ries,
founder of the Lean Startup methodology, to test out various
software features on users.

Use:
The Assumption Testing Canvas comes into play when you already
have a solution in front of you, and you want to test its underlying
premises. Based on the results from using it, you can decide
whether to pursue the solution further, to modify it, or reject it.

The basic structure:

Idea name:
Critical assumption: What must be true in order for the solution to
work?
Experiments: How can we test the assumptions?
Expected results:
Start of the testing period:
Test length: In days/months
Total number of tests: How many people will be interviewed/tested
Amount of positive feedback:
Amount of negative feedback:
Confirmed/rejected?
Outcome: What is the outcome of the testing results? What are the
next steps?

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Exploring Acceptance
Design Thinking: Test
Systematic Creative Thinking: Exploring Acceptance

How it works:
1. Derive the central, critical assumptions that must be fulfilled for
your solution to be successful. For example: People are ready
to consult psychologists online.
2. Next, think about experiments you could carry out to test your
critical assumption. For example: Hold qualitative interviews
with users and also assess and analyze click-through rates on a
website for quantitative measures.
3. Next consider what these quantitative results reflect so you can
decide whether to pursue the idea, adapt/modify the concept, or
reject the idea.
4. Test the assumption. The precision of the tests depends on the
type of idea you are testing. After you have carried out a
sufficient number of tests, evaluate your notes / results to
decide if these results meet your desired standards.
5. It is important that you document each individual step in detail
so you can keep track of which data was used as the basis of
the decisions you made in the process developing your idea.

Tips:
• The minimum number of tests can vary dramatically according
to the type of idea and assumption being tested. For an event
concept in the B2B context, speaking with potential customers
may be sufficient. For a product that has to be adapted to meet
end customers needs, you may have to collect dozens or
hundreds of responses.

Source: Ries
ASSUMPTION TESTING
CANVAS
Tactical Thinking
Whereas Strategic Thinking focuses attention on general directions
for the longer-term, Tactical Thinking directs notice to small, concrete
and measurable steps that can be taken over a short, medium or
longer time periods.

Tactical Thinking takes place after the precise solution and strategy
are in decided upon. It is essential to use this kind of thinking at the
end of the creative process and before engaging in specific actions
to implement ideas and solutions so you can measure the
effectiveness of your activities.

Now it’s time to take action; you’ve planned enough. Like a bird in
the hand, as the saying goes, a good plan today is better than a
perfect plan tomorrow. When Tactical Thinking is complete, you will
have a well-defined plan of action complete with specific,
measurable steps.
TACTICAL THINKING
How-How Diagram
The How-How Diagram is a logical-analytical structured Tactical
Thinking tool that assists you in creating a plan of action. It helps to
identify important milestones and detailed action steps by using your
responses to focused “how?” questions.

Use:
The How-How Diagram can be an used as an alternative to an
action plan, but it can also be used to support an existing action
plan. This tool helps you to add more detail to solutions that may
seem too generalized. It is also helpful to use when you have worked
out a solution, but you don’t yet know the best way to implement it.
The How-How Diagram uses both divergent and convergent
thinking.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating a Plan
Design Thinking: Not Explicitly Included
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating a Plan

How it works:
1. Write down your idea/solution/measures to be taken.
2. Next, ask yourself, “How?” repeatedly and write down all
possible action steps right next to your solution. In doing so,
diverge and write down various courses of action (see
illustration).
3. Next develop the second How level. For each of the action
steps up to this point, now ask, “How?” again and again, write
down the answers right next to each step. Here you also
diverge.
 4. Continue asking and answering “How?” questions as long as
you can – until each action arrives at its logical conclusion and
asking the question, “How?” doesn’t make sense anymore.
5. Finally, apply convergent thinking. Select the most relevant
actions steps from the ones you generated.

Tips:
• Work visually by illustrating the connecting lines between the
different levels.
• Ideally, don’t use a computer; for every action step; use a
Post-it note. In this way, you can make modifications easily
and afterward, better work through the steps you identified.

Sources: Puccio, Murdock, Mance

Developing Action Steps
An Action Plan uses divergent thinking to find all steps necessary for
implementing a solution and, at the same time, to avoid forgetting or
overlooking anything. Then, with convergent thinking, the most
important steps are identified and organized into timeframe.

Use:
Fundamentally, an Action Plan comes into play at the end of a
creative process to effectively implement solutions that have been
developed to that point. When a creative process unfolds over a long
time period, which is often the case, an Action Plan can be created
after every step, to organize what needs to be done in the interim.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating a Plan
Design Thinking: Not Explicitly Included
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating a Plan

How it works:
1. Create a list of possibilities for specific, simple, first steps of
action to get the ball rolling and begin the implementation of
your solution.
2. Next, choose the first action step of your plan. Write this down
under “What?” e.g. “Inform colleagues about the project.”
3. Following every “What,” comes a very specific “How,” e.g.
“Write an email and explain the most important content.” The
more specific the “How,” the easier it will be for you to
accomplish.
4. Finally, enter the action steps that precede and follow it into the
table until the action plan appears complete.
Tips:
• In the column, “How specifically?” try to include as much detail
as possible. The more your action plan is formulated vaguely
or abstractly (for example, “work out the concept”), the greater
the danger is that nothing will happen or that the person who
should be doing the action will procrastinate because the
specifics are unclear.
• If you create the Action Plan in groups, make a specific name
appears in the “Who” column, not a whole team or just a job
title. This is important for generating responsibility. The person
whose name appears in the “Who” column does not have to
carry out the action all by themselves, though they are one
responsible for the step’s completion.
• Under “By when?” make sure that you enter a specific date
and not, “By the end of the year” or “TBD.” This is especially
important when the action plan is generated on a computer so
that the action plan can be sorted by dates.
• If you carry out a creativity or innovation workshop with a
group during the course of the project, you may want to
integrate some of the ideas they generate into the plan. In this
case, at the beginning of the planning phase, you can add an
additional “Idea” column. For every idea you choose to carry
out, a brief plane with next steps should be established.

Source: Basadur
DEVELOPING ACTION STEPS
Momentum Matrix
The Momentum Matrix is a tool to use to estimate the quality of the
progress being made in implementing a solution and so you can
improvements. It is used after you begin executing a solution.
Many companies have a problem carrying out ideas generated for
innovation. Ideas get bogged down on the way to their being
realized. The Momentum Matrix helps to overcome this situation. By
using it you develop an awareness of a stalled momentum problem,
and shift attention to keep up the momentum. The Momentum Matrix
comes from analogies to physics and the motion of objects with
mass.

Use:
The Momentum Matrix is useful for creating awareness of what is
necessary for generating momentum and, during implementation, to
diagnose how this momentum can be maintained. It is created
before the implementation of a solution begins.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: Formulating a Plan
Design Thinking: Not Explicitly Included
Systematic Creative Thinking: Formulating a Plan

The three columns of the Momentum Matrix:

Three variables influence the momentum of an initiative.
• The resources that will be invested in implementation.
• The speed at which the work will be performed.
• The direction in which the initiative proceeds.

How it works:
 1. Consider your solution and the (planned) implementation.
2. Estimate its current state with regard to the three values –
resources, speed and direction.
3. Create possibilities for to improve on each and make
adjustments accordingly.

Tips:
• Repeat the diagnosis for this initiative every few weeks and
months to get a feeling for the quality of the implementation’s
progress.

Source: Michailidis

MOMENTUM MATRIX
 4
GENERAL CONVERGENT TOOLS

The creative processes introduced in this book have steps that are
each subdivided into a divergent and a convergent portions. In each
step, first, options and alternatives are broadly gathered without
evaluation and second, the most interesting options are filtered out.

Even though each step has a separate focus, there is a series of

tools you can use, regardless of which creative process step you are
in, to conduct the convergent portion. In every step you sort data of
one kind or another, and group ideas together. The techniques I
introduce in the following pages aid you in maintaining an overview
of your many options and alternatives.
Telescoping
Telescoping is a group technique. It serves to select the best/most
interesting/most significant options from a large number of them and
to make these clear and manageable. It doesn‘t make a difference if
the options you are dealing with are ideas, background data or
problem formulations.

Use:
The Telescoping method is used when you need to reduce a large
assortment of options. It is useful for all steps of the creative
processes in this book.

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: All Steps
Design Thinking: All Steps
Systematic Creative Thinking: All Steps

The three successive steps of the telescoping method:

1. Select a manageable number of options
2. Listen to understand
3. Select a critical few

How it works:
1. Out of the many options you have developed, pick your best
bets that will continue on to the next round. Criteria for selecting
a manageable number from the options could be: importance,
feasibility, simplicity, etc. About the number of ideas to move
forward: As a general guideline to get a manageable number,
use the 10% rule: If you have 60 options, you may select a
maximum of 6 options per person to present in the next round.
 Also, as the number of participants in a group increases, the
number of options that every participant is allowed to choose
should decrease.
2. Next, and very important - each participant briefly justifies their
selections to give everyone a better understanding of their
choices. The group should be listening to understand. They
shouldn’t discuss the selections yet. This purpose of this step is
to make sure everyone understands the selections before
moving on to step three.
3. Finally, after all the selected options have been explained, the
number of selections is further reduced by using an assessment
discussion and by combining similar options. The selections
remaining now should be the best and most essential options.
We like to call these the critical few (dates, challenges, ideas,
solutions, action steps, etc.).

Tips:
• When you perform the idea selection process in a group, the
number of ideas to be selected per person should be less than
when you are alone.
• After step 2, listening to understand, use another tool like
Clustering to sort the selections according to content criteria.

Source: Basadur
TELESCOPING
Clustering
Clustering is a tool that helps to you organize, categorize, and show
connections among a large number of options. You can reduce
complexity and maintain better overview of your selection options by
using it.

Use:
Clustering is used in every convergent phase of every step in a
creative process, after (!) options have become selections using a
convergent technique like Telescoping (see page 288) or the COCD
Box (see page 220).

Location in the process models:

Creative Problem Solving: All Steps
Design Thinking: All Steps
Systematic Creative Thinking: All Steps

The successive steps of the cluster method:

1. Bring similar options together
2. Label the commonalities

How it works:
1. After the options are preselected and discussed, bring the
similar selections together; the ones that share commonalities in
their content. For example, ideas with an underlying technical
principle or ideas that deal with drawing attention to topic XY.
2. Next, give each cluster a label that describes the essence of the
cluster. You should make sure the label has more than one
word. Ideally the cluster label should have at least one verb and
 one noun. For example: “find out customer needs” or “apply the
magnetic rotation principle.”

Tips:
• It often happens, especially during the convergent phase after
creating ideas, that two of the selected ideas express the
same thing, or, one idea is a sub-aspect of another one. When
forming clusters, differentiate between two selections by
determining if they are similar or they express the same thing.
Make this difference clear by listing the ideas one on top of
another or arranging the Post-its in a similar way.
• When ideas are similar (thus, in the same cluster) they should
be recorded next to one another.
• Clusters shouldn’t be too big or too abstract. If more than 5 – 7
selections are placed together in one cluster, you should
decide if you want to further divide the cluster to get to greater
levels of detail.
• If you go on to work with the grouped content after using
clustering, you should refer to the individual options and not
deal with an entire cluster as one usable option. A cluster is
always more abstract than its individual points and is,
therefore, harder to apply than are individual ideas. Clustering
serves to get a better overview of a multitude of options.

Source: creaffective
CLUSTERING
Mind Mapping
Mind Mapping is a technique for visualizing, organizing and
structuring thoughts and information. As opposed to all of the
thinking tools in this book, a mind map doesn’t give you an indication
of the direction in which you should be thinking; it helps you to
clearly depict the contents of your thoughts. Tony Buzan invented
this technique over 40 years ago.

Use:
The Mind Mapping tool is suited for the convergent phase of any
creative thinking step, when your aim is to show contents and
structures.
It is not suitable when a creating a certain sequence is necessary. It
is not suited for group divergent thinking (for example, a
brainstorming session), because a structure is automatically
established and the options generated have to be evaluated.

Location in the process models:

Mind mapping can be used in the convergent phase of every step in
the innovation process.

How it works:
1. Write the topic (the central idea) of the mind map in the middle
of a sheet of paper. When you are using mind mapping
software, this is done for you automatically.
2. Place the contents of the mind map on branches and twigs that
are connected with one another and the central idea (see
illustration). A new twig always begins at the far end of an
existing twig.
 3. See if you can assign one key word per twig instead of writing
whole sentences. You can add details in the form of sub-twigs.
4. Use graphic elements like colors, images and symbols to add
further meanings to a twig. In this way, you can highlight
relevant and interesting content, using, for example, a red 1,
etc.

Tips:
• You might find my book, “Mind Mapping for Dummies” worth
looking into if you would like to delve more deeply into mind
mapping and all of its application areas. For the purposes of
this book, I have only described mind mapping for the use in
the creative process.
• A mind map isn’t self-explanatory. You can’t just send a mind
map to other people it must have an accompanying
description. So, when you are working with a mind map, all the
relevant people should be present when it’s being created, or
you will have to take the time to explain it.

Source: Rustler

Example:
The example shows a selection of marketing ideas for creaffective.
MIND MAPPING
 5
FURTHER REFERENCES AND
LITERATURE

Adunka (2009) Elementare Umformungen. Eigenverlag

Adunka (2009) Funktionsanalyse (Basis) nach TRIZ für Produkte.

Eigenverlag

Altschuller, G. (1984) Erfinden. PI, Cottbus

Basadur, M. (2002) Simplex System, Basadur Applied Creativity,

Toronto

Brown, T. (2009) Change by Design. Harper Collins, Toronto

Byttebier I, Vullings R (2007) Creativity Today, BIS Publishers,

Amsterdam

Carlson, C.R / Wilmot, W.W (2006) Innovation: The Five Disciplines

for Creating What Customers Want. Crown Publishing, New York

Davila, T. / Epstein, M. / Shelton, R. (2005) Making Innovation Work.

Pearson, New Jersey

Davis, G.A (1999) Creativity is Forever. Kendall / Hunt, Dubuque

De Bono, E. (1995) Teach Yourself to Think. Penguin, London

De Bono, E. (1996) Edward de Bono’s Thinking Course. BBC Active,

Harlow

Eberle, B. (2008) Scamper: Creative Games and Activities for

Imagination Development. Prufrock Press, Austin

Eckert, B. (2014) Demystifying Innovation Culture Efforts.

www.newandimproved.com, New York

Ekvall, G. (1996) Organizational Climate for Creativity and

Innovation. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 1996, 5(1), 105 – 123

Faltin, G. (2008) Kopf schlägt Kapital. Hanser, München

Gassmann (2013) The Business Model Navigator. Pearson, London

Geschka, H. (1979) Methods and organization of ideas generation.

Creativity Week Two, 1979 Proceedings. Center for Creative
Leadership, Greensboro

Gordon, W.J.J. (1961) Synectics. Harper & Row, New York

Govindarajan, V. / Trimble, C. (2010) The Other Side of Innovation.

Havard Business School Publishing, Boston

Gundlach, C. / Nähler, H.T (2006) Innovation mit Triz: Konzepte,

Werkzeuge, Praxisanwendungen. Symposion, Düsseldorf

Hurson, T. (2008) Think better. McGrawHill, New York

Isaksen, S.G / Treffinger, D.J (2004) Celebrating 50 years of
reflective practice: Versions of Creative Problem Solving. The
Journal of Creative Behavior, 38, 75 – 101.

Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan, New York

Kim, W.C / Mauborgne, R. (2005) Blue Ocean Strategy, HBR Press,

Boston

Klein, G. (2007) The Power of Intuition. Random House

Knapp, J. (2016) Sprint: How to solve big problems and test new
ideas in just five days. Transworld, London

Koestler, A. (1964) The act of creation. Macmillan, New York

Michalko, M. (2006) Thinkertoys - A Handbook for Creative-Thinking

Techniques. Ten Speed Press, Toronto

Michailidis, S. (2009) Make it Happen with Momentum. Creative

Studies Graduate Student Master‘s Projects. Paper 130
(http://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/creativeprojects/130)

Miller, B. / Vehar, J. / Firestien, R. (2001) Creativity Unbound – An

Introduction to the Creative Process. Innovation Res. Inc,
Williamsville

Miller, B. / Vehar, J. / Firestien, R. (2001) Facilitation – A Door to

Creative Leadership. Innovation Resources Inc, Williamsville

Moon, Y. (2010) Different – Escaping the competitive herd. Crown

Business, New York
Osborn, A.F. (1963) Applied Imagination: Principles and procedures
of creative problem-solving (3rd ed.). Scribner, New York

Osterwalder, A. / Pigneur, Y. (2011) Business Model Generation.

Campus Verlag, Frankfurt

Parnes, S.J (1992) Source Book for Creative Problem Solving.

Creative Education Foundation Press, Hadley

Plattner H, Meinel C, Leifer L (2001) Design Thinking: Understand

Improve Apply. Springer, Heidelberg

Proctor, T. (2005) Creative Problem Solving for Managers.

Routledge, London

Puccio, G.J / Murdock, M.C / Mance, M. (2007) Creative Leadership

– skills that drive change. Sage Publications, London

Rhodes, M. (1961) An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42,

305 – 310.

Rhodes, M. (1987) An analysis of creativity. In Isaksen S.G, ed.,

Frontiers of-creativity research: Beyond the basics. Bearly, Buffalo.

Ries, E. (2011) The Lean Startup. Crown Publishing Group.

Runco, M.A (2007) Creativity. Elsevier Academic Press, London

Rustler, F. (2011) Mind Mapping für Dummies, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim

Rustler, F. (2012)
Stein, M.I (1974) Stimulating Creativity: Volume 1. Academic Press,
New York

Zwicky, F. (1969) Discovery, Invention, Research - Through the

Morphological Approach, Macmillian, Toronto