what are the 4 stages of creative problem solving

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

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

Business Insights

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

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

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

• 01 Feb 2022

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

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

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

Access your free e-book today.

What Is Creative Problem-Solving?

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

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

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

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

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

1. Balance Divergent and Convergent Thinking

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

2. Reframe Problems as Questions

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

3. Defer Judgment of Ideas

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

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

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

Creative Problem-Solving and Design Thinking

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

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

The four stages are:

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

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

Creative Problem-Solving Tools

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

Creating a Problem Story

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

1. Identify a UDP

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

2. Move Forward in Time

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

3. Move Backward in Time

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

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

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

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

4. Break the Chains

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

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

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

Brainstorming

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

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

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

Alternate Worlds

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

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

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

Continue Developing Your Skills

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

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

About the Author

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 10 min read

Creative Problem Solving

Finding innovative solutions to challenges.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

Imagine that you're vacuuming your house in a hurry because you've got friends coming over. Frustratingly, you're working hard but you're not getting very far. You kneel down, open up the vacuum cleaner, and pull out the bag. In a cloud of dust, you realize that it's full... again. Coughing, you empty it and wonder why vacuum cleaners with bags still exist!

James Dyson, inventor and founder of Dyson® vacuum cleaners, had exactly the same problem, and he used creative problem solving to find the answer. While many companies focused on developing a better vacuum cleaner filter, he realized that he had to think differently and find a more creative solution. So, he devised a revolutionary way to separate the dirt from the air, and invented the world's first bagless vacuum cleaner. [1]

Creative problem solving (CPS) is a way of solving problems or identifying opportunities when conventional thinking has failed. It encourages you to find fresh perspectives and come up with innovative solutions, so that you can formulate a plan to overcome obstacles and reach your goals.

In this article, we'll explore what CPS is, and we'll look at its key principles. We'll also provide a model that you can use to generate creative solutions.

About Creative Problem Solving

Alex Osborn, founder of the Creative Education Foundation, first developed creative problem solving in the 1940s, along with the term "brainstorming." And, together with Sid Parnes, he developed the Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving Process. Despite its age, this model remains a valuable approach to problem solving. [2]

The early Osborn-Parnes model inspired a number of other tools. One of these is the 2011 CPS Learner's Model, also from the Creative Education Foundation, developed by Dr Gerard J. Puccio, Marie Mance, and co-workers. In this article, we'll use this modern four-step model to explore how you can use CPS to generate innovative, effective solutions.

Why Use Creative Problem Solving?

Dealing with obstacles and challenges is a regular part of working life, and overcoming them isn't always easy. To improve your products, services, communications, and interpersonal skills, and for you and your organization to excel, you need to encourage creative thinking and find innovative solutions that work.

CPS asks you to separate your "divergent" and "convergent" thinking as a way to do this. Divergent thinking is the process of generating lots of potential solutions and possibilities, otherwise known as brainstorming. And convergent thinking involves evaluating those options and choosing the most promising one. Often, we use a combination of the two to develop new ideas or solutions. However, using them simultaneously can result in unbalanced or biased decisions, and can stifle idea generation.

For more on divergent and convergent thinking, and for a useful diagram, see the book "Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making." [3]

Core Principles of Creative Problem Solving

CPS has four core principles. Let's explore each one in more detail:

• Divergent and convergent thinking must be balanced. The key to creativity is learning how to identify and balance divergent and convergent thinking (done separately), and knowing when to practice each one.
• Ask problems as questions. When you rephrase problems and challenges as open-ended questions with multiple possibilities, it's easier to come up with solutions. Asking these types of questions generates lots of rich information, while asking closed questions tends to elicit short answers, such as confirmations or disagreements. Problem statements tend to generate limited responses, or none at all.
• Defer or suspend judgment. As Alex Osborn learned from his work on brainstorming, judging solutions early on tends to shut down idea generation. Instead, there's an appropriate and necessary time to judge ideas during the convergence stage.
• Focus on "Yes, and," rather than "No, but." Language matters when you're generating information and ideas. "Yes, and" encourages people to expand their thoughts, which is necessary during certain stages of CPS. Using the word "but" – preceded by "yes" or "no" – ends conversation, and often negates what's come before it.

How to Use the Tool

Let's explore how you can use each of the four steps of the CPS Learner's Model (shown in figure 1, below) to generate innovative ideas and solutions.

Figure 1 – CPS Learner's Model

Explore the Vision

Identify your goal, desire or challenge. This is a crucial first step because it's easy to assume, incorrectly, that you know what the problem is. However, you may have missed something or have failed to understand the issue fully, and defining your objective can provide clarity. Read our article, 5 Whys , for more on getting to the root of a problem quickly.

Gather Data

Once you've identified and understood the problem, you can collect information about it and develop a clear understanding of it. Make a note of details such as who and what is involved, all the relevant facts, and everyone's feelings and opinions.

Formulate Questions

When you've increased your awareness of the challenge or problem you've identified, ask questions that will generate solutions. Think about the obstacles you might face and the opportunities they could present.

Explore Ideas

Generate ideas that answer the challenge questions you identified in step 1. It can be tempting to consider solutions that you've tried before, as our minds tend to return to habitual thinking patterns that stop us from producing new ideas. However, this is a chance to use your creativity .

Brainstorming and Mind Maps are great ways to explore ideas during this divergent stage of CPS. And our articles, Encouraging Team Creativity , Problem Solving , Rolestorming , Hurson's Productive Thinking Model , and The Four-Step Innovation Process , can also help boost your creativity.

See our Brainstorming resources within our Creativity section for more on this.

Formulate Solutions

This is the convergent stage of CPS, where you begin to focus on evaluating all of your possible options and come up with solutions. Analyze whether potential solutions meet your needs and criteria, and decide whether you can implement them successfully. Next, consider how you can strengthen them and determine which ones are the best "fit." Our articles, Critical Thinking and ORAPAPA , are useful here.

4. Implement

Formulate a plan.

Once you've chosen the best solution, it's time to develop a plan of action. Start by identifying resources and actions that will allow you to implement your chosen solution. Next, communicate your plan and make sure that everyone involved understands and accepts it.

There have been many adaptations of CPS since its inception, because nobody owns the idea.

For example, Scott Isaksen and Donald Treffinger formed The Creative Problem Solving Group Inc . and the Center for Creative Learning , and their model has evolved over many versions. Blair Miller, Jonathan Vehar and Roger L. Firestien also created their own version, and Dr Gerard J. Puccio, Mary C. Murdock, and Marie Mance developed CPS: The Thinking Skills Model. [4] Tim Hurson created The Productive Thinking Model , and Paul Reali developed CPS: Competencies Model. [5]

Sid Parnes continued to adapt the CPS model by adding concepts such as imagery and visualization , and he founded the Creative Studies Project to teach CPS. For more information on the evolution and development of the CPS process, see Creative Problem Solving Version 6.1 by Donald J. Treffinger, Scott G. Isaksen, and K. Brian Dorval. [6]

Creative Problem Solving (CPS) Infographic

See our infographic on Creative Problem Solving .

Creative problem solving (CPS) is a way of using your creativity to develop new ideas and solutions to problems. The process is based on separating divergent and convergent thinking styles, so that you can focus your mind on creating at the first stage, and then evaluating at the second stage.

There have been many adaptations of the original Osborn-Parnes model, but they all involve a clear structure of identifying the problem, generating new ideas, evaluating the options, and then formulating a plan for successful implementation.

[1] Entrepreneur (2012). James Dyson on Using Failure to Drive Success [online]. Available here . [Accessed May 27, 2022.]

[2] Creative Education Foundation (2015). The CPS Process [online]. Available here . [Accessed May 26, 2022.]

[3] Kaner, S. et al. (2014). 'Facilitator′s Guide to Participatory Decision–Making,' San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

[4] Puccio, G., Mance, M., and Murdock, M. (2011). 'Creative Leadership: Skils That Drive Change' (2nd Ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[5] OmniSkills (2013). Creative Problem Solving [online]. Available here . [Accessed May 26, 2022].

[6] Treffinger, G., Isaksen, S., and Dorval, B. (2010). Creative Problem Solving (CPS Version 6.1). Center for Creative Learning, Inc. & Creative Problem Solving Group, Inc. Available here .

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

What is problem solving.

Book Insights

The Back of the Napkin: Solving Problems and Selling Ideas With Pictures

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

Get 20% off your first year of Mind Tools

Our on-demand e-learning resources let you learn at your own pace, fitting seamlessly into your busy workday. Join today and save with our limited time offer!

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Most Popular

Newest Releases

Team Management Skills

5 Phrases That Kill Collaboration

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

How do i manage a hybrid team.

Adjusting your management style to a hybrid world

The Life Career Rainbow

Finding a Work-Life Balance That Suits You

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Anger management.

Control the Rage and Deal With Your Emotions

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Team Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Pain Points

• Case Studies
• Flexible Products

• Expert Insights
• Research Studies

• Creativity and Culture
• Management and Leadership
• Business Solutions

• Member Spotlight
• Employee Spotlight

Understanding the four stages of the creative process

There’s a lot that science can teach us about what goes into the creative process—and how each one of us can optimize our own.

How do great artists and innovators come up with their most brilliant ideas ? And by what kind of alchemical process are they able to bring those ideas to life? 

I have eagerly sought the answers to these questions over the past decade of my career as a psychology writer. My fascination with the lives and minds of brilliant artists and innovators has led me on a quest to discover what makes us creative , where ideas come from, and how they come to life. But even after writing an entire book on the science of creativity and designing a creative personality test , there are more questions than answers in my mind. 

Decades of research have yet to uncover the unique spark of creative genius. Creativity is as perplexing to us today as it was to the ancients, who cast creative genius in the realm of the supernatural and declared it the work of the muses.  

What the science does show is that creative people are complex and contradictory. Their creative processes tend to be chaotic and nonlinear—which seems to mirror what’s going on in their brains. Contrary to the “right-brain myth,” creativity doesn’t just involve a single brain region or even a single side of the brain. Instead, the creative process draws on the whole brain. It’s a dynamic interplay of many diverse brain regions, thinking styles, emotions, and unconscious and conscious processing systems coming together in unusual and unexpected ways. 

But while we may never find the formula for creativity, there’s still a lot that science can teach us about what goes into the creative process—and how each one of us can optimize our own. 

Understanding your own creative process

One of the most illuminating things I’ve found is a popular four-stage model of the creative process developed in the 1920s. In his book The Art of Thought , British psychologist Graham Wallas outlined a theory of the creative process based on many years of observing and studying accounts of inventors and other creative types at work. 

The four stages of the creative process: 

Stage 1: preparation.

The creative process begins with preparation: gathering information and materials, identifying sources of inspiration, and acquiring knowledge about the project or problem at hand. This is often an internal process (thinking deeply to generate and engage with ideas) as well as an external one (going out into the world to gather the necessary data, resources, materials, and expertise). 

Stage 2: Incubation

Next, the ideas and information gathered in stage 1 marinate in the mind. As ideas slowly simmer, the work deepens and new connections are formed. During this period of germination, the artist takes their focus off the problem and allows the mind to rest. While the conscious mind wanders, the unconscious engages in what Einstein called “combinatory play”: taking diverse ideas and influences and finding new ways to bring them together. 

Stage 3: Illumination

Next comes the elusive aha moment. After a period of incubation, insights arise from the deeper layers of the mind and break through to conscious awareness, often in a dramatic way. It’s the sudden Eureka! that comes when you’re in the shower, taking a walk, or occupied with something completely unrelated. Seemingly out of nowhere, the solution presents itself. 

Stage 4: Verification

Following the aha moment, the words get written down, the vision is committed to paint or clay, the business plan is developed. Whatever ideas and insights arose in stage 3 are fleshed out and developed. The artist uses critical thinking and aesthetic judgment skills to hone and refine the work and then communicate its value to others. 

Of course, these stages don’t always play out in such an orderly, linear fashion. The creative process tends to look more like a zigzag or spiral than a straight line. The model certainly has its limitations, but it can offer a road map of sorts for our own creative journey, offering a direction, if not a destination. It can help us become more aware of where we’re at in our own process, where we need to go, and the mental processes that can help us get there. And when the process gets a little too messy, coming back to this framework can help us to recenter, realign, and chart the path ahead. 

For instance, if you can’t seem to get from incubation to illumination, the solution might be to go back to stage 1, gathering more resources and knowledge to find that missing element. Or perhaps, in the quest for productivity , you’ve made the all-too-common mistake of skipping straight to stage 4, pushing ahead with a half-baked idea before it’s fully marinated. In that case, carving out time and space for stage 2 may be the necessary detour. 

Related articles

How to optimize your creative process for ultimate success

But let’s dig a little deeper: As I’ve contemplated and applied the four-stage model in my own work, I’ve found within it a much more profound insight into the mysteries of creation.  

At its heart, any creative process is about discovering something new within ourselves and then bringing that something into the world for others to experience and enjoy. The work of the artist, the visionary, the innovator is to bridge their inner and outer worlds—taking something that only exists within their own mind and heart and soul and birthing it into concrete, tangible form (you know, not unlike that other kind of creative process). 

Any creative process is a dance between the inner and the outer; the unconscious and conscious mind; dreaming and doing; madness and method; solitary reflection and active collaboration. Psychologists describe it in simple terms of inspiration (coming up with ideas) and generation (bringing ideas to life). 

In the four-stage model, we can see how the internal and external elements of the creative process interact. stages 2 and 3 are all about inspiration: dreaming, reflecting, imagining, opening up to inspiration, and allowing the unconscious mind to do its work. Stages 1 and 4, meanwhile, are about generation: doing the external work of research, planning, execution, and collaboration. Through a dynamic dance of inspiration and generation, brilliant work comes to life. 

How does this help us in our own creative process? The more we master this balance, the more we can tap into our creative potential. We all have a preference for one side over the other, and by becoming more aware of our natural inclinations, we can learn how to optimize our strengths and minimize our weaknesses.  

More inward-focused, idea-generating types excel in stages 2 and 3: getting inspired and coming up with brilliant ideas. But they run the risk of getting stuck in their own heads and failing to materialize their brilliant ideas in the world. These thinkers and dreamers often need to bring more time and focus to stages 1 and 4 in order to keep their creative process on track. Balance inspiration with generation by creating the necessary structures to help you commit to action and put one foot in front of the other to make it happen—or just collaborate with a doer who you can outsource your ideas to! 

Doer types, on the other hand, shine in stages 1 and 4. They’re brilliant at getting things done, but they risk putting all their focus on productivity at the expense of the inner work and big-picture thinking that helps produce truly inspired work. When we bypass the critical work that occurs in the incubation stage, we miss out on our most original and groundbreaking ideas. If you’re a doer/generator, you can up-level your creative process by clearing out the space in your mind and your schedule to dream, imagine, reflect, and contemplate. 

By seeking a balance of these opposing forces, we can bring some order to the chaos of the creative process. And as we become dreamers who do and doers who dream, we empower ourselves to share more of our creative gifts with the world. 

WeWork’s space products including  On Demand ,  All Access , and  dedicated spaces  help businesses of all sizes solve their biggest challenges.

Carolyn Gregoire is a writer and creative consultant living in Brooklyn. She is the co-author of  Wired to Create: Unravelling the Mysteries of the Creative Mind  and the creator of the Creative Types personality test. Her work has been featured in the New York Times, Scientific American, TIME, Harvard Business Review, and other publications.

Designed to cultivate a positive and respectful working environment, here are the most common coworking etiquette rules.

“Busyness” doesn’t always equate with progress—learning how to prioritize tasks will help you make the most of your workday

Attending lots of virtual meetings can be tiring. Here’s how to spot symptoms of fatigue and how to fix them

What is creative problem-solving?

Table of Contents

An introduction to creative problem-solving.

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

Importance of divergent and convergent thinking

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

Emphasis on collaboration and diverse perspectives

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

Nurturing a risk-taking and experimental mindset

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

The role of intuition and lateral thinking

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

Stages of the creative problem-solving process

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

Clarifying: Understanding the real problem or challenge

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

Ideating: Generating diverse and multiple solutions

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

Developing: Refining and honing promising solutions

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

Implementing: Acting on the best solutions

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

Techniques for creative problem-solving

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

Brainstorming

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

Mind mapping

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

SCAMPER technique

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

Benefits of creative problem-solving

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

Finding novel solutions to old problems

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

Enhanced adaptability in changing environments

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

Building collaborative and innovative teams

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

Fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement

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

Get on board in seconds

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

Project Bliss

The osborn parnes creative problem-solving process.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Benefits of Using Creative Problem Solving  

Using a creative problem-solving approach has multiple benefits:

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

Origin of the Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-solving Process

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

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

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

What is the Osborn Parnes Creative Problem-solving Process

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

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

1.    Mess-Finding / Objective Finding

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

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

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

2.    Fact-Finding

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

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

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

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

3.    Problem-Finding

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

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

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

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

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

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

4.    Idea-Finding

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

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

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

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

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

5.    Solution-Finding

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

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

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

6.    Action-Finding

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

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

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

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

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

Creative Problem-Solving Categories

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

More recent modifications group the activities into four categories: 

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

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

Divergent and Convergent Thinking

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

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

Divergent Thinking

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

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

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

Use questions to stimulate creative thinking.

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

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

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

Convergent Thinking

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Running Your Problem-Solving Sessions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related Posts

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

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

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

Great reading – it helped me with my Creativity Tools homework

• Pingback: Creative Problem-Solving – Riyanthi Sianturi November 7, 2020

• Board of Directors

What is CPS?

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

Why does CPS work?

CPS begins with two assumptions:

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

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

Divergent thinking.

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

Convergent Thinking

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

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

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

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

The CPS Process

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

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

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

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

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

Explore Ideas. Generate ideas that answer the challenge questions.

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

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

Explore Ideas. Generate ideas that answer the challenge question

Core Principles of Creative Problem Solving

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

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

Performance & Leadership Unleashed

Creative Problem Solving

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On This Page

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

Innovation is a Team Sport

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

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

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

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

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

What is the Creative Problem Solving Process?

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

It’s effectively a process framework.

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

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

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

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

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

What are Variations of the Creative Problem Solving Process?

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

Here are five variations that are commonly referenced:

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

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

Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving (CPS)

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

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

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

Criticisms of the Original Creative Problem Solving Approach

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

These include:

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

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

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

Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

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

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

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

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

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

Why Creative Problem Solving 21st Century?

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

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

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

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

Stages of the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

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

Steps of the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

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

CLARIFY THE PROBLEM

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

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

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

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

GATHER DATA

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

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

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

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

GENERATE IDEAS

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

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

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

DEVELOP SOLUTIONS

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

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

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

PPCo EVALUATION

PPCo stands for Pluses, Potentials, Concerns and Overcome concerns

Review your solution story .

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

PLAN FOR ACTION

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

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

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

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

Credits for the Creative Problem Solving 21st Century

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

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

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

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

Video Walkthroughs

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

FourSight Thinking Profiles

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

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

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

Why FourSight Thinking Profiles?

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

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

Stages of FourSight Creative Problem Solving

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

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

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

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

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

4 Thinking Profiles in FourSight

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

The four preferences in FourSight are:

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

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

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

Right Hand vs. Left Hand

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

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

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

Combinations of FourSight Profiles

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

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

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

2-Way Combinations

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

3-Way Combinations

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

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

Where to Go for More On FourSight

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

Basadur’s Innovative Process

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

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

• Problem Formulation
• Solution Formulation
• Solution Implementation

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

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

What is Basadur’s Innovative Process

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

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

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

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

“That’s a great idea, but…”

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

3 Phases and 8 Steps of Basadur’s Innovative Process

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

Phase 1: Problem Formulation

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

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

Phase 2: Solution Formulation

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

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

Phase 3: Solution Implementation

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

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

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

Where to Go for More on Basadur’s Innovation Process

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

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

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

The Story of Synetics

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Synetics?

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

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

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

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

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

Synetic Sessions

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

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

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

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

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

Steps of the Synetics Process

The Synectics process typically involves the following steps:

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

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

Example of How Synetics Explores Analogies and Metaphors

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What Does SCAMPER Stand For?

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

Here’s what each letter stands for:

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

Example of SCAMPER

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

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

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

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

Design Thinking

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

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

Here are some key ways to think about Design Thinking:

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

What is the Origin of Design Thinking

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

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

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

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

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

Key Principles of Design Thinking

Here are key principles of Design Thinking:

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

Where to Go for More on Design Thinking

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Creative Problem Solving vs. Brainstorming vs. Lateral Thinking

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

Creative Problem Solving:

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

Brainstorming:

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

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

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

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

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

Creative Problem Solving Empowers You to Change Your World

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You Might Also Like

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

About JD Meier

I help leaders change the world.

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

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

• Art and Psychology

Graham Wallas and the Four Stages of the Creative Process

The 4 Steps of Creative Problem Solving

Based on 60 years of study and practice in the field of creativity, we know that creative outcomes must be deliberate. We also know that the creative problem-solving (CPS) process is a universal set of four steps designed to frame a problem, find a novel solution, and formulate a plan of action. As we explore in this Advisor , these CPS steps comprise the building blocks of innovation. First up: Clarify a problem, challenge, or opportunity.

• Sustainability
• Executive Education
• Join the Cutter Community
• Subscribe to our Newsletters
• All Experts
• Leadership Experts
• Sustainability Experts
• Technology Experts
• Industry Experts
• Corporate Overview
• Testimonials
• Privacy Policy & Terms of Use
• Write for Cutter

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

Discover the 5 Stages of Creative Problem Solving

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

What is Creative Problem Solving?

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

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

What are the 5 stages of creative problem solving?

Preparation: understanding the issue.

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

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

Define the Problem

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

Gather Information

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

Incubation: Letting Ideas Marinate

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

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

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

Set Problem Aside

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

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

Engage in Different Activities

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

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

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

This can lead to sudden moments of insight and creativity.

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

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

Insight: The Aha Moment

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

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

Wait for the Spark

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

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

Recognize the Solution

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

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

Evaluation: Testing Solutions

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

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

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

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

Assess Ideas

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

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

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

Refine Solution

To refine a solution, you can:

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

Specific steps to further improve the proposed solution include:

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

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

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

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

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

Elaboration: Applying the Solution

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

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

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

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

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

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

Develop Action Steps

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

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

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

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

Implement the Solution

The 5 stages of creative problem-solving are:

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

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

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

How Each Stage Fits Into the Creative Process

Link between stages.

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

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

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

Transition from One Stage to Next

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

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

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

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

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

Students Win with Creative Problem-Solving

How creative problem solving works in schools.

Before downloading the canvas, we would like to invite you to our newsletter, from time-to-time we will send you curated content about business strategy

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Overview of the Problem-Solving Mental Process

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

• Identify the Problem
• Define the Problem
• Form a Strategy
• Organize Information
• Allocate Resources
• Monitor Progress
• Evaluate the Results

Frequently Asked Questions

Problem-solving is a mental process that involves discovering, analyzing, and solving problems. The ultimate goal of problem-solving is to overcome obstacles and find a solution that best resolves the issue.

The best strategy for solving a problem depends largely on the unique situation. In some cases, people are better off learning everything they can about the issue and then using factual knowledge to come up with a solution. In other instances, creativity and insight are the best options.

It is not necessary to follow problem-solving steps sequentially, It is common to skip steps or even go back through steps multiple times until the desired solution is reached.

In order to correctly solve a problem, it is often important to follow a series of steps. Researchers sometimes refer to this as the problem-solving cycle. While this cycle is portrayed sequentially, people rarely follow a rigid series of steps to find a solution.

The following steps include developing strategies and organizing knowledge.

1. Identifying the Problem

While it may seem like an obvious step, identifying the problem is not always as simple as it sounds. In some cases, people might mistakenly identify the wrong source of a problem, which will make attempts to solve it inefficient or even useless.

Some strategies that you might use to figure out the source of a problem include :

• Asking questions about the problem
• Breaking the problem down into smaller pieces
• Looking at the problem from different perspectives
• Conducting research to figure out what relationships exist between different variables

2. Defining the Problem

After the problem has been identified, it is important to fully define the problem so that it can be solved. You can define a problem by operationally defining each aspect of the problem and setting goals for what aspects of the problem you will address

At this point, you should focus on figuring out which aspects of the problems are facts and which are opinions. State the problem clearly and identify the scope of the solution.

3. Forming a Strategy

After the problem has been identified, it is time to start brainstorming potential solutions. This step usually involves generating as many ideas as possible without judging their quality. Once several possibilities have been generated, they can be evaluated and narrowed down.

The next step is to develop a strategy to solve the problem. The approach used will vary depending upon the situation and the individual's unique preferences. Common problem-solving strategies include heuristics and algorithms.

• Heuristics are mental shortcuts that are often based on solutions that have worked in the past. They can work well if the problem is similar to something you have encountered before and are often the best choice if you need a fast solution.
• Algorithms are step-by-step strategies that are guaranteed to produce a correct result. While this approach is great for accuracy, it can also consume time and resources.

Heuristics are often best used when time is of the essence, while algorithms are a better choice when a decision needs to be as accurate as possible.

4. Organizing Information

Before coming up with a solution, you need to first organize the available information. What do you know about the problem? What do you not know? The more information that is available the better prepared you will be to come up with an accurate solution.

When approaching a problem, it is important to make sure that you have all the data you need. Making a decision without adequate information can lead to biased or inaccurate results.

5. Allocating Resources

Of course, we don't always have unlimited money, time, and other resources to solve a problem. Before you begin to solve a problem, you need to determine how high priority it is.

If it is an important problem, it is probably worth allocating more resources to solving it. If, however, it is a fairly unimportant problem, then you do not want to spend too much of your available resources on coming up with a solution.

At this stage, it is important to consider all of the factors that might affect the problem at hand. This includes looking at the available resources, deadlines that need to be met, and any possible risks involved in each solution. After careful evaluation, a decision can be made about which solution to pursue.

6. Monitoring Progress

After selecting a problem-solving strategy, it is time to put the plan into action and see if it works. This step might involve trying out different solutions to see which one is the most effective.

It is also important to monitor the situation after implementing a solution to ensure that the problem has been solved and that no new problems have arisen as a result of the proposed solution.

Effective problem-solvers tend to monitor their progress as they work towards a solution. If they are not making good progress toward reaching their goal, they will reevaluate their approach or look for new strategies .

7. Evaluating the Results

After a solution has been reached, it is important to evaluate the results to determine if it is the best possible solution to the problem. This evaluation might be immediate, such as checking the results of a math problem to ensure the answer is correct, or it can be delayed, such as evaluating the success of a therapy program after several months of treatment.

Once a problem has been solved, it is important to take some time to reflect on the process that was used and evaluate the results. This will help you to improve your problem-solving skills and become more efficient at solving future problems.

A Word From Verywell​

It is important to remember that there are many different problem-solving processes with different steps, and this is just one example. Problem-solving in real-world situations requires a great deal of resourcefulness, flexibility, resilience, and continuous interaction with the environment.

Get Advice From The Verywell Mind Podcast

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast shares how you can stop dwelling in a negative mindset.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

You can become a better problem solving by:

• Practicing brainstorming and coming up with multiple potential solutions to problems
• Being open-minded and considering all possible options before making a decision
• Breaking down problems into smaller, more manageable pieces
• Asking for help when needed
• Researching different problem-solving techniques and trying out new ones
• Learning from mistakes and using them as opportunities to grow

It's important to communicate openly and honestly with your partner about what's going on. Try to see things from their perspective as well as your own. Work together to find a resolution that works for both of you. Be willing to compromise and accept that there may not be a perfect solution.

Take breaks if things are getting too heated, and come back to the problem when you feel calm and collected. Don't try to fix every problem on your own—consider asking a therapist or counselor for help and insight.

If you've tried everything and there doesn't seem to be a way to fix the problem, you may have to learn to accept it. This can be difficult, but try to focus on the positive aspects of your life and remember that every situation is temporary. Don't dwell on what's going wrong—instead, think about what's going right. Find support by talking to friends or family. Seek professional help if you're having trouble coping.

Davidson JE, Sternberg RJ, editors.  The Psychology of Problem Solving .  Cambridge University Press; 2003. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511615771

Sarathy V. Real world problem-solving .  Front Hum Neurosci . 2018;12:261. Published 2018 Jun 26. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00261

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• Episode 4: Clarify Stage of Creative Problem Solving
• June 18, 2015

In this episode you will learn tools to use for the first stage of the Creative Problem Solving process – the Clarify Stage.

What You’ll Learn

• Why the Clarify Stage of CPS is important
• The 3 steps within the Clarify Stage
• How to develop a challenge statement that guides the rest of the CPS process
• Three activities to help you get clarity and develop your own challenge statement

Feel like reading instead of listening? You can read it below. Enjoy!

Amy Climer:  On today’s episode, we’re going to walk through the first stage of the Creative Problem Solving Process.

Hey everyone, welcome to  episode #4  of the Creative Problem Solving Process.  I’m really excited because this episode is going to be a little bit different than the past ones.  This is the first of four episodes that will make up a Creative Problem Solving Workshop to help you develop creative ideas for particular challenge you have.  Today’s episode, we’re focusing on the clarifying stage of Creative Problem Solving.

The four episodes are going to build on each other and you’ll be able to work on a real challenge you have.  You can either listen to all the four episodes first and then do the activities or do the activities as I present them by pausing the episode.  The activities will help you develop new ideas and help you implement those ideas for whatever your challenge is.  Accompanying this episode is also a free workbook that I’ve put together for you, a little bonus for you all.  You can download at  ClimerConsulting.com/004 .  The workbook has all the activities in there to make it easier for you to follow along.

The Creative Problem Solving Process begins with clarifying the situation, clarifying the challenge you want to focus on.  Think about a problem or a challenge that you have in your organization or that you just have personally – something that you’re interested and coming up with new ideas for.  It could be that you’re trying to develop a new product, maybe you have a product or a service that you’re looking at how to market better.  Maybe you want to engage your staff in a different way or more fully.  Maybe you want to design a really cool family vacation or perhaps you’re planning a wedding and you want it to be really innovative and interesting.

Whatever it is, pick a challenge that you want to focus on through these next four episodes.  Once you have your challenge, we’re going to start clarifying it.  The purpose of clarifying of course is to gain clarity about the situation.  You’re going to explore the background, assumptions you might have.  You’re going to look at data and ultimately you’re going to develop a specific challenge statement to focus on.  This stage of the process is important because people often don’t spend enough time clarifying and then what happens is they come up with all these ideas and they implement one or more of the ideas, but it doesn’t actually solve the problem they were originally trying to solve.  Take in some time and dig in and really figuring out “what is my real issue” will help you along the road.

In the clarifying stage, there are two steps – there is the Exploring the Vision and Formulating the Challenge.  We’re going to spend some time in each of those and at the end, you’re going to have a challenge statement that you’ll use as we go into the Ideation Stage.  We’re going to start with Exploring the Vision.  If you have the workbook, flip to that page in the workbook and you’ll see that I’ve listed a space for you to fill out 30 things.  What you’re going to do is develop 30 different iterations of your problem.  That may seem like a lot to you – and it is – but often what happens is we stop too soon and we think, “Well, there are three or four, maybe five different ways to look at it,” but I want to push you to keep going.

What you’re going to do is you’re going to answer these two sentences.  “I wish….” or “Wouldn’t it be great if…”  Answer those in 30 different ways specific to your challenge.  Let’s use the example of designing a wedding.  I think that’s something that most people have either experienced or you’ve been to a wedding, or at least if nothing else, you understand what a wedding is about.  Let’s say that you’re getting married and you really want your family and friends at the wedding to have an opportunity to get to know each other.  Perhaps you might say, “Wouldn’t it be great if at our wedding, we started developing community amongst our family and friends?” or “I wish at my wedding that my family and friends got to know each other at a deeper level.”  Those are some examples of how you might phrase the challenge.

Keep going.  You can look at this from a lot of different ways.  At this point, you might also ask yourself the 5 Why’s.  If your wish is to develop community at your wedding, then ask yourself why.  Why is that important to you?  Why do you want to do that?  Whatever that answer is, develop an “I wish” statement from that.  Maybe if you say, “Well, I really want to develop community amongst my family and friends,” and then someone says, “Why?”  You say, “Well, I really like for them to get to know each other because I feel like I have this great group of friends and my family is awesome, but they don’t know each other and that would be amazing if they got to know each other.  I think that they would really like each other.”

Then the question might be, “Is your wedding the best place to do that?”  It might push you even further where maybe it’s not the wedding that’s the place to do this.  What if, “I wish my family and friends knew each other really well.”  The wedding may or may not be the place to do that.  If your vision statement doesn’t include the wedding, you’re moving up on this ladder of abstraction.  You’re taking the problem and you’re becoming more abstract with it.  Instead of specific to the wedding, you’re now looking even broader.  Now that has pros and cons, of course.  Sometimes, you can make the vision so broad that it’s pretty diluted.  On the other hand, sometimes it could be so narrow and so specific that you’re not going to be able to generate as many ideas or the ideas you generate won’t solve the real problem.

As you move up that ladder of abstraction, eventually typically, the very top of the ladder is something like, “I want to live a happy and healthy life.”  Maybe that’s too broad so you’re going to bring it down to a little bit more specific and concrete level.  Find your sweet spot in there as you’re writing those vision statements and come up with what might be the ideal level of abstraction for you and for your situation.  If you are working on this in real time with me, you can go ahead and hit pause, work on those 30 statements, and then come back.

The next part, once you have your 30 ideas for your different angles of the vision, is you’re going to look at those and I want you to consider the 3 I’s.  This is very helpful in the Exploring the Vision stage. The 3 I’s are Influence, Importance, and Imagination.  For each of those statements, I want you to think about, “Do you have influence and ownership over this?”  It has to be something that you personally can be involved in solving.  If you don’t own the problem, don’t go through this process.  Don’t try to solve a problem for somebody else.  They most likely are not going to want your ideas.  You may want to bring them in to the process and work with them and make it more collaborative, but it’s pretty unusual to have someone just love this idea that you spent hours working on.  Make sure you can actually influence the action.  That’s the first I.

The second I is Importance.  Is this problem worth putting time into?  Obviously if it’s not, don’t do it.  Move on to something else.  The third one is Imagination.  Whatever the problem is, you want it to be something where you need imagination.  You want to think differently about it.  Sometimes, we just need a couple of ideas but we don’t really want to be that creative about something.  If that’s the case, you don’t need a creative process to solve that problem.  Choose another problem where you do want some creativity and innovation.  Make sure that your challenge meets the 3 I’s –Influence, Importance, and Imagination.  Take a few minutes.  Look at that list of 30 and perhaps circle the top couple, maybe the top three or four that look like they are going to be the best ones, and if you need to pause the episode for that.

Now that you’ve circled the best vision statements, we’re going to move on to another step, a little kind of a side step called the Data Dump.  What you’re going to do with the Data Dump is explore everything you already know about your situation.  You’re going to look at the facts, you’re going to look at the history or the background, you’re going to think about who all the stakeholders are, what opportunities arise, what’s the current state of the situation, and you’re just going to really dig in and explore all these pieces.

Part of the Data Dump is you’re going to use an approach called 5WH and this is where you’re developing a series of questions that start with either who, what, when, where, why, or how.  You can also develop a second set of questions where you add the word “else” in the end – who else, what else, when else, etc.  The first thing you’ll do is you’ll craft a series of questions beginning with those sentence stems and then you’re going to answer those questions.  You’re going to generate a ton of information about your problem.  In developing the questions, you want to think about feelings, assumptions, impressions, information, and other questions.

This is all in the workbook.  You can go to that page titled Data Dump and you’ll see a few examples.  An example for the when question is “When are impressions formed about the situation?” For instance if we’re continuing with the wedding and the wedding example, impressions about weddings are formed as early as when you get the invitation.  They are formed when you walk in the door and what’s the first thing you see.  Those are the kind of things that you’ll answer for that question.

Another example is “Where can I get more information about the current situation?”  Another example is “Why has this problem evolved?”  You’re going to come up with a series of questions and just list all the questions first and then after you have the questions, spend some time answering those questions.  You can see that this is going to take a while.  We’re going fairly deep.  We’re trying to figure out what exactly is our problem.

The next stage is the Problem Statement.  You’ve spent a lot of time Exploring the Vision and you have a better sense of what’s going on.  You’re going to hone in the Clarifying Stage by developing a specific statement.  There’s a certain formula you’re going to use to help you create the statement.  The formula goes like this: there’s a question starter or sentence stem at the beginning plus an actor, plus an action, plus a goal.  This is all in that workbook.  The question starters or sentence stems might be “How to…, in what ways might…, wouldn’t it be nice if…, how might…, I wish…, or it would be great if…”

As you’re developing the problem statement, there are some criteria that your statement needs to meet.  We call these the 3 B’s – Broad, Brief, and Beneficial.  First, the statement needs to be broad.  We’re going to move off of the wedding example but an example of a broad statement would be, “In what ways might I take the next step in my career that also provides reasonable income?”  That’s a good statement.  One that’s not broad enough is “In what ways might I get a job with a new employer?”  The reason why these two statements matter and why the crafting of the statement is important is because you’re going to get different ideas based on those two statements.

The first one, “How might I take the next step in my career?”  Maybe an idea is to start your own business or maybe it’s to go get an internship.  There are so many options that might come up with that one but if you said, “How do I get a job with a new employer?”  Those ideas wouldn’t even come up although they would probably solve your problem.  The way you craft a statement really matters.  You want it to be broad.  Of course you don’t want it to be, again, so broad of, “In what ways might I live a happy, healthy life?”  In some ways, that’s just too big.  This is going back to that ladder of abstraction.  Where do you fit within that ladder?

The next B is Brief.  You want the challenge statement to be reasonably short.  For instance, “How might I help our team be more productive?”  Great, clear to the point, we got it.  One that is not so good is, “How might I create a project plan that would help me focus the energy of my team members in a direction that is mutually beneficial and productive for all those involved and help my boss see that the energy of the group is being well used?”  That is way too long.  It’s like you can’t even track exactly what the problem is.  It’s too complicated.  You want it to brief.  “How might I help our team be more productive?”  There you go.

The third B is Beneficial.  A good problem statement might be, “Wouldn’t it be nice if I could maintain my health?” versus “Wouldn’t it be nice if I could avoid being sick?”  Again, the way you word it is going to impact the type of ideas you come up with.  “Wouldn’t it be nice if I could avoid being sick?”  Remember that movie about the boy in the bubble, you could just stay in your room, stay in your house all the time.  You could wear a little mask on your face and never leave and don’t actually interact with anyone else.  You probably wouldn’t get sick but I wouldn’t say you’d be very healthy.  “Wouldn’t it be nice if I could maintain my health,” we come up with very different ideas than “wouldn’t it be nice if I could avoid being sick.”

Another example would be “wouldn’t it be nice if I had a great relationship with my roommate” versus “wouldn’t it be nice if my roommate and I didn’t argue.”  Well, if you don’t want to argue, just draw a line in the middle of the room and don’t talk to each other.  That’s not necessarily what’s going to solve your problem.  Perhaps what you really want is to have a great relationship with your roommate and that’s going to be a lot more fulfilling.  Those are some examples of challenge statements with the 3 B’s.  I want you to spend some time now looking at your data, looking at the vision, and craft a challenge statement that meets those 3 B’s.

I’m going to give you a few more examples in case that’s helpful.  How to prioritize the use of my work time? Or perhaps you work in a hospital, how do I design a work schedule for our staff that allows nurses to work 8-hour shifts instead of 12-hour shifts?  In what ways might we develop our staff’s creativity?  Because I was recently doing some travelling, how might we design our airports so that people enjoy the experience?  How to increase the sales of our new product?  Let’s say you work in a summer camp, wouldn’t it be nice if we had new unique, creative in-camp programs this year?  Spend a little time writing your challenge statement and I would suggest writing several statements and then narrowing in on the best one.  Go ahead and pause the episode and work on that.

Now that you have your challenge statement, you’re going to kind of do a little bit of gut check with that statement or with that question, and ask yourself this, “If we answer this challenge statement, would our problem be solved or would our troubles go away?” Think about that.  If your answer is, “Yeah, if we answered this, it would be awesome,” then you probably have a pretty good challenge statement.  Sometimes though, you might realize, “Well, actually if we answered this specifically, we’re going to still have this other problem.” Think about how do you really get at the root of the problem, what really is your problem?  Spending time in the clarifying stage will make the rest of the creative problem solving process so much better and so much more worthwhile.

I hope that this is helpful.  I hope that you will all work through this.  It takes time and it takes work.  If you’re working with a team, it probably will take even longer.  It’s worth it, though.  Play this episode for your entire team.  Walk through each of the steps.  Share that workbook with your team.  You’re welcome to use that.

Here’s your challenge for the week.  I want you to develop your challenge statement, to go through the clarifying stage of the creative problem solving process.  This episode is airing on June 18, 2015.  If you email me your challenge statement by Monday, June 22nd, or if you put it in the show notes in the comment section, I will share at least a couple of ideas related to your challenge in  episode #5 , which is the Ideation Stage.  That will be the following week.  Send that to me via email or in the show notes by Monday and if I get that, I will be sure to come up with a few ideas to share with you.

My email address is  [email protected]  or you can go directly to the show notes, which is also where you can get the workbook and some other resources.  That is  ClimerConsulting.com/004 .  The other thing that I’ll put in the show notes is some books about Creative Problem Solving.  If you’re interested in learning more about this, I’ll put them in there.  I got some of these activities from the books that I will list.  I’ll put them in there if you just want to dig in and learn more.  If you have any questions about the clarifying stage, shoot me an email.  I would be more than happy to respond and answer those questions.  Also if you do go to my website, you can sign up for my newsletter where you will get more great content about creativity and innovation.

Thank you so much for listening to the Deliberate Creative podcast.  I’m really excited to hear your challenges and what you’re trying to work on.  I hope this helps you be more creative both individually and with your team.  Go out and be creative.  Clarify your problem! I will talk to you next time.  Bye y’all.

Thanks for Listening!

Thank you so much for listening to The Deliberate Creative Podcast. If you have feedback or comments leave them below. You can also  email me directly  with any questions, suggestions, or feedback.

If you enjoyed the episode please share it with others using the social media links at the bottom of this page. And, leave an honest review on  iTunes . Your reviews make a big difference and I love reading them!

Note: The links on this page may be affiliate links. That means I get a small commission of your sale, at no cost to you. However, I only share links to products that I or my guests believe in. Enjoy them! 

Dr. Amy Climer

Listen on itunes, listen on spotify, listen on google play, rave reviews.

Amy Climer’s show helps all of us grow our creative muscles. She is authentic and cares about her listeners. Amy empowers us with tools that work in the office, training sessions, and our communities. The best part is her ability to make what feels out of reach, something that can be accomplished with simple steps forward.

Love listening to Amy’s podcast! Her guests are awesome and conversations are full of inspiring information.

Amy Climer hit a home run with this podcast and continues to get hits with every episode. I was hooked with the first one and binge-listened to the four solo episodes about the Creative Problem Solving process. Her knowledge of the subject of creativity and innovation is incredibly deep. And, she makes it easy for others to learn and apply. I have listened to other "expert" podcasts and Amy's is different in that she holds nothing back. Episode after episode offer practical insights, tips and tools. She has a generosity of spirit that is contagious.

Recent Episodes

Episode 103: Designing Creative Space with Donald Rattner

Episode 102: Emergent Innovation with Johnathan Cromwell

Episode 101: Polymaths with Dr. Angela Cotellessa

Episode 100: Creativity Stories from Listeners

Episode 99: How to Conduct Ethnographic Interviews for Design

Hire dr. amy climer.

Fill in the form below and our team will be happy to assist you

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

What are the Stages of Creativity?

Let’s explore the various stages of creativity so you can get a firmer idea of its true nature as such a powerful human resource. Graham Wallas was the first to create an overview of a creative process back in 1926. As you can imagine, lots of iterations have emerged since then. Some of these theories describe a creative process of 4, 5 or 6 stages. But essentially, nothing has changed. Solid insights and knowledge do last for a long time.

• Transcript loading…

In the book The Art of Thought from 1926, Graham Wallas proposed one of the first complete models of the creative process. Wallas described how it consists of the four-stage process of preparation (or saturation), incubation, illumination and verification (or implementation). This 1920s’ theory continues to be highly cited among professional design teams and in scholarly works on creativity.

What happens in the four stages of creativity?

Preparation: This first stage is all about gathering information. This is the stage where you do user research and empathize with the users in order to define the problem and your users’ needs. Some people think that creative ideas just pop up from a vacuum, but creative ideas are always solutions to a problem or a need. At this stage, you also use various ideation methods to help you understand, attack and build your design problem and creative idea from various angles. You provoke your habitual thinking in order to better understand your design problem, your idea and your design space.

Incubation: At this stage, you take a step back from the problem and allow your mind to wander to let it contemplate and work the problem through. You nurture the unconscious thought process, for example, by staying open to the ideas that come to you while you do the dishes or go for a walk. You open your mind to all ideas—even the crazy ones.

Illumination: This is the third stage. This stage essentially describes the classic “eureka!” or “aha” moment of insight. However, the fact that illumination has an entire stage devoted to it shows that it’s essentially not just a quick moment of insight and helps us understand that it’s something we can—and should—work towards achieving. The third stage is what most people think is a classic characteristic of a creative person, but creativity is a process which even the most seemingly unimaginative people can learn to manage and nurture.

Verification/implementation: At this fourth stage, you build on the “aha” solution. You evaluate, analyze and build on your idea. You then polish it to make sure that it’s both useful and novel. At this stage, you would also often choose to prototype and test your idea in order to find out if it meets the users’ needs which you defined at the preparation stage—and, if so, polish it as needed.

How to Create a UX Portfolio

Get Weekly Design Insights

What you should read next, tree testing: a complete guide.

The Role of Micro-interactions in Modern UX

How to Design UI Forms in 2024: Your Best Guide

What is Eye Tracking in UX?

10 UI Designer Portfolio Examples

UX Storyboards: Ultimate Guide

• 2 weeks ago

Mobile Breadcrumbs: 8 Best Practices in UX

What is Interaction Design?

• 1.3k shares
• 3 weeks ago

The 5 Stages in the Design Thinking Process

• 1.8k shares

How to Use Mental Models in UX Design

Open Access—Link to us!

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

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

Privacy Settings

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

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

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

Enhanced Functionality

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

Referral Program

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

Error Reporting

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

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

Analytics Storage

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

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

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

Advertising Storage

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

Personalization Storage

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

Advertising Personalization

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

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

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

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

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

LinkedIn Insights

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

LinkedIn CAPI

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

Google Ads Tag

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

Share the knowledge!

Share this content on:

or copy link

Cite according to academic standards

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

New to UX Design? We’re giving you a free ebook!

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

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

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

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Creative problem solving and facial expressions: A stage based comparison

Mritunjay kumar.

1 Department of Design, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India

Satyaki Roy

2 Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India

Braj Bhushan

Ahmed sameer.

3 Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad, Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India

Associated Data

All data files are available from the protocols.io database ( dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.4r3l2oq4jv1y/v1 ).

A wealth of research indicates that emotions play an instrumental role in creative problem-solving. However, most of these studies have relied primarily on diary studies and self-report scales when measuring emotions during the creative processes. There has been a need to capture in-the-moment emotional experiences of individuals during the creative process using an automated emotion recognition tool. The experiment in this study examined the process-related difference between the creative problem solving (CPS) and simple problem solving (SPS) processes using protocol analysis and Markov’s chains. Further, this experiment introduced a novel method for measuring in-the-moment emotional experiences of individuals during the CPS and SPS processes using facial expressions and machine learning algorithms. The experiment described in this study employed 64 participants to solve different tasks while wearing camera-mounted headgear. Using retrospective analysis, the participants verbally reported their thoughts using video-stimulated recall. Our results indicate differences in the cognitive efforts spent at different stages during the CPS and SPS processes. We also found that most of the creative stages were associated with ambivalent emotions whereas the stage of block was associated with negative emotions.

Introduction

The cognitive mechanisms underlying the creative process have been the focus of creativity research for decades [ 1 ]. Numerous sources of information, knowledge, skills, and emotions are utilized in different ways during the creative process [ 2 ]. Therefore, understanding how individuals take different approaches and learn to be creative becomes crucial to support their creative development.

Recent years have seen a rise in the number of studies in understanding the creative subprocesses and stages [ 3 – 5 ]. While most of the studies have focused on understanding the granularity of the creative process, it is essential to identify the creative act in its totality [ 6 ]. It is crucial that we evaluate the similarities and differences between the creative and non-creative acts to develop a holistic understanding [ 2 ]. Nevertheless, this area has received scant attention, and no direct study has empirically investigated the nature of the either processes [ 7 – 9 ].

It is no surprise that a significant part of the creative process is emotional [ 10 ], from the initial decision to try something new to the skills for maintaining enthusiasm and perseverance for creative endeavors [ 8 ]. Unfortunately, assessing emotions during the creative process remains a challenge due to methodological complexities. Methods such as experience sampling methods and diary studies have successfully captured the dynamics, but they do not account for the in-the-moment emotional experiences during the creative process. There is a strong need for a novel approach to capturing emotions in real-time during the creative process.

This article is exploratory in nature and examines the process-related differences between the CPS and SPS processes, as well as captures the in-the-moment emotional experience of the individuals during the CPS process. The specific questions addressed in this article include:

• RQ1: What stages of the CPS and SPS require the greatest amount of cognitive effort from the individuals?
• RQ2: What types of emotions are experienced during the various stages of the creative process?

Background of the study

The dynamics of the creative process.

The connotation of the word ‘dynamic’ supports the concept of the creative process not being linear [ 2 ] p. 295 explained the creative process as “a succession of thoughts and actions that leads to novel and adapted productions.” Research into the creative process has progressed rapidly since [ 11 ] four-stage model of creativity and several models have emerged over the past few years (for a detailed overview, see [ 2 ]) despite the absence of consensus on the definition of the stages. Cropley and Cropley [ 12 ] have mentioned seven stages—preparation, activation, generation, illumination, verification, communication, and validation. In Wallas’ four-stage model, Sadler-Smith [ 13 ] proposes a five-stage model, with an intimation phase added between incubation and illumination. Sawyer’s emergent model [ 14 ] examined six subprocesses (intuition, idea emergence, iteration, experimentation, and exploration). More recent work by [ 3 ] examined the concurrent sequence between the subprocess of generation, selection, exploration, evaluation, refinement, comparison, synthesis, and application. Other researchers have explored the stages of problem recognition, idea generation, idea evaluation, and solution validation in creative problem solving [ 15 ]. Furthermore, for an understanding of the creative act in its entirety, it is necessary to identify similarities and differences between the processes that result in creative outcomes and those that result in noncreative outcomes [ 2 , 6 ]. Lubart presented four hypotheses as possible explanations for the differences. Under the first approach, creativity and non-creativity can be viewed as separate constructs that lead to creative and non-creative outcomes. The second hypothesis doesn’t differentiate these two processes and considers a creative and noncreative process continuum. Third, depending on the quality of knowledge used, the same process can lead to highly creative, moderately creative, or non-creative outcomes. Lastly, these processes may entail the same stages and may also involve the same amount of time spent at each stage, with the only variation being the quality of execution at each stage. Mumford and colleagues also outlined four hypotheses regarding the differences between creative and regular problem-solving processes. First, creative problem solving (CPS) involves ill-defined problems, as opposed to regular problem-solving. Second, CPS allows higher degrees of divergent and convergent thinking wherein routine tasks permit applying previously known procedures and information to solve the problem. Third, the difference lies in the multiple cycles of divergent and convergent thinking involved in CPS instead of regular problem-solving. Finally, the CPS process involves reorganizing and restructuring the information, while the routine, non-creative process just recalls the information based on the existing knowledge. These differences, though, require further investigation as there is no empirical evidence that can be used as a comparison between CPS and the simple problem solving (SPS) processes.

Emotions and the creative process

Similarly, understanding the emotional processes that contribute to creativity becomes essential as they influence higher-level cognitive functions during the creative process, such as perception of the stimuli, judgment, decision making, and reasoning [ 16 , 17 ]. Phenomenology research into creativity and emotions shows a wide range of emotions occurring during the creative process across many domains. Several creative individuals, e.g., artists, musicians, scientists, designers, describe the feelings of mixed emotions such as joy, happiness, and pain during the long processes of working and reworking on the creative problem to realize the idea of the product or outcome [ 18 , 19 ]. Some long-standing views have examined the role of positive emotions in enhancing cognitive flexibility and creativity [ 8 ]. Others have explored the relationship between negative affects compared to neutral mood states in promoting creativity by helping individuals be more focused, critical, and determined in producing a creative outcome [ 20 , 21 ]. The third paradigm produced reliable evidence for ambivalent emotions association with creativity [ 22 ], where highly activated positive (excited) and negative (angry) states were linked to high creative engagement and deactivated positive (relaxed) and negative (discouraged) states were linked to lower creative engagement [ 23 ].

Notably, a few studies have also investigated the dynamics of emotions for different creative stages. Peilloux and Botella [ 24 ] for example, found that the creative stages of immersion, thinking, research, inspiration, and insight were associated with positive emotions and the stages of judgment, experimentation, and planning were associated with negative emotions. Most recently, Kumar et al. [ 25 ] examined the dynamics of emotions using the eight design subprocesses, where positive affects dominated the conceptual phase of the design process whereas negative affects dominated the embodiment phase of the design process.

Existing measures of the creative process

Protocol analysis . Protocol analysis has emerged as an important tool for behavior analysis during the dynamics of the creative process [ 3 , 5 , 26 , 27 ]. Concurrent verbal protocols or the think-aloud method involves participants verbalizing their thought processes while performing the task in real-time using their short-term memory [ 28 ]. In the retrospective protocol method, participants retrieve the information of the already completed task that has been stored in their memory. Both these methods have their own advantages and limitations. Gero and Tang [ 29 ] have emphasized that both these methodologies achieve similar results with respect to examining the process-oriented aspects of the creative design process.

Markov’s chain analysis . Recent years have seen a rise in utilizing the Markov’s chain analysis to study the creative subprocess sequence. A Markov Chain is a stochastic model for predicting, estimating, or guessing the result of an event based on the preceding state and its action [ 30 – 32 ]. Pringle and Sowden [ 5 ] compared shifts of the associative mode of thinking with the analytical mode of thinking during the processing of emotional input. Moreover, Kan and Gero [ 33 ] examined design protocols from the standpoint of the sequential order of the Function Behavior-Structure (FBS) processes using the first-order Markov chain for various design processes. Nevertheless, the Markov analysis can be performed on any coding scheme. Ergodic Markov chains have the property of achieving a single stationary state distribution as time progresses. Generally, it is represented as a row vector π whose entries are probabilities that add to 1, and given the transition matrix P, it satisfies

where π is referred to as the equilibrium distribution of a chain. Computing a stationary state distribution makes it easy to statistically compare different distribution probabilities.

Existing measures of emotions during the creative process

Most of the published research in measuring creativity and emotions together has relied primarily on diary studies and experience sampling methods [ 34 , 35 ]. Even though these methods offer greater ecological validity, they are costly, time consuming, and do not account for in-the-moment emotional experiences of the creators. A further step in this direction should include the use of various technological advances that enable the investigation of the physiological and behavioral measures of the creative process and emotions [ 36 ]. A recent study employed eight body postures to decode an individual’s emotions during the creative design process using Kinect and a machine learning classifier [ 37 ]. Several articles have also asserted that facial expressions can be used to study emotions during the creative process [ 17 , 38 ]. Maybe the concept of measuring facial Action Units (AUs) can be utilized to map the corresponding emotions that arise at different stages of the creative process.

Present study

The research gap.

Several articles have asserted that facial expressions can be leveraged to study emotions of the individuals during the creative process. To the best of our knowledge, no study has examined the dynamics of emotions during the CPS process using facial expression data.

Consequently, the two primary goals of this study are to examine the process related difference between the CPS and SPS processes and to capture in-the-moment emotional experiences of individuals using facial expressions during the CPS process.

Objective of this study

More specifically, the objectives of this study are -

• To compare the CPS and SPS processes using Protocol analysis and Markov chains.
• To classify different stages of CPS process based on automatic facial AU data combinations.

Participants

A total of 69 participants volunteered for the study, of which two opted out of the study, citing discomfort in wearing the headgear during the experiment, while the data of three participants were excluded due to the wrong orientation of the facial camera during the experiment. Thus, the study was carried out on a convenience sample of 64 adults randomly assigned to the CPS and SPS task groups. The CPS and SPS groups comprised 33 (17 men and 16 women) and 31 (18 men and 13 women) participants, respectively. The mean age of CPS group was 25.24 years (Men 25.59 years, SD 1.06; Women 24.88, SD 0.96), while the mean age of SPS group was 25.45 years (Men 25.78, SD 0.81; Women 25.00, SD 0.71). All the participants were postgraduate students ranging from several disciplines: mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, fine arts, design, civil engineering, psychology, literature, philosophy, and economics. The presence of glasses, beards, and mustaches were the exclusion criteria. The participants were recruited through an advertisement and were monetarily compensated. They were briefed about the study, and their participation was confirmed after they signed the informed consent form. The study protocol (IITK/IEC/2018-19/II/7) was approved by the Institute Ethics Committee of the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur.

Two different sets of tasks, CPS and SPS, each comprising of three different activities, were used in this study. The CPS task consisted of three different tasks ( Fig 1 ), a drawing task [ 39 ], a writing task [ 40 ], and a structure making task [ 41 ]. The diversity of these creativity tasks allowed more room for creative engagement. They were chosen owing to the fact that working on a variety of creative tasks and switching between them enhances divergent and convergent thinking by reducing cognitive fixation [ 42 ]. The SPS task consisted of a drawing task, a writing task, and a structure-making task that were tailored to demand the same amount of effort as solving the creative tasks ( Fig 2 ). The difficulty levels of the two sets of tasks were assessed beforehand by eight judges who rated the creative components (1 = not at all creative, 5 = very creative) and difficulty levels (1 = very easy, 5 = very difficult) of the tasks on a 5-point Likert scale. The two tasks did not differ in terms of their difficulty levels (t = −0.323, df = 14, p = 0.751). In contrast, the CPS tasks were rated significantly higher on creativity as compared to the SPS tasks (t = 15.82, df = 14, p < .001).

Capturing the facial expressions

Participants’ facial expressions were captured using a custom-made head-worn camera. The aim was to ensure that the frontal faceview was always in view of the camera, regardless of the participant’s head movements during the task. An AKASO V50 pro sports camera was mounted on the headgear facing the participant at an approximate distance of 12.25 inches from their nose tip. The face was also illuminated by a strip of LED lights embedded in the headgear, as shown in Fig 3 . The participants’ facial expressions were recorded while solving the tasks for 30 minutes at the rate of 25 frames per second in 720p.

The left figure presents the 3/4th view of the face, while the right figure presents the frontal profile. In both instances, the face has been appropriately illuminated using LEDs.

A manipulation check was performed to ascertain that the headgear did not interfere with the task performance by administering the same to 18 randomly selected matched participants who were not part of the main study. Nine participants were required to wear the headgear, while the remaining nine did not and were asked to complete the alternative usage test [ 43 ] where they were asked to provide ‘five different usages of a brick’ within two minutes. The z-scores indicated no difference between those wearing the headgear and those who did not on fluency (z = −0.97, p = 0.39), flexibility (z = −0.225, p = 0.87) and originality scores (z = −0.94, p = 0.39).

The experiment was conducted in the one-way glass room of the psychology lab at IIT Kanpur. This room was equipped with three dome cameras to record all the activities of the participants. Besides observing the participant through the one-way glass, the experimenter could observe the session from the observation room by controlling the camera movements using a control panel. The three cameras captured the whole process providing a close-up view, a 3/4 profile, and a backside profile (see Fig 4 ). The one-way glass room had only a working table, and a chair in addition to a table meant for the raw materials. After establishing the rapport, the participants were provided with the informed consent form upon reaching the venue. Upon signing it, they were instructed to wear the headgear and continue the interaction with the experimenter. This was done in order to make them accustomed to the headgear. As soon as the participant approved of working for 30 minutes on the tasks while wearing the headgear, they were instructed to proceed to the one-way glass room. The instructions were read aloud to them, and thereafter the CPS or SPS set was provided to them. The participants could start with any task and switch between tasks or work simultaneously on different problems. At this point, the participants were instructed not to read the three tasks until they heard the 1st buzzer. Doing so ensured that we did not lose out on any possible observation of the spontaneous occurrence of stages just after reading the task/tasks. The participants began working on the tasks following the first buzzer, and their sessions were recorded. While the dome cameras recorded the entire session, the head-mounted camera made separate recordings of the facial expressions. The participants were instructed not to think aloud to avoid any manipulation of the facial AUs. Participants were also periodically reminded of the time passed every 10 minutes through the buzzer sound. The total time for completion of all three tasks was 30 minutes. The task activity was followed by a short break of five minutes. Following the short break, the participants were asked to describe their thinking process during the activity based on some questions and instructions. Using the video stimulated recall, participants watched the whole video recording of their activity, where they were asked to reflect retrospectively on the process, speak aloud, and report their experiences. They were free to pause the video and speak about the process. This session was audiotaped. The total time to administer the whole experimental procedure, including the retrospective recall, was approximately 110 minutes per participant.

(A) A close-up view of the output is captured by the CAM4, (B) a medium close-up 3/4th view is captured by the CAM2, (C) and a zoom-out view of the overall activity is captured by the CAM1, in the psychology lab.

Data analysis

Segmenting the protocols.

The video of facial expressions was synchronized with the timeline of the three dome camera recordings from the beginning to the end of the activity and the audio recordings with the video timelines. Adobe Premiere Pro CC was used to trim and synchronize videos and audios using the frame-matching features. Audio MP3 for each participant was mastered and boosted for better sound quality. This was followed by transcription of the verbal utterances on a word file. The transcribed verbal utterances were further divided into small units/segments/moves based on one main verb per parse [ 26 ] along with the timestamps in the datasheet for each participant. The start and end of a verbal utterance were timestamped based on the time interval of the recorded video that the participants were referring to. After parsing the verbal utterances, video recording observations that were not reported as verbs or actions during the retrospective verbal utterance process were separately segmented and were added to the same excel sheets with timestamps. They can be categorized as task-related actions (e.g., reading the task description, sketching, making the prototype, arranging the raw materials, etc.) and other actions (e.g., standing up, relaxing the body, etc.). The segmentation of actions based on video observation became more robust by capturing details that were obscured by verbal utterances alone.

Coding the segments

Following the review of the segmented protocols, seven categories, namely preparation, ideation, illumination, evaluation, verification, production, block, or other were developed as coding scheme with the attributes of the different modes of thinking based on the literature review. Each segment was assigned to one category only. Table 1 summarizes the coding scheme based on which a total of 18,355 segments were coded for all the 64 participants.

When dealing with a large number of categories, coding requires a high level of reliability. Accordingly, after the lead author completed this exercise, an independent coder who was blind to the experiment but was proficient in coding schemes and creativity research coded 1476 segments randomly chosen from the CPS and SPS groups. Cohen’s kappa was computed for these 1476 segments to determine intercoder reliability. We observed strong agreement in 82% of the segments (k = .816, p < .001) after correction for chance. In the event of disagreements between the coders, the coding categories were discussed between the two coders in order to categorize the protocols into different stages based upon different modes of thinking. Upon resolution of the discrepancy between the coders, the codes were adjusted to be consistent across all protocols for each participant.

Markov’s analysis to study the transition between different stages

Based on the coding for the segments in the excel sheet, we calculated the probability of transition from one state to the next for each of the eight categories, providing us with an 8 by 8 matrix for each participant. Using these probability matrices, a stationary state distribution matrix with one row and eight columns was created using R studio for each participant to represent the differences in cognitive effort exerted at different stages of the task solving process. The analysis of Markov’s stationary state distribution in this study was based on the work by Kan and Gero [ 33 ].

Transition state diagrams

The transition diagrams provide a visual representation of the transition of events with their probabilities. Based on the analysis of Jeong’s work [ 54 ], the transition state from one stage to another, for each participant, the sum of these frequencies was taken, and a relative frequency was computed for each transition. This provided us with a single transition matrix containing 64 probabilities of the transitions for the CPS and SPS groups, respectively.

In these transition diagrams, the creative stages are represented by the nodes that are linked to the other nodes using directional arrows. These directional arrows represent the relative frequency from one stage to another and the width of the arrow represents the strength of the transitional probability. Numbers in the transitional state diagrams represent the probability of one stage being followed by another stage.

Facial expression analysis

Automatic facial action coding system . Facial Action Coding System [ 55 ] is a rigorous and psychometrically robust system that utilizes facial muscle movements to represent them as action units (AUs) to describe facial activity. Emotion-specific AUs or the combination of AUs can be found in EMFACS [Ekman & Friesen, 1983 [Unpublished]]. Several researchers across different domains have used automatic facial expression recognition software to characterize a specific set of emotions [ 56 ].

This study leveraged the OpenFace 2.0 [ 57 ] program to extract the facial action units from the synchronized videos of all the sessions. Based on comparing the performance of automatic facial expression recognition tools, OpenFace has been shown to be superior to the high-paid commercial softwares, e.g., Nodlus FaceReader, and Affectiva in detecting automatic facials. AUs with better accuracies [ 58 ]. Another advantage of OpenFace is that it is available in the open-source domain ( https://github.com/TadasBaltrusaitis/OpenFace ). This program is trained on different facial datasets and uses a linear kernel support vector machine to recognize individual AUs. The system recognizes seventeen specific AUs (1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 20, 23, 25, 26, and 45). This study used only 12 AUs and their combinations that correspond to seven emotions. Details regarding the combination of AUs related to specific emotions used in this study can be found in [Ekman & Friesen, 1983 [Unpublished], 59 , 60 ].

For each participant, OpenFace generated a total of 45000 frames based on the video duration of 30 minutes. These 45000 frames (rows) contained continuous AU data from 0 to 5 (intensity of AUs) for 12 facial AUs, along with the timestamp and confidence level. In most cases, AUs is regressed with high levels of confidence, usually 98%. To increase internal validity, frames with confidence levels less than 95% were removed from the analysis. Fig 5 demonstrates the OpenFace graphical user interface while simultaneously collecting the variables in a spreadsheet.

Based on video and image outputs, this program detects and extracts participant facial features such as facial landmarks, head pose, eye gaze, and facial Aus.

Support vector machine to classify the creative stages based on facial AU combinations

The dataset generated by OpenFace required further processing before classification, as the facial AU datasets were highly imbalanced (typically a result of an unequal distribution of classes within a dataset) with some AUs with 0 values indicating no movement of specific muscles, while other AUs displayed continuous values (above 0), indicating movement intensity of the muscles at different time intervals.

As part of the feature set in this study, seven different combinations of AUs are used to represent seven different emotions to predict the target class, comprising of six stages. During the data analysis, the datasets of ‘illumination’ and ‘others’ stage were discarded as ‘illumination’ occurs within a fraction of a second [ 61 ] and is, therefore, inaccessible by retrospective protocol analysis and ‘others’ did not contain tasks-related information. Further, by eliminating these stages, the model’s performance improved by reducing the data imbalance issue. The final dataset for the CPS and SPS groups used for the SVM classification is presented in Table 2 .

Before the model generation in SVM, we used a random undersampling approach to balance our facial AUs dataset using python libraries. We leveraged the imblearn.undersampling_sampling package in python programming language to undersample the data and generate a new dataset. The RandomUnderSampler function results in random selections of examples from the majority class. The parameter ‘replacement’ is set to false to prevent the repetition of the same example that requires deletion from the training dataset. This is followed using the fit_resample function to under sample the dataset and thereafter, train_test_split function has been leveraged to split into the training and testing dataset. 80% of the data were split into training sets and 20% as test sets.

We used a polynomial kernel function with degree 4 using Python to classify the stages, as other kernels did not provide high accuracy in predicting the stages based on different combination of AUs. Beyond this degree, the model became saturated. Moreover, our SVM model utilized the C parameter to avoid misclassification of the training data. Decision function shape is used as an ovo (OnevsOne) classifier to serve as a binary classifier for all pairs of classes, as well as the training utilizes the fit function to obtain a fitting of the model to the input training instances while testing utilizes the predict function to make predictions about the testing instances.

Results and discussion

Comparing the distribution of stages during the sps and cps processes.

Since the computed stationary state distributions of the stages were not normally distributed, the Mann Whitney U test was conducted. The results of the statistical analyses are summarized in Tables ​ Tables3 3 and ​ and4 4 .

Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in the distribution of stages during the CPS and SPS processes. Participants in the CPS group predominantly spent their cognitive efforts towards the stages of Ideation (z = −6.572, p < 0.05), Illumination (z = −2.696, p < 0.05), and Refinement (z = −3.437, p < 0.05).

Task A’s ideation phase involved participants generating pre-inventive structures from incomplete elements provided to them, which encouraged them to diverge and consider alternate solutions. For example, Participant 01 or P01 (CPS) commented, “This curvy shape looked like a girl and a vase” whereas, P02 (CPS) associated the shape with surrealism and reported, “ It looked like a Dali painting . ” The majority of participants for Task B expressed ideas based on the combination of the previously stored schema for having common festivals as interaction points between two countries that could facilitate cross-cultural exchanges. For example, P18 (CPS) reported, “we can have movies like Bajrangi Bhaijaan which will bring more unity among each other” while P12 (CPS) reported, “then I thought about the food as a medium to connect these two countries . ” During Task C, most participants were interested in creating a strong and stable foundation for the structure. For example, P28 (CPS) reported, “to fir I got the idea about making a strong base that will hold the tower , ” and P07 (CPS) reported, "I will have to make many legs where this long heightened thing can stand . ”

In the illumination stage, some of the participants credited the emergence of insight to random associations during idea generation that somehow emerged spontaneously as an appropriate solution. For example, P02 (CPS) during Task A reported, “you know when I saw this , I was thinking of many things , and immediately this idea suddenly came . ” Some participants attributed the spontaneous occurrence of insights to chance; for example, P30 (CPS) during Task A reported, “I mean what a coincidence that I bought a chair today and when I saw this it clicked here . ” During Task C, P06 (CPS) reported, “and then here the idea came to me just like that . ” It is worth noting that time constraints played a crucial role in some participants’ sudden appearance of insights. For example, P07 (CPS) reported during Task C, “and I am like very capable if the time is limited , like here where I came up with the leg spread concept . ”

A substantial number of enhancements were made during the refinement stage to produce a better output. Many participants returned to the previous tasks and refined their work as they worked on the current task. Since they were occupied with other tasks, they were more likely to incubate, evaluate their previous responses, and then make changes.

Participants in the SPS group spent majority of their cognitive efforts during the Preparation (z = −6.878, p < 0.05) and the Production stage (z = −5.914, p < 0.05). The preparation stage required a considerable amount of concentration and attention. Task A demanded considerable focus on the deliberation of mentally converting the shapes. For example, P06 (SPS) reported, “these shapes were simple but required a lot of attention as you need to think the reverse of it” while P12 (SPS) reported, “I became habituated with the drawings and the conversion thing . ” During the preparation stage of Task B, participants worked on gathering the information from the graphs, translating the data, and arriving at relevant conclusions. For example, P15 (SPS) reported “these graphs were simple but I was reading them again and again to find the connection” . Similarly, during Task C, P13 (SPS) reported, “so I read these instructions one by one and it required focus . ”

During the production stage, participants spent their cognitive efforts in creating or transforming their ideas or thoughts into a tangible solution. In task A, for example, participants focused most of their efforts on implementing their ideas through sketching on the grid answer sheet. We observed an average increase in participants’ drawing speed after the 6th to 7th element. As participants became familiar with the grid and the reference sheet, their drawing speed increased. During the task B production stage, participants spent their efforts in writing their conclusions after making sense of the data. During Task C, participants tried to develop the structure prototype based on the instructions provided. It is interesting to note that some participants spent considerable time unraveling the adhesive tape, while others cut multiple strands of tape and stuck them to the table for convenience and time savings.

Stage transition diagrams between different stages

As illustrated in Figs ​ Figs6 6 and ​ and7, 7 , the participants of CPS group expressed more thought sequence from the production to the ideation stage (57%) than the SPS group (1%). As participants developed the idea they produced them, and then immediately returned to the mode of ideation. By generating the outputs, the participants were able to generate a greater number of ideas, for instance, P03 in the CPS group stated— “I was doodling without much thought and started to visualize it when doodling” . This was followed by transition from preparation to preparation, which was 57% for the CPS group and 40% for the SPS group. Consequently, participants in the CPS group transitioned rapidly from the preparation-to-preparation stage to gather relevant information before moving on to the ideation stage. This is an important step as it is said that preparation requires 99% of perspiration which leads to 1% of inspiration [ 62 ]. For the CPS group, the transition from illumination to ideation was 65%, whereas there were no such instances in the SPS group. The reason for this is that the tasks in the SPS group did not require illumination activities, whereas in the CPS group, when the idea suddenly emerged, participants expected it to be developed further. For example, P06 in the CPS group reported— “the idea that came instantly was the biryani competition” (illumination) and then immediately reported— “This was funny idea and I thought to develop it further” (ideation).

Blo = Block; Ide = Ideation; Eva = Evaluation; Ref = Refinement; Prod = Production; Oth = Others; Illum = Illumination.

More events of transition from production to preparation (82% vs. 12%), preparation to the production (50% vs. 19%), others to preparation (49% vs. 33%), illumination to preparation (100% vs. 5%), refinement to preparation (50% vs. 22%) happened for the SPS group than the CPS group, respectively. As part of the SPS group, it was necessary to examine sample sheets (preparation) to produce appropriate outputs. The results indicate that the preparation stage was most likely to occur for the SPS and was at the center of most of the transitions. It is likely that this result is due to the nature of the tasks where the participants spent most of their time collecting information and setting up the problem.

SVM classification of stages based on facial AU combinations

For selecting the best separation between classes, the highest possible accuracy scores for each stage were considered. Among all the stages, only the target class block was classified with the highest accuracy scores (above 95%). The remaining stages were classified with moderate accuracy scores. The results are presented in Table 5 .

Preparation stage and associated emotions

The stage preparation observed moderate accuracy scores for the ambivalent emotions, happiness (67.65% and 64.73%), and fear (68.95% and 66.52%) during the CPS and SPS process respectively. Positive emotions at the beginning of the task led some of the participants to approach the problem with high levels of motivation. For example, P01 (CPS) during task A reported— “this question was very interesting and I was just staring at them to understand the question” and P15 (CPS) reported,— “I was totally excited so immediately I started counting the shapes . ” During task B, P21 (CPS) reported— “I like literature and writing and I can use my knowledge so this was really exciting , ” and P03 (CPS) reported— “this question was interesting as well as tough . ” During task C, P16 (CPS) reported— “this task was full of creativity and fun , ” and P17 (CPS) reported— “I thought why not first solve the 3rd task as it looks very interesting” . For some of the participants, preparation was accompanied by a sense of apprehension after appraisal of the task about failing to complete the task. For example, during task A, P27 (CPS) reported— “I was worried because I was losing on a lot of time in searching for the pen to write” ; P10 (CPS) reported— “I was a bit skeptical and stressed when I read this question . ” Nevertheless, some participants also experienced negative emotions when attempting to complete the tasks on time. For example, during task A, P06 (CPS) reported— “but these shapes were complex and I got scared to finish it on time . ” During task B, P13 (CPS) reported— “basically this was a political question and I realized that this task was going to take a lot of time . ” During task C, P21 (CPS) reported— “I was also thinking about how much time I have left for this task . Participants in the SPS reported negative feelings in response to the focus and attention demanded by the tasks. For example, P15 (SPS) during task A reported— “this one demanded focus and attention and I had to be careful in converting the shapes” ; P31 (SPS) during task B reported— “so I was also calculating the values in my head after looking at these graphs , that’s why it was taking time for me to see and then write the answers” ; P17 (SPS) during the task C reported— “this kind of task is like want you to be very attentive because you will have to measure everything and make them . ” Alternatively, the other perspective could be perhaps due to the nature of the tasks in the SPS group that were not exploratory and did not demand high divergent thinking abilities. For example, P06 (SPS) reported during task A— “there was nothing much to think about this task” ; P31 (SPS) reported— “actually this was a complicated problem due to the shapes and you can’t come up with ideas here . ”

Ideation stage and associated emotions

The ideation stage also involved ambivalent emotions. These observations are in accordance with previous findings [ 8 ]. Moderate accuracy scores were observed for happiness (73.81% and 70.19%) for the CPS and SPS groups, respectively. For fear, accuracy scores were significantly higher (76.05%) for the SPS group than for the CPS group (56.90%). Perhaps the gap between ideation and implementation of those ideas during the SPS process seemed farfetched due to the nature of the tasks that resulted in such a difference. Some of the participants dedicated their cognitive efforts on making richer associations with positive emotions, thereby facilitating flexibility. For example, P27 (CPS) during task A reported— “so at first glance I thought that it was something like Picasso’s work and I was like very happy that I have direction now” ; P02 (CPS) during task A reported— “it looked like a Dali painting somehow from which I got inspired . ” During task B, P15 (CPS) reported— “I felt really happy that I came up with this idea of one nation one flag . ” While during task C, P06 (CPS) reported— “I was thinking of making something similar to the Eiffel tower . ” Perhaps, for some of the participants, not being able to transform pre-inventive structures into a concrete mental representation or idea caused fear during ideation. For example, during task B, P33 (CPS) reported— “I was scared if I will be able to complete this vague idea of UN ka intervention with Pakistan . ” In the SPS group, negative affects encouraged participants to develop self-efficacy necessary to reach the right solution, resulting in positive affect. The participant initially struggled with converting a few shapes in Task A, but later came up with an idea for transforming the shapes. For example, P02 (SPS) stated— “I was not sure here but then I came across a rough idea of converting these arcs into semi triangle that made me feel lighter” .

Block stage and associated emotions

Block is the only stage that observed very high accuracy scores for negative emotions—anger (96.04% and 97.26%), fear (94.67% and 97.26%), sadness (95.01% and 95.95%), and disgust (96.90% and 95.57%) respectively for the CPS and SPS groups. This makes sense as there are several factors that can be attributed to an impasse, for example, creative fixation, fear of failure, or lack of faith in oneself [ 63 ]. For example, during the task A, P1 (CPS) reported— “this was a sad moment because I couldn’t think of anything at this moment” ; P2 (CPS) reported— “I was not able to come up with an idea right away which pissed me off” ; P11 (CPS) reported— “It was very irritating that why I am not able to move forward” . During the task C, P19 (CPS) reported— “this paper was frustrating me because there was nothing I can do with this” . It is interesting to note, despite this, that some of the participants learned to accept these negative emotions, helping them to persist and complete their tasks, while others switched to an alternative activity.

Several participants in the SPS group were stuck on task A’s shapes, specifically the third element with two semi-circular shapes and the eleventh element with a star shape. For example, participant P01 (SPS) during task A reported— “at this point I was confused and irritated about converting this circle or not” ; P02 (SPS) reported— “then at this figure the confusion happened and I was fearing that I could make this one wrong” ; P30 (SPS) reported— “this was not triangle not circle both which was frustrating to decode” . In addition, some participants had difficulty rolling an 81-cm paper in Task C and encountered an impasse. For example, P04 (SPS) reported— “First I was not satisfied and I did not understand what I have to do to make it 81 cms” ; P31 (SPS) reported— “even after trying so hard it was not 81 cms which was irritating”; P22 (SPS) reported— “I was like there was no option to make the length bigger which was very sad” . Participants in both the groups either abandoned the tasks immediately and switched to the other task or worked on the task for some time.

Evaluation stage and associated emotions

The evaluation stage observed moderate accuracy scores for ambivalent emotions, happiness (72.25% and 74.09%), pride (64.63% and 68.08%), fear (60.74% and 67.83%) and stress (59.72% and 68.58%) respectively for the CPS and SPS groups. This state, which requires focused attention to determine whether the idea is weak, is an emotionally taxing process. For example, P19 (CPS) during task C reported— “but then this was not standing which gave me a lot of stress . ” P05 (CPS), during task A reported— “but something was not very right here and it was very disappointing . ” Similarly, in the SPS group, P01 (SPS) during task A reported— “in between I was checking whether I am doing it correctly as I was little worried” ; P11 (SPS) reported— “I was having a lot of problem and stress in drawing this circle on this line” . For task C, most of the participants utilized their cognitive efforts on measuring the length of the rolled sheet. For example, P13 (SPS) reported— “mine was coming a bit long which was mind boggling” ; P27 (SPS) reported— “when I realized this one to be 10 cms short I was like shit … ”

It is interesting to note that some participants appraised their results positively which perhaps resulted in experiencing happiness. For example, P03 (CPS), during task A, reported— “I just looked at this thing and it came out to be nice . ” P22 (CPS) during task C, reported— “here , when it stood na , I was very happy” ; P06 (CPS) reported— “here I was happy that this structure could stand” . Our findings are consistent with previous research that showed designers experience high levels of arousal and positive emotions during the verification stage [ 64 ].

Refinement stage and associated emotions

For the state of refinement, the CPS and SPS groups scored higher accuracy scores for ambivalent emotions—happiness (85.81% and 83.49%), pride (81.58% and 82.13%), and stress (77.19% and 81.19%) respectively. During this stage, additional layers of work, refinements, and finishing touches were added. Some participants were successful in resolving the issues and thus experienced happiness. For example, P01 (CPS) during task A reported— “I felt extremely happy when I made more flames to provide a completeness in this photograph . ” Nonetheless, there were some participants who struggled to resolve the issues, which resulted in additional time and stress. For example, P14 (CPS) during task C reported— “even after spreading these legs , my idea did not work that tensed me . ” P19 (SPS), during task A, reported— “I shaded the rest of the shapes to be free from tension”; P18 (SPS) reported— “I was having problem in redrawing this circle again and again . ”

Production stage and associated emotions

This stage observed moderate accuracy scores for ambivalent emotions—happiness (74.35% and 74.09%), fear (60.55% and 65.71%), pride (70.29% and 71.31%), and stress (60.71% and 71.83%) for both the CPS and SPS groups respectively. At this stage, all the tasks required the participants to produce tangible outcomes to implement an idea they had already conceptualized. Perhaps, those who were successful in transforming their ideas into successful outcomes felt happiness and pride. For example, during task A, P17 (CPS) reported— “once I had this face idea , I was successful in making it here . ” During task C, P02 (CPS) reported— “I was enjoying making firm base out of this newspaper sheet . ” During task A, participant P18 (SPS) reported— “I kept drawing like this because I was enjoying it . ” During task C, P22 (SPS) reported— “I folded the sheet into exactly three parts and woaahhhh !! ” . Perhaps, some of the participants may have realized that they could not produce a quality outcome and, as a result, might have experienced fear and stress. The realization of this ongoing process of production differs from the process of evaluation where the produced outcome or an idea is verified. It becomes difficult to capture the evaluation of the ongoing production process during the retrospective think-aloud protocol.

General discussion and conclusion

For a more comprehensive understanding of creativity, it is necessary to capture creativity act in its totality and the underlying emotional mechanisms. This work presents a novel method of capturing in-the-moment emotional experiences of the individuals during the creative process using the facial expressions data and a headgear setup. Previous studies have leveraged self-report scales and diary studies in examining the emotion influences on the creative work. This study is first to capture the emotional states associated with each stage during the CPS process using real-time facial action unit combinations and support vector machine classification. Moreover, this work also compared the CPS and SPS processes using the protocol analysis and Markov chains.

In order to answer the first research question (RQ1—what stages of the CPS and SPS require the greatest amount of effort from the individuals?), protocol analysis and Markov’s analysis results revealed that the participants in the CPS group spent most of their cognitive effort during the stages of ‘ideation,’ ‘illumination,’ and ‘refinement,’ whereas the participants in the SPS group spent most of their cognitive effort during preparation and production. Perhaps, this difference is attributable the tasks assigned, as the tasks in the CPS group offered more opportunities for divergent thinking. In the ‘ideation’ process, participants spent most of their time deriving pre-inventive structures, although some participants were more successful than others in generating pre-inventive structures quickly and solving the tasks on time. Different components, such as task motivation, and skillsets impacted the quality of output produced for a specific task as not all tasks were attended with equal efforts. The same is true for the other stages. For example, most participants showed more interest in solving tasks A and C than task B for the CPS group. Although all these tasks encouraged divergent thinking, drawing and structure-making tasks were considered more playful and enjoyable than the written tasks. Task A and Task B were given priority over task C for the SPS group. This requirement arose from the requirement for greater focus and attention in reading the instructions and then developing the prototype. Furthermore, all the tasks in the SPS group involved high attentional demands, which meant some participants were able to focus more and produce better results. As a result of this study, one of the approaches proposed by [ 2 ] to differentiate between the CPS and SPS is supported: these two processes entail the same stages, but the variation is in the level of execution at each stage. These results provide the first empirical evidence in understanding the difference between the CPS and SPS process at a micro-level and lend support to studies suggesting that the creative process must allow higher degrees of divergent and convergent thinking [ 6 ]. There were also differences in transition state diagrams between the CPS and SPS processes. The CPS group experienced more transitions from ‘preparation’ → ‘preparation,’ ‘illumination’ → ‘ideation’ and ‘production’ → ‘ideation.’ The SPS group, on the other hand, experienced more transitions from ‘production’ → ‘preparation,’ ‘refinement’ → ‘preparation,’ ‘illumination’ → ‘preparation,’ ‘others’ → ‘preparation’ and from ‘preparation’ → ‘production.’

To address the second research question (RQ2—What kinds of emotions occur at different stages of the creative process?), the exploratory part of this study investigated the in-the-moment experience of emotions during the CPS processes by fulfilling the research gap posited in the literature regarding the use of automatic facial expression analysis in researching the role of emotions in creativity. Six stages were classified using SVM based on seven facial expressions (or facial AU combinations). Although ambivalent emotions were majorly present during most of the creative stages, considering the results, specific emotions were found to be present for different stages where the negative and positive emotions have a predominance presence. Happiness and pride were found to be predominant during the stages of evaluation, refinement, and production whereas negative emotions were predominant during the stage of block. These results are unique and corroborate with the previous findings. During the evaluation and refinement process, one may see a silver lining that induces happiness whereas, during a creative block, the idea becomes fixated, and the emotions become predominantly negative.

The findings of this study are consistent with theories relating to the role of ambivalent emotions in creative work [ 18 , 22 , 25 ]. The appraisal of the tasks and the appraisal of one’s performance during the completion of the tasks caused most participants to experience both positive and negative emotions at different time intervals. Furthermore, the time pressure to finish the three tasks on time allowed some participants to stay motivated and experience ambivalent emotions to be more creative, but for others, this time pressure acted as a guillotine to their creative performance. On the contrary, the stage of ‘block’ was highly dominated by negative emotions, and high accuracy scores were observed for anger, fear, sadness, and disgust. This makes sense as the previous research has indicated that a diverse set of negative thoughts is encountered during the resolution of this state, e.g., loss of focus, fear of failure, worry, depression, etc [ 53 ]. Interestingly, we did not observe much difference in the emotional profiles for each stage between the CPS and SPS processes, even though CPS and SPS have different distributions of stages.

Limitations of the study

Unlike any other study, this study has its limitations. We did not postulate a dichotomy between the CPS and SPS processes nor examine the different categories of stages between the two processes. Segmenting and coding different categories of stages for the CPS and SPS processes might pose a construct validity issue since the literature fails to distinguish stage-based differences for the CPS and SPS processes. In addition, conducting a statistical test becomes difficult based on the difference in categories of stages between the CPS and SPS stages. Another limitation of the study is its lack of ecological validity. The creative process in the real physical world is influenced and mediated by many factors, and thus, the laboratory-based study may yield a different result from those in the natural situation [ 65 ]. As of now, the prospect of recording and analyzing moment-to-moment facial expressions in a real-life situation seems distant at this moment. Additionally, this research was constrained by the retrospective protocol analysis, which lowered the accuracy of the in-the-moment CPS and SPS process analyses. Nevertheless, concurrent verbal utterances could have introduced bias in the data due to redundant facial muscles movements. Furthermore, the small sample size didn’t permit us to account for the differences between the creative performances of the high and low scorers.

Implications of this research

Despite these limitations, this research can have significant practical implementations in creativity research. Novel methods and tools could be developed to train individuals to recognize and regulate their emotions during the creative process to create a deeper understanding of what emotions to expect at each stage and implement effective strategies to manage those emotions. The process of ideation could, for instance, be enhanced by inducing positive emotions and allowing flexibility. Similarly, creative individuals can also be trained to regulate their negative emotions during the creative block to stay motivated and find ways to solve the problem. Few studies have developed personalized gaming experiences based on different emotions. E.g., the game alters its difficulty level by sensing negative emotions in gamers through recognizing facial expressions in real-time to help them stay motivated throughout the gameplay [ 66 , 67 ]. Consequently, the results of this study may serve as a baseline for developing creative support systems for various professionals. For instance, an individual could receive personalized visual cues or affective cues in real-time based on the changes in their facial expression captured by their personal device to enhance their creative performance. This claim may be considered immature at this point due to the limitations of current technological advances, as well as laws and policies about the monitoring of sensitive facial information. Furthermore, designing such affective solutions must demonstrate excellent reliability and validity to be generalized.

Future work

There is a need for further research regarding creativity and facial expressions. Replication of our study with a larger sample size among various ethnic groups may demonstrate the similarities and differences with our findings. Future work could include longitudinal studies that capture facial expressions at different stages of the creative process to clarify the relationship between creativity and emotions. Moreover, the benefits of such studies could also improve ecological validity by determining the causal connection. A further step could be to triangulate this study by utilizing other technological interventions, e.g., EEG and biofeedback sensors. In addition, different automatic facial expression recognition algorithms could be used to cross-validate the accuracy scores obtained in this study.

Supporting information

Acknowledgments.

The authors would like to thank Mr. Gregory Boldt (University of Calgary, Canada) who offered his feedback on the methodology and analysis on a video conference call. We thank Mrs. Shweta Mittal (Excel expert) and Mrs. Swati Mittal (Design Researcher, Microsoft) for providing tips on Excel for extracting the data efficiently.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Data Availability