Посты с тэгом: boyd and goldenberg

Contradictions: A Pathway to Creativity

Published date: March 30, 2015 в 5:49 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,

Some people regard the Spanish Civil War as a romantic war, one in which many idealistic men and women were prepared to sacrifice their lives for what they perceived as the social good. But as Hector, Prince of Troy, said, “There is nothing poetic in death.” In less than three years (from July 17, 1936, to April 1, 1939), an estimated five hundred thou- sand people lost their lives. In addition to the actual combatants, tens of thousands of civilians were killed for their political or religious views. Even after the war, the victorious Fascists persecuted sympathizers of the vanquished Republican regime, driving up the death toll further still.
This bloody war is often called “the first media war” due to the fact that so many writers and journalists—many of them foreigners— observed and wrote about it firsthand. Some even participated actively in fighting alongside the anti-Fascist forces, including, most famously, Ernest Hemingway, Georges Bernanos, George Orwell, and Arthur Koestler. For this reason, we know many more details about this war than about earlier wars. One story in particular is striking because of what it teaches us about people’s resourcefulness when faced with a seemingly unsolvable challenge.
At one stage during the war, the Fascists took control of southern Spain, driving the Republicans into the hills outside a town called Oviedo. A group of two thousand Republicans, consisting of both civilians and civil guards led by Captain Santiago Cortés González, re- treated to the monastery of Santa Maria de la Cabeza, located on a hill overlooking Andujar, a small town near Córdoba.
The Fascists were led by a “tough and murderous” officer who was notorious for taking no prisoners. As the enemy troops closed in upon him, Cortés González knew better than to surrender. Instead, he fortified the monastery, ed his people into it, and prepared to fight to the death. The Republican forces endured a long, hard siege that lasted for months. Initially food, ammunition, and medicine were parachuted into the monastery by airplane. But soon this supply lifeline was threatened by a shortage of parachutes. Imagine this situation: You’re surrounded by enemy forces, with no way out and no way in. The only method of landing necessary supplies is by air. Yet you have no para- chutes. What do you do?
We have no documentation on whose flash of inspiration led to the unconventional solution. But we do know that at a certain stage, the pilots flying the supply planes began attaching supplies to live turkeys. That’s right: turkeys. The birds flapped their wings as they fell, slowing their descent and assuring safe delivery of the supplies—as well as fresh turkey meat—to the men under siege.
This story had a happy ending, as war stories go. Colonel Carlos García Vallejo raised twenty thousand Republican troops who marched upon Andujar and successfully crushed the Fascists, ending the siege. Although Cortés González himself died of wounds inflicted during the battle, today he is regarded as one of Spain’s most celebrated heroes.
War stories are a tragic and dark legacy of our ancestors’ past follies. But they also provide rich material for understanding human resourcefulness—especially resourcefulness under highly stressed and constrained situations. We can analyze the structure of these creative ideas while still praying that one day our knowledge of war will be confined to history books. In the example above, the solution came from inside the Closed World. Task Unification was used in a clever and unexpected way. The turkeys’ primary task was to be consumed. But their additional task was to flap their wings carrying medicine and supplies to the ground softly.
A contradiction exists when a particular situation contains features or ideas that are connected yet directly opposed to one another. When we call something (or someone) inconsistent, we typically mean that a contradiction exists. In the case of the Spanish Civil War, the contra- diction was the conflict between parachuting more supplies (needed by the troops) and the requirement to use fewer parachutes (because of the shortage).
Our typical reaction to a contradiction is, understandably, confusion or dismay. We become perplexed, anxious. We usually feel that it is impossible to get around the contradiction because it signals a dead end. And because this reaction to contradictions is so intense, we have a strong desire to avoid them, to purge our lives of them. After all, a contradiction is an acute signal that something is completely wrong.
Paradoxically (here’s a contradiction for you!) spotting a contradiction within a Closed World is a very exciting moment, because it fuels enormous creativity: contradiction is a blessing. It is a pathway to creativity.
One of the goals of our book is to help you swiftly transform your negative reaction to contradictions to one of delight. You’ll learn how to identify contradictions and why you should always consider yourself lucky when you discover one. As you’ll see, behind every contradiction is an untrodden path that leads directly to options and opportunities that may not have been considered.
 
From “Inside the Box: A Proven System of Creativity for Breakthrough Results

Strategy+Business: Thinking Inside the Box

Books about business innovation seem to arrive as quickly as ideas on a whiteboard in a brainstorming session. But Inside the Box: A Proven System of Creativity for Breakthrough Results  (Simon & Schuster, 2013), by Drew Boyd and Jacob Goldenberg, jumps out for its counterintuitive take on creativity.

In the book, Boyd, assistant professor of marketing and innovation at the University of Cincinnati and former director of Johnson & Johnson’s Marketing Mastery program, and Goldenberg, professor of marketing at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s School of Business Administration, assert that thinking inside the box enhances idea generation. Thus, they argue, innovation initiatives should be limited to resources close at hand, and function should follow form—that is, we should start with a solution and then consider the problem it addresses, rather than vice versa. When I asked the authors why thinking inside the box is a more productive, reliable way to pursue business innovation than thinking outside the box, here’s what they said:

“Thinking outside the box is a complete myth. It is based on flawed research from the 1970s. Subsequent research shows that simply telling people to think outside the box does not improve their creative output. It sends people on cognitive wild goose chases.
“Thinking inside the box constrains the brain’s options and regulates how it produces ideas. By constraining and channeling our brains, we make them work both harder and smarter to find creative solutions. Contrary to what most people believe, the best ideas are usually nearby. Thinking inside the box helps you find these novel and surprising innovations.
“Innovation usually results from a set of five simple patterns:
• Subtraction: removing a component that was previously thought essential to a product or service, such as the elimination of the record function in the Sony Walkman
• Task unification: combining tasks within a product or service, such as warmth and deodorizing in Odor-Eaters socks
• Multiplication: copying an existing component, such as “picture-in-picture” TVs
• Division: separating a component from the product, such as the remote control
• Attribute dependency: making two previously independent attributes dependent in a meaningful way, such as a baby bottle that changes color when the liquid inside reaches the proper temperature
“For thousands of years, people embedded these patterns in their inventions, usually without realizing it. In our method, Systematic Inventive Thinking (SIT), the patterns have been structured into techniques that enable creativity on demand. SIT takes a product or service and breaks it down into components. Then, you use one or more of the techniques to manipulate the components and generate new-to-the-world ideas. This allows you to tap into the very rich world inside the box.”

This article by Theodore Kinni first appeared in Strategy+Business, July 7, 2013.

Inside the Box Makes Front Page of The Wall Street Journal

Published date: June 17, 2013 в 3:00 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,

The Wall Street Journal featured our new book, Inside the Box: A Proven System of Creativity for Breakthrough Results (Simon & Schuster), on the front page of the weekend edition. Jacob and I contributed the feature article which is adapted from the book. Here are some excerpts.

When most CEOs hear the word “innovation,” they roll their eyes. It conjures up images of employees wasting hours, even days, sitting in beanbag chairs, tossing Frisbees and regurgitating ideas they had already considered. “Brainstorming” has become a byword for tedium and frustration.
Over the past decade, we have asked senior executives, on every continent and in every major industry, two key questions about innovation. The first: “On a scale of one to 10, how important is innovation to the success of your firm?” The second: “On a scale of one to 10, how satisfied are you with the level of innovation in your firm?”
Not surprisingly, they rate the importance of innovation very high: usually a nine or 10. None disputes that innovation is the No. 1 source of growth. Without fail, however, most senior executives give a low rating—below five—to their level of satisfaction with innovation.
How could business leaders rate innovation as so important yet feel so dissatisfied with their own organization’s performance? Because what they really want to know is how: How do you actually generate novel ideas and do so consistently, on demand.

Here is the premise of Inside the Box:

We
advocate a radically different approach: thinking inside the proverbial
box, not outside of it. People are at their most creative when they
focus on the internal aspects of a situation or problem—and when they
constrain their options rather than broaden them. By defining and then
closing the boundaries of a particular creative challenge, most of us
can be more consistently creative—and certainly more productive than we
are when playing word-association games in front of flip charts or
talking about grand abstractions at a company retreat.

Inventions can be extraordinary, but invention isn’t an extraordinary event or an activity for a specialized group. Nor is creativity reserved for the gifted and talented. It’s a skill that can be learned and mastered by anyone, if approached properly. Like so much else in life, the more it’s practiced, the more skillful at it we become.

For those of you who have ordered the book, we thank you. And thanks to the many emails, tweets, and comments of support during our first week.
Be sure to check out the rest of our website that has lots of resources and cool things about the book as well as our Facebook Page for regular updates about the project and the authors.
 
 

Inside the Box: A Proven System of Creativity for Breakthrough Results

Published date: June 4, 2013 в 5:55 am

Written by:

Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,,,

Next week, Jacob Goldenberg and I will launch our new book, Inside the Box: A Proven System of Creativity for Breakthrough Results. It is the first book to detail the innovation method called Systematic Inventive Thinking, the subject of this blog for the last six years.

In the twenty years since its inception, SIT has been expanded to cover a wide range of innovation-related
phenomena in a variety of contexts. The five techniques within SIT are based on patterns
used by mankind for thousands of years to create new solutions. These
patterns are embedded into the products and services you see around you
almost like the DNA of a product or service. SIT allows you to extract
those patterns and reapply to other things.

The five techniques are:

  • Subtraction:
    Innovative products and services tend to have had something removed,
    usually something that was previously thought to be essential to use the
    product or service. The original Sony Walkman had the recording
    function subtracted, defying all logic to the idea of a “recorder.” Even
    Sony’s chairman and inventor of the Walkman, Akio Morita, was surprised
    by the market’s enthusiastic response.
  • Task Unification:
    Innovative products and services tend to have had certain tasks brought
    together and “unified” within one component of the product or service,
    usually a component that was previously thought to be unrelated to that
    task. Crowdsourcing, for example, leverages large groups of people by
    tasking them to generate insights or tasks, sometimes without even
    realizing it.
  • Multiplication: Innovative products and services
    tend to have had a component copied but changed in some way, usually in a
    way that initially seemed unnecessary or redundant. Many innovations in
    cameras, including the basis of photography itself, are based on
    copying a component and then changing it. For example, a double flash
    when snapping a photo reduces the likelihood of “red-eye.”
  • Division:
    Innovative products and services tend to have had a component divided
    out of the product or service and placed back somewhere into the usage
    situation, usually in a way that initially seemed unproductive or
    unworkable. Dividing out the function of a refrigerator drawer and
    placing it somewhere else in the kitchen creates a cooling drawer.
  • Attribute
    Dependency: Innovative products and services tend to have had two
    attributes correlated with each other, usually attributes that
    previously seemed unrelated. As one attribute changes, another changes.
    Transition sunglasses, for example, get darker as the outside light gets
    brighter.

Using these patterns correctly relies on two key
ideas. The first idea is that you have to re-train the way your brain
thinks about problem solving. Most people think the way to innovate is
by starting with a well-defined problem and then thinking of solutions.
In our method, it is just the opposite. We start with an abstract,
conceptual solution and then work back to the problem that it solves.
Therefore, we have to learn how to reverse the usual way our brain works
in innovation.

This process is called “Function Follows Form,”
first reported in 1992 by psychologist Ronald Finke. He recognized that
there are two directions of thinking: from the problem-to-the-solution
and from the solution-to-the-problem. Finke discovered people are
actually better at searching for benefits for given configurations
(starting with a solution) than at finding the best configuration for a
given benefit (starting with the problem).

The second key idea to
using patterns is the starting point. It is an idea called The Closed
World. We tend to be most surprised with those ideas “right under
noses,” that are connected in some way to our current reality or view of
the world. This is counterintuitive because most people think you need
to get way outside their current domain to be innovative. Methods like
brainstorming and SCAMPER use random stimulus to push you “outside the
box” for new and inventive ideas. Just the opposite is true. The most
surprising ideas (“Gee, I never would have thought of that!”) are right
nearby.

We have a nickname for The Closed World…we call it Inside the Box.

Get our innovation model that has worked for 1000+ companies.

    No thanks, not now.