Mentoring, Networking and Innovation.

Mentoring, networking and innovation:
A prescription for the 21st century, is a co-
authored guest post by Alan Berkson and Fred McClimans.

History is filled with examples of linkages between
networking, mentoring and innovation, but over the
centuries the “knowledge acquisition ecosystem” has
changed considerably. There was a time when this
process was slow and rooted in tacit knowledge, but as
the needs and wants of society progressed and evolved,
the process became more refined—moving faster—and
rooted in the exchange of explicit knowledge.
Regrettably, as society and technology continue to
explode at a pace that stretches Moore’s law, it translates
to the current knowledge acquisition ecosystem beingMentoring, networking and innovation:
A prescription for the 21st century, is a co-
authored guest post by Alan Berkson and Fred McClimans.

History is filled with examples of linkages between
networking, mentoring and innovation, but over the
centuries the “knowledge acquisition ecosystem” has
changed considerably. There was a time when this
process was slow and rooted in tacit knowledge, but as
the needs and wants of society progressed and evolved,
the process became more refined—moving faster—and
rooted in the exchange of explicit knowledge.
Regrettably, as society and technology continue to
explode at a pace that stretches Moore’s law, it translates
to the current knowledge acquisition ecosystem being
broken; in fact, we may be at risk of losing a generational
exchange of knowledge and innovation.
Following is a fast-paced tour through related history,
plus a prescription for 21st century mentoring, networking
and innovation.

In days of yore
Centuries ago, the path to gainful employment often
required apprenticeships. If you wanted to learn a trade
you had no other option: you needed to find somebody
who was already doing it.
Through practice and much coaching—especially if it
involved tacit knowledge—you could eventually master a particular craft or art. This was a
one-to-one relationship that benefited both the master and the student. Students learned a
trade that would serve them for life, and masters acquired young, cheap talent to keep their
businesses alive. If you wanted to learn a trade, you had to find a person who was willing to
teach you how to do it. And, if you were lucky, the master provided you with paid employment
at the end of your apprenticeship.
In this type of direct one-on-one learning process, a master could only have a limited number
of apprentices at any one time. This not only limited the ability of the master to educate the
masses in their skill, but it also limited the ability of the young student to ask questions or
bring new ideas to a wide audience.
While the collaborative sharing of knowledge occurred, the resulting by-product—innovation
—was a slow process measured in decades, not years or months.

The age of mass
Enter the Industrial Revolution, characterized by the advent of mass production techniques.
To feed the growth of industries that required a large quantity of similarly skilled production
workers, education structures were modified to “mass produce” explicit knowledge workers
who understood “Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic.” As a result of the Industrial Revolution
and its changing educational requirements, the primary need for most types of
apprenticeship programs was undermined or devalued.
During this period, the master/student apprenticeship process evolved into—particularly at
the management level—a mentorship process. The master/student relationship remained
intact, but it became less about passing along tacit knowledge and fundamental skills and
more about the refinement and guiding of the student’s career path.
Throughout this revolutionary period, the one constant in the apprenticeship and mentorship
processes was that both the master and the student benefited from the relationship. It was a
two-way street that helped advance both experience and new ideas.
In essence, it helped foster innovation.

The next “next”
In the 21st century, we’ve shifted into a post-industrial, information-based economy that once
again has resulted in a requirement for both educational change and a shift in the type of
workforce required. Unfortunately, some things have changed (not necessarily for the better)
along the way; namely:
the master/student mentorship process quickly is becoming a casualty of the global
availability of information; and
there is a shift in the way society learns and how we reinforce our decisions.
The “hyper-connected” generation
Technology, pervasive communication and the global availability of “any information
everywhere” have had a negative impact on the state of mentorships.
Twenty years ago we had a culture where peers still relied upon personal face-to-face (or
voice-to-voice) real-time communications. As we “graduated up” from high-school to
university or college, we were introduced to a new level of peers and potential teachers/
mentors. As we left our institutions of higher education and moved into the work-force, each
new job opportunity brought with it a “new” level of contacts.
This change in contacts and peers wasn’t necessarily by choice. It was a by-product of the
way we communicated and the limitations that geography placed upon our network of “on-
demand” peers.

Today’s generation (some may call it Gen Y or Millennials—we’ll use the phrase “hyper-
connected” here) faces an interesting conundrum:
As they move from high-school into the work-force, the hyper-
connected still encounter the same “new contact” opportunities as
their predecessors. The complication is they also bring with them a
collection of trusted peers, with whom they remain connected through
pervasive communications.
As a “trusted” group, and taking into account peer pressure, it is no surprise they rely
heavily on this group of peers when it comes to making lifestyle or career decisions. Rather
than seek out the advice of those with experience in their new-found field of employment, the
hyper-connected often are likely to seek the counsel of their long-term friends.
This may fill the need the hyper-connected have to gain confirmation or acceptance of their
plans, but it diverts their attention from the value that an outside advisor or mentor can bring
to the equation.
The Need to Mentor
Why do we mentor others? Like parenting, it’s motivated by both selfish and selfless
aspirations.

We want to:
1. Bestow on others our own knowledge.
2. Give them the opportunity both to work with us and for us.
3. Pass along our collective experience to those who we trust to continue our legacy.
At the same time, we recognize they may become our peers or even our competition—
something that both forces us to raise our game to the next level and challenges us to find
innovative solutions to win the game.
Where does this innovation come from? The innovation comes from the exchange of ideas
with those we mentor.
Why networking is key to leveraging mentoring
It’s often been said that it is not what you know but who you know. Today, more than ever,
people recognize the value of diversity of opinion. We also recognize that a person need not
have just one mentor and that mentorship needs—and mentors—may change over time;
ultimately, helping to form a group of trusted advisors.

How do you accommodate this?
Mentoring is part of a larger ecosystem of networking. It requires you to reach out of your
comfort zone to find those who are “where you want to be.” Unfortunately, too many people
are afraid to—or don’t feel the need to—truly network and reach out to establish these long-
term beneficial relations.
Simply reaching out online to ask an experienced person a question, or asking for a limited
piece of advice, isn’t true networking. It often results in answers that lack context.
What many of today’s younger generation fail to realize is that networking isn’t about:
following people
commenting on a blog; or
asking a question from a person with whom you haven’t built a relationship of trust.
While the old axiom “you may find that the most successful people make the most effective
mentors” still applies, it has taken on a new meaning in the digital era. It isn’t about how
many people you follow or how many people follow you, but how many personal relationships
you cultivate through your online community.

Tomorrow’s workforce
As we migrate from a world driven by process to one focused on innovation and problem-
solving, we see the benefits of both data-driven components and experiential/tacit knowledge
—something that is ideally suited to the:

Internship > Mentorship > Employment Model

As we create new professions (community managers didn’t exist a decade ago), we find that
traditional education falls short in preparing candidates with the requisite skills and mindset
to be successful.
Today’s questions are now:
1. “How do we bridge that gap?”
2. “How do we cross that functional/educational divide?”
The answers are that we—collectively—need to reach out proactively to schools and to
students in the early stages of their careers. We need the hyper-connected to:
think analytically; and
evaluate events and circumstances and make the most effective and positive decisions
they can.
And we need to:
push them towards internship programs that foster and grow this critical skill set; and
ultimately, lead them to mentorship programs that offer opportunities and provide for the
mutual exchange of knowledge and ideas that lead to innovation.

Things that make you go “Hmmm…”
We invite you to ponder this mental checklist:
1. Are you reaching out to your local college or university community (or your summer
student base) and offering internships that make a difference?
2. Are you willing to both educate and learn from your interns?
3. Do you realize the value (both for your organization and children) of helping the next
generation of leaders benefit from your experience (careful—this requires a time
commitment…)?
4. And are you willing to openly give to those that you mentor, allowing them the opportunity
to learn from you, work for you and perhaps even compete against you?

If the answer to any of the above is yes, you are one step ahead of your competition.

HALF TIME

Half Time.
By Bob Buford
Foreword by Jim collins
Bob Buford has a peculiar genius for inspiring people to embrace discomfort. I first met Bob in
1996 when he asked me to teach pastors from large evangelical churches. I knew nothing about
megachurches, and I wondered if I could possibly contribute to their thinking. “All the more reason
to do it!” responded Buford. “It will force you to learn something new that you can contribute to
others. You have no idea what you will learn when you engage these church leaders—and that
will make you more useful.”
Bob turned out to be right about the learning adventure. Part way through the megachurch
session, while I was encouraging pastors to create churches built to last, a hand shot up in the
back.
“Jim, now why is this important?” queried a pastor from South Carolina.
“Because if you don‘t think ahead about succession—if your church depends just on you and your
charismatic personality—it will likely decline or fall after you leave.” I then shared the story of a
once-great company whose aging founder defined succession planning as merely prefacing a
statement every month or so with “If I happen to be unavailable . . . .”
The pastor looked at me almost with pity, as if I‘d somehow missed first grade, then said in a slow,
deliberate drawl, “Now, Mr. Collins, I think you‘re, ah, missing a fundamental point here,” pausing
for effect. “See, our founder,” - another pause - “well, he‘s never unavailable.”
The room erupted into laughter, and I noticed Buford nodding at me, as if to say, “See, I told you
that you‘d be pushed by this and you‘ll be better for it.” I went home and rethought the built-to-
last ideas in the context of religious leadership, and thus began a lasting friendship that has been
a continual source of renewal for me.
Buford kept pushing and challenging. During one of our long conversations, I asked Buford (who
happens to be the best emissary for Christianity I‘ve yet to meet), “How did Christianity transform
itself from a handful of fanatics wandering around a remote backwater of the Roman Empire into
the official religion of the most powerful empire in the world three hundred years later? To use an
analogy, it would be like two dozen people starting a new religion thirty miles from Bagdad today
and turning it into the official religion of the United States a century or two down the road—and
doing it without any mass communication. How did this happen?” Buford responded by asking
knowledgeable Christian historians, collecting their answers, and sending me a banker‘s box of
data and information to read and digest—another challenge, another opportunity for learning and
renewal, another Bob Buford jolt.
There is a delicious irony in Bob‘s asking me to pen this foreword: I‘m right smack in the middle of
half-time, as I‘m turning fifty. Buford slyly got me to engage with his work at the very moment
when it will do me the most good. I do not have the answers, but Buford has given me—and all
those who read his book—the right question: Why capitulate to irrelevance after we‘ve spent
decades accumulating empirical wisdom?
In the first half of the twentieth century, people largely viewed work as a necessary evil, a way to
provide security and comfort. Then, in the 1960s, people began to demand more from their
careers—they wanted meaning and a sense of purpose. And now Bob Buford comes along with
the next challenge: to think beyond the narrow bounds of a satisfying and successful career to a
meaningful and useful entire life. Here in Halftime, he asserts that the old model of arduous career
followed by relaxing retirement should be jettisoned, replaced by the idea that the second half can
—and should—be more creative, more impactful, more meaningful, more adventurous, filled with
more learning and contribution than the first half. A successful first fifty years should be viewed as
nothing more than a good start.
Most who read Buford‘s work have already attained success, and find it wanting. And when we
reach half- time, when we know we have fewer days ahead than behind—when our mentors and
teachers and moms and dads begin to die—the idea of just “more success” does not answer the
question “What‘s the point?” Have you answered the question, “What‘s the one thing—not two
things, not three, not four, but the one big thing—in the box?” Have you written your own
epitaph? Have you articulated a strategy for multiplying your contribution by 100X? Have you
answered “How much is enough?” Have you done “seismic testing” to discover where you can
best be of service? Have you organized your time around two essential elements of a complete
life: self-realization and community? If you‘re ready for these questions, you‘re ready for Halftime.
In puzzling on Buford‘s questions, I‘ve come to see two distinct approaches to self-renewal—and I
encourage you consider both as you read this book. The first lies in the late John Gardner‘s idea
of repotting ourselves into entirely new activities as we move from success to significance,
changing our activities from career to contribution. Gardner, former Secretary of health,
education, and welfare (and author of the classic Self-Renewal), once told me that he planned to
learn and grow as much between seventy and eighty-eight as between zero and eighteen. When
challenged, Gardner said that he knew a little bit more about learning at seventy than when he
was zero. Gardner pushed people to think about “repotting” themselves every ten to fifteen years,
throwing themselves into challenges that extract hidden strengths. Buford picks up where
Gardner left off, challenging us to see that some of our most significant and meaningful
contributions should come in the second half, defying the view that creativity wanes with age. By
repotting, you can recreate the sense of excitement and imagination experienced in your teens or
twenties—again and again and again. Repotting also has the wonderful side benefit of slowing
down time. Think about how vivid your experience was the first few weeks of moving to a new
school, new city, new company, or new country - the very newness heightened your senses and
deepened your memories - compared with how you experienced the fiftieth or one hundredth
week, when life has become routine.
The second path to self-renewal lies in seeing your primary activity—the same activity you‘ve
pursued for your first half—as the primary means to renewal. For some, the best choice lies on
the second path, choosing to renew within a chosen genre or field, much as an artist grows within
his or her craft. Beethoven didn‘t reach half time and then give up music to renew; he stayed
focused and created some of his most radical, path-breaking music. Would Beethoven been of
more use giving up music to find significance? Like Beethoven, Peter Drucker took the second
path, and it is entirely fitting that Drucker wrote the first foreword to this book.
Drucker‘s books fill three bookshelves at Claremont Graduate University; as a Claremont friend of
mine pointed out, “Notice that his writings before age sixty-five sit on one shelf and his writings
after sixty-five require two shelves.” When I asked Peter Drucker, then aged eighty-six, which of
his twenty-six books he was proudest of, he responded, “The next one.” For some, being a CEO
(or a writer or a church leader or a professor) is their art, and if this describes you, the question
becomes, if you‘ve only written four symphonies by half time, what will be symphonies 5, 6, 7, 8
and 9—and how can you make your ninth symphony the most extraordinary of all?
So, be forewarned before you become acquainted with Bob Buford through the pages that follow.
Do not read this book if you want your life to be easy and comfortable. Do not read this book if
you want to coast to the finish line. Do not read this book if you want to mainly take rather than to
give. But if you have a deep desire to be of use, to learn and to grow right up until the day you
die, you‘ll find Halftime an invigorating challenge. The question of renewal stays with us for our
entire lives. Some answer the question with tremendous grace and creativity, becoming “seventy
years young”; others, sadly, begin to age early, reaching half-seventy as “thirty-five years old.”
And while Buford has employed the half time analogy with tremendous effect, there remains one
huge difference between a sport and life: in football (or in a marathon or on a mountain climb) you
know exactly when you‘ve crossed the halfway mark. In life, you might think you‘ve reached
halftime, but in fact be at mile twenty-five of the twenty-six-mile marathon, or in the last two minutes
of the fourth quarter, or perhaps—if fortunate—still only a third of the way up the mountain. We
only get one life, and the urgency of getting on with what we‘re meant to do increases every day.

The clock is ticking and it waits for no one, neither you nor me have a hold on time but the best we can do for ourselve and world is make every seconds count and add value to lives.
Please don't wait till you are 50 before taking a fruitful steps to fulfilling destiny.
Tick...tick...tick...it goes...

CREATIVE THINKING SERIES.

Sorry we’ve been unable to post and update our blog for some time now but we are back to serve you and continue the creative thinking series,  right now we are looking at: Criteria for Evaluating a Creative Solution.

Criteria for Evaluating a Creative Solution

Some idea of the value or merit of an idea (or a solution to a problem) can be discovered by the degree to which it fulfills some or all of the following criteria, as appropriate. How significant a solution is will be determined by the problem itself. Inventing a new antacid is obviously less significant than finding a cure for cancer, but both can be evaluated using these criteria.

Successful

•           Solves the Problem Effectively. The solution achieves the stated goals, meets a need well. "It works." Because many solutions are only partial, the degree to which the solution works is also an important part of this measure. And because there are often several solutions to the same problem, the degree of superiority of the solution is important. "This is a better idea." "What an improvement." Negative side effects (collateral damage in a military operation, side effects of a medication, hostile customer reaction, high electrical consumption) must also be factored in.

•           Meets Constraints. The solution works within the stated constraints to the problem (or overcomes or circumvents them in some acceptable way). "It’s on time." "It fits the specifications." "It's under budget."

•           Acceptable to Users. The solution is agreeable to those who must implement it, to society, to those affected by it. It is not "technologically brilliant but sociologically stupid." The solution has positive secondary effects and no (or minor) negative secondary effects. "We like it." Acceptance is a perceptual, emotional, and psychological phenomenon, as well as an intellectual and experiential one. It is crucial to think beyond the engineering, beyond the technology, when deciding whether the solution is or will be successful. You may have invented an anti-gravity device, but if no one will use it, it is not a successful solution.

Efficient

•           Good Cost/Benefit Ratio. The solution is economical, with high price/performance ratio. "We can afford it." "It’s worth the money." "It’s worth the effort." "Here's a new, less expensive way to do it." "This will pay for itself quickly." Money (that of corporations and individuals) exists in finite amounts, and all solutions must compete with each other for these limited resources.

•           Practical. The solution is logical, useful, systematic, understandable, "do-able," not overly difficult or complex for the intended benefits. It is as simple and direct as possible for the desired outcome. "We can do it." "We found an easier way." "I can see how this could work and what it could do for me." Sometimes a seemingly impractical solution is actually only a communication problem. Many new Internet companies, for example, seem unable to explain in a few, clear words, just what they do.

•           Reliable. The solution will continue to work over time with a high degree of reliability, consistency, and effectiveness. "Hah! It still works." Dependability is at the core of user satisfaction. The parts cost may be trivial, but replacement cost in labor, disruption, and psychic trauma add up quickly. Or if the matches are great when they light, but they don't always light. . . .

New

•           Original. The solution is innovative, breaking new ground. "That’s brilliant." "What will they think of next?" A ball point pen with a particularly great design may be seen as original from a design point of view.

•           Surprising. The solution is unusual, out of the ordinary lines of thought. "Why didn’t I think of that?" "I can't believe they can do it that way."

•           Seminal. The solution provides the foundation for further, similar solutions, opens new vistas for further development. It represents a beginning--a new line of inquiry--with the promise of a future. "Hey, this has possibilities." "We could use something like this over there, too."

Coherent

•           Unified. The solution is organized, seamless, synthetic, organic, holistic, competent. "It all fits." "It’s perfect." "What a great system." Solutions that involve a clear (and perhaps even simple) conceptual design, are most likely to emerge as unified.

•           Refined. The solution is synergetic, high quality, good, well-designed, well-crafted, well-executed. "That’s neat." The best solutions have usually passed through several iterations of the refinement process before being implemented. (Of course, refinement continues after the solution collides with the "real world" as well.)

•           Esthetic. The solution is artistic, attractive, beautiful, enduring, timeless, likable. "It’s beautiful." "What an elegant idea." Many a great technology has failed because it was put into an ugly plastic shell.           

An Idea List of Ways to Improve Something.

An Idea List of Ways to Improve Something

• Simplify--remove complexity
• Apply to new use
• Automate
• Reduce Cost
• Make easier to use, understand
• Reduce fear to own, use
• Make safer
• Give more performance, capacity
• Make faster, less waiting
• Provide more durability, reliability
• Give better appearance
• Create more acceptance by others
• Add features, functions
• Integrate functions
• Make more flexible, versatile
• Make lighter weight--or heavier
• Make smaller--or larger
• Make more powerful
• Reduce or eliminate drawbacks, bad side effects
• Make more elegant
• Give better shape, design, style
• Provide better sensory appeal (taste, feel, look, smell, sound)
• Provide better psychological appeal (understandable, acceptable)
• Provide better emotional appeal (happy, warm, satisfying, enjoyable, fun, likable, "neat")
• Aim toward ideal rather than immediate goals
• Give larger capacity
• Make portable
• Make self-cleaning, easy to clean
• Make more accurate
• Make quieter

Note: Remember that some of the major problems in modern living are too much noise, too much information, too many decisions, too much complexity, together with a general lack of quality and reliability. Intelligent addressing of these problems in connection with your idea should produce welcome improvements to it.

What-Iffing.

A major block to creativity for many of us is the mind's fierce grasp on reality. This very factor that keeps us sane also keeps us from thinking beyond what we know to be true. What-iffing is a tool for releasing the mind, for delivering us from being blocked by reality.

In its simplest form, what-iffing involves describing an imagined action or solution and then examining the probable associated facts, consequences, or events. Instead of quickly saying, "That sounds dumb," or "That would never work," and leaving our criticism vague, we trace as exactly as our reasonable minds can generate the specific implications or consequences of the newly imagined fact.

For example, what if automobiles were all owned by the government and everybody had a key and could use any car that was handy? Consequences: Parking lot size could be reduced. There would probably be more cars pooling with strangers. If cars were maintained by the government, too, some would be in better shape than now, but others would be in worse shape--no pride in personal ownership. On sunny days cars would be plentiful, but on rainy days, you might get stuck at the shopping centre. Cars that broke down would be abandoned. You couldn't lock things in your car. You'd never know if the car you drove to a location (like the movie theatre at night) would be there when you got out.

Another example might be to ask, "What if we do nothing about the problem?" Then seek as accurately as possible the consequences.

On another level, what-iffing allows us to create a completely new reality, to establish a new chain of being or relationships, to change the unchangeable in hope of generating a new perspective on a problem or a new idea.

For example: What if rocks were soft? We could put big ones in our houses like pillows to lean on in the living room. We could use them like "medicine balls" to toss to each other for exercise. We could line roads with piles of rocks to keep cars from damage when control was lost on dangerous corners. We could jump off high buildings onto rock piles. Crushed rock pits could be used to jump into by athletes. On the other hand, rock grinding wheels wouldn't work anymore. Concrete, made of rock, would be soft. A cinderblock cell would be a padded cell.

Another example: What if we could see odours? You'd know the source of the bad smell in the kitchen--a plant, garbage disposal, wastebasket, old food in the refrigerator. You could see the perfume as it wafted off the girl wearing it--a visible "come on." Since we can see farther than we can smell, you could see who had an orange or banana or Limburger cheese sandwich in his lunch bag from across the room. Visible odours could be socially embarrassing in ways not necessary to detail.

Whether or not the "seeing odours" thought suggests the invention of an odour detecting device, a super sniffer like the ones used by the U.S. military to sniff out enemy soldiers, a main benefit of practicing what-iffing is to train the mind to explore unreality or imagined reality, to think about, for a few minutes, the necessary, logical consequences or facts needed to support such a change in real things. Too often when someone gets a new idea, little attempt is made to think about its logical consequences for a few minutes.

For example, we have heard some people say that the United States should legalize drugs like cocaine because then the pushers and organized crime couldn't make money and would stop pushing them and the drug problem would go away. Okay, what if drugs were legal? Would they be legal for everyone, even children? Well, no, you'd have to be 18 to buy them. But then wouldn't the pushers concentrate on selling drugs to those under 18 instead of to adults, which would be a worse situation than we have now? Or, would adults stop using cocaine if it were legal and cheap? Or would it be legal and expensive? And so on.

As I said, too often we simply stop thinking altogether when something contrary to fact comes across our minds or else we think about it in the most illogical and impractical way. When we ask, "What if the sky were green?" the response we tend to get, either from others or from ourselves, is, "Well, the sky isn't green, so why think about it?" But if nothing else, thinking about it is good practice at logical thinking.

In more practical terms, though, thinking about what does not exist is about the only way we have of eventually making it exist. In other words, the first step to implementing a new reality is to imagine it.

Notice when you mention a "what if" to your friends, their reaction will probably be to laugh and change the subject, or to laugh and suggest one funny consequence. There is little attempt to trace probable consequences thoroughly, to outline a full set of associated realities. By not doing so, we are in danger of cutting off many new idea

Try It Yourself

What If. Choose one of the questions below and then trace the reasonable and logical consequences that would follow. You might be sure to think of both good and bad (and perhaps indifferent) consequences. List or describe (in a sentence or two each) at least ten consequences.

1.         What if anyone could set up as a doctor?

2.         What if each home could run the television only one hour a day?

3.         What if a citizen could serve only one term in one office during a lifetime?

4.         What if gasoline grew on trees and was a renewable resource?

5.         What if exams and grades were abolished in college?

6.         What if our pets could talk?

7.         What if gasoline cost $25 a gallon?

8.         What if we never had to sleep?

9.         What if we could read other people's minds (and they could read ours)?

10.       What if all marriages were automatically cancelled by the state every three years?

11.        What if everybody looked almost exactly alike?

12.       What if clocks and watches didn't exist and daylight lasted six months?

 Attribute Analysis.

Attribute analysis is the process of breaking down a problem, idea, or thing into attributes or component parts and then thinking about the attributes rather than the thing itself.

For example, let's say you work for a ball bearing manufacturer and you discover that a flaw in one of the machines has caused the production of 800 million slightly out-of-round ball bearings. You could ask, "What can I do with 800 million slightly out-of-round ball bearings?" and, of course, a few things come to mind, like sling shot ammo and kid's marbles. But you could also break the ball bearings down into attributes, such as roundish, heavy, metal, smooth, shiny, hard, and magnetisable. Then you could ask, "What can I do with 800 million heavy things?" or "What can I do with 800 million shiny things?"

Further, you can focus on each identified attribute and ask questions about it, like this:

What can heavy things are used for? Paperweights, ship ballast, podium anchors, tree stands, scale weights, and so on

What can be done with metal things? Conduct electricity, magnetize them, melt them, and make tools with them

To solve the problem of poverty, ask, what are the attributes of poverty

Some answers: people, crime, lack of food, lack of goods, large families, psychological lacks, low self esteem, welfare, lack of jobs, lack of job skills, lack of value-rich upbringing, lack of education, lack of motivation, poor economic judgment (poor buying skills), poor quality housing, poor quality transportation.

Then, each of these attributes can be addressed, either directly, or through further attribute analysis. For example, take "poor economic judgment." What are the attributes of that?

Some possibilities: buying low quality items, buying smaller packages at higher price per ounce, wasteful spending habits, tendency to "blow a wad" on payday, inefficient food buying (expensive rather than quantity or health considerations), lack of market competition (and hence higher prices), lack of ability to budget, tendency to use money for non food items like alcohol, inability to calculate price per ounce, etc. to determine greatest economy

Discovering attributes can be aided by the use of checklists. For example:

Physical: colour, weight, material, speed, odour, size, structure, taste

Psychological: appearance, symbolism, emotive ("happy smell of detergent")

Functional: intended uses, applications, how it does what it does

People: who's involved?

Miscellaneous: cost, reputation, origin, class it belongs to, definition

Attribute analysis is sometimes described as a smashing technique, because it smashes our fixed and frozen collection of thoughts about a problem or idea. Notice that this is accomplished by refocusing onto something belonging to the problem but more general or abstract or more specific and concrete. Often, attribute analysis is another way of recognizing that a given problem is really a collection of interrelated smaller problems. And often it is a way of perceiving the variables that make up a situation or thing in a way that allows us to change one or more and improve the whole thing.

Example problem: How can we read and remember better? First, what are the attributes of reading and remembering?

Possibilities: books, repetition, visualization, understanding (comprehension), quantity of material and number of details, length of time desired to remember (short or long or permanent)

What are the attributes of visualization? ... Solution: draw pictures of what you read.

What are the attributes of understanding? ... Simplify text by rewriting it or summaries of it into your own words

Another problem: What are the uses for a yellow pencil? What are the attributes?

Possibilities: yellow paint, hexagonal, pointed, rubber end, metal ring, wood, graphite rod, long and stick-like shape

What are the attributes of wood? Burns, floats, electrical insulator, nailable, paintable, gluable, structural component, soaks up liquid slowly, can be sanded or carved

Morphological Analysis.

Morphological analysis builds upon attribute analysis by generating alternatives for each attribute, thereby producing new possibilities.

The rules are simple:

A. List the attributes of the problem, object, or situation as you would in a standard attribute analysis.

B. Under each attribute, list all the alternatives you can think of.

C. Choose an alternative from each column at random and assemble the choices into a possibility for a new idea. Repeat the choosing and assembly many times.

In the next post we will be working on problem solving, what’s all about problems!

Have a fruitful week!

WINNERS DO QUIT; QUITTERS DO WIN

WINNERS DO QUIT; QUITTERS DO WIN

by Akpoveta Valentine 'tejiri 

This is something I want you to read, it not our usual creative thinking material but it's  something I want you to read!

Yet another quote I’ve come to discover an inherent falsehood in is the ‘winners never quit, quitters never win’ theory.

I have, myself, been guilty in the past of making such errors and carrying on about the tenacity andstick-to-it-iveness of winners. While this may be true in several ways, I have found that it is a horrible tool of gross deception in several others. Even the slightest cursory observation unravels the weak threads that hold this premise together.

A heavy smoker who just discovers a lung problem, a lager lout who has lost several valuables due to his drinking habits, an indulgent sweet tooth who has just been diagnosed with diabetes- these people would be undoubtedly and astutely labeled as wholesomely foolish if they continue in those harmful vices that got them in their unenviable predicament just because ‘winners never quit and quitters never win’.

In fact, this saying is a bastion of grand delusion behind which weak-willed people rally behind in denial of their feelings of insecurity, fear of the unknown and unwillingness to step out and step forward.

The manufacturers of coal trains latched on to this saying and were gradually but firmly stamped out of business when they refused to acknowledge that they could quit the coal train business and remain in the transport business by buying into the emerging automobile business.

The Swiss watch-makers had this saying as their creed of belief and article of faith when they rejected a bright young man’s idea of quartz digital watches. The 1970’s and ‘80’s saw them suffer huge but avoidable losses because they rejected Market Evolution.

2003 was the beginning of the end for the ‘baddest man on the planet’ as he refused to see the telltale sign of the end of his reign as champion of the world. Mike Tyson filed for bankruptcy and suffered pitiful bashing in the ring he once controlled and held sway. He could have- but didn’t- leave when the ovation was loudest because he believed ‘winners never quit and quitters never win’.

There are those who never quit yet never win. Theirs is a vicious cycle. They never quit because they want to win, and they’ll never win because they never quit.

Loosers never know when to quit.

It doesn’t occur to them that to keep doing the same things in the same way and yet to expect different results is a synonymous definition of insanity. No, practice doesn’t always make perfect- not if you’re doing the wrong things in the wrong way and at the wrong times. You can try to practice passing a camel through the eye of a needle from now till eternity. I confidently assure you that when you’re old and grey and your eyesight grows exceeding dim, the only thing you’d succeed in doing is topass the needle through the eye of the camel!

If you’re doing something totally wrong for you, something you’re unsuited for, it takes the courage, which only winners have, to quit. It does no eternal good to waste a life-time, energy and resources building castles on quick-sand, doing what you have no business doing, going down an eventual dead-end, working on areas of weaknesses while side-lining areas of strength- it does no eternal good and is counter-productive to succeed in a path that will ultimately fail rather than dare to fail in the paths that would ultimately succeed. I sincerely do not see the wisdom of “hang in there” on a sinking ship buffeted by the harsh elements you foresaw, gutted by the booming canon balls of reality.

Winners are nimble.

Winners know when to quit and what to quit.

Winners know when to walk away.

Winners have an in-depth understanding of times and seasons. A time to ‘hold on’ and a time to ‘let go’.

Winners know what things to hold on to and what things to let go off.

Letting go is a strictly physical action yet mental engagement for a better way. Giving up, on the other hand, is a merely physical expression of a deep mental conviction of the hopelessness of a case or cause. Thomas Edison let go off several ideas while trying to invent the light bulb- including using the whiskers of his beard as filament. But he never gave up on building that electric bulb.

Winners win, not because they never quit, but because, on the contrary, they have the strength and courage of discovered purpose to begin again more intelligently.

Losers lose, not because they always quit, but because they ‘never give up’ on the wrong things.

  

In that place of winners…, I hope to see you.

Have a wonderful week! 

Happy Sunday!

Idea Generating Questions

Idea Generating Questions

Asking questions to stimulate curiosity and creativity has proven helpful for all kinds of endeavors, whether problem solving, product development, inventing, or communication. A written list of mind-stimulating questions is useful because it reminds us of approaches and possibilities that we otherwise would not have in mind. Yes, it is sometimes possible to be creative in a thorough and even orderly way.

The Journalistic Six Question!

These are the six key questions that journalism students are taught to answer somewhere in their news articles to make sure that they have covered the whole story. For creative thinkers, these questions stimulate thinking about the idea in question and allow approaches to it from various angles.

1. Who? (Actor or Agent) Who is involved? What are the people aspects of the problem? Who did it, will do it? Who uses it, wants it? Who will benefit, will be injured, will be included, will be excluded?
2. What? (Act) What should happen? What is it? What was done, ought to be done, was not done? What will be done if X happens? What went or could go wrong? What resulted in success?
3. When? (Time or Timing) When will, did, should this occur or be performed? Can it be hurried or delayed? Is a sooner or later time be preferable? When should the time be if X happens?
4. Where? (Scene or Source) Where did, will, should this occur or be performed? Where else is a possibility? Where else did the same thing happen, should the same thing happen? Are other places affected, endangered, protected, aided by this location? Effect of this location on actors, actions?
5. Why? (Purpose) Why was or is this done, avoided, permitted? Why should it be done, avoided, permitted? Why did or should actor do it? Different for another actor, act, time, place? Why that particular action, rule, idea, solution, problem, disaster, and not another? Why that actor, time, location, and not another?
6. How? (Agency or Method) How was it, could it be, should it be done, prevented, destroyed, made, improved, altered? How can it be described, understood? How did beginning lead to conclusion?

Historical Examination

These questions are especially useful for generating ideas for improving something (the evolutionary approach), but they also help to break thinking out of the evolutionary mode and put it into the revolutionary mode by returning the thinker to the origin and purpose of the idea or solution. By returning to the roots of the problem, a new vision can be created.

1. Essence. What is it? object, concept? What is it made of? What is its real, elementary nature? What are its parts? What is it like, unlike? (Similes and metaphors help in understanding abstractions). What is it related to? What are its various kinds, facets, shades? What is it a part of? Which part of it is unusual or outstanding? In what forms does it appear? Is it typical or atypical of its kind? What is it not? What is it opposed to? How is it different? What makes it different?
2. Origin. Where did it come from? How was it made or conceived or developed? What caused it? If an idea, how did it arise? Are its origins meaningful now? What makes it spread or multiply or gain adherents? What was the reason behind it? Is the reason still valid or useful? Why? Why not? Is it still needed? What influences it? Does it change? Can it, should it be changed, strengthened, eliminated? What could have prevented, delayed, encouraged it?
3. Purpose. What does it do? How does it work? What is its purpose? Is the purpose fulfilled? Better than by its predecessor? Can it, should it be improved? Is it helpful or harmful in intent? What are its implications; what does it lead to? Does it have obvious or hidden consequences? Does it have more than one purpose? What are its immediate effects and its long-term effects? Is its actual function the same as the original purpose intended by its originator? Can it be put to other uses?
4. Import. What is its overall significance? What is its significance to man, environment, civilization, happiness, virtue, safety, comfort, etc.? How is it important? Is it a key element in life, civilization, local area, one man's existence? Is it necessary? Is it desirable?
5. Reputation. What do you think about it? What are your underlying assumptions? What do others think about it? Do you find consensus, division? Is it good, bad, helpful, harmful in fact or in the opinion of others? Can you resolve any differences between truth and opinion, intent, and actuality, pro and con members? What weaknesses are commonly identified? Are there obvious areas of desired change or improvement or elimination?

Blocking and Block Busting

Many people complain of not being creative when in fact their creativity has merely been blocked. Once the blocks are removed, nearly everyone can exercise a high degree of creativity. Several techniques exist which will help remove the usual blocks to creativity, but before we discuss these, we should say a few words about the blocks themselves.

Sources of Blocking

1. Functional Fixation. As we mentioned earlier, functional fixation arises when someone is unable to see beyond the historical or accepted use for an item, often identified by its name or label. Thus, for example, a screwdriver is a tool for tightening or loosening screws, just as its name says. A person suffering from functional fixation would be unable to see any other uses for the item. But, of course, a screwdriver can also be used as a paint can opener, an ice pick, a plumb bob, a paper weight, and so on.

Similarly, to see a length of water pipe and to think only of water pipe may block your thinking if you are need of pry bar, a blow gun, a plant prop, a flag pole, a fishing rod, a measuring stick, or something else that the pipe might serve for.
An interesting example of how people are almost by nature functionally fixated comes from an experiment. Several people were placed in a room where a short length of pipe containing a ping pong ball was anchored in the floor. The task of the people was to remove the ball from the pipe without damaging either. Several sets of people were given this same task. For some of the sets, a bucket of water was placed on the floor. When this was the case, over 80 percent of the groups solved the problem by pouring water into the pipe and floating the ball out. For some of the other sets, a pitcher of ice water and some drinking glasses were placed on a table in the room. When this was the case, fewer than 40 percent of the groups solved the problem by using the water in the pitcher. The pitcher of water and the drinking glasses so fixated them on the idea of refreshment, that they could not see beyond the ostensible purpose of the pitcher to its use as a solution to their problem.

Block Busting Techniques

1. Uses For. This is a simple technique that can be used for mental stimulation or practical application, depending on what you have in mind at the time. It is an excellent tool for breaking you out of a functionally fixated mindset. To use this technique, think of an item or object, usually a common one like a brick, toothpick, pencil, or bucket, and set the task of thinking of all the possible uses for that object, without regard to what the object is normally used for, what it is named, or how it is usually thought of.

Sometimes a time limit, like three to five minutes, is given. Other times a quantity limit, like 25 to 100 is given. All the techniques of idea generation are used, from checklist to attribute analysis to random stimulation.
For example: What are the possible uses for a brick? 
Ideas: doorstop, boat anchor, build a wall, build a walk, ballast, sanding block, powder and make dye, put on white background and make a sign (red letters), nut cracker, shoes, straightedge, red chalk, stop signal (use something green like a cucumber for go), heat reservoir, leaf press, paper weight, step stool, target for shooting, children's toys, scale weight standard, distance standard, definition of red, water holder (soaked), tamper, pattern maker (in soft material), pendulum weight, bell clapper, roofing material (crushed)
Another example: What are the possible uses for a steak knife? 
Ideas: hot pad, planter stick or prop, hole digger, popsicle stick, bubble wand (through hole in handle), flipping tool or spring, hammer, gun sight, fishing weight/float, compass (magnetize the steel), plumb bob, drill, can opener, carving tool, electrical (knife) switch or other electrical conductor use, awl, measuring device (two knives long and three knives wide), shim, design maker in wet plaster (serrated edge), writing instrument (dip in ink), all cutting and chopping uses, guitar pick, branding or soldering device (get red hot first), ice climbing aid (hook or glue to boots with part of blade down into ground).
Please do have a wonderful weekend ahead!

Miscellaneous Good Attitudes.

1. Perseverance.

Most people fail because they spend only nine minutes on a problem that requires ten minutes to solve. Creativity and problem solving are hard work and require fierce application of time and energy. There is no quick and easy secret. You need knowledge gained by study and research and you must put your knowledge to work by hard thinking and protracted experimentation. You’ve surely read of the difficulties and setbacks faced by most of the famous inventors--how many filaments Edison tried before he found a working one, how many aircraft designs failed in the attempt to break the sound barrier. But planning to persevere is planning to succeed.

2. A flexible imagination.

 Creative people are comfortable with imagination and with thinking so-called weird, wild, or unthinkable thoughts, just for the sake of stimulation. During brainstorming or just mental playfulness, all kinds of strange thoughts and ideas can be entertained. And the mind, pragmatist that it is, will probably find something useful in it all. We will look at several examples of this later on.

3. A belief that mistakes are welcome.

 Modern society has for some reason conceived the idea that the only unforgivable thing is to fail or make a mistake. Actually failure is an opportunity; mistakes show that something is being done. So creative people have come to realize and accept emotionally that making mistakes is no negative biggie. One chief executive of a big American corporation warns all his newly hired managers, "Make sure you make a reasonable number of mistakes." Mistakes are educational and can lead to success--because they mean you are doing something.

Sir Francis Pettit Smith, one of the early developers of the screw propeller, tried one design in 1836. During the test, half of it broke off--what a failure--but then the boat increased in speed substantially, revealing the efficiency of a new design, formed from a mistake.

In sum, as Vergil once said, "They can who think they can." Having the proper positive attitude about generating new and useful ideas and solving problems is really a large part of the whole process.

Please do have a wonderful week

CREATIVE THINKING 2.

CREATIVE THINKING 2.

Mental Blocks to Creative Thinking and Problem Solving!!!

1.     Prejudice.

The older we get, the more preconceived ideas we have about things. These preconceptions often prevent us from seeing beyond what we already know or believe to be possible. They inhibit us from accepting change and progress.

Example problem: How to connect sections of airplanes with more ease and strength than using rivets. A modern solution is to use glue--glue the sections together. We probably wouldn't think of this solution because of our prejudice about the word and idea of glue. But there are many kinds of glue, and the kind used to stick plane parts together makes a bond stronger than the metal of the parts themselves.

Another problem: How can we make lighter weight bullet proof windows? Thicker glass is too heavy. Answer: Use plastic. Again, we are prejudiced against plastic. But some plastics are not flimsy at all and are used in place of steel and in bullet proof windows.

Another problem: Make a ship's hull that won't rust or rot like steel or wood. Solution: Use concrete. Our prejudice is that concrete is too heavy. Why not make lightweight concrete? That's what's done.

Final example: How to divide a piece of cake equally between two kids so they won't complain that one kid is preferred over the other: "You gave him the bigger piece; you like him better! Waaaah!" Solution: Put the kids in charge of dividing the cake. Our prejudice is that immature, selfish kids can't do the job. But the solution, one cuts the cake, the other has first choice of pieces, works very well.

2.    Functional fixation.

 Sometimes we begin to see an object only in terms of its name rather in terms of what it can do. Thus, we see a mop only as a device for cleaning a floor, and do not think that it might be useful for clearing cobwebs from the ceiling, washing the car, doing aerobic exercise, propping a door open or closed, and so on. (Later on in the semester, we will be doing "uses for" to break out of this fixation.)

There is also a functional fixation of businesses. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the railroads saw themselves as railroads. When automobiles and later airplanes began to come in, the railroads didn't adapt. "That's not our business," they said. 

But if they had seen themselves as in the people transportation business rather than in the railroad business, they could have capitalized on a great opportunity.

Similarly, when the telephone began its rise, some of the telegraph companies said, "That's not our business; we're telegraph companies." But if they had said, "Hey, we're in the communication business, and here's a new way to communicate," they would have grown rather than died. Compare Western Union to AT&T. And have you heard of those big calculator companies Dietzgen or Pickett? No? Well, they were among the biggest makers of slide rules. But when electronic calculators began to rise, they didn't know what business they were in. They thought they were in the slide rule business, when they were really in the calculator business. They didn't adapt, they didn't accept the challenge of change and opportunity, and they fell.

And there's a functional fixation of people, too. Think a minute how you react when you see your pastor mowing his lawn, or your auto mechanic on a television show promoting a book. Stereotyping can even be a form of functional fixation--how many people would laugh at a blonde quoting Aristotle? Too often we permit only a narrow range of attitudes and behaviors in other people, based on bias, prejudice, hasty generalization, or limited past experience. Think of those statements like, "I can't believe he said that," or "Imagine her doing that," and so on. But recall the proverb, "The goal of my life is not to live down to your expectations."

3.    Learned helplessness.

 This is the feeling that you don't have the tools, knowledge, materials, ability, to do anything, so you might as well not try. We are trained to rely on other people for almost everything. We think small and limit ourselves. But the world can be interacted with.

If you are in need of information, there are libraries, bookstores, friends, professors, and, of course, the Internet. And there are also city, county, and state government agencies with addresses and phone numbers and web sites. There are thousands of government agencies that really exist and that will talk to you. Contact the EPA if you're working on air pollution or pesticides. Get some government publications. Call your state senator or federal congressman for help on bills, information, problems. Contact the manufacturer of a product to find out what you want to know about it.

If you are technologically poor, you can learn. Learn how to cook, use tools, make clothes, use a computer. You can learn to do anything you really want to do. All you need is the motivation and commitment. You can learn to fly an airplane, drive a truck, scuba dive, fix a car--name it.

4.    Psychological blocks.

Some solutions are not considered or are rejected simply because our reaction to them is "Yuck." But icky solutions themselves may be useful or good if they solve a problem well or save your life. Eating lizards and grasshoppers doesn't sound great, but if it keeps you alive in the wilderness, it's a good solution.

Perhaps more importantly, what at first seem to be icky ideas may lead to better solutions--de-ickified analogues of the original. When doctors noted that some unsophisticated natives were using giant ant heads to suture wounds, they imitated this pincer-closing technique by inventing the surgical staple.

Psychological blocks prevent you from doing something just because it doesn't sound good or right, which is a pretty ridiculous thing. Overcoming such blocks can be really beneficial. Navy commandos in Vietnam overcame their blocks and put on women's panty hose when they marched through the swamps and jungle. The pantyhose cut down on the friction and rubbing from the plants and aided in removing the dozens of leeches after a mission. Overcoming the block to using your own blood to write a help note could save your life someday if you got kidnapped.

Positive Attitudes for Creativity

1.     Curiosity.

 Creative people want to know things--all kinds of things-- just to know them. Knowledge does not require a reason. The question, "Why do you want to know that?" seems strange to the creative person, who is likely to respond, "Because I don't know the answer." Knowledge is enjoyable and often useful in strange and unexpected ways.

For example, I was once attempting to repair something, without apparent success, when an onlooker asked testily, "Do you know what you're doing?" I replied calmly, "No, that's why I'm doing it."

Next, knowledge, and especially wide ranging knowledge, is necessary for creativity to flourish to its fullest. Much creativity arises from variations of a known or combinations of two knowns. The best ideas flow from a well equipped mind. Nothing can come from nothing.

In addition to knowing, creative people want to know why. What are the reasons behind decisions, problems, solutions, events, facts, and so forth? Why this way and not another? And why not try this or that?

The curious person's questioning attitude toward life is a positive one, not a destructive one reflecting skepticism or negativism. It often seems threatening because too often there is no good reason behind many of the things that are taken for granted--there is no "why" behind the status quo.

So ask questions of everyone. Ask the same question of different people just to be able to compare the answers. Look into areas of knowledge you've never before explored, whether cloth dying, weather forecasting, food additives, ship building, the U.S. budget, or the toxicity of laundry detergents.

2.    Challenge.

Curious people like to identify and challenge the assumptions behind ideas, proposals, problems, beliefs, and statements. Many assumptions, of course, turn out to be quite necessary and solid, but many others have been assumed unnecessarily, and in breaking out of those assumptions often comes a new idea, a new path, a new solution.

For example, when we think of a college, we traditionally think of a physical campus with classrooms, a library, and some nice trees. But why must college be a place (with congregated students and faculty) at all? Thus, the electronic college now exists, where students "go" to college right at home, online. Correspondence courses have existed for years, too, beginning with the challenging of the school-as-centralized-place idea.

When we think of an electric motor, we automatically think of a rotating shaft machine. But why assume that? Why can't an electric motor have a linear output, moving in a straight line rather than a circle? With such a challenged assumption came the linear motor, able to power trains, elevators, slide locks, and so on.

Problem: We make brandy, and for this special edition of our finest kind, we want a fully-grown pear in one piece inside each bottle. The bottle is narrow necked. How can we do it? As you think, watch for the assumptions you are making. Possible solutions (assuming fully grown pear): close the neck or bottom after insertion, use a plastic bottle like heat-shrink tubing, change to a wide mouth bottle. If we do not assume a fully grown pear: grow the pear from a bud inside the bottle.

3.    Constructive discontent.

This is not a whining, griping kind of discontent, but the ability to see a need for improvement and to propose a method of making that improvement. Constructive discontent is a positive, enthusiastic discontent, reflecting the thought, "Hey, I know a way to make that better."

Constructive discontent is necessary for a creative problem solver, for if you are happy with everything the way it is, you won't want to change anything. Only when you become discontent with something, when you see a problem, will you want to solve the problem and improve the situation.

One of the hallmarks of the constructively discontented person is that of a problem seeking outlook. The more problems you find, the more solutions and therefore improvements you can make. Even previously solved problems can often be solved again, in a better way. A constructively discontent person might think, "This is an excellent solution, but I wonder if there isn't another solution that works even better (or costs less, etc)."

Another mark of constructive discontent is the enjoyment of challenge. Creative people are eager to test their own limits and the limits of problems, willing to work hard, to persevere and not give up easily. Sometimes the discontent is almost artificial--they aren't really unhappy with the status quo of some area, but they want to find something better just for the challenge of it and the opportunity to improve their own lives and those of others.

4.    A belief that most problems can be solved.

 By faith at first and by experience later on, the creative thinker believes that something can always be done to eliminate or help alleviate almost every problem. Problems are solved by a commitment of time and energy, and where this commitment is present, few things are impossible.

The belief in the solvability of problems is especially useful early on in attacking any problem, because many problems at first seem utterly impossible and scare off the fainter hearted. Those who take on the problem with confidence will be the ones most likely to think through or around the impossibility of the problem.

5.    The ability to suspend judgment and criticism.

 Many new ideas, because they are new and unfamiliar, seem strange, odd, bizarre, even repulsive. Only later do they become "obviously" great. Other ideas, in their original incarnations, are indeed weird, but they lead to practical, beautiful, elegant things. Thus, it is important for the creative thinker to be able to suspend judgment when new ideas are arriving, to have an optimistic attitude toward ideas in general, and to avoid condemning them with the typical kinds of negative responses like, "That will never work; that's no good; what an idiotic idea; that's impossible," and so forth. Hospital sterilization and antiseptic procedures, television, radio, the Xerox machine, and stainless steel all met with ho-hums and even hostile rejection before their persevering inventors finally sold someone on the ideas.

Some of our everyday tools that we now love and use daily, were opposed when they were originally presented: Aluminum cookware? No one wants that. Teflon pans? They'll never sell. Erasers on pencils? That would only encourage carelessness. Computers? There's no market for more than a few, so why build them?

Remember then that;

 (1) an idea may begin to look good only after it becomes a bit more familiar or is seen in a slightly different context or clothing or circumstance and

(2) even a very wild idea can serve as a stepping stone to a practical, efficient idea. By too quickly bringing your judgment into play, these fragile early ideas and their source can be destroyed. The first rule of brainstorming is to suspend judgment so that your idea-generating powers will be free to create without the restraint of fear or criticism. You can always go back later and examine--as critically as you want--what you have thought of.

Proverb: "A crank is a genius whose idea hasn't yet caught on."

6.    Seeing the good in the bad. Creative thinkers.

 when faced with poor solutions, don't cast them away. Instead, they ask, "What's good about it?" because there may be something useful even in the worst ideas. And however little that good may be, it might be turned to good effect or made greater.

Example problem: How can we get college students to learn grammar better? Solution: Spank their bottoms with a hickory stick. This isn't a good solution, partly because it's probably illegal. But should we just toss it out? Why not ask what's good about it?

 (1) it gives individual, attention to the poor performers,

 (2) it gives them public attention,

(3) it motivates other students as well as the student being spanked,

(4) it's easy and costs nothing.

The next question is, Can we adapt or incorporate some of these good things into a more acceptable solution, whether derivative of the original or not?

We easily fall into either/or thinking and believe that a bad solution is bad through and through, in every aspect, when in fact, it may have some good parts we can borrow and use on a good solution, or it may do inappropriately something that's worth doing appropriately. And often, the bad solution has just one really glaring bad part, that when remedied, leaves quite a good solution. In the above example, changing the physical spanking to a verbal spanking changes the entire aspect of the solution while keeping all the good points we identified.

7.    Problems lead to improvements.

 The attitude of constructive discontent searches for problems and possible areas of improvement, but many times problems arrive on their own. But such unexpected and perhaps unwanted problems are not necessarily bad, because they often permit solutions that leave the world better than before the problem arose.

For example, the first margarine was made from beef fat, milk, water, and chopped cow udder. It wasn't extremely tasty or healthy. Then about the turn of the century a shortage of beef fat created a problem. What to use? The margarine makers turned to vegetable fats from various plants and the soybean, corn, and sunflower oils they used are still used today. The margarine is healthier and tastes better.

Or think about exams or papers. When you don't do as well as you want, you think, "Oh no!" But actually, you have a good insight into what you don't know and still need to learn. You are aware of the geography of your knowledge in a much more detailed form than before the errors showed up.

8.    A problem can also be a solution.

 A fact that one person describes as a problem can sometimes be a solution for someone else. Above we noted that creative thinkers can find good ideas in bad solutions. Creative thinkers also look at problems and ask, "Is there something good about this problem?"

For example, soon after the advent of cyanoacrylate adhesives (super glue), it was noted that if you weren't careful, you could glue your fingers together with it. This problem--a permanent skin bond--was soon seen as a solution, also. Surgeons in Viet Nam began to use super glue to glue wounds together.

Another example, also involving glue: 3M chemists were experimenting with adhesives and accidentally came up with one that was so weak you could peel it right back off. Hold strength, shear strength, all were way below the minimum standards for any self-respecting adhesive. A glue that won't hold? Quite a problem. But this problem was also a solution, as you now see in Post-It Notes.

9.    Problems are interesting and emotionally acceptable.

 Many people confront every problem with a shudder and a turn of the head. They don't even want to admit that a problem exists--with their car, their spouse, their child, their job, their house, whatever. As a result, often the problem persists and drives them crazy or rises to a crisis and drives them crazy.

Creative people see problems as interesting challenges worth tackling. Problems are not fearful beasts to be feared or loathed; they are worthy opponents to be jousted with and unhorsed. Problem solving is fun, educational, rewarding, ego building, helpful to society.

Please we welcome any comment from you!

Have a fruitful weekend!