University of Sunderland 2005

A Critical Appraisal of Creativity Techniques
in the Context of Innovations for xxx company

A Project Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the regulations
governing the award of the degree of M.Sc. in Information Technology Management

by: Florian Konow

Abstract

This project was initiated by xxx company for the purpose of a recommendation of techniques applicable for the idea generation within their research and development department. The intent of these techniques should be to deliver valuable inputs into the innovation process. This paper strives to deliver a structured and holistic approach to the idea generation within the field of innovation. A literature review focussed first on innovations to identify the sources of novel thoughts. Those revealed to be the outcome of creativity, which lead to an examination of the creativity domain. Investigations within this field of research showed different possibilities of fostering the creative outcome, one of them being the improvement of the creative thinking skills. Literature encouraged the use of creative problem solving techniques to nurture the creative thinking skills. While a multitude of such techniques were identified, four of them, namely brainstorming, checklists, analogies and morphological analysis, were taken into consideration for an initial illumination. They were chosen because of the influence they had in shaping the field of creativity research. Even though they provide the ability to generate valuable ideas, various shortcomings were addressed for these techniques as well. Therefore two systematic creative problem approaches were chosen for an in depth investigation.

To allow for a most suitable recommendation for xxx company’s research and development department two methodologies were chosen which derived from divergent backgrounds. Considered were Synectics, an approach based on psychological research and observations during the innovation process, and TRIZ, a methodology derived from empirical research into technological patent collections. For the main investigation a qualitative research approach compared both methods with the aid of three dimensions. These dimensions of analysis are the theoretical underpinning, the process and the performance. The dimensions served for a structured literature based investigation providing a holistic understanding which clearly indicates the strength and weaknesses of each method. Investigations revealed that both methods derived from a rich framework of knowledge in their specific domain. Furthermore the two of them apply systematic approaches involving different stages of abstraction, herein they utilise different tools to advance the problem solving process. Despite uncovered differences in the level of abstraction and the utilised approach, a final evaluation derived in a recommendation for xxx company .

Table of Contents

A Critical Appraisal of Creativity Techniques in the Context of Innovations for xxx company ... I

Abstract ... II

Acknowledgements ... III

Table of Contents ... IV

Statutory Declaration ... VI

Table of Abbreviations ... VII

Table of Figures ... VIII

1 Introduction ... 1

2 Innovation and Creativity ... 3
2.1 Innovation ... 3
2.2 Creativity as a Source for Innovation ... 5
2.3 Foundation Glossary of Creativity Fostering Techniques ... 7
2.3.1 Brainstorming ... 8
2.3.2 Checklists ... 10
2.3.3 Analogies ... 13
2.3.4 Morphological Analysis ... 14
2.4 Concluding Remarks ... 16

3 Methodology ... 17

4 Synectics ... 19
4.1 Theoretical Underpinning ... 20
4.2 Procedure ... 22
4.2.1 Groundwork and Immersion ... 22
4.2.2 Divergent Exploration ... 23
4.2.3 Selection ... 23
4.2.4 Focussed Exploration ... 23
4.2.5 Initial Articulation of a Potential Solution ... 24
4.2.6 Development and Transformation ... 24
4.2.7 Final Remarks ... 25
4.3 Performance ... 25

5 TRIZ ... 27
5.1 Theoretical Underpinning ... 28
5.2 Procedure ... 29
5.2.1 Specific Problem ... 31
5.2.2 Abstract Problem ... 32
5.2.3 Abstract Solution ... 33
5.2.4 Specific Solution ... 34
5.3 Performance ... 3

6 Evaluating Synectics and TRIZ ... 37

7 Project Evaluation ... 39
7.1 Achievement of Objectives ... 39
7.2 Project Constraints and Setbacks ... 41
7.3 Evaluation of Deliverable ... 42
7.4 Lessons Learned and Further Research ... 44

References ... 45

Appendix A: Terms of Reference ... 50
Terms of Reference ... 50
Project Title: ... 50
A Problem Identification Recommendation in the Context of Software Innovation for the Research and Development Department of xxx company ... 50
Overview: ... 50
Objectives ... 51
Constraints ... 52
Resources ... 52
Reporting ... 53
Initial References ... 53
Client Details ... 54
Company Name: ... 54
Address: ... 54
Contact Name: ... 54
e-mail: ... 54

Appendix

1 Introduction

The widely acknowledged strategic key concept of competitive advantage pioneered by Michael Porter has the possibility to set a business apart from its competitors and can help to attain a favourable market position. A competitive advantage can be achieved in many different ways, e.g. a low cost advantage through economies of scale or a prime position based on reputation. Furthermore Tidd et al. (2005) state, that a competitive advantage can increasingly be created by those who are able to "create novelty in their offerings and the way in which they create those offerings". This implies a need for innovation as one possible source for competitive advantage.

xxx company, a company well known for their digital imaging software, is aiming to consolidate their competitive position in the volatile and competitive market of digital imaging. Therefore being innovative and creative in the development and improvement of their software products is essential to the business. Creating innovations within highly competitive markets with a high degree of new product introductions is even more difficult as innovations have to be perceived as such by the customers (Friar, 1995). Therefore innovations need to be substantial and well developed in order to create value to the organisation. To achieve this, xxx company will create a research and development department consisting of five employees, which will be responsible for initial software developments, improvements and inventions. One of their major tasks will be to identify and initiate software projects to the stage where it can be passed over to the software development department for coding and implementation.

xxx company postulates that innovations within software development follow a rough process of identification of possible problems which will then be filtered and condensed through a problem definition. The reduced amount of problems will then be brought forward to the final solution. While the field of innovation management is a broad topic, which is widely acknowledged within general product development e.g. pharmacy or mechanical engineering, most literature focuses on the solution of a given problem, but very limited research is available in the field of idea generation or problem identification as a source for innovation (Flynn et al., 2003). Therefore xxx company was seeking an investigation on the current thinking and research in the field of innovation management in respect of problem and idea identification as a source for innovation.

Research was initiated after the development and agreement of terms of reference for the project in cooperation with xxx company (see Appendix A). The aim was, to provide a recommendation on methods and techniques of idea generation or problem identification for the research and development department. The recommendation had to be based on an investigation which identifies appropriate methods and techniques within innovation management and which have proved valuable in other well established organisations. Furthermore they had to be considered and evaluated in the context of a possible implementation within xxx company.

For a holistic understanding of the idea generation the subsequent chapter will start with a literature review of the innovation research. The term of innovation will be clarified and the necessary background to identify in which stage ideas are generated will be provided. This will establish the link to creativity research which starts off by defining creativity and showing what is meant by creativity. Furthermore it will be considered by which factors creativity is influenced and how it can be improved. This leads to an investigation of creativity fostering techniques where four of them will be further elaborated.

Those techniques will form the basement of the main investigation started in chapter three. Here a qualitative research design will be defined for an investigation of two systematic creative problem solving approaches. This literature based research will provide the necessary illumination to identify the strength and weaknesses of those techniques. Based on this examination a final evaluation will provide the recommendation for xxx company in chapter six. Finally an overall evaluation of the project and its conduct showing the achievements and lessons learned will be provided in chapter seven. We will start off by introducing the innovation and creativity research.

2 Innovation and Creativity

Idea generation as a source for innovation requires an understanding of innovation and the innovation process. Therefore a literary survey of the topic of innovation will introduce the following sections. During this it will become apparent that innovation is heavily accompanied by creativity as a fundamental source. This leads to a closer look at creativity and creativity fostering techniques presented in the subsequent sections.

2.1 Innovation

Innovation has an ambiguous meaning, although the term is used in our every day language, innovation can be either the output of the innovation process or the process itself (Higgins, 1996). The process can be described as identifying opportunities and turning them into practice. Also an innovation is usually perceived as something new, which derives from the Latin noun innovatio (renewal) or the verb innovare meaning making something new (GfdS). Furthermore the ambiguous meaning is reflected by several different dimensions which are employed for a classification of innovation. The two most common ones are the type of innovation and the degree of novelty.

The type of innovation is classified as

• product innovation – new or enhanced products and services,
• process innovation – improvements in the effectiveness and efficiency of the way in which things are achieved,
• position innovation – improvements in the marketing functions of the company or products delivered, and
• paradigm innovation – called management innovation by Higgins, both can be subsumed as the strategic direction of an organisation (Higgins, 1996, Francis and Besssant, 2005)

These types do not limit the ability to innovate to a single type. Organisations can embrace different types of innovation at the same time.

The degree of novelty represented by an innovation is the second, more subjective classification. Although Garcia and Calantone (2002) propose a more specific view on this classification, the widely used continuum between radical and incremental innovation is sufficient within the scope of my project. A radical innovation represents entirely new and different solutions from yet known, e.g. introduction of Compact Discs - CD’s, while an incremental innovation is a relatively minor change, adaptation, refinement or enhancement of existing practices, e.g. the multi colour display of mobile phones (Flynn et al., 2003). This subjectivity is concerned with the view of the observer, because what may be radical to one country, industry, organisation or person might be incremental to another. However, incremental innovations are just as important as radical (Drucker, 2002). AIDS research is a good example of an important incremental innovation, where a couple of years ago almost nothing could have been done for people diagnosed HIV positive, medicine nowadays can stop the virus from breaking out sometimes for more than ten years through small steps in the development process.

The different characteristics of innovations are also reflected in several different definitions of the term innovation, Tidd et al. (2005, p. 92) list six such definitions, Hauschildt (2004, p. 4-6) lists another sixteen. McFadzean (1998), McAdam and McClelland (2002) and Flynn et al. (2003) also consider other definitions. Most of them can be simplified and subsumed as the process of taking a novel idea and turning it in a useful product, service or work method (Robbins and Coulter, 2002). Therefore innovation is closely linked to ideation, which Tidd et al. (2005) state as “..the key point is that the innovation moves from a collection of ideas to some physical reality..”, furthermore they go on by stating “..there is considerable scope for creativity..” (p. 92). This citation links the ideation process to creativity as a fundamental source for innovation.

2.2 Creativity as a Source for Innovation

Creativity has been expressed as a fundamental part of innovation, therefore the term creativity should be further examined. Robbins and Coulter (2002) define creativity as “the ability to combine ideas in a unique way or to make unusual associations between ideas” (p. 354), they state that ideas are put into practice by innovation. While Nickerson (1999) delineates creativity as “the ability to get lots of useful ideas, especially new and original ideas” (p. 394), he emphasises creativity as a property of thinking. Out of those two, and similar other definitions stated by Flynn et al. (2003) and McAdam and McClelland (2002), I will summarise creativity as a process of thought with a beneficial, yet undiscovered outcome.

Every human being has had some thoughts with a beneficial, yet undiscovered outcome in his life. So is everyone creative? Literature provides an unanimous affirmative answer (e.g. Flynn et al., 2003; McAdam and McClelland, 2002; Nickerson, 1999). Not everyone however, would be considered creative in society which is due to subjective societal measures. Creativity, again, depends on the view of the beholder, which is influenced by two variables, the benefit and the novelty. Therefore different models of the degrees of creativity are proposed. Nickerson (1999) delineates two, one from Gardner which distinguishes between ‘little-c’ and ‘big-C’ creativity and the other from Boden which contrasts psychological (p) and historical (h) creativity. Another approach by Smith et al. (2000) differentiates between mundane and exceptional creativity. All three describe a continuum with the initial expression being used as a novel idea to the individual, which may have occurred somewhere else and therefore has a low benefit to society. The latter describes a novel and as such perceived idea to the society which therefore benefits the society (see examples in Figure 1).

(Figure 1 available in downloadversion)

The perception of society, which is connected to the benefit, is an important factor. If an idea is not recognised it will stay little-c / mundane / p-creative. That implies that the recognition of ideas, as well as the creative process, are dependent on knowledge. Knowledge of the domain, needed to understand the idea in order to achieve recognition. Therefore Smith et al. (2000) state that creativity is domain specific, which is supported by Flynn et al. (2003) and McAdam and McClelland (2002).

Furthermore, several other factors also influence the creative ability and frequency. Therefore creativity has been studied from several perspectives ranging from psychology, over sociology and education to organisational behaviour (Williams and Yang, 1999). Out of those, several different concepts of research on creativity can be identified, such as

• individual views – which focuses on the individuals abilities, personalities, characteristics and experience
• system views – whose concept examines the environments influence on the creative individual and also creative group behaviour,
• process views – which focus on the thoughts and attempts to understand the inputs needed for a creative thought and which model the transformation of inputs into creative performance, and
• organisational views – which determine the influence of the organisational settings such as the strategic direction, resource availability, management style, culture and climate. (Williams and Yang, 1999)

These concepts have also been investigated in relation to innovation for a better understanding and managing capability of the innovative organisation (e.g. Mumford, 2000; McAdam and McClelland, 2002). This is due to their examination of influential factors concerning the fundaments of innovation. Although Higgins (1996) acknowledges the importance of these concepts and their influence regarding innovation, he states that it sometimes requires extensive efforts within an organisation to tackle the needed changes. This is true to a certain extent, as for example changing an organisations culture can take several years and is difficult to pursue (Robbins and Coulter, 2002). Higgins (1996) states that the most beneficial and easiest way of improving innovativeness and enhancing creativity is through the use of creative problem solving techniques. He mentions the existence of more than one hundred techniques which have the possible ability to improve the level of innovation.

2.3 Foundation Glossary of Creativity Fostering Techniques

 Based on the former definitions, improving the level of innovations would mean to enhance the amount or quality of ideas as a vital part of innovation, which in turn indicates to magnify creativity. It was already shown that every human being is creative to a certain extent, but does that imply that we are able to nurture creativity? One of the most cited authors in that context is Amabile, who postulates three components of creativity, namely expertise (knowledge), motivation and creative thinking skills (e.g. Flynn et al., 2003; McAdam and McClelland, 2002). Following Amabile, creativity can be enhanced if one of these factors can be improved. This is supported by other authors as well which do not explicitly cite Amabile (e.g. Arnold, 1992). Therefore the use of creative problem solving techniques can help to increase creativity as they support creative thinking, which is also supported by McFadzean (1998).

[...]