training in creativity

Recently a senior executive in a well-known advertising agency indicated that he would not consider training in creativity. This is a not uncommon view from those who consider creativity to be a natural and special gift which some have and others do not have.

Possibly there is an underlying fear that making creativity more conscious and more deliberate will somehow damage the natural flair.

­Possibly there is concern that, if creativity can indeed be trained, that reduces the 'special' position of creative people. If everyone can become creative, then what is so special?

Possibly there is the fear that any formal approach to creativity will tend to produce standardised results. If the processes are standard, will not the results also be standard?

CONSCIOUSNESS
There is the well-known story of the centipede 'which lay distracted in the ditch, wondering which leg came before which'. The centipede could function on automatic rhythm, but once it all became self-conscious, the task became impossible. I can appreciate this fear, but it is related to the 'mystique' notion of creativity, which is now so old-fashioned in the idea world.

Over the years many highly creative people in the worlds of architecture, industrial design and advertising have come to tell me how useful they find the formal techniques of lateral thinking. They say they have been using some of the processes in a weak sort of way. Having them spelled out strongly and formally has been of benefit to them.

Carole Ferguson, one of my accredited trainers, was working with a major corporation in South Africa. One afternoon she set up 130 workshops, mixing senior engineers with people who swept the shop floor. Using just one of the formal lateral thinking techniques they generated 21,000 ideas. It took nine months just to work through the ideas. I do not believe that 'inspirational' creativity would have had anything like this effect.

I believe that this fear of 'consciousness' is totally misplaced. On the contrary, consciousness makes the processes even more powerful.

CREATIVE TALENT
If a creative person uses the formal tools of lateral thinking, the output will be much better than if the same tools are used by a person who is less creative. The tools simply set up special 'situations'. How the thinker moves forward from those situations will be affected by creative talent. A creative person will more easily pick out the concept involved. A creative person will more easily spot the emerging values. A creative person will more easily relate the developing idea to existing possibilities.

Even though the formal tools of lateral thinking do stimulate creativity, how that stimulation is used and taken forward will be affected by existing creative talent. There is no contradiction.

Creative talent can show off by showing how very well it can use the tools. Now, it is true that there are many creative people who are not truly creative at all. They have learned some simple habits which give the appearance of creativity. They modify and tweak existing ideas without ever producing a really new idea. Those people who enjoy a reputation for creativity based on 'false creativity' will indeed feel threatened, because the lateral thinking tools will now allow other people to equal and exceed their creativity. Anyone who has confidence in his or her creativity does not feel threatened by a deliberate and formal approach to creativity.

STANDARD APPROACH
There is fear that a formal approach will always produce a sort of standard, stereotyped creativity. This is to show a complete misunderstanding of the nature of a 'tool'. A sculptor can use a standard hammer and chisel to produce varied works of art. The standard nature of tools does not determine the object. Computers are formal and standard devices. This does not determine what can be done with computers.

If you are in a locked room and someone gives you a key to the lock, does that determine where you go on leaving the room? If you are taught how to escape from existing concepts, that does not determine what new concepts you may create. Those new concepts may be determined by your background and experience, but that would have been the case whether you used the tools or not.

NO NEED FOR TRAINING
I suspect that the above reasons are not really the main reasons why some people reject the need for training.

If you accept the need for training, this means you are not operating at 'full throttle'. It means that you are not as creative as you might be. This is a very uncomfortable feeling for many people. It is like accepting the need for training in humour or sexual prowess. It is almost an insult to ability.

Yet in the world of athletics, people with natural ability still see the need for training and coaching in order to get the very best from that natural ability. If you have the ability, why not develop it to its fullest extent?

There is also the feeling that, if you accept the value of training, then there is the tiresome bother of getting trained. You have to allocate time and be prepared to participate. You may even not come out of it as well as you suppose - there is a risk. So it is much better to deny the value of training.

BAD EXPERIENCES
In the field of creativity there is a lot of rubbish around. People who have had experience of this rubbish are very reluctant to accept the value of training in creativity. I do not blame them.

My own view is that there is no mystique about creativity. The brain acts as a self-organising system which inevitably sets up asymmetric patterns. In order to change patterns and to make the fullest use of our experience, we need some deliberate interventions such as provocation. There are now mathematical papers showing the need for provocation in any self-organising information system. The formal tools of lateral thinking are based on an understanding of such systems.

WHO WOULD BENEFIT FROM TRAINING?
There are three clear groups who might benefit from formal training in creative methods.

1. Those who need to generate new ideas and concepts.
2. Management.
3. Everyone.

It is fairly obvious that advertising, marketing, new product development, design and strategy all involve creative thinking. Training in creative thinking is a boost to natural and other creative energies. There is nothing to be lost and much to be gained. If you find that a wonderful new golf club, which everyone else is praising, does not suit your style - then do not use it. Where a single powerful idea can make a huge difference, it is well worth investing in the generation of ideas. People often claim that they are 'not short of ideas'. That is rubbish. Everyone is short of good ideas.

The purpose of training management in creativity is twofold. Management needs creativity to solve problems, to improve processes, to simplify systems, to solve disputes, etc. Creativity is not only involved in new product design. Many day-to-day matters could be much improved by creative thinking.

The second reason for training management in creative thinking is that management can then respond to creativity and actively encourage it. In a world in which competence, information and state-of-the-art technology are becoming commodities, creativity is becoming more and more important. So management needs a thorough understanding of creativity, even if individual managers are not personally creative.

The value of training everyone in creativity is that it provides:

1. A motivation...
2. A framework...
3. Methods...

...for thinking about whatever you are doing. Creative confidence encourages people to think about their own jobs and ways of improving those jobs. Just exhorting people to be creative and having suggestion schemes is very weak. Giving people the creative tools to use is much more powerful and much more motivating.

MOUNTAIN TOPS
It is possible to talk about a distant city as a destination. Once that destination is chosen, then there are roads, maps, signs and vehicles. It is not difficult to reach the destination once it has been decided. This is not the case with creativity. Almost every organisation claims that it is creative. This is like admiring a mountain top. But to get there you had better learn some climbing techniques. Creativity as a wish and an object sounds good, but it is useless in practice. It is necessary to learn how to exercise and apply creativity.

NOTE
Thousands of people have already been trained in creative methods. Those requiring practical information should contact: UK fax 44 (0)1865 554027 or e-mail: edwdebono at msn.com