Suzanne A. Celmer-Harter, MA, BS, MT(ASCP) - Home



Conceptual Blocks and Creative Problem SolvingSuzanne Celmer-HarterSiena Heights UniversityConceptual Blocks and Creative Problem SolvingThe inability to be creative when attempting to solve a problem is frustrating and aggravating at times, especially when one is faced with time constraints. Everyone struggles with this type of problem at some point in their lives, whether it is trying to decide on how to juggle a schedule when one cannot be in two places at the same time, or trying to figure out a practical solution to a problem that has been plaguing a team in a workplace. Problem solving does not come easily to many individuals and can be hindered by limited thinking and the inability to see beyond the obvious. Scholars refer to these mental obstructions as conceptual blocks. Being able to overcome these blocks and efficiently solve problems is crucial to being successful in leadership and life. Problem SolvingWilliams (n.d.) described a problem as “the discrepancy between the current situation and the desired future situation” (para. 2). Problems in organizations can be related to inefficient processes, complicated or obscure workflows, inability to manage conflicts or unsuccessful outcomes. “Solving problems involves procedures which are generally not known and therefore novel to the subject” (Wimmer, 2016, p. 1). Problem solving utilizes a process of defining, analyzing and generating information, determining solutions that resolve the issue, evaluating solutions, and implementation (Steiner, 2009; Whetten & Cameron, 2011). There are two types of problem solving: analytical and creative. “Effective managers are able to solve problems both analytically and creatively, even though different skills are required for each type of problem” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 174). Leaders must be able to solve problems and make decisions every day in the most efficient manner. When determining to use analytical or creative problem solving methods, one must decide if the problem is simple, complicated, or complex. Research has shown simple and complicated problems require routine problem solving such as the analytical type. Complex problem solving requires creativity to find solutions are not yet known (Steiner, 2009). Often, inexperienced managers will try to solve a problem alone or make a decision quickly without fully understanding the problem or implications of the solution. The creativity process required for complex problem solving takes longer and requires the involvement of several individuals. Placing restrictions on time, creativity processes, and defining issues create conceptual blocks affect or prevent problems solving.Conceptual BlocksConceptual blocks limit one’s ability solve problems creatively. “Conceptual blocks are mental obstacles that constrain the way problems are defined, and they can inhibit us from being effective in any of the four types of creativity” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 183). Conceptual blocks impede problem solving and creative thoughts. They lead to a lack of innovation and stagnancy. Whetten and Cameron (2011) defined four major conceptual blocks along with two representative examples of each mental obstruction. The four conceptual blocks are constancy, commitment, compression, and complacency. ConstancyConstancy occurs when one looks at a problem in only one way and does not consider any other alternatives. It is defined by vertical or linear thinking and using only one language to identify a problem. Thinking and language are required for communication. Vertical thinking “refers to defining a problem in a single way and then pursuing that definition without deviation until a solution is reached. No alternative definitions are considered. All information gathered and all alternatives generated are consistent with the original definition” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 186). One language is a communication barrier, which indicates only utilizing verbal mechanisms to define a problem instead of other thought languages such as symbolic, imagery, for emotional (Whetten and Cameron, 2011, p. 187). Just as there are different types of learning styles, there is not one method to communicate information in problem solving. Information needs to be conveyed in various formats to get the message across to different individuals. Organizational leaders often are stuck in these two types of constancy. It is a “cookie-cutter” or “one size fits all” approach to solving problems. It is the easy way out of a problem. “Creative problem solving requires being able to define and solve problems multiple ways” (Williams, n.d., para. 2). It is far easier to use a solution or problem solving method that has worked in the past or is easy, rather than looking for unique solutions. CommitmentCommitment occurs when one describes a problem based on previous experiences. The past can prejudice or cloud interpretation of the present. There are “two forms of commitment that produce conceptual blocks: Stereotyping based on past experiences and ignoring commonalities” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 189). Commitment keeps people from looking for alternative solutions. It limits creativity. Stereotyping involves a method of problem solving where an individual will use the same solution that has previously worked in the past for common problem instead of spending the time and energy obtaining a new and different solution which work even better. It relates to the saying, “re-inventing the wheel.” Ignoring commonalities keeps leaders “committed to a particular point of view, to the fact that elements are different, and consequently, becomes unable to make connections, identify themes, or perceive commonalities” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 189). CompressionCompression does not allow one to filter out the relevant information from what is important. “Two especially cogent examples of compression are artificially constraining problems and not distinguishing figure from the ground” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 190). It is similar to the saying, “cannot see the forest for the trees.” Compression also occurs when the problem is defined with too narrow constraints. Removing too much information from problem solving can lead to making assumptions, many of which are probably incorrect. Sometimes, leaders are too familiar with a problem, and it limits the ability to see beyond the obvious. Artificial constraining involves placing problem boundaries one cannot imagine breaking. Unable to distinguish figure from the ground implies one makes problems too big or difficult to solve. The common theme is imagination, dreaming, and simply thinking cannot take place to combat placencyComplacency is a method of acceptance and not being willing to ask questions or delve into the problem deeper to find out more information might allow for a better understanding of the problem.Some conceptual blocks occur not because of poor thinking habits or inappropriate assumptions but because of fear, ignorance, insecurity, or just plain mental laziness. Two especially prevalent examples of the complacency block are a lack of questioning [noninquisitiveness] and a bias against thinking. (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 192)Noninquisitiveness leads to individuals not obtaining the most information because of the lack of questioning. Individuals may think they will appear naive or ignorant if they question something or attempt to redefine a problem. Asking questions puts them at risk of exposing their ignorance. It also may be threatening to others because it implies that what they accept may not be correct. This may create resistance, conflict, or even ridicule by others. (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 193)A bias against thinking is a phrase describing the propensity for not using all of the creative options available to solve problems. This mental laziness leads to solving problems in a quick, linear fashion. Complacency results in making quick decisions, which may not be the best solution possible.My Personal Experiences with Conceptual BlocksAs a leader, I am often blocked by constancy. I am very logical, analytical and goal oriented. I follow linear problem solving methods because I have extensive experience in mathematics and science. I like solutions to follow steps A to B to C and not to deviate. It is often difficult for me to imagine the “what ifs” and to see things in conceptual forms. I see black and white, not Technicolor. I have to rely on team members to add the creativity to the straightforward analytical and scientific aspects of my problem solving methods. Together, our combined talents for problem solving, utilize the best of analytical and creativity methods to break down constancy. In addition, I struggle with commitment stereotyping. I have been guilty of using “tried and true” methods to avoid spending time using one’s imagination to solve a problem. Past learning, practical considerations, and evaluations all tend to depress fights of imagination-the forward leap that is based on a hunch (insufficient evidence). Creative thinking is a radical rather than a conservative look at a problem situation and requires encouragement if it is to be nurtured. (Farcas, 2013, p. 768) Unfortunately, I have limited time to spend on problems. When I encounter a problem, I just want to fix it and move on. Often, I have to decide to take shortcuts by utilizing an existing solution instead of trying to come up with something new, which might be a better one. It is difficult to stop a process that works to step aside for a moment, and take the time to consider alternatives, which might work even better. On the other hand, what if the something worse happens and the alternative fails? How would a leader look then to their team or upper administration? Is one willing to put oneself in the spotlight and under scrutiny for the opportunity to change or develop a new and possibly improved process? Is that a risk one is willing to take? It depends on the circumstance and what I think are the odds of succeeding. I sometimes will choose to be safe over the risk of being wrong. Organizational Action PlansThe first step to overcoming conceptual blocks is to recognize conceptual blocks are present and identify them and their subcomponents if they are also present. After identification, one must determine the appropriate technique(s) required to remove the block(s) successfully and creatively problem solve. Some of the methods or tools a leader should use to break down the block(s) include advocacy, inquiry, lateral or divergent thinking, problem reversal or reframing, communication and organizational culture. When using advocacy and inquiry in the discussion of creative problem solving, both are methods used to either support or investigate a cause or process for a block(s). The other terms are methods or supportive mechanisms resulting in the generation of creative solutions to problems. Leaders need to direct teams and provide a safe environment for creativity. They also may provide additional resources as needed. In addition, when setting up an action plan, leaders or teams need to determine the purpose, identify the participants, develop ground rules, decide on assignments, establish timelines and action dates, measure progress, and evaluate the plan, which will allow the team to know when the goal has been reached. Advocacy The term advocacy refers to making our thinking process visible and publicly testing our conclusions and assumptions (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994) through the use of the following three techniques (Smith, 1987): (a) giving examples to illustrate thinking, (b) sharing the data or steps used to reach conclusions, and (c) thinking systemically so that the person providing the information recognizes others may have a different view. Inquiry involves asking others to make their thinking process visible (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1994). It too involves three techniques (Smith, 1987), as follows: (a) encouraging challenges, (b) probing others' thinking, and (c) seeking others' views. (as cited in Tompkins, 2001, p. 554)Advocacy allows a person to explain a point of view and give supporting information as to why he or she came to a particular conclusion. Senge et al. (1994) described mental models in The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization “as images, hypotheses, and histories that we are maintaining in our minds regarding ourselves, other people, institutions, and each aspect of the world we are living” (as cited in Fillion, Koffi, & Booto Ekionea, 2015, p. 80). This statement highlights the importance of utilizing storytelling as a communication method in organizations. “Storytelling should be considered as a communication method to arouse emotions and energy and get individuals involved in solving the various problems…” (Pinkerton, 2003, p. 299). Leaders can use storytelling as a form of advocacy to explain a point of view, show support for a cause, or persuade others to take a particular position.As a leader and an advocate for a particular process, goal or value, I would provide my staff with specific examples that would add importance or weight to my opinion. For example, if I wanted my team to change the way they receive in work because it was causing an increase in the length of time it took to complete the testing, I would provide them with time studies and data derived from our computer system. I would define the new steps in a laboratory process I wanted the staff to take, such as moving a centrifuge closer to the entry point into the department, or decreasing the amount of time the processing staff waits to collect a group of specimens before they deliver the tubes to the technical department. I would attempt to define the issues ahead of time where processor and technologist might be resistant to change. However, I would emphasize to the staff the most important thing to remember was the specimens needed to get back to the technical area to be analyzed as soon as possible to provide the best care possible for our patients. InquiryInquiry allows leaders to explore other individuals’ mental models by asking the questions how, what or what. Senge et al. (1994) stated,Indeed, given mental models are habitually tacit; they are often not tested and examined. They are generally invisible to us until the time we decide to examine them. The main task of this discipline is therefore to make such that mental models emerge, to explore them, and to talk about them the more freely possible in order to help us not only to see the mirror, but also the frame of the mirror: to see its impacts on our lives and to find ways to reframe the mirror in creating new mental models which will be more useful in the future to see the world. (as cited in Fillion, Koffi, & Booto Ekionea, 2015, p. 80)When people are allowed to question each other in a manner that allows for exploration and discovery, a learning organization is created where positive change can occur. Senge was quoted as saying, “if new adds-on, ideas, or strategies are never put into practice, it is because they are in conflict with our deep internal images of the world, images which are limiting us to our familiar ways of thinking and acting” (as cited in Fillion, Koffi, & Booto Ekionea, 2015, p. 80). Everyone has an opinion or thoughts how to improve a process. Many people will not verbalize them for fear of embarrassment or insecurity. Giving problems a voice is the first step to solving them. Leaders must create an environment where members feel safe to expose themselves through expressing their opinions and thoughts, and allow creativity to occur. This process will inspire change, learning, and growth. Leaders must encourage the sharing of ideas and discussion of problems so any incorrect assumptions can be cleared up.Inquiry allows leaders and team members to obtain more information to allow for further understanding. To utilize inquiry within my team, I ask the technologists and processors for ideas how to make a process work better by asking where they see gaps. The staff has an integral role in creating lean processes and making them work successfully or fail. I would ask staff to keep an open mind during a trial period and report on any issues or concerns, keeping communication open. During and upon conclusion of a trial or study, I would ask the participants for feedback about the process. We would then diagram problems and brainstorm issues to work out problems. Additional changes might be required to improve the new process even more, but the key to success is participation. Lateral or Divergent ThinkingLateral or divergent think is an approach where problems are solved by thinking in different ways. Lateral thinking is the alternative to vertical thinking and allows for creativity. “As opposed to vertical thinking, lateral thinking tries to identify different directions of solving a problem. It is not sequential; it is not restricted by relevant information and does not have to be correct” (Hernandez & Varkey, 2008, p. 27-28). Leaders have to be able to create an environment for staff, which encourages nontraditional and creative ways to problem solve that is non-vertical and nonlinear. This way of problem solving allows employees to view issues in a different light to generate novel ideas. To those of us that are analytical, this is an incredibly scary prospect, which is why we need to surround ourselves with creative people on our team and in other leadership positions to support us and provide us with a safe environment to experiment and to gain confidence in our creative abilities. Dane, Baer, Pratt and Oldham (2011) suggest when leaders direct people to use non-typical problem solving methods, over time, people may change the way they approach problem solving and become more creative. Problem Reversal or ReframingGeneration of new ideas leads to solutions that might not have been obvious at first glance or obtained from a linear analysis. Redefining the problem by reframing or reversing it, so one looks at a problem from a different perspective with the hope of gaining a new insight. One would find gaps in a process between what occurs and what should happen. In healthcare, we know what should occur because we have benchmarks, best practices, and clinical pathways established. The question to ask is how do we get from our current practice to what we want to be in a future state? We can reverse the thinking to include statements that would define the problem in terms of the opposite of what is the reality or the absurd and then move it to the reality. Gautam (2001) uses the example of a critical care nursing shortage defined as a surplus of nurses in subacute patient care units, which does not fit the hospital’s mission of providing support for acute care patients. Reframing the problem in this manner results in “too many patients, not too few nurses” (p. 21). Reversal or reframing of a problem eliminates vertical or linear municationSuccessful creative problem solving requires communication from leaders to be credible and trustworthy because employees are influenced by messages sent by management. The message being communicated should be tailored to the type of listener. The message should be understandable, concise, consistent and aligned with the goals and strategic direction of the organization and backed with data if needed (DuBrin, 2010). Communication can exist in many forms including written, electronic, and verbal. The best type depends on the message being delivered and the intended audience. A message that is of a serious nature requires accuracy or direct feedback should be done with face-to-face communication. Creative problem solving requires communication, which is open, direct, and concise. Many times, problems occur because of a lack of communication between individuals or departments. Maintaining an open dialog and not forming a preconceived idea before knowing all of the facts will help keep open lines of communication and help with solving problems. Part of communication includes managing conflict. The more open the communication is, the greater the possibility for conflict, which requires leaders to be able to use conflict management tools effectively. Conflict is not necessarily bad and may be the result of a passionate display of emotions and ideas, which may lead to greater understanding and learning if done in a constructive manner. In my department, my team exchanges ideas every day at huddle. We also have monthly team meetings, which we use as a forum to address larger complex problems. I give and receive feedback every day. I am very approachable, which allows my staff to bring problems to me in real time. I also empower my team to let them problem solve. Often, I do not know about problems until after my very competent staff has resolved them. I consider that independence creative and innovate. Interdepartmental problems are worked on by members of many teams, which allow us to develop working relationships and new knowledge into other disciplines in the hospital. These groups require the most transparent type of communication because of the unfamiliarity of processes in other departments. We cannot assume anything and have to be clear and concise with our discussions to ensure we understand each other and the processes when we are problem solving. Listening is one of the most valuable forms of communication required in problem solving teams. In my experience, communication issues are usually the most challenging and difficult aspects of the problem solving process, especially in cross-functional, interdepartmental anizational CultureIntegrating creative learning processes within the organizational culture will allow for innovation and creativity. Martins and Terblanche (2003) cite the amount of freedom given to employees to make decisions as a reflection of the organizational culture directly influences the level of creativity and innovation of the organization. When people are engaged in processes and encouraged to participate in generating new ideas without fear, value unique insights, creativity will flow, learning will occur, and knowledge will be obtained. Leaders should spearhead the problem solving process and create an environment allowing creativity and innovation (Hughes, 2003; Martins & Terblanche, 2003). Arad et al. (1997) stated, “The degree to which employees have freedom and authority to participate in decision making in solving problems determines the level of empowerment, which is positively related to the level of creativity and innovation in an organization” (as cited in Martins & Terblanche, 2003, p. 71). The leader has to be able to identify all of the appropriate participants involved in the process, make sure everyone has a precise definition of the problem in relationship to the situation and workplace, have the employees work on creative solutions, which allows for buy-in, and oversee the entire process from start to finish. Leaders should be able to determine if the process is moving in the right direction to solve the problem, or if there is a breakdown, be able to identify the point where the break occurred, and work to repair it. Leaders should be able to provide direction and align a strategy linking the results of the process to the performance of the workgroup. The culture of an organization will either support or inhibit creativity.ConclusionLeaders need to be able to identify conceptual blocks, how they occur, and what methods are required to remove them so creativity can happen in work teams. “Some conceptual blocks occur not because of poor thinking habits or inappropriate assumptions but because of fear, ignorance, insecurity, or just plain mental laziness” (Whetten & Cameron, 2011, p. 192). Open and clear communication is required in the workplace to ensure messages are received and provide feedback. People are “creatures of habit” and often have a hard time doing things differently or deviating from “tried and true” methods. Others are afraid to face ridicule and refuse to offer creative suggestions, which might lead to change. Overcoming conceptual blocks requires an organizational culture where leaders encourage employees to have open minds, a readiness to learn, a willingness to fail, and experience in problem solving, Innovation in business creates viability and as leaders, we should encourage employees to challenge the status quo in a safe environment. Imagination and creativity can break down conceptual blocks and result in new opportunities, change, and growth.References BIBLIOGRAPHY \l 1033 Dane, E., Baer, M., Pratt, M. G., & Oldham, G. R. (2011). Rational versus intuitive problem solving: How thinking "off the beaten path" can stimulate creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 3-12. doi:10.1037/a0017698DuBrin, A. J. (2010). Leadership: Research findings, practice and skills (6 ed.). Mason, Ohio, USA: South-Western.Farcas, F. (2013). The creativity and problem solving for qualitative solutions. Revista de Management Comparat International, 14(5), 766-773. Retrieved from Review of International Comparative Management: , G., Koffi, V., & Booto Ekionea, J. P. (2015). Peter Senge's learning organization: A critical view and the addition of some new concepts to actualize theory and practice. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict, 19(3), 73-102. Retrieved from , K. (2001). Conceptual blockbusters: Creative idea generation techniques for health administrators. Hospital Topics, 79(4), 19-25. Retrieved from , J. S., & Varkey, P. (2008). Vertical versus lateral thinking. Physician Executive, 34(3), 26-28. Retrieved from , G. (2003). Add creativity to your decision processes. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 26(2), 4-13. Retrieved from , E. C., & Terblanche, F. (2003). Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1), 64-74. doi:10.1108/1460106031056337Pinkerton, S. (2003). Persuasion through the art of storytelling. Nursing Economics, 21(6), 298-9. Retrieved from , G. (2009). The concept of open creativity: Collaborative creative problem solving for innovation generation-a systems approach. Journal of Business and Management, 15(1), 5-33. Retrieved from , T. C. (2001). Using advocacy and inquiry to improve the thinking process of future managers. Journal of Management Education, 25(5), 553-571. Retrieved from , D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2011). Solving problems analytically and creatively. In D. A. Whetten, & K. S. Cameron, Developing management skills (8th ed., pp. 167-231). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Williams, S. (n.d.). Creative Problem Solving. Retrieved April 23, 2016, from Wright State University: , L. (2016). Problem solving as a condition of the creative process: A case for closer cooperation of creativity research and problem solving research. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(488). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00488 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download