China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Conceiving Design Solutions
Published in Bahram Nassersharif, Engineering Capstone Design, 2022
Lateral thinking is a way to escape from getting stuck in the same line of thinking for design solutions that can happen during brainstorming. Because sometimes our brains get fixated on solving the problem using the same methods repeatedly, some external input is needed to provoke our thinking into a different approach. The random input interrupts our line of thinking and points us into thinking differently, and therefore, the idea generation can become productive again. The random input does not have to be thoughtful but can be purely a random selection. For example, you can pick up a book and go to a random page, paragraph and pick a word. Then, try and relate the word to the problem at hand. A team member can also randomly think of a word, maybe from a song they like or a phrase they heard on the news or a friend. You are not limited to words in random input; pick an object or select a picture randomly and try to relate that to the design problem at hand. In relating the random input to your problem, you will be able to create new solution ideas.
The Principles of Creativity
Published in Mike Baxter, Product Design, 2018
Product function analysis starts with an existing product and systematically arranges its functions in a hierarchy. This forces you to work out what is the primary function of that product and how the subsidiary functions contribute to that main function. This is a technique for problem reduction. The technique plays a key role in concept design and hence the toolkit describing it is found on page 236 in the concept design chapter. Product feature permutation also starts with an existing product and explores all the different ways in which its components or elements can be arranged. This technique is also for problem reduction, and it plays a key role in embodiment design. I t is described and exemplified in the embodiment design chapter (See p 275) Orthographic analysis presents two or three attributes of a problem in a graphical two or three dimensional array. This allows possible solutions to be explored by means of combination, permutation, interpolation or extrapolation. This technique can be used for both problem reduction and problem expansion and its toolkit is described on pages 88-89. SCAMPER is an acronym for 'substitute, combine, adapt, magnify or minify, eliminate or elaborate and rearrange or reverse'. It is intended to stimulate thinking about different ways an existing product could be changed. This technique is for problem reduction and its toolkit is on page 90. Analogies and metaphors of problems can be used to stimulate lateral thinking. Synectics is a specific technique, involving the use ofanalogies. These are problem digression techniques and the toolkit is on pages 91-
Innovative Aspects of Green Chemistry
Published in Vera M. Kolb, Green Organic Chemistry and Its Interdisciplinary Applications, 2017
The terms “lateral thinking” and “vertical thinking” were coined by Edward de Bono. Vertical thinking is traditional thinking in which one takes a position and then builds on the basis of that position, in a stepwise and logical manner. Vertical, deductive, and linear thinking are related because they share the tools of logic. In lateral thinking, we search for different approaches and different ways of looking at things, and we move “sideways” to perceive things differently and to try different concepts and points of entry (de Bono, 1993, p. 53). Lateral thinking challenges assumptions and generates alternative ways of looking at the problem. It breaks out of the concept prison of old ideas (de Bono, 1990, p. 11). It is involved in creating something new, rather than analyzing something old. It explores multiple possibilities and approaches, instead of pursuing a single approach. Lateral thinking is creative and leads to innovation. This type of thinking is best captured by de Bono’s description: “You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper” (de Bono, 1993, pp. 52–53). Lateral thinking corresponds to digging the hole in a different place, whereas vertical thinking corresponds to digging the hole in the same place.
Promoting creative insubordination using Escape Games in mathematics
Published in International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2022
Since Aristotle, logic has been the only instrument that deals with the structure of reasoning, and for this reason, it is an object of every discipline; but new ideas, for their unpredictable characteristic, indicate that they are not always the results of logical reasoning. Therefore, it is noted that a different intellectual process emerges during the creation of new and simple ideas. In the literature, the expression convergent thinking often represents a logical method, instead lateral or divergent thinking refers to the use of creativity (Antonietti, 2011). Divergent thinking is a transversal competence taking part in the social and cognitive development of students; abilities that are acquired in this way can be used in different contexts of daily life. Lateral thinking represents the ability to generate different and ingenious solutions for a problem; it is spontaneous, fluid and nonlinear reasoning that leads to consider a problem from different points of view (Antonietti, 2011).
Investigating the future of the fuzzy front end: towards a change of paradigm in the very early design phases?
Published in Journal of Engineering Design, 2018
Y. Borgianni, G. Cascini, F. Rotini
Some approaches to PP based on cognitive abilities show great freedom of thought similarly to Brainstorming, but favour particular directions through which to find new ideas. Lateral thinking (De Bono 1968, 1994) is a well-known technique with a considerable diffusion in industrial contexts (Coates, Cook, and Robinson 1997) that, unlike logical ‘vertical’ thinking, pushes individuals to think from different perspectives, overcoming their psychological inertia and generating as many new ideas as possible. Several methods and tools have been tested to support this task, e.g. Mind Maps (e.g. Hüsig and Kohn 2009) and Six Thinking Hats (De Bono 2009; Vernon and Hocking 2016). Other approaches strive to identify the potential user needs and product requirements through a scenario-based analysis. This practice reflects upon most likely product use scenarios and alternative future developments. Scenario-based techniques are already diffused in industrial environments as a means for identifying new products ideas, giving rise to satisfactory results (Suri and Marsh 2000; Flint 2002).