A NUMBER OF formal lateral thinking techniques have been put forward. Most of these tools have been shown to work systematically and effectively through years of use with different people in different cultures. There is no question that these tools do work. If you find that a certain tool does not work for you, consider three possibilities:
In essence, the tools are so fundamental and so basic to the creative process that anyone who cannot make the tools work is unlikely to be able to be creative. It is important, however, that students of creative thinking should make an effort to get the tools to work for them. It would be a pity if they gave up after the first try and decided that they are never going to be able to be creative. As with riding a bicycle, the first stages are awkward until you get the “hang” of it.
If someone at a seminar tells me that he or she finds that the techniques do not work, I reply:
Maybe the techniques do not work for you, at this moment, but there are a lot of people who have found that the techniques do work for them.
That is the great advantage of years of experience in the field. You get to know when things work and this is no longer a matter of opinion.
Do the different techniques have different uses? Do the different techniques have different areas of application? Which techniques are best in which situations?
In general, each of the lateral thinking techniques can be used on any occasion that demands lateral thinking. It may, however, be necessary to formulate the creative task in a suitable way. For example, the provocative “escape” technique works best when there is something from which to escape. So how could this be used in a “greenfield” situation (see here) where your difficulty is that you do not know where to start? So you need to formulate the task in the following way:
What would be the “normal” or standard thinking approach to this situation? Now let me escape from that.
For the opposite example we can look at problem solving. Here there is a definite point to be reached – removal of the problem. So how could the “random word” technique work here? By definition, the random word technique is not directed to a purpose and works best with a “general-area” type of focus. So we keep the problem needs in mind and carry out the random word technique. We then look to see if any of the ideas generated are directly of use for the problem. Even if this is not so then we try to shape or bend an idea to see if that idea could be of value in helping to solve the problem. There may be a principle that is usable even if the idea itself is not usable.
It is quite true that some people are happier with some of the techniques. Creative thinkers come to have their favourite technique because they find that a technique is easy to use or it works well for them. For example, many people favour the random word technique because it is so very easy. Others prefer the escape technique in order to escape from the usual thinking on the subject. The bolder people like the stepping-stone because it permits more extreme provocations. The concept fan is a favourite with more systematic people who like to proceed step by step.
Even if you do have a favourite technique it is important to practise the others from time to time. As a golfer you may have a favourite club but you need to retain some skill in the use of every club in your bag.
Some of the techniques are of direct use on any occasion when there is a need for new ideas.
The ability to focus precisely and to refocus and to create new subfocuses is of creative value on any occasion. Even if you are provided with a fixed task, there is benefit in clarifying the focus and also creating new focuses within the set task. Repeating the focus from time to time and giving alternative definitions of the focus (which might be a problem) are also basic creative habits suitable for all occasions.
The creative challenge can be applied to something that exists or to the thinking that takes place during the creative effort. Why do we have to look at it this way? Why do we have to keep within these boundaries? Even when there is a formed solution or idea, that itself can also be challenged (or some aspect of it).
The simple search for alternatives is the very essence of creativity. Are there alternative definitions of the focus? What are the alternative approaches? What alternative techniques might we use? Whenever we extract a “concept” during the creative thinking we immediately look around for alternative ways of carrying through the concept. Even when we have a final idea we can ask: is there a better way of doing this?
The random input technique (as in the random word) has a very wide applicability. If you are stuck and have run out of ideas during the creative thinking process, you can try an instant “random word” to open up new lines of thinking. When you do not know where to begin, the random word will provide starting points. The random word works best when the focus can be rephrased as a “general-area” type of focus.
The stratal is also a general-purpose technique. At the beginning of the thinking exercise you put together a stratal that refers to the whole situation about which you are thinking. This can apply to any situation. In the course of your thinking you can try another stratal, which this time refers to your thinking about the subject. What sort of things have come up in your thinking? In its general application the stratal is similar to the random word but is less provocative. It is more useful for dealing with complex situations.
Wherever the requirements of the situation can be spelled out, the filament technique can be used. The requirements are listed one under the other. From each requirement there comes the “filament” which steps outside the context of the present situation. Since broad requirements can be put down for most thinking situations, the filament technique is applicable to most situations.
There are some very basic types of thinking that can be considered along with the most appropriate tools to use for each type. These basic types are an oversimplification of thinking but help to provide some guidelines for use of the different lateral thinking techniques.
How do we reach this point? How do we solve this problem? How do we carry out this task? We have a clear idea of where we want to be. In the case of problems we want to remove the problem or be without it. This type of thinking covers problems, tasks, projects, negotiation, conflicts, and so on. While many of the techniques of lateral thinking are suitable in “achievement thinking” the most appropriate are as follows:
CHALLENGE. The boundaries, the dominating concepts, the essential factors and even the definition of the problem can all be challenged. Why do we have to look at it this way? Why do we have to look at it as a problem?
CONCEPT FAN. This is the key technique for achievement thinking because it is concerned with “how do we get there?” What are the needed concepts? The concept fan may itself turn up new focus points, which will also need creative attention. Proceeding systematically through the concept fan should turn up many alternative approaches and routes of achievement. Obviously, the concept fan is an elaborated form of the search for alternatives. When it is not possible to go through the concept fan process then a simple search for alternatives is appropriate.
STEPPING-STONE. This strongly provocative technique is useful in trying to get really new approaches by turning the problem inside out and putting things in a way that demands new thinking. While the concept fan will flush out a variety of possible approaches, the stepping-stone provocation will create some entirely different ones. If the problem has been around a long time it is important to try at least one provocative technique; otherwise the same ground will be covered again.
Improvement thinking can often be phrased as achievement thinking (how can we get a faster process?) but is worth considering separately because there are certain special characteristics of improvement. The first characteristic is that there is already something in operation which works. The second characteristic is that the direction of improvement (speed up, less time, less energy, less mistakes) is phrased in a general and open-ended way. Again, many techniques can be used but the most useful might be as follows:
CHALLENGE. This is the key technique. How did we come to do it this way? Why does it have to be done this way? Why do we work within these boundaries? We can challenge both what is and also our thinking about the process. Continuity analysis is particularly relevant.
ALTERNATIVES. We seek alternatives at every point. We define fixed points and then look for alternative ways of reaching those fixed points. This does not only apply to the overall process but to every part of it.
ESCAPE. This is the most appropriate provocative technique. We spell out the things that we “take for granted” in the normal process and then we escape from them. With improvement there are always things to escape from because we are seeking to improve an ongoing process. Even the most fundamental matters can be subjected to the escape provocation.
Where do we start? How do we get going? Greenfield thinking is the opposite of improvement thinking: with improvement thinking we have the existing process to work upon, but with greenfield thinking we have nothing to work upon except a general brief. Invention and design are obvious examples of greenfield thinking. So is the development of new opportunities or new concepts. Sometimes greenfield thinking is falsely treated as “achievement” thinking (I need a new invention here).
RANDOM INPUT. This is the key technique. The random input technique will immediately provide some new starting points whatever the situation might be. The random input leads thinking out in different directions. Once these directions are there they can be modified or changed. Further directions may be suggested. That is why rock groups and others use this technique.
THE FILAMENT TECHNIQUE. The general requirements of the task (the “brief”) can be put down and then the filament technique can be used to develop lines of thought. You can let ideas emerge from this or you can use the “forcing” aspect of the technique in which certain things are held together in order to force a new idea.
WISHFUL THINKING. This is one of the methods for setting up the stepping-stone provocation. In the greenfield situation you can set up this “wishful thinking” fantasy and that can open up lines of thought. This is best combined with a strong effort to pick out and to formulate new concepts as ideas develop. What is the concept behind this idea? How else might this concept be used?
All the elements are to hand. How do we organize things in the best possible way? This applies to plans, strategies, some types of design, and organizing in general. While much of this thinking can be analytical optimization there may also be a need for some new approaches.
ALTERNATIVES. The key thing is to try out different possibilities. These should not only be “reasonable” alternatives but also provocative ones. What would happen if we put things this way?
CHALLENGE. Much of “arranging” thinking will be guided by the traditional ways of doing things and also by assumptions, boundaries, and restraints. So challenge is very important to “challenge” the usual approaches and to attempt fresh approaches.
DISTORTION. This is one of the ways of setting up a steppingstone type of provocation. It is particularly appropriate to the arranging type of thinking because the usual arrangements are “distorted” in order to force some new approaches. This type of provocation can lead to sudden insights and changes in the way things are done.
I shall now go through some specific situations one by one. Much of what is written for each situation will repeat the comments given in the basic types of thinking. It would be impossible to leave this out. The lateral thinking techniques most applicable to each situation will be given. This does not exclude other techniques because there are occasions during any creative thinking when each of the techniques might be used. For example, if you are getting nowhere in solving a problem, you might want to use a random word then and there. So the techniques are not fixed recipes but suggestions to help you if you have no better strategy of your own. In time, you may set up your own preferred strategies and sets of techniques for dealing with each situation.
There are also times when one type of situation may include another. For example, in conflict resolution specific “problems” might occur. Or in a design situation there might be a need for “improvement”. At other times you may not be very clear as to how to classify the situation in the first place. There is no harm in treating a situation in any number of different ways, so long as you make progress and develop the needed ideas. Be careful to not classify everything as a “problem” just because you need to get an output.
In all cases, the relationship to information, analysis, and logic is assumed to be on the following lines:
As I have mentioned many times, this is potentially the biggest volume use of creativity, because everything might be improved. The difficulty is getting anyone to make the improving effort because we are so used to thinking only about “problems”.
Focus is important because we need to be clear about the focus. We also need to be able to focus on anything we choose. There is no need for it to be a problem. If we succeed in focusing on something that other people have not looked at then even a little creative effort can make a big difference.
Challenge is important because we have to assume that the current way of doing things may not be the best, but it is there for reasons of continuity. We also need to challenge boundaries, assumptions, essential factors, and so on, in order to obtain the necessary freedom to suggest changes. It is important to remember that challenge is not a critical attack but an exploration: might there be other ways?
The search for alternatives is of key importance because that is how we are going to make the improvement (unless we drop something altogether). The search for alternatives needs to be at different levels: the overall purpose, the concepts, the detail level. Defining fixed points will help keep the search for alternatives on track.
The concept fan is a way of examining how improvements can be made. What are the general “directions” of improvement and how might we proceed in these directions? The concept fan may also be applied to the overall “purpose” of the operation. Forget what we are doing right now. The purpose of this operation is this. Now let us set up a concept fan to see how we might achieve this purpose.
An examination of the “concepts” involved in the current process may lead towards a change in the concepts or the development of better ways to put the concepts into action.
The escape method of provocation allows us to “escape” from any aspect of what we are now doing. This forces us to rethink the process.
The stepping-stone type of provocation when applied to current systems can radically change the nature of the whole system. This method is less useful when applied to detail than when applied to whole systems.
Focus is important for defining the problem and trying out alternative definitions of the problem. Focus is important for creating subproblems within the overall problem. Focus can shift attention to aspects of the problem.
Challenge is important for challenging the presentation of the problem and for challenging the way the situation is being looked at. Perhaps it is as much opportunity as problem. Do we need to tackle the problem? Might it just go away? Challenge is also important for challenging assumptions, boundaries, polarizations, and all those things that limit the range of possible approaches or solutions.
Alternatives are important at every point. With small problems the search for alternatives out of our experience may be sufficient to solve the problem. The definition of the fixed point helps this search.
The concept fan is the major technique for problem solving. What are the “directions” or approaches? What concepts will work in each direction? What ideas can be used for putting the concepts into action? It must be remembered that the concept fan will turn up some sound ideas but is unlikely to provoke any really new ideas. In the course of doing the concept fan, however, several new focus points may emerge (how do we park cars above street level?).
The escape type of provocation is used on the standard or current approach to this problem or to problems of this type. How do we usually approach this problem? Can we escape from this? The escape technique can also be used at any stage in the creative thinking. When it seems that something is being taken for granted then there can be an attempt to escape from this.
Stepping-stone provocations of any type can be used to alter the whole picture in such a way that new ideas may emerge. This is particularly so when the problem involves the behaviour of some system. The stepping-stone may be the best way of getting radically new approaches.
The filament technique is useful when it is a “design”-type problem with many requirements that have to be met.
The random word technique is used when there is the feeling that there are no new ideas and the same ground is being covered again and again. This technique is unlikely to provide an immediate solution but can open up new lines of thought.
If a problem is something that you have to do, then a “task” is something you want to do. The task may be given to you by yourself or by someone else. We are concerned here with “creative tasks” that demand new ideas and not just competence.
Focus is important in order to be very clear as to what we are trying to do. Remember the bad habit of creative people of always wanting to have ideas about everything except the assigned task.
The concept fan is useful mainly to look at what the usual approaches to the task might be. The fan might indicate an important concept and then the focus shifts to ways of carrying out that concept (how do we make cars disappear once they have reached the city centre?).
Concepts are extremely important. There is a need to generate concepts and to play around with concepts. Indeed, any idea that suggests itself is mainly of use in suggesting another concept. There should be no rush to get down to the practical idea level. There will be plenty of time for that later. Remaining at the concept level is more likely to provide a fresh approach.
The random word is central here. The random word is used to open up new lines of thinking that should be very different from the concept fan approaches.
Wishful thinking is probably the most useful of the stepping-stone provocations because it allows an open-ended step forward. There is no limit to the fantasies that can be put up as provocations.
The filament technique is used when the requirements of the task seem clear. Quite often the objective of the task is actually defined by a set of specifications or requirements.
There is some change in circumstance and the hope that this might somehow provide an opportunity. There is a new product of material; what opportunities does this provide? Surveys show changes in attitudes and behaviour; do these offer opportunities?
Wishful thinking is important here. This type of steppingstone provocation can open up a range of concepts. The thinker is not fettered by reasonableness.
The stratal is useful because, by laying out aspects of the situation, it allows the mind to make new connections. The stratal can be used in the passive or active way (forcing ideas).
The random word might work to open up some line of thinking and to provide at least a starting point from which to move on to concepts.
Somewhere in the course of the thinking, but not necessarily at the beginning, it is useful to try to extract and to formulate different concepts. These may arise from the creative work that has already been done. Occasionally concepts suggest themselves right at the beginning.
The escape technique can be used from time to time in order to escape from the things which seem to be “taken for granted” in the opportunity thinking itself. Opportunity thinking can easily get bogged down in certain directions. Thinkers need to be forced out of these new assumptions.
Challenge can also be used on the thinking process itself. The reasons are the same as for the escape technique: why are we concerned only with the low price of this material?
There are many different starting points for invention. Some of these might be open-ended “general-area”-type focuses (I want to invent something for gardening). At other times there may be a specific focus (I want an infinitely adjustable nozzle for the water hose). Quite often the invention process is almost exactly the same as the “task” process.
Focus is important because focus can change in the course of the thinking and it is important to note the new focus. An inventor may set out to invent something and end up inventing something else. With invention this is perfectly permissible.
The concept fan can give some approaches. If the focus has been an unusual one, then the concept fan may be sufficient to complete the invention because there may well be available methods of fulfilling the task.
The filament technique is most useful here by allowing the requirements themselves to be used to stimulate new ideas. Inventors usually have in mind a very specific set of requirements.
Wishful thinking (and other types of stepping-stone provocation) can provide a different approach if the focus for the invention is not an unusual one. The requirements of the task can be subjected to this type of provocation (Po, the water itself adjusts the nozzle of the hose).
The random input technique (using objects as well as words) can provide fresh starting points when the other starting points have not led anywhere interesting.
Challenge can be used in the course of the thinking to challenge why certain assumptions are being made and why certain boundaries are being accepted. Quite often the breakthrough in an invention comes precisely as a result of this challenge (why does a lawnmower have to have wheels?).
An invention is a creative effort that may not have an outcome. Design is required to have an outcome. It is always possible to fall back to traditional and standard ways of doing something if nothing better can be found.
Challenge is important at the beginning to challenge the usual approach, assumptions, and received wisdom. Challenge is also useful in the course of the thinking to challenge the way things are going.
Escape provocation is important for the same reason as challenge. There is an escape from the traditional design assumptions. There is an attempt to escape from the initial thinking of the designer who is faced with the design task (what is my thinking here?). By itself escape can set off a whole new thinking direction. This direction can then be developed quite logically.
Alternatives can be used at all levels. There are alternatives in the broad sense of alternative approaches to the whole design. There are also alternatives of implementation (what materials can I use here?). Then there are alternatives of detail within the overall direction of the design. A very clear definition of the fixed point is needed when alternatives are being sought; otherwise, a change at one point can upset things elsewhere.
Concepts are also used in two ways. There may be a playing around with concepts right at the start of the design process. During the thinking process itself it is also useful to crystallize the concepts that emerge because there is a need to explore ways of carrying out the concepts. Without this conceptualization a design may have a momentum of detail and end up as a mess.
Stepping-stone provocation can be tried right at the beginning in order to provoke a totally new design concept. It is worth trying.
The random word is useful in design in order to overcome complacency. Often a design concept emerges early and then serves to trap all further thinking on the matter. It is difficult to get away from this. A random word can suddenly open up a whole new concept, which serves to show that the existing concept is not inevitable.
A stagnant situation is one where creativity seems to have died. There are no new ideas. The same ground is being covered again and again. It seems impossible to find a new approach. This situation may occur in the course of thinking about something or it may occur over a longer term during which any attempt to think about the matter comes back to the same ideas. Stagnant situations can apply to any of the specific situations listed here.
The random word is by far the simplest and most effective way of getting ideas moving again. The random word just starts up new lines of thought. Even if these are unrealistic, the “logjam” is shifted.
The escape provocation technique can also be used. This is not used on the subject matter of the thinking but on the thinking itself. For example, there can be an escape from something that is taken for granted in the solutions that keep turning up (Po, we do not have to keep people happy).
The filament technique used in the “forced” mode can also be useful because it operates in a similar manner to the random word.
These are “blank sheet of paper” situations. You do not know where to start. This is very different from the stagnant situation where you keep coming back to the same ideas.
The stratal can be useful in providing a setting from which ideas can start to emerge.
Where general requirements are available then the filament technique in both passive and active modes can also provide some starting points.
As might be expected, the random input technique is powerful in greenfield situations since it does not have to work on anything at all. The technique does not have to be limited to random words. There can be random objects, random reading, random visits to exhibitions, and so on.
A task requires a creative effort and a project requires a competence effort. There may, however, be a willingness to see if creativity can make any contribution to the competence of the project. There may just be a better approach.
Both the overall focus and chosen subfocuses are important. These are “thinking” focuses, not action objectives.
There can be challenges to the normal thinking, to one’s own current thinking, to assumptions, to boundaries, and so on.
The concept fan is the classic achievement approach. The fan may itself turn up some new focuses, which are then subjected to further creative thinking (how can we transport it by water?).
The escape provocation may be used on the standard approaches to projects such as these. What do we normally take for granted? What happens if we escape from such things?
The filament technique lays down the project requirements and may then find a different approach. The passive mode of use is more appropriate here (let the ideas emerge).
Attention to the basic concepts involved in the project can lead to improvements in the concepts, changes in the concepts, or just better ways of putting the concepts into action.
The creative effort may apply to the whole project or just to various subsections of the project. That is why the focus process is so important.
Many of the points made about “design” or “task” situations also apply to projects.
Bargaining, negotiating, and fighting are all aspects of the conflict situation in which opposing interests seek to have their own way. The usual methods involve power, pressure, fear, and pain. There is much more scope for creative thinking than most people (especially those involved in conflict resolution) suppose.
The search for alternatives is the basic process. These include alternative perceptions, not just of the overall scene but of every move or development. How is this being perceived? How could it be perceived? There are alternative ways of presenting suggestions. There are alternative values and interests. There are alternative packages. Being clear about the “fixed points” makes it easier to be precise about alternatives.
The creative pause is very important. Instead of instant knee-jerk reactions to what is proposed, there is need for a pause in which the proposal is seen as much as an opportunity as a threat.
The process of “challenge” is not directed at the opposing party but at one’s own thinking. Why does the situation have to be looked at this way? Are these things really important? How much is continuity? Are we locked into certain positions? What are the polarizations? What are the “essential factors”? Are they really essential?
The escape process, which so often goes along with the challenge process, can also be applied to one’s own thinking. If the conditions of discussion are suitable, then the escape provocation can be attempted on a joint basis (Po, there was no need to have fixed working hours).
There needs to be attention to concepts of value. The ability to perceive different concepts of value is the basis of successful conflict resolution. Once concepts of value have been perceived then there can be attempts to design ways of providing this value. Concepts of action and pressure also need to be extracted and redesigned (or blocked). It is a mistake to believe that all the pieces are already on the board as in a chess game and that it is only a matter of moving the pieces around.
The stratal can be useful both at the beginning of, and also after, a lot of thinking has taken place. The stratal allows the thinker to pause and stand back so that new ideas can emerge.
As always, the random word can be useful in one’s own thinking in order to turn up some new lines of thinking when an impasse is reached. If conditions are very favourable then the random word can be tried on a joint basis with both parties taking part in the creative exercise.
We normally get our picture of the future by extending present trends and anticipating convergences where different things come together to produce a new effect. There are times when we need to get a richer view of the future and to seek possible discontinuities. For that we need creativity.
The stratal is a very useful way of allowing separate factors to come together in the mind to create possibilities. There can be several different stratals around the same focus or around different focuses. It is important that the stratal be done honestly and not just “designed” to reflect our existing thinking. One way to prevent this is to put a number of stratal “lines” into a bag and just to draw forth five of them, randomly, to form the stratal.
All the ways of setting up stepping-stone provocations (exaggeration, reversal, distortion, wishful thinking) are useful in generating possible discontinuities. These provocations serve to move us away from continuities.
A combination of the escape type of provocation and concept analysis can be useful. We look at existing and possible future concepts and then we escape from them or from some aspect of them (Po, we did not have to work to earn money).
Even if some of the basic concepts stay the same there might be alternative ways of carrying them out (for example, alternative work styles). So the definition of fixed points and the search for alternatives is important.
Finally the random word can offer some new possibilities that might not have come up in any other way. These possibilities should be explored in their own right and also examined to see how they fit in with the other possibilities that have been generated.
The challenge process can be used at any stage to challenge our thinking about the future even as we are doing that thinking.
Setting a strategy is a complex process that involves problems, opportunities, tasks, futures, and conflict, all of which are put together in a design process. Setting a strategy involves a considerable input from information and the analysis of trends, possibilities, and competitive responses. Creativity is needed for the introduction of new concepts and for the design of flexibility and fallback positions.
Focus is, of course, very important. It is necessary to be clear about the overall focus and the various subfocuses that are needed. What is the purpose of the strategy? What is it going to achieve? How is it going to be treated?
Challenge is very important in order to challenge conventional and traditional wisdom and also to challenge thinking within the organization. Assumptions about the future and about competitive responses can be challenged. Boundaries set by regulations, values, and technology can also be challenged. Often there are polarizations (low-cost or premium operations) that can be challenged. There is always a cycle of concepts cohering into a strategy and then being pulled apart again through challenge. Eventually things settle down to the final strategy.
There are alternative strategies, alternative concepts, and alternative ways of carrying through a particular strategy. There are alternative views of the future. Here, even more than elsewhere, it is vital to define the fixed points before generating alternatives.
A great deal of attention needs to be paid to concepts, which in this case are more important than ideas. If a concept is wrong, then no idea will put it right. All ideas are treated as ways of getting concepts through “pulling back”.
When there is a rich assortment of concepts, these can be organized as a concept fan. Such an organization will then give the broad directions in which it is possible to move. Ways of carrying through the concepts can also be attended to.
The escape type of provocation can be applied to existing thinking within the organization and also within the industry. Escape-type provocation can also be applied to the existing formulations of the strategy.
Radical new ideas will require the stepping-stone type of provocation and the distortion version in particular.
Much of what has been written about futures, design, projects, and strategy is also relevant to the planning process. It has to be assumed that the normal logical process of planning has been attended to and there is still a willingness to seek better ideas.
Alternatives can be sought out at every step. There may be different routes to be taken or different ways of taking the same route. There may be alternative places to put the monitoring points. Provocative alternatives can be used (what would happen if we did this?).
There can be challenges to the plan itself or to the conditions that the plan has to meet. Do we have to accept these boundaries? Are these really essential factors?
The escape type of provocation can be used both to generate new concepts and also to test the flexibility of the plan (Po, interest rates do not fall).
Any attempt to radically restructure the plan would need the stepping-stone type of provocation, which might serve to change perceptions about the situation. If the perception of the situation changes then the plan would have to change, too.
At this stage there should be a good general feeling about how the different techniques can be applied. We can summarize the basic uses of the techniques as follows:
Focus. To define the focus and changing focuses. To seek alternative definitions of the focus. To choose subfocuses.
Challenge. To challenge traditional thinking, existing thinking, and the thinking taking place during a creative session. Also to challenge the surroundings of the thinking: assumptions, boundaries, and so on.
Alternatives. To find different ways of doing things and of satisfying a defined fixed point. Can be operated at different levels ranging from the broad to the detailed.
Concept Fan. An elaborated method for finding different ways of doing things by going through concepts. Useful in achievement thinking.
Concepts. Deliberate attention to concepts. Seeking to extract and crystallize concepts. Pulling back from ideas to concepts. Modifying and changing concepts. Finding ways of putting the concepts into action. Useful in all areas that are driven by concepts.
Escape Provocation. Useful in all areas where challenge is useful. Escape provocation turns the challenge into a provocation. Useful for looking at existing methods and also for looking at existing thinking. Can be applied to the creative thinking that is taking place at the time.
Stepping-stone Provocation. Generally used to try to get radical changes in the whole system or approach. The most provocative of the techniques. The wishful thinking method also has a special use in generating ideas from a greenfield situation. Stepping-stones generally work best when applied to the whole system.
Random Input. Used to provide fresh ideas on any occasion. Used to get going in greenfield situations. Used to get going again when ideas have run out. Used to seek additional and different ideas when there are already some ideas on the table.
Stratal. Used at the beginning of the thinking to allow ideas to emerge. Used later on in the thinking to see what might emerge from the thinking that has already been done.
The Filament Technique. Useful whenever there is a known set of requirements. Can be used in a passive way to let ideas emerge and can also be used in an active or “forced” way where it behaves in a similar manner to the random word.
The Six Thinking Hats method has not been included in the techniques discussed in this section because it is a framework process that applies to thinking in general within an organization. The green hat is a specific request for a creative effort but does not indicate how that effort is to be made. This may be a simple pause in order to consider other possibilities or an attempt to suggest alternatives. Other lateral thinking techniques can also be used at this point. The main value of the green hat is the space it makes for creative effort.
The yellow hat has a high value in directing thinking towards searching for feasibility and values. So an emerging idea can be given constructive attention at the outset. Someone who opposes the idea might be asked directly to make an effort to discover value in the idea and to suggest how the idea could be carried out.
A very important aspect of the Six Thinking Hats method is the possibility of restricting black hat thinking to certain specific times instead of it being applied at every moment. Black hat thinking would be applied in the treatment of ideas in order to point out the defects that needed to be overcome. Black hat thinking would be applied in the assessment of the ideas.
It is in such ways that the framework of Six Hats facilitates creative effort.
There are times when a simple sequence of hats might be used almost directly as a creative procedure. In such cases the sequence might be:
White Hat. The information base. What do we know?
Green Hat. Alternatives, suggestions, and ideas.
Yellow Hat. Feasibility, benefits, and values of the ideas.
Black Hat. Difficulties, dangers, problems, and points for caution.
Red Hat. Intuition and feelings about the ideas.
Blue Hat. Conclusion.