The "Opposable" mind-set and Innovation

Understanding how great innovators think is not the challenge. The real challenge is, how do to emulate them. To use a technical metaphor, you can’t copy “software” to the hard drive and expect it to work, it needs to be initiated and “loaded” into the cpu according to a specific set of rules.

Reflecting on the anecdotes of successful innovators and even a more careful analysis of how they think is never enough to embed their knowledge and ability into your own process. It's a good start though. Ultimately, it's your own DNA that will need to generate a personal innovation style, call it "opposable" or "a gestalt" or anything you want. It will have to be a cognitive tool that is yours alone, that can only be described to others but never really instilled in them.

see:  http://rogerlmartin.com/library/books/the-opposable-mind/

The Power of the Sketch

What were you doing at 17? Don't think, just sketch...make a mark on paper first. This is not as easy to do as you may think and especially if you're not comfortable with sketching anything. It's not about the quality of the sketch, no artistic talent for drawing is necessary. What comes to the surface should be the tacit knowledge of that time in your life: events, feelings and things in general, that you may think you forgot or may have even tried to forget.

The key to successful and meaningful sketching, in this context, is intimately connected to the ability of the participant to discard inhibitions. 

How else can we use the "power of the sketch"? TBD!

(note: this was also an exercise given to the cohort near the beginning of my MDesign program at OCAD U. This is my sketch. I was amazed that I actually recalled so much vivid information about this particular time in my life as a high school oarsman. The arrow points out my position in the boat).

The visual metaphor and "emergent properties"

In a recent paper on visual thinking I was trying to describe the relationships of elements on on a surface (e.g. painting) or aural patterns (music) as a type of complex system. The relationship that the we have to the painting or music is both unique and universal at the moment of perception.

The emergent property of a complex system of pigments and structure is that special feeling that one gets when viewing art or listening to music. We can create a diagram as a metaphor  that may demonstrate an emergent property, as a cognitive model.

To be clear, the dotted line is not a property at all, it’s actually just a curved vector, but it has some communicative power to suggest that when two forces collide a third and greater “result” is the conclusion. This diagram is only a metaphor for an emergent property. These visual metaphors are still powerful and can communicate complex ideas and as such have an important role to play in the composition of a gigamap.*

* carefully designed visual artefacts that take on the form of richly detailed, large scale images (static or dynamic) representing various levels of textual and visual information.

Innovation and the shoulders of giants (thoughts on the creative process) Part 1.

As an inventor* (in this episode), Homer was on the right track. In fact, through his own“process” he discovered a truly original idea: the un-tippable chair. Unfortunately Thomas Edison beat him to it decades earlier, D’oh!

When do you stop researching? As a neophyte researcher and someone who resisted looking too deeply at things lest they “pollute” my own vision, this may be a very naive question. Early in my career as an art director you were warned by some senior creative directors not to study the creative annuals of award winning work. Look, but don’t look too hard at. It was obvious, however, that many others would take more than just a little inspiration from the work they saw. I was determined to be original.

I suppose, by being blind to some of what’s really out there may make you think you’re being original, but as google and computer information systems in general, become smarter and even more ubiquitious there’s no excuse not to be intimately familiar with the arena you’re playing in. The reasearch is out there. All the information you want is at your fingertips. With even just an average ability to comprehend your material, gaining basic mastery over your subject area is no longer a time-consuming task.

* with respect to innnovation / invention , I realize that they are very different things. An invention is not necessarily an innovation. I prefer Art Fry’s definition “Innovation is where people switch to a new practice or use a new product”

What does my iPhone see when I'm walking and listening to music?

Shooting stills while walking and listening to music.
I don't need to look through the lens.
I trust in my iPhone.
It will see what it wants to see.

(images and color adjusted in Ps5)

Why do solvers go off brief?

The problem-statement brief changes as soon as you read it. We all see different aspects of the brief with varying degrees of attention and focus. The more complex the document the more varied the perception of it amongst the solvers. We see the things that interest us first: the things we know how to do or have done before.  These biases are difficult to avoid without following a strict critical thinking methodology. The variations of perspectives, on the other hand, can lead to deeper and more creative insights when the problem solving process is made "public"and shared.

This diagram (click to view) represents the "hidden" nature of the solving process. If you can involve the client in some of your "synthesis" steps the less disingenuous rationalization you'll need to do when it comes time to present your solutions.

The creative process is often hidden from the key stakeholders. They don't participate in the synthesis, which is a messy and protracted event that's difficult to unravel and even more difficult to share. It evades scrutiny and description and therefore never really surfaces for discussion during the final presentation stages. Instead, the primary stakeholders are subject to a dog and pony show that attempts to rationalize the final solution in light of the original brief which is in fact a "different"one for the solvers.

There is an approach to "surfacing" the synthesis as described by Jon Kolko*. He calls this a synthesis framework which involves 3 basic steps.

1. Prioritizing
2. Judging
3. Forging connections

By naming the process, making it more tangible the client can not only see how you got to your solution, they can also participate. I think it's important to emphasize that the client (the authors/owners of the problem statement, as well as the researchers, directors of a problem-finding mission) have much more knowledge about the issue at hand than the solvers. What a waste of a valuable resource if you cannot include them in your creative problem solving process.

•Kolko, J. (2010). Abductive thinking and sensemaking: The drivers of design synthesis. Design Issues, 26(1), 15-28. Retrieved from http://iefx.engineering.illinois.edu/ sites/iefx.engineering.illinois.edu/files/Kolko(10)The drivers of design synthesis.pdf

What does the larva and caterpillar want you to see?

There is nothing in a caterpillar that tells you it’s going to be a butterfly. - B.Fuller

With all due respect to Mr. Fuller I am distorting his original intention to suit my own needs.

What’s in a caterpillar that tells you it’s going to be a butterfly?

Photos: Larva by ddavid, Monarch Butterfly by William Warby

It’s just an exercise in being acutely aware of your surroundings through vision, to really look at things beyond just what they appear to be at first glance. It’s not about a prolonged staring contest, “things” don’t stare back. What they do offer is a myriad of hints to their true meaning and structure. 

You don’t draw the figure of a human body by examining the surface features alone, you draw from the inside out. The skeletal and muscle structures define the surface shape. The play of light and shadow on the surface only makes sense when you understand what’s happening on the inside. You can replicate the light and shadow that defines a surface but without knowing why the shadow bends the way it does, you’re just “reporting” on what you see rather that drawing what is really there. If your subject were to disappear but you have a  knowledge of anatomy,  you could still make relevant and deep changes to your sketch.

What does the object of your attention want you to see?

My comparison between larva and a butterfly may be a little glib, but I do believe that the way you look at your subject and the skills of perception naturally leads to a deeper appreciation of it.

( see Inge Druckrey,“teaching to see” produced by Edward Tufte, 2012)

I feel, therefore I think

"....we live in a world where we are taught from the start, that we are thinking creatures that feel. The truth is, we are feeling creatures that think..." 

                                    Jill Boyle Taylor (b.1959) neuroanatomist

In the process of my literature review on "visual thinking" I'm often distracted by trains of thought that are tangental to my main focus of inquiry. That's perfectly ok though, it just takes more time to get to the heart of the matter. I'm fascinated  (as well as overwhelmed) by the amount of material developed on cognition and the creative ideation process. How do we solve problems? What's my process, what's yours? It's not a private affair any longer -- although we still have to do deep critical thinking on our own -- the real work happens outside of our heads. The work gets done in the room, with as many relevant stakeholders as possible and practical.

The thought process is shared, it's a distributed cognition that relies on the input of others as well as any artefacts we can get our hands on:  the white boards, the sticky-notes, the idea sketches scrolled all over presentation pads.

It feels at once familiar and strange to me. This is how we used to "play" in early grade school. I think it still needs to be considered a type of "play". It may require rigorous attention to detail and process, especially when using cognitive tools to structure information and data. But aside from the brain work, we can't ignore the body work. What does the body know? Or the heart? How we feel informs what we think and do. The holistic approach to problem-solving is natural and so necessary when faced with the complexities of our time.

Somewhere between an overwhelming preponderance of evidence and your assumptions...