Creative thinking framework: the box

The expression ‘thinking outside the box’ is in common use and a well understood term of creativity. It is visual and communicative. I received a Christmas card showing an angry man berating a bewildered cat who is standing by the box of kitty-litter. The man is saying: ‘Don’t you ever think outside the box again’.

There is an implication that the ‘box’ is a bad thing and constricting, as all boxes tend to be. Yet, to be honest, the box is a very good thing indeed. The box contains all the values, attitudes, beliefs, rules and assumptions that allow us to behave in a rational and useful way on any occasion.

Everyone has a set of ‘boxes’. One box may relate to a business or a professional life. Another box may relate to a set of relationships, as in a family. Another box may relate to self-esteem and self-awareness.

Without boxes, life would be a random walk. Or we would have to work out every single step rather than rely on routine or the value guidance of a box.

There is a famous mathematical theorem called ‘Godel’s Theorem’. It states that from within a system you can never logically prove the starting points of the system.

So no matter how logical you may be, the starting points are always arbitrary perceptions and values.

PERCEPTION

For centuries, education has completely neglected perception and believed that logic is enough. That is why my work with thousands of schools around the world and in whole countries teaches ways of improving perception. There is growing interest from India and China. Indeed, research at Harvard has shown that 90% of the errors in thinking are errors of perception.

How do perceptions relate to ‘boxes’? Because it is the box that determines perception.

Sometimes the box gives a ready-made perception.

Sometimes the box instructs us to pay attention to some things and not others - and so determines our perception.

Sometimes the box provides the formed ingredients which we put together to give the perception.

All this is very useful and prevents us from floundering around trying to find ways of problem solving. The reverse gear in a motor car is not used much of the time. But when there is need for the reverse gear, then no other gear will do. Without a reverse gear you would get blocked in the first blind alley you came to - and parking would be rather difficult.

So most of the time we should be very comfortable within the ‘box’. While appreciating the high convenience and operating value of the box, there are times when we want to break out of the box. There are also times when we need to break out of the box, but are not conscious enough of that need to convert it into a ‘want’.

BREAKING OUT OF THE BOX

The intention to ‘break out of the box’ is essential as the first step. By itself, however, this intention does not get us very far. The intention to be creative is excellent, but very weak in practical terms.

There are various traditional methods for creativity. There is brainstorming and the suspension of judgment. There is sitting on the river bank and playing baroque music. There is the employment of people who claim to have creative talent - and sometimes demonstrate this talent.

LATERAL THINKING

Then there are more formal, deliberate and powerful ways of being creative. These are the formal tools of lateral thinking. They can be learned, practised and used by anyone as a skill. One such tool used by a group of workshops in South Africa generated 21,000 ideas for a company in one afternoon.

Lateral thinking is based on an understanding of the brain as a self-organising information system that forms asymmetric patterns. There is no mumbo-jumbo about that, except for simple minds that cannot understand such systems.

A completely different approach is to bring in someone who is not in the same ‘box’. An outsider can think about the issue in a very different way, simply because that person is an outsider.

THE DILEMMA

There are certain business areas where there is a strong belief that you need to spend years in that area before you acquire the box perspectives and values. The motor industry is one example. The retail industry is another.

People within such industries believe that anyone from outside cannot possibly understand the dynamics of the industry.

So there is the dilemma. There is a need for some new thinking outside the box. At the same time, there is a belief that you have to be within the box to provide useful solutions.

Put another way, the dilemma might be: you have to be a novice to learn new tricks, but tricks not based on experience have no value.

The solution to the dilemma is surprisingly simple. The outsider works with an insider as a team.

LOGICALLY RELATED

Most things that are done are logically related to something else. That is why they are done. So it is always possible to give sound reasons for why things should be done in a certain way.

Sometimes, if we follow the ‘logical trail’ back, we come to a point where what was done depended on an arbitrary assumption, an arbitrary value, an arbitrary perception or the technology that was available at the time.

For example, Greek-style democracy might never have developed today with technology that allows people to express their views directly, rather than through an elected representative.

The insider can explain why, logically, things must be done as they are done. The outsider can probe and find the original assumption.

Even when it is logical that something must be done in a certain way, there is always the possibility of another way which is just as logical, but more effective or cheaper. Adequacy should never block the search for something better.

INSECURITY

There is a paradox attached to the willingness to look for outside thinking (outside the box).

It might be thought that there is a belief that such thinking would provide nothing and would therefore be a waste of time and money. This is a bit absurd as the risk and cost are small. Even if nothing spectacular results, time spent re-considering existing methods and thinking is always worthwhile.

The paradox is that the reluctance is usually based on a belief that some powerful new idea might be developed. Such an idea would cause dissatisfaction with the existing system. Such an idea would have to be examined and even implemented. All this would mean disruption, decisions, more thinking, more risk, etc.

Much better to let things continue in the same way.