The Sociodrama Model was developed by Jacob Moreno, MD.This model was developed during World War I in 1943. Born out of Jacob Moreno’s creativity and love for theater in Vienna. Most of Dr. Moreno’s work was developed in the United States and was further developed by his wife, Zerka, and other notable scholars. “Sociodrama, represents the transfer of the concepts, techniques, and practices of psychodrama (for instance, role playing, doubling, role reversal, and sculpting) into group, community, and non-clinical organizational settings. Sociodrama has been widely used in a range of organizational settings such as education, social work, management, the military, the police, and health care” (Rapley & Hansen, 2006).
• How does it work? This model is based on several theories to include Sociometry and Social Role Theory. Sociometry examines relationships utilizing tools such as the spectrogram, sociogram and social atom. Role Theory purports that the behavior and motives of human beings can be best understood by observing them in various roles and interactions with others which ultimately shapes their desires, dreams and aspirations.
• What were the components of the historical model?
The steps of sociodrama are quite similar to the problem-solving process developed by Parnes (1967) and Osborn (1963) (Torrance, 1975).
Step 1: Define the Problem- during this stage members of the group are told that they will be participating in an unrehearsed skit to gain some solutions to problems they have been experiencing. The participants are then asked a series of questions in order to define the problem and formulate the conflict.
Step 2: Establishing a Conflict- Drawing from the responses derived from the cast a conflict situation is described by the director in objective and understandable terms. No direction is given as to the outcome, however during this process judgment is deferred.
Step 3: Casting Characters: Participation in roles is voluntary. However, the director may pan the audience for emergent roles or to tap the timid member who may be indicating through body language that they would like to participate. Additionally, several members may play a particular role as they may each come from a different perspective.
Step 4: Briefing and Warming Up of the actors and observers: During this phase the actors are given some time to plan the setting and agree on the direction they would like to take. Additionally, the audience is warmed up by the director sharing possible alternative or asking them to identify with or follow a certain actor.
Step 5: Acting Out the Situation: this may be seconds or 10 to 15 minutes. During this phase a number of techniques can be utilized to dig deeper, however, the director should not hint towards a desired outcome.
Step 6: Cutting the Action: Action should be cut based on several situations: when the actor falls out of character, when there is a block and they can’t continue, the drama gains a conclusion, or the director seizes an opportunity to stimulate thinking to forge a different episode.
Step 7: Discussing and Analyzing the situation, the behavior and Ideas produced- This stage takes place as a guided discussion as the director aids the group in redefining the problem and/or helps them identify the possible solutions as indicated by the drama.
Step 8: Making plans for future testing and/or Implementing plans for New Behavior- Subsequent sessions may include testing the ideas brought forth from the original session or for further idea generation.
• What are the applications of the model (and with who, how easy it is to use)? This method is utilized with groups that may be experiencing some difficulty; to include family, community and the Public. There are also articles regarding using sociodrama to help teach communication in end-of-life care and in promoting caring relationships among teachers and students.
• What specialized vocabulary is involved (define terms)?
1. Soliloquy technique-The Director stops the action to allow the actor to share with the audience their normally hidden and suppressed feelings and thoughts.
2. Double Technique- Within the production one of the actors is supplied with a double who is placed side by side with the actor and interacts with the actor by brining out the actor’s ‘other self.’
3. Mirror Technique- Another actor represents the original actor in the conflict situation, copying his behavior and essentially showing him how other people experience him.
4. Magic Shop: Helps groups realize their real goals and desires. The proprietor of the Magic shop offers the group anything they may want for their future but demands as payment something of value from the group.
5. Role Reversal- This is where one person moves from one role to another; usually used in confrontation to help the actor view the situation from the other person’s perspective.
• What are the major advantages or strengths of the model?
• Is it in use today and how has it changed over time?
Sociodrama/Psychodrama is still being used today, while it has changed overtime. Role play is probably the most widely used variation of sociodrama. This concept is used in classrooms, business organizations and the like to bring about important themes and behaviors. Other ways sociodrama has been utilized are as follows (Gershoni, 2003):
· General spontaneity training
· Learning about nonverbal communications
· Assertiveness training
· Empathy training
· Conflict resolution and
· Role training
• Is there training available? Yes
• What books, articles, manuals, websites, etc are available to support the theory and application (list)?
Eckloff, M.(2006). Using Sociodrama to improve communication and understanding. ETC, 259-269.
Gershoni, J. (Ed.). (2003). Psychodrama in the 21st century: Clinical and educational applications. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com.
Murdock, M. C., (1992). Practice and rehearsal: Some key semantic distinctions and implications for creative learning. International Creativity Network Newsletter, 2(4), 4-5.
Murdock, M. C.,& Torrance, E. P. (1988). Using sociodrama as a vehicle for negotiation, Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 13(2), 108-114.
Peskasi-McLennan, D. M. (2008). The benefits of using sociodrama in the elementary classroom: Promoting caring relationships among educators and students. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35, 451-456.
Rapley, M & Hansen, S. (2006). Sociodrama. In B.S. Turner (Ed.), Cambridge dictionary of sociology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://proxy.buffalostate.edu:2443/login?url=https://search.credoreferene.com/content/entry/cupsoc/sociodrama/0?institutionld:2571
Sternberg, P., & Garcia, A. (2000). Sociodrama : Who's in your shoes?. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Torrance, E. P. (1979). Developing creativity instructional materials according to the sociodrama model. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 4(1), 9-19.
Torrance, E. P. (1988). Sociodrama and the creative process. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.
Torrance, E.P. (1975). Sociodrama as a creative problem-solving approach to studying the future. Journal of Creative Behavior, 9 (3), 182-195.
Torrance, E.P., Murdock, M. & Fletcher, D. (1996). Creative problem solving through role play. Pretoria, South Africa: Benedic Books.
Transformation Theory is a theory of natural processes that integrates principles of creativity, growth, and change. This Theory was developed in 1973 by George Land, Ph.D. It was originally published in George Land’s landmark book, Grow or Die: The Unifying Principle of Transformation. The Transformation Theory describes the universal process of change and growth. Land (2000) asserts that organisms, people, and organizations all progress through the same distinctive phases of the S-Curve as they grow; there is a basic pattern of change throughout all of nature. “His concepts around transformational growth combined with creative strategic thinking were brilliant for the time.” Land (1973) asserts that the imperative of Life is to grow and reproduce; the mandate of nature is to “Grow or Die”
According to Land’s Theory of Transformation, every organization goes through the same S-Curve, which begins with a dip as the organization enters the invention phase.
Once the initial challenges are resolved, the first break point occurs, and the organization moves into the improvement phase. Because complexity continues to grow outside of the organization a second dip will occur. Re-invention / innovation is necessary at the second break point in order to remain relevant and avoid obsolescence.
Transformation Theory “puts into perspective why and how individuals and organizations grow, change and sometimes renew themselves” (Arizona Technology Council, 2016). Transformation Theory helps managers understand how to manage products and organizations along the s-curve. The theory identifies the three phases of growth within the smoothed curve that have very different rules and characteristics. During the two breakpoints, the behavior of the system must radically shift for it to succeed. Once managers understand these dynamics, they can take full advantage of new opportunities (Land, 2000). Based on George Land’s assertion, Man is not limited to the rigid and fixed genetic patterns of animals who will perform their specific growth tasks., Zylstra (2016) declares that men were destined to innovate, to create a better world.
George Land developed a creativity test for NASA to help select innovative engineers and scientists. In 1968, using the same test, George Land conducted a research study to test the creativity of 1,600 children ranging in ages from three-to-five years old. He re-tested the same children at 10 years of age, and again at 15 years of age. The study found that 98% of 5-year olds, 30% of 10-year olds and 12% of 15-year olds scored in the “highly creative” range, respectively. Only 2% of adults scored in the “highly creative” range.
“What we have concluded, is that non-creative behavior is learned.” Dr. Land’s studies on the enhancement of creative performance ultimately led to the formulation of Transformation Theory.
Growth is the keystone of Transformation Theory and humans modify their behavior towards growth based on “feedback” received from the environment. Land posits that growth cannot occur independently, but instead requires interaction and interrelationship with the environment.
Transformation relates not only to the expression of human behavior, but to those processes that enable man to develop, achieve or loose these expressions. (Land, 1973).
If an organization can pinpoint its position on the life cycle curve (S-curve), and it has a sense of the slope of the curve, it has an excellent mechanism for determining where its technology is headed and when interventions should be made.
The Transformation Theory recognizes every aspect of human behavior as naturally evolved types of growth. The effectiveness of applying the theory in organizations is contingent upon the robustness of the manager’s forecasts (Modis, 2007
Historically, the orientation of learning and the path to success in organizations was centered around efficiency and best practices; decisions were made at the highest level of the hierarchy with little opportunity for collaboration. Due to the unpredictability and complexity of the 21st Century, the orientation of learning is shifting to creative response and innovation; and information flow in multiple directions and collaborative work are widely embraced.
Alphabet / Google the most innovative company in the world today (Forbes, 2019), exemplifies the transformation theory, as it constantly develops new products with overlapping S-Curves, that facilitate its continuous growth in a rapidly changing environment.Though not specifically about the Transformation Theory, the annual Creative Problem Solving Institute (CPSI) at the Creative Education Foundation provides an opportunity for individuals to choose from several experiential programs to learn a proven process for deliberate creativity and innovation.
Land, G. (1973). Grow or Die: The Unifying Principle of Transformation. Random House.
Land, G. (1973). Grow or Die: The Principle of Transformation. Journal of Creative Behavior. 7:2, 77-132.
Land, G. & Jarman B. (1992), Breakpoint and Beyond: Mastering the Future Today. Harpercollins Publishers
Land, G. (2000). Creating a Sustainable Competitive Edge. Journal of Innovative Management. Summer, 2000.
Land, G. (2011). TEDx Tucson, The Failure of Success. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfKMq-rYtnc
Modis, T. (2007). From My Perspective: Strengths and Weaknesses of the S-Curve. Technological Forecasting & Social Change.74, 866–872
Robinson K. (2007). TED Talk “Do schools kill creativity”. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=do+schools+kill+creativity
World Business Organization. George Land, Ph. D. (1932 – 2016). Retrieved from https://worldbusiness.org/fellows/george-land-ph-d/
Zylstra, S. (2016). Grow or Die: Remembering Innovator George Land. Retrieved from https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/blog/techflash/2016/03/grow-or-die-remembering-innovator-george-land.html
In 1974 A School of TRIZ was established in Leningrad (currently St. Petersburg) by V. Mitrofanov, which was probably the most influential training and developing TRIZ center in the former USSR.
A major step in the evolution of TRIZ: publication of ARIZ-85C [9, 15]. Even today, it is the only officially recognized version of ARIZ. The algorithm included 32 steps, and introduced a number of new rules and recommendations, as well as put a special focus on using time, space, and substance-field resources to obtain most ideal solutions. References to Inventive Standards were introduced in several parts of ARIZ-85C.
In 1989 the first TRIZ software “Invention Machine™” was released by Invention Machine Labs (later evolved to “TechOptimizer™” and “Goldfire Innovator™” by Invention Machine Corp. – now owned by HIS ), which included Function Analysis, 40 Inventive Principles, Matrix of Resolving Technical Contradictions, 76 inventive Standards, Databases of Physical, Chemical, and Geometric Effects, and Feature Transfer (Alternative Systems Merging).
Several global companies including Ford Motors, Procter & Gamble, and Mitsubishi have used TRIZ to develop better products more quickly (Rantanen & Domb, 2008).
TRIZ possesses considerable advantage over other methods applied to problem solving and innovation. Methods such as brainstorming, mind mapping, lateral thinking, morphological analysis, etc., have the ability to identify or uncover a problem and its root cause, but lack the capability to actually point out solutions to the problem. On the other hand, TRIZ helps to identify problems and offers direct solutions to them, along with confidence that most (if not all) possible new solutions to the problem have been considered (Gadd, 2011).
The components of TRIZ are contradictions, ideality and patterns of functionality.
Contradictions are indicative of inventive problems arising from the apparent incompatibility of desired features within a system. Resolving the contradictions solves the problems. There are two major types of contradictions: technical contradictions and physical contradictions.
Ideality derives from ‘‘the ideal machine’’, an arbitrary system which has all its parts performing at the greatest possible capacity, introduced by Altshuller (1999). Ideality is a measure of how close a system is to the best it can possibly be i.e. the ideal machine (or the ideal final result (IFR)).
The benefits are the useful functions provided by the system and harms are its unwanted outputs, waste products (also regarded as harmful functions) of the system.
• What are the applications of the model (and with who, how easy it is to use)?
Being a systematic tool, TRIZ can be used as a useful method in new product development process to generate alternatives.
TRIZ includes analytical tools that are necessary for problem solving and also it is knowledge-based tools that are necessary for system transformation and their theoretical foundations. Using all the information about the problems of the products, the analytical tools of TRIZ can be used for transforming, modelling and analyzing problems.
TRIZ uses algorithmic approaches for improving legacy systems or designing new systems. Therefore, it includes to evaluate the available data rather than estimation. The main goal of TRIZ method is to find the ideal solution or perfection. TRIZ methodology depends on four basic paradigms; 1. Contradictions 2. Perfection 3. Functionality 4. Using resources
Creative thinking -was developed and founded on its principles to reach non-classical solutions by Russian scientist Genrich Altshuller who didn’t accept the concept of randomness. According to creative thinking of Altshuller; 1. Creative solutions eliminate contradictions. 2. Creative solutions is based on limited number of methods to eliminate contradictions. 3. It is possible to achieve effective tactics for finding a meaning between different types of contradictions and overcoming them
TRIZ provides a structured approach to problem solving, which prevents erratic brainstorming and search for solutions.
TRIZ helps identify and clarify problems and provide good solution hints.
TRIZ provides useful and usually novel solutions. Apart from the quality of ideas, TRIZ helps to generate more innovative ideas than would have been generated otherwise. – Innovation and new solutions.
TRIZ provided breakthrough innovation and solutions and new concepts for development. – Speed: the resolution of problems and arriving at innovative solutions was achieved in shorter times, because it became possible to identify the problems and focus on them quickly
TRIZ methodology is too rigid and difficult to adapt for application in a variety of situations
TRIZ appears to require deep understanding and requires some preliminary practical experience before producing effective results.
Absence of a standardized best-practice guide for the methodology.
TRIZ may not be readily accepted and absorbed by an organization.
THE TRIZ JOURNALThe TRIZ Journal was founded in 1996 by Ellen Domb and James Kowalick and contains a wealth of articles on TRIZ and its application in industry.
After a small hiatus where it was only available for viewing, it’s now live online again with a new management team generating new content. The extensive archive is a treasure trove for people interested in learning more about TRIZ: there are more than a thousand articles on TRIZ written by practitioners and TRIZ experts, case studies and examples of the 40 Principles in different industries. There is also an archive of the journals’ blog posts and discussion boards.
OXFORD CREATIVITY RESOURCES Regular short webinars are available, including an introductory “Welcome to TRIZ” as well as more in-depth TRIZ topics. There are also a number of case studies on the application of TRIZ in industry and some introductory information about TRIZ. In the resource section you can find an interactive online Contradiction Matrix, plus some materials available for download: a printable Contradiction Matrix, the 40 Inventive Principles with examples, a number of TRIZ worksheets for putting the tools into practice, plus a cartoon gallery with a number of cartoons by Clive Goddard which can be freely used.
OXFORD CREATIVITY EFFECTS DATABASEOxford Creativity has a free Effects Database, created, maintained, and continually developed by Andrew Martin. You have the option of searching by function you want, parameter you want to change or energy transformation you require. The results can also by split by broad effect, specific application or you can select both. There is a short description of each effect and a link to the relevant Wikipedia page.
PRODUCTION INSPIRATIONProduction Inspiration is a free Effects Database: less comprehensive results but with pictures. If you go to the top left of the page, there is also the option to navigate to Patent
Inspiration (a tool for searching patents); More Inspiration (a catalogue of novel inventions) and Test My Creativity (a creativity test).
TRIZ.CO.KRAnother free version of the Effects Database plus information on other TRIZ tools in English and Korean –TRIZ.co.kr includes the 40 Inventive Principles, plus the full Standard Solutions (in the original Classical TRIZ 5 classes) and Trends of Classical TRIZ. Make sure you select “TRIZ” from the bar on the first page. The site is not very easy to navigate around but does provide the Classical TRIZ tools and the steps of ARIZ (the Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving).
ASKNATUREBiomimicry is the reapplication of nature’s solutions to solve problems, usually in technical applications such as engineering and design. AskNature is a wonderful resource for finding out how nature has solved problems; sort of an alternative to the Effects Database. It is searchable by function, so if you have already defined the functions that you want, as well as looking up how humans have worked out how to solve the problem, you can ask nature as well! In addition to the database, there are some case studies, information on current design challenges and upcoming biomimicry events (mostly in the US).
TRIZ future conference aims globally to spread TRIZ knowledge, tools and methods worldwide. It brings together industrialist and academics to share experiences, works and progress on the subject of how to use and develop TRIZ. It will be held October 9-11, 2019 in Marrakesh,
Altshuller G.S., Shapiro R.V. ABOUT A TECHNOLOGY OF CREATIVITY. Questions of Psychology, #6, 37-49 1956 (First publication)
This was the first publication about TRIZ. The article presents the foundations behind the TRIZ approach drawn from the regularities of technology evolution.
Altshuller G.S. HOW TO LEARN TO INVENT. Tambov: Tambovskoe knijnoe izdatelstvo, 1961
This was the first comprehensive book (128 pages) about a methodology of inventive problem solving.
Altshuller G.S. THE FONDATION OF INVENTION, Voroneg: Centralno-Chernozemnoe izdatelstvo, 1964
This popular book about the Theory of inventive problem solving includes definition and examples
of an ideal machine, deep analysis of the evolution of technical systems, algorithm of inventive problem solving
Altshuller G.S. ALGORITHM OF INVENTION. Moscow: Moscowskiy Rabochy (1st ed.-969; 2nd ed.1973)
This book presents in detail the basic theoretical concepts of TRIZ through a large number of
examples and case studies. Book includes the review of technical system evolution and analysis of
modern stage through patent resources.
Altshuller G.S. CREATIVITY AS AN EXACT SCIENCE. Moscow: Sovietskoe radio, 1979
Pavel Livotov, Vladimir Petrov: Innovationstechnologie TRIZ. Produktentwicklung und
Problemlosung. Handbuch. TriSolver Consulting 2002, Hannover, 302 Seiten, ISBN 3-935927-
Rolf Herb, Thilo Herb, Veit Kohnhauser: TRIZ - Der systematische Weg zur Innovation.
Werkzeuge, Praxisbeispiele, Schritt-fur-Schritt-Anleitungen. Landsberg/Lech: Verlag Moderne
Industrie, 2000, 260 Seiten, ISBN 3-47891-980-0
Ainsworth-Land, G. T., Land, G. T. L. (1973). Grow Or Die: The Unifying Principle of Transformation. United States: Random House.
Jarman, B., Ainsworth-Land, G. T. (1998). Breakpoint and Beyond: Mastering the Future - Today. United States: Leadership Two Thousand, Incorporated.
Rantanen, K., Domb, E., 2008. Simplified TRIZ—new problem solving applications for engineers and manufacturing professionals. Auerbach Publications, New York
Kosse, V. (1999). Some limitations of TRIZ tools and possible ways of improvement. 103. 111-115.
TRIZ Journal, www.TRIZ-journal.com
Classic Creativity Model Project
Synectics is a creative problem-solving technique which uses analogies and metaphors to analyze a problem and develop possible solutions. was developed by William J. J. Gordon and George M. Prince.
What were the persons background and expertise?
· William J. J. Gordon (1919-2003) was an inventor and psychologist. He developed many commercial patents for products and services.
· He was the leader of the Invention Design Group at Arthur D. Little.
· George M. Prince (1918-2009) was an advertising executive, author, psychologist and chairman of Synecticsworld. Prince conducted studies with creative people and psychologists to understand how new ideas could be generated to solve problems.
· Gordon and Prince met in 1958 while both worked at the Inventive Design Group at Arthur D. Little (ADL), an industrial research company in Boston, Massachusetts.
When was it developed?
· The Synectics model was developed in 1961.
What else is important to know about the history of the model?
· The main ideas of Synectics were conceived during studies on creative thinking which William Gordon conducted in 1944 while at Harvard University.
· The model was originally designed to develop ‘creativity groups’ in industrial organizations to solve problems and to develop products for companies.
· The basic principles and rules of Synectics were developed by Gordon and Prince while at Inventive Design Group at ADL.
· In 1961 Gordon and colleagues established Synecticsworld to focus on creativity and innovation training.
· Synectics was later adapted in education to develop creativity among school children.
How does it work
· A Synectic group is made up of 5-8 people and includes a facilitator (directs the group through the process), content expert (problem-owner), and participants (people from various backgrounds).
Synectics consists of the following major steps (Figure 1):
1. Problem as Given (PAG)
· A general statement of the problem to be solved as given by a facilitator or by an individual in the group.
· Analysis of the PGA – problem is made familiar by the participants who analyze and define the problem.
2. Create Direct Analogies
· Purge – participants discuss immediate solutions and viewpoints.
· Problem as understood – participants restate the problem as they understand it.
· Choice of Problem as Understood – selection of problem to work on.
3. Evocative Question (EQ)
· Evocative Questions for Direct Analogy – comparison of one thing with another
· Evocative Question for Personal Analogy – emphatic identification with something outside oneself
· Evocative Question for Book Title – crucial words or phrases which capture the essence of meaning of an object or activity or problem.
· Select one of the analogical examples
· Force Fit – example analogy is “force-fitted” to the problem that it may be viewed in a new way.
· View Point – view the problem from several angles to generate new ideas.
· Excursion – new examples can be used if new aspects of the problem are revealed.
5. Development of solution
· The solution is identified and written up.
· Actions are listed (what, when, who).
What are the components of the historical model?
This process involves two main activities (Gordon, 1961):
1. Making the strange familiar (defining the problem)
· Individuals force strangeness into acceptable patterns based on experiences or change biases to make room for the strangeness.
2. Making the familiar strange (using analogical tools to arrive at novel solutions).
· Conscious effort to achieve a new look at the old problems, patterns, ideas, people, feeling and things.
What are the applications of the model (and with who, how easy it is to use)?
· Synectics has been used in corporate organizations such as Microsoft, AT&T, Hewlett-Packard, SPSS Inc., Hallmark, Disney, Universal Studios, 3M and Citibank; and in education and medical field.
· Licensed by over 400 major corporations worldwide.
· Synectics method is not difficult to learn or to use as it provides a framework for creative solutions.
· Several training programs, interactive business workshops, lesson plans, and textbooks have been developed using the Synectics method.
What research supports the model?
· The model is based on research conducted over several decades, including Gordon’s 1940s work on the conscious and subconscious activities during the process of the creative act and Prince’s 1950s work on creative people.
· Thousands of hours of audio and video recordings of inventing and problem solving sessions on how the process of invention occurred.
· Influenced by Jung and Freudian principles of psychoanalysis that imagination and the generation of ideas could be stimulated by the used of repressed thoughts.
· Influenced by Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow theories that individuals were always striving for self-actualization.
What specialized vocabulary is involved (define terms)?
· Personal Analogy is the use of emotions and feelings to identify an individual with the subject of a problem.
· Direct Analogy is a comparison of two objects or concepts.
· Symbolic Analogy involves making use of objective and personal images to describe a problem.
· Fantasy Analogy takes the most desirable solutions by setting aside existing laws of nature, logic, and common sense.
· Compressed Conflict is a two-word description of an object in which the words seem to be opposites or contradict each other.
What are the major advantages or strengths of the model?
· Stimulates creative thinking in individuals and groups.
· Works well as a cooperative learning exercise.
· Can be adapted to many situations and applications.
· Allows divergent thinking processes.
· Reaches students with different learning styles.
· Enables the use of the imagination and senses.
· Useful in problem solving and brainstorming activities.
What are its limitations?
· The technique requires time and effort.
· The necessity of a trained leader or facilitator to keep the creative process in flow and for effective performance.
· The technique is not effective for work in large groups.
· The vocabulary of the model may inhibit some understanding of the psychology of problems solving.
· May be difficult to access resource material as some is trademarked.
Is it in use today and how has it changed over time?
· Successfully in the business world in a wide variety of situations.
· Synectics Education Initiative promotes the use of Synectics skills in the education system.
· Vincent Nolan and other users have developed the approach further over the past 50 years.
· The original nine-steps have been modified into other steps.
· Taught at Buffalo State College.
Is there training available?
· Synecticsworld provides training and facilitation certification program (synecticsworld.com/training/certification-programs).
What books, articles, manuals, websites, etc., are available to support the theory and
Gordon, W.J. J. (1961). Synectics: The development of the creative capacity. NY: Harper & Row.
Gordon, W. J. J. & Poze, T. (1971). The basic course in Synectics (Vol 1-6). Cambridge,
MA: Porpoise Books.
Gordon, W. J. J. (1972). Practice in Synectics problem-solving. Porpoise Books.
Gordon, W.J. J. (1973). The metaphorical way of learning and knowing. Cambridge, MA: Porpoise Books.
Gordon, W. J. J. & Poze, T. (1976). The art of the possible. Cambridge, MA: Porpoise Books.
Gordon, W.J.J. (1992). On being explicit about creative process. In S.J. Parnes (Ed.) Source book for creative problem solving (pp. 164-168). Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.
Gordon, W. J. J. & Poze, T. (1992). Conscious/subconscious interaction in a creative act. In S.J. Parnes (Ed.) Source book for creative problem solving (pp. 193-200). Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.
Nolan, V.C. (ed.) (2000) Creative Education: Educating a nation of innovators. Synectics Education Initiative, Stoke Mandeville.
Nolan, V.C. (2003) Whatever happened to Synectics? Creativity and Innovation Management, 12(1), 24-27.
Nolan, V. C., & Williams, C. (2010). Imagine that! Celebrating 50 years of Synectics. Synecticsworld, Inc.
Prince, G. M. (1968). The operational mechanism of Synectics. Journal of Creative Behavior, 2(1) 155-159.
Prince, G M. (1970). The Practice of creativity: A manual for dynamic group problem-solving. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
Articles and Technical Reports
Jimenez, J. (1975). Synectics: A technique for creative learning. ERIC #EJ114909.
Prince, G. M. (1982). Synectics: Twenty-five years of research into creativity and group process. American Society for Training and Development, 91-103. Retrieved from https://georgemprince.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/synectics-25-years-of-reasearch-into-creativity-group-process.pdf
Websites: www.synecticsworld.com; www.synecticsworld.com; www.georgemprince.com; www.vincentnolan.co.uk.; www.georgemprince.com/booksarticles.htm; wikipedia.org
Lateral Thinking is a set of processes that provides a deliberate, systematic way of thinking creatively that results in innovative thinking in a repeatable manner. While critical thinking is primarily concerned with judging the true value of statements and seeking errors. Lateral thinking is more concerned with the "movement value" of statements and ideas. A person uses lateral thinking to move from one known idea to creating new ideas.
DeBono defines four main catagories of Lateral thinking tools:
· Idea-generating tools which break free your current thinking patterns from their usual pathways.
· Focus tools that open your mind to new possibilities in the search for new ideas.
· Harvest tools that help maximize value is received from the idea generating output
· Treatment tools that ground the creativity process by making the wild ideas and make them fit the real world constraints, resources, and support.
Built on the premise that thinking can be developed using training and coaching, and that while creative thinking is a logical process, it does not use the same process that the brain typically uses for passive thinking – that of recognizing and repeating patterns.
De Bono Institute opened in 1996 to serve as a center for training and research into new ways of thinking.