Atlanta Creativity Exchange 2010
May 6-8, 2010
"Hooked at the Roots"
December's featured writer K.T. Connor, Ph.D.
Created Equal but Thinking Differently:
Implications for CPS'Unplugged:
Remotus Perspectus

Please visit www.atlantacreativity.org


Unique thinking patterns affect problem solving practice. Using the 6 Step Osborn-Parnes PS model, we find different thinking patterns treat the CPS process differently.

In my work we measure three kinds of thinking: intuitive, pragmatic, and conceptual. When we combine these three, on a very simple level it is possible to describe nine styles. Let's see how those styles relate to the CPS process.
------------------------------------------
Feeler-Feeler:
Deals with the intrinsic, personal world intuitively. Feel-Doer:
Deals with the practical world intuitively. Feeler Thinker:
Deals with the conceptual world intuitively.
------------------------------------------
Doer-Feeler:
Deals with the intrinsic world practically. Doer-Doer:
Deals with the practical world practically. Doer-Thinker:
Deals with the conceptual world practically.
------------------------------------------
Thinker-Feeler:
Deals with the intrinsic world conceptually. Thinker-Doer:
Deals with the practical world conceptually. Thinker-Thinker:
Deals with the conceptual world conceptually.
------------------------------------------

EXAMPLE: We often hear that action oriented people (Doers) skip many of the steps of the CPS process. With axiometric analysis we can discover the why this is not always the case. For example, the Doer-Feeler will tend to mesh OBJECTIVE-FINDING and FACT-FINDING in order to determine what to target. They will tend to overlook PROBLEM-FINDING and again combine IDEA-FINDING and SOLUTION-FINDING. They will defer to ACCEPTANCE-FINDING, but only to control outcomes.

Doer-Doers, on the other hand, start with SOLUTION-FINDING, merging PROBLEM-FINDING, FACT-FINDING, and IDEA-FINDING at the same time in order to focus on how to solve the problem and move on. They will definitely lose patience with ACCEPTANCE-FINDING.

Doer-Thinkers will be more planful and more attentive to the steps, but will still be practical and focused on results. They will tend to co-mingle FACT-FINDING and IDEA-FINDING as a series of questions asking what, how, and why. The action planning phase of ACCEPTANCE-FINDING will be critical to them, though they too will be impatient with the "needs analysis" aspect, convinced as they are of the acceptability of their logically derived solution.

This kind of analysis raises some fun questions:

· How might we convince the learner of the value of each CPS step, whatever their thinking style?

· What might be some implications for building teams and what cautions can we propose?

· Why is it better to measure these differences objectively rather than using self report assessment?

· In what ways might we help folks value their uniqueness as we facilitate their problem solving success?

· What thoughts does this analysis provoke for you?

K.T. Connor, PhD