Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Typically, to measure the level of creativity attributable to application of the protocol,
before interacting with the document set, users are asked to list issues they are already aware
of. Once the individual has completed to their satisfaction the SBS protocol (i.e., all documents
have been examined), the issues that were raised can be analyzed across various dimensions
(e.g., originality, workability, and relevance).
Central to the SBS protocol is the encouragement of participants to use their cognitive
abilities by asking them to make “lateral comments” (e.g., being instructed to make conceptual
connections between issues and between documents). Lateral thinking is a function of
knowledge and imagination that may bring out discovery, innovation, imagination, and
exploration. It is also an aid to creativity when one needs to have diverse ideas. Lateral
thinking is a way of thinking that seeks as many alternative options as possible to the extent
of one's adventurousness. In other words, it is a mental activity involving making connec-
tions between knowledge and ideas that were previously unrelated. In idea generation
sessions, it is important to think expansively and to suspend judgment.
In a SBS session, lateral comments involve input from the participant as well as from
different “authors” of the abstracts and views featured within the other documents. The
interaction between these two sources of inputs brings forth creativity, acts as a rich source
for stimuli that will trigger greater recollection of relevant knowledge (tacit knowledge), and
makes it possible for the participant to see relationships between different elements, make
analogies, and look at scenery from different points of view. If the participant does not have
any “lateral comments,” then essentially they are restricted to only the material in abstracts.
There is no universally accepted set of lateral-thinking or creative-thinking criteria. Aurum
(1997) suggested that the level of “laterality” for any thought for a given problem can only
be assessed with respect to the thoughts generated by others for the same problem.
In addition, the value of SBS also lies in it being a “formal” protocol — one that places
specific (yet flexible) demands upon participants to adhere to a set of behaviors designed to
enhance the level of an individual's creativity. Adherence to the SBS regime will thus
encourage a higher level of intrinsic motivation (discipline), application of a systematic and
thorough approach to analysis, as well as reflective and lateral thinking.
As a technique to facilitate creativity, the SBS protocol touches upon an important issue
in creativity: the link between an individual's level of domain knowledge and their capacity
to be creative within that domain. (For example, does being truly creative require a rich mental
model of the domain?; or can only experts within a domain truly provide creative insights or
solutions?) In a typical SBS session, participants are presented with factual-type information.
It can, therefore, be argued that this information may allow participants to learn more about
the domain, thereby evolving their mental model of causal connections (e.g., identifying
previously unknown variables, parameters, or links; or weakening existing links and associa-
tions). Supporting this view is Amabile (1983), who identifies domain knowledge or expertise
as the foundation of creative activity. A similar view of the importance of knowledge in
creativity is held by Holyoak and Thagard (1995), who regard analogical reasoning (which
requires a rich source of potential referents and, therefore, knowledge) as an important
potential source of creative thinking. In contrast, Finke et al. (1992) specifically mention the
need to suspend one's expertise as a precursor to creativity, and in doing so, reduce the
possibility of fixation. Purcell and Gero (1996), commenting about architectural design, explain
fixation as people being unable to see new ways of using objects, which could lead to an
innovative solution to a problem, because they are blocked or fixated on well-learned uses
or properties of the object. It follows that experts would be expected to have more well-learned
