Problem Solving Process of Creativity - Wallas Model - Essay Example

Problem Solving Process of Creativity Student’s Name Course Tutor’s Name Date Introduction Creativity is cited as a core competency in finding solutions to problems and/or challenges. Often, creativity requires that a person uses his imagination, logic and/or intuition in order to come up with plans and/or solutions. Creativity is especially relevant in problem-solving. Andreasen (2011) however notes that while the importance of creativity is noteworthy, very little is known about the nature of creativity or its basis. Neural processes are especially cited as important in the creative process. Unfortunately, not much has been discovered regarding what happens at the neural level for creativity to be present. In literature, different scholars have come up with different models to try and explain how creativity occurs. This paper provides a critical analysis of two theories of creativity namely the Wallas’ Model of the Creative Process and the Whole Brain Model. The paper will use examples to illustrate several pointers that will be raised in the critical analysis. The Wallas’ Model of the Creative Process The Wallas’ model was developed by Graham Wallas, a psychological researcher who wanted to understand how people obtain creative solutions to problems or issues facing them. Wallas identified a four-stage process that began with preparation. During preparation, Wallas (cited by Williams 1987) indicates that a person defines the need, desire or problem and gathers information regarding the same. In this stage, a person would further verify solutions that would be acceptable in addressing a prevailing desire, need or problem. Wallas identified incubation as the second stage, which involves stepping away from an issue or problem and letting the mind contemplate it. Contemplating the issue or problem can take a few hours, weeks, months or even years. In this stage, a person can actively seek solutions in his environment. The third stage in the Wallas’ model is the illumination stage, where after a period of contemplation, the mind comes up with ideas and insights which are used in forming solutions to an issue or problem. The final stage in the Wallas’ model is the verification model where a person applies ideas and/or insights attained in the illumination stage to the desires, needs, or problems identified in the preparation stage. During verification, a person determines whether the ideas and/or insights attained from contemplation satisfactorily address the prevailing needs, desires or problems. The entire process as proposed by Wallas is sequential and the preceding stage must be accomplished before the next stage is undertaken. The whole brain model Ned Herrmann is credited with combining the Left/Right Brain Hemisphere Theory with the Triune Brain Model to come up with the Whole Brain Model. According to Herrmann (1989 cited by Proctor 2010), the brain is divided into four quadrants as indicated in figure 1 below. The upper-left quadrant (A) caters for factual based thinking and has attributes which include rational, analytical, logical, and quantitative thinking. The lower-left quadrant (B) is responsible for sequential thoughts. Its attributes include focus, organisation and linear thinking (Williams 1987). The lower-right quadrant (C) caters for a person’s emotions and has aspects that include kinaesthetic awareness, interpersonal skills, feelings and emotions. The final upper-right quadrant (D) caters for ‘holistic intuitive, integrative and synthesising processes’. Quadrant D is fact-based, logical, quantitative and analytical (Williams 1987). Arguably, creativity involves all four brain quadrants. However, some people have dominant quadrants. Daft (2014) for example argues that people who have a dominant quadrant A are logical thinkers, are good at processing numbers and analysing facts. They are also critical thinkers, realistic and rational. They have a ‘scientific’ orientation and as such, their creativity is attained through critical analysis and logical procedures. Their creativity is unlikely to be generated through emotions or feelings, and sometimes, even their ‘gut feelings’ have to be analysed to determine if they are indeed founded on rational and logical facts. A person who has a dominant quadrant B is on the other hand good at planning, organising and scrutinising facts and/or details (Daft 2014). A dominant quadrant B kind of thinking is less creative compared to quadrant A because it strives for stability by avoiding risks. Additionally, such people follow rules and procedures and as such, any creative thoughts need to be approved by relevant authorities before they can be tried out. Quadrant C thinkers on the other hand are precise and organised in their approach to things and issues. They are also interactive and sensitive towards others (Daft 2014). Additionally, they enjoy teaching others and are empathetic, friendly and trusting. The foregoing does not however hinder them from upholding precision and organisation in their thinking. People who are predominantly quadrant D thinkers are imaginative, playful and love experimentation. They take more risks and enjoy freedom and flexibility (Daft 2014). Quadrant D is indicated as the “artist part of the brain” (Daft 2014, p. 118). Despite the usage of some of the quadrants by some people, Herrmann argues that people can learn to balance and apply all brain quadrants in problem-solving. Analysis The whole brain model and the Wallas’ Model of the creative process have similarities as well as differences. Proctor (2010) notes that the first and last stages in the Wallas’ model are applicable in quadrants A and B in the Whole Brain Model. The third and second stages of the Wallas’ Model are on the other hand applicable in quadrants C and D in the Whole Brain Model. Critically therefore, it would appear that the Wallas’ Model is advocating the use of the whole brain in creative problem-solving. For example, when using the Wallas’ Model, a person would be required to prepare by thinking logically and processing and analysing facts as would happen with a quadrant A thinker. The incubation period on the other hand requires conceptualisation, and/or imagination, which would require a person to use quadrant D properties. Some authors have argued that incubation occurs at the subconscious level, although as Hills, Shrader and Lumpkin (2000) suggest, there is no agreement among scholars whether indeed incubation is a conscious or subconscious activity. Those who support incubation being a subconscious activity argue that it is typically a non-intentional, non-linear and intuitive process (Hills et al. 2000). Those who support the idea that incubation is a conscious process argue that although people find creative solutions to issues/problems at a time when they are no longer actively thinking about the same, the concept of’ mulling things over’ during this stage shows that the conscious mind is usually at work (Hills et al. 2000). During illumination, a person would have to engage quadrant C properties, while the verification process would call for a person to engage quadrant B properties. Arguably therefore, the four stages of creative thinking in problem-solving as indicated in the Wallas’ Model, indirectly propose the application of the Whole Brain Model. The two models seem to differ in relation to the role of the conscious and subconscious mind in creativity and problem solving. In the past, it had been argued that creative solutions arise from people’s unconscious mind (Anderson 2004). The unconscious mind is for example thought to be at work in people argues that they cannot force inspiration or that their creativity happens to them ‘like magic’. The foregoing means that they do not actively or consciously seek to find creative answers or solutions, but in the most unlikely time, the solutions just occur to them. A good example is that of Archimedes, whose narrative indicates did not know whether a golden crown given to him was an alloy of gold or made from pure gold. One day in his bathtub, an unexpected insight occurred to him, and he realised that he could measure the crown’s density by the amount of water it displaced. Though an archetypal story, eureka moment when Archimedes discovered the solution to the question that had been bothering him occurred at a time that he was not actively seeking answers. Such stories of ‘accidental’ inspiration and/or ideas are common and as such, are used to support the argument that the subconscious mind has a role to play in creative problem solving. Notably, the Wallas’ Model seems to deviate from the conscious form of problem solving in its second stage, which calls for a person to step away from an issue or problem, and let the mind contemplate it. Such kind of stepping away from a problem is similar to a person hears a song, tries to remember who sang it, but eventually gives up because he simply cannot remember the name. In the end, the person decides not to think about the musician’s name anymore. At a different time, the person may remember the musician’s name ‘out of nowhere’. The foregoing means that although the conscious mind had stopped trying to find answers, the subconscious mind was still trying to resolve an issue or problem that had not been finalised by the conscious mind. The Wallas’ model further seems to have an appreciation of the unconscious mind because the third stage (illumination) is arguably a product of eureka moment when a person suddenly finds a solution to their issue/problem. People suddenly become aware of a creative solution when they are doing something extremely apart from the issue/problem. For example a person may be in the swimming pool, in the shower, jogging or even asleep when they suddenly realise that a specific idea could work. Notably, the Whole Brain Model does not seem to leave any room for the subconscious mind. Quadrant D has aspects of the subconscious mind (e.g. when a person intuitively finds a creative solution to an issue/problem), but as Wilber (1997) indicates, consciousness is distributed and embedded in all four brain quadrants. All the four quadrants seemingly involve the conscious mind, and even if one was to use the whole brain in creative problem solving, they wouldn’t have used the subconscious moment. If indeed people say that they cannot consciously force inspiration or ideas, and other say that ideas come to them at the most unlikely moment, the Whole Brain Model has not effectively explained how such eureka moments happen. A critical difference between the two models is that Wallas’ model implies that creativity follows a sequence of steps. This means that all the four stages in the Model must occur for creativity in problem solving to be realised. The Whole Brain model however does not indicate which quadrant needs to take predominance over the other. Additionally, the Whole Brain Model is not indicative the thought process when one should follow to creatively resolve an issue or problem. The foregoing could mean that Wallas’ Model implies that creativity is a sequential process, which occurs in a linear manner. Conclusion Creativity is no doubt a process that occurs in the mind. As indicated above however, the two models indicated herein have different perspectives on how creativity occurs. The Wallas’ model implies that both the conscious and the subconscious mind are involved in creativity. The Whole Brain Model on the other hand does not leave any room for the subconscious mind. Arguably, consciousness permeates all four brain quadrants hence the foregoing argument. Another difference between the two models is that the Wallas’ Model is assumes that creativity follows a sequential pattern where all four stages must be accomplished for a creative solution to an issue/problem to be found. The Whole Brain Model on the other hand does not indicate which of the four brain quadrants takes dominance during the creative process. However, it is indicated that some quadrants are more dominant over others; yet, the same model proposes that a person can learn to use their entire brain for creativity purposes. As explained in the analysis section, attributes of the four brain quadrants are applicable in the Wallas’ model. As such, each stage of the Wallas’ model gets to use attributes of a specific brain quadrant. From the foregoing perspective, it appears that the two models propose the usage of the whole brain. Wallas may not have known it, but it can be said that his model was affirming that creativity is indeed the function of the whole brain. Creative problem solving will possibly continue being a topic of literally discourse. References Anderson, J R 2004, Cognitive psychology and its implications, sixth edition, Worth Publishers, New York. Andreasen, N C 2011, ‘A journey into chaos: creativity and the unconscious’, Mens Sana Monographs, vol. 9, no.1, pp. 42-53. Daft, R 2014, The leadership experience, Cengage Learning, Stanford, CT. Hills, G, Shrader, R & Lumpkin, G 2000, ‘Opportunity recognition as a creative process’, viewed 28 June 2014, Proctor, T 2010, Creative problem solving for managers: developing skills for decision making and innovation, Routledge, New York. Wilber, K 1997, ‘An integral theory of consciousness’, Journal of Consciousness Studies, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 71-92. Williams, R 1987, Unleashing the right side of the brain: the LARC creativity program, S Green Press, New York. Read More