Difference between lateral and vertical thinking
· Vertical thinking is selective, lateral thinking is generative
· Vertical thinking moves only if there is a direction in which to move, lateral thinking moves, in order to generate a direction
· Vertical thinking is analytical, lateral thinking is provocative
· Vertical thinking is sequential, lateral thinking can make jumps
· With vertical thinking one has to be correct at every step, with lateral thinking one does not have to be
· With vertical thinking one uses the negative in order to block off certain pathways. With lateral thinking there is no negative
· With vertical thinking on concentrates and excludes what is irrelevant, with lateral thinking one welcomes chance instrusions
· With vertical thinking categories, classifications and labels are fixed, with lateral thinking they are not
· Vertical thinking follows the most likely paths, lateral thinking explores the least likelyVertical thinking is a finite process, lateral thinking is probabilistic
Techinques
The generation of alternatives
In the natural search for alternatives on is looking for the best possible approach, in the lateral search for alternatives one is trying to produce as many alternatives as possible. One is not looking fot the best approach but for as many different approaches as possible.
In the natural search for alternatives one stops when one comes to a promising approach. In the lateral search for alternatives one acknowleges the promisint approach and may return to it later but one goes on generating other alternatives.
In the natural search for alternatives one considers only reasonable alternatives. In the lateral search for alternatives these do not have to be reasonable.
Even if the search for alternatives proves to be waste of time in a particular case it helps develop the habit of looking for alternatives instead of blindly accepting the most obious approach.
Set a quota – the advantage of having a predetermined quota is that one goes on generating alternatives until one has filles the quota and this means that if a particularly promising alternative occurs early int the search on acknowleadges it and moves on instead of being captured by it
Challenging assumptions
It is usually asumed that the basic ideas are sound and then one starts fitting them together to give different patterns. But the basic ideas are themselves patterns that can be restructured. It is the purpuse of lateral thinking to challenge any assumption for it is the purpose of latheral thinking to try and restructure any pattern.
In problem solving one always asuumes certain boundaries. Such boundaries make it much easier to solve the problem by reducing the area within the problem solving has to take a place. But if such boundaries or limits are wrongly set then it may be as impossible to solve the problem as it would be to find an address south of the river Thames by looking north of the river.
Use „why“ technique – the usual respons to „why“ is to explain something unfamiliar in terms that are familiar enough to be acceptable explanation. With the „why“ technique these familiar terms are questions as well. Nothing is sacred. The intention is to create discomfort with any explanation. By refusing to be comforted with an explanation one tries to look at things in a different way and so increses the possibility of restructuring the pattern.
Suspended judgement
The purpose of thinking is not to be right but to be effective. Vertical thinking involves being right all along. Judgement is excercised at every stage. With latheral thinking one is allowed to be wrong on the way even though one must be right in the end. This is called delaying of judgement insteade of applying it immediately. Shift attention from it won’t work TO how it can be useful or where could it lead.
The suspension of judgement can have the following effects:
· An idea will survive longer and will breed further ideas;
· Other people will offer ideas which their own judgment would have rejected. Such ideas may be extremely useful to those receiving them;
· The ideas of others can be accepted for their stimulatinf effect instead of being rejected;
· Ideas which are judged to be wrong within the current frame of reference may survive long enough to show that frame of reference needs altering.
Design
just excercises...
Dominant ideas and crusial factors
Unless one can convert a vague awereness to a definite pattern it is extremely difficult to generate alternative patterns, alternative ways of looking at the situation. In a define situation one picks out the dominant idea not in order to be frozen by that idea but in order to be able to generate alternative ideas.
Example designing an apple picking machine: the dominant problem for the engineers is „advantage over manual labour“ whereas for the childeren it is „getting/reaching the apples“.
A crusial factor is some element of the situation which must always be included no matter how one looks at the situation. The crusial factor is a tethering point. Very often a crusial factor is an assumption – at least the „crucial“ nature of that factor is an assumption. If the factor is found not to be crucial then the tethering effect of that factor disappears and there is more freedom in structuring the situation.
In the design of a machine for picking apples a crucial factor may have been „that the apples must not be damaged“ or „only ripe apples were to be picked“. The necessity to include such crucial factors would restrict the way the problem could be looked at. For instance shaking the tree would not be a good idea.
Fractionation
The reversal method
Brainstorming
Analogies
Choice of entry point and attention area
Random stimulation
Consepts / divisions / polarization
The new word po
Blocked by openness
Description / problem solving / design
No comments:
Post a Comment