I looked into what motivates people and organizations to invent. It’s literally what it takes to invent something so I can look at it a lot better now.
When inventing occurs, whether we are a lone inventor or doing this work within a creative organization , there must be some important factors to this work. In the last 100 years, many experiments have been created for a creative process used by human beings to solve problems. I will combine a number of ideas from 2 different models for” inventing “or steps in” Creative Problem Solving”. The first source of education was the economic historian Abbott P.Usher’s book “A History of mechanical inventions (1954) and the latter Brian Lawson’s book “How do designers think? (1990) ” 5 key steps are created by combining the resources of Usher and Lawson to create compositions from their books.
Step # 1-Definition Of The Problem
Defining a problem that cannot be solved, or describing a problem that is not fully solved in the current way, and deciding to solve it
Step # 2-Research
Gathering information and creating initial solutions to help better understand the problem
Step # 3-Incubation Period
Resting times allow subconscious thought.
Step # 4-Insight Behaviors
A mental movement that goes beyond a talent behavior in the normal expectation of a trained professional in that field is quickly resolved.
Step # 5-Critical Review
The solution is fully explored, tested and reconsidered towards a working solution, most likely shaping it beyond a number of movements of insight.
Defining a problem to be solved or defining a need to be explained is a key step for the initiation of the innovation process. As you have seen before, there are probably many starting steps. You can see examples of the curiosity that has led people to look for Cockerell and the technical principles of air bag transport, or a number of scientific applications. Sometimes people describe an unresolved need, like Percy Shaw and roads without light. Sometimes people describe a need with an incomplete solution that is literally out of date, like James Dyson and the traditional wheelbarrow that he doesn’t like.
The starting point for another invention is to identify possible new uses for existing products or processes. The first key step for such situations is to comprehend technological facilities and pazr facilities. These days, many organizations spend time actively searching for new uses for processes and existing products to function as problems that need to be solved with new inventions. Take note of the 3M Company’s struggle for a new type of adhesive to be used. That glue wasn’t really hard. In this case, the problem; it was the need for a new technologically fictionalized solution rather than the Sunday need research of an existing product.
This follows the identification of the problem, a number of attempts are made to better understand it and to attempt to design a solution. This may be a small process or it may take years and involves detailed research for information, experimenting with different designs, redefining the problem as a result of this activity.
Alexander Graham Bell, while researching the problem of designing a working phone, acquired a problem-based strategy. This strategy was typically used by scientists and engineers, involving research and effectively identifying the problem before creating a solution. A different approach is to go quickly to a solution made by designers based on their own experiences and choices, and then to the problem is tested and modified for the need to solve the problem more effectively. This more directed approach, called solution-oriented strategy, was often used by Thomas Edison.
In case Edison’s electric bulb light was discussed in advance, this process for research took more than 12 months. Before finally achieving its first working prototype, Edison systematically experimented with thousands of different materials for the filament. His first patent was for a bulb with platinum filament, although it worked, it was a complex study when compared to the bulbs that were in mass production less than 2 years later. These used carbonized bamboo filaments, which were later replaced with other materials. This experiment provided a much better understanding of the problem, and its possible solution was a reliable one that resulted in the final design.
The incubation period is the period of time during the period of identification and research, when the inventor is working on the problem for which he or she does not give him or her conscious attention. The subconscious mind continues to deal with the problem, whether it is for a purpose or not, even though the Problem and its solution are thrown aside. During this time, according to Roy ( Open University, 2004, p.34), the relieved brain, after receiving a number of relevant information as new information, reintroduces the information obtained for the preparation period to a specific composition from the beginning. What Roy thinks about re-stereotyping is the fact that information connects. A new piece of information leads to new connections to be made, and new insights are achieved. While it is often not entirely possible to show that the incubation period has taken place, there are a lot of case studies where inventors have done something irrelevant for their inventions in which a threshold point of insight is triggered
Suddenly an insight suggests a solution, or conveys to the inventor the meaning of achieving a solution. Mythical examples show Newton’s apple falling from a tree and him having an insight into the law of gravity, or the processes by which Archimedes leaps from the bath and runs naked through the streets as Eureka. These vivid pictures Mark creative ideas when they do not unconsciously solve a problem.
These insight behaviors are not only dependent on the mental state of the inventors, in fact, they are also dependent on the circumstances in which they occurred. The picture of Archimedes ‘ insight timing is similar. Archimedes understood that when he extended himself to his bed, there was a link in the displacement between his own weight and the volume of his water.
Archimedes was excited; he understood that a problem directed to Archimedes by Hierro II, the head of Syrakus on the island of Sicily, could lead to a solution to the president. Hierro had acquired a new crown but this was doubtful because the metalworkers had stolen some gold and replaced it with a gold-silver alloy so he could want to know whether the Crown would be pure gold or silver. Archimedes, the mathematician of Syracus and the applicable mechanician , said that if the crown was a certain amount of silver, it would be less dense than gold, it would be massed because of its weight, and so more water would be displaced when it sank. As a result, Archimedes would have found a principle that could help him determine whether the King’s crown was pure gold or a mixture of gold and silver.
In his book “The behavior of creativity” , Arthur Koestler (1989) critically points out the two main communities of unconnected thought with which his self-perpetuating mind connects. No one had put these separate thoughts together before Archimedes, and if these partial situations had not been relevant-thinking about the crown problem while bathing-that partial eureka moment might not have occurred. This could have happened to someone else because the history of invention shows that many minds have worked on the same problem.(Remember Edison and Swan’s work on electric light) but such situations, the combination of advantageous situations and the mind of the inventor, can pass without being aware of the need for need.
Koestler interpreted the formation of success in order to draw that partial result, rather than the formation of mental success, but rather the coming together of two unconnected ideas – a process of unification, as he referred to it. The union is an example of” relatable thinking”, a way of bringing invention solutions to these problems. There are other ways to relate ideas!
Adaptation, transfer, combination, and analogy..
5. Critical Review
Once a solution has been established, then the issue of how content effectively solves the problem needs to be investigated and revisited wherever necessary. While plenty of attention has been given to the timing of inspiration throughout insight behaviors unlike any other step in Inventor, it is this long, difficult, and costly critical revision process.
“Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.”Thomas Edison
As defined by Thomas Edison’s famous saying, for a brilliant idea to develop into a working prototype, intense work and insight must be co-created.
This critical over
Resources: Google Searches