Callisto on creativity

Callisto Utriainen
I was at a very interesting talk last Thursday. Callisto Utriainen, a creativity coach, talked about creativity, how it works, and how to find creative solutions to irksome problems.

Callisto started off by talking about a great creativity killer: Too deeply rooted habits.

Habits are not bad per sé. Habits free brain capacity up to do new things, like finding creative solutions to problems, but there is a flip side. When we get too deeply entrenched in following the same patterns every day, we may lose the most important habit of all, the habit of thinking and doing new things.

When we get creative, we physically change the brain by creating new connections between neurons.
Callisto also talked about what habits look like from a neurological perspective: Pathways in the brain where synapses (junctions between neurons) have grown strong because they are used a lot.

She talked about how we can induce the brain to create new pathways by deliberately exposing ourselves to a state of confusion, like when someone tells us a joke. First, when you hear a joke, you get confused, then, when you get it, you laugh. Do a lot of this, and the brain will create new synapses, and you will actually get smarter and more creative. (Even if you don't, you'll have a happier and more interesting life.)

Solve problems by deliberately looking for bad solutions, then figure out the opposite.

It is a good thing to get the audience involved when you do a talk. Callisto took us through a problem solving exercise where we began by trying to find the worst possible solution to a problem. As I am sure you have noticed, finding solutions that suck is pretty easy. Usually it is the first solution that comes to mind...

What most people miss is the next step Callisto took us through, that of finding the opposites of the solutions we just came up with. That is where the good solutions are. There are several ways to do this.

The method Callisto showed us is very useful both when solving problems alone and in groups. Business design thinking company XPlane uses a similar exercise they call Anti-Problem to get people unstuck during creative dry spells. Similar techniques are used in other problem solving methods, like the Thinking Process that I work with.

I like the simplicity of the method Callisto used, so I'll include it in my own repertoire of problem solving techniques. If you follow this blog, you know that I work a lot with The Logical Thinking Process, which is rather left-brainish. It is very useful to mix that with more right-brain oriented techniques. Keeps my brain from getting too lopsided. (My brain may already be irrevocably "loopsided" due to my preoccupation with iterative processes.)

The talk was a success. It was also fairly short. Afterwards I heard people speaking about how they wished it had been a bit longer. From a speaker perspective, I think that is great: Leave the audience hungry for more, and they will turn up again.

I had the opportunity to talk a bit with Callisto before her presentation, and it was very interesting. She is a dancer and an avowed right-brainer. I am a management consultant with a strong left-brain bias in how I think. She is interested in creativity in individuals. I am interested in building creative and innovative organizations.

In other words, Callisto's approach is a bit different from mine, and that made her talk all the more interesting. It got both halves of my brain going. As Callisto pointed out, it is important to deliberately break habits and seek new perspectives.


The audience was quite small, about ten people. That did not matter to us who were there to listen, but it does mean a lot of people missed out on an interesting and thought-provoking evening.

The talk was arranged by a business relation network, Framgångsrika Relationer (Successful Relations), and held at First Hotel G in central Gothenburg.

As for me, I intend to spend the rest of the day doing something creative.

Be seeing you!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Waterfall vs. Agile: Battle of the Dunces or A Race to the Bottom?

Image
The major software methodology wars since the mid 1950’s. Someone was wrong on the Internet, so here we go… In a recent HBR article, It’s Time to End the Battle Between Waterfall and Agile , the author sets up a false premise: There is a war between Waterfall methodology and Agile. The war must end. And finally, you can combine the approaches to get the best of both worlds. This sounds good, but the article is based on a misunderstanding of both Waterfall and Agile. Also, there is no war between Waterfall methodology and Agile. There can’t be, because Waterfall methodology does not exist! Waterfall is a name for large projects that failed in the 1960’s. Waterfall was never a methodology, but a failure to apply the methodologies that existed back then. As I will show towards the end of this article, at least one of the “successful” Waterfall projects mentioned in the HBR article was neither successful, nor a Waterfall project. I got invaluable help from Alistair Cockburn. He fact che...
Read more

Performance Evaluations, Business Strategy, and Agile Methodologies

Image
It is performance evaluation time in many companies. This can be stressful, both to the people being evaluated, and the people doing the evaluation. In companies adopting agile software development methods, the tension can be extraordinary. Individual performance evaluations run counter to agile philosophy, which emphasizes team performance over individual performance. However, managers and corporate leaders need to take a few steps back, and consider the impact performance evaluations have on the organization as a whole. Especially now, in the midst of a recession, it is important to look at a companies current policies to see if they can be improved, or if they are actually holding the company back. So, how can a manager evaluate policy? Performance evaluation policies can serve as an excellent example. I'll confine myself to discussing the so-called ‘rank and yank’ methods. These are performance reviews were employees are ranked using a forced ranking system. It usually looks so...
Read more

Agile Requirements Structures, Part 1

Image
If you have worked in large Agile projects or programs, you may have noticed that there is often quite a bit of confusion about requirements, what the requirement types are, their purpose, how to write them, how to use them, and above all, what not to do with them. There are many causes for this confusion. Here are some of the more common I have seen: Nobody in the organization has read up on the requirements model it is using, so everyone makes their own interpretation. The organization deviates from a standard requirements model, but nobody knows which standard model the organization is deviating from, and/or there is no agreement about how they deviate from it. The organization has not documented its own requirements model very well. The organization mixes two or more different requirements models, often without realizing it. The organization has documented its requirements model, but finding the documentation is an epic project in itself, on par with when Henry Sta...
Read more