Running Head: CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 1

Conceptual Blocks and Creativity

Kelly Chambers

April 10, 2017

LDR-630 Organizational Culture and Communication

Siena Heights University

CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 2

Introduction

Creative and critical thinking skills are considered some of the highest level of cognitive

skills that we can develop as humans and doing so comes with a series of challenges. Critical and

creative thinking are considered whole-brain thinking skills as they actively use both sides of our

brains as we look at issues; one side is used to fully analyze and understand the operational

functions while the other is engaging creatively and emotionally in looking toward solutions.

Whole-brain thinking provides you with a strategic roadmap for creativity, problem-solving,

innovation and transformation. These processes can be used to develop creativity and innovation

capabilities within an organization (Selhub, 2016).

Unfortunately most individuals through their personal experiences, formal education and

work experience become set in their problem solving and ways of thinking. Consequently, they

become less apt to solve problems in creative ways and begin to engage in conceptual blocks that

prevent the creative problem solving process. Experience on the job often leads to set ways of

doing tasks, specialized knowledge and rigid expectation of appropriate actions and as a result,

individuals lose the ability to experiment, improvise, or take mental detours. Adults over 40 have

less than 2 percent of the problem solving abilities of children under 5 due to their perceived and

assumed resolutions to problems (Whetten & Cameron, p. 164).

The Four Major Conceptual Blocks

There are four major conceptual blocks identified by Whetten and Cameron (2002) which

include: constancy, commitment, compression and complacency. Each of these blocks work

against someone and inhibit creative problem solving from taking place within an organization.

Further, Whetten and Cameron (2002) identify two prime behavior characteristics that occur

within each of these conceptual blocks; with constancy there is vertical thinking and one thinking
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 3

language; commitment has stereotyping based on past experience and ignoring commonalities;

compression consist of distinguishing figure from ground and artificial constraints; while

complacency has noninquisitiveness and nonthinking. It is critical for leaders to not only become

aware and overcome their conceptual blocks, but also help their employees learn ways to move

past them as well.

Constancy

Oxford dictionary defines constancy as the quality of being enduring and unchanging

with origins in 15th century Latin from constant or standing firm (Oxford, 2017). Whetten and

Cameron (2002) further define that constancy is when an individual becomes coupled to one way

of looking at a problem and taking only one approach to solving it. This is one very common

issue in creative problem solving approaches. While consistency is often a highly regarded

human and employee trait, in this context it can become a hindrance. Two behavior

characteristics of the constancy block are vertical thinking and using only one thinking language

(Whetten & Cameron, p. 168).

Vertical thinking.

Much like one would expect based on the term, vertical thinking is when the thought

process only moves in one direction and only about one issue at a time. As author Markovitz

(2015) concludes this creates thinking silos in which, people think more about what is best for

them and their department than about what solutions might be best for the entire organization or

customers. Whetten and Cameron (2002) add to this by stating that vertical thinking, first defined

by Edward de Bono refers to defining a problem in a single way and then pursuing that

definition without deviation until a solution is reached. No alternative definitions are considered.
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 4

All information gathered and all alternatives generated are consistent with the original

definition (p.168).

One thinking language.

A second behavior expression of the constancy block that Whetten and Cameron (2002)

describe is the use of only one thinking language. As they state, most people think primarily in

words; they think about a problem and solution in terms of verbal language even though other

thought languages are available. Nonverbal or symbolic languages, sensory imagery, feelings and

emotions, and visual imagery are all thinking languages that could be used in solving problems.

The more languages utilized by the problem solvers, the more creative their solutions are likely

to be. As Robertson (2016) states, verbal language can become a barrier standing between our

thinking self and our reality. This is the reason that true creativity often starts when we move

beyond simple verbal thinking (p. 126).

Commitment

Much like consistency, commitment is another term that most view as a positive trait for

an employee; commitment to the company, the vision, and the mission are all seen as sought

after characteristics for a member of the staff. However, as Whetten and Cameron (2002)

explain, for creative problem solving being overly committed in your thinking can become a

block that can lead to dysfunctional or irrational decisions that are rigidly defended. This

commitment is the allegiance to a specific train of thought, concept, idea, opinion,

characterization, explanation, or resolution. Once individuals become committed to a particular

point of view, definition, or solution, it is likely that they will follow through on that
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 5

commitment. Two forms of commitment that produce conceptual blocks; stereotyping based on

past experiences and ignoring commonalities.

Stereotyping.

One major and significant obstacle to inventive problem solving is that people tend to

express present problems in terms of problems they have faced in their past experience. Much

like we often stereotype people based on commonalities and make assumptions and conclusions

about them as people, we do the same with issues we face each day. Whetten and Cameron

(2002) explain, this constraint is denoted as perceptual stereotyping or preconceptions formed on

the basis of past experience that will determine how an individual defines that situation and

possible outcomes (p. 171).

Ignoring commonalities.

Failing to identify similarities and correlations amongst superficially unrelated data is

another behavior of the commitment block. This is argued by Whetten and Cameron (2002) to be

the most commonly identified block to creativity. Here a person becomes committed to a

particular point of view, to the fact that elements are different, and becomes unable to make

connections, identify themes, or to perceive commonalities. They filter out data that may not

look related on the surface without making deeper dives to determine if in fact the issues might

have the same root cause. This leads to a failure in problem solving and can overload a problem

solver by requiring that every problem encountered be solved individually (p. 172).
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 6

Compression

It is easy to see from what has been reviewed thus far that single directional thinking and

relying on the same solutions from yesterdays problems to solve the issues of today are

detrimental to modern creative problem solving techniques. Additionally, being unable to

differentiate findings and being overly committed to one particular view point or idea can create

challenges for an organization trying to make advancements in problem resolution. Another issue

that is a challenge people and organizations have to face is that people may not be able to view a

problem in its totality or they may excessively filter out potentially critical information; Whetten

and Cameron (2002) refer to this behavior as the compression block. Compression most simply

is looking too narrowly at a problem or not looking at the big picture. This block consists of

the behavior of creating artificial constraints and separating figure from the ground.

Artificial constraints.

Whetten and Cameron (2002) explain that artificial constraints are when individuals

place vast restrictions, limitations and borders around the issue at hand to the point that no

resolution can be found; they in essence mentally eliminate possible solutions due to their

perceived restrictions for resolutions (pp. 172-174). This behavior prevents the person from

being able to see a resolution as their mind fundamentally tells them that it will not work before

it is even fully considered or tested.

Distinguishing figure from ground.

In addition to limiting information to the point no resolution can been seen, people can

also fail to filter out any information, overwhelming those looking for solution with irrelevant
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 7

data. This too can be destructive and Whetten and Cameron (2002) refer to this behavior as

distinguishing or separating figures from the ground. In trying to get to the root of the problem,

inappropriate, ambiguous and imprecise information needs to be filtered out, failing to do so can

make the issue appear more difficult than what it actually is; this also encumbers the application

of the possible simple problem solution (p. 174).

Complacency

Unlike some of the other terms, complacency is not one that often spurs positive thoughts

when used in terms of employment; and as a conceptual block it is defined as a lack of action

due to fear, ignorance, insecurity, or just plain mental laziness. Two predominant behaviors

associated with the block of complacency are a lack of questioning or non-inquisitiveness and a

bias against thinking.

Non-inquisitiveness.

For some, the inability to solve problems stems from a fear or lack of desire to even begin

the process of asking questions to attain information or to pursue needed data. This behavior may

be due to personal insecurity or not wanting to appear uninformed. However, this behavior

prevents them from being able to move into creative problem-solving because they simply do not

have the information needed to participate in the process. Whetten and Cameron (2002) explain

that individuals may feel that they will seem naive or ignorant if they question something or

attempt to redefine a problem. They worry that asking too many questions may put them at risk

of exposing their ignorance. It also may be perceived as a threat by those that do not like to be

questioned. This may create resistance, conflict, or even ridicule by others (pp. 175-176).
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 8

Bias against thinking.

The second part of the complacency block is simply a lack of space to allow the thinking

process to occur, or an assumption that thinking is not active working therefore thinking behavior

or time to think is avoided.

Why Do These Blocks Occur in Organizations

Conceptual blocks occur quite simply because of basic human nature. We enjoy

consistency and often form habits over time, doing things the way we feel most comfortable and

confident. By nature we often fear change and creative problem solving is often a process that

seeks to actively introduce change into the workplace. Additionally, we by nature are often

insecure creatures that fear being the first to try something new or suggest something outside

what is preserved as the normal way of doing business. As a result, business cultures often do not

develop into safe spaces that embrace creative problem solving techniques.

What Can Leaders Do

Creative problem solving, like baking is a process. As Baumgartner (n.d.) explains,

Creative problem solving isn't just brainstorming, although that's what many people may

associate it with. It's actually a well-defined process that can help you from problem definition to

implementing solutions (para. 1). And just like bakers need to understand the baking process

that leads to successful recipes, leaders need to understand the framework for creative problem

solving themselves and gain mastery if they wish to then teach and bring problem solving to the

organizational culture.
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 9

As a baker myself, the processes share many similarities; preparing your environment

and gathering tools, incubating or cooking the outcomes, observing and monitoring progress, and

ultimately taste testing the final product and if needed adjusting the recipe. And most

importantly, knowing that no matter how much expertise I may have, others may have ideas that

would improve our final product. These same steps must be used by leaders when working with

employees to use creative problem solving for work related issues.

If leaders want to get the organizational culture to adopt creative and linear problem

solving methodologies, these leaders must carry the responsibility for first modeling problem-

solving behaviors themselves. This means they must fully understand and model the process and

then coach and create a safe environment for those new to using the process. Offering training on

structured problem-solving also goes a long way toward bringing it into an organizational

culture. As Dalto (2016) states, once your employees have the fundamental knowledge and

skills mentioned above, plus an understanding of your work processes, you can begin working

with them to develop their problem-solving skills.

To help cultivate this kind of environment, leaders must themselves change perspective;

they must realize they are no longer the only expert and must begin to respect the expertise and

ideas of their team. They must realize that their role becomes one of support; finding ways to

encourage employees to be the ones solving the problems and accepting that they may not have

all the answers. They should focus instead on defining targets, creating a safe environment for

raising problems, ensuring people have enough time for problem solving, and helping them

develop their skills. Adjusting to this change in role can take time for leaders accustomed to

being the one with the answers. But by learning how to help others participate, they can find a

new identity and an even more powerful way to add value to their organization.
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 10

My Experiences and Personal Application

My role within my organization and team changed recently; now instead of a simple

member on my team I am now a leader for my team. This change has come with new

responsibilities and insights that has prompted me to reflect, self-evaluate, and seek to improve

myself professionally for myself and my team. As a result, I have begun to further examine and

identify my own conceptual blocks for problem solving.

I see most often when facing problems, that I struggle both with my own and my teams

constancy-vertical thinking and commitment-stereotyping. As those that work in database

applications know, we by nature of our work think in linear steps and processes, however these

problem resolution techniques do not always work when looking at customer relationship issues

which we are currently challenged to overcome. We often assume that we can work with each

customer area in the same way, based on our positive experiences with other departments, but we

are quickly finding that this vertical thinking approach is damaging to many relationships since

each customer area has different and unique needs. We will need to work together as a team to

think more laterally and creatively about our approach to each area individually.

Additionally, we often stereotype issues and make vast assumptions based on our past

experience with particular users. When issues are reported instead of taking deeper dives and

looking at them openly, we often jump to the conclusion that issues are the result of uneducated

users or processing errors. This often delays the process of finding a resolution as we delay

investigation of technical and software errors based on the assumption that the user will discover

they missed a step in the process.

CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 11

These are two areas that we as a team need to focus on in order to remove our blocks and

become more creative in our thinking to improve our overall outcomes as a team.

Action Plan

Purpose: The purpose of this action plan is to identify and assess conceptual blocks within my

team and to become more creative in our thinking and improve our overall team outcomes.

Goal: Improve our customer satisfaction levels while decreasing issue resolution times.

Results/Accomplishments:

Action: What Will Be Done? The team will take self-evaluations to

determine conceptual blocks.

Responsibilities: Who Will Do It? Entire team will do individual assessments and
discuss as a team.

Timeline: When Will Be Done? Complete assessments for team review by May
25, 2017.

Resources: A. Time and space to learn blocks and

A: Available complete assessments.
B: Needed B. HR online training access if needed.

Barriers: What might we have to overcome? Team lack of participation or organization

failing to provide time space other resources.

Communication/Feedback Plan A. Team and Customers

A, Who? B. Customer Survey
C. Quarterly
B. Method?
C. How Often?

Evidence of Success: Our benchmark will be to increase our customer satisfaction by 5% each

quarter with a gain from current rate of 64% to 84% this year.
CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 12

Evaluation Process: We will self-evaluate as a team each month and review where and what we

need to do to overcome our blocks. We will review our survey results to see if we are making

progress and if needed make adjustments to our resolution plan.

Conclusion

In review, the four conceptual blocks introduced and discussed that hinder creative

problem solving are; constancy, commitment, compression and complacency. As leaders we must

educate ourselves on these blocks and seek to employ methods to help both ourselves and our

employees overcome these blocks if we wish to create an organizational culture that embraces

and successfully utilizes creative problems solving. Creative problem solving is critical for both

our organizations and our nation so we can continue to grow and move forward into the ever

changing global business world.

CONCEPTUAL BLOCKS AND CREATIVITY 13

References

Baumgartner, J. (n.d.). The Basics of Creative Problem Solving. Retrieved April 01, 2017, from

http://www.innovationmanagement.se/imtool-articles/the-basics-of-creative-problem-

solving-cps/

Constancy [Def.]. (n.d.). Oxford Online. In English Oxford Living Dictionaries. Retrieved April

9, 2017, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/constancy

Dalto, J. (2016, May 09). Helping Workers Develop Problem-Solving Skills: How to Do It Well

and Do It Quickly. Retrieved April 01, 2017, from

https://www.convergencetraining.com/blog/helping-workers-develop-problem-solving-

skills

Markovitz, D. (2015, September 22). The Perils of Vertical Thinking. Retrieved April 10, 2017,

from http://www.industryweek.com/lean-six-sigma/perils-vertical-thinking

Roberston, L. (2016). Language of Man: Learning to speak creativity. S.l.: DAYMARK PRESS.

Selhub, E. M., M.D. (2016, September 10). Balancing Right and Left and Learning to become a

'Whole-Brain' Thinker. Retrieved April 09, 2017, from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eva-m-selhub-md/balancing-right-left-and-

_b_8119556.html

Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. M. (2002). Ch. 3: Solving problems analytically and creatively.

In Developing Management Skills (5 ed., pp. 155-178). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

Education, Inc.