Creativity and Ideation Methods

Introduction

Entrepreneurship depends not only on recognising opportunities but also on generating, developing and selecting useful responses to them. Creativity is the capacity to produce ideas that are both novel and appropriate to a situation. Ideation is the deliberate process of generating, organising, developing and evaluating ideas. While creativity is often associated with individual talent or sudden insight, entrepreneurial creativity can be cultivated through knowledge, motivation, structured methods and supportive environments.

For entrepreneurs, ideation serves several purposes: identifying unmet customer needs, designing value propositions, developing products and services, improving operations, responding to technological change and creating new business models. Effective ideation does not mean producing the largest possible number of unusual ideas. It means creating a sufficiently diverse set of possibilities and then converting promising possibilities into testable concepts.

This chapter presents major theories of creativity and practical ideation methods, including brainstorming, brainwriting, SCAMPER, analogy, morphological analysis, mind mapping, lateral thinking and TRIZ. It also considers facilitation, inclusion, evaluation, ethical issues and the use of digital and artificial-intelligence tools.

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Explain creativity as a cognitive, motivational and social process.
2. Distinguish divergent thinking from convergent thinking.
3. Apply structured ideation methods to entrepreneurial problems.
4. Facilitate individual and team creativity inclusively.
5. Compare the strengths and limitations of common ideation techniques.
6. Select and evaluate ideas using transparent criteria.
7. Recognise ethical, cultural and technological issues in contemporary ideation.

1. Understanding Creativity in Entrepreneurship

1.1 Creativity, invention, innovation and ideation

These terms are related but not interchangeable.

• Creativity is the generation of ideas or interpretations that are novel and appropriate.
• Invention is the creation of a new device, process or method, whether or not it becomes commercially successful.
• Innovation is the implementation and adoption of a new or significantly improved product, process, marketing method or organisational method.
• Ideation is the purposeful activity of producing and developing possible solutions, opportunities or concepts.

An idea becomes entrepreneurial only when it is connected to a problem, stakeholder, resource configuration or opportunity. A technically novel product may have little value if customers do not need it, cannot access it or do not trust it.

1.2 The nature of creative performance

A useful creative idea normally has at least four qualities:

1. Novelty: It differs meaningfully from existing alternatives.
2. Relevance: It addresses a recognised need, constraint or opportunity.
3. Feasibility: It can potentially be developed with available or attainable resources.
4. Value: It creates benefits for customers, users, organisations or society.

These qualities may not be fully present at the beginning. Early ideation deliberately tolerates incomplete and impractical suggestions because an apparently unrealistic idea can stimulate a more feasible one. Evaluation should therefore follow generation rather than prematurely suppress it.

1.3 Divergent and convergent thinking

Divergent thinking expands the search space by producing multiple interpretations and possibilities. It values fluency, flexibility, variety and remote associations. Convergent thinking narrows the search space by comparing alternatives against criteria and selecting, combining or refining them.

The two modes are complementary. A common entrepreneurial process is:

frame the challenge → diverge → cluster and interpret → converge → prototype → learn → diverge again

The process is iterative rather than strictly linear. Customer feedback may reveal that the original problem was poorly framed, requiring a new round of exploration.

2. Theories and Models of Creativity

2.1 The componential perspective

The componential perspective, associated particularly with Teresa Amabile, explains creative performance through the interaction of:

• domain-relevant knowledge and skills;
• creativity-relevant processes, such as flexible thinking and tolerance of ambiguity; and
• task motivation, especially intrinsic motivation.

The social environment also matters. Excessive surveillance, fear of failure, controlling evaluation and narrow performance targets can reduce creativity. Conversely, autonomy, meaningful purpose, resources, psychological safety and constructive feedback can support it. Extrinsic rewards are not always harmful, but they may undermine creativity when they signal control rather than recognition.

2.2 The investment perspective

The investment theory of creativity, associated with Robert Sternberg and Todd Lubart, describes creative people as willing to “buy low and sell high” intellectually. They pursue ideas that are initially unpopular or undervalued, develop them and persuade others of their merit. In entrepreneurship, this highlights the importance of opportunity recognition, persistence and communication—not merely idea generation.

2.3 The systems perspective

A systems view treats creativity as an interaction among an individual, a field of knowledgeable evaluators and a cultural domain. An idea is not creative solely because its originator considers it original. It becomes recognised as creative when relevant communities judge it to make a meaningful contribution. This is important for entrepreneurs because investors, regulators, customers, professional communities and affected groups all influence whether an idea is accepted.

2.4 The design-thinking perspective

Design thinking frames innovation as a human-centred and iterative process. Although versions differ, a typical cycle includes empathising with stakeholders, defining a challenge, generating ideas, prototyping and testing. The process is not a rigid sequence. Teams may return to research after testing reveals unanticipated needs.

Design thinking contributes three important principles to ideation:

• investigate lived experience rather than relying only on assumptions;
• make ideas tangible quickly through prototypes; and
• treat failure as evidence for learning, not as a judgement of personal ability.

2.5 The creative process

Graham Wallas’s classic model proposes preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. Preparation involves understanding the problem and gathering information. During incubation, conscious attention shifts away while associations continue to develop. Illumination is the emergence of a possible insight. Verification involves testing and refining it.

The model should not be interpreted as a universal sequence. Many ideas develop through deliberate analysis, collaboration and repeated experimentation. Nevertheless, it explains why breaks, sleep, movement and exposure to different contexts can sometimes improve problem solving.

3. Preparing for Effective Ideation

Ideation quality depends strongly on how the challenge is framed. A narrow statement such as “How can we sell more units of our existing product?” may constrain exploration. A broader but purposeful question such as “How might we help first-time users achieve the desired outcome with less effort?” invites alternative business models, services and partnerships.

A well-prepared ideation brief should specify:

• the users or stakeholders concerned;
• the observed need or opportunity;
• evidence supporting the problem;
• constraints that must be respected;
• the time available;
• the intended output; and
• criteria for later evaluation.

Constraints can improve creativity when they are meaningful. A limited budget, a requirement for accessibility or a low-carbon target may encourage resourceful solutions. However, arbitrary or hidden constraints can reduce the quality and fairness of the process.

Psychological safety and inclusion

Teams generate better ideas when participants can propose tentative thoughts without ridicule or premature judgement. A facilitator should separate idea generation from evaluation, invite quieter contributors, prevent interruption and make decision criteria explicit.

Inclusion is more than inviting diverse people into a room. It requires accessible materials, appropriate timing, language support, recognition of different communication styles and attention to power differences. Anonymous contribution tools can help people who fear status-based judgement, although anonymity should not be used to avoid accountability for harmful content.

4. Core Ideation Methods

4.1 Brainstorming

Brainstorming, developed by Alex Osborn, is a group method intended to increase idea production by postponing judgement. Its classic principles are:

1. defer criticism;
2. encourage wild ideas;
3. seek quantity; and
4. build on and combine ideas.

A practical session begins with a clear challenge and a short warm-up. The facilitator restates the rules, gives participants silent thinking time and records every relevant contribution where all can see it. Ideas are clarified without evaluating them. After the generation phase, the group clusters related ideas and moves to evaluation.

Brainstorming can generate shared energy and cross-pollination, but conventional verbal brainstorming has limitations. Production blocking occurs when only one person can speak at a time. Evaluation apprehension makes participants withhold ideas. Social loafing may reduce effort, while status differences may cause senior voices to dominate.

These limitations can be reduced by silent writing before discussion, round-robin participation, small groups, skilled facilitation and explicit separation of generation from evaluation.

4.2 Brainwriting

Brainwriting replaces or supplements spoken contributions with written ones. In the 6–3–5 format, six participants each write three ideas in five minutes and then pass their sheets for further development. The numbers describe the traditional format, not an inflexible requirement.

A contemporary process may be:

1. individually write ideas for five to ten minutes;
2. share them anonymously or by name;
3. build on selected ideas;
4. cluster and clarify the combined set; and
5. evaluate using agreed criteria.

Brainwriting is useful for distributed teams, multilingual groups and participants who need reflection time. Its risks include superficial contributions, reduced interpersonal energy and difficulty clarifying ambiguous written ideas.

4.3 SCAMPER

SCAMPER is a checklist for transforming an existing product, service or process:

For example, an entrepreneur examining a neighbourhood grocery delivery service might substitute electric cargo bikes for vans, combine ordering with meal planning, adapt a library reservation system, minimise packaging, put delivery routes to use for local recycling collection, eliminate printed receipts and reverse the model by allowing households to aggregate demand before a delivery is dispatched.

SCAMPER is accessible and fast, but it may produce incremental rather than radical innovation. It is most powerful when used after a clear understanding of customer needs.

4.4 Analogy and biomimicry

Analogy transfers a relationship, mechanism or principle from one domain to another. A direct analogy compares similar systems; a symbolic analogy uses metaphor; a personal analogy asks participants to imagine being the user or object; and a fantasy analogy suspends normal constraints.

The method can be conducted as follows:

1. describe the target problem without prescribing a solution;
2. identify unrelated domains with a similar pattern;
3. study how the analogous domain handles the pattern;
4. transfer the underlying principle, not merely the surface appearance; and
5. test whether the transfer is technically and ethically appropriate.

Biomimicry applies this logic to biological systems. For instance, studying how natural systems manage water, attachment or distributed sensing may stimulate engineering and service ideas. Analogy is valuable because it breaks functional fixedness, but superficial comparisons can mislead. Biological efficiency does not automatically translate into economic feasibility or social desirability.

4.5 Morphological analysis

Morphological analysis decomposes a problem into dimensions and generates alternatives for each dimension. The alternatives are then combined into concepts.

Consider a mobile learning service with dimensions such as:

Selecting one alternative from each row creates combinations for further investigation. With four dimensions containing 3, 4, 3 and 3 alternatives respectively, the theoretical combination space is 3 × 4 × 3 × 3 = 108 combinations, although many will be infeasible or redundant.

Morphological analysis encourages systematic coverage and reduces fixation on a single solution form. Its limitations are combinatorial overload, weak understanding of interactions and the risk of treating options as independent when they are not.

4.6 Mind mapping

A mind map is a radial representation of a central topic and its associated branches. It supports associative thinking, categorisation and memory. A useful entrepreneurial mind map may place “affordable urban mobility” at the centre and branch into users, journeys, technologies, partners, barriers, revenue models and environmental impacts.

Mind maps are especially useful for exploring a broad opportunity space before applying a more focused method. They should not be confused with causal models: proximity on a page does not prove that one factor causes another. Digital mind-mapping tools support collaboration, search and version control, but excessive visual complexity can obscure priorities.

4.7 Lateral thinking

Edward de Bono’s lateral-thinking approach challenges established assumptions and dominant patterns. Techniques include:

• provocation: introduce a deliberately disruptive statement;
• random entry: use an unrelated word or object to stimulate connections;
• reversal: invert a normal assumption;
• challenge: ask why an existing rule or practice is necessary; and
• concept extraction: identify the principle behind a current solution and seek alternatives.

For a restaurant, the provocation “customers never enter the restaurant” might stimulate a delivery-only model, mobile kitchens or event-based service. A provocation is not itself a proposal; it is a device for generating alternatives. Lateral thinking is valuable when dominant industry assumptions are strong, but it requires later feasibility and stakeholder analysis.

4.8 TRIZ

TRIZ, the Russian acronym for “Theory of Inventive Problem Solving,” originated in the work of Genrich Altshuller. It is based on analysis of patterns in inventive solutions and focuses on contradictions. A contradiction occurs when improving one attribute worsens another. For example, increasing the strength of packaging may increase weight and transport cost.

TRIZ encourages the problem solver to:

1. define the useful function and the harmful effect;
2. identify the contradiction;
3. seek a way to resolve it rather than merely compromise;
4. consider inventive principles such as segmentation, taking out, local quality, nesting, dynamisation or prior action; and
5. test the resulting concept.

The well-known contradiction matrix links pairs of engineering parameters to inventive principles. It is a heuristic aid, not a guaranteed algorithm. Contemporary TRIZ applications extend beyond engineering to services, organisations and business models, but translation into these domains requires careful interpretation.

For example, a reusable delivery container may need to be durable but light. Segmentation could produce a modular container with replaceable protective panels; taking out could separate the protective structure from the disposable inner liner; prior action could use a deposit-return system that ensures collection. The best option depends on user behaviour, cost, hygiene and regulation.

5. Selecting and Developing Ideas

Generating ideas is only one stage. Selection should be transparent and should not reward familiarity alone. Useful criteria include customer value, desirability, feasibility, viability, strategic fit, accessibility, environmental impact and ethical acceptability.

A simple scoring approach assigns each idea a rating from 1 to 5 on selected criteria and then applies agreed weights. If s_i is the score for criterion i and w_i is its weight, a weighted score can be represented as:

Here, S is the total score, w_i is a non-negative criterion weight and s_i is the rating for criterion i. The method assumes that ratings are sufficiently comparable and that the weights reflect stakeholder priorities. It is a decision aid, not an objective measurement of future success.

For example, suppose an idea receives ratings of 4 for customer value, 3 for feasibility and 5 for impact, with weights 0.4, 0.3 and 0.3. Its score is S = 0.4(4) + 0.3(3) + 0.3(5) = 1.6 + 0.9 + 1.5 = 4.0. The result should be discussed alongside assumptions and evidence. A high score based on weak evidence should lead to a learning experiment, not immediate investment.

Other selection tools include the desirability–feasibility–viability framework, impact–effort matrices, assumption maps and portfolio selection. A portfolio may deliberately contain incremental, adjacent and transformational concepts rather than selecting only the highest-scoring short-term idea.

Prototyping and experimentation

Ideas become more reliable when made tangible. A prototype may be a sketch, role-play, landing page, storyboard, service simulation, clickable interface or manual back-end process. The appropriate prototype is the cheapest representation that can answer the current question.

A good experiment identifies:

• the riskiest assumption;
• the target participant;
• the observable behaviour or response;
• the evidence threshold; and
• the decision that will follow.

This prevents teams from confusing enthusiasm with validation. Ethical experimentation requires informed participation where appropriate, protection of personal data and avoidance of deceptive or harmful tests.

6. Facilitating Individual and Team Creativity

A facilitator designs the conditions under which thinking occurs. Key practices include:

1. Prepare the challenge: provide relevant evidence without prescribing the answer.
2. Use multiple modes: combine individual reflection, pair work, visual methods and discussion.
3. Sequence activities: begin with divergence, then cluster, enrich and converge.
4. Make participation visible: use equal speaking opportunities and written contributions.
5. Manage energy: alternate focused work with movement or short breaks.
6. Protect psychological safety: critique ideas and assumptions, not people.
7. Document decisions: preserve rejected ideas and reasons for selection.
8. Close the loop: assign owners, experiments and review dates.

Teams should also consider cognitive diversity. People may differ in professional knowledge, cultural experience, risk tolerance, communication preference and attention to detail. Diversity can improve idea variety but may create misunderstanding or conflict. Shared problem framing, respectful norms and time for clarification help convert diversity into creative performance.

7. Illustrative Case: Reimagining Food Access

Background

The following is a fictional illustrative case. “FreshLink” is a start-up exploring ways to improve access to affordable fresh food in a low-income urban district. Existing supermarkets are distant, small retailers have limited refrigeration and delivery services charge fees that many residents cannot afford.

Problem

The founding team initially framed the challenge as: “How can we build a low-cost supermarket?” This framing led repeatedly to ideas involving premises, inventory and financing. Interviews with residents, shopkeepers and community organisations revealed a broader issue: residents needed reliable access to small quantities of fresh food, predictable prices and convenient collection, rather than necessarily a new supermarket.

The revised question became: “How might we make fresh food affordable and convenient without requiring a large new store?”

Analysis and ideation

The team used several methods. Brainwriting produced ideas for collection points, subscriptions, mobile stalls and partnerships. SCAMPER was applied to the existing grocery model: delivery was substituted with neighbourhood collection; ordering was combined with local community activities; packaging was minimised; and weekly purchasing was reversed so demand was aggregated before orders were placed.

Morphological analysis generated combinations across customer group, ordering channel, fulfilment location and payment model. Analogy with library systems suggested reserving items online and collecting them at trusted local sites. Lateral provocation—“customers never choose individual products”—led to exploration of affordable seasonal baskets. TRIZ-style contradiction analysis addressed the tension between product variety and low inventory cost. A modular basket system was proposed: a small standard basket would be supplemented by optional items based on aggregated demand.

Solution and experiment

FreshLink designed a four-week pilot using a community centre and two independent shops as collection points. Residents ordered through paper forms, a simple mobile interface or assisted telephone ordering. The start-up partnered with a wholesaler and used reusable crates. Rather than building a delivery fleet, it scheduled one consolidated drop to each collection point.

The team measured completed orders, collection rates, customer-reported convenience, food waste, gross margin and participation across ordering channels. It also interviewed residents who did not use the service to avoid learning only from early adopters.

Outcome

The pilot showed that residents valued predictable prices and collection times. However, the initial mobile interface excluded some older users and people with limited digital access. The team added assisted ordering and translated information. It also discovered that a standard basket reduced choice for some households, so it introduced modular options while retaining demand aggregation.

Learning points

1. The quality of the challenge statement strongly influenced the solution space.
2. Combining methods was more productive than relying on a single technique.
3. Analogy stimulated a service model, while TRIZ helped address a contradiction.
4. Inclusion had to be designed into both ideation and implementation.
5. A low-cost pilot revealed behavioural and accessibility assumptions that discussion alone had not resolved.

8. Limitations, Ethics and Contemporary Developments

Ideation methods can create an illusion of objectivity. A colourful workshop does not guarantee valuable innovation. Techniques may privilege participants who are articulate, confident or familiar with business language. Cultural assumptions can make some suggestions appear “unusual” only because dominant norms are treated as standard.

Ethical issues include the appropriation of community knowledge, exclusion of affected stakeholders, misuse of confidential information, discriminatory concepts and the externalisation of environmental costs. Teams should ask who benefits, who bears risks, whose knowledge is recognised and whether consent is meaningful.

Intellectual-property concerns also arise. Participants should understand how contributions will be recorded, owned and used. Organisations should distinguish confidential information from ideas that cannot reasonably be owned and should establish fair policies for employee and community contributions.

Digital platforms enable asynchronous brainwriting, virtual whiteboards, rapid clustering and participation across locations. Artificial-intelligence tools can generate variations, summarise themes, identify analogies and simulate user perspectives. They can also reproduce bias, expose confidential material, produce inaccurate claims and create a false impression of originality. AI outputs should therefore be treated as stimuli requiring human verification. Sensitive data should not be entered into a tool without an appropriate governance basis.

A responsible AI-supported ideation process should document the tool used, the prompt or task, the human decisions made, the sources used for factual claims and the checks applied for bias, privacy, accessibility and intellectual property. Human judgement remains essential, particularly when ideas affect vulnerable people or public interests.

Best-Practice Checklist

Before an ideation session, confirm that:

• the challenge is evidence-informed and open enough to permit alternatives;
• participants represent relevant users and perspectives;
• accessibility and confidentiality requirements are understood;
• generation and evaluation stages are separated;
• more than one method is available;
• criteria for selection are explicit; and
• the next experiment is defined.

During and after the session:

• record ideas faithfully;
• invite quieter and remote participants;
• challenge assumptions without humiliating contributors;
• cluster ideas by meaning rather than by status of the speaker;
• preserve minority perspectives;
• test the riskiest assumptions; and
• review outcomes to improve the organisation’s future ideation practice.

Chapter Summary

Creativity in entrepreneurship is the production of ideas that are novel, relevant and potentially valuable. It depends on knowledge, flexible thinking, motivation and a social environment that supports autonomy and psychological safety. Ideation is a structured process that alternates between divergent exploration and convergent selection.

Brainstorming creates group energy but must address evaluation apprehension, production blocking and status effects. Brainwriting supports reflection and inclusion. SCAMPER provides prompts for transforming an existing offering. Analogy transfers principles from other domains; morphological analysis systematically combines alternatives; mind mapping organises associations; lateral thinking challenges dominant assumptions; and TRIZ addresses contradictions through inventive principles.

Effective entrepreneurs do not treat any method as a guaranteed recipe. They frame challenges carefully, combine methods, include affected stakeholders, evaluate ideas transparently and convert assumptions into low-cost experiments. Ethical governance, accessibility, cultural sensitivity, data protection and responsible use of AI are integral to high-quality ideation.

Key Terms

Creativity: The generation of ideas that are novel and appropriate.

Ideation: The deliberate generation, development and organisation of ideas.

Innovation: The implementation and adoption of a new or significantly improved offering or process.

Divergent thinking: Expanding a problem space by generating varied possibilities.

Convergent thinking: Narrowing alternatives through comparison, evaluation and selection.

Brainstorming: Group idea generation that postpones criticism and encourages quantity.

Brainwriting: Written or asynchronous idea generation and development.

SCAMPER: A checklist using Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to another use, Eliminate and Reverse or rearrange.

Analogy: Transfer of a relationship or principle from one context to another.

Biomimicry: Developing solutions inspired by biological systems.

Morphological analysis: Decomposing a problem into dimensions and combining alternatives.

Mind map: A radial visual representation of a central topic and associated branches.

Lateral thinking: Deliberate disruption of established patterns and assumptions.

TRIZ: A theory and set of heuristics for inventive problem solving, especially contradictions.

Psychological safety: A shared belief that people can contribute without interpersonal punishment or humiliation.

Functional fixedness: The tendency to see an object or system only in its familiar use.

Prototype: A tangible representation used to learn about an idea.

Assumption: A proposition believed to be true but requiring evidence.

Weighted scoring: A decision method that combines criterion ratings with assigned weights.

Portfolio: A collection of innovation initiatives distributed across different levels of risk and novelty.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. Distinguish creativity, ideation, invention and innovation.
2. What are divergent and convergent thinking, and why are both required?
3. State the four classic principles of brainstorming.
4. Explain how morphological analysis generates concepts.
5. Identify two ethical risks in AI-supported ideation.

Long Answer Questions

1. Explain the componential and systems perspectives on creativity and discuss their implications for entrepreneurial teams.
2. Compare brainstorming and brainwriting in terms of participation, process quality and limitations.
3. Describe SCAMPER, analogy, mind mapping and lateral thinking, using an entrepreneurial example for each.
4. Explain TRIZ and the role of contradictions in inventive problem solving.
5. Develop a complete ideation process for a new venture, from challenge framing through experimentation and evaluation.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. A team wants to reduce food-delivery costs without reducing customer convenience. Apply SCAMPER, analogy and TRIZ to generate and refine possible solutions.
2. Design a 60-minute inclusive ideation workshop for a culturally and professionally diverse team. Justify the sequence, methods and facilitation practices.
3. Construct a morphological table for an educational technology venture with at least four dimensions. Generate three possible concepts and identify the assumptions that should be tested first.

Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which statement best defines entrepreneurial creativity?

A. Producing as many ideas as possible regardless of usefulness

B. Generating ideas that are novel, relevant and potentially valuable

C. Implementing only technologies that have never existed

D. Selecting the cheapest available solution

Correct Answer: B. Generating ideas that are novel, relevant and potentially valuable

Question 2

What is the primary purpose of divergent thinking?

A. To narrow alternatives using fixed criteria

B. To calculate the financial return of an idea

C. To expand the range of possible interpretations and solutions

D. To eliminate unconventional suggestions

Correct Answer: C. To expand the range of possible interpretations and solutions

Question 3

Which activity is most consistent with brainwriting?

A. One senior participant presents the final answer

B. Participants silently write ideas before sharing or developing them

C. Participants evaluate every idea immediately

D. A facilitator chooses ideas before participants contribute

Correct Answer: B. Participants silently write ideas before sharing or developing them

Question 4

In SCAMPER, the letter E commonly refers to which prompt?

A. Estimate

B. Expand

C. Eliminate

D. Exchange

Correct Answer: C. Eliminate

Question 5

What is the central purpose of morphological analysis?

A. To identify a single industry benchmark

B. To decompose a problem into dimensions and combine alternatives

C. To rank employees by creative ability

D. To replace customer research with intuition

Correct Answer: B. To decompose a problem into dimensions and combine alternatives

Question 6

Which statement about analogy is most accurate?

A. It transfers an underlying relationship or principle from another context

B. It guarantees that a borrowed solution will be feasible

C. It is limited to comparisons between identical products

D. It should be used only after final implementation

Correct Answer: A. It transfers an underlying relationship or principle from another context

Question 7

What does TRIZ primarily encourage a problem solver to examine?

A. Contradictions between improving one attribute and worsening another

B. The popularity of an idea on social media

C. The speaking time of each participant

D. The colour scheme of a prototype

Correct Answer: A. Contradictions between improving one attribute and worsening another

Question 8

Why should ideation and evaluation usually be separated?

A. Evaluation is never needed

B. Separation reduces premature judgement that can suppress novel ideas

C. Ideas cannot be evaluated using criteria

D. It prevents teams from combining ideas

Correct Answer: B. Separation reduces premature judgement that can suppress novel ideas

Question 9

A weighted score uses weights 0.5, 0.3 and 0.2 with ratings 4, 3 and 5 respectively. What is the score?

A. 3.2

B. 3.7

C. 4.0

D. 4.8

Correct Answer: B. 3.7

Question 10

Which practice most directly supports inclusive team creativity?

A. Allowing the highest-status member to speak first and longest

B. Using only spontaneous verbal discussion

C. Providing multiple participation modes and making criteria explicit

D. Rejecting ideas that require clarification

Correct Answer: C. Providing multiple participation modes and making criteria explicit