Creative Problem Solving: a working guide for leaders

Some problems have a correct answer that can be found through analysis: a calculation, a diagnosis, a technical fix. Others do not. How should we redesign our service so that customers stay longer? How can two merged teams build a common way of working? How might we reduce waste without slowing production? These are open-ended problems, with many possible solutions and no single right one. They call for a different approach.

Creative Problem Solving, often shortened to CPS, is one of the best-established structured methods for tackling such problems. Its roots go back to the work of Alex Osborn, the advertising executive who popularised brainstorming in the mid-twentieth century, and Sidney Parnes, who developed the method further in an academic setting. Over the decades it has been refined by many researchers and practitioners, and it now exists in several versions. They differ in detail, but share a common logic that leaders can use with their teams.

The logic behind the method

Two principles run through every version of Creative Problem Solving.

The first is that problem solving involves several distinct stages, each requiring a different kind of thinking. Understanding a problem is not the same as generating ideas, which is not the same as developing a solution or planning its implementation. Rushing from one to another, or doing them all at once, produces poor results.

The second is that each stage alternates between two modes of thinking: divergent thinking, which generates many options, and convergent thinking, which selects among them. This rhythm, explained on the page about divergent and convergent thinking, is applied again and again throughout the process.

The main stages

Different models name and group the stages differently. For practical purposes, four broad phases capture the essentials.

1. Clarify the challenge

Before generating solutions, the group explores the situation. What is happening? What has been tried? What would success look like? Who is affected? From this exploration, the group formulates the challenge as an open question, typically starting with “How might we…?” or “In what ways might we…?”.

This stage is often underestimated, yet it shapes everything that follows. A group that works on the wrong question will produce excellent answers to a problem that does not matter. Spending time here, generating several possible formulations of the challenge before choosing one, is usually time well invested.

2. Generate ideas

With a clear challenge, the group generates as many ideas as possible. Judgement is suspended: the aim is quantity, variety and originality. Techniques can help, such as individual writing before group sharing, deliberately absurd ideas used as stepping stones, or analogies borrowed from other fields.

At the end of this phase, the group converges by selecting the ideas that seem most promising. Selection should rely on criteria that the group has made explicit, not just on immediate preference.

3. Develop solutions

Selected ideas are usually too rough to implement. In this phase, the group strengthens them: what are their advantages, what are their weaknesses, how could those weaknesses be overcome? One useful approach is to examine each idea for its strengths first, then its potential, then its concerns, phrasing concerns as questions to be solved rather than as objections.

The result is a smaller number of developed solutions, each with a clearer picture of how it would work and what it would require.

4. Plan for action

Finally, the group prepares implementation. Who needs to be involved? What resources are required? What might support or block the solution? What are the first concrete steps? Considering sources of resistance at this point, rather than discovering them later, greatly increases the chances of success.

Using CPS in practice

Leaders can use Creative Problem Solving in several ways.

As a full process. For significant challenges, a complete CPS session, or a series of sessions, can take a team from a vague concern to a concrete action plan. This works best with careful preparation and a skilled facilitator, who may be the leader in a facilitative role, as described in the guide to becoming a facilitative leader.

As a set of tools. Even without running the whole process, individual stages and techniques are useful in everyday work. Reformulating a problem as a “How might we…?” question can transform a stuck meeting. Separating idea generation from evaluation can rescue a discussion that keeps going round in circles.

As a shared language. When a team knows the method, it can say “we are still clarifying” or “let’s diverge before we decide”, which makes the thinking process visible and easier to manage.

Common pitfalls

A few mistakes recur when teams start using CPS.

• Skipping clarification. Under time pressure, groups jump straight to ideas. The result is often a list of solutions to different problems.
• Judging too early. Even groups that know the rule struggle to suspend judgement. A facilitator needs to protect the divergent phases actively.
• Selecting without criteria. Choosing ideas by vote alone tends to favour safe, familiar options.
• Stopping at ideas. Many sessions produce good ideas that are never implemented because the action planning stage was rushed or skipped.

Why it matters for change

Creative Problem Solving is particularly valuable in times of change, when organisations face a stream of new problems that existing procedures do not cover. Teams that know how to tackle open-ended problems together adapt faster and with less friction. They also tend to own the solutions they develop, which reduces resistance during implementation. In that sense, CPS is not only a method for innovation; it is a practical tool for leading change creatively.