Reappreciating Applied Imagination

Hello again Humantific readers. Inspired by a reoccurring question seen in one of the LinkedIn Design Thinking discussion groups regarding “SCAMPER” we decided to make this the focus of this week’s post. Since many of our readers/clients are innovation initiative leaders we thought it might be useful to you if we share a somewhat lost story regarding this thinking related subject.

At Humantific we recognize SCAMPER as a basic idea prompting technique, (not a method) with a long history that seems to be not well understood in some communities of practice today. 

SCAMPER originates in the Applied Creativity/Creative Problem Solving community (*1), not the design / design thinking community. For those who might not know these are two very different communities of knowledge…with very different timelines, heroes, orientation to challenges and methodology histories. While many parallels exist, one is certainly not interchangeable with the other.

I point this out as it is useful, some might say necessary, to undertake some historical research when importing techniques from other knowledge communities in order to understand their original context, appreciate the original intentions etc. One does not have to be a methodology scholar to be respectfully doing that. 

Frankly speaking, it is really not possible to understand where design thinking is and isn’t today without cross community perspective. Much of what is being positioned as “Design Thinking” today actually comes from elsewhere. It would be great to see much more cross-community knowledge among a new generation of design leaders.

We recognize Bob Eberle’s 1973 “SCAMPER” (*2) to be directly derived from the early work of Applied Creativity/Creative Problem Solving pioneer Alex Osborn (1888-1966).

A version appears in the first edition of Osborn’s super important book Applied Imagination published in 1953. [There were only 5000 copies of the first edition printed in 1953 so if you happen to have one hold onto it!] 

As Osborn’s 4th book on the subject, Applied Imagination focused on “inducing imagination” while communicating that everyone has the capacity to be creative, and to contribute. This inclusive orientation, championed early on by the CPS/Applied Creativity community became popular in the United States during and after the second world war.

Applied Imagination is one of a handful of early CPS/Applied Creativity volumes that contain the initial crown jewels of that knowledge community. Many of the gold nuggets seen in Applied Imagination were subsequently built on by later arriving others. Much of that knowledge is still in play today.

To cut to the chase: Below is a simple comparison between the Osborn and Eberle versions of the idea prompter logic.

Osborn’s Idea Prompter 1953

Intended for use within the context of brainstorming solution options, here is what Osborn’s Idea Prompter construct looked like in 1953 before it became reconfigured as the acronym “SCAMPER”:

1. Adapt: What else is like this? What other idea does this suggest? Does past offer parallel? What could I copy? Whom could I emulate?

2. Modify: New twist? Change meaning, color, motion, sound, odor, form, shape? Other Changes?

3. Magnify: What to add? More time? Greater frequency? Stronger? Higher? Longer? Thicker? Extra Value? Plus ingredient? Duplicate? Multiply? Exaggerate?

4. Minify: What to subtract? Smaller? Condensed? Miniature? Lower? Shorter? Lighter, Omit?, Streamline?, Split up? Understate?

5. Substitute: Who else instead? What else instead? Other ingredient? Other material? Other process? Other power? Other place? Other approach? Other tone of voice?

6. Rearrange: Interchange components?, Other pattern? Other layout? Other sequence? Transpose cause and effect? Change pace? Change Schedule?

7. Reverse: Transpose positive and negative? How about opposites? Turn it backward? Turn it upside down? Reverse roles? Change shoes? Turn tables? Turn other cheek?

8. Combine: How about a blend, an alloy, an assortment, an ensemble? Combine units? Combine purposes? Combine appeals? Combine ideas?

Bob Eberle’s “SCAMPER” 1973 

Twenty years after Applied Imagination was published Osborn’s Idea Prompter was reconfigured as the acronym “SCAMPER” and made much more product focused looking like this:

1. Substitute: What materials or resources can you substitute or swap to improve the product? What other product or process could you use? What rules could you substitute? Can you use this product somewhere else, or as a substitute for something else? What will happen if you change your feelings or attitude toward this product?

2. Combine: What would happen if you combined this product with another, to create something new? What if you combined purposes or objectives? What could you combine to maximize the uses of this product? How could you combine talent and resources to create a new approach to this product?

3. Adapt: How could you adapt or readjust this product to serve another purpose or use What else is the product like? Who or what could you emulate to adapt this product? What else is like your product? What other context could you put your product into? What other products or ideas could you use for inspiration?

4. Modify: How could you change the shape, look, or feel of your product? What could you add to modify this product? What could you emphasize or highlight to create more value What element of this product could you strengthen to create something new?

5. Put to Another Use: Can you use this product somewhere else, perhaps in another industry? Who else could use this product? How would this product behave differently in another setting? Could you recycle the waste from this product to make something new?

6. Eliminate: How could you streamline or simplify this product? What features, parts, or rules could you eliminate? What could you understate or tone down? How could you make it smaller, faster, lighter, or more fun? What would happen if you took away part of this product? What would you have in its place?

7. Reverse: What would happen if you reversed this process or sequenced things differently? What if you try to do the exact opposite of what you're trying to do now? What components could you substitute to change the order of this product? What roles could you reverse or swap? How could you reorganize this product?

Created two decades apart you will notice numerous differences between the two versions, in particular how Adapt is described. 

Today many additional versions of this prompter construct exist. Most have been simplified down to a few bullet points for each of the 7-8 dimensions that are in various versions organized in different orders. In most contemporary innovation workshops of today this tool would be a simple one-pager hand-out.

From the Humantific perspective, more important then the finer points of the ordering mechanics within the tool itself is to understand Osborn’s original underlying intention.

Long lost in the altering of the various versions is Osborn’s original orientation that can been seen in the early 1953 Applied Imagination text and does not waver through the subsequent 1957 and 1963 edition revisions. It is an orientation seen not only in the Idea Prompter and throughout the Applied Imagination book but also in the early 1950’s CPS/Applied Creativity community itself. 

The Edison Effect

It might come as a surprise to some unfamiliar with Osborn’s work or that of the various other United States based CPS/Applied Creavity pioneers but the early orientation of this community can be described as significantly influenced by the Edison Effect….as in Thomas Edison (1847-1931).Without getting into the later criticism leveled at Edison we can acknowledge for the purposes of this post that he was a prolific, highly influential legendary American Inventor.

By far the most overwritten and forgotten aspect of Osborn’s Idea Prompter is that the orientation underneath all aspects of Applied Imagination can best be described as the Psychology of the Inventor. 

To state the obvious: the Psychology of the Designer, the Psychology of the Business Manager, the Psychology of the Artist, even the Psychology of the Engineer is not exactly the same as the Psychology of the Inventor. Lets take a moment to appreciate that.

It is the Psychology of the Inventor circa 1953 that explains much of why Osborn’s version of the Idea Prompter appears as it does, in particular his description of Adapt.

Osborn’s Idea Prompter is not just a list of 8 words. It's a deliberate permissioning device. It is permissioning that reflects the Psychology of the (Thomas Edison) Inventor as Osborn interpreted it in 1953.

Connecting the dots across history this sentence appears in the first edition of Applied Imagination: “In any search for ideas it pays to pursue all possible parallels, thus abiding by Aristotle’s first law of associationism - similarity.”

Osborn goes on to make a connection between Aristotle and Wendell Phillips and later between Aristotle and Thomas Edison including what is perhaps the most influential Edison quote of the early CPS/Applied Creativity era.

Wendell Phillips: “In every matter that relates to invention, to use, or beauty, or form we are borrowers.”

Thomas Edison: “Your idea needs to be original only in its adaptation to the problem you’re working on.”

Big Wow! Don't drive by. Lets reflect on what that means for a moment! For Edison changing the context was key. This reading unleashed and permissioned a great deal of forward adaptation in the CPS community and that logic remains in play for many still today.

It is this Edison Adapt that Osborn has in mind. This is the originality and the adaptation that Osborn is permissioning in his 1953 version of the Idea Prompter. 

Making the case for the Edison version of Adapt this revealing text appears in all three editions of Applied Imagination: “To direct one’s imagination along those lines, self-queries like these can be helpful: What is like this? What ideas does it suggest? Does past offer parallel? What else can be adapted? Is there something I could copy?” 

That last question may sound like approval of plagiarism and infringement. Not so. Unquestionably it is wrong, both legally and morally, to steal another’s creation to the damage to the creator; but it is legitimate to take a lead from what someone else has thought up. The sanction of this is good public policy; for without such adaptation, there would be far fewer ideas of benefit to the people. It is a common and inescapable practice.”

This text reveals the now rather obscured "adaptation highway" that Osborn is referring to throughout Applied Imagination. Here are just a few other examples:

“Sometimes an adaptation is a frank copy, but in a far cheaper form”

“More often the adaptation is but partial. Baseball for instance, was adapted from the English sport of “rounders”.

“Not only new styles but epoch-making new products are arrived at via the adaptation highway.”

“Composing music is largely based on borrowing.”

“It is well-nigh impossible for writers not to adapt…A novelist is forced to use a well-used basic plot…Goethe claimed there were only 36.”

“What other process could be adapted to this job? Could we make it better or cheaper with an assembly line? Questions like these have led to ideas that have raised Americas standard of living.”

“In the same ways tools meant for one purpose have been successfully adapted for something else.”

“The trails of adaptation, modification and substitution are endless avenues to an infinite number of ideas. No matter what our problem, it is well to survey with our imaginations the many fields into which those roads lead.”

Osborn recognized that open adapting and adaptation are key to the Psychology of the Inventor. As a teacher of thinking Osborn’s focus was always on enabling open thinking rather then on debating outcomes. 

At times sounding like Walter Cronkite meets JP Guilford, Mr Rogers, and Thomas Edison the early work of Alex Osborn is inspiring in its incredibly open and artful nurturing.

Alex Osborn passed away in 1966 at the age of 78 but it seems likely that he would be happy with at least most of the adaptations of his work, still going on long after he departed. He would probably suggest that his adopters and adapters take a look at his original intentions...:-) You can decide for yourself if those intentions have been superceded.

With numerous versions of Idea Prompters around in the marketplace today, including inside Humantific (*3) you can certainly decide which tool best fits with your particular context….and with the permissioning that you have in mind. Of course as an innovation initiative leader you will want to keep your own mind open if you are tasked with enabling others!

Today we might ask: How is “the Startup Mindset” and or “the Design Thinking Mindset” similar or different from the “Psychology of the Inventor”? An entire conversation for another day!

Certainly the subject of what constitutes Adaptability in individual and organizational contexts remains front and center in many innovation related conversations today.

Before we agree, or disagree with Osborns’ Edison influenced “Psychology of the Inventor”…Before we slice and dice his Idea Prompter or toss it overboard, lets first understand and appreciate it for what it was in that moment….an amazing and enduring contribution. 

Great stuff Alex. You are not forgotten!

Hope this is helpful to our Humantific readers. Good luck to all.

END

Notes:

(*1): The vibrant Applied Creativity community is also known as the CPS (Creative Problem Solving) community. Its first methods oriented conference was held in 1955 and is still ongoing yearly.

(*2): Technically speaking it is true that “The SCAMPER Technique” was created by Bob Eberle, but not recognizing and crediting Alex Osborn in that so direct and adaptive creation, would not be fair to Osborn, now no longer able to speak up for himself.

(*3): Idea prompter tools and holistic innovation methods are two very different things. To be effective, the former should nest inside the later. At Humantific idea prompters are not stand alone innovation methods.

SOURCES:

HUMANTIFIC: Actionizing Enterprise Adaptability: Making Sense of Ambidextrous Capacity Building / COMING SOON!

HUMANTIFIC: Applied Creativity Origins: Making Sense of Where 100 Workshop Exercises & Constructs Came From / COMING SOON!

HUMANTIFIC: Innovation Archives 1885-2018: 

Alex Osborn, Applied Imagination, First Edition 1953, Second Revised Edition 1957, Third Revised Edition 1963.

Bob Eberle, SCAMPER, Games for Imagination Development, 1971

RELATED:

Humantific: Making Sense of Alex Osborn:

Humantific: Crediting “How Might We?”: Sid Parnes not IDEO

Humantific: Lost Stories in Applied Creativity History

Humantific: ReThinking Design Thinking: In Progress. Coming Soon! Humantific Publishing, New York.

.