Research on Our Model:
Does Creative Problem Solving Work?
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Parnes and Noller carried out a comprehensive examination of the impact of CPS training. The Creative Studies Project is reported in a number of sources (see Parnes, 1987; Parnes & Noller, 1972a, 1972b, 1973; Reese et al., 1976). Parnes and Noller studied the effects of four semester-long creativity courses on undergraduate students. The main creativity model featured in this educational program was CPS. Students entering the freshman class at Buffalo State College were invited to participate in the research study. Volunteers were randomly assigned to either an experimental group, who were enrolled in the four creativity courses taught over a two-year period, or to a control group, who were not enrolled in the creativity courses.
Pre- and post-test paper-and-pencil measures were administered to all students in the study. Many of these measures were drawn from Guilford's Structure of the Intellect model (Cuilford, 1977). These comparisons revealed that the experimental group had statistically significant gains after the training in comparison to the students in the control group. The students who participated in the creativity courses showed significant differences on measures of divergent production, convergent production, and cognition.
A number of other researchers have conducted studies in which various creativity programs have been compared in regard to their effectiveness (Rose & Lin, 1984; Scott, Leritz, & Mumford, 2004a, 2004b; Torrance, 1972; Torrance & Presbury, 1 984). Such studies supported the positive effects of CPS training. Torrance (1972), who studied the effectiveness of nine different kinds of creativity programs, found that CPS achieved the highest percentage of success (i.e., 20 of the 22 studies yielded significant results). Rose and Lin (1984) conducted a meta-analytic evaluation of creativity programs. To provide a basis for their evaluation of different creativity programs, Rose and Lin evaluated research studies that used the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking as a measure of the impact of training. In examining the effect training had on Torrance's measure of creative thinking skills, these authors concluded that the substantial impact of CPS on verbal creativity provided clear evidence of its effectiveness. A more recent comparative analysis by Scott et al. (2004b) found that cognitively oriented creative process programs, such as CPS, proved to have positive effects on participants.
Many of the studies involved in these comparative reviews were carried out in educational contexts, but what about the impact of CPS Training in organizational settings? A number of studies have empirically evaluated CPS training with professionals, perhaps most notably the program of research carried out by Basadur and his colleagues. Basadur, Craen, and Green (1982) demonstrated that employees trained in CPS outperformed control and placebo groups. For example, employees trained in CPS were more fluent in generating new product ideas, produced better ideas for new products, and were more effective at problem finding. Basadur, Graen, and Scandura (1986) reported that CPS training significantly enhanced engineers' attitudes toward divergent thinking. Basadur went on to demonstrate that similar results could be achieved with managers in Japan (Basadur, Wakabayashi, &Takai, 1992) and South America (Basadur, Pringle, & Kirkland, 2002). He also reported the positive effects of CPS training on union-management negotiations. According to Basadur, Pringle, Speranzini, and Bacot (2000), CPS training improved trust between negotiating parties and resulted in new solutions. Positive results of CPS training in the workplace have been reported by Kabanoff and Bottger (1991); Fontenot (1993); Wang, Wu, and Horng (1999); Wang and Horng (2002); and Wang, Horng, Hung, and Huang (2004). See Puccio, Firestien, Coyle, and Masucci (2006) and Puccio et al. (2005) for a review of additional CPS impact studies in organizations.
As a result of a recent quantitative analysis of creativity programs, Scott et al. (2004a) concluded that creativity training does work. Specifically, training has been shown to significantly impact divergent thinking, problem solving, performance, attitudes, and behaviors. These authors cited CPS as one of the more successful creativity programs. This success was attributed to this program's description of "the key cognitive processes underlying creative thought" (p. 383) in combination with strategies for applying these processes.
Above piece excerpted, with permission, from the book "Creative Leadership: Skills that Drive Change" by Gerard Puccio, Mary Murdock and Mary Mance. For information on this book go to http://www.sagepub.com/booksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book227278. For information on the International Center for Studies in Creativity go to http://buffalostate.edu/creativity.