Curious Cloud method, detailed version

Curious Cloud method, detailed version

 

To help us enhance learning outcomes this year, I wanted us to have a high-level model that we could refer back to, giving a focus to our conversations. I couldn’t find what I wanted in the academic literature, so I’ve created my own, which is notionally called the Curious Cloud model. This is the more detailed version of my thinking.

 

Between education, social media, the news etc, it’s easy to be aware of a ‘wide’ range of subjects, although certain topics will interest us more than others. Maybe you’re interested in BREXIT, local parking regulations, sport.

 

However, Curiosity is a different level of interest. It involves digging much deeper and being sufficiently interested to deliberately seek out different perspectives, or alternative ways to experience something. My sense is that, whether your degree pathway is Business, Finance, Economics, Marketing or HR, it is your curiosity that will help to explain the difference between getting a Pass mark or a Distinction on a given module.

 

Of course, Passion is a whole different level of more-consuming interest, where we start to notice fascinating connections with everything we do, see or hear. Fortunately we only need Curiosity to drives our ability to be really creative.

 

When we start to become curious about a subject, we start to notice what we don’t already understand, as well as the inconsistencies, the problems, and the frustrations that exist. I see these as clouds and whilst there are lots of them, some are darker or more compelling than others, depending on our particular interest in the subject.

 

Like bolts of lightning, deep frustrations spark specific questions : often simply ‘how can we solve this problem?’ though it is worth spending time carefully framing the challenge so that we consider any critical constraints whilst working towards a viable solution.

 

Just to be clear, the challenge can be almost anything, though in our case there might be a focus on business: how do we get this dysfunctional team to work together optimally; how do we increase our revenues and net profitability; how can we reduce production time without sacrificing quality; how can we resolve this customer or employee complaint before it goes to litigation; how can we market this new product effectively given our start-up budget?

 

Having carefully framed the question, we need to think about the input that is required to really solve this issue. Understanding of a subject comes from a mixture of knowledge and experience and we may potentially have enough of this, based on our longstanding curiosity.

 

However, it is more likely that further input is required and this might come from a mix of new knowledge (for example reading or researching), new experience (immersion or direct observation) or new team members (who bring the requisite understanding with them). If you are working on changes that affect people, which many changes do, then an effective solution is less likely if you do not have the benefit of end-user views… work hard to involve them in the process if possible.

 

To be really creative you might also consider bringing in passionate subject-matter experts from other, adjacent fields, since groundbreaking ideas often come from the grey space between different subjects… this is essentially how the Pentagon’s DARPA, the Defence ‘Advanced Research Projects’ Agency, created radical inventions such as the Internet or Global Positioning Satellites.

 

Having assembled sufficient input for the given task, the next stage of our model is Divergent thinking. This is what most people think of when they think about creativity… wild ideation (maybe we should coin this as wildeation)!

Think of this phase in terms of creating ingredients for the subsequent convergent thinking phase. In this case the ingredients equate to elements that might form part of a possible solution to the problem.

 

Creativity tools can help speed up this task, but the idea is simple: come up with as many potentially relevant thoughts as possible, with no idea being too wild or infeasible. As with cooking ingredients, some pack more of a punch, despite being relatively small items… try to figure out what these are for your challenge.

 

The idea of the Convergent thinking phase is then to combine elements from the previous phase into different potential solutions, that are each mutually exclusive.

 

Thus, one potential solution for the dysfunctional team might be to change the working environment, giving people more light, more comfortable chairs & desks, more places to have short conversations or spaces to sit quietly to think. Another potential solution could be to tweak the roles and responsibilities to give each individual more autonomy in their work and a clearer reporting structure. A third potential solution might be to create a workshop where a senior manager shares the overall company strategy and clarifies how the department plays a critical role, before the team figure out for themselves how they can work more effectively together.

 

Once we can clearly see the different options, it is possible for us to compare them based on their likely payoff. This will vary depending on the question, but we essentially consider the outcome or output value of each option, given the level of investment required, in time or money, and the level of risk involved, or likelihood of success.

 

Thus, for the dysfunctional team options, the payoffs may be broadly similar, but replacing desks requires greater investment, whilst changing roles and responsibilities carries greater risks. Both require more time and effort than running a workshop, which looks like it might be a faster, less costly and less risky option.

 

Having reached a conclusion, we might then decide to take our choice back through the input, divergent and convergent stages again, this time with a view to honing and strengthening our eventual solution.

 

Alternatively we can take our solution to the next stage, which is to create some kind of prototype that we can get into the hands of the eventual user. Early prototypes might be a scale model, a combination of ‘found items’ held together with sellotape, or a role play of a customer service experience. This allows us to evaluate how it works, quickly and inexpensively, before iterating in order to optimise performance.

 

Once we are happy with the prototype, we can move forward to implement. This might involve something as simple as developing and running the workshop above, or much more complex like starting to create a manufacturing process for a new product. In either case, keep looking for flaws and don’t be afraid to iterate even late on in the process, provided it’s warranted.