Capacity for ideation

We all have ideas. In fact, ideas abound, within us and around us. If we associate ideas with change, we may also relate ideas to our capacity for coming up with new ideas. or ideation-capacity for change. What, then, we may ask, lies behind our capacity for change, or ideation? The psychologist Brian Little, whose research lies at the intersection of personality, developmental and applied psychology, suggests that when we are motivated by an important and meaningful personal goal we break free from personality constraints that may be holding us back. In this, Little highlights three forces that govern our lives: our biogenic natures (whether we are physiologically extravert, introvert or whatever), our sociogenic natures (how we are raised, the culture we live in and the company we keep), and finally, our idiogenic or “third natures”, which are comprised of our personal projects and the free traits we express in pursuit of them. Ideation, then, as a tool, or vehicle for change, and if seen as part of third natures, could be enhanced by turning first thought, or Aha! moment into a personal project thinking about its importance and meaning relevant to your values and identity pulling you forward into new possibilities. Ideation indeed!. Reference: Little, B. (2014)  Me, Myself, and US -The Science of Personality and the Art of Well-Being. Toronto: HarperCollins

Collaborative ideation

Ideation tends to emphasise individualism, both in education and practice reflecting how designers prioritise individual likes and dislikes over collective preferences. Ideas, then, may appear "selfish", metaphorically speaking, in that ideators seek to maximise their chances of getting their ideas accepted and, ultimately realised. But selfish ideas are capable of adaptation as manifested in forms of collaborative ideation. For example, Walter Gropius embraced the philosophy of working collaboratively with others when he was the director of Bauhaus in Germany and, later, when he became a member of the US architectural firm The Architects Collaborative. For TAC, then, the idea of collaboration was carried out in that an entire group of architects would have their input on a project. Paul Rudolph was inspired by this collaborative approach when he enrolled in Gropius's master class at Harvard University, as an architect student. Rudolph explains: 'Although I had studied architecture for five years, I had no sense of direction. I found in Gropius's teaching a base on which one could build, not merely a formula, as so many others have ... Gropius's strength lies in his ability to analyze and make precisely clear the broad problems of our day ... He was able to incorporate many diverse ideas and still give a sense of direction'*. Interestingly, in Rudolph's own practice he borrowed ideas liberally from the first generation of modern architects, such as Wright, Le Corbusier and Mies and was always willing to acknowledge his sources in the works of these pioneers. * Rudolph P. (1952) Paul Rudolph. Perspecta, The Yale Architectural Journal pp 18-25.