1998.8.6. Catherine Middleton wrote:
<<
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 00:29:34 -0400
From: catherine middleton <
cmiddlet@BUS.YORKU.CA>
Subject: teaching problem solving
Hello. I've been following the thread on problem solving with great
interest. I'd be interested to hear from anyone out there who is involved
in teaching problem solving. As part of a required management skills course
in the MBA program at the Schulich School of Business in Toronto we teach
an extensive module on what we term "reflective problem solving". We've
struggled with the term, as what we're really trying to do is help students
develop some practical means of engaging complex issues. Problem solving is
a component of this, but what we're *trying* to do is broader than this. We
too have struggled with various problem solving methodologies, and are
currently using a combination of what might be called rational problem
solving and more creative techniques (including some of De Bono's and
Senge's tools).
It would be great to hear from anyone else who is teaching problem solving
in any context. We'd be interested in exchanging course outlines, or
sharing ideas on how to introduce students to some basic practical
approaches to tackling complex issues.
end of quote >>
Systematic Problem Solving, based on the Morphological Approach by Zwicky,
is taught in MBA classes in Germany (to the best of my knowledge - because
I have an article on morphological problem solving and inventing from
a respective teacher). There are quite an number of people who are keeping
this systematic approach alive. It has been enhanced by Hermann Holliger,
who made it into a complete teachable system. This is waht we are using
at the Morphological Institute Canada. It is exactly the same as used be
European Morphologists.
Checking with Toronto University I am afraid to say that the quoted
"MBA program at the Schulich School of Business in Toronto" can not be
reached through the UT website. I have not tried long distance phone so
far and am yet to try York University instead.
We do not use De Bono etc., though we are concerned with human behavior.
We are using morphological means to describe and alter it where
necessary, e.g. in creativity teams. We generally have no problem with
team behavior, provided the client allows us to go though the full
2 1/2 day seminar.
The seminar covers behavior of 1. Mind 2. Communication.
3. The influence of organization structures and power,
4. Thinking processes and thinking error research
5. Appropriate methodologies
The goal is to integrate 3 competences:
1. Social behavior,
2. Professional competence (knowledge & know-how
3. Methodical competence (how to approach, what to use)
The morphological way is very different from the psychological way.
Yet there are of course some similar ways, like defered judgement,
stress reduction, etc. The morphological way is very suitable for
those who want ethical means to do what needs be done. It is
a self supporting process for temas and organizations. Still,
beware, if the top brass doesn't care, the chances are reduced.
However, participants will benefit for life and be able to use
what they learned elsewhere.
Emil Zahner
Morphological Institute Canada
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/canmor/index19.htm