Four Types of Invention

In their book Breakthrough: Stories and Strategies of Radical Innovation, Mark Stefik and Barbara Stefik describe innovation as a "dance of two questions." Those questions are "What is possible?" and "What is needed?" They discuss four main approaches that drive how scientists and inventors arrive at breakthroughs:

1) Theory-Driven: A mental model or theory provides a way of thinking that leads to insight and invention. Tagline: "Eureka!"

2) Data-Driven: An anomaly in data presents a surprising possibility. Tagline: "That's strange."

3) Method-Driven: Instrumentation enables previously unknown observations, discoveries, and inventions. Tagline: "Now I can see it!"

4) Need-Driven: Learning about an unresolved need or problem in the world leads to a search for a way to satisfy or solve it. Tagline: "Necessity is the mother of invention."

"These approaches," say the authors, "are like colors on a palette in that they can be mixed to form variations and combinations."

I was thinking about my earlier posts that explored what industry leaders mean when they talk about creativity and innovation as 21st century skills. I think it would be valuable for science, mathematics, and technology teachers to refer to these four approaches as they design curriculum and instruction geared to the preparation of future STEM majors and workers.

Of course my questions are: Do these four approaches apply to the arts? Is it possible that artistic invention—learning and making sense of the world through the practice of art—would add to the development of the skills and traits that prepare students to master those four approaches in a STEM context? Does the creative process that occurs before an artist begins to create a product (and by "product" I mean anything from a sculpture or musical composition to a dance or dramatic interpretation of a character) and the kinds of decisions an artist makes as a work takes shape consist of very similar ways of perceiving, thinking, and imagining? Does criticism in the arts translate to critical thinking in the STEM disciplines?

I do not claim that spending all day working on art projects or practicing an instrument will prepare you to discover a new star or invent the next generation of computer. Students need knowledge and skill in math and science as well. But I also don't think those skills are sufficient. Here is my first attempt to relate the arts to these four approaches to invention:

Theory-Driven: A quest for "the beautiful" is one thing arts and sciences have in common. Scientists and mathematicians often use the terms "beautiful" and "elegant" when discussing equations and solutions, says philosopher Robert Grudin in his far-ranging exploration of creativity and innovation (The Grace of Great Things). "Art itself can be a form of hypothesis, the detailed elaboration and testing of an idea," he says.

Data-Driven: Might training in the visual arts be a way to develop better powers of observation and a sensitivity to patterns? Could music instruction help students become more attuned to changes in their environment?

Method-Driven: Could the intense discipline required to practice an art form skillfully be related to the focus needed in STEM disciplines?

Need-Driven: Industrial design, a rapidly growing career area, often begins with a need. Often, artists are part of the team, not only because they provide an aesthetic perspective, but also because of their ability to see problems in different ways.