332 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS ripe, the leader will then throw in the real problem: "We want a new can- opener." Later, as the group becomes closer-knit, this device can be dispensed with. The members learn to identify themselves very intimately with the prob- lem-become part of it, in a sense. There are probably less than six groups of people practicing Operational Creativity at the moment. One successful project which can be mentioned was the development of a new product for the Kimberley-Clark Corpora- tion. Because Operational Creativity produced an answer to a problem which had eluded other approaches, Kimberley-Clark is setting up their own group. Another recent success of Dr. Gordon's group was the develop- ment for the Horto Corporation of a new technique for anchoring the foun- dations of light buildings, such as greenhouses and garages, to the ground. One technique for collecting ideas, which bears a superficial resemblance to Operational Creativity (O. C.) has become known as "Brainstorming." There are, however, a number of fundamental differences between these two approaches: 1. O.C. groups take the concept through reduction to practice brain- stormers "think up" ideas only. 2. Brainstorming sessions may be short, and repeat sessions usually de- crease in productivity. O.C. takes considerable time--as many as 30 ses- sions have been held on one problem. The group becomes closely knit, and tends to increase in productivity with time. 3. O.C. is most useful in attacking and defining basic, broad problems, whereas brainstorming usually concentrates on narrow, well-defin•d prob- lems. 4. O.C. relies on the group working as a whole toward a unique solu- tion brainstorming encourages a competitive attitude within the group, and thus every suggestion is an individual solution. 5. Brainstorming emphasizes the quantity of ideas generated O. C. the quality. At the moment, the "blue skyers" are too small a group to permit us to generalize about personality. It ii obvious, however, that they must be articulate--if not eloquent--since their concepts arise only from discussion. They must learn to work together without inhibitiYn's wh'ich would tend to dampen the flow of ideas and concepts. O.C. adherents believe that indi- vidual creativity can be enhanced by participation in group sessions. Their educational background is varied, but the group must contain or have ac- cess to a person skilled in the technical area under examination. How do these groups fit together to form our problem-solving society? We should be unrealistic if we expected them to get along with one another all the time. The model-builder says of the experimentalist, "There he goes again--re-inventing the second law!," and the experimentalist corn-

PROBLEM SOLVING: METHODS AND PEOPLE 333 plains that the model-builder tries to baffle everyone with science, by main- raining a blackboard full of impressive equations. In turn, each of these groups is skeptical of the blue skyers, because they are newcomers and they talk so much! Perhaps the model-builder envies the relative ease with which the experi- mentalist sells his approach to management. The experimentalist has a slight inferiority complex because he is viewed in certain quarters as a "second-class scientist." The "blue skyer" is in a militant minority at this stage, and suffers accordingly. It is, therefore, vitally important that research management on any scale of operations should realize the importance of maintaining close contact between groups following the various disciplines. These groups must not be allowed to withdraw from one another, to feel that their method is "right." There is so much to be gained from the free exchange of ideas and the willingness to seek advice from others that every opportunity for liaison should be encouraged. Scientists who have the ability to recognize the strength and limitations of the various approaches to problem-solving (and of the problem solvers too!) can do much to benefit the problem-solving world.