“Everything that can be invented has been invented.” ~Charles H. Duell, an official at the US patent office, 1899

“X-rays will prove to be a hoax.” ~Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1883

“Louis Pasteur’s theory of germs is ridiculous fiction.” ~Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872

“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.” ~Thomas J. Watson, Chairman of the Board of IBM, 1943

“With over 50 foreign cars already on sale here, the Japanese auto industry isn’t likely to carve out a big slice of the U.S. market.” ~Business Week, 1958

“The ordinary ‘horseless carriage’ is at present a luxury for the wealthy; and although its price will probably fall in the future, it will never, of course, come into as common use as the bicycle.” ~Literary Digest, 1899

“There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” ~Albert Einstein, 1932

“This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” ~Western Union internal memo, 1876

“Fooling around with alternating current is just a waste of time. Nobody will use it, ever.” ~Thomas Edison, American inventor, 1889

“Rail travel at high speed is not possible because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia.” ~Dr. Dionysys Larder, professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, 1793-1859

Today these statements seem preposterous. How could experts be so wrong? Did the general public really accept this thinking? Yes. Just like many people do today.

While conventional wisdom is sometimes hard to spot, its defenders often expose it by trying to discredit and suppress people who threaten it… like those with contrary views, new information or alternative answers. When defenders have little evidence or logic to justify their positions, they often attack truth seekers as they represent the greatest threat. In addition, defenders sometimes resort to manipulation, clichés and propaganda to build support for their beliefs. For example, some politicians and their followers chant “Drill Baby Drill” to reinforce the conventional wisdom regarding our national security, independence and need for more oil. While simple repetition proves nothing, it does rally the troops and reinforces conventional wisdom. The ongoing oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico has many Americans reconsidering this chant and the conventional wisdom it proclaims regarding the need for more oil.

Whether it’s energy, healthcare, business or an interpersonal struggle you’re going through… it’s important to remain cognizant and not simply default to the quick, simple and convenient answers conventional wisdom offers. While eliminating independent critical thinking may be tempting… it’s rarely a good solution. At some point, conventional wisdom is always confronted by reality. If it aligns well enough, it stays; if it doesn’t, it’s replaced by new thinking. This cycle has been in place since the beginning of recorded history. It is maintained by those who blindly follow conventional wisdom, by those who defend it, by those who question it… and by those who change it and create new realities. Where do you fall within this cycle?

Easter Island is the most isolated habitable piece of land in the world. It lies in the Pacific Ocean more than 2,000 miles west of South America. According to scientists, when its inhabitants first arrived around 400 AD, they must have thought they landed in paradise. The mild climate, fertile soil, rich vegetation and forests would have provided all the resources needed to build homes, canoes (for fishing), fuel for fire, making rope, weapons, thatching, and so on. Over time these islanders developed a complex social structure, centralized government and religious practices… and at some point, they began creating statues.

But by the time Dutch explorer Jacob Roggeveen discovered the island in 1722 on Easter day (hence its name), it was far from a paradise. There wasn’t a tree or bush standing higher than ten feet tall. The native animals had vanished and the islanders were raising chickens to survive. According to Roggeveen and others who followed him, these famished natives certainly weren’t capable of producing and moving such massive statues. So what happened on Easter Island? There are many theories. Not only about why and how these statues were made… but what happened to the islanders who made them… and what happened to their paradise?

According to Jared Diamond (Professor of Geography and Physiology at UCLA), “…they began erecting stone statues on platforms, like the ones their Polynesian forebears had carved. With passing years, the statues and platforms became larger and larger, and the statues began sporting ten-ton red crowns—probably in an escalating spiral of one-upmanship, as rival clans tried to surpass each other with shows of wealth and power.”

“In just a few centuries, the people of Easter Island wiped out their forest, drove their plants and animals to extinction, and saw their complex society spiral into chaos and cannibalism.”

Read Diamond’s Article: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/24/042.html

While some question Diamond’s hypothesis, few dismiss it. Whether he is 100% right isn’t the point. The point is that his hypothesis has merit… it provides insight and serves as a warning. When we destroy ecosystems and deplete natural resources, we endanger our lives and the lives of future generations.

Things rarely happen overnight. There are turning and tipping points along the way. There are always those in society who support the status quo and those who challenge it. No doubt some islanders downplayed the situation and embraced the unsustainable norm. I can imagine them chanting “Cut, Baby, Cut” and mocking those who were concerned over the destruction, while dismissing those brave heroic souls who were searching for alternative solutions.

What if the situation had been acknowledged? What if this society had embraced creativity and innovation? What if rather than doing the same thing over and over… they had tried something new? What if the natural resources had been protected? What if they had conserved resources and worked together toward finding healthy sustainable solutions? What if these people had embraced change? What if they recognized they were part of the ecosystem… not superior to it? Countless questions like these fill my head and I realize they not only apply to Easter Islanders… but to you and me and our world today.

As barrels of oil shoot into the Gulf of Mexico and destroy our environment, some Americans are still chanting, “Drill, Baby, Drill” and mocking those who object to offshore drilling. Many of those supporting this chant fear change and consider innovation and alternative thinking a threat. To me these people are similar to the islanders who were more focused on statues than progress or survival. Instead of using their creative capacity to find sustainable solutions for the greater good, they blindly kowtowed to the power that be. In the case of the islanders, it was the chiefs, bureaucrats and priests. In the case of these Americans, it’s politicians, special interest groups, and big business.

What Erich von Däniken overlooked is man’s ability to create and innovate. This ability should never be dismissed. Creativity is our most powerful asset. Without this capacity we wouldn’t have survived… let alone progressed to where we are today. We don’t need visiting aliens’ “Chariots of the Gods” to teach and guide us… we already have the most powerful force in the universe—creativity. The question is: How will we use it? We can continue destroying our planet by building bigger and bigger statues… or we can work together and create positive change. The choice is ours… where do you stand?

Perhaps the stars were aligned just so that week, but of the three consultancies invited to present, the first two started their presentations the exact same way… by challenging us with a nine-dot puzzle. Solving it required connecting each dot using four straight, continuous lines—without lifting the pen from the paper.

The first consultant seemed taken aback by our questions and passion toward solving it. Apparently he had come in expecting to present the puzzle, answer a few predictable questions, watch us make some failed attempts, and then give us the answer. Until that day, he had only presented to business executives who had little interest in solving visual puzzles—not graphic designers.

By using a very wide marker, all nine dots could be connected with only one line.

When I asked him if we could use one line rather than four, he just smiled. “If you can solve the puzzle using only one line, by all means, be my guest. Just make certain it’s a straight line… and don’t lift your pen.” Before I could respond, he added, “If you solve it with four lines, lunch is on me… solve it with one line and I’ll make certain you get a raise… and bonus, too,” then winked at the president of our firm.

When I explained that my solution required a very wide pen, he began shaking his head and then with a dismissive laugh said, “No… I’m afraid that would be cheating… you have to use a standard size pen.” Then he held his marker up for everyone to see before asking again, “Okay, are you ready for the answer?”

When we shook our heads, he seemed concerned. His concerns grew when a senior designer stood and presented another solution. Having folded his puzzle like an accordion, he carefully angled his marker and hit all nine dots in one pass.

Shaking his head once again the consultant announced, “I’m afraid you can’t fold the paper either… you must use four continuous straight lines without lifting the pen from the paper… and it must stay flat… no folding is allowed.”

Folding the paper didn't exactly solve the problem but it was an interesting direction.

By repositioning the dot, the puzzle could be solved in a number of ways.

As I stopped folding my paper to consider the newly established rules, the designer sitting behind me shared another solution. By carefully cutting out each dot and repositioning them on the paper, she not only solved the puzzle, but also did so without violating the established rules. Her solution also confirmed my suspicions… I really had smelled rubber cement.

Before she could expound on the merits of her solution… or before someone else could share another solution, the frazzled consultant grabbed his marker, drew four quick lines on the easel and announced, “To find the solution, you must… THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX!”

This is "the" answer the consultant expected.

You might imagine how the second presentation went over. What still eludes me is the number of business people back then that accepted this puzzle as some form of empirical evidence. What’s more preposterous: accepting that an executive with poor puzzle solving abilities can’t solve business problems… or that a consultant who solves the very puzzle he just presented, can? Maybe it’s a toss-up.

What I also found interesting was the similarities between the first two consultants. Each presented the puzzle as THE litmus test for business innovation… yet, ironically, both assumed that only one answer existed. Why couldn’t they let us explore more ideas or discuss the answers we proposed? Because they were really outside the box! Besides, if another solution existed, their presentation “theme” wouldn’t have worked. By trying to expose our imaginary boundaries, they were actually exposing their own.

It’s funny… they wanted to be perceived as innovators—cutting-edge problem solvers—but the more they repeated the phrase, “Think Outside the Box,” the clearer it became… they were anything but. I’ve often wondered how long it would have taken us to find this solution… more importantly, what other solutions and potential directions would we have discovered along the way?

Most people have seen The Wizard of Oz—at least once. It’s been playing since 1939. If you haven’t, you should consider doing so. For those who have seen it, reflect back to the scene where Dorothy, her little dog Toto, the Scarecrow, Cowardly Lion and the Tin Man are all standing before the great and powerful Wizard of Oz. As he blows fire and warns them not to incur his wrath, Toto casually walks over and pulls back a curtain to reveal that the intimidating Wizard of Oz is no more than a little man projecting a big image onto a screen, pushing buttons and yelling into a microphone.

Hoping he hadn’t been seen, the wizard quickly pulls the curtain closed and announces into the microphone, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.” But it’s too late. The truth had been exposed.

Over the years, I have met other people (experts) professing to have “the” answer, too. These modern day wizards often hide behind titles, organizations and use fancy argot to appear knowledgeable. But like Toto, it’s important to look past illusion (and clichés), pull back the curtain, and deal with reality. This is paramount to finding “real” solutions.

Having spoken for 45 minutes, I was nearly finished when I said, “Before I close, does anyone have any comments or questions?” A woman toward the back of the auditorium stood and raised her hand. “Thank you for coming to Alaska and sharing your inspiring insights on creativity with us… I have thoroughly enjoyed your presentation. But I do have a question for you.” With everyone’s undivided attention, she continued, “What can we do right now to improve our creative ability?”

Before I share my response, there are a few things I need to tell you:

1) I had just arrived in Alaska that morning.  2) Chicago is 3 hours ahead of Alaska… and while the clock read 9:30 pm… to me it was 12:30 am.  3) This was not a religious event.  4) I am a truth seeker and don’t like being misled.  5) Sometimes when I’m tired, my brain filters stop working properly and I become brutally honest.

My response: “That’s an interesting question… and I would say to improve your creative ability, you should embrace the Golden Rule.”

This answer seemed to silence the crowd as they awaited my follow-up. I believe, like me, they were somewhat taken aback by my answer. I took a drink of water and continued:

“Yes, the Golden Rule… the ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ Golden Rule. I realize this answer may sound strange at first… but let me explain. The Golden Rule, also known as the ‘ethic of reciprocity’ has been around for a long time. In fact, long before today’s religions adopted it, it was being practiced and discussed. Confucius believed no other guiding concept was more important for a society to follow. And I agree… Socrates and other great thinkers did as well. But you’re wondering what does all this have to do with your question—right? Everything. You see… practicing the Golden Rule requires us to put ourselves in another person’s position… to walk in their shoes, so to speak.

“This is no easy task. It takes focus and imagination. Getting outside of our own mental boxes and experiencing the world through others’ is an incredibly creative act. This practice expands our EQs (emotional quotients), too. It connects us and provides us with countless perspectives and new understandings of the world. In fact, I believe children who aren’t taught the Golden Rule and encouraged to practice it are at a major deficit. Those void in this area are often creatively bankrupt. Imagining how someone else feels… and treating them how you would like to be treated if you were in their position… is an excellent way to expand your creative capacity. And you can start right now… tonight.”

By the time I finished speaking, signing books and shaking hands, it was past 11:30 pm (Alaska time). I was exhausted but exhilarated. I can’t tell you the number of people who wanted to discuss the Golden Rule with me. My spontaneous answer seemed to have trumped my prepared keynote. Until that night, I had never really thought about the Golden Rule being a creative act. Maybe my impromptu answer was a result of being tired… but I really don’t think so. As that woman was asking her question, I used my imagination and put myself in her shoes. By the time I had transported myself back on stage, I knew the answer she needed… it was the one I would have wanted someone to share with me if I were in her position.

If everyone embraced the Golden Rule, or whatever one wants to call it, the world would be a better place… and yes, people would be more creative.

Consider the following example: Professor Daniel Simons and his psychology students asked volunteers to watch a short video. In the video, team members (one team dressed in black shirts, the other in white shirts) passed a basketball back and forth. The volunteers were told to count the number of passes made by the team wearing white. At some point, a person in a gorilla suit appears during the video. When the video ended, researchers asked if anybody saw anything unusual. Only half of the volunteers reported seeing the gorilla. The other half reported to have seen nothing unusual.

Here’s a video based on the original study:

Click here to view the embedded video.

How could people not notice the gorilla in the room? Mostly because they weren’t looking for it. They were focused on something else. Magicians have known about this phenomenon for years… so have politicians.

Here’s another example called the “Door Study”

This helps explain how experts can be more susceptible to perceptual blindness than beginners, and why “outsiders” often find solutions that experienced “insiders” miss. Beginners and outsiders are usually more open to possibilities because they don’t make common assumptions. By extension, they’re often better at finding solutions the experts have stopped seeing.

Perceptual blindness sheds much light on why we miss obvious solutions… especially those we mislabel as problems. By focusing on one thing (a problem), we miss something else (a solution). So why not refocus on solutions? This is one of the topics in my upcoming book: “Pink Bat: Turning Problems Into Solutions.” It should be available for the holiday season… I’ll keep you posted.

Why didn’t they accept it at first? Simple. With a duck-like bill, an otter-like body, a tail like a beaver, and webbed feet, the platypus didn’t fit an established category. So it couldn’t possibly be real! While this may seem funny, the idea of rejecting ideas (new realities) that don’t fit neatly into accepted categories, still happens on a regular basis.

I learned this firsthand while working with Michael Jordan on his book, Rare Air. It was my first retail book experience so I was naive to the process. After working hard and putting a presentation together, I flew to NYC to meet with several prominent publishers. (By the way, when Michael writes a letter on your behalf, asking someone (anyone) to meet with you… they will.) By the end of my first meeting, I learned that since Rare Air didn’t fit an existing category, it couldn’t be “real.”

Like the scientists and the platypus, every publisher who initially saw Rare Air rejected it. By reinforcing each other’s beliefs… they shook ours. When Michael asked whom we had selected to publish his book, we were speechless. We had one last meeting set up in California with Harper Collins. But this time we were prepared… since a category didn’t exist, we decided to create a new one. We called it a “pictorial autobiography” and the publisher bravely (or naively) accepted it. Rare Air went on to become a NY Times best-seller, sold more than a million copies in numerous languages… and established a new publishing niche.

Years later, I reconnected with one of those NY publishing executives on another project. “What were we thinking?” he asked me. He went on to say, “After Rare Air’s phenomenal success, I would often lay awake at night reliving your presentation… it was so obvious! Why on earth couldn’t we see it then?” The answer to his question was… and still is… obvious. He and the other publishers were so focused on the status quo, and established categories, they couldn’t see new possibilities. They chose accepted categories over reality. Categories exist everywhere. They can help us, but also blind us if we’re not careful. Most importantly, they don’t define reality unless we let them.

Before you throw out a great idea, stop and question the existing categories… it might be time for a change. Creativity is constantly exposing reality, and in the process, changing and creating new categories.

According to Nuno Sousa at the University of Minho in Portugal, there’s a good reason for why this happens. Sousa found when lab rats are stressed out; their responses to familiar routines become very repetitive. For example, rather than trying new maze paths that lead to food, chronically stressed rats repeatedly ran down the same dead-end paths.

Robert Sapolsky, a neurobiologist at Stanford University School of Medicine said, “This is a great model for why we end up in a rut and then dig ourselves deeper and deeper into that rut.”

When we’re stressed out we become repetitive and don’t recognize that our normal coping mechanisms aren’t working properly. So rather than trying something new or taking a different approach, we become compulsive and do the same things—repeatedly.

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.”

Maybe Einstein’s definition applies to stressed out people as well?

By reducing our stress levels, over time, we can regain our natural creative capacity. Through meditating, breathing, exercising and simply relaxing the neurons and synapses in our brains recover and begin to make new connections.

Making new connections is at the center of creative thinking and developing innovative solutions. It’s easy to become stressed out—especially in light of today’s hectic and competitive world.

By learning to relax (and making the time to do so), you’ll not only eliminate stress from your life but you will be contributing greatly to your creative development. For your health and your creative capacity—make time to relax.

According to what I’ve read and experienced, people who write down their goals have a greater chance of reaching them. I believe the same holds true for people who write down their creative thoughts and ideas. The chance of discovering creative solutions that work successfully increases significantly.

Creative ideas are fleeting gifts. The question isn’t whether you have them (everyone does), but whether you take these gifts seriously and record them. Since we never know where or when they’ll strike us (walking, sleeping, shaving…), it’s important to be prepared at all times.

A few months back, while taking a shower, I was struck by a childhood event that involved a broken plastic baseball bat. It came out of left field (no pun intended) and started connecting to a plethora of today’s so called “problems.”

Within moments it grew beyond control and crystallized in my brain. By the time I finished showering, dried off, put on some clothes and found my notebook, many fragments had already disappeared. I wrote down what I could remember and over the next few weeks filled in the missing pieces.

The result? My new book, The Pink Bat: Turning Problems Into Solutions, is scheduled for release this fall. If I hadn’t taken the time to write down those fragments at that moment, the ideas for this book would have vanished.

I’ve carried notebooks (journals, sketchbooks, etc.) for nearly twenty years. Recently I’ve begun to realize these rough and random ideas truly are fleeting gifts. Some people accept them—most people don’t. They take them for granted, think they’ll return, or simply ignore them. Rarely do they return—and they never appear the same way twice.

I’ve lost countless ideas these ways myself. But I’m learning!

According to history, Beethoven carried a small notebook with him at all times. He’d fill the pages with rough ideas and then put it away and start a new one. After a month or so, he’d revisit the old one and if anything struck him he would refine it and transfer it to a second notebook. By the time his ideas reached the third notebook, they were well on the way to becoming a sonata.

Consider Leonardo da Vinci, Darwin, Beethoven, Dylan, Edison, Jefferson, Einstein, Matisse, Van Gogh, Hemingway… the list of famous notebook carriers is long. It seems people who have created something new or made significant contributions to business, society, science or art, have something in common—they all write down their ideas.

I’ve often wondered, “Is it because they were brilliant that they wrote down their ideas?” or “Did the act of writing down their ideas contribute to their brilliance?”