10 HANDS-ON EXERCISES TO SPARK

STUDENT CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION

Charles M. Wood, PhD
UNIVERSITY OF TULSA

Abstract
Ten theoretically-based exercises are described in order to help instructors expand
students’ creative capacity and encourage the development of innovations.

Introduction
Creative processes and ideation play a crucial role in the development of innovations.
University students in technical fields become well-equipped with key theories, equations, and
knowledge during their time in classes, but they don’t often have exposure to or experience
with effective creative processes that can build upon that knowledge and help them develop
useful innovations on their own. This paper is not proposing that a separate course be offered,
but rather offers a set of classroom tools and interactive techniques designed to help instructors
give their students more experience with the creative process within existing courses.

The tools and techniques presented in this paper have a theoretical basis drawn from three
areas: experiential learning, psychological ownership, and the triarchic theory of intelligence.
Together, these theoretical streams form a foundation of pedagogical attributes of the tools:

• experiential and interactive,

• focused on developing creative process and output, and
• emergent from the students’ own ideas and interactions.

Theoretical Foundation: Experiential Learning

Experiential learning involves “a guided process of questioning, investigating, reflecting, and
conceptualizing based on direct experience. The learner is actively engaged in the process of
learning, has freedom to choose, and experiences directly the consequences” (Stehno 1986,
35). Kolb (1984) developed a model of experiential education that depicts learning as a cyclic
process involving four modes: (1) concrete experience (i.e., engaging in a hands-on activity),
(2) reflective observation (i.e., thinking, recording, discussing the experience), (3) abstract
conceptualization (i.e., thinking at a more abstract level about why the observed processes
work as they do), and (4) active experimentation (i.e., testing hypotheses that emerge). Students
with entrepreneurial motivations or hands-on learning styles are likely to enjoy the fact that
they have some control over the design of their work (Wilson 1986). For effective learning to
occur, students must be actively engaged in the education process (DeLay 1996). Experiential
education may achieve much of its success because it actively involves and empowers students
through a “bottom-up” versus “top-down” educational process (Margerison 1988).

Theoretical Foundation: Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

A series of studies by Sternberg (1988, 1997, 2006) proposed a model of intelligence referred
to as the triarchic theory. According to this theory there are three types of intelligence: (1)
analytical, the ability to solve a problem by looking at its components; (2) creative, the ability to

@VentureWell 2015
 use new or ingenious ways to solve problems; empirically demonstrated that classroom
and (3) practical, referring to street smarts instructors can improve student learning and
or common sense (Sternberg et al. 1995). satisfaction by increasing students’ level of
Sternberg underscores the importance of psychological ownership in group exercises. In
using all three types of intellectual skills by the study, a sense of ownership was promoted
highlighting the difference between academic in the classroom by allowing students to make
problems and real-world, practical problems: choices about aspects of their assigned work
or by encouraging them to provide their own
…the characteristics of academic ideas or materials for projects. This study
problems tend to be (a) formulated by provided empirical reinforcement to what
others;(b) intrinsically uninteresting for many instructors have known for years—that
the most part; (c) self-contained, in that students’ sense of ownership can improve their
all needed information is available from satisfaction with experiential projects. The
the beginning; (d) disembedded from results support the idea that when students
an individual’s ordinary experience; are given incrementally more control over how
(e) well defined; (f) characterized by a their education product is configured and
‘correct’ answer; and (g) characterized delivered, their overall level of self-reported
by a single method of obtaining the learning will increase. Buchko (1992) found
correct answer. In contrast, practical that ownership affects group members’
problems tend to be (a) unformulated or attitudes primarily through greater perceived
in need of reformulation; (b) personally influence and control. Efforts to increase
interesting; (c) lacking information ownership by customers in the product design
necessary for solution; (d) related to and production process have been shown to
everyday experience; (e) poorly defined; improve relationships and customer satisfaction
(f) characterized by multiple correct (Duray and Milligan 1999).
or at least “acceptable” solutions, each
with liabilities as well as assets; and (g) Research in management has generally
characterized by multiple methods for recommended that managers use a flexible,
picking a problem solution (Sternberg et adaptive leadership style (Mescon, Albert, and
al. 1995, 352). Khedouri 1988). The framework developed
by Hersey and Blanchard (1982) shows that
leadership styles characterized by participation
Theoretical Foundation: Psychological
and delegating are more effective when group
Ownership
members are more mature, and “selling”
Another theoretical foundation is found in the
and “telling” styles are more effective for
research stream of “psychological ownership.”
less mature individuals. This suggests that
Management scholars have advocated for
educators should consider a wide range of
years that satisfaction in organizations can
teaching tools for their classes and choose a
be improved when those managing a group
pedagogical approach based on their students’
promote “psychological ownership” or
overall maturity level, evidenced by their
“empowerment” among the group members
willingness and ability to take responsibility
(see Allport 1946; Druskat and Pescosolido
for the work involved in group projects. For
2002; Lee and Koh 2001; Reeve and Smith
those classes that demonstrate a higher level of
2001). Pierce, Kostova, and Dirks (2001) defined
maturity, participative and delegating styles are
it as “a state of mind ... in which individuals feel
appropriate.
as though the target of ownership (material
2 or immaterial in nature) or a piece of it is A service (as a category of consumer products)
‘theirs’” (299). Prior research by Wood (2003) has been defined as “… the production of
an essentially intangible benefit, either in its Some of the best discussion stems from
own right or as a significant element of a “bad examples” – i.e., consumer products
tangible product, which through some form of that the student or teacher believes may
exchange, satisfies an identified need” (Palmer not succeed. After introducing the item,
2007). Higher education is primarily a service the student/teacher passes the item

10 HANDS-ON EXERCISES TO SPARK STUDENT CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION

around the room and explains why they
product. One aspect of service products
believe it will succeed or fail. The items
that distinguishes them from goods is the
may be purchased at a store, or students
“inseparability” of services or the fact that
may bring in news items about new
services are often produced and consumed product releases.
at the same time. This attribute reflects the
• Lesson 1: Creativity by itself is not the same
idea that customers can become involved in
as innovation, but is the foundation for
tailoring the design of the service product
innovation. Innovations solve real problems
they purchase (e.g., giving instructions to a
and add value in unique ways.
barber as a haircut is performed). Customers
• Lesson 2: When “bad examples” are
are being viewed increasingly as active
presented, there is often an opportunity
collaborators in creating value (Liechty,
for the instructor to turn the discussion
Ramaswamy, and Cohen 2001), and products
into one focused on finding potential. The
may be differentiated along the inseparability
instructor may ask the group “We know its
dimension by increasing or decreasing the flaws, but what may be good or promising
customers’ involvement in production or about this idea?” This helps keep the
delivery (Song and Adams 1993). classroom environment positive, and helps
students see and voice the potential in
The Ten Tools even dubious new ideas.
The tools and techniques presented here
are designed to help an instructor achieve a 2. Two Buckets
variety of purposes, and are brief enough to
• Students form teams of three to five. Each
be used as a module within a normal class
team randomly chooses an index card from
session or lecture. Some tools help start a each of two buckets. One set of cards has
discussion about the nature of innovation major brand names (including international
origins. Others help students learn a process brands). One set has product categories
or technique they can use in future group (including developing nations’ needs). The
projects. Several get students working in instructor opens with “You work for the
teams through a creative exercise designed company on the one card, and they now
to teach them a principle of innovation. The require you to develop a product for them
tools don’t require any special equipment, that is on the other card.” The groups are
and have been successfully field tested over given five to seven minutes to develop
several years in university courses, executive the product’s features, benefits, target
audience, and perhaps promotional ideas.
education programs, and workshops for high
One spokesperson from each team briefly
school students.
presents to the class while the instructor
1. The “Wall of Fame/Shame” records their ideas on the board.
• Lesson: Forced association (combining
• The instructor (or students) find real, disparate ideas) is a helpful and practical
everyday examples of innovation from way to get ideas for potential innovation,
around the world or local sources and and a skill that can be developed in
briefly present them to the class. These students.
can include examples of new products 3
designed for the “bottom of the pyramid.”

@VentureWell 2015
 3. Innovation You the target number, so they learn the value
of building on each others’ ideas and not
• Although there are key principles of to inhibit ideas from others. They should
innovation, each student will approach be encouraged to recall this lesson when
the process differently depending on their their team is asked to develop ideas in new
individual talents and strengths. To help contexts.
students better personalize and internalize
the innovation process, this take-home 5. iWish
assignment asks students to “create a
poster about YOU.” This exercise requires • This exercise is designed to reinforce
a bit of advanced reading and discussion, the idea that innovations need to solve
and some class time for their presentations a human problem of some kind. First,
when the posters are due. students are asked to work individually and
think of a problem or hassle that people
• Lesson 1: Innovation requires regular doses
they know often face. The instructor can
of inspiration, so they should include their
also direct the students to focus on people
favorite quote, and a photo and short bio
with special needs (e.g., blind, elderly)
of a person they find inspirational.
or in developing nations. Then, students
• Lesson 2: Promising innovations are most are asked to form teams of three to five,
likely to derive from a well-developed discuss each of their ideas together, and
knowledge base (see Gladwell 2008). The decide on one that can best be solved with
students should include a description and a smartphone app (“I wish a cell phone
photo of a skill, hobby, or field that they could _ _ _ _ _ _ _”). The next step is for
know the most about (outside of family them to draw a large outline of an iPhone
and school). They may also include a brief on a page (or use one provided by the
description of experiences where they have instructor), and sketch the app interface on
experienced “flow” (see Csikszentmihalyi their iPhone drawing. Each team presents
1990). the human problem they sought to solve
• Lesson 3: Variety and diversity is good. and their app solution to the class.
The students take a free online Jung • Lesson 1: Ideas in groups tend to be better
typology test and report the result on the if the members work individually first, then
poster. They also read the list of Gardner’s compare notes with the rest of the team.
“multiple intelligences” and report the ones
• Lesson 2: The best innovations solve real
that fit them best.
problems.
• Presentation is important. I require a
physical, 3D item of some sort on their 6. R&D
poster that reflects their interests or
expertise, and encourage them to think • In many engineering-focused industries,
broadly about the idea of a “poster” and the technology comes first and then
how they present their work. an application for the technology is
sought—this is the reverse of the standard
4. 100 Uses innovation process. Instead of starting
with problems and developing many
• This exercise is a way to warm up a group possible innovations, students will start
and lower their inhibitions for sharing their by examining the latest technological
ideas with others in their team. The task is developments and then consider their
simple: In ten minutes, come up with 100 application to many possible problems. For
uses for old newspapers (or unused pizza example, looking through a website such
boxes, or outdated computer materials). as rdmag.com, the instructor can show
4 • Lesson: The teams need every conceivable examples of recent R&D developments
idea their members can offer to approach (e.g., spider silk, nanobatteries, sprayable
 metals) and ask “What types of products a student receives a card, they should try
or applications can you think of for this?” to build on the ideas already presented, if
Other examples may be purchased possible. After passing the cards three to
through sites such as inventables.com, four times, ask each person—on the next
discussed in the context of 3D printing or round—to write down a “wild idea.” Then,

10 HANDS-ON EXERCISES TO SPARK STUDENT CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION

with a Makerbot demonstration, or through pass the cards once more and ask them to
a visit and tour to a local FabLab. build on that. Have the students report on
• Lesson: Ideas for innovations can come as their favorites to the class.
we scan outside publications about trends, • Lesson: When we consider others’ input
technology, and R&D news. and build together, we can get better
outcomes.
7. Visioning
9. Perceptual Maps
• This exercise uses a type of “judo”
approach to pull ideas from students • Perceptual maps are used in strategy
rather than push them out. For example, if sessions and by advertising agencies
the challenge is to think of new programs to illustrate visually the rationale for a
that a school can implement to increase marketing strategy or to identify new
its reputation, the instructor can create a product opportunities. Students form
fictional, super positive news story about teams of three to five, and draw X-Y axes
the students, school, or organization using on paper. The instructor gives the class
a very realistic-looking newspaper article a product category to consider (e.g.,
generator: restaurants, theaters, grocery items).
• http://www.fodey.com/generators/ The group identifies two attributes that
newspaper/snippet.asp consumers consider important when
buying that product, and label their axes
• The instructor should reveal the article, with those attributes. Next, they plot all
and—because the story only shows the the competitors on their map according to
headline and part of the beginning text— how they are perceived by consumers. By
ask the group to offer three to five ideas looking at the open spaces, or considering
about what the organization must have new attributes or dimensions, students
done to deserve this recognition or win this may see new possibilities for products and
award. The ensuing ideas are often things services.
nobody had thought of before.
• Lesson: Innovations may be viewed as
• Lesson: Sometimes a “pull” works better filling “holes” in the competitive landscape
than a “push.” so that customers may be better served.

8. Card-io 10. Innovation Challenges

• At IDEO, the developers of Design • A larger, more robust challenge often
Thinking, the teams begin their ideation brings out the best in students. One form is
sessions by asking a question with the a campus-wide innovation challenge using
prefix “How might we…?” Put challenge a specific kind of material. The instructions
questions at the top of large index cards are to simply “Add Value” using the
using “How might we” as the start to a materials (e.g., post-it notes, unused pizza
number of problems you want the class boxes, old computer diskettes and CDs).
to consider. Give a card to each student This type of challenge is an opportunity to
in the class, and ask them to write an idea reach out to other colleges on a campus,
for solving that problem just beneath the and into the community for judges. Social
question. Then, each student passes their innovation challenges can also generate 5
card to the person on their right. Each time interest by rewarding the team with the

@VentureWell 2015
 best idea for addressing a nagging social DeLay, Randolph. 1996. “Forming Knowledge:
issue in their own community or abroad. Constructivist Learning and Experiential
• Another way to inspire students with a Education.” Journal of Experiential Education
larger challenge is to take on a project for 19(Aug-Sep): 76-81.
a non-profit organization in the city. It is Druskat, Vanessa U., and Anthony T.
a prime opportunity for them to employ Pescosolido. 2002. “The Content of Effective
design thinking across a semester, by Teamwork Mental Models in Self-Managing
starting with Empathy, moving to Ideation,
Teams: Ownership, Learning and Heedful
and finally to Implementation.
Interrelating.” Human Relations 55 (Mar): 283-
• Lesson: Innovation is needed by all 314.
organizations, both for-profit and non-
Duray, Rebecca, and Glenn W. Milligan. 1999.
profit.
“Improving Customer Satisfaction Through
Conclusion Mass Customization.” Quality Progress
Over the years, we have found that it 32(Aug): 60-66.
helps instructors and students manage the Gladwell, Malcolm. 2008. Outliers: The Story of
development and implementation of these Success. New York, NY: Little, Brown and
tools and activities if they have a flexible Company.
working space available—one that includes Hersey, Paul, and Ken Blanchard. 1982.
rolling tables, plenty of whiteboards, and Management of Organizational Behavior:
an interesting décor. Because students Utilizing Human Resources. 4th ed.
are also intensely interested in for-credit Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
opportunities that allow them to develop their Kolb, David A. 1984. Experiential Learning:
innovative capacities, we have also found Experience as a Source of Learning and
that a certificate program with additional Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
professional contacts and support resources Hall.
allows them to pursue projects of individual
Lee, Mushin, and Joon Koh. 2001. “Is
interest, thus further tailoring and customizing
Empowerment Really a New Concept?”
their degree program to their passions
International Journal of Human Resource
and interests. At the University of Tulsa,
Management 12(June): 684-95.
examples of these resources are Studio Blue
(www.utulsa.edu/studioblue) and The Nova Liechty, John, Venkatram Ramaswamy, and
Fellowship (www.novafellowship.org). Steven H. Cohen. 2001. “Choice Menus
for Mass Customization: An Experimental
References Approach for Analyzing Customer Demand
Allport, Gordon W. 1946. “The Psychology of with an Application to a Web-Based
Participation.” Psychological Review 52(Fall): Information Service.” Journal of Marketing
117-32. Research 38(May): 183-96.
Buchko, Aaron A. 1992. “Effects of Employee Margerison, Charles J. 1988. “Action Learning and
Ownership on Employee Attitudes.” Work Excellence in Management Development.”
and Occupations 19(Feb): 59-78. Journal of Management Development 7(5):
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. 1990. Flow: The 43-53.
Psychology of Optimal Experience. New Mescon, Michael H., Michael Albert, and Franklin
York, NY: Harper & Row. Khedouri. 1988. Management. 3rd ed. New
York, NY: Harper & Row.
6 Palmer, Adrian (2007). Principles of Services
Marketing. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Pierce, Jon L., Tatiana Kostova, and Kurt T. Dirks.
2001. “Toward a Theory of Psychological
Ownership in Organizations.” Academy of
Management Review 26(Apr): 298-310.
Reeve, Charlie L., and Carla S. Smith. 2001.

10 HANDS-ON EXERCISES TO SPARK STUDENT CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION

“Refining Lodahl and Kejner’s Job
Involvement Scale with a Convergent
Evidence Approach: Applying Multiple
Methods to Multiple Samples.” Organizational
Research Methods 4(Apr): 91-111.
Song, Jae H., and Carl R. Adams. 1993.
“Differentiation through Customer
Involvement in Production or Delivery.”
Journal of Consumer Marketing 10(2): 4-12.
Stehno, Joseph J. 1986. “The Application and
Integration of Experiential Education in
Higher Education.” Working paper, ERIC
document ED285-465, Southern Illinois
University at Carbondale.
Sternberg, R. J. 1988. “Mental Self-Government:
A Theory of Intellectual Styles and their
Development.” Human Development 31:
197–224.
---. 1997. Thinking Styles. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
---. 2006. “The Nature of Creativity.” Creativity
Research Journal 18(1): 87–98.
Sternberg, R. J., R. K.Wagner, W. M. Williams, and
J. A. Horvath. 1995. “Testing Common Sense.”
American Psychologist 50: 912–927.
Wilson, D. K. 1986. “An Investigation of the
Properties of Kolb’s Learning Style
Inventory.” Leadership and Organization
Development Journal 7(3): 3-15.
Wood, Charles M. 2003. “The Effects of Creating
Psychological Ownership Among Students
in Group Projects.” Journal of Marketing
Education 25(Dec): 241-249.

@VentureWell 2015