The Basadur Creative Problem Solving Profile

The Basadur Creative Problem Solving Profile (CPSP) is a tool developed by Canadian researcher Min Basadur to determine an individual’s creative problem solving style.
A creative problem solving style is a reflection of how a person prefers to gain and use knowledge within the four stages of the creative process. Some people prefer to understand things more by experiencing while others prefer to use abstract thinking and analysis to understand. Also, some prefer to use understanding for generating options while others prefer to use understanding to evaluate options. The four styles are generation, conceptualization, optimization and implementation.
The Creative Problem Solving Profile is used in conjunction with Basadur’s workplace creativity training known as Simplexity Thinking. First developed in 1981, it has gone through 5 improvements to its accuracy over the years, as a result of extensive research and use with people from countries and workplaces around the world.The Basadur Profile is available in Chinese (simplified and traditional), Turkish, Dutch, Korean, Spanish, German, Japanese, French, Portuguese, and Danish.
The Creativity Equation
Creativity can be portrayed as a function of knowledge multiplied by imagination (to create options) and judgment (to evaluate options). Drs. Parnes, Noller and Biondi in 1977 suggested this simple equation for creativity as a model: C K x I x E. This equation suggests that for one to solve problems creatively, one must first have appropriate knowledge (K). Secondly, the bits and pieces of this knowledge can be transformed by one’s imagination (I) into various new, different combinations called ideas, options, points of view, etc. This is analogous to how the bits and pieces of colored glass in a kaleidoscope are rearranged into new different combinations called patterns by spinning the drum. Thirdly, evaluation (E) is needed. One must exercise judgment to select the most appropriate ideas, options, point of view, etc. for implementation (Action) or further development. (The equation then becomes C K x I x E x A).
How people gain knowledge (learn) is personal and individualistic. That is, the bits and pieces of knowledge a person absorbs and retains can be gained in contrasting ways. One way is by direct, concrete experience. This can best be described as getting personally involved in the task at hand and “getting one’s hands dirty.” The opposite way is by detached, abstract thinking, by standing back, observing, analyzing and theorizing to understand.
How people use knowledge is also very personal and individualistic. It is suggested that there are two opposite ways of using one’s knowledge. The first use is for ideation (to proliferate ideas, options and different points of view while deferring judgment) and the second is for evaluation (to judge and select from those ideas, options and points of view).
Each person could thus be characterized as having a unique set of relative preferences on these two information processing dimensions (experience-thinking for gaining knowledge and ideation-evaluation for using knowledge). This set of preferences would describe how the person tends to prefer to learn and to prefer to use the knowledge learned. Each person’s unique set of preferences can then help identify his or her own unique style of creative problem solving.
It’s important to realize that people fall somewhere between the two extremes of both dimensions. For example, everyone learns partly by experiencing and partly by abstract thinking and analysis, and everyone uses their knowledge partly for ideation and partly for evaluation. There is no person who uses one but not the other.
Measurement: Quadrants
The Basadur Creative Problem Solving Profile (CPSP) Inventory measures an individual’s unique blend of preferences for the four stages of the creative process. By plotting one’s Inventory scores on a two dimensional graph, an individual can display his or her own preferred blend of the four different stages. One’s largest quadrant on the graph represents one’s preferred or dominant style, while the sizes of the other quadrants represent supporting orientations in turn. The resulting unique blend of styles is one’s profile.
Each unique style reflects individual preferences for ways of gaining and using knowledge. Some people prefer to understand things more by experiencing while others prefer to use abstract thinking and analysis to understand. Also, some prefer to use understanding for generating options while others prefer to use understanding to evaluate options.
Quadrant 1: Generation

* I like to get things started by getting involved, gathering information, questioning.
* I like imagining the possibilities and sensing all kinds of new problems and opportunities.
* I can see good and bad sides to almost any fact, idea or issue.
* I am comfortable with ambiguity.
* I’m willing to let others take care of the details.
Quadrant 2: Conceptualization
* I tend to form quick associations, define problems and conceptualize new ideas, opportunities and benefits.
* I excel in inductive reasoning, in distilling seemingly unrelated observations into an integrated solution.
* I don’t like proceeding until I have a sound understanding of the situation.
* I would prefer not to have to prioritize among good or not fully understood alternatives.
* I prefer ideas rather than moving to action.
Quadrant 3: Optimization
* I do best in situations where there is a single correct answer or optimal solution to a problem.
* I can sort through large amounts of data and pinpoint “what’s wrong” in a given situation.
* I am confident of my ability to make a sound evaluation and select the best solution to a problem.
* I tend to lack patience with ambiguity.
* I prefer not spending too much time thinking about other ideas and points of view, or how different problems relate to one another.
Quadrant 4: Implementation

* I like becoming involved in new experiences.
* I like to try things out rather than “mentally test” them.
* I consider myself a risk-taker: I don’t need to understand something completely before I act.
* I’m willing to try as many different approaches as necessary until I find one that is sufficiently acceptable to those affected by the problem.
* I tend to be enthusiastic, but can be impatient as I try to act on plans.
A major goal of the Basadur Profile is to tap resources in all four styles to help the individual, team or organization cycle smoothly through the complete innovation process of finding good problems to solve, developing solutions to those problems, and implementing the solutions. Another goal is to capitalize on an individual’s preferred orientation, thus making his or her work more satisfying. It may also point out development opportunities, because just because a person has a preferred orientation it is very possible to increase skills in all four stages of the creative process by training or coaching.
Not a personality test
The Basadur CPS Profile is not a personality test. Some organizations ask their employees to take personality tests to determine their individual thinking and problem solving styles. However, employees fear the potential uses of the test results. They wonder if they will be shuffled around and or asked to change their personalities if their tests show them to be a poor fit for their job. It measures states, not traits. It is a tool to help an individual, team or organization understand how to increase creativity and innovation in a supportive environment. No one profile, or style, is considered more “creative” than any other. All styles require creativity, merely different kinds of creativity, each one contributing uniquely to the overall creative process and innovative results.
Further Reading
* Basadur, M.S., Gelade, G., and Basadur, T.M. (2013, in press). Creative problem solving process styles, cognitive work demands and organizational adaptability. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science.
* Basadur, M.S., Basadur, T.M. and Licina, G. (2013). Simplexity Thinking. Chapter in the Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship. Springer. Editor: Ruchika Bhatt
* Basadur, M.S. and Basadur, T.M. (2011). Where are the generators? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts, Vol 5 (1), 29-42.
* Basadur, T.M. and Basadur, M.S. (2010). The role of creative problem solving style in advice network formation and subsequent creative performance. Presented at the Southern Management Association (SMA) annual meeting, October 28, 2010, St. Petersburg, Florida. (Awaiting submission to selected journal)

* Basadur, T.M., Beuk, F. and Monllor, J. (2010). Regulatory fit: How individuals progress through the stages of the creative process. Published in the proceedings of the Academy of Management (AOM) annual conference, August 11, 2010, Montreal. (Awaiting submission to selected journal)
* Basadur, M.S., Gelade, G., Basadur, T.M. and Skorokhod, T. (2009). Testing the predictive validity of the Basadur creative problem solving profile (CPSP). Published in the Proceedings of the Southwest Academy of Management Annual Meeting, February 25-28, 2009, Oklahoma City.

* Basadur, M.S. and Gelade, G. (2009). Creative problem solving style and cognitive work demands. Presented at the Annual Conference of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New Orleans. April 2-4.

* Basadur, M.S., Gelade, G. and Basadur, T.M. (2008). Improved reliability and research applications of the Creative Problem Solving Profile (CPSP). Published in the proceedings of the Southern Management Association Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, October 30.

* Basadur, T.M., Basadur, M.S. and Gelade, G. (2008). Cognitive problem solving style as related to person-vocation fit and person-organizational hierarchy level of fit. Presented at the Southwest Academy of Management Conference, February 24-28, Houston, TX. (Awaiting submission to a journal)

* Basadur, M.S. and Gelade, G. (2006). The role of knowledge management in the innovation process. Creativity and Innovation Management. Vol. 15 (1), 45-62. March 2006.

* Basadur, M.S. (2005). Management: Synchronizing different kinds of creativity. In “Creativity across domains: Faces of the Muse”. Lawrence Erlbaum. Ch. 15, pp. 261-279. Editors; Kaufman, J.C. and Baer, J.

* Basadur, M.S. and Gelade, G. (2005). Modeling applied creativity as a cognitive process: Theoretical foundations. The International Journal of Thinking & Problem Solving. Vol. 15 (2), 13-41.

* Basadur, M.S. (2004). Leading others to think innovatively together: Creative leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 103-121.

* Basadur, M.S. and Gelade, G. (2003). Using the creative problem solving profile (CPSP) for diagnosing and solving real-world problems. Emergence: Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management. Vol. 5 (3), 22-47.
* Basadur, M.S. and Head, M. (2001). Team performance and satisfaction: A link to cognitive style within a process framework. Journal of Creative Behavior, Volume 35 (4), 227-248.
* Basadur, M.S. (1995). Optimal ideation-evaluation ratios. Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 8 (1), 63-75.
* Basadur, M.S., Wakabayashi, M. and Graen, G.B. (1990). Individual problem solving styles and attitudes towards divergent thinking before and after training. Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 3 (1), 22-32.
* Basadur, M.S., Graen, G.B., and Wakabayashi, M. (1990). Identifying differences in creative problem solving style. Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 24, No. 2, 111-131.
* Basadur, M.S., Gelade, G. (2002). Simplifying organization-wide creativity - a new mental model. McMaster University, Management of Innovation and New Technology Research Centre, Working Paper No. 107, November.
* Basadur, M.S. (2000). Evaluating the psychometric improvements provided by Basadur CPSP 2 - experimental. McMaster University, Management of Innovation and New Technology Research Centre, Working Paper No. 99, September.
* Basadur, M.S. (1998). Improving the psychometric properties of the Basadur Simplex creative problem solving inventory. McMaster University, Management of Innovation and New Technology Research Centre, Working Paper No. 84, December.
* Basadur, M.S. (1998). The Basadur Simplex creative problem solving profile inventory: Development, reliability and validity. McMaster University, Management of Innovation and New Technology Research Centre, Working Paper No. 83, November.
* Basadur, M.S. and Lapierre, L.M. (1998). Predicting creative problem solving behavior within teams. McMaster University, Management of Innovation and New Technology Research Centre, Working Paper No. 79, September.
* Basadur, M.S. (1991). The first technical manual for the Basadur creative problem solving profile (CPSP). Center for Research in Applied Creativity, October.
* Basadur, M.S., Wakabayashi, M., and Graen, G.B. (1988). Identifying creative problem solving style. McMaster University Faculty of Business Research and Working Group, Working Paper Series #317, December.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu