383 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
383 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
# Constraint-Based Creativity Template
|
|
|
|
## Workflow
|
|
|
|
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Constraint-Based Creativity Progress:
|
|
- [ ] Step 1: Gather inputs and clarify the creative challenge
|
|
- [ ] Step 2: Select or design 1-3 strategic constraints
|
|
- [ ] Step 3: Generate 20+ ideas within constraints
|
|
- [ ] Step 4: Evaluate and refine top solutions
|
|
- [ ] Step 5: Document and validate
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Step 1: Gather inputs and clarify the creative challenge**
|
|
|
|
Ask user for problem/creative challenge, context (what's been tried, why stuck), success criteria, existing constraints (real limitations), and preferred constraint types (if any). Use [Input Questions](#input-questions) to gather comprehensive context.
|
|
|
|
**Step 2: Select or design 1-3 strategic constraints**
|
|
|
|
If existing constraints → Work within them creatively. If no constraints → Design strategic ones using [Constraint Selection Guide](#constraint-selection-guide). Maximum 3 constraints to avoid paralysis. Document constraint rationale in the output file.
|
|
|
|
**Step 3: Generate 20+ ideas within constraints**
|
|
|
|
Use [Idea Generation Techniques](#idea-generation-techniques) to produce volume. Document ALL ideas including "failures" - they contain insights. Aim for 20+ ideas minimum before evaluating. Quality comes after quantity.
|
|
|
|
**Step 4: Evaluate and refine top solutions**
|
|
|
|
Apply [Evaluation Framework](#evaluation-framework) to select strongest 2-3 ideas. Refine by combining elements, removing complexity, and strengthening the constraint-driven insight. Document why these solutions stand out.
|
|
|
|
**Step 5: Document and validate**
|
|
|
|
Create `constraint-based-creativity.md` file with complete documentation. Validate using [Quality Checklist](#quality-checklist) before delivering. Ensure constraint-creativity causality is explained.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Input Questions
|
|
|
|
Ask the user to provide:
|
|
|
|
**1. Creative Challenge:**
|
|
- What needs solving, creating, or improving?
|
|
- What's the core problem or opportunity?
|
|
|
|
**2. Context:**
|
|
- What's been tried already? Why didn't it work?
|
|
- Why does ideation feel stuck or stale?
|
|
- What assumptions are currently in place?
|
|
|
|
**3. Success Criteria:**
|
|
- What does a good solution look like?
|
|
- How will you know if the constraint-based approach worked?
|
|
- Are there measurable goals (cost, time, engagement)?
|
|
|
|
**4. Existing Constraints (Real Limitations):**
|
|
- Budget limitations? (exact amount)
|
|
- Time constraints? (deadline)
|
|
- Technical limitations? (platform, tools, compatibility)
|
|
- Material/resource limitations? (team size, equipment)
|
|
- Regulatory/policy constraints? (legal, compliance)
|
|
|
|
**5. Constraint Preferences (Optional):**
|
|
- Are there specific constraint types that interest you? (resource, format, rule-based, technical, perspective)
|
|
- Any constraints you want to avoid?
|
|
- Preference for tight vs loose constraints?
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Quick Template
|
|
|
|
Create file: `constraint-based-creativity.md`
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Constraint-Based Creativity: [Project Name]
|
|
|
|
## Problem Statement
|
|
|
|
[What creative challenge needs solving? Why is it important?]
|
|
|
|
## Context
|
|
|
|
**What's been tried:** [Previous approaches and why they didn't work]
|
|
|
|
**Why we're stuck:** [Pattern that needs breaking - e.g., "All ideas feel incremental" or "Default to expensive solutions"]
|
|
|
|
**Success criteria:** [What makes a solution successful? Measurable if possible]
|
|
|
|
## Active Constraints
|
|
|
|
**Constraint 1: [Type] - [Specific Limitation]**
|
|
- Rationale: [Why this constraint will unlock creativity]
|
|
- Enforcement: [How we'll ensure it's respected]
|
|
|
|
**Constraint 2: [Type] - [Specific Limitation]**
|
|
- Rationale: [Why this constraint matters]
|
|
- Enforcement: [How we'll check compliance]
|
|
|
|
**Constraint 3 (if applicable): [Type] - [Specific Limitation]**
|
|
- Rationale: [Strategic purpose]
|
|
- Enforcement: [Validation method]
|
|
|
|
## Idea Generation Process
|
|
|
|
**Technique used:** [e.g., Rapid listing, SCAMPER within constraints, Forced connections]
|
|
|
|
**Volume:** Generated [X] ideas in [Y] minutes
|
|
|
|
**Mindset:** [Notes on staying within constraints vs urge to bend rules]
|
|
|
|
## All Ideas Generated
|
|
|
|
1. [Idea 1 - brief description]
|
|
- Constraint compliance: ✓/✗
|
|
- Initial assessment: [Quick gut reaction]
|
|
|
|
2. [Idea 2]
|
|
- Constraint compliance: ✓/✗
|
|
- Initial assessment:
|
|
|
|
[Continue for all 20+ ideas...]
|
|
|
|
## Insight from "Failed" Ideas
|
|
|
|
[Document ideas that broke constraints or didn't work - what did they reveal?]
|
|
|
|
## Top Solutions (Refined)
|
|
|
|
### Solution 1: [Name/Title]
|
|
|
|
**Description:** [Detailed explanation of the solution]
|
|
|
|
**How constraints shaped it:** [Explain causality - this solution wouldn't exist without the constraints because...]
|
|
|
|
**Strengths:**
|
|
- [Strength 1]
|
|
- [Strength 2]
|
|
- [Strength 3]
|
|
|
|
**Implementation notes:** [How to execute this]
|
|
|
|
**Risks/Limitations:** [What could go wrong or where it falls short]
|
|
|
|
### Solution 2: [Name/Title]
|
|
|
|
**Description:** [Detailed explanation]
|
|
|
|
**How constraints shaped it:** [Constraint-creativity causality]
|
|
|
|
**Strengths:**
|
|
- [Strength 1]
|
|
- [Strength 2]
|
|
|
|
**Implementation notes:** [Execution plan]
|
|
|
|
**Risks/Limitations:** [Honest assessment]
|
|
|
|
### Solution 3 (if applicable): [Name/Title]
|
|
|
|
[Same structure as above]
|
|
|
|
## Evaluation
|
|
|
|
**Constraint compliance:** All top solutions fully respect the imposed limitations
|
|
|
|
**Novelty assessment:** These solutions are [novel/somewhat novel/incremental] because [reasoning]
|
|
|
|
**Problem fit:** Solutions address the original challenge by [explanation]
|
|
|
|
**Actionability:** [Can these be implemented? What resources needed?]
|
|
|
|
## Creative Breakthrough Explanation
|
|
|
|
[Explain how the constraints drove the creativity. What thinking pattern did they break? What unexpected angle did they reveal? Why wouldn't these solutions exist in unconstrained brainstorming?]
|
|
|
|
## Next Steps
|
|
|
|
1. [Immediate action]
|
|
2. [Follow-up action]
|
|
3. [Testing/validation plan]
|
|
|
|
## Self-Assessment (using rubric)
|
|
|
|
[Score against rubric criteria before delivering to user]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Constraint Selection Guide
|
|
|
|
**If user has existing constraints (real limitations):**
|
|
|
|
1. **Accept and amplify:** Make the constraint tighter to force more creativity
|
|
- Budget is $5K → Challenge: "Design for $1K"
|
|
- Timeline is 2 weeks → Challenge: "Ship in 3 days"
|
|
|
|
2. **Add complementary constraint:** Pair resource constraint with format constraint
|
|
- Low budget + "No text, visuals only"
|
|
- Short timeline + "Using existing tools only"
|
|
|
|
**If user has no constraints (brainstorming is just stuck):**
|
|
|
|
1. **Diagnose the stuck pattern:**
|
|
- Ideas too complex? → Add simplicity constraint ("Maximum 3 features")
|
|
- Ideas too conventional? → Add rule-based constraint ("Can't use industry standard approach")
|
|
- Ideas too similar? → Add perspective constraint ("Design for opposite audience")
|
|
|
|
2. **Choose constraint type strategically:**
|
|
|
|
| Stuck Pattern | Recommended Constraint | Example |
|
|
|--------------|----------------------|---------|
|
|
| Too complex/feature-bloated | Resource or Format | "One-page explanation" or "$100 budget" |
|
|
| Too conventional | Rule-based | "Can't use competitor's approach" or "No best practices" |
|
|
| Too similar to each other | Technical or Medium | "Text-based only" or "Works offline" |
|
|
| Too vague/abstract | Format | "Explain in 6 words" or "Show with single image" |
|
|
| Too incremental | Historical or Audience | "Design as if it's 1990" or "For 5-year-olds" |
|
|
|
|
3. **Apply the "1-3 rule":**
|
|
- 1 constraint: Safe, good for first-timers
|
|
- 2 constraints: Sweet spot for most challenges
|
|
- 3 constraints: Maximum before over-constraining
|
|
- 4+ constraints: Usually paralyzes creativity (avoid)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Idea Generation Techniques
|
|
|
|
**Technique 1: Rapid Constraint-Compliant Listing**
|
|
- Set timer for 15 minutes
|
|
- List every idea that respects constraints, no matter how wild
|
|
- Don't judge or refine - just capture volume
|
|
- Aim for 30+ ideas in timeboxed session
|
|
- Good for: Getting unstuck quickly
|
|
|
|
**Technique 2: Constraint-Focused SCAMPER**
|
|
- Apply SCAMPER prompts while respecting constraints:
|
|
- **S**ubstitute: What can replace X (within constraints)?
|
|
- **C**ombine: What can merge (within constraints)?
|
|
- **A**dapt: What can we adapt from elsewhere (within constraints)?
|
|
- **M**odify: What can we change (within constraints)?
|
|
- **P**ut to other use: Different purpose (within constraints)?
|
|
- **E**liminate: What can we remove (constraint might already do this)?
|
|
- **R**everse: What can we flip (within constraints)?
|
|
- Good for: Systematic exploration
|
|
|
|
**Technique 3: Forced Connections**
|
|
- Pick 3 random elements (objects, concepts, brands)
|
|
- Force connection between challenge + random element + constraint
|
|
- Example: "App redesign" + "Coffee shop" + "No images" = Text-based app with coffee shop naming metaphors
|
|
- Good for: Breaking patterns completely
|
|
|
|
**Technique 4: Constraint Escalation**
|
|
- Start with mild constraint, generate 5 ideas
|
|
- Tighten constraint, generate 5 more
|
|
- Tighten again, generate 5 more
|
|
- Example: "$10K budget" → "$1K budget" → "$100 budget"
|
|
- Good for: Finding the creative sweet spot
|
|
|
|
**Technique 5: The "Yes, And" Game**
|
|
- Build on each idea while adding constraint layer
|
|
- Idea 1: "Simple landing page"
|
|
- Yes, and (constraint): "...with no images, text only"
|
|
- Yes, and: "...using only questions, no statements"
|
|
- Yes, and: "...in under 50 words"
|
|
- Good for: Progressive refinement
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Evaluation Framework
|
|
|
|
**Phase 1: Constraint Compliance Check**
|
|
|
|
For each idea, verify:
|
|
- [ ] Respects ALL imposed constraints (no "bending" or exceptions)
|
|
- [ ] Uses constraint as feature, not workaround (embraces limitation)
|
|
- [ ] Would be eliminated in unconstrained brainstorming (proves constraint drove it)
|
|
|
|
Eliminate any ideas that fail these checks.
|
|
|
|
**Phase 2: Problem-Solution Fit**
|
|
|
|
For remaining ideas, assess:
|
|
- [ ] Addresses the original creative challenge
|
|
- [ ] Meets success criteria (if measurable)
|
|
- [ ] Is actionable with available resources
|
|
- [ ] Differentiates from existing approaches
|
|
|
|
Rank ideas by problem fit.
|
|
|
|
**Phase 3: Novelty Assessment**
|
|
|
|
For top-ranked ideas, evaluate:
|
|
- **Novel (5)**: Completely unexpected angle, wouldn't exist without constraint
|
|
- **Fresh (4)**: Interesting twist on existing concept, constraint made it distinctive
|
|
- **Improved (3)**: Better version of known approach, constraint forced refinement
|
|
- **Incremental (2)**: Slight variation, constraint didn't add much
|
|
- **Derivative (1)**: Essentially same as existing, constraint was superficial
|
|
|
|
Select ideas scoring 4-5 for refinement.
|
|
|
|
**Phase 4: Refinement**
|
|
|
|
For selected ideas:
|
|
1. **Combine elements:** Can you merge strengths from multiple ideas?
|
|
2. **Subtract complexity:** Remove anything non-essential
|
|
3. **Strengthen constraint insight:** Make the constraint-creativity link more explicit
|
|
4. **Add implementation details:** How would this actually work?
|
|
5. **Acknowledge limitations:** Where does this solution fall short?
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Quality Checklist
|
|
|
|
Before delivering `constraint-based-creativity.md` to user, verify:
|
|
|
|
**Constraint Integrity:**
|
|
- [ ] Constraints are clearly stated and rationalized
|
|
- [ ] All top solutions genuinely respect constraints (no cheating)
|
|
- [ ] Constraint enforcement was rigorous during ideation
|
|
- [ ] Document includes 1-3 constraints (not over-constrained)
|
|
|
|
**Idea Volume:**
|
|
- [ ] Generated 20+ ideas minimum
|
|
- [ ] Documented "failed" ideas and insights
|
|
- [ ] Showed quantity before quality approach
|
|
- [ ] Timeboxed generation to avoid perfectionism
|
|
|
|
**Solution Quality:**
|
|
- [ ] Selected 2-3 strongest solutions
|
|
- [ ] Solutions are novel (not incremental variations)
|
|
- [ ] Solutions solve the original problem
|
|
- [ ] Solutions are actionable (not just conceptual)
|
|
- [ ] Strengths and limitations are honestly assessed
|
|
|
|
**Creative Causality:**
|
|
- [ ] Explanation of HOW constraints drove creativity
|
|
- [ ] Clear link between limitation and breakthrough
|
|
- [ ] Wouldn't exist in unconstrained brainstorming
|
|
- [ ] Identified what thinking pattern was broken
|
|
|
|
**Documentation:**
|
|
- [ ] Problem statement is clear
|
|
- [ ] Context explains why stuck/what's been tried
|
|
- [ ] Success criteria are stated
|
|
- [ ] All ideas documented (including volume metrics)
|
|
- [ ] Next steps are actionable
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Common Pitfalls
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 1: Bending constraints mid-process**
|
|
- **Symptom:** "This constraint is too hard, can we adjust it?"
|
|
- **Fix:** Constraint difficulty is the point. Breakthroughs happen when you can't take the easy path.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 2: Accepting incremental ideas**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Ideas that are slight variations of existing approaches
|
|
- **Fix:** Use novelty assessment. If it scores < 4, keep generating.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 3: Over-constraining**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Zero ideas generated, complete creative paralysis
|
|
- **Fix:** Reduce to 1-2 constraints max. Add constraints progressively, not all at once.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 4: Arbitrary constraints**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Constraint has no relationship to the creative block
|
|
- **Fix:** Choose constraints strategically (see Constraint Selection Guide). Constraint should counter the stuck pattern.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 5: Skipping volume phase**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Evaluating/refining ideas before generating quantity
|
|
- **Fix:** Force 20+ ideas before any judgment. Set timer and don't stop early.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 6: Missing the causality**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Can't explain how constraint drove the creativity
|
|
- **Fix:** If solution could exist without constraint, it's not constraint-based creativity. Keep generating.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 7: Confusing constraint-based with regular brainstorming**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Treating constraints as optional or as framing device only
|
|
- **Fix:** Constraints must be enforced rigorously. They're not suggestions.
|
|
|
|
**Pitfall 8: Stopping at conceptual**
|
|
- **Symptom:** Solutions are interesting but not actionable
|
|
- **Fix:** Add implementation notes. Verify solution can actually be executed.
|