Serious creativity

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

此记录保留了作者、时间和来源链接，请打开 HN 阅读完整上下文。

…as asking "How did you get your startup ideas?" which is a little different. Some context. I was reading some books (Christiansen's "Innovator's Solution" and de Bono's "Serious Creativity" - I am a developer but I do read a business book once in a while! :-) ) which seem to advocate a deliberate, methodical approach to idea generation. I wondered how startup founders (especially the YC folks) generate their ideas. Hence the (original) question , trying to tap the experience of people reading this. Over the last couple of days I heard some debate on on whether creating an idea first and then gathering co founders is better than the other way round so I added that. Apologies for any errors in phrasing. English is not my first language.

Edward de Bono, the so-called grandfather of creativity, describes this approach in his groundbreaking book "Serious Creativity." Basically you always want to generate ideas separately, then expand on them in a group. The reason is that a group approach from the start will squash somewhat crazy concepts before sufficient time has been put into making them practical. As a result, the most creative ideas are shot down before they are given a chance to be refined. Instead, if you generate ideas on your own you can spend more time on a half-baked concept in order to round out its flaws. Then once its ready, other people can help provide different perspectives on the idea without shooting it down outright. Therefore I don't see this article as simply advocating a single founder approach. However, co-founders should harden their new ideas on th…