Functional fixedness is a sub-category of a mental set. It has a cognitive bias which is focused on using objects in an expected, or normed way.  For example, if you are looking to use a screwdriver to screw something together, but you can’t find the screwdriver, what do you do? If you are struggling with functional fixedness, you spend a lot of time searching for the screwdriver to ensure your success with the task at hand.

If you are not struggling with functional fixedness and can think more creatively in a more lateral fashion, you might think to yourself, “I could use the tip of a butter knife, instead” (or a pair of scissors, the edge of a coin, or a paperclip etc.).

Karl Duncker examined the concept of functional fixedness in the 1930s.

Long before Duncker came along, one most unfortunate example of functional fixedness had already infamously occurred, costing many, many lives, when the Titanic sank. Even though it was (obviously) very close to an iceberg when it went down, no one on the ship thought to climb onto the iceberg and wait there for the four hours it would have taken to be saved by the other ship. Instead, many people perished from hypothermia and/or drowning from waiting in the icy cold water for rescue. That’s a good (if heartbreaking) example of functional fixedness. Everyone on board was thinking of the iceberg as being the source of the problem (which it was), rather than also a potential solution (which it also could have been).

Tragically, more than 1,500 people died as a result, who might well have been saved had anyone been able to think more flexibly.

How can functional fixedness be helpful when it is the opposite of innovation? Though it sounds like a real downer in terms of creativity, it can be efficient in everyday living. Many times, we don’t need to think creatively to solve simple problems. Like a mental shortcut, looking at common, mundane ways of using objects can efficiently save on brain power. And that leaves us freer to tackle more novel and interesting challenges, ones that require more brain juice.

Here is one way of moving through this thinking challenge. It is based on functional fixedness research from one scientist who came up with a list of 32 categories based on the physical features of objects. Results from this research had suggested that, in fact, of the 32 categories, most people overlooked 20.7 (usually the ones which are not associated with how the object is commonly used).

Missing out on about two-thirds of potential solutions isn’t good when problem-solving.

The idea of the generic parts technique was born. When using this technique, you first want to break each object down into as many parts as possible, then ask yourself these questions: ‘Can I break it down further?’ ‘Does the way I’ve broken it down suggest a use for the object?’

Looking back to the Titanic example, the name ‘iceberg’ suggests something which can hit and sink ships. If instead the iceberg is described as something that is 200 to 400 feet long and floats, the opposite information emerges. Maybe it can be used to save people from a sinking ship. It is, after all, stable, too big to sink, and it floats!

When we stop thinking from inside the box of conformity and consider a space outside of ‘been-there-and-done-that,’ the more obscure bits of information about an object may now move out from the shadows into the spotlight of consciousness and provide the basis for an innovative solution.

The opposite skill of functional fixedness, which this technique develops, is called divergent thinking.

There are games people have created to increase your divergent thinking. For example, you can ask yourself questions like, ‘How many uses for a paperclip can I imagine?’ When you play with this, you are practising developing new neural pathways in your brain that encourage new associations. This means new and different ways of thinking, both in general and when faced with a problem.

The less your thinking is bound by functional fixedness, the more space your creative juices will have to flow and the more inventive your solutions to problems will be.