CREATIVITY IN BUSINESS

CONTEXT

For Assignment or Dissertation Help, Please

Contact:
Muhammad Sajid Saeed
+44 141 4045137
Email:
todrsaeed@gmail.com
Skype ID: tosajidsaeed

Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................... 2
1. Introduction....................................................................................................... 3
2. Creativity Models............................................................................................... 3
3. Barriers to Creativity.......................................................................................... 4
4. The Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving Process.......................................5
4.1 Objective Finding.......................................................................................... 5
4.2 Fact Finding.................................................................................................. 6
4.2.1 Strengths................................................................................................ 7
4.2.2 Weaknesses............................................................................................ 7
4.2.3 Opportunities.......................................................................................... 7
4.2.4 Threats................................................................................................... 8
4.3 Problem Finding............................................................................................ 8
4.4 Idea Finding.................................................................................................. 9
4.5 Solution Finding.......................................................................................... 10
4.5.1 Reform Boeing Organisational Structure (peoples perspective)..........11
4.5.2 Change Management (process perspective)........................................11
4.5.3 Management Control System...............................................................11
4.6 Acceptance Finding..................................................................................... 13
5. How to assess creativity.................................................................................. 13
6. Conclusion....................................................................................................... 14
References........................................................................................................... 15

1 | Page

Executive Summary
The creative solving problem process is inherent for any company to avoid existing and
probable issues and challenges. In this paper, the issues and problems of Boeing Company
are realised and addressed by applying Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving (CPS)
model. The findings of the paper suggest that delay is the key problem that Boeing is
currently facing due to lack of control over supply chain management system. In this regard,
the idea of reforming current Supply Chain Information System (SCIS) with an integration of
technology, people, and processes is generated and evaluated on the basis of a set of criteria.
It is believed that Boeing can take advantage of CPS models in order to achieve its strategic
objectives by eliminating delay issue in developing new products.

2 | Page

1. Introduction
This paper reviews the problems, issues, and challenges of the Boeing Company with the
help of Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving (CPS) model which is founded on the
principles of former creativity models. The Boeing Company was established in 1916 and
today it is known as worlds giant company in manufacturing military and commercial
aircrafts. The company is operating in more than 90 countries at this time and has over
20,000 suppliers around the world. From the last decade, the Boeing is facing constant delays
in delivering its new commercial aircraft namely Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
The structure of the paper is straightforward. After the introduction, the next section briefly
outlines the features of some popular creativity models and then the barriers to creativity in
any organisation are discussed briefly. The key section of this paper is the application of
Osborn-Parnes CPS process on Boeings case study to investigate key issues and challenges
that Boeing is currently facing. Before concluding the paper, a short but comprehensive
section illustrates how creativity can be assessed in any organisation.

2. Creativity Models
Graham Wallas developed first model for the creative process in 1926 which proposes that
analytical and creative thinking are closely associated with each other (Clow et al. 2011). The
process consists of four significant stages such as preparation, incubation, illumination, and
verification. After that many other researchers built their models following the approach of
Wallas but in 1953 Alex Osbornes developed a seven step framework for creative thinking
which is considered as one of the useful models today. The seven stages of Osbornes model
are: orientation, preparation, analysis, ideation, incubation, synthesis, and evaluation. The
process in the model is mainly based on alternative ideas of development with divergent
thinking in terms of solving a particular problem. This innovative concept opened a door for
the development of brainstorming technique which is widely used these days.
Another well-known model for creative thinking in order to solve problems is Creative
Problem Solving (CPS) model which is derived from the work of Osborn. CPS profoundly
follows the idea of divergent-convergent-divergent-convergent procedure (Isaksen and
Treffliger, 1985; Parnes, 1992). The CPS model comprises of six stages such as objective
finding, fact finding, problem finding, idea finding, solution finding, and acceptance finding.
3 | Page

CPS provides an organised framework for solving the problem with particular creative
thinking techniques that assist an organisation to meet issues, challenges, and opportunities
that organisation is currently facing or expecting in the future (Isaksen et al. 1994). It is
believed that most of the creativity models developed till now have common foundations
following the approaches of Wallas and Osborn (Kaufman and Sternberg, 2010).

3. Barriers to Creativity
There are several barriers to creativity which are broadly categorised into three overlapping
groups such as personal (people-related), problem solving (process-related), and
environmental (situation-based) (Sternberg, 1999; Kaufman and Sternberg, 2010). The people
related barriers are the hurdles to creativity due to several blocks including deficiency in
creative thought, educational and cultural influence, extreme or unnecessary eagerness,
saturation, lack of emotional sensation, habitual thinking, hunger for popularity, a propensity
to conform, and lack of self-confidence etc. (Sternberg, 1999). On the other hand, problem
solving barriers may comprise of lack of problem solving skills and abilities, inability to
develop or identify alternative solutions, lack of focus on problem solving tasks, inadequate
language abilities, inadequate problem solving approaches, rigidity, numerous perceptual
prototypes, non-disciplined endeavour, premature planning and judgement, and deficiency in
turning ideas into action (Kaufman and Sternberg, 2010).
Environmental barriers represent conditional or situational based hurdles to creativity which
usually include: confrontation of new ideas, overemphasis on rivalry or cooperation, strategic
blocks restricting proper resource utilisation, despotic decision making, an inadequate
approach towards creative thinking, isolation, and the conviction that merely one or two
kinds of thinking is needed for creativity (ibid).
One of the ways to mitigate the impact of these barriers is to enhance the abilities and
strengths of any organisation. Another way is to apply one of the CPS models to identify and
address the core problems, issues, or challenges that the organisation is currently facing. This
is the reason that Osborn-Parnes CPS model is adopted in this paper to investigate the issues
and challenges that Boeing is currently facing.

4 | Page

4. The Osborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving Process

The relationship between problem solving and creativity is the question surrounding in the
literature of behavioural science since the 1960s (Parnes, 1992). Osborn-Parnes creative
problem solving process is adopted in this paper because this model contains the
brainstorming features of all previously developed creativity models. In addition, the
following questions are addressed in this study by following Osborn-Parnes CPS process:
How CPS process will facilitate creative changes in Boeing?
How CPS process will help Boeing in identifying and addressing key issue that hinder
the organisation to achieve its strategic objectives?
What are the techniques that can support CPS process?
How to develop and evaluate different ideas and solutions to address key issues that
Boeing is currently facing?
How to find proper ways to implement chosen idea following CPS process?

4.1 Objective Finding

The vision of Boeing Company is to emphasis the approach of people working together as a
global enterprise for aerospace leadership (Boeing, 2001a). The vision complies with
Boeings long-term mission that anticipates becoming the number one aerospace company
in the world and among the premier industrial concerns in terms of quality, profitability, and
growth (Boeing, 2001b). It is evident from the vision and mission of Boeing that the
fundamental objective of the company is to develop effective strategies to achieve quality,
performance, and profitability of each business segment. The quality and performance
standards are usually determined by measuring customer satisfaction; and profitability and
productivity are measured by evaluating an increase in the wealth and value of any
companys shareholders. Boeing has adopted many techniques in the past to effectively
achieve its mission and strategic objectives. These techniques mainly include: technological
excellence, continuous improvement, hiring competent staff, ongoing training and motivating
staff, intensifying financial strength, and other modern techniques to overcome barriers and
weaknesses in the way to achieve objectives (Boeing, 2001b).
There are several approaches (e.g. control charts or gap analysis) can be used for situational
analysis in order to identify the differences between Boeings objectives and real
performance. Proctor (2009) emphasises the importance of gap analysis which is useful in
5 | Page

highlighting the areas where the company lacks in addressing its strategic objectives.
Therefore, the gap analysis model, developed by Zeithaml et al. (2009), is used to conduct
gaps analysis of Boeing in this section to identify inconsistencies between how companys is
expected to perform and how it is actually performing. The gaps analysis model emphasises
to close customer gap which is the difference between customer expectations and perceptions.
In order to close or tighten customer gap, the models suggest to identify and close four other
gaps so-called provider gaps. These gaps are management perception gap, quality
specification gap, service quality gap, and communication gap.
The management perception gap and quality specification gaps are not evident in Boeing due
to adoption of latest tools and technique but Waugh and Watson (2011) highlighted service
quality gap in Boeing which has been resulted in failure to meet deadlines several times in the
past. This has caused concurrent delays in the delivery of aircrafts to customers and also
increased costs in millions of dollars. The communication gap also exists between Boeing
and its suppliers (McGlaun, 2008) which also caused delays in delivering the products to
regular clients. In addition, some intellectual property disputes, labour strikes, and even legal
proceedings against Boeing are also evident due to lack of communication with customers,
employees, and suppliers (Datamonitor, 2009; 2011).
The most common problem occurred due to gaps between the objectives and current
performance of Boeing is the delay problem. As a result, Airbus (a close competitor of
Boeing in commercial aircrafts) successfully acquired an extensive market share of Boeing
(Mayer, 2008). In addition, the profit of Boeings commercial airplanes segment also faced a
6.5% declined in 2010 (Datamonitor, 2011).

4.2 Fact Finding

According to Proctor (2009), SWOT analysis is an appropriate tool for finding facts about
any company. In this section, SWOT analysis is conducted to highlight strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of Boeing to know significant facts about the
company. The SWOT analysis will help in identifying the areas where creative changes are
required.

6 | Page

4.2.1 Strengths

Boeing provides its aerospace products and services to more than 90 countries. The
major strength of Boeing is its leadership position in the aerospace industry in terms of large
scale operations, modern designs, latest technology, a range of aerospace products, and more
than double revenue compared to its competitors (Datamonitor, 2011; Szymanski 2011).
Moreover, the company has strategic alliances with NASA, US Air Force and other
companies in the aerospace sector around the globe (Butler, 2012). The innovative
capabilities of company in the context of the commercial airplane sector are based on product
and process innovation. For product innovation, Boeing has adopted the policy of spending at
least 7% of its total revenue each year on R&D activities in order to forecast market trends
and also to satisfy customer needs (Boeing, 2009). In order to continuously bring process
innovation, the company is implementing Lean manufacturing strategy to effectively utilise
and manage its finances, assets, inventory, costs, and customer-supplier relationships (Mayer,
2008).
4.2.2 Weaknesses

The main weakness of Boeing is the delay problem that the company is facing from
many years particularly since 2008 when it introduced new Boeing 787 Dreamliner (Waugh
and Watson, 2011). Because of this weakness, the company missed its deadlines multiple
times and broke many promises in the past to deliver the product on time. This has caused
company to bear the loss of million dollars and the credibility is also damaged and as a result
the market share is shifted towards Airbus. McGlaun (2008) reported the ineffective
communication of customer-supplier relationships which is the foremost problem of delay in
developing particular aircraft. Furthermore, some intellectual property disputes, labour
strikes, and even legal proceedings against Boeing are also reported due to lack of
communication with customers, employees, and suppliers (Datamonitor, 2009; 2011).
4.2.3 Opportunities

The demand of aircrafts has been increased around the globe due to changes in trends
in the travelling sector. Today, more people wish to travel around the world as they can afford
air tickets due to increased competition among airlines. Similarly, a considerable increase in
the trends of improving defence systems has also created several opportunities for the
company (Datamonitor, 2011). The recent economic downturn has created many
7 | Page

opportunities for the Boeing Company to acquire recession affected firms within the
aerospace sector in order to expand its operations in logistic and supply chain contexts.
4.2.4 Threats

Airbus and emerging Chinese aircraft manufacturing firms are the prominent threats
for Boeing. Airbus has already acquired a considerable amount of market share of Boeing due
to concurrent delays in Boeing 787 Dreamliner. On the other hand, the Chinese government
also officially announced the launch of commercial aircrafts in 2020 (Liu, 2010). In addition,
labour strikes and lack of support of labour unions are also a threat to the organisation
(Datamonitor, 2011). Boeings 35% suppliers belong to Japan which is the globally known as
a land of earthquakes. The future manufacturing operations may face delays due to shortage
of parts supply from Japan as it happened recently when the manufacturing of Boeing 787
affected due to great East earthquake in Japan (Datamonitor, 2011).

4.3 Problem Finding

The problem finding step of the CPS model mainly deals with pinpointing the real problem.
Therefore, in this section the problem statement for Boeing Company is written as In What
Ways Might Boeing captures the real problem (Parnes, 1992; Proctor, 2009) by answering the
questions of 5Ws and how. Recently, the Boeing Company developed commercial airplane
Boeing 787 Dreamliner to retain its leadership position in the aircraft industry. Initially, the
product gets a considerable response of the market and several airlines around the world
placed orders to Boeing. But unfortunately, the company experienced concurrent delays in
delivering the aircraft to clients (Kesmodel, 2011). The company revised the delivery
schedule eight times since 2008 and recently it is announced that Boeings 787 Dreamliner
delivery will be detailed by three more years as the company is facing engine problems due to
parts supplied by its suppliers (Blake, 2013). The delay problem causes countless problems
for Boeing. Since 2008 the original budget for developing 787 Dreamliner has been
intensified up to 120% (Rigby, 2013).
It is evident from various sources that Boeing is experiencing most of the delay problems due
to inadequate supply chain management (Lamba and Elahi, 2012; Rigby, 2013). Koemodel
(2011) also highlights the fact that Boeing has no adequate control over its manufacturing
activities due to lack of supply chain management. This problem publicized when one of the
spokespersons from Boeing reported the company made too many changes at the same time
8 | Page

- new technology, new design tools and a change in the supply chain - and thus outran the
ability to manage it effectively for a period of time (Airwise, 2011). On the basis of the
above facts, it can be said that delay is the key problem that Boeing is facing at this time
mainly due to supply chain management problems. The figure 1.1 shows the cause and effect
diagram of Boeing based on SWOT analysis and the problems identified in this section.
Figure 1.1 Cause and effect diagram

4.4 Idea Finding

The idea finding section of the CPS process includes the main idea to solve the particular
problem identified in the previous section. In order to adopt new technology for Boeing 787
Dreamliner, the company deals with local and international supplier firms who are popular in
producing latest technological equipment all over the world. But at the same time it is also
inherent to regularly communicate with suppliers to avoid delays. Bayer (2010) emphasises
the importance of communication by stating that large organisations often experience delay
issues due to lack of communication with suppliers and other stakeholders. The Boeings case
is also not different in this regard. In fact, in the beginning of 2010 the company employed
third party services to reform its supply chain system but the attempt was also failed due to
lack communication between Boeing, third party, and suppliers (Lamba and Elahi, 2012).
To confront existing supply chain issues, the company is required to follow the idea of
reforming its present Supply Chain Information System (SCIS). According to Gupta (2011),

9 | Page

SCIS is an information system that automates the flow of information between a firm and its
suppliers to optimise the planning, sourcing, manufacturing, and delivery of the products and
services (p. 401). The solid SCIS implementation requires an incorporated approach of
technology, people, and processes (ibid).
Peoples skills and abilities are inherent in terms of reforming the companys structure to deal
with complex processes and also to better utilise modern technological equipments. Similarly,
Boeing should avoid employing outdated technologies that may result in slowdown the entire
production and communication process. Nowadays, several SCIS computer based application
programmes are available in the market where Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) is
popular in integrating people, technology, and processes. ERP is also popular to reduce
supplier relationship management issues. Although, Boeing is already implementing ERP
technology (Info World, 1998) but there is a strong need at this time to best utilise it by
considering the present supply chain concerns. The following table illustrates the idea for
improving SCIS of Boeing.
Table 1.1 Idea and rationale
Idea

Reforming Supply Chain Information

System (SCIS) by bringing creative
changes in technology, people, and
processes

Rationale
o

To establish an efficient and

successful control system in order
to reorganise and administer
supplier communication

To address service quality and

communication gaps between
Boeing objectives and current
performance

To avoid concurrent delays that

Boeing is current experiencing due
to supply chain management issues

4.5 Solution Finding

In this step of CPS process, various solutions of the problems are evaluated on the basis of
cost, time, performance, environmental, influence constraints. On the basis of the above idea,
there can be three possible solutions for improving supply chain information system of
Boeing: (1) reforming organisational structure, (2) change management, (3) control system.
10 | P a g e

These are explained in the following subheadings and then these options will be evaluated
through a decision/evaluation matrix.
4.5.1 Reform Boeing Organisational Structure (peoples
perspective)

The role of people is inherent in any organisation (Senior, 2009) and reforming
organisational structure needs to decide which strategy Boeing can adopt. The people can
accommodate two types of strategies (business and functional) to change the organisational
structure by performing required activities. At the business level, necessary decisions can be
taken by authorised staffs to improve existing supply chain management system. For
example, customising and upgrading ERP packages to meet primary and secondary needs, or
obtaining more licences to effectively implement SCIS. On the other hand, the staff will
ensure the functionality of amended SCIS at functional level.
4.5.2 Change Management (process perspective)

Table 1.2 illustrates four ways through which change can be accommodated in Boeing.
Table 1.2 Types of organisational change

Source: Senior (2009, p. 47)

From the above available options, the Boeing needs to select adaption strategy to apply
SCIS effectively. The adaption change is appropriate because it can be implemented within
the present paradigm and occurs incrementally.
4.5.3 Management Control System

A management control system refers to a method of managing and reorganising the

operations, activities, and behaviours of the people in any organisation (Anthony, 2011). In
case of Boeing, the management control system for reforming supply chain information
system mainly requires to manage and reorganise people, processes, and technology. The
11 | P a g e

table 1.3 shows a management control system for Boeing demonstrating essential resources
allocation and activities.
Table 1.3 Management Control System
Elements
PEOPLE &
PROCESSES

TECHNOLOGY

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o

Essential activities and resource allocation

Encourage effective internal and external communication
Continuous R&D activities
Ongoing research and feedback
Staff training and development
Design new processes using service blueprints
Implementation of new technology i.e. Upgraded ERP system
Comply existing system with new ERP system before implementing
new technology
Continuous feedback, support, and upgrading systems
Source: Anthony (2011)

The decision matrix is used to evaluate above stated solutions to the delay problem by
managing supply chain information system of Boeing. The options are evaluated on the basis
of cost, performance, environment, health and safety, acceptance, and ease of implementation
constraints.
Table 1.4 Decision Matrix

CRITERIA
Impact on performance
Easy to implement
Cost/benefit association
Quick implementation
Stakeholder acceptance
Environmental influence
Health and safety impact
Gross Rating

Weight
3
1
2
1
1
2
2

Scoring: High = 5, Medium = 3, Low = 1

EVALUATION
Management
Change
Control System
Management
3x5 = 15
3x1 = 3
1x3 = 3
1x1 = 1
2x5 = 10
2x3 = 6
1x3 = 3
1x1 = 1
1x5 = 5
1x3 = 3
2x3 = 6
2x3 = 6
2x5 = 10
2x1 = 2
52
22

Reform Org.
Structure
3x3 = 9
1x3 = 3
2x3 = 6
1x5 = 5
1x3 = 3
2x5 = 10
2x3 = 6
42

Source: Bushman and Rai (2004, p. 14)

The above table shows that management control system option is most appropriate for
Boeing Company to avoid delays by improving the supply chain information system.

12 | P a g e

4.6 Acceptance Finding

The action plan for implementing creative change in SCIS is shown in Gantt chart as follows:
Table 1.5 Gantt chart

5. How to assess creativity

According to von Stamm (2008), creativity in any organisation can be assessed through a
Balanced Scorecard approach. The balance scorecard of Boeing is presented in table 1.4
which assesses creativity in four significant aspects such as financial, customer, internal
business process, and supplier.
Table 1.6 Balanced Scorecard
Financial Aspect
Objective

Financial
performance
improvement

Measuring device

o
o

Financial accounts and

statements
Profitability and
liquidity ratios

Value for
o Share price
shareholders
o Dividend payout ratio
wealth
Internal Business Process
Objective

Improvement in
operating
Suppliers
oriented

How to measure

Customer Aspect
Objective

Customer service

Measuring device

Feedback from
customer

Upfront product orders

Customer satisfaction
Timely delivery
level
Suppliers View
o
o

Objective

Kaizen approach

Improving SCIS

o
o

Suppliers relationship
Communication and
controlling suppliers

Long-term
supplier
relationships

How to measure

ERP implementation

Implementing SCIS
using integrated
approach of technology,
process, and people

13 | P a g e

6. Conclusion
It is investigated with the help of Osborn-Parnes CPS model that Boeing is currently facing
critical delay problem in delivering Boeing 787 Dreamliner to its customers due to supply
chain issues. It is therefore suggested to Boeing to bring creative changes in the Supply Chain
Information System (SCIS) by improving current Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
system. For this purpose, Boeing can use management control system device as an integrated
approach of people, processes, and technology to bring creative changes. Furthermore, the
level and progress of creativity can be measured and assessed through a Balanced Scorecard
approach.

14 | P a g e

References
Airwise (2011). Boeing Learns From 787 Outsourcing Issues. News Air Wise, 20 January
2011.

Anthony, R.N. (2011). Management control systems. 12th edition, Tata McGraw-Hill
Education

Asia-Pacific insight (2012). Tianjin Boeing composite material double its China purchases by
2015. Asia-Pacific insight, 29 June 2012

Boeing (2001a). The Boeing Company Vision 2016. Retrieved from:

http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/financial/finreports/annual/06annualreport/assets/Bo
eing_06AR_01.pdf [Accessed: 19 February 2013]

Boeing, (2001b). The Boeing company 2001 annual report. Retrieved from:
http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/financial/finreports/annual/01annualreport/BOEING
2001AR_all.pdf [Accessed: 19 February 2013]

Beyer, S. (2010). Supply Chain Performance Measurement & E-Business Supply Chain
Management. GRIN Verlag

Botten, N. (2009). Enterprise Strategy. 5th edition, Elsevier

Blake, M. (2013). More nightmares for Boeing 787 Dreamliner as plane suffers second fuel
leak - the FIFTH reported problem in just one week. Daily Mail, 13 January 2013.

Bushman, N. and Rai, K. (2004). Strategic Decision Making: Applying the analytic hierarchy
process. Springer

Butler, A. (2012). SpaceX wins its first USAF contracts. Aviation Week, 10 December 2012

Clow, K.E., De Nardin, T.J., Sani, B. and Stammerjohan, C.A. (2011). Teaching creativity:
where do we go from here? International Journal of Education Research, 6(1), pp. 147-158.
Datamonitor, (2009). The Boeing Company: company profile. London: Datamonitor

15 | P a g e

Datamonitor, (2011). The Boeing Company: company profile. London: Datamonitor

Gupta, H. (2011). Management Information System. Hitesh Gupta Publishers.

Info World (1998). Boeing takes off with Baan: massive ERP installation showing payoff in
manufacturing processes. Enterprise Computing, Infoworld Magazine, 6 July 2008.

Isaksen, S. G. and Trefflinger, D.J. (1985). Creative problem solving. Buffalo, NY: Bearly
Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (1994). Creative approaches to problem
solving. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Kaufman, J.C. and Sternberg, R.J. (2010). The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity.
Cambridge University Press
Kesmodel, D. (2011). Boeing Examines Supply Chain for Weak Links. The Wall Street
Journal, 30 December 2011
Lamba, N. and Elahi, E., (2012). When Supply Chain strategy does not match supply chain
capabilities, IGI Global, DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0065-2, pp. 159 160
Liu, J. (2010). Chinese planes challenge Boeing and Airbus. BBC News, 2 February 2010
Mayer, S. (2008). Airbus versus Boeing- Strategic Management Report. GRIN Verlag
McGlaun, S. (2008). Boeing's 787 Dreamliner Hit with more Delay Nightmares. Daily Tech,
12 December 2008
Osborne, A. (1953). Applied Imagination. New York, NY: Charles Scribner
Parnes, S.J. (1992). Sourcebook for Creative Problem Solving: The Basic Course. Buffalo,
NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.
Proctor, T. (2009). Creative Problem Solving for Managers: Developing skills for decision
making and innovation. 3rd edition, Routledge
Rigby, B. (2013). Analysis: Lengthy 787 probe, fixing problem, may cost Boeing dear.
reuters.com, 26 January 2013.
Senior, B. (2009). Organisational change. 3rd edition, Pearson Education India
Sternberg, R.J. (1999). Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press
16 | P a g e

Szymanski, A. (2011). The competitive analysis of the commercial aircraft industry. GRIN
Verlag
von Stamm, B. (2008). Managing innovation, design and creativity. John Wiley & Sons
Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought, New York, NY: Harcourt Brace
Waugh, R. and Watson, L. (2011). First salute for the new age of air travel: Hundreds turn out
to send off Boeing's new carbon-fibre 787 Dreamliner. Daily Mail, 27 September 2011
Zeithaml, V.A., Bitner, M.J. and Gremler, D. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple item scale for
measuring consumer perception of service quality, Journal of Retailing, 64, pp. 64-79.
Zeithaml, V.A., Bitner, M.J. and Gremler, D. (2009). Service marketing: Integrating customer
focus across the firm, 5th edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.

17 | P a g e