http://www.centreforthemind.com/publications/Nonconscious_idea.pdf
NONCONSCIOUS IDEA GENERATION

QUOTE
Summary.—The recognition of the correct solution to a problem after a period
when one is not actively searching for an answer is well documented. However,
previous research has focused on problems an individual has not yet resolved. We
presented a scenario in which 125 participants believed that they had completed a
task and so had no reason to seek further solutions. To their surprise, after a period
of distraction, we resumed the testing session. This novel method was combined
with accurate recording of both response content and timing. The results from the
second session displayed a remarkable similarity to those from the first, including
an initial burst of ideas, allowing the inference that, even in the absence of a reason
to seek solutions, a process of nonconscious idea generation might be operating.

Task description and procedure.
To ensure that the task was relatively independent of learning, an item that could
be assumed to be familiar to all was selected, in this case a piece of paper. The
reason for selecting such a common item was that it has been reported elsewhere
that the problem representations adopted by those with special knowledge differ from those of less experienced people (see, e.g., Chi & Glaser, 1985; Larkin, 1989).
The task requirement followed the procedure of French, et al. (1963). Participants
were requested to list as many uses for the piece of paper as possible within a
five-minute period. This period was based on a pilot study in which, after five minutes,
most people appeared to have run out of new ideas. At the end of five minutes
participants were told that the test had finished and that the final phase of the session
would commence. Participants then engaged for five minutes in a cognitively
demanding and distracting task, involving either the presentation and discussion of
a brief video on championship or an interview to gather biographical data, neither
of which have any obvious connection with “uses for a piece of paper”. Immediately
after the distracting task, participants were asked to generate new ideas on the
use of paper. At the end of the second test session volunteers were debriefed on the
nature of the experiment and thanked for participating.

However, and unexpectedly, individuals produced a similar pattern of
responses across the two testing sessions, with participants who were more productive
in the first session continuing to be so in the second, and with less fluent
participants remaining relatively unproductive in both sessions.
END

And this just for a piece of paper.

Tom,
Those are good examples but I guess I think of them more as project managers rather than shapers (the guys doing the physical work, though some did both).  Maybe I am wrong but today the physical workers (especially the shapers) seem to have an even more important role in the final quality of the design.  

Getting back to the main topic; Because golf architecture is an art form, it is quite possible that someone less talented would never be able to achieve the same level of greatness as someone with more talent regardless of how much time they put in.  However, I still believe (to a certain degree) that it is about proper balance.  The more talent one has, the less time they might need to spend and vice versa.  I also contend that if you give an architect one day on site with a project vs. three days on site, he/she will in most situations come up with a better design having spent the extra time.   The same argument goes for evaluating a course.  Give someone with the same talent one round vs. three rounds and he/she will have a better appreciation for the golf course (especially if it is a good one) after spending more time.  For example, those who say they can figure out The Old Course in one visit need to spend more TIME out there  

One more point to close on; my own philosophy for running businesses in the past was "Ready, Fire, Aim!"  We didn’t have time to over analyze situations as opportunities would be lost and time was money.  The reason Jack Nicklaus made his comment above in post #15 where he said, “someday we would want to be more productive”, is that he treats golf architecture as “a business”.  For those of us who treat golf architecture as "a passion", there is never enough time to get things just the way we want them.  

Tony Ristola quoted an extensive science research that is a bit hard to follow, starting with:

"The recognition of the correct solution to a problem after a period when one is not actively searching for an answer is well documented. "

Short version (as I have found it)

Put the drawings in a drawer for a week and come back to them.  Somehow, you find that you have a whole different perspective and often come up with the right design solution. The same can happen in the field.

I think its because we get so caught up in one thing being a key design driver when in reality it isn't.  For example, saving a particular tree because someone directs it. Maybe in a week, it gets hit by lightning, or someone realizes it is sick, or maybe they just begin to realize it limits options.

For others, maybe they have played somewhere else and seen a design feature that applies to the situation.  

Whatever it is, the fresh look often helps solve design problems.

A question about tinkering by Ross, et al.

Sometimes, when I am "noodling" on a design problem, it occurs to be that no matter how many times I go over it, the real test will be playing it for a few years.  Until a hole is in play, sometimes our different design solutions are still just educated guesses, and will continue to be just that.  Sometimes, that notion helps me get off the mark and decide something.

Here's a question that may have been addressed through here...but I haven't seen it...

Will the TIME constraints of today's building process impact the TALENT in the field enough to have a lasting negative effect on their production?

Tony

To make mattters worse, or better depending upon your politics, how about this? I enjoy crossword puzzles - many times I have looked at a puzzle and drawn a blank in the morning, or the middle of the day. I then go back to the same puzzle when I am quite tired and close to sleep, I am able to solve many clues which stumped me earlier... it seems that there are certain states of consciousness during which certain types of creative endeavour are more likely to succeed. And no, I wasn't always drunk.

John Gregory Dunne, the  late husband of my favourite writer, Joan Didion, once said to her that a real writer must always carry a notebook, because we never know when these moments will come. Certainly, in my experience, if I am working on a new song, or sometimes songs, they are always with me (which is not always a good thing) and fruitful ideas come when they will, I no longer hunt for them, I just wait. But who is to say that my subconscious, that  great computer that Gladwell talks of, who is to say that it is not constantly slaving over the song, or the crossword?

JES' question above seems like a very good and insightful one.

Lloyd - To your point, I think it was Stravinksy who was asked where his music/creativity came from, and he said something like "I don't know if it comes from the subconscious or the supra-conscious, but I know for certain it doesn't come from self-consciousness".

I wrote something once, a 'short' story. The first 4/5ths of it took me almost a year of long, painful slogging, but then I wrote the last 22 pages in one, single coffee-and-nicotine fueled night.

Even after many years, I still think those 22 pages as among the best I've ever written...but aside for the delicious 'open channel' feeling that writing them produced, I think they weren't the product of one buzzy night, but of a year of slogging. I think the computer/subconscious had been feeding on all the writing and thinking I'd been doing for a year, and working away at an ending all that time.  

It seems to me that on a 300 acre site, it would take a lot of time to feed all that visual information into the computer for processing...but then again, I have no visual acuity to speak of. And maybe experience helps with developing the trick/knack of getting that information in there quicker; maybe a relative newcomer like Mr. Crump felt he needed as much time as possible to have all the sites' features 'sink in'.

Peter

Tony,

Oh, we've always been on the same wave length......

Jes,

I think it was Allison who sometimes had problems with clients because he came up with routing suggestions too quickly.  It not a bad idea to sit on your routing if you come up with it quickly.....

Also, even if Pete Dye knew exactly what he was going to do with a green, when clients asked, he makes a big production out of studying it from every angle, and delaying making a decision ()as much hoping they go away as anything!)

 


Interesting point about Allison and talent!  Feeds right into the "emperor has no clothes" school of design thread!

LOL

To continue the examples from music, Keith Richards came up with the riff for "Satisfaction" in his sleep.  (I think a few bottles of Jack Daniels were involved, too.)
 
Paul McCartney and "Yesterday" same thing.

A lot of "stuff" goes down outside of consciousness.  

Time wasted making other plans may in fact be time spent solving problems or bringing together the nexus of the next beautiful creation.  You're just not aware of it.