Concept Fan
Concept Fan: When stuck on a problem, step back to a higher level of purpose. Ask "what is this approach trying to achieve?" Then ask what else could achieve that purpose. At each level of abstraction, a new set of alternative approaches fans out. Moving to higher abstraction levels reveals solutions invisible from the original framing.
What Is the Concept Fan?β
The Concept Fan was developed by Edward de Bono, the cognitive scientist who also coined "lateral thinking," and published in his 1992 book Serious Creativity. It addresses a common creative block: when a team is committed to a particular approach and that approach encounters obstacles, the natural response is to work harder within the same frame. The Concept Fan provides a systematic method for stepping outside the frame.
The visual metaphor is a hand-held fan. The current specific approach is one blade at the tip of the fan. Moving backward along the handle expands to the concept level (what is this trying to accomplish?), then to the purpose level (what is the wider goal?), then to the broad direction (what kind of outcomes do we want?). At each level, the fan opens: multiple alternative approaches become visible that are invisible when you're focused on one specific solution.
The method is particularly valuable because it makes explicit the hierarchical structure of goals β specific approaches serve broader concepts, which serve purposes, which serve directions β and uses this structure as a scaffold for generating alternatives at each level.
How It Worksβ
Step 1: Write the current approach
β State what you're currently trying to do specifically
β Example: "Build a mobile app for customer support"
Step 2: Step back to Concept level
β What is this approach trying to achieve?
β "Provide fast, accessible customer support"
β Fan: What other approaches could provide this? (Chatbot, phone, in-store)
Step 3: Step back to Purpose level
β What is the concept trying to serve?
β "Reduce customer frustration with product issues"
β Fan: What other concepts could reduce frustration? (Better product documentation, proactive outreach)
Step 4: Step back to Direction level
β What is the broader aspiration?
β "Create customers who feel supported and loyal"
β Fan: What directions could achieve this? (Community building, personalisation, guarantee programmes)
Step 5: Work back down
β Choose the most promising level to generate solutions
β Develop specific approaches at the chosen level
β Ask: what approaches from higher levels could replace the original?
Three Real-World Examplesβ
Traffic Congestion in a Cityβ
A city planning department was working on a highway expansion (specific approach). Using the Concept Fan:
- Concept: Move more vehicles through the corridor β Also possible: reduce vehicles, enable non-vehicle movement
- Purpose: Reduce journey times for commuters β Also possible: reduce commuting need, shift commuting time
- Direction: Increase economic productivity of the city β Also possible: enable remote work, redistribute employment geographically
The highway expansion was one approach at the tip of the fan. At the purpose level, "shift commuting time" (staggered working hours) was dramatically cheaper. At the direction level, "redistribute employment geographically" (satellite offices, remote work infrastructure) offered a generational solution that made the highway expansion less necessary.
Product Growth Stallβ
A SaaS company's growth team was focused on paid acquisition (specific approach) β CPAs were rising.
- Concept: Acquire new customers β Also: convert existing users to paid, win back churned customers
- Purpose: Grow active paying user base β Also: increase revenue per user, improve retention
- Direction: Build a sustainable, growing business β Also: increase NPS to drive word-of-mouth, build product virality
The Concept Fan revealed that improving retention (purpose level) had a 3Γ ROI vs. paid acquisition β a solution invisible when the team was fixated on the acquisition channel.
Personal Career Developmentβ
An individual was planning to get an MBA (specific approach) to advance their career.
- Concept: Gain credibility and skills β Also: get visible results, build a public portfolio
- Purpose: Advance to a senior leadership role β Also: build a network that creates opportunities, develop a specialisation
- Direction: Build a fulfilling, well-compensated career β Also: create own business, develop adjacent skills
At the concept level, "build a public portfolio" (writing, speaking, open-source projects) was significantly cheaper and faster than an MBA for the specific career transition being planned.
When to Use Itβ
β Use Concept Fan when:
- Your team is stuck on one approach and generating diminishing ideas
- The current solution feels arbitrary β there might be fundamentally different approaches
- Initial ideas were rejected and you need genuine alternatives, not variations
- You want to question the problem definition itself, not just the solution
β Less useful when:
- The approach is already fully specified by constraints (regulatory, contractual)
- Fast iteration on an existing solution is more valuable than exploring alternatives
- The team is already working at a high level of abstraction
| Pairs well with | Why |
|---|---|
| Reframing | Concept Fan is a structured reframing method β each level up is a new problem frame |
| Lateral Thinking | Both de Bono methods; Concept Fan provides systematic structure for lateral moves |
| Jobs to Be Done | JTBD clarifies the purpose/direction level of the fan |
| First Principles | First principles questions assumptions at each level of the fan |
Common Misuses and Limitationsβ
Moving levels without generating alternatives at each level. The fan's value comes from generating multiple alternatives at each level of abstraction before moving to the next. Simply listing the purpose without exploring what else could achieve that purpose misses the method.
Stopping at the first higher level. Often the most creative alternatives emerge at the purpose or direction level, not at the concept level. Teams too comfortable with the existing frame often stop one level back and miss the more radical alternatives.
Using it as a reframe for the same approach. The Concept Fan should generate genuinely different approaches at each level. If every option at the concept level is a variation of the original approach, the reframing hasn't been effective.
Related Modelsβ
| Model | Relationship |
|---|---|
| Lateral Thinking | Concept Fan is a structured lateral thinking tool |
| Reframing | Each level of the Concept Fan represents a new problem frame |
| Abstraction Laddering | Both use abstraction levels to expand solution space; Abstraction Laddering moves both up and down |
Frequently Asked Questionsβ
How many levels should the Concept Fan have?
Typically 3β4 levels produce the most useful output: specific approach β concept β purpose β broad direction. More levels tend to become too abstract to generate actionable alternatives. Fewer levels may not escape the original frame. In practice, the useful stopping point is the level at which alternatives become genuinely different in kind (not just different executions of the same idea).
How does the Concept Fan differ from asking "why" repeatedly?
Asking "why" repeatedly (the 5 Whys) is a diagnostic tool that traces causation backward. The Concept Fan is a generative tool that uses abstraction levels to expand the solution space. The 5 Whys asks why a problem exists; the Concept Fan asks what other ways a goal could be achieved. Both use layering, but in different directions for different purposes: diagnosis vs. creative expansion.
When should you choose to work at a higher vs. lower level of abstraction?
Work at a lower level (close to the specific approach) when: implementation constraints are tight and you need practical variations. Work at a higher level when: the current approach is fundamentally wrong, not just imperfect. The signal for moving higher is when all lower-level alternatives are variations of the same thing. Move up until you find a level where meaningfully different alternatives exist, then develop those alternatives down to specifics.
Further Readingβ
- de Bono, E. (1992). Serious Creativity β the original source for Concept Fan
- de Bono, E. (1970). Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step β the broader framework
- Michalko, M. (2006). Thinkertoys β practical creativity techniques including abstraction-based methods
Apply with AIβ
π Expand your solution space with a Concept Fan in MindMax β
This page is part of the MindMax Mental Models Knowledge Base.