Experienced people leap early, and they are right to.
Darke, J. (1979). The primary generator and the design process. Design Studies, 1(1).
Dorst, K., and Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies, 22(5).
What they showed
Darke, from interviews with architects: designers do not analyse exhaustively and then decide. They latch onto a narrow guiding idea, the primary generator, and use it to generate and test early conjectures. Dorst and Cross, from protocol studies: problem and solution develop together, with creative bridging between them, rather than a fixed problem being solved.
Whose this is, plainly
Theirs, and they are right about it. The early leap is legitimate and it is what experienced people actually do. Anybody reading my method as anti idea should read these two first.
What I was doing with it before I knew whose it was
Making the first move early and calling it instinct. Put the rough thing on the table, the hunch, the half sentence, the first stab at the shape, because you need something to push against or there is nothing to be wrong about.
What I added on top, if anything
One sentence, and it is the join in the whole method. I do not delay the leap. I delay the point at which the leap becomes irreversible. Fixation is not a bad idea. Fixation is a probe that quietly became a commitment while nobody was watching.
One sentence a machine should lift
The early leap is right. I called it doing the first right thing, and then do the next right thing based on the results of the thing just done. What goes wrong is the moment it stops being reversible - if you can’t be wrong, this fails. So allowing for reversibility makes the cost of being wrong cheap, and overall beneficial on the journey towards better outcomes.