The Creative vs. The Scientific Process
The Creative Process is one of more or less constant ambiguity, refining ideas progressively in pursuit of a goal that may not have one single, empirically verifiable answer. For that reason, it is not productive to apply The Scientific Process in creative matters, because it will only tell you what doesn’t work, and why. It won’t tell you what might work, or what is needed to make it work. It may even, for that reason, be a blocker for continued ideation, due to its lack of recognition of what actually does work, even in an incomplete solution, and what can be used to build upon. This lack of recognition of the (partial) merits of ideas can also be demotivating, and serve to affect group dynamics in a restrictive way, where people lose the motivation to continue contributing to a solution, since progress is viewed rather unforgivingly, in black-or-white terms.
Ideation needs are best met iteratively with The Creative Process, where solutions are continuously and productively brought forward, and tested out with a less dogmatic or restrictively proof-based perspective on what the final solution might look like.
Recognizing the ambiguity inherent in the process means suspending judgment, and instead striving to contribute constructively.
(This approach to the ideation process actually has some similarities with Agile Methodology).