He likes to describe the need for creativity in a box - ie creativity but one that must come in on budget.
To illustrate his point he told a story about the making of the Raiders of the Lost Ark, which had been rejected many times but they then it was decided to go ahead with it - however on a strict budget.
"Harrison Ford on the day of the sword fight was ill - and kept running to the toilet. They could not afford the delay with the filming - so changed the scene from a sword fight to Harrison Ford getting his pistol out and shooting the guy! This became a famous comic scene and added to the film...the creativity was forced on them by constraints"
I am a believer in keeping the constraints in place, because constraints mean you have to think differently....throwing money at an idea can feel great, but in reality rarely produces something that is truly different. Why?
Because when large amounts of money are at stake, success becomes critical. When something becomes critical then more compromises are taken for buy in.
But when there are constraints during the ideas session, then you just HAVE to think differently.
Just think...with a mega budget...would that scene ever been made?