Industrial Design Education (IDE) is a delicate balance between developing skills (practices and methods) and nurturing creativity (developing opportunities). Assigned projects need to emphasize, to varying degrees, both skills and creativity. There are two main constituencies within IDE, educators and students. Because educators develop the projects and assignments, they can be viewed as Top-Down processors; seeing the whole project and how it can be broken into different parts. Students can be viewed as Bottom-Up processors, reacting to the assigned projects. They, generally, see each individual part but not, necessarily, how each part contributes to the whole. When projects are assigned, students must review, reflect, and develop/expand ideas based on the project description (i.e., prompt). There is a propensity for design students to quickly lock on to an idea, rejecting alternate potential project directions. Quickly locking onto an idea negates exploring iterative solutions resulting in less opportunity for a new/improved project direction. Alternately, when the assignment description is too focused, it does not allow for opportunities that do not exactly match the description. Introducing ambiguity into project descriptions allows students to consider a variety of solutions and use the Industrial Design process to develop proposed concepts. Sidney Parnes says in, Creativity: Unlocking the Human Potential “…without the ability to synthesize, evaluate and develop our ideas, we achieve no effective creativity.” (Parnes, 1972, p. 7) This paper will reflect on how design students translate assigned information into creative product solutions.