what's a pretty good answer to "do you consider yourself creative [or like creative problem solver]"
As ywhtptgtfo said, this is just an opportunity to give an example of when you've solved a problem. Creativity isn't just about interpretive dance or pretty poetry; any time you solve a problem, you're
creating a solution. So this is literally just asking "give an example of a problem you have faced and how you solved it". A lot of interviewers like to ask that question; the one you've posed here is just a more loaded way of phrasing it. You have surely solved a problem in your professional or academic life; it doesn't need to be a difficult problem, nor does it require a complicated solution. Ywhtptgtfo's example is typical: it's the type of problem that most programmers can solve, but it's still a great example of creating a solution. If you're a computer programmer, then you will have LOADS of really great examples to pick from. Literally any time you make a program without following a tutorial, you're solving a problem.
Worst case scenario: you're fresh out of university with no work experience. You don't have any practical experience in work to draw from, so you don't have a ready-made example of creativity as it applies to a business. But you nonetheless have a plethora of examples in your academic life. I did a physics degree, which isn't a subject that is traditionally characterised as "creative". But when you design an experiment, isn't that an expression of creativity? You need to test X, and eliminate confounding variables Y and Z, so you design an experiment to do that: you create something new, from scratch, to solve a specific problem. Or maybe you encountered a problem with the equipment that you overcame somehow - that's really easy to talk about, because it's something practical and reasonably relatable.
And hell, even if you don't believe you are creative, you can still answer the question and score points on it, depending on the type of person who's interviewing you. The way you approach an integral, for example, is a decent allegory to the way you would solve a problem in business: you see a tough problem, you look at the tools you have available (integration by parts, taking logs, series expansions -- I dunno lol I'd just use mathematica), and then you break the problem down into a series of easier to solve problems. That's what maths is about, right? Taking a complicated problem and reducing it to a set of problems with known solutions? "I approach problems in real life in a similar way: I try to break down the problem into a series of smaller, more manageable problems. I analyse each part separately, so that I can use the right tool for the right part of the problem. And if I can't solve the problem, I try to mitigate against it as far as possible. Some people rely on their creativity to solve a problem, but I've always found that a more methodical, systematic approach is most effective for me."
EDIT: Oh and another thing. With interview questions, sometimes you really don't have an answer for it. E.g. some interviewers will ask you a really vague, elusive question, which, even after you've asked them to clarify, remains essentially impossible to answer directly. In this case, I just use it as an opportunity to talk about whatever I want to talk about. I have a list of points that I want to get across -- things that I need to convince the interviewer of in order for them to hire me. So if the job requires X, Y and Z, then I need to get the point across that I have X, Y and Z. Let's say that at this point in the interview, I have only got across points X and Y; I still need to convince them that I have Z. So if they ask a stupid, vague question to which I have no direct answer, I'll simply start talking about Z instead.
Politicians do something called a "pivot". If someone asks a question on employment, they'll "pivot" to talk about something else, e.g.:
>> "Mr Cameron, unemployment currently stands at 7.3%, and the official Bank of England forecast is for it to remain above 7% for the next 3 years. The Financial Times has published an opinion piece criticising your jobs policy. What is your response to these criticisms?"
> "The best way to get people back into work is to make sure they have the skills necessary to participate in a modern knowledge economy. That's why my Conservative government is reforming education, making it easier for parents to choose which schools their children go to. <continues to talk about their flagship education policy>"
Don't be afraid to just start talking about the thing you want to talk about -- it's better than having no answer at all!!!
