777fly
Lateral or Outside the `box thinking is what regulators have tried to move away from in recent times and I agree with this. It is the quality of the procedures that you follow that need to be changed. The MEL should be doing the thinking outside of the box, not the engineer.
If you want a change in approach, then you need to remove the MEL as the first go to book, if an aircraft has a fault on prior to departure. If you had to quote a maintenance/schematic manual or wiring diagram reference along with a MEL reference, then you would be forcing the engineer to be giving him/herself a quick refresher on the system to be deferred.
But this approach lengthens the time it takes to dispatch the aircraft and so costs money. So write better MEL's.
How do you prove that the engineer had an understanding of the air/gnd system to the type of aircraft. He/she may have sat the course and passed the exams, but in the modules dealing with air/gnd sensing and anti ice protection, only got 75%, meaning that 25% of the syllabus was not understood. That is why you don't think outside the box. You follow procedures, i.e. what the MEL tells you to do.