The authors give many reasons for the fact that existing marketing techniques are no longer so successful, it is connected with the reduction of the product life cycle, and with the revolution made by the transition to digital technologies and with the growth of diversity within the categories of goods and much more. All this only proves that the modern world needs a new approach. Innovation is the key and basis of modern competitive strategies. Innovations can be both from the inside of the market, and from the outside. From the inside of the market, innovations are based on modulation (variation of one of the basic qualities of goods or services, which is to strengthen or reduce this quality), sizing, packaging, design, complements development, effort reduction. But the most effective way, according to the authors, is innovations from outside of the market, such as the creation of a new market or category.
P. Kotler and T. de Bes do not oppose traditional and lateral marketing. They believe that lateral marketing is a complement to traditional marketing. Vertical marketing process is a sequence of steps: identification of needs, definition of the market, segmentation, positioning, development of marketing tools. A vertical marketing process is a logically consistent movement from the general to the particular. Lateral marketing – involves restructuring existing information and moving from the private to the general with a less rigorous thought process – research, risky and creative.
In their book, P. Kotler and T. De Bes attempted to formulate a theory of lateral marketing. They give the following definition of lateral marketing: it is a workflow that receives existing objects (goods or services) at the input and gives innovation goods or services that are targeted to needs, customer groups or ways / situations of use not currently covered ; thus, this process with a high probability leads to the creation of new categories or markets.
The authors propose a scheme for the process of lateral marketing. It consists of three steps and is based on the process of creative thinking:
Choosing a Focus in the Marketing Process
Generating a Marketing Gap
Making Connections
Lateral marketing begins with a product or service. There are two options:
Select the product or service that we are selling.
Choose a product or service with which it is difficult for us to compete.
1 step. Having determined the goods, we must choose the focus in it. For the purposes of lateral marketing, it is necessary to divide all components of vertical marketing into three main levels:
Market definition level (need, target group, mode/situation of use)
Product Level
The level of marketing tools (i.e. the entire marketing mix except for the product).
The second step is to shift the focus, which is located on one of three levels. Here you can select six basic operations:
– Substitution
– Combination
– Inversion
– Exaggeration
– Elimination
– Reordering
Step 3 – establishing a connection or eliminating a gap. For this purpose, an analytical evaluation is performed. There are three ways to assess this: track the purchase process, identify useful properties and find the right situation.
The process of lateral marketing gives three types of results:
The same product, new use
New product, new use
New product, same use
At the present time, when new products are brought to the market with unusual speed, a significant proportion of attempts fail. The book describes a new technique for successfully competing in the market, it allows you to develop new products, find new market niches and eventually make a breakthrough in business. The authors do not reject classical marketing but advise in addition to it to use non-standard ways of thinking.
The book will be useful for those who are going to use lateral marketing in their company, for specialists in marketing and advertising, as well as for those who are interested in unconventional thinking as an ideal way of developing new ideas.
A process for generating ideas? Ideas
are a creative business not a mechanical one, do you say? In a world, where everything
is process-driven how can creativity be an exception? In fact, scientists are
trying to understand the principles (or process?) of even chaos to control it.
We are digressing. Let’s stick to creative Process.
James Webb Young, the legendary advertising
man wrote a great book –A Technique
for Producing Ideasin 1960, which is a classic even today.
He described the five steps in detail. Here is the essence:
Mind follows a method which is just as
definite as a production process or even an assembly line. There is a technique
for using the mind for producing ideas. Whenever an idea is produced, this
technique is followed consciously or unconsciously. And the good news is that
this technique of producing ideas can be consciously cultivated, thereby increasing
the ability of the mind to produce ideas.
This technique of mind follows five
steps. While you can recognize them individually, it is important to recognize
their inter-relationships more than anything else. One more thing. The mind
follows these five steps in definite order or sequence that is not
interchangeable.
Gather the raw material systematically for the
product or service for which you are seeking to develop a great new idea.
Gather as much as you can both the raw materials – raw material that is
specific to your product and to the people to whom you want to sell your
product.
2.Masticate the material gathered and
start the mental digestive process. Masticate the material till gastric
(creative) juices are secreted. You have to digest before ingest.
3.Now drop the whole subject and put the
whole problem as completely as you can. Turn it over to your sub-conscious mind
and let it work on it. Ideas come after you have stopped straining for them,
and have passed through a relaxation from the search.
4.When you are totally pre-occupied with
it, out of no where the idea appears. This is youreureka moment! It will come to you when you are
least expecting it – while shaving, or bathing or most often when you are
half-awake. It may even wake you up in the middle of it. Remember what Sir
Isaac Newton said when he was asked how he discovered the law of gravitation.
He saidby constantly thinking about it!
5.Having produced one, don’t hold your
idea close to your chest. Submit it to the criticism of the judicious. Because
an idea has self-expanding qualities. It stimulates those who see it to add to
it.
What are you waiting for? Go and start
producing those great, unique ideas you have been wanting to!
In a recent class I was challenged by a participant whose organization wanted to be able to measure creativity. They felt that it was key to their artistic process that they hire and develop truly creative people, but they were having a hard time pinpointing exactly what they wanted.
The textbook answer is to “trust the process”, as the discipline of asking your team to formulate concrete intended results usually drives the design of meaningful measures. But the more I help organizations, the more I am starting to think that subject-matter expertise is also an important part of the formula.
The basic measurement development process embedded in our MPRA model is straightforward. We always start by articulating strategic intent using a disciplined process. Then there are four basic steps in measure development:
Identify objectives and intended result(s)
Understand alternative measures
Select the right measurement(s) for each objective
Define and document selected performance measures
From there we move to target setting and an ongoing performance review cycle.
It is during the intended results and alternative measures steps that the team spend most of the time thinking through an intangible like creativity. The challenge is almost always to establish consensus across the team about what the desired result is in concrete, measurable terms. From there, various alternative measures can be designed and the ideal measure(s) can be selected through a disciplined scoring process.
During these two steps, having a subject-matter expert in the room can be invaluable. For example, a subject-matter expert will have a deep understanding on how others have approached your problem. Creativity, for example, is an intangible quality that academics have been trying to measure for decades. How one defines “creativity” can vary and will impact the desired result we want to measure. Some scholars define creativity as the ability to produce original and appropriate solutions to problems or challenges. Others view creativity as a combination of novelty, usefulness, and surprise. In general, creativity involves generating ideas, products, or solutions that are both original and valuable.
A subject-matter expert will likely also understand how others have approached measuring creativity. This is useful not because we want to blindly adopt something that others have done, but to learn from the past and apply ideas that seem appropriate.
Most methods that have been used in academia could be broadly categorized as either subjective, objective, or a hybrid of both. Subjective methods of measuring creativity involve using the judgment of experts or observers to evaluate the creativity of a person or their work. These methods are commonly used in the arts, such as music, painting, and writing, where the evaluation of creativity is based on subjective opinions.
Objective methods of measuring creativity could involve the production of products or sales generated. On the academic side, objective methods include standardized tests or measures to assess creativity. An example includes divergent thinking tests, which assess a person’s ability to generate multiple and diverse ideas in response to a given prompt. The most common divergent thinking test is the Guilford Alternate Uses Test, which requires participants to list as many uses as they can for a common object. Another example is the Remote Associates Test, which assesses a person’s ability to identify the common link between three seemingly unrelated words. If you are trying to create an organizational measure, these academic approaches might not seem that helpful in a literal sense, but understanding the reasoning behind those measurements might drive the right solution. Perhaps an index could be created that included end outcomes focusing on products and revenue generated, medium impact measurements around subjective evaluation of design, and contributing factor-type measurements around the skills tests.
In today’s business environment, there is mounting pressure for B2B marketers to do more with less. The pace of business is fast, teams are lean, competition is fierce, and the need to remain innovative is higher than ever.
Yet, what many should remember is that innovation doesn’t necessarily mean creating “the next best thing”. Innovation is a continual process of improvement and seeking to better understand new and different ways of satisfying the needs of customers.
There is a lot that B2B marketers can borrow from consumer-oriented businesses to rev up their innovation efforts. One effective way is leveraging the principles of design thinking and applying it to product development / innovation initiatives.
The AMA defines the 5 steps in design thinking as:
Empathize – gain a deep understanding of your customers / end-users’ behaviors and needs
Define – clearly frame the problem to solve
Ideate – cross-functional brainstorming
Prototype – rapidly bringing ideas to life
Test – experimenting and capturing quick feedback from customers / end-users
In this article, we will look at each of the 5 steps in the design thinking process and how B2B organizations could apply them to their businesses – specifically for product development so that as new products are developed, they are desirable (customers want it), feasible (the company can do it), and viable (the business can scale it).
Empathize – Understanding the Customer’s Needs
Design thinking is often associated with terms such as “human-centered design” or “user-centered design”. This underscores the clear link between the business and people – after all, businesses serve people.
The first step in the design thinking process is to bring a deep understanding of the customer or more importantly, the end-user, into the process. Oftentimes, B2B organizations rely on internal customer-facing functions such as the sales teams or customer service to act as the voice of the customer. While helpful, this provides a limited view of the true customer experience.
It is therefore crucial to capture the customer’s point of view in an unbiased way and to step into their shoes to better understand their goals, motivations, behaviors, challenges and unmet needs. Leveraging primary research such as ethnographies, focus groups, or in-depth interviews with customers and developing decision making eco-systems, buyer personas, and customer journey maps are excellent tools for building foundational knowledge about B2B customers.
Define – Identify the Problem to Solve and Develop a Clear Brief
Famous inventor, Charles Kettering, once said “A problem well-stated is half-solved.”. Truer words have not been spoken when it comes to innovation. To inspire creative ideas, there needs to be a clear problem to solve. By gathering customer insights from the empathy stage (and other resources) and looking for common trends or themes, teams may start to identify certain opportunity areas to plan to innovate around. It’s not uncommon for several opportunity areas or unmet needs to exist.
However, it’s important for organizations to prioritize which to attack first. This step could also help to build a pipeline of opportunities to explore over the near, mid, and long term. The output from the ‘Defining’ stage is typically a well-crafted brief with a strategic focus, clear objectives, and inspiration that can guide both design and research later in the process.
Ideate – Unleash Creativity and Generate Potential Solutions
Armed with a strong foundation of customer knowledge and a clear direction on what problem to solve, it’s time to bring together a cross-functional team to collaborate and generate ideas for solutions. The purpose of these sessions is to focus on the main problem to solve – per the brief coming out of the Defining stage – and to generate as many possible solutions as possible. During these collaborative brainstorming sessions, it’s critical to create an environment that encourages divergent thinking – where everything from mild to wild is acceptable. Once all ideas are on the table, the goal will be to begin converging on a few high potential ideas worth pursuing.
The converging process is often where the blue-sky thinking gets a dose of reality and constraints are applied. Using tools such as a SWOT, customer value proposition, or impact/feasibility frameworks can be helpful in prioritizing which opportunities to pursue first. By the end of the Ideation stage there should be several potential concepts (and alternatives) as well as hypothesis about benefits to further explore.
Prototype – Rapidly Bringing Ideas To Life
Quickly bringing new product concepts to life in a way that customers / end-users can engage and interact with is a critical component for how B2B organizations can leverage design thinking in their innovation process. This step is mostly led by the product design team who take inspiration from the ideation stage and think of ways that the company could feasibly bring a new product to market. Depending on the subject, prototypes could take the form of 3D printed models, renderings, concept statements, wireframes, etc.
The intent of the prototyping stage is to quickly design stimuli for testing that customers / end-users can understand, react to, and provide feedback on how it may / may not work for them or their organization. Often there are several concepts and alternatives developed that each represent a unique benefit. The purpose of this is to isolate variables and build upon what is working.
Early in the innovation process these conceptual prototypes don’t necessarily have to be perfect – a term that is often used in this space is Minimally Viable Product (MVP). That means if the prototype is at a high enough fidelity for the general idea to be understood, it should be good enough for testing. As the concepts move closer to commercialization, the need for higher fidelity prototypes increases (i.e., close to a final working product).
Test – Agile Feedback from Real Customers
The once conceptual ideas have been brought to life via prototyping and are now ready to be tested with customers / end-users. Although many associate product testing with quantitative benchmarking (which is appropriate at times), a qualitative approach can help product teams dive much deeper into the “why” and “how” of the feedback to truly understand how a potential product idea may be used in real world applications.
One common pitfall at this stage in the process is allowing customers to drive the innovation process. While customer feedback is extremely important, learnings need to be validated with business experts who understand both feasibility and strategy. This is especially true with upstream innovation (i.e., where product concepts are still in their infancy) and learnings are used as building blocks to continue informing the design process.
The key to the testing stage is to go in with a clear set of hypotheses and action standards / success criteria that can help inform go/no-go decisions for winnowing down the number of concept candidates to further pursue.
While there are 5 clear steps in the design thinking process, it is not always linear. In fact, the design and innovation process is meant to be agile and iterative, meaning teams might go back and forth between stages before moving forward (e.g., test, learn, ideate, prototype, test again) as new information may challenge ingoing hypotheses or lead to new ideas. The benefit of following this process is quite rewarding as innovation efforts are closely linked to customer needs and the design of products is strongly informed by customer feedback so products provide added-value, are differentiated, and commercially viable to produce.
As businesses begin formulating return to office strategies, how concerned are they about current productivity levels? And what downsides and potential upsides have they seen since making the shift to remote working? In this latest article we find that while there have been plenty of productivity challenges, many businesses are seeing some interesting opportunities arising from remote working.
Productivity Currently a Top Concern for Businesses
Data from our latest wave of research shows worries over ability to cope with flexible working and with productivity of colleagues and employees topping the list of concerns for businesses around the globe. More than four in 10 business decision-makers are very or extremely concerned about these issues, placing them at first and second, respectively, among all operational concerns we’ve asked about since the second week of May:
While productivity is a pressing concern for all businesses right now, the burden of ensuring that workers remain active and industrious are not shared equally across different regions: Concern over productivity of colleagues and employees seems especially high among organizations based in the Asia-Pacific region, where 53% are “very” or “extremely” worried about the issue. By contrast, organizations in the Americas seem significantly less troubled, as only one-third (33%) rated it very or extremely concerning.
This reflects the different stages of the pandemic that these regions are at right now – with Asia-Pacific significantly further through its initial phase of the crisis. What this suggests is that productivity may remain a persistent issue as we move toward recovery.
Reasons to Worry: Negative Impacts on Productivity
To understand the reasons behind these significant concerns over productivity, we asked businesses about a range of negative impacts they have seen to their business since early May, as well as how significant or extreme each of these impacts has been over this timeframe:
The results above indicate that productivity concerns are driven by a range of perceived problems. Altogether, 95% of concerned decision-makers indicated that at least one of the productivity problems listed above has impacted their business to some extent. Enterprises (those with 250 or more employees) generally register significantly higher proportions that have seen any impact from these challenges on their business, versus SMEs (<250 employees).
So what have the main issues been?
Top Challenges to Productivity
Motivation – Problems with staff morale and motivation top the list in terms of prevalence and impact, with nearly 8 in 10 (78%) citing this problem. Given the duress many have endured in balancing professional responsibilities with striving to protect themselves and loved ones from health impacts of COVID-19, it would be a surprise not to see morale as an issue. Job security created by economic uncertainty is also likely to be part of these worries.
The fact that this issue tops the list of productivity challenges should serve as a stark reminder to organizations that they are only as strong as their people: Making employees’ mental wellbeing a top priority is likely to become an even bigger focus in future in the context of productivity.
This need to focus and support employee mental health may, in part, be addressed by a growing array of mobile mental health and therapy apps that companies can encourage their employees to use. This includes apps such as Kite and Talkspace, as well as other mental health tools and resources. A further example of this is the free “Innen Leben” downloadable flashcard set recently developed and made available for free by a psychologist and psychiatrist in Germany.
Utilization – Simply having enough work to keep all employees occupied throughout the workday is problem for around two-thirds (66%) of businesses with concerns about productivity. And 3 in 10 see this as exerting a major negative impact.
Initiatives based around shortened working hours have started to be considered by some companies and governments. New Zealand’s prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, recently floated the idea of a national 4-day workweek aimed at both helping to bolster domestic tourism and also helping employees strike better, healthier work/life balance as the global crisis continues.
Distraction – “Difficulties balancing work and childcare commitments” and “general distractions at home” are significant, and linked, issues. The melding of work and home lives brings with it everyday distractions that impinge on working time. Whether it’s deliveryman ringing doorbells, construction workers jackhammering nearby or furry familiars leaping across keyboards, virtually everyone has a harder time staying focused and engaged when removed from their regular business environment. Given the diversity of home settings of employees, it has been challenging for many firms to devise an overarching strategy to mitigate this problem.
Supervision – The inability to monitor and manage employees represents the fourth and final major drawback for productivity that the working world has had to grapple with. This obstacle can make it difficult for managers to effectively delegate to and checking on their direct reports. It also directly exacerbates the two previously discussed issues of distraction and (lack of) utilization, since managers can no longer “catch” and refocus distracted employees, nor optimally allocate workloads across their various reports. Now more than ever, managers must be able to trust the initiative of employees.
Other Struggles with Productivity
Sub-optimal Setups – One less severe, but common issue with productivity is the issue of sub-optimal working environments – i.e. a lack of suitable workspaces and/or equipment. This issue has had a major impact on only around one-fifth of firms with productivity problems, although around 6 in 10 have seen it have some negative impact. While firms can do little to provide for a better room or space in which their employees can work remotely, they can certainly help in the form of better technology, tools and equipment. This is especially so if working from home is likely to continue for a significant while longer, as expected in many economies.
Time Management – The final challenge is individual and collective time management. Around 55% of firms to have seen their productivity negatively impacted report a surfeit of meetings that take up too much time and/or long working hours impinging on individual productivity. With so many organizations operating with reduced staff or reduced hours, being careful not to overload those employees becomes a priority. However, this is a difficult balance to strike given the pressures many firms face.
Looking on the Bright Side: Positive Impacts on Productivity
As ominous as the commercial horizon has become, business decision-makers still recognized a range of positive impacts on productivity across their organizations in recent weeks.
Extra Time Means More Time for Reflection and Creativity: First, workers have had the benefit of extra time to get their jobs done, not least in terms of time saved on business travel and commuting to work. Less time spent commuting has had a major positive impact on more than 4 in 10 organizations (42%), and some positive impact on around three-quarters (74%).
Having this extra time and space to themselves has allowed workers to put more thought and creativity into their outputs and deliverables. Around 3 in 10 (29%) reported major positive benefits here, with around two-thirds (68%) of companies surveyed saying this has had at least some impact. More time doesn’t always lead to more productivity, of course – However, gaining a significant chunk of extra time at the start and end of the working day, in particular, has likely helped in this regard.
Extra Flexibility: Many workers have recently gained additional flexibility to work preferred hours and patterns. Around a third (34%) of our sample cited this as a major positive impact, and even more (39%), cited it as having a minor positive impact on their business over the past few weeks. The closely related issue of changing routines was also cited as a major benefit by 25%.
Extra Responsibilities: A third and distinct benefit that more than half (56%) cited as exerting some positive impact on productivity is that of extra experience – i.e. employees being asked to do a wider variety of tasks than normal. Theoretically, if a given organization can accomplish a wider variety of things with the same or fewer resources, productivity will increase. One caveat here is that asking individuals to learn new processes or take on additional responsibilities may still have a time and productivity cost: They’ll need additional time to learn these new skills and even then may not be as efficient as those that previously specialized in these tasks.
Extra Intensity & Room to Focus on Complexity: The fourth and final productivity benefit since the advent of COVID-19 has been that of extra intensity or focus. For many roles, having solitary workspace away from the distractions of the usual, bustling workplace appears to have improved focus for some. While this benefit was only seen as having a major positive impact by around one-fifth of organizations, this was significantly higher in technology firms – here, 33% stated there had been major positive impacts. This aligns closely with software development or coding tasks.
Taken together, these results portray a complex and double-edged array of impacts to organizational productivity during COVID-19 so far. The ability of organizations to get work done has been hampered by issues of motivation, occupation, distraction, and supervision. At the same time, companies have seen many gains in productivity due to their workforces utilizing the benefits of extra time, flexibility, experience, and intensity.
These enforced changes to working patterns are, however, likely to provide strong pointers for businesses and policy-makers in helping to crack the “productivity puzzle” that many firms in mature economies had encountered even prior to the pandemic.
New products breathe life into a product portfolio.“New” is one of the most powerful words in the marketing vocabulary and every company needs to see a significant proportion of its product lineup graced with this adjective. This is something we all know. What is more difficult to determine is where ideas for new products come from.
New ideas can arise randomly or they can be forced in a more systematic way.
Random ideas may appear as such, but it is more likely that they are drawn magnetically to the crucible of design. A company’s existing products will inevitably draw comments and conceptions from within the company and from customers. The skill is being able to harness these seemingly random suggestions and vet them to see if they can be turned into a viable opportunity.
However, we haven’t time to hang around waiting for random ideas which may not arise when we need them. It is worthwhile therefore understanding how to force the generation of new product ideas. Here are 8 possibilities:
Look to the competition. Visit exhibitions, look on the Internet, walk around distributors premises. Despite what people say, there can be money to be made out of being second into the market. Think BookStacks which was founded in 1992 and paved the way for Amazon who didn’t start in business until a couple of years later and made a better fist of it.
Look at market sectors. Look at the indirect competition – companies making products that perform a similar function to yours but which are made in a different way. A manufacturer of cardboard boxes wanted to extend its range and looked at companies using plastics in packaging where it found targets which were interested in a more sustainable packaging product.
Look at patent applications. Where patents are registered and what they are for can be highly illuminating. In addition, there could be mileage in looking at patent applications which have remained dormant but which could present good licensing opportunities today.
Look inside your own company. Ask the sales teams, look back through old reports, check the archives. There could be something that was not appropriate for launch a few years ago which could make it to the market today.
Look to customers. Customers use your products and sometimes they modify them to make them more user-friendly without mentioning what they have done to you. Walk round your customers’ factories and offices and see how your products (and your competitors’ products) are being used. Ask your customers what they would wish for if they had a magic wand.
Look at the pressures influencing a market. The traditional forces that shape a market are political, economic, social and technological. Which of these are having most effect on your market? A company selling mail-order products could see that its customer base was ageing rapidly. Instead of trying to diversify and find younger customers, it extended its products for older people and tapped into a very wealthy and profitable seam.
Look to the academics. Universities and academics have time on their hands to think about new products. Sometimes their lack of commercialization means that they ignore opportunities which are sat on their benches.
Look to foreign sources. It used to be said that products launched in America would find their way into other countries five years later. America isn’t the only cradle of new product development today. Asia could be a fertile source of new ideas.
Brainstorming is a group creativity technique by which efforts are made to find a conclusion for a specific problem by gathering a list of ideas spontaneously contributed by its members.[citation needed]
In other words, brainstorming is a situation where a group of people meet to generate new ideas and solutions around a specific domain of interest by removing inhibitions. People are able to think more freely and they suggest as many spontaneous new ideas as possible. All the ideas are noted down without criticism and after the brainstorming session the ideas are evaluated.[citation needed]
In 1939, advertising executive Alex F. Osborn began developing methods for creative problem-solving.[2] He was frustrated by employees' inability to develop creative ideas individually for ad campaigns. In response, he began hosting group-thinking sessions and discovered a significant improvement in the quality and quantity of ideas produced by employees. He first termed the process as organized ideation, but participants later came up with the term "brainstorm sessions", taking the concept after the use of "the brain to storm a problem".[3]
During the period when Osborn made his concept, he started writing on creative thinking, and the first notable book where he mentioned the term brainstorming was How to Think Up (1942).[4]
Osborn outlined his method in the subsequent book Your Creative Power (1948), in chapter 33, "How to Organize a Squad to Create Ideas".[5][6]
One of Osborn's key recommendations was for all the members of the brainstorming group to be provided with a clear statement of the problem to be addressed prior to the actual brainstorming session.[2] He also explained that the guiding principle is that the problem should be simple and narrowed down to a single target.[7] Here, brainstorming is not believed to be effective in complex problems because of a change in opinion over the desirability of restructuring such problems. While the process can address the problems in such a situation, tackling all of them may not be feasible.[7]
Osborn's method
Flowchart for conducting a brainstorming session.
Two principles
Osborn claimed that two principles contribute to "ideative efficacy":
Following these two principles were his four general rules of brainstorming, established with intention to:
reduce social inhibitions among group members;
stimulate idea generation;
increase overall creativity of the group.
These four rules were:
Go for quantity: This rule is a way of enhancing divergent production, aiming at facilitation of problem solution through the maxim quantity breeds quality. The assumption is that the greater the number of ideas generated the bigger the chance of producing a radical and effective solution.
Withhold criticism: In brainstorming, criticism of ideas generated should be put 'on hold'. Instead, participants should focus on extending or adding to ideas, reserving criticism for a later 'critical stage' of the process. By suspending judgment, participants will feel free to generate unusual ideas.
Welcome wild ideas: To get a good long list of suggestions, wild ideas are encouraged. They can be generated by looking from new perspectives and suspending assumptions. These new ways of thinking might give better solutions.
Combine and improve ideas: As suggested by the slogan "1+1=3". It is believed to stimulate the building of ideas by a process of association.[8]
Applications
Osborn notes that brainstorming should address a specific question; he held that sessions addressing multiple questions were inefficient.
Further, the problem must require the generation of ideas rather than judgment; he uses examples such as generating possible names for a product as proper brainstorming material, whereas analytical judgments such as whether or not to marry do not have any need for brainstorming.[8]
Groups
Osborn envisioned groups of around 12 participants, including both experts and novices. Participants are encouraged to provide wild and unexpected answers. Ideas receive no criticism or discussion. The group simply provide ideas that might lead to a solution and apply no analytical judgment as to the feasibility. The judgments are reserved for a later date.
Participants are asked to write their ideas anonymously. Then the facilitator collects the ideas and the group votes on each idea. The vote can be as simple as a show of hands in favor of a given idea. This process is called distillation.
After distillation, the top-ranked ideas may be sent back to the group or to subgroups for further brainstorming. For example, one group may work on the color required in a product. Another group may work on the size, and so forth. Each group will come back to the whole group for ranking the listed ideas. Sometimes ideas that were previously dropped may be brought forward again once the group has re-evaluated the ideas.
It is important that the facilitator is trained in this process before attempting to facilitate this technique. The group should be primed and encouraged to embrace the process. Like all team efforts, it may take a few practice sessions to train the team in the method before tackling the important ideas.
Group passing technique
Each person in a circular group writes down one idea, and then passes the piece of paper to the next person, who adds some thoughts. This continues until everybody gets his or her original piece of paper back. By this time, it is likely that the group will have extensively elaborated on each idea.[citation needed]
The group may also create an "idea book" and post a distribution list or routing slip to the front of the book. On the first page is a description of the problem. The first person to receive the book lists his or her ideas and then routes the book to the next person on the distribution list. The second person can log new ideas or add to the ideas of the previous person. This continues until the distribution list is exhausted. A follow-up "read out" meeting is then held to discuss the ideas logged in the book. This technique takes longer, but it allows individuals time to think deeply about the problem.
This method of brainstorming works by the method of association. It may improve collaboration and increase the quantity of ideas, and is designed so that all attendees participate and no ideas are rejected.[citation needed]
The process begins with a well-defined topic. Each participant brainstorms individually, then all the ideas are merged onto one large idea map. During this consolidation phase, participants may discover a common understanding of the issues as they share the meanings behind their ideas. During this sharing, new ideas may arise by the association, and they are added to the map as well. Once all the ideas are captured, the group can prioritize and/or take action.[9]
Directed brainstorming is a variation of electronic brainstorming (described below). It can be done manually or with computers. Directed brainstorming works when the solution space (that is, the set of criteria for evaluating a good idea) is known prior to the session. If known, those criteria can be used to constrain the ideation process intentionally.[citation needed]
In directed brainstorming, each participant is given one sheet of paper (or electronic form) and told the brainstorming question. They are asked to produce one response and stop, then all of the papers (or forms) are randomly swapped among the participants. The participants are asked to look at the idea they received and to create a new idea that improves on that idea based on the initial criteria. The forms are then swapped again and respondents are asked to improve upon the ideas, and the process is repeated for three or more rounds.
In the laboratory, directed brainstorming has been found to almost triple the productivity of groups over electronic brainstorming.[10]
A guided brainstorming session is time set aside to brainstorm either individually or as a collective group about a particular subject under the constraints of perspective and time. This type of brainstorming removes all cause for conflict and constrains conversations while stimulating critical and creative thinking in an engaging, balanced environment.
Participants are asked to adopt different mindsets for pre-defined period of time while contributing their ideas to a central mind map drawn by a pre-appointed scribe. Having examined a multi-perspective point of view, participants seemingly see the simple solutions that collectively create greater growth. Action is assigned individually.
Following a guided brainstorming session participants emerge with ideas ranked for further brainstorming, research and questions remaining unanswered and a prioritized, assigned, actionable list that leaves everyone with a clear understanding of what needs to happen next and the ability to visualize the combined future focus and greater goals of the group nicely.
Individual brainstorming
Individual brainstorming is the use of brainstorming in solitary situations. It typically includes such techniques as free writing, free speaking, word association, and drawing a mind map, which is a visual note taking technique in which people diagram their thoughts. Individual brainstorming is a useful method in creative writing and has been shown to be superior to traditional group brainstorming.[11][12]
Question brainstorming
This process involves brainstorming the questions, rather than trying to come up with immediate answers and short-term solutions. Theoretically, this technique should not inhibit participation as there is no need to provide solutions. The answers to the questions form the framework for constructing future action plans. Once the list of questions is set, it may be necessary to prioritize them to reach to the best solution in an orderly way.[13]
"Questorming" is another term for this mode of inquiry.[14]
Methods to improving brainstorming sessions
Groups can improve the effectiveness and quality of their brainstorming sessions in a number of ways.[15]
Avoid face-to-face groups: Using face-to-face groups can increase production blocking, evaluation apprehension, social matching and social loafing.
Stick to the rules: Brainstorming rules should be followed, and feedback should be given to members that violate these rules. Violations of brainstorming rules tend to lead to mediocre ideas.
Pay attention to everyone's ideas: People tend to pay more attention to their own ideas, however brainstorming requires exposure to the ideas of others. A method to encourage members to pay attention to others' ideas is to make them list the ideas out or ask them to repeat others' ideas.
Include both individual and group approaches: One method that helps members integrate their ideas into the group is brainwriting. This is where members write their ideas on a piece of paper and then pass it along to others who add their own ideas.
Take breaks: Allow silence during group discussions so that members have time to think things through.
Do not rush: Allow plenty of time for members to complete the task. Although working under pressure tends to lead to more solutions initially, the quality is usually lower than if more time is spent on the task.
Stay persistent: Members should stay focused and persist at the task even when productivity is low.
Facilitate the session: A skilled discussion leader should lead and coordinate the brainstorming sessions. This leader can motivate members, correct mistakes, and provide a clear standard of work. They can also be used to keep track of all the ideas and make sure that these ideas are available to everyone.
How to Facilitate a Brainstorming Session
Once you decide that brainstorming is the right approach for the stage your project is in, follow these steps to get the most out of your brainstorming session.
Select your facilitator, idea recorder, and participants, and reserve your place and time. One writer advocates including five to seven people (http://www.mindtools.com/brainstm.html). According to BABOK, six to eight participants are ideal. Try to choose a representative from each stakeholder group, and try to choose personalities that are both vocal and cooperative.
You will want to be sure everyone is on the same page regarding the process. Set expectations about the format and objective—explain that in brainstorming no idea is off the table, and there is no such thing as too many ideas. Participants must agree to withhold judgment of ideas during the brainstorming process. Also, help everyone agree on a method for evaluating the ideas—to be used only once the session is over. (As Wiegers noted, “Brainstorming and imagining the possibilities is a separate matter from analyzing priorities, feasibility, and the constraining realities.”[6])
You may want to give participants a small amount of time (five minutes or so) to brainstorm on their own before bringing their ideas to the group, especially if you have some more introverted participants. As one business analysis blogger noted, “When individuals are given an opportunity to think about a topic for a bit in advance, they might be less intimidated to then contribute their ideas to the group.”[7] You may even want to encourage them to write their ideas down and hand them to you or the facilitator to mention.
Once the group session has started, keep everyone on topic. Remind everyone of the one objective you want to accomplish. “We’re here to try to figure out why product A is not working for customers, not to focus on any other problems they may be having, or to wander into comments on other products.”
Do not limit creativity, free association, or the number of ideas! The goal is come up with as many solutions as possible. Encourage participants to build on each others’ ideas if they wish. Do not censor or edit ideas as they flow. As one writer cautions: “Valuable but strange suggestions may appear stupid at first sight. Because of this, you need to chair sessions tightly so that ideas are not crushed.”[8]
If the session is more than an hour long, build in some coffee break times so that people can mentally refresh.
Write all ideas down in plain view of the entire group. Or, if someone is proficient with “mindmapping” software (such as Mindmeister [www.mindmeister.com] or Mindomo [www.mindomo.com]), this would be an ideal time to use it. If no one is proficient with this software and you still want to use the mindmapping technique, you can just try putting similar groups of self-adhesive notes together in logical flows and hierarchies. For more information on this technique, see http://businessanalyst.tarunchandel.com/2008/09/business-analysis-tool-mindmaps-for.html.
Once the brainstorming session is over, begin the refining process based on the pre-established criteria. Condense groups of similar ideas into one thought. Create a list of what results, and distribute it to everyone for review.
As you refine your approach, you may find brainstorming to be one of the more lively aspects of your business analysis work. As BABOK notes, “Facilitated properly, brainstorming can be fun, engaging and productive.” You may see some quieter colleagues come out of their shells, and be surprised with innovative ideas from unexpected sources. Additionally, the collective nature of brainstorming can have the added benefit of creating cohesion among the various stakeholders, benefiting your team and organization as well as your project.
https://bit.ly/3zUCZpT
Alternatives to brainstorming
If brainstorming does not work for a group, some alternatives are available:[15]
Buzzgroups: Larger groups can form subgroups that come up with ideas when the larger group is stumped. Afterwards, these subgroups come back together and discuss their ideas as a whole group.
Bug list: Group members write down all the little problems or irritations concerning the issue they are working on, and then the group discusses solutions for each of these "bugs".
Stepladder technique: A method where new members state their ideas before listening to the group's position.
Synectics: A leader guides the group and discusses their goals, wishes, and frustrations using analogies, metaphors, and fantasy.
TRIZ: This method is primarily used in science and engineering, and involves following a specific sequence of problem analysis, resource review, goal setting, and review of prior approaches to the problem.
Although the brainstorming can take place online through commonly available technologies such as email or interactive web sites, there have also been many efforts to develop customized computer software that can either replace or enhance one or more manual elements of the brainstorming process.[citation needed]
Early efforts, such as GroupSystems at University of Arizona[16] or Software Aided Meeting Management (SAMM) system at the University of Minnesota,[17] took advantage of then-new computer networking technology, which was installed in rooms dedicated to computer supported meetings. When using these electronic meeting systems (EMS, as they came to be called), group members simultaneously and independently entered ideas into a computer terminal. The software collected (or "pools") the ideas into a list, which could be displayed on a central projection screen (anonymized if desired). Other elements of these EMSs could support additional activities such as categorization of ideas, elimination of duplicates, assessment and discussion of prioritized or controversial ideas. Later EMSs capitalized on advances in computer networking and internet protocols to support asynchronous brainstorming sessions over extended periods of time and in multiple locations.
Introduced along with the EMS by Nunamaker and colleagues at University of Arizona[16] was electronic brainstorming (EBS). By utilizing customized computer software for groups (group decision support systems or groupware), EBS can replace face-to-face brainstorming.[18] An example of groupware is the GroupSystems, a software developed by University of Arizona.[16] After an idea discussion has been posted on GroupSystems, it is displayed on each group member's computer. As group members simultaneously type their comments on separate computers, those comments are anonymously pooled and made available to all group members for evaluation and further elaboration.[16]
Compared to face-to-face brainstorming, not only does EBS enhanced efficiency by eliminating travelling and turn-taking during group discussions, it also excluded several psychological constraints associated with face-to-face meetings. Identified by Gallupe and colleagues,[18] both production blocking (reduced idea generation due to turn-taking and forgetting ideas in face-to-face brainstorming)[19] and evaluation apprehension (a general concern experienced by individuals for how others in the presence are evaluating them) are reduced in EBS.[20] These positive psychological effects increase with group size.[21] A perceived advantage of EBS is that all ideas can be archived electronically in their original form, and then retrieved later for further thought and discussion. EBS also enables much larger groups to brainstorm on a topic than would normally be productive in a traditional brainstorming session.[18]
Computer supported brainstorming may overcome some of the challenges faced by traditional brainstorming methods. For example, ideas might be "pooled" automatically, so that individuals do not need to wait to take a turn, as in verbal brainstorming. Some software programs show all ideas as they are generated (via chat room or e-mail). The display of ideas may cognitively stimulate brainstormers, as their attention is kept on the flow of ideas being generated without the potential distraction of social cues such as facial expressions and verbal language.[21] EBS techniques have been shown to produce more ideas and help individuals focus their attention on the ideas of others better than a brainwriting technique (participants write individual written notes in silence and then subsequently communicate them with the group).[21] The production of more ideas has been linked to the fact that paying attention to others' ideas leads to non-redundancy, as brainstormers try to avoid to replicate or repeat another participant's comment or idea. Conversely, the production gain associated with EBS was less found in situations where EBS group members focused too much on generating ideas that they ignored ideas expressed by others. The production gain associated with GroupSystem users' attentiveness to ideas expressed by others has been documented by Dugosh and colleagues.[22] EBS group members who were instructed to attend to ideas generated by others outperformed those who were not in terms of creativity.
According to a meta-analysis comparing EBS to face-to-face brainstorming conducted by DeRosa and colleagues,[23] EBS has been found to enhance both the production of non-redundant ideas and the quality of ideas produced. Despite the advantages demonstrated by EBS groups, EBS group members reported less satisfaction with the brainstorming process compared to face-to-face brainstorming group members.
Some web-based brainstorming techniques allow contributors to post their comments anonymously through the use of avatars. This technique also allows users to log on over an extended time period, typically one or two weeks, to allow participants some "soak time" before posting their ideas and feedback. This technique has been used particularly in the field of new product development, but can be applied in any number of areas requiring collection and evaluation of ideas.[24]
Some limitations of EBS include the fact that it can flood people with too many ideas at one time that they have to attend to, and people may also compare their performance to others by analyzing how many ideas each individual produces (social matching).
Incentives
Some research indicates that incentives can augment creative processes. Participants were divided into three conditions. In Condition I, a flat fee was paid to all participants. In the Condition II, participants were awarded points for every unique idea of their own, and subjects were paid for the points that they earned. In Condition III, subjects were paid based on the impact that their idea had on the group; this was measured by counting the number of group ideas derived from the specific subject's ideas. Condition III outperformed Condition II, and Condition II outperformed Condition I at a statistically significant level for most measures. The results demonstrated that participants were willing to work far longer to achieve unique results in the expectation of compensation.[25]
Challenges to effective group brainstorming
A good deal of research refutes Osborn's claim that group brainstorming could generate more ideas than individuals working alone.[12] For example, in a review of 22 studies of group brainstorming, Michael Diehl and Wolfgang Stroebe found that, overwhelmingly, groups brainstorming together produce fewer ideas than individuals working separately.[26] However, this conclusion is brought into question by a subsequent review of 50 studies by Scott G. Isaksen showed that a misunderstanding of the tool, and weak application of the methods (including lack of facilitation), and the artificiality of the problems and groups undermined most such studies, and the validity of their conclusions.[27]
Several factors can contribute to a loss of effectiveness in group brainstorming.
Production blocking: Because only one participant may give an idea at any one time, other participants might forget the idea they were going to contribute or not share it because they see it as no longer important or relevant.[28] Further, if we view brainstorming as a cognitive process in which "a participant generates ideas (generation process) and stores them in short-term memory (memorization process) and then eventually extracts some of them from its short-term memory to express them (output process)", then blocking is an even more critical challenge because it may also inhibit a person's train of thought in generating their own ideas and remembering them.[29] Group members can be given notepads to write their ideas on and the meeting can organize who will get to speak next. However, this brainstorming technique does not perform as well as individuals using the nominal group technique.
Collaborative fixation: Exchanging ideas in a group may reduce the number of domains that a group explores for additional ideas. Members may also conform their ideas to those of other members, decreasing the novelty or variety of ideas, even though the overall number of ideas might not decrease.[30]
Evaluation apprehension: Evaluation apprehension was determined to occur only in instances of personal evaluation. If the assumption of collective assessment were in place, real-time judgment of ideas, ostensibly an induction of evaluation apprehension, failed to induce significant variance.[12][31] Furthermore, when an authority figure watches the group members brainstorm the effectiveness lowers because members worry their ideas may be viewed negatively. Especially individuals with high social anxiety are particularly unproductive barnstormers and report feeling more nervous, anxious, and worried than group members who are less anxiety prone.[32]
Free-writing: Individuals may feel that their ideas are less valuable when combined with the ideas of the group at large. Indeed, Diehl and Stroebe demonstrated that even when individuals worked alone, they produced fewer ideas if told that their output would be judged in a group with others than if told that their output would be judged individually. However, experimentation revealed free-writing as only a marginal contributor to productivity loss, and type of session (i.e., real vs. nominal group) contributed much more.[12]
Personality characteristics: Extroverts have been shown to outperform introverts in computer mediated groups. Extroverts also generated more unique and diverse ideas than introverts when additional methods were used to stimulate idea generation, such as completing a small related task before brainstorming, or being given a list of the classic rules of brainstorming.[33]
Social matching: One phenomenon of group brainstorming is that participants will tend to alter their rate of productivity to match others in the group. This can lead to participants generating fewer ideas in a group setting than they would individually because they will decrease their own contributions if they perceive themselves to be more productive than the group average. On the other hand, the same phenomenon can also increase an individual's rate of production to meet the group average.[26][34]
Illusion of group productivity: Members tend to overestimate their group's productivity and so work less. Members of the group can only guess at the quantity and quality of their group's product and their personal contributions to the process but there is no standard to determine how well it is performing. A combination of processes explain why members are incorrectly overestimating productivity:
Group member(s) may intuitively mistake others' ideas for their own, and so when they think about their own performance they cognitively claim a few ideas that others actually suggested[35]
Group members compare themselves to others who generate relatively few ideas, reassuring them that they are one of the high performers[36]
Group brainstorming may "feel" more successful because participants rarely experience failure in a communal process. When individuals are trying to think creatively alone, people repeatedly find that they are unable to come up with a new idea. In a group setting, people are less likely to experience this failure in their search for new ideas because others' ideas are being discussed.[37]
^ Jump up to:abParker, Jeanette; Begnaud, Lucy (2004). Developing Creative Leadership. Portsmouth, NH: Teacher Ideas Press. p. 20. ISBN978-1563086311.
^Trott, Paul; Hartmann, Dap; van der Duin, Patrick; Scholten, Victor; Ortt, Roland (2016). Managing Technology Entrepreneurship and Innovation. Oxon: Routledge. p. 63. ISBN9780415677219.
^ Jump up to:abcOsborn, A.F. (1963) Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem solving (Third Revised Edition). New York, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons.
^Santanen, E., Briggs, R. O., & de Vreede, G-J. (2004). Causal Relationships in Creative Problem Solving: Comparing Facilitation Interventions for Ideation. Journal of Management Information Systems. 20(4), 167-198.
^ Jump up to:abcdNunamaker, Jay; Dennis, Alan; Valacich, Joseph; Vogel, Doug; George Joey (1991). "Electronic Meeting Systems to Support Group Work". Communications of the ACM. 34 (7): 40–61. doi:10.1145/105783.105793. S2CID10389854.
^ Jump up to:abcGallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M. and Nunamaker, J. F. (1992), "Electronic Brainstorming and Group Size," Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 350-369. JSTOR256377
^Gallupe, R. B.; Cooper, W. H.; Grise, M.-L.; Bastianutti, L. M. (1994). "Blocking electronic brainstorms". Journal of Applied Psychology. 79 (2): 77–86. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.79.1.77.
^Frunham, A (2000). "The brainstorming myth". Business Strategy Review. 11 (4): 21–28. doi:10.1111/1467-8616.00154.
^ Jump up to:abcMichinov, N (2012). "Is electronic brainstorming the best way to improve creative performance in groups? An overlooked comparison of two idea generation techniques". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 42: E222–E243. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01024.x.
^Leggett Dugosh, Karen; Paulus, Paul B. (1 May 2005). "Cognitive and social comparison processes in brainstorming". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 41 (3): 313–320. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.05.009. S2CID145769905.
^DM DeRosa; et al. (2007). "The medium matters: Mining the long-promised merit of group interaction in creative idea generation tasks in a meta-analysis of the electronic group brainstorming literature". Computers in Human Behavior. 23 (3): 1549–1581. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2005.07.003.
^Kerzner, H. (2013). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (11th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
^ Jump up to:abMichael Diehl; Wolfgang Stroebe (1987). "Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Toward the Solution of a Riddle". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 53 (3): 497–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497.
^Camacho, L. M., & Paulus, P. B. (1995). The role of social anxiousness in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1071–1080. [1]
^Henningsen, David Dryden; Henningsen, Mary Lynn Miller (2013). "Generating Ideas About the Uses of Brainstorming: Reconsidering the Losses and Gains of Brainstorming Groups Relative to Nominal Groups". Southern Communication Journal. 78 (1): 42–55. doi:10.1080/1041794X.2012.717684. S2CID145293729.
^Brown, V.; Paulus, P. B. (1996). "A simple dynamic model of social factors in group brainstorming". Small Group Research. 27: 91–114. doi:10.1177/1046496496271005. S2CID143567740.
^Stroebe, W., Diehl, M., & Abakoumkin, G. (1992). The illusion of group effectivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(5), 643-650.
^Paulus, P. B., & Dzindolet, M. T. (1993). Social influence processes in group brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 575.
^Nijstad, B. A., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. F. (2006). The illusion of group productivity: A reduction of failures explanation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(1), 31-48.
Brainstorming techniques
There is a lot of advice out there on different brainstorming techniques, and no two techniques seem to match. That’s ok, because the spirit of how to conduct a brainstorm matters more than the particulars.
The techniques I offer to conduct both individual and group brainstorms follow the spirit of much of the advice out there.
On top of that, I’ve found the following two techniques to be very effective at helping me make decisions. I’ve trained teams to use them with much success, both at large public companies and fast growing tech startups.
Technique #1: brainstorming by yourself (step-by-step guide)
Mind mapping is a powerful brainstorming exercise when you’re by yourself. It’s so simple and easy that anyone can do it with 5-10 minutes of work.
Contrary to popular belief, brainstorming on your own can be an extremely effective path to coming up with great ideas.
I usually recommend that each member of my team does their own mind mapping exercise before entering a group brainstorming session. I find that the group brainstorm is a lot more productive that way.
The Mind Mapping Technique:
Example mind mapping diagram
Write down your question or problem in the center of a blank piece of paper.
Example: Where should we get married?
Write down your ideas as branches from the center.
Example: Las Vegas, relative’s backyard, my mom’s church, etc.
Do some word association with the ideas in the main branches, and write these related thoughts as sub-branches created out from the main branches.
Example: “relative’s backyard” may make you think of flowers, and the outdoors
Write down more ideas as branches from the center, this time keeping in mind the word associations you just had.
Example: “flowers” and “the outdoors” may inspire you to add “the Botanical Gardens”
Repeat word association and jotting down new ideas as needed until you’re satisfied.
Tips for Mind Mapping Success:
Mind Mapping works best when you let yourself free associate words. Try not to criticize or evaluate your thoughts. Just get them on the page. This strategy will ensure that you get the volume and variety of ideas you need to make the best decision.
Use word association to come up with new ideas. A good brainstorming session allows ideas to build on each other. You may discover that word association unlocks values and constraints for your decision you hadn’t thought of before. Use these insights to develop your list of ideas even further.
Set a five minute time limit and only use words or short phrases. It’s worth emphasizing: this method works best when you bypass your inner critic. Setting a time limit can help create the urgency needed to do that. Keeping the phrases short also helps you get into the flow of generating lots of ideas instead of getting stuck going deep on one.
Technique #2: brainstorming with a group (step-by-step guide)
Want to harness the power of several minds to generate amazing ideas and solutions? If so, a group brainstorming session is in order.
In an individual brainstorming session, you are responsible for organizing the exercise and for coming up with the ideas.
In a group brainstorming session, your role as organizer and facilitator may prevent you from fully participating in idea creation.
If you don’t see yourself as creative, or the “idea” person in the room, then facilitating a group brainstorming session is a wonderful opportunity.
You walk away with tons of actionable ideas, but it’s your friends or colleagues who end up doing the “hard” work of generating potential solutions.
Now let’s go through the step-by-step guide on facilitating a group brainstorming session.
Step #1: Set a time, place, and invite list
Whom you invite is very important.
Include a broad spectrum of people, so you have diverse perspectives in the room.
For example, if you want ideas on how to increase learning outcomes at schools, invite teachers and curriculum advisors.
Also, try to make sure everyone is familiar with the decision you’re trying to make, and it affects everyone’s life in some way.
If you do those things, then the attendees will come up with a wide range of creative ideas, and will be invested in doing their best.
A sweet spot for the number of participants is 6-10.
Any less and you start to have fewer ideas with less variety. Any more and it starts getting out of hand, and difficult to facilitate.
When you set a time, keep in mind how long the session should last. For 6-10 participants, I like to make the brainstorming session a minimum of 30 minutes.
If people are still coming up with great ideas by the end of the 30 minute mark, I do everything I can to keep them going.
If the group seems stalled before the 30 minute mark, I stand my ground and get the group to continue. Sometimes there are lulls, but usually the group becomes inspired once again.
If there are fewer than 6 participants, or more than 10, feel free to dial up or dial down the length of your brainstorming session accordingly.
Lastly, make sure you give people plenty of notice, because they should have prep work to do.
Step #2: Give participants homework to do before the brainstorming session
Often overlooked, this point is super important. Don’t let participants come to your meeting unprepared.
I think you’ll agree when you compare the quality of ideas you get from people don’t have context about the problem vs. people who do.
Don’t waste time at the beginning of your brainstorming session getting everyone up to speed.
That is precious idea generation time.
Don’t waste those special moments where everyone you need is actually sitting together, ready to help you.
There are two types of homework I like to give.
Sometimes I ask participants to perform a mind mapping exercise on their own.
This gets their mind turning on the problem at hand, and it also seeds the brainstorming session with a bunch of ideas. No more slow awkward beginning to a brainstorm.
Other times I ask participants to read up on the decision we’re trying to make. Usually I will provide qualitative and quantitative data about the problem.
If I’m trying to come up with ideas on how to improve customer satisfaction, I might share the most recent customer reviews with the group. In addition I might send average product ratings by category.
By sharing relevant data, I ensure that the group is grounded in facts pertaining to the issue.
Step #3: Hold the session in a fun, relaxing environment
Boxing people up in an environment they’re used to will not get them thinking out of the box, for a couple of reasons.
First, brainstorming requires people to forget the context they were in, and immerse themselves in a new creative space. Unless the space they enter is different, people will bring their stress, fixations, and worries with them.
Second, brainstorming is best when people are inspired to think differently and boldly. A space they’re used to is much less likely to spark inspiration because it feels ordinary and boring.
Fortunately, you can create a fun and relaxing environment without spending money booking a cool space or wasting time traveling outside the building.
I find that a bit of redecoration goes a long way.
Is your living room the best place to invite your friends to a brainstorming session on your next career move? Consider rearranging the furniture to spice up the space.
In a work setting, perhaps the best place to hold a brainstorming session is the same conference room you use for every other meeting. Consider bringing a bunch of stuffed animals to the room.
Not only do they visually add something that creates a new feel for the space, participants may find that interacting with them helps to relax and get those creative juices flowing.
Step #4: Start the session by grounding people in the facts
A brainstorming session is a group conversation, so spending a little time at the beginning getting people on the same page is really helpful.
Why is it helpful? Your participants all left something they were focusing on and are now with you.
They are likely still thinking about the other thing, instead of your thing. Sharing qualitative and quantitative data at the beginning of the session gets them thinking about your thing.
Sharing data gets them thinking about your thing in the right way. With a grasp on the reality of the situation, they are more likely to come up with ideas that would actually be helpful.
Data-driven brainstorming and decision making is better than only using your intuition. But don’t overthink what it means to be data-driven.
Qualitative data is just as important as quantitative data, and it includes things like conversations, comments, trends, and opinions.
Data is just another word for information, and information can take many forms. Don’t be afraid to think creatively here.
Step #5: Set the rules for the brainstorming session
Make sure people understand that criticizing is not allowed. Encourage that all voices be heard.
Outlawing criticism is critical for the success of your brainstorming session. It cannot be overstated: criticizing ideas during the brainstorm will kill the creativity in the room!
If a participant censors someone’s idea, it encourages the part of everyone’s brain that evaluates ideas before they’re spoken. No one wants to be criticized in a group setting.
Usually this part of the brain is awesome. It ensures you don’t put your foot in your mouth.
But during a brainstorming session, it’s lethal.
Remember, with a brainstorm, the goal is volume and variety of ideas. Censorship hurts both volume and variety.
You might argue that criticism encourages quality over quantity.
After all, you don’t just want ideas. You want good ideas that lead to good decision making.
The problem with that logic has to do with a core part of what makes brainstorming effective. Namely, that brainstorming works because people build ideas on top of each other.
Many times, one person’s bad idea mentioned in haste inspires someone else to come up with an awesome idea.
Remember the staff at the National Gallery of Art in D.C.?
In their brainstorming session, someone offered a not so great idea of making lectures mandatory for visitors. That inspired someone else to offer the idea of optional instructional videos on-demand.
Save the evaluation for after the brainstorm. You or a group can filter through the ideas and save the promising ones for the next stage of the decision making process.
Encouraging all voices to be heard is also important.
Sometimes the quietest people have the best ideas, because they are really soaking everything in and making those all important connections to churn out something brilliant.
I’ll say more about this in the next section, but when setting the rules, simply encouraging people to give each other the space to talk can go a long way.
Step #6: Facilitate the brainstorming session
Write ideas out on a whiteboard or easel pad as they come. Or, get someone else to do it so you can more easily contribute ideas.
It’s important to write the ideas down so they are visible. The visual aid helps people build ideas on top of each other.
You could write down ideas on your phone instead, but I wouldn’t recommend it. You’ll stifle creativity.
The facilitator will also need to enforce the rules stated above. No criticizing, and all voices should be heard.
Sometimes people who tend to be quiet feel intimidated by brainstorms. I usually ask people just to shout out their ideas, and while this method encourages volume it also rewards the loudest and most extroverted personalities.
You could instead ask people to raise their hands, and call on them one at a time. It slows down the flow a bit, but it will allow quieter people to jump in more easily.
What I like to do is reserve some time at the end to call out people who have not shared anything yet. This move empowers those who might have been too shy to offer their suggestions.
Naturally, during the course of the brainstorming session, questions or comments will come up that are not necessarily ideas to be written on the board. Do not stifle these, thinking they are distractions.
Rather, these contributions are probably helpful to many of the participants.
They might clarify something that is unclear. They might add a perspective which sets off a chain of thinking that becomes really valuable.
Keep these side conversations bounded, and make sure people come back to the brainstorm after a short time. But don’t feel the need to stop them from happening.
Step #7: After the brainstorming session, the evaluation process can begin
Take a picture of the ideas, then filter and organize them.
Once you’ve taken the picture, rewrite the ideas into a word doc or onto a piece of paper.
Organizing the ideas into categories as you rewrite them can be helpful for a couple of reasons.
First, you start understanding the possible strategies to solve your problem.
Second, you automatically pool similar ideas together. This will help you synthesize these ideas into one, or allow you to easily choose the one that is the best.
Brainstorming is great for decision making
Let’s briefly look at the decision making process so we understand how brainstorming helps with great decision making.
Brainstorming is a skill needed for Step #2 of the decision making process.
https://bit.ly/3hr0pNy
Types of Brainstorming
Majorly, brainstorming is done in two ways – individually or in a group. Though, when it comes to how we brainstorm on topics, it can be of the following types:
Analytics Brainstorming
In this, we analyze the present situation from a different perspective and mostly use tools to assist us. Mind mapping, reverse brainstorming, SWOT analysis, Five Whys, Gap Filling, and Diverse Analysis are some of its major subtypes.
Quiet Brainstorming
This is mostly done when members are not able to meet, so that they can share their ideas in the best possible solution, via collaborative brainstorming, brain-netting (online brainstorming), slip writing, etc.
Role Play Brainstorming
In this, we intentionally think from the perspective of someone else (like customers or competitors). Reverse thinking, role storming, or figure storming are some of its major instances.
Powerful Free Brainstorming Tools
As you know, what the main purpose of brainstorming is, you can start working on it. To make things easier for you, I have listed the 3 popular brainstorming tools to try.
EdrawMind is a freely available solution by Edraw that can run on different platforms like Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, and Linux. There is even an online version of the application that you can work on without downloading anything.
EdrawMind features more than 700 different clip art that you can use to work on all kinds of brainstorming ideas.
There are also readily available themes and templates that you can use to save your time further.
It features a dedicated brainstorming mode to make it easier for teams to share ideas in one place.
The tool is widely used for collaborative brainstorming with its cloud integration and availability on various desktop/mobile platforms.
2. Google Docs
Most of the people are already familiar with Google Docs, but they seldom utilize its features. Using it, you can work on some basic mind maps or brainstorming ideas and can further share it with others.
Integration with Google Sheets and Docs help us utilize the right data
Since these tools are available for free, anyone can use them without spending anything
Automatic upload on Google Drive and easy sharing features
There are some basic tools you can use to draw mind maps as well.
As the name suggests, this online tool works as a visual representation of thesaurus. Although it might not help you brainstorm big ideas, but would automatically provide a visual connection of words.
The tool would create a spider map of a word to show how it is linked to other words.
The online application is majorly used to find the right word and improve one’s vocabulary.
You can also share the word maps or email it to your friends.
Brainstorming is a method for generating ideas in a group situation. Teams and departments should use brainstorming when:
Determining possible causes and / or solutions to problems.
Planning out the steps of a project.
Deciding which problem (or opportunity) to work on.
Running a Brainstorming Session
Provide a time limit for the session. Generally 30 minutes is sufficient. Identify one or more recorders. The recorders' job is to write all ideas down (where everyone can see them, such as on a flipchart or overhead transparency) as they are voiced.
Choose either:
a freewheeling format (share ideas all at once, list all ideas as they are shouted out) or
a round robin format (everyone takes a turn offering an idea, anyone can pass on a turn, continue until there are no more ideas, all ideas are listed as they are offered).
Establish the ground rules.
Ground Rules
Don't edit what is said and remember not to criticise ideas.
Go for quantity of ideas at this point; narrow down the list later.
Encourage wild or exaggerated ideas (creativity is the key).
Build on the ideas of others (e.g. one member might say something that "sparks" another member's idea.
End the session when - everyone has had a chance to participate, no more ideas are being offered, you have made a "last call" for ideas, you have thanked all the participants.
Next steps
Prioritise your ideas to help you decide where to start.
Sort large amounts of information according to common themes (use e.g. affinity diagrams - post-its, one idea on each, all generated by individuals in response to a goal statement, within a limited time frame, sorted into groupings).
Remember brainstormed ideas may be based on opinion and data may need to be gathered to support or prove ideas.
.jpg)
