Brainstorming, an act that is conducted by all organizations those are in the process of improving their structure to better serve their customers and improve their efficiency. Brainstorming sessions carry a significant cost associated with them, thus in order to get maximum benefits from those sessions it is desirable to have a clearly defined agenda(s) and a pool of better/targeted questions pertaining to agenda(s).
Traditional brainstorming where all are encouraged to “Get creative”, and “Think outside the box”, presents its challenges. In traditional brainstorming sessions, some attendees remain stone-faced throughout the session, some participate sporadically and some vociferously dominate the session by their pet ideas. Ideas come along but due to the lack of structure, no one (or few) idea gets pursued and most of the ideas fall in to the well of ambiguity. At the end of the session, every one leaves with a very hazy impression of next process.
There is a way to improve this process by leveraging participant’s ability to think and work on creative problem-solving approach. An approach called brainsteering, developed by Kevin P. Coyne and Shawn T. Coyne, delivers superior result than traditional brainstorming. However, brainsteering requires much more preparation than traditional brainstorming but shows better and targeted results. Coyne & Coyne presents their approach in 7 steps that can be very helpful for better brainstorming.
First step of the process is to know and be very clear about the decision making criteria of your organization. Thinking outside the box is not necessarily the best way to approach brainsteering process as companies/organizations are themselves constrained in a box of policies, resources and past decisions. Thus in order to steer creative thinking among brainsteerign participants, manages have to be well aware of the real criteria that organization will follow to make decision about a proposed ide/solution. It is a better idea to collaborate with senior managers and form highly specific (2 or 3) and tailored need to meet the immediate needs.
Second step of this process is to ask the right questions targeted towards the agreed upon problem/need. Traditional, loosely structured brainstorming process (i.e. go for quantity) is inferior approach than well structured (i.e. go for quality) approach . Asking right question can provide a helpful platform for idea generation. Right questions should be identified using two characteristics (i) they should force participants to take a new and unfamiliar perspective on the problem, as this will steer their thinking process ; (ii) they should be able to limit the conceptual space (range of solutions) without restricting the thought process that may force a particular answer or outcome.
Third step is to choose the right people who can answer the questions you are asking. As obvious it sounds, it is not what occurs in companies/organizations while picking up brainstorming teams. Traditionally organizational chart plays bigger role than the actual fit of the person who is capable of answering the relevant question.
Fourth step is to divide & conquer i.e. avoid holding continuous and rambling discussion for extended time in a big group. The best way is to form groups of 3 to 5, given them a question and ask them to spend ~30 min to come up with some answers/scenarios. Groups should not be larger than 5 as norm in larger groups is to stay quite. Assignment of people in groups should be done very carefully i.e. it is necessary to isolate “idea crushers” into their own subgroups. “Idea crushers” are very well suited for the workshop but intentionally or not, hinder others to suggest good ideas. “Idea crushers” comes in three varieties (i) bosses, (ii) big mouths and (iii) subject matter experts. People are hesitant to speak an unproven idea in front of their boss, big mouths take air time, and subject matter experts tends to be biased (sometimes) and may become intimidating to others. A group of above three “idea crushers” will still be productive as they will eventually speak and will come up with something. Also, take proper care of assigning the relevant question to relevant group (i.e. group that is capable of answering that question).
Fifth step is clearly conveying what you are trying to accomplish (before breaking the participants into subgroups). Convey that groups will be isolated and for half an hour they will only be discussing on question. Also, be careful that no other idea from any other source, no matter how good it is, should be mentioned. Any out of the scope idea should be written down and should be shared later to save time. Make the subgroups aware that any 30 minute discussion may only generate 2 to 3 worthy ideas. First 5 minutes of any brainsteering process may look very similar to that of traditional brain storming as people will try to test their pet ideas or will come up with some new superficial ones, but participants should persevere as this will eventually bring up some good ideas.
Sixth step is to wrap it up. At this point, question arise how to choose winning idea? Instead of asking group to vote/choose the winning ides (as everyone in the group may not have clear understanding of the constrained the organization function in), every group should be asked to narrow down their list of 15 ideas to top few (may be 2 or 3). Announce, to the group, the process of choosing the winning ides among to 10-15 ideas, also make the group aware that whey and how will they hear about the winning ideas.
Seventh step is to follow up quickly to see maximum affect. Decision and follow up activities should be quick and thorough. The acceptance or rejection of ideas should be conveyed the participants and reasons for acceptance or rejection should be respectfully explained.
Traditional brainstorming where all are encouraged to “Get creative”, and “Think outside the box”, presents its challenges. In traditional brainstorming sessions, some attendees remain stone-faced throughout the session, some participate sporadically and some vociferously dominate the session by their pet ideas. Ideas come along but due to the lack of structure, no one (or few) idea gets pursued and most of the ideas fall in to the well of ambiguity. At the end of the session, every one leaves with a very hazy impression of next process.
There is a way to improve this process by leveraging participant’s ability to think and work on creative problem-solving approach. An approach called brainsteering, developed by Kevin P. Coyne and Shawn T. Coyne, delivers superior result than traditional brainstorming. However, brainsteering requires much more preparation than traditional brainstorming but shows better and targeted results. Coyne & Coyne presents their approach in 7 steps that can be very helpful for better brainstorming.
First step of the process is to know and be very clear about the decision making criteria of your organization. Thinking outside the box is not necessarily the best way to approach brainsteering process as companies/organizations are themselves constrained in a box of policies, resources and past decisions. Thus in order to steer creative thinking among brainsteerign participants, manages have to be well aware of the real criteria that organization will follow to make decision about a proposed ide/solution. It is a better idea to collaborate with senior managers and form highly specific (2 or 3) and tailored need to meet the immediate needs.
Second step of this process is to ask the right questions targeted towards the agreed upon problem/need. Traditional, loosely structured brainstorming process (i.e. go for quantity) is inferior approach than well structured (i.e. go for quality) approach . Asking right question can provide a helpful platform for idea generation. Right questions should be identified using two characteristics (i) they should force participants to take a new and unfamiliar perspective on the problem, as this will steer their thinking process ; (ii) they should be able to limit the conceptual space (range of solutions) without restricting the thought process that may force a particular answer or outcome.
Third step is to choose the right people who can answer the questions you are asking. As obvious it sounds, it is not what occurs in companies/organizations while picking up brainstorming teams. Traditionally organizational chart plays bigger role than the actual fit of the person who is capable of answering the relevant question.
Fourth step is to divide & conquer i.e. avoid holding continuous and rambling discussion for extended time in a big group. The best way is to form groups of 3 to 5, given them a question and ask them to spend ~30 min to come up with some answers/scenarios. Groups should not be larger than 5 as norm in larger groups is to stay quite. Assignment of people in groups should be done very carefully i.e. it is necessary to isolate “idea crushers” into their own subgroups. “Idea crushers” are very well suited for the workshop but intentionally or not, hinder others to suggest good ideas. “Idea crushers” comes in three varieties (i) bosses, (ii) big mouths and (iii) subject matter experts. People are hesitant to speak an unproven idea in front of their boss, big mouths take air time, and subject matter experts tends to be biased (sometimes) and may become intimidating to others. A group of above three “idea crushers” will still be productive as they will eventually speak and will come up with something. Also, take proper care of assigning the relevant question to relevant group (i.e. group that is capable of answering that question).
Fifth step is clearly conveying what you are trying to accomplish (before breaking the participants into subgroups). Convey that groups will be isolated and for half an hour they will only be discussing on question. Also, be careful that no other idea from any other source, no matter how good it is, should be mentioned. Any out of the scope idea should be written down and should be shared later to save time. Make the subgroups aware that any 30 minute discussion may only generate 2 to 3 worthy ideas. First 5 minutes of any brainsteering process may look very similar to that of traditional brain storming as people will try to test their pet ideas or will come up with some new superficial ones, but participants should persevere as this will eventually bring up some good ideas.
Sixth step is to wrap it up. At this point, question arise how to choose winning idea? Instead of asking group to vote/choose the winning ides (as everyone in the group may not have clear understanding of the constrained the organization function in), every group should be asked to narrow down their list of 15 ideas to top few (may be 2 or 3). Announce, to the group, the process of choosing the winning ides among to 10-15 ideas, also make the group aware that whey and how will they hear about the winning ideas.
Seventh step is to follow up quickly to see maximum affect. Decision and follow up activities should be quick and thorough. The acceptance or rejection of ideas should be conveyed the participants and reasons for acceptance or rejection should be respectfully explained.
No comments:
Post a Comment