Brainstorming – work or no? What’s it really all about?
Had a call yesterday with a distributor of mind mapping software who tried to convince me that brainstorming doesn’t work. Made me think he was telling me something as inane a hammer doesn’t work.
Brainstorming is a tool; the craft and art of using the tool influences the success of using it, as does the skill, wisdom and openness of the people involved in generating ideas or perspectives for new thinking.
Speaking from experience here, its easy to pinpoint other brainstorming influencers as well: mood in the room, pressure on participants, how the space is used, how the participants ‘get along’ be it personality style, personal agenda for participating, degree of collaborative attitudes and supports, where people are in an organization – using Barry Oshry’s terms – Tops (in charge), Middles or Bottoms. The colour on the walls has influence, the time of day, the food people eat, their physical comfort and state of health, the pharmaceuticals they are taking, the air quality and circulation, yes, I can go on. If there are windows…
The skill of the facilitator as a curator of appropriate mood-setting-imagination-spurring activities, behaviours, tools, and methods also plays a key role. The facilitator’s deftness to design the flow or, as I like to call it, the choreography, influences how willing and able people are to share their thinking; the design informs engagement and quality of outcome. There’s much more to the art of facilitating brainstorming than meets the eye, and good facilitators are aware of them including the dynamics of the people in the room as they experience a variety of highs, and lows throughout the session.
Conversations about the efficacy of brainstorming can be tiresome when its meaning is understood, assumed and experienced uniquely from person to person; that is, when it’s definition is muddy the arguments keep the water murky.
- To some, brainstorming describes an array of techniques and thinking tools that let loose new options; unleash considerations for new potential.
- To others, brainstorming is one tool among many.
I’m from the first camp – brainstorming describes different kinds tools used to crack open new thinking to create new futures; and inferred within the term brainstorming, are guidelines for divergent thinking which allows for exploration before making a decision. The brainstorming rules, or guidelines put forward by their creator, Alex Osborn, include: Defer judgement, Go for Quantity, Hitchhike – build on others’ ideas, Freewheel. One I’ve added is: All ideas are welcome. This phrase replaces the statement many like to use to welcome new thinking. ‘There’s no such thing as a bad idea’, they say. Try passing that sentiment along with full integrity to realists, like me.
Why this blog post? It’s in response to a recent article in Fast Company. From Alex Osborn to Bob Sutton: A Meeting of the Minds to Build a Better Brainstorm. It’s a wonderful piece showing different points of view on brainstorming you might find interesting.
Bottom line: Does Brainstorming work?
It doesn’t matter. If it works for you, keep it; if it doesn’t, use something else that gets the job done. What’s most important is this: new ideas, new decisions, new actions create new futures.
If you are using brainstorming, or idea generating methods and want to get better at it, let’s talk – I can coach you to lead amazing sessions, and teach your team skills to upgrade their capacity for innovative and creativity-thinking.
Marci Segal, MS, Creativity and Change Leadership; Freeing leaders thinking to create new futures.
Related Posts
In a Brainstorming Quandary? Get over it and get on with generating ideas
Idea Generating Intelligence lacking… study
The Man Who Taught Brains to Storm – About Alex Osborn, the one who brought brainstorming to life
Related articles
Follow…
Top Posts & Pages
Good point, especially about the hammer;-). After having read a bunch of articles and arguments about why brainstorming doesn’t work, I came to the conclusion that more often than not it is the war of branding. To position themselves facilitators and consultants take old tools, techniques and methodologies, give them new names and after that they need to provide reasons why this new brand is better than old ones.
The other reason of this eternal discussion is that, as I have noticed, when people talk about brainstorming inefficiency, they really have in mind some experience of badly facilitated brainstorming. Cause the arguments they provide why the other techniques are better point to that. “You need to give good focus to the ideation to come up with good ideas”. Well, of course, this is what you do BEFORE brainstorming, this is what you do with CPS – explore and formulate your challenge. Or, when they argue that groups that are allowed to provide critique to the ideas produce better ideas… But then they specify: the critique should be provided in a specific way, to focus on a constructive improvement of an idea. Of course! What “Build up on ideas” guideline for? Etc, etc. As you say, if you take a hammer and start hitting your fingers instead of nails with it, of course it won’t work.
Ah yes Irina, we share the same point of view! Thanks for writing.
Marci, I totally agree with your ‘most important’ conclusion that new ideas, new decisions, and new actions can create new futures!
Thanks Tom, You should know after so many successes!
Hi Marci, enjoyed your post. Silly man telling you brainstorming doesn’t work… sheesh! Thanks for the reference to the fast company article.
Thanks Janice. I wonder how different beliefs surrounding brainstorming influence the creation of a creativity professionals’ community.
If a hammer doesn’t work, who’s guilty? Has to be the hammer, hasn’t it? If s.o. beats s.o. else with a hammer, who’s guilty. See above. tbc. Brainstorming is a tool, not more but not less. In the hand of a skilled “worker” it can create “Whows” beyond measure – in the hand of a dilettante it’ll be useless (at best). Yesterday I was sitting in a coffee-shop and, for a project, browsing through Osborn old book (and bible ). I found that, beside the name Brainstorming, actually very little what Osborn said more than 50 years ago about how to use it efficiently, made it’s way to presence.
So, I I’d say no: Brainstorming doesn’t work (it its used in a way many (if not most) people use it). An yes: Brainstorming is, in all its simplicity still a bright ball at the Christmas tree (if used in a “good” and productive way.
And furthermore, if one still doesn’t like the tool: The underlying PRINCIPLE is the basis for so many further creativity techniques (including mindmapping!), that one may be well advised to focus on this (or these) very principle(s).
Match, of course – the principle of brainstorming! Defer judgement, etc. thanks for your comment.
I think so many people miss the aspect of science that supports the notion of CPS and the tool called Brainstorming. Problem solving has a strong correlation to genetic programming, in that if the problem is fit and worth solving then the problem becomes defined and either individual or group brainstorming is sought to solve the problem with the most fit solution. I infer here that both problems and solutions have fitness factors that determine the importance of solution resolution. Darwinian evolution process then prescribes that the fittest (most important or strongest) problems are worth solving and the strongest solution fit has the best chance of succeeding. Brainstorming is a divergent approach to generate solution options for a given problem. Accordingly if the problem is not clearly defined then the brainstormed solution options will not deliver suitable solution options. I posit that if someone concludes that brainstorming does not work it is because the problem is not defined or well understood.
Interesting connection between evolutionary processes CPS and brainstorming. Can you provide the research to support the neurological correlations with CPS as you mention?
Marci of course a good question. I have been trained in the CPS process over many years and always wondered why “problem science” has not been clearly identified. We have seen a lot of work on the study of creativity and innovation in problem solving but very little work done to understand how problems exist and are related. Invariably CPS as an process, looks at the world as single problems to which we apply the solving tools in creative ways to generate solution options. Ok sounds right…. however after spending many years conducting observational and contextual research in the field of medicine it is very apparent that problems are complex and interconnected connected to each other in forms of neural networks.
The concept of solving one problem and creating another is central to this concept. My work to map this problem relationship space has been to look closely to how problems are related and how solutions are related to different problems. I have been working for many years on a series of hypotheses that appear to have characteristics that parallel genetic traits in nature. As one example – we know that gene traits that have strength in their context seem to be selected and survive. As a very broad hypothesis – the worst problems that cause the most disruption or inconvenience tend to be selected first to be solved. The weaker problems that have the least strength are often passed over for solving as they have the least overall effect if solved. Accordingly a problem is not a monolithic structure like a single carbon atom. A problem that we look at in CPS contains various characteristics that influence it’s existence. When we start to categorize these characteristics we can see that problems typically share most of the same categories – this is similar to DNA (not as a helix but as a subset of combined traits). I am using a variation of the Medici Effect here to study problems utilizing other know scientific knowledge to look for patterns and behaviors. So while I do not have any published empirical research I think there is much more research to do in this space. This is a pretty sketchy overview I realize so I am sure such hypotheses can be easily dismissed without real data but one has to start some where! Thanks for asking in any case.
Russ, thanks for sharing your thinking. I agree with you about CPS – it was invented (so to speak) in the 1950′s and 60′s when life was much simpler, for a number of reasons. It worked well then and continues to and I see opportunity for expanding scope to embrace, and flow with the complexity. Maslow’s model of needs, the hierarchy, worked well in its time to help people understand behaviour and motivation. There’s a different model I prefer to use, one that posits coexistence of needs rather than levels. I guess that’s to say, again, I encourage you to continue to bring more light to the subject.
What’s considered a “creative problem” per the first quote by Alex Osborn. I thought the process was creative “problem solving”. The questions is what? brainstorming works or does not work for what?
Using a complete problem solving process, where all know the objective and desired goal, you identify the objective, brainstorm, then generate solutions, winnow to the best ideas, then gain acceptance for the idea.
Is it useful for a group to to blindly “brainstorm” about a “topic”?
Some generated ideas may be useful in an arena or in some way. But how does that help solve a problem not well defined?
In many business groups, I find everyone rushing to “brainstorm” when they don’t know what the actual problem is or the goal.
If your flashlight stops working, you certainly can brainstorm about it. Knowing whether the batteries are dead, the light bulb is blown, the switch is broken, it’s been damaged by water, or you can simply turn a light on in the room, makes a huge difference on what to brainstorm about. Fixing the flashlight, buying another or just getting sufficient light into the area.
Yes. Many rush to brainstorm as the one approach to approach finding pathways to overcome challenges without complimenting their efforts with additional considerations including the definition of the real question, evaluating several options and planning implementation to pilot a new solution. Thank you for your comment.
[...] Brainstorming – work or no? What’s it really all about? (creativityland.ca) [...]
@marcisegal thank’s very much, extraordinary new point of view about Brainstorming method, also comments about.
Dear Marci,can I use it?
An honour that you’d ask. Yes you may use what makes sense for you … including the citation and link back.