Connecting Practice

Brainstorming is an approach for a worthwhile idea generation. Typically it is used as a tool in a workshop activity that encourage a group’s parallel and full-spectrum thinking participation to arrive on something that the group needs to understand better and make a decision about. Note that leaders used discussion to give the group the idea that they have a voice and an input into decisions.

2 Phases - Paul Burek

1. Collection of information in the form of sentences / List generation (aiming for quantity of ideas to be considered for new products and/or the like) which is the brain dump of ideas. Note that there is lots of research out there about which way or ways to generate greater quantity or more creative ideas. Moreover, it is guided by Alex Osborn’s rules characteristically as follows:

a. Criticism is ruled out. Adverse judgment of ideas must be withheld until later.
b. “Free-wheeling” is welcomed. The wilder the idea, the better; it is easier to tame down than to think up.
c. Quantity is wanted. The greater the number of ideas, the more the likelihood of winners.
d. Combination and improvement are sought. In addition to contributing ideas of their own, participants should suggest how ideas of others can be turned into better ideas; or how two or more ideas can be joined into still another idea. (p. 84)

2. Clarification (aiming for quality) where ideas are categorized (grouped by like items to create a process map), analyzed, reviewed, discussed, expanded, and ultimately kept or discarded based on their value of achieving the purpose of the activity. It is guided by the desire to achieve consensus (alignment, acceptance, and buy-in on the decisions made).

The Process

1. Elicit the ideas for which the Team should draw out, in sequence, objective data, reflective responses and reactions, interpretations, and/or decisions. This includes:

a. Getting the Team to write their ideas (contribution to the idea development: creativity, alternatives, proposals, what is interesting, provocations and changes) privately on the subject that the member, pairs, or threes would find interesting to suggest/recommend toward something that might actually work and then bring them in on/before the meeting.
b. Introducing the open-ended question.
c. Inviting each member to present their own logical responses, such as intuition, feelings, and/or emotions regarding his answer why it will / will not work and offer benefits. Note that a member may pass if he likes.
d. Writing the answers on flipchart.
e. Clustering ideas using the open-ended question as a guide and putting ideas together “where they most helpfully illuminate a larger idea/solution.” This uses the principle of scientific inquiry rather than scientific analysis, thus creating ideas that are more insightful than any one member has come up with.
f. Naming the new ideas created by the clustering.
g. “Eliminating overlap” so that the widest diversity of ideas is captured.
h. Allowing each member respond (agree or disagree) to what the speaker had said, esp. challenging statements. This includes minimizing interruptions. Then letting each member explain or point out why the information does not fit the facts, the available experience, the system in use, and/or the policy that is being followed in commando fashion. Acknowledge their good part of responses. Next, allowing the speaker respond to what each member had said for open and spirited conversation. Lastly, writing opposing solutions in outside parts of overlapping circles.
i. Every few minutes, restating where they are in the flow toward agreement – agreement and not agreement. Use visuals as well as voice.
j. If sequential questioning, repeating the Step 3b with the remaining open-ended question.

2. The whole thing is brought to a resolve through a discussion which may include mapping road to agreement, prioritizing, generating alternative ideas, making decision, developing individual or group action plan, re-scoping the sequence, scheduling, writing statements, and/or etc.

This follows a natural pattern of human thinking, involving both intuitive and rational thought, and is much bigger than an individual can create alone.

Notes

1. Face-to-face brainstorming groups produce fewer ideas than nominal groups (i.e., individuals who generate ideas without interacting with other ideators). Note that increasing group size inhibits the performance of face-to-face brainstorming-Process blocking and evaluation. Apprehension appears to provide the fullest explanation of this phenomenon.
2. More recent research indicates that electronic brainstorming groups generate more ideas than do nominal groups. Note that increasing group size facilitates the performance of electronic brainstorming.

Problems

1. Participants continue not to engage in discussion which is vital to the work of the group.-Ask if they agree or disagree and what they would suggest to make the group work more effectively.
2. Small group discussion worked, while large group discussion has not.-a.) Explore and break whatever barriers there are that prevent you from using breakout groups every time you meet. b.) Explore what prevents open discussion in the whole group. Maybe it’s just size and amount of air time per person, but there might be other issues.
3. They want to ignore the hard work of narrowing the provocative ideas to feasible ones, and the even harder work of picking the ones to be acted on.
4. Fails to do the list analysis.
5. Brainstorming sessions get off to a shaky start because the participants think the approach is not a good idea.
6. Brainstorming sessions get bad ideas, or produce not a really good idea.
7. Brainstorming sessions is used to distribute blame in the event of failure.
8. Brainstorming sessions that leave groups to their own devices produce bad ideas.
9. Creativity and its mulish muse can’t be scheduled between a certain time.
10. Someone hijacks the theme at hand, finds a way to syndicate things, uses creative energy trying to tell others their ideas are bad, tries to prove everyone else wrong, works to impress the superiors who are present, and/or just plain blathers for his own enjoyment. Another, someone crosses his fingers that the session would deteriorate into what some people call “blamestorming” or “coblabberation,” where you get nowhere or settle on something mediocre to be done with it.
11. Sometimes group sessions can result in one member’s bad idea tainting and limiting the range of others’ ideas - David Perkins, a professor.
12. End up with more pedestrian solution that you would have had had you not held the session.
13. Participants don’t truly give all their ideas that come into their heads - especially when they know there will be an evaluation of ideas in the next step. They censor all their ideas and only call out what they have decided will receive a favorable judgment.

Root Cause of the Problems

The reasons for our failure to brainstorm adequately for creative problem solving are simple:
1. Resisting change
2. Either people do not want to see their problems
3. They have an utopian view of the solution (’a panacee’) - which means also resisting change.

So, in the end, we continue to do more of the same: “i complain a lot”. And brainstorming becomes just another to complain about!

Solution

Set up is key. Setting out some clear expectations for behavior and operationalizing the facilitator’s role congruent with the agreements you may have established allows a group of people the intellectual relief that enables their participation. I would offer here that “set up” includes letting people know what will likely happen AFTER brainstorming,

After Action Review (AAR) is a tool that can enable others to provide constructive, directly actionable, and/or on-the-spot feedback in a non-threatening way within a process of participation, cooperation, and involvement.

Each time an incorrect performance is observed, it should be immediately corrected so that it will not interfere with future projects. During major projects, it is not always easy to notice incorrect performances. Indeed, in many cases, the correct performances will be unknown for these projects as they are learning projects for others. That is why the AAR should be planned at the end of each project so that others can be enabled to provide feedback; others can be given an opportunity to share their views, comments, suggestions, ideas, issues, and/or concerns; others can be enabled to understand why things happened during the progression of the process; others can be enabled to learn lessons and grow from their experience; and others can be enabled to identify innovation and/or generate solution, suggestions, and ideas for the improvement of their next project.

Guideline: Perform AAR after each project.

Climates:
1. Enabling participants to obtain mutual trust from each other.
2. Enabling participants to speak freely.
3. Enabling participants to give commitment to learning.
4. Enabling participants to have an innovative behavior as the norm.
5. Enabling participants to do the right thing.
6. Remind participants that problem solving should be pragmatic.
7. Remind participants that they should NOT be preoccupied with status, territory, or second guessing “what the leader will think.”

Responsible: Team Lead
1. Perform Risk Analysis to solve potential project stopping issue(s). Note that the lack of resource is one of the root of many other problems. Identifying and examining the risk(s) at the start of the project would avoid these problems before the team set off for the project.
2. Ask all participants to keep a note of problems, issues, and/or concerns that they encountered during the project. They should keep a note of successes as well as failures.
3. Prepare, plan, and appoint a facilitator (an independent person) to facilitate the AAR meeting. This includes identifying and re-affirming the need and/or purpose of the AAR meeting.

Responsible: Facilitator
4. After project release, establish the “ground truth” of the completed project by revisiting the objectives and deliverables of the project and sending email request to all participants a day before the AAR meeting asking them to list 10 successes, failures, and problems that occurred during the project. This includes choosing the participants and writing their position titles and responsibilities. The participants should provide the following information:

• Project name
• Name, position, and objective of person submitting the information
• Function Name + [Success that was made (a brief statement of the identified task and/or activity that went well) + What were the intended results? + What were the actual results that answer why the identified task and/or activity went well? + Who's to credit for this? + Can other teams benefit from doing the same?]1:m
• Function Name + [Failure that was made (a brief statement of the identified task and/or activity that went not ok) + What were the intended results? + What were the actual results? + Get explanations that answer why the identified task and/or activity were taken, why the failure happened, what caused the results, or why did the actual results happen that way? + Who's the owner for this? + What suggestion can be made? + Can other teams be affected from doing the same?]1:m
• Function Name + [A brief statement of the identified task and/or activity affected by a problem? + Problem + Who's responsible for this? + Who should be responsible? + What's the identified root causes? Was it a gap in the process? + What's the identified solutions? + What is the consequence of not solving this problem? The worst consequence? Most probable? + Can other teams be affected from doing the same? + Escalation Point]1:m
• Function Name + [a brief statement of the identified issues and/or concerns that surround the project for resolution]1:m

Note: The participants should ask their teams for feedback on the issues before completing the form.

5. Define scope of AAR meeting by documenting and/or putting together a list of the 10 most common successes, failures, and problems before the AAR meeting. Note that the information will form the AAR meeting agendas. This includes creating a list of probing open-ended questions, establishing the priority of the items, estimating the amount of time on each item, and if necessary, setting for limited discussion to arrive at the appropriateness of the selected items on the agenda.

6. Calling AAR meeting as soon as possible and inviting all the participants in advance. This includes determining time and location parameters for the AAR meeting and arranging for action minutes to be taken (minutes of the meeting) by one of the participants. Note that every effort should be made to get all of the participants into one room for the meeting. If this is not possible then video conferencing should be used. It is difficult to discuss sensitive issues when you can’t see the person you’re talking too.

7. At the getting started of the AAR meeting, give a short introduction, make announcements first and quickly, present the theme, and state the scope and other limitation.

Tips or Guidelines

• Create the right climate that is one of trust, openness, and commitment to learning in the AAR meeting. Present some rules, if appropriate.
• Make clear that the purpose of the AAR meeting is to help future projects run more smoothly by identifying the learning points from this project.

8. At the AAR meeting, share the information, summarize the key events, and/or decide to construct a flow chart of what happened.

9. In the failure discussion, explore the gap between the intended and actual results in order to identify causes and commit the team to a few key “sustains” and “improves” for the next cycle of the project. Brainstorm the “gaps” to generate worthwhile ideas from the theme to arrive on something that a group needs to understand better and make a decision about.

Tips or Guidelines for Facilitator

• Ensure that everyone has an opportunity to contribute.
• Strive to allow participants to offer previously unspoken issues and/or concerns by calling for questions, clarifications, and concerns.
• Strive to allow participants to offer solutions, answers, insights, comments, and/or ideas rather than you offering them.
• Remain unbiased throughout the AAR review.
• Allow NOT blame and/or personal attacks.
• Handle complaints positively.

Tips or Guidelines for Team Lead

• Address issues and/or concerns from the point of view of what should have been done to make the situation better, what process should we change to ensure that this doesn’t happen again.

10. In the problem discussion, begin with presenting problem. Then allow the participants to brainstorm the problems to generate worthwhile solution from the theme to arrive on something that a group needs to understand better and make a decision about. Also allow the participants to evaluate and select solution and generate alternative solutions. Lastly, develop an action plan. Define the top 15 actions to be completed and identify who will do each action or who will delegate where necessary. Note that the top 15 action items should have dates agreed for when they will be completed. The remaining actions will be lower priority but the team should be aware that not completing these actions will cause problems on projects in the future.

11. In the success discussion, begin with presenting the report and things to the team what they can do well allowing them to reflect and think on impact of the project. Then ask ‘what the team could do better to improve the team’s performance as the team continue to work together?’ or ‘what needs improvement that the team could do better next time?’ Here you may explore alternative courses of actions that might have been more effective. This includes identifying issues and/or concerns that surround the theme for resolution.

12. Ask ‘what lessons can be learned from the experience?’ Here you may press participants for specific, repeatable advice that others could apply in similar situations.

13. At closure, ensure that everyone feels fully heard before leaving the AAR meeting. Here you may ask them for a numerical rating of the project: ‘looking back, how satisfied are you with the project: marks out of ten?’ Their answer would enable you to ask them, ‘what would have made it a ten for you?’ This includes appreciating any ideas that have come up and encouraging the participants to communicate more ideas that will come up with possibilities that work as they continue to ponder about the subject (failures, problems, issues, concerns, etc.).

14. [Optional] 1 hour should be scheduled at the end of the AAR meeting for an Executive Summary. A conference call will be held between the participants in the AAR review meeting and any other interested parties. The top 10 problems, 15 issues, and 15 action plan should be presented at this conference meeting.

15. Give closing comments and agreement on next steps. This includes announcing that a discussion must be continued in another meeting - a discussion extension with several options to address problems, issues, and/or concerns.

16. Record the AAR. Things like: Conclusions; lessons and guidelines for the future; some background information about the project to help put these guidelines into a meaningful context; the names of the people involved for future reference; and any key documents such as project plans or reports.

17. Share the completed document to all parties involved.

18. Follow-up on the top 15 action items and ensure that they are completed.

AAR is a working document and should evolve as others learn more from the AAR process. I am confident that you can develop your AAR knowledge and skills further in your field of expertise.