Brainstorming: What Works
It may not be what you think if breakthrough ideas are the pursuit
What seems like it will ideally work doesn’t always prove itself effective in practice.
“When groups meet to brainstorm, good ideas are lost,” says Adam Grant, an author and a professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. “People bite their tongues due to conformity pressure, noise and ego threat.”
There’s a smarter way, he offers.
“A better approach is brainwriting,” Grant asserts. “Generate ideas separately, then meet to assess and refine.”
He concisely explains the why behind it.
“Group wisdom begins with individual creativity, Grant says.
It shouldn’t come as a complete surprise that the good ideas, practical and desirable, that Grant talks about, don’t materialize in communication when they must originally be communicated within groups.
“Power dynamics can intersect with cultural differences so that one group may be amplified and others stifled,” says Melissa Nelson — the chief talent officer at the law firm, Levenfeld Pearlstein — who holds a master’s degree in leadership and organizational development.
“One cultural background might encourage people to interrupt while another strongly discourages it. Power dynamics can influence how this plays out in groups.”
That’s why it’s vitally important, she adds, to lessen the likelihood of this happening.
“It's important to set brainstorming ground rules around not reacting to ideas in the moment,” Nelson says, because “people too easily fall into the trap of judgment.”
That’s costly.
“Brain science tells us that judgment limits your ability to think creatively, so the path to new ideas or connections is blocked,” Nelson points out.
Personalities within a group are not entirely similar, a fact that isn’t often and fully taken into consideration when people convene to communicate.
“When groups meet, you endure the fact that many people are introverts and would prefer to make their ideas known privately,” says Kevin Kocher, the owner and managing director at Immigrant Spirit, where he helps place English-speaking professionals into jobs in Germany.
“They can get lost when other things come to mind, like group acceptance, being politically correct or the repercussions of saying something wrong.”
That naturally is going to lead to diminished contributions or an absence of them.
“Some people are more likely to hold back in group settings, compared to everyone being able to express good, practical ideas in private,” Kocher says.
Grant states that the inhibitors of the generation the best ideas are the very real presence of conformity pressure, noise and ego threat. How leaders go about addressing them is a critical task not regularly accomplished, resulting in people not likely feeling encouraged to assertively, confidently communicate.
“There are ways to stimulate conversation when little participation occurs during open idea-generation team meetings,” Nelson says.
“Experimenting with various interventions, including direct questions to quieter participants, anonymous idea-generation surveys and individual coaching conversations outside of the team meeting, are useful solutions.”
It’s important to remember leading sessions can prove to be a complex facilitation.
“There are no shortcuts to finding the levers that work for each person,” Nelson warns, while mentioning the potential payoff. “Helping a reluctant participant find a place to contribute is incredibly rewarding and motivating for all involved.”
Kocher says because of human nature, leaders of brainstorming or any meeting are not going to eliminate the blockers that Grant mentioned because those challenges and behavior are “inherent human characteristics.”
He doesn’t recommend that being the objective anyway.
“You can eliminate all hindrances to idea generation,” Kocher suggests, “but that means shrinking the audience size (of contributors).”
Some leaders may believe that improving psychological safety for brainstorming could be helpful and want to experiment to determine if it will work.
“Even with limited time, leaders ask their team to spend the first two minutes of their time together creating individual ideas before sharing those with the group in a discussion,” Nelson says.
“Leaders can also utilize technology to offer ways for people to anonymously share ideas while in the room together to limit the perceptions and assumptions about who is contributing what.”
She shares her professional experiences at Levenfeld Pearlstein.
“We’ve also achieved good results when we ask senior leaders to leave the room for a portion of the group session to help others feel more comfortable sharing ideas, especially if they are feeling vulnerable,” Nelson says.
There are factors that determine peace and confidence for people expressing themselves, that goes beyond a brainstorming session.
“On a macro level, a company’s culture significantly impacts whether people feel comfortable offering what may be deemed a ‘bad’ idea or ‘failure’ before people even walk into the room,” Nelson explains.
“Are all ideas and experiments celebrated, even if they don’t lead anywhere immediately? Are people encouraged to fail? Is it okay to make mistakes?
“Creating a psychologically safe culture can enhance productivity and participation in group brainstorming sessions.”
“Leaders can improve the outcomes for brainstorming by introducing public speaking trainings or coaching in the organization,” Kocher recommends.
“That way, the employees will learn what to focus on during public speaking. Without this knowledge, the focus of expressing an idea goes in an unproductive way towards getting the idea out in the open.”
The Beneficial Adjustment
Brainstorming before meeting is the productive way forward, Grant says the science shows and therefore, recommends. This is the value opportunity.
This “can help people who think differently than others or don’t feel like they belong in the room or have anything to add feel included and more comfortable sharing their ideas,” Nelson says.
“Expanded inclusion, in turn, results in a diversity of thought, background and perspectives that expand the scope of ideas. For instance, as an introvert, I often need more time to process internally before I am ready to react.”
She shares the experiences and challenges she has faced.
“When I was more junior in my career, I was in workspaces, intentionally or unintentionally, where I was treated like I had nothing to add to a conversation,” Nelson says. “So, I didn’t.”
She hasn’t forgotten how that felt and thinks about it as she has moved into a role of influence and persuasion.
“As I’ve grown in my career, I find myself on the other side of the spectrum. I am in a leadership position, found my voice, and am confident contributing. But now I need to think about my influence in these conversations,” Nelson says.
“Is groupthink happening based on my opinions and reactions? Do people around me know I want to be challenged? Do they have the confidence in themselves to do that?”
The importance of creating more optimal environments for brainstorming is clear.
“No other thoughts come into idea generation as opposed to all the previously discussed downsides that you run (into) when you bring everyone into a large group first,” Kocher says. “You want the natural first reaction.”
Nelson’s past made an emotional, psychological impact on her, to the degree that she decided to minimize the likelihood that others will have to endure and suffer the same experience.
“I know what it felt like not to be expected to contribute and I never want my team to experience it,” Nelson stresses. “I am never the smartest person in the room. I am never going to always have the best ideas.
“I want them to feel comfortable offering their ideas, participating in the conversation, and contributing to the process.”
To sponsor this publication, place an ad or have links published, check this page.
Please consider following Communication Intelligence at the LinkedIn company page