GETTING THE MOST OF OUT OF

BRAINSTORMING GROUPS

Paul B. Paulus

University of Texas at Arlington

Effective Collaboration

• Idea and problem solving meetings involve group interaction and exchange of information, perspectives and ideas.

• Part of interaction is social/bonding/learning about others

• How groups do it naturally seldom very effective.

• What feels good often is not good—food etc.

• Perception of performance not closely related to actual performance

Seven Basic Problems of Group

Interaction • Group size

• Production blocking

• Unequal participation

• Similarity/agreement bias

• Status/expertise differential

• Satisficing/going with first good ideas solutions

• Lack of structure/preparation/clear goals

Seven Bad Habits of Meetings

• Done as one group

• Done only as a group

• Lack of focus/subtopics

• Ineffective turn taking

• Lack of attention

• Lack of simultaneous cognitive elaboration

• Failure to tap cognitive inertia in a timely manner

Interaction in “Natural Groups”

• One person talks at a time

• Uneven participation

• Initial ideas become the focus of attention-

premature consensus

• Tend to share similar ideas

• Focus on agreement or common expertise

• Deferment to experts

• Inhibition of minority perspectives/minority

members

Common Knowledge Effect

Common Knowledge Effect

Common Knowledge Effect

Tapping the Collective Genius of Groups

• Small group/dyadic interaction

• Balance of group, dyad, alone experiences

• Focusing on one issue or component at a time

• Use multiple interaction modalities

• Build transactive memory/leverage diversity

• Benefits of group experience, training, planning,

structure

• Tap external connections

Theory of the Group Mind

• Individual search of knowledge

• Search within and across domains/flow (in the

box and out of the box)

• Associative networks

• Attention to self vs others

• Cognitive stimulation of associations-

connections—spreading activation

• Memory limitations/cognitive

overload/distraction/decay

• Stimulation vs fixation

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Initial private search of relevant knowledge or ideas (by

writing ideas or typing)

• Avoids initial bias or fixation

• Allows for in-depth search of relevant knowledge of all group

members

• Idea search can occur without distraction/flow of ideas

• No competition for face-time

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Sharing this knowledge in an efficient manner (writing,

electronic) with a small sub-group

• Attentive processing of ideas by others

• Allows for input from all members

• Allow for stimulation effect of new ideas

• Novel ideas have more impact (contrast with own ideas)

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Then some more private reflection time to build on the

shared ideas

• Ideas based associations generated by the sharing processes

• Connect own ideas/knowledge to the shared material

• No distraction from others’ responses

• No competition for face time

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Take a break

• allow for incubation

• dissipation of fixation

Tapping the Diverse and Creative Potential of Groups

• Select best ideas in small groups

• Idea selection tends to be better in groups than in isolation

• Benefits of multiple perspectives and experiences in evaluation

applicability

• Crowdsourcing/electronic voting

• Wisdom of the crowd

• Groupthink not a problem

Tapping the Diverse and Creative Potential of Groups

• Share the ideas with the entire group/come to consensus

about best ideas

• The contrasting ideas coming from different groups will stimulate

further discussion/elaboration

• Discovery of overlap in top ideas may increase confidence in those

ideas

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Have small subgroup of relevant experts develop ideas

into implementable format

• They should interact with originators of ideas to insure they

understand the full context of the ideas

• They should get input from those outside the division or

organization who have relevant expertise

Best Practices in Group Brainstorming

• Instructions

• Group size

• Brainwrite

• Electronic

• Goals

• Feedback

• Turnover

Best Practices in Group Brainstorming

• Breaks/length of session/intervening activities

• Asynchronous

• Alone, Dyad, Group variation

• Task decomposition/categories

• Importance of flow.

• Priming—common stimuli/categories

• Facilitators/training

• Synergy issue

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Training

• Planning for the interaction process

• Experience as a team

• Collective intelligence

• Development of transactive memory

• Group turnover

• Team reflexivity

• Leadership and organizational support

Virtual and Asynchronous Groups

•There is some utility to being all focused on an

issue at one time •Focused Attention

•Motivation

•Sharing in a restricted time frame while cognitions are “hot”

• Can be done electronically

• Yet during building/selection phase, in person

interactions may be most useful

The Typical Group Interaction Model

Wise Group Model

Group Genius or Synergy Model

Implications Continued Practice in Groups

• Need for intense and efficient one-on-one interactions

• Bring ideas to the team for evaluation, elaboration,

development

• Have structured discussion sessions in limited time

periods (motivation/in depth cognitive processing/flow)

• Alternate group interaction and reflective periods close in

time

• Use different modes of interaction at different phases

• Develop a “natural model” for meetings that incorporates

the science of the group mind

• Become an innovative, effective and reflexive “team”

Tapping the Creative Potential of Groups

• Category Process

• Important for structuring exploration/building process

• Facilitates search process

• Linking semantic clusters

• Related/unrelated

• Allows both for in the box and out of the box thinking

• Start with sequence process for ideation

• Later do connecting/linking