Brainstorming 1. Group Members Express Any Idea That Comes To Mind No Matter How Strange, Weird or Unusual. Do Not Censor Any of Your Ideas. 2. Do Not Evaluate Any of the Ideas That Are Suggested. All Ideas Should Be Considered. 3. Quantity Is Important. The More Ideas The Better. 4. Build On The Ideas Of Others. Try to Extend On The Ideas of Other People.

Advantages of Rules Directed Towards Removing Evaluation Apprehension Separation of Idea Generation From Idea Evaluation Generation of a Large Pool of Ideas Try Avoid Being In A Rut; Other Ideas Spark A New Way of Thinking What the rules of BS are designed to do

Which Is Better? Individual Brainstorming Or Brainstorming In Groups? Individuals (in nominal groups) typically outperform the same number of people working in interacting (face-to-face-groups). Both in Terms of Quantity of Ideas and Quality of Ideas .

Reasons Groups May Not Perform as Well Social Loafing. People work less hard when they are part of a group than when they are working alone. Conformity. Conformity occurs when people bring their behaviors in line with what they perceive to be what others are doing in thoughts. .

Reasons Groups May Not Perform as Well Production Blocking. Production blocking refers to the fact that a person performing one task, say writing or speaking, or even listening, cannot easily perform another task.

Reasons Groups May Not Perform as Well The Illusion of Group Productivity. Perhaps the biggest threat to group effectiveness is the group’s own illusion of confidence. Stated another way, groups have a much greater sense of self-efficacy or self-confidence than is warranted by their actual productivity level.

Reasons Groups May Not Perform as Well Coordination Problems. Take turns producing ideas and have to wait for their turn to speak. Failure to follow the rules of brainstorming.

Paulus’s new rules to enhance brainstorming include: Stay focused on the task. In particular, group members should not tell stories and should not explain their ideas. Keep the brainstorming going. There will be lulls in the ideation phase and during these times, group members should continue to brainstorm. Return to previous categories. Group members may have new ideas about a given topic or category later in the process, so they should cycle back to those ideas.

Brainwriting-have members at key intervals cease talking and write their ideas down, silently and independently. Use Nominal Group Procedures.

NGT (Fox) Revised Phase 1 Pre-meeting activity: Individuals told of topic and generate ideas in advance. Ideas submitted to recorder, anonymously. At meeting ideas are distributed to members. After individual review, a short individual idea generation phase. Idea slips are placed in central stack. Recorder lists all ideas. Individuals propose which ideas can be combined or worded to eliminate duplicates. If any one objects no change is made. Recycle idea generation phase if requested.

Phase II 1. Serial discussion of each item. Speak for or against each item. Not a debate of item or attempt to reach agreement on item. Information gathering. 2. All items discussed before voting. Participants can go back to discuss each item. 3. Last call for changes on existing items or additional items.

Phase III 1. 15% of the total number of items are ranked. 2. Private polling. 3. Votes recorded and clear winners identified. 4. Items similar rank and inconsistent are discussed again. Voting on these items. Do not including original items. 5. Set-up committee for implementation of ideas.

Improve Process (Benefits of NGT) Separation of idea generation and idea evaluation Independent generation of ideas-brainstorming Reduce variability in group member behavior-consistency from group to group Anonymity in vote in obtaining consensus High task orientation-not much spent time on non-problem activities Member equality in search and evaluation—equal participation Tolerance for non-conformity—weaker overt pressure to follow to the leader High closure-solution

Possible Costs Low flexibility-can’t modify course or direction, maybe only fit problems where members have a pool of ideas. Low level of conflict, discussion flat. Problem with possible ambiguity in voting procedure. Very formal process success depends on conference leadership. More time expended.