The Struggle for Imaginationland

I recently read through this blog post on Lateral Action about brainstorming and the apparently ongoing debate about its usefulness, and I found myself reacting with some disdain. (I posted a pretty long comment.) I’m not sure exactly why I got worked up over a seemingly innocuous debate. Maybe the fact that I work primarily in Marketing, perceived by most to be a creative field, made me feel like my professional livelihood was being addressed along with it. I also disagreed strongly with anyone’s opinion that “brainstorming” is not useful, because I believe that the vast majority of great ideas have come from brainstorming in some form. (I of course have nothing to base that on, but I don’t care.)

Now, I realize at the beginning of the post Mark states that the detractors are referring specifically to the concept of “Brainstorming” as originally suggested by some advertising guy in 1963. I don’t know if this is specifically the case or not, but to me, that’s not even worth confronting as an argument. As the admen griping about brainstorming certainly understand, the term “brainstorming” has taken on a wider popular significance that does not refer to a specific, four-pronged activity written about in a particular book meant for a certain field almost half a century ago. I’m certain they know this, because these men are too smart not to realize it, yet are smart enough to realize the power of word choice and the attention demanded by controversy (and yeah, I realize I’m playing into this, but at least I do realize it). However, there is nothing I like more than to disprove people who base their entire careers on saying things just to say them. So now that you, dear reader, understand my frame of mind when reading something like this, I want to rant for a little while about its utter bullshittiness.

In fact, the specific, decades-old concept of brainstorming discussed in the post isn’t really the problem. If that’s the end of what that guy thought brainstorming was, those are good enough points. I think a lot of this was implied, but I would amend them in this way:

1) “Generate as many ideas as possible” should read, “Get as many people to contribute as possible”: Diversity is the driving force behind brainstorming. Everyone brings different thoughts, emotions, life experiences, and frames of reference to the flow. Quantity of ideas may not necessarily increase quality, but broadening contributions always does.

2) “Don’t criticize” should read “Make everyone feel their opinion is valid”: At first glance, these appear to be the same thing. The important distinction is that debate fuels brainstorming as much as openness. As long as the criticism isn’t personal, people should be able to rationalize the ideas being suggested. There is a way to do this without stifling creativity, and it starts with checking ego, title, and interpersonal conflict at the door.

3) “Welcome unusual ideas” should read “Make sure everyone knows that anything is potentially valid in the discussion”: Start by saying “no idea is unwelcome,” and yeah, you might get a few things that would never work. But you never know what individuals think is possible or isn’t. One might be thinking that budget is part of the restriction, while another may think current staffing is a restriction. By setting out that nothing is impossible, you level the playing field and ensure that everyone knows that big ideas are possible.

4) “Combine and improve ideas” should read “Guide the conversation wisely”: Like I said, debate is crucial to the process. People have an intuitive sense of what will work and what won’t. As long as people are open to anything going into the session (which is muy importante, and should probably be Tip #5), the potential solutions will naturally spark more conversation. This kind of refinement is what brainstorming is all about, and one of the things that makes it vastly superior to individual creativity, no matter how robust.

The hidden factor that lurks in each of these guidelines is the need for a thoughtful moderator. A good brainstorm administrator is a neutral persona that sets the tone for the session, makes people feel at ease, and steers the conversation away from distraction and toward breakthroughs. Creative sessions should have the feel of internal focus groups, and sometimes it’s a good idea to have someone from outside the company administer the session because they have no interpersonal cache to overcome. All of the supposed drawbacks of brainstorming can be overcome by structuring the session. It’s easy to waste half a day of productivity around a brainstorming session that has no direction, and a good way to allow this to happen is to have an unsuitable mediator.

Of course, the title of this post was stolen from South Park, and it’s not by accident. Television shows are the perfect example of the successes of brainstorming, because TV writers are the quintessential example of the craft in practice. Most television shows are written by a committee of writers, who toss around premises for shows in a similar “brainstorm” fashion. That doesn’t mean that there’s never been a TV show written by a single writer, but its unpopularity does imply the superiority in group sessions to generate a wealth of useful content.

Putting my money where my mouf iz at, I had a meeting the other night with two of the founders of the Mile High Business Alliance to volunteer myself to lead brainstorming sessions with local small business owners who I had recently found out were floundering because of what I estimated to be a lack of creative marketing ideas. Soon, we will be announcing an ongoing program of structured brainstorming sessions meant to address specific problems that small business owners are facing (stay tuned for details coming soon). I’ve been trained academically in creative production, and I hope not only to give participants multiple concrete solutions to their problems, but also to introduce a design mentality to Colorado small business owners for use in every aspect of their business operations after leaving the session. I can’t wait to help out small businesses in Colorado and rub the results in the faces of group creativity naysayers.