Meeting Tools and Jewels

Synectics in Creative Problem Solving History

At the same time that Alex Osborn's friends (he was the inventor of "brainstorming") were evolving the Osborn-Parnes Method of creative problem solving, a group of men in Cambridge worked at Arthur D. Little Company in the Invention Design Group.  They became intrigued by the way they worked together and the fact that sometimes they were wildly successful in generating innovative thinking and yet other times came up with routine, "been there, done that" ideas.  They began to audiotape, later videotape, their meetings to see if creative thinking were replicable - that is, available by choice.

 

In 1960, they left ADL to form Synectics®, Inc. where they continued to study their own process and that of artistic, creative people. Ultimately, they decided that everyone is creative and that what was necessary was a process to access that creativity, which they proceeded to invent.  The role of "process facilitator" was created by Synectics along with a nine-step process that is still in use today in their consulting practice.

 

I will share this process in a later blog post.

Creative Problem-Solving History

As described in an earlier blog entry, Alex Osborn was the creator of the term and practice known as "brainstorming." 

 

Osborn developed a network of friends who were also interested in creative problem solving and came from many walks of life.  Some leading psychologists - J.P. Guildford, E. Paul Torrance, and Calvin Taylor - were part of this group and together they founded the Creative Education Foundation.  This organization still exists and holds conferences in the United States.

 

They developed what is called the Osborn-Parnes CPS Process.  It consists of these steps:

 

         •Objective or Mess Finding

         •Fact Finding

         •Problem Finding

         •Idea Finding

         •Solution Finding

         •Acceptance/Action Finding

Brainstorming

Brainstorming as a process was first devised in the 1930's by Alex Osborn, partner in charge of creativity at BBD&O, one of the most successful advertising agencies in the world.  He explored what contributed to creativity and group creativity in particular. 

 

He developed four basic "rules" or "guidelines" for brainstorming.  These and more are described in his book from the early 1950's Applied Imagination.

 

1.  Quantity breeds Quality --always generate many before choosing

2.  No Judgment--refrain from judging while generating ideas

3.  Hitchhike--combine ideas to yield other ideas

4.  Freewheel--any and all ideas are encouraged

 

This technique is still used throughout the US.  There are many variations that have evolved as well and subsequent blog entries will address these. 

Brainstorming meetings

There is a ton to say about brainstorming, making them work as a facilitator and helping people get truly creative.  And I will be sharing some tools and jewels in future on this topic.

For now, though, check out PsyBlog in the UK at http://budurl.com/sq73

Jeremy Dean is the author and he suggests that electronic brainstorming may be the answer to two problem aspects of brainstorming meetings:  social loafing (letting others carry the load of idea generation) and production blocking (having to wait to voice one's idea and having forgotten or dismissed when it's finally time to speak).  Computers allow people to participate quickly and simultaneously while also displaying the ideas from others in the session, thus addressing these shortcomings.

Obviously, the facilitation of a computer-aided brainstorming session requires different skills from those of classic brainstorming.  You have to understand the computer limitations as well as group dynamics and creative thinking.  You have to be able to trouble-shoot.  I've been in sessions where the computers died and the ideas with them!  Painful. 

But there are easy ways around this kind of technology glitch.  And the benefits of using electronic brainstorming - increased number of ideas, fuller participation, ability to sort faster - outweighs the danger of the glitches. In fact, Dean points out research that says, "Gallupe and Cooper (1993) found that electronically mediated brainstormers generated more high quality ideas than face-to-face brainstomers."

Do you agree?  Some people prefer the old-fashioned marker and notepad as a faster way to the sub-conscious, but that's a topic for another blog entry.

How to Evaluate a Meeting

In the previous blog entry, I talked about the value of evaluating a meeting.  People have asked, "But how do you evaluate a meeting?"

The best way to do this is to ask, at the end of the meeting, for a quick sense of what worked in this meeting and then what could be improved. Either list these points on a flipchart or include them in the notes of the meeting. If you are the meeting chairperson, review the feedback prior to your next meeting so you can make that meeting better.

A benefit of gathering this feedback is that all participants will begin to develop a sense of what makes meetings effective

As often as possible, take two minutes at the end of the meeting to ask the group to evaluate the meeting. Ask for specifics on what worked and where improvements are necessary. Over time, you can apply the feedback and make your meetings better. Participants will notice when you address problem areas and will not only appreciate it but also will share the responsibility for increasing meeting productivity.

Evaluate Your Meetings

If not every meeting - perhaps every few meetings evaluate them.  You can help each participant learn how to make meetings more effective by building their awareness of the behaviors and techniques that make for a good meeting or, conversely, for a bad one. 

Have participants create a brief list of what has worked or is currently working in your meetings and what needs improvement. Discuss as a group and make changes or try experiments in future.

One way to make all meetings more effective is to enlist the participants in giving feedback.  This will create an awareness of meeting process and procedures, which they can apply in subsequent meetings with this group and in meetings with other people.

When to Use a Facilitator (part 2)

There are times and certain kinds of meetings where having a facilitator will make the meeting effective and productive.  Here are more situations where having a facilitator will give you the desired results:

·                If group commitment is essential

·                When internal politics are strong

·                If bringing in someone "from the outside" will lend importance to the tasks at hand

·                If you're leaving meetings frustrated

Having a meeting facilitator can free you and your team from worrying about note-taking, time-keeping, and staying on-target and allow you to focus on the task at hand. For your next important meeting, consider bringing in a professional facilitator or having a staff member fill that role.

 

When To Use a Facilitator (part 1)

Management of organizations is not easy in an era characterized by constant change and an unpredictable political and economic environment. A professional facilitator can help a team or organization move forward productively, whether on a single topic or a strategic plan. Typical instances where a facilitator can make a big difference include:

• If you are scheduling a strategic planning "retreat" to decide where your
company, organization or department is going over the next three to five years

• If you want innovative thinking on a recurring task

• If critical meetings go on and on without a decision

• When you have lots of ideas but can't get them to solution stage

(see next post for more times when a facilitator can help your meetings be more productive.)

Facilitator Dilemma

Sometimes a group will resist being facilitated. Some people feel it is too formal while others feel less structure is best.

Options for the facilitator:

1. Calmly and clearly state what a facilitator does and does not do and how some attention paid to the process of the meeting prevents totally wasting time on random discussion.

2. Accept the input and facilitate from a seat at the table rather than from the front of the room. Offer ideas for how to process discussion.

3. Take on related roles: timekeeper, scribe, summarizer. Be low-key.

Do not allow the group to flounder. They will not thank you for doing nothing and demonstrating their foolishness. Instead, offer to step in if they begin to be unproductive. Have a few suggestions for how the group can move forward in the remaining time. Do not be smug when they go off-track or they will not cooperate with you in future.

More on Ground Rules

Ground Rules are useful in guiding a group into the behavior the group has determined is most appropriate. Many ground rules are straightforward: start on time, one person speaking at a time, etc.

With a group that meets frequently, it may make sense to augment some kinds of Ground Rules with others that are unique to the group. For example, if participants seem reluctant to speak up, the group can create a Ground Rule that relates specifically to this.  For example, the Ground Rule might read:  Full participation adds value to the meeting.  You might even have a discussion on this topic.

Starting with a question can ensure your ground rules are productive.  Ask, "What rules would help us ensure that people feel comfortable in speaking up on any topic?" This conversation might lead to one or several additions to your Ground Rules. Examples: What is said here stays here; personal attacks will not be tolerated; anyone can call a time-out to clarify the agenda item or to express discomfort with the climate in the room.

In subsequent posts, I will share some sample ground rules that have been used by groups.