Skip to Content
Author's profile photo Jonathan Becher

Is Brainstorming Brain Dead

I know this will be an unpopular point of view but I’ve come to the conclusion that brainstorming is a bad idea that doesn’t work.

Brainstorming advocates claim groups of people are more likely to find solutions to problems than individuals working alone. The idea was popularized in the 1950’s by advertising executive Alex F. Osborn who was frustrated by his employees’ inability to develop creative ideas for ad campaigns. According to his book Applied Imagination, Osborn increased overall group creativity by encouraging the rapid generation of ideas and reducing the creative inhibitions among members.  His brainstorming mantra was “reach for quantity and defer judgment.”

In the name of brainstorming, participants are asked to generate as many ideas as possible, favoring sheer volume over specific solutions. Participants ignore traditional constraints (such as budget or feasibility) and look for unusual approaches or perspectives. The claim is this approach improves the odds of producing a radical and effective solution.

Over my career, I’ve seen little evidence which supports this claim. Group brainstorming sessions might produce a higher volume of ideas than a single person would but groups don’t produce higher quality ideas. A small number of people often dominate the conversation and group think almost always happens as a result of peer pressure. In my experience, the most creative ideas have come from individuals working alone.

It turns out my (somewhat irrational) bias is confirmed by science. More than a dozen research studies show that individuals perform better than groups in both quality and quantity, and the performance of brainstorming groups gets worse as size increases. As organizational psychologist Adrian Furnham quipped:

“…business people must be insane to use brainstorming groups. If you have talented and motivated people, they should be encouraged to work alone.”

The failure of brainstorming doesn’t mean that group collaboration can’t work.  In the last few years SAP has had tremendous success with design thinking to spur practical creativity for solutions. Design thinking explicitly balances desirability (what people want), technical feasibility, and economic viability. Unlike other approaches, design thinking starts with what is supposed to be achieved (the goal) rather than what needs to be changed (the problem).

This solution-based approach appeals to me because it mirrors my performance management philosophy. Traditional brainstorming encourages a higher volume of ideas which improves activity-focused ego metrics. Design thinking focuses on the outcome we are trying to achieve: a solution people want that can be implemented in a cost-effective manner.

Now, that’s using your brain.

It’s also a non-brainer to follow me on twitter @jbecher

This blog was originally posted on Manage By Walking Around.

Assigned Tags

      1 Comment
      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Tom Van Doorslaer
      Tom Van Doorslaer

      I completely agree.

      Brainstorming sessions are always dominated by the one that makes the most noise. Often times, the best ideas only emerge after the brain storming session, by the quiet guy in the corner that used his time to come up with a good idea, rather than just blurt out random thoughts.

      A solution is supposed to be a well thought end-to-end process. A random idea does not fit that constraint.

      However, Brainstorm sessions, if done properly, can be a starting point to jog people's creativity. Afterwards, individuals, or small groups, can work out an idea a bit further and see where it takes them.