Fun social psych fact: research has shown group brainstorming to be an overall process loss. You’re better off brainstorming alone and bringing your ideas to the table individually, ADHD or otherwise.
Lots of reasons why, but you can imagine some of the obvious ones, like only one person being able to speak at once, or groupthink issues where a person or group dominates the process.
“Brainstorming” is what you force ppl to do when they would absolutely not do it diligently on their own & just stubbornly repeat “idk, I have no ideas”.
So you take them out of their environment (off-site preferably) & force them to think about shit.
It’s also a shitty job to moderate such a group or take notes/main points to later develop.
You’re trading variety and mental capacity for direction and group cohesion right? If you have a good leader who can set good themes, or a group that gets into disagreements, then a group discussion setting might turn 20, potentially off-topic or divisive ideas into 5 on-topic, agreeable ideas. But yeah, if you have the time for individual research, then that can be valuable as well.
Well, that same concept but I demand that ppl get prepared beforehand (‘send me an email with 5 actually viable suggestions & prepare data if necessary/applicable/reasonably feasible’).
That way ppl don’t wander off, don’t suggest (as) stupid shit (as they otherwise would) that wound obviously lead nowhere + they get group feedback to workshop (or not) the idea further.
Fun social psych fact: research has shown group brainstorming to be an overall process loss. You’re better off brainstorming alone and bringing your ideas to the table individually, ADHD or otherwise.
Lots of reasons why, but you can imagine some of the obvious ones, like only one person being able to speak at once, or groupthink issues where a person or group dominates the process.
“Brainstorming” is what you force ppl to do when they would absolutely not do it diligently on their own & just stubbornly repeat “idk, I have no ideas”.
So you take them out of their environment (off-site preferably) & force them to think about shit.
It’s also a shitty job to moderate such a group or take notes/main points to later develop.
You’re trading variety and mental capacity for direction and group cohesion right? If you have a good leader who can set good themes, or a group that gets into disagreements, then a group discussion setting might turn 20, potentially off-topic or divisive ideas into 5 on-topic, agreeable ideas. But yeah, if you have the time for individual research, then that can be valuable as well.
Well, that same concept but I demand that ppl get prepared beforehand (‘send me an email with 5 actually viable suggestions & prepare data if necessary/applicable/reasonably feasible’).
That way ppl don’t wander off, don’t suggest (as) stupid shit (as they otherwise would) that wound obviously lead nowhere + they get group feedback to workshop (or not) the idea further.
Eh, agreeable ideas are boring ideas. On anything creative, I’d rather have something divisive with character than something corporate and filed-down.