By Jonathan Vehar, CEF Colleague and President/Cofounder, New & Improved, LLC

Thanks Newsweek (July 19, 2010) for perpetuating one of the biggest research myths since the Loch Ness Monster. Years of research and practice shows that Brainstorming works – like any tool – when used properly. The headline and text erroneously say otherwise.
We do, however, appreciate that the author’s main article, “The Creativity Crisis.” It may well have lit a spark under the collective butt of America and may indeed reignite imagination in the spirit of Alex Osborn who coined the term brainstorming and democratized creativity around the world. Unfortunately, we (and many other scholars) believe that the article also gives a false impression about brainstorming.

To proponents of the Brainstorming technique as described in Applied Imagination and as we teach and practice it, even a cursory reading of the 1958 Yale study referenced shows that it does not disprove the effectiveness of brainstorming since the question of the research was, “does group participation when using brainstorming facilitate or inhibit creative thinking.”

In other words, is it better to brainstorm in a very small group or to brainstorm alone? Either way, they were testing brainstorming, and they found that brainstorming works to generate a high number of useful ideas.

The research concluded that for some things brainstorming alone works better, and by other measures (e.g. uniqueness of ideas) brainstorming in a small group works better.  However, contrary to the Newsweek article, the study absolutely does not say “Forget Brainstorming,” nor does it say that “brainstorming doesn’t work” or that “the technique reduces a team’s creative output!”

While we know from subsequent correspondence with the authors that they take their research seriously, we believe that it does not show up in their treatment of brainstorming in Newsweek.  This is unfortunate, since their article in the same issue, “The Creativity Crisis” was an eloquent call-t0-arms for those of us who know that creativity is important to the future success of our children and our nation.
As Alex Osborn, the father of brainstorming said in his 1953 book, Applied Imagination, “group brainstorming is recommended solely as a SUPPLEMENT to individual ideation” (p. 142, emphasis mine). In his book he spoke of the value of generating ideas as an individual, in pairs and in small groups of up to 12 people. By contrast, the Yale study only evaluates individuals and groups of four people, while acknowledging that “Osborn suggests that the optimum size for a brainstorming group is between five and ten.” (p. 47)

Certainly the Yale research was flawed because it didn’t test group brainstorming using Osborn’s description of Brainstorming (e.g. use of a trained facilitator, providing additional concepts to stimulate new ideas, working with appropriate group size, enforcement of all guidelines, etc.).  Regardless of methodology, the study concluded that brainstorming works better when working alone.  So why would you forget it based on one flawed and widely misrepresented study? Use research wisely.

According to research by Brian Hartman, there have been over 250 studies that evaluate the effectiveness of brainstorming.  Unfortunately, several studies use the same misguided approach that the Yale study did, which is to say that they don’t use a trained facilitator to direct the group. Brainstorming is a specific tool with specific guidelines (defer judgment, etc.) that are enforced by a facilitator who guides the group’s thinking.  Hartman’s (2010) conclusion is that, “it appears that a majority of the research conducted on brainstorming has been done using a technique significantly different than the one outlined by its author, Alex Osborn.”

What many people mistakenly call “brainstorming” is in fact just “a bunch of people sitting around firing off and shooting down ideas.” Let’s call that “skeet-shooting.”  And on that we can agree: working individually will work better than skeet-shooting in a group.

In their quick dismissal of about half of the techniques used to spur creativity, the authors asked the question “are they good?” We’d rather they asked, “when are they good?”  Is a hammer a good tool? It is when it is used to drive nails, but not when it is used to change channels of your television or to change a diaper.

The leading academic institution that has been studying what works and when is the International Center for Studies in Creativity at the State University of New York College at Buffalo.  One of their faculty found that groups that were TRAINED in the guidelines of brainstorming generated two-and-a-half times more ideas than untrained groups, which resulted in (and this is the important part) two-and-a-half times more GOOD ideas, as well as a similar proportion of bad ideas (video).  This is but one of a stack of research studies proving that when properly used, like a hammer, Brainstorming works. Exceedingly well.

However, when people get together and skeet-shoot, blamestorm, or clobberate, they are not brainstorming, and accordingly, their results will suffer.  Perhaps common incorrect usage of the term “brainstorming” has confused the issue, but just because I call my hammer a “diaper changer,” doesn’t mean I should say it doesn’t work. It just means I’m using it incorrectly. Words mean something.  Let’s use them properly.

References:

• Osborn, A.F. (1963). Applied Imagination (3rd ed.). Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation Press.
• Firestien, R.L. & McCowan, R.J. (1988). Creative Problem Solving and Communication Behaviors in Small Groups.  Creativity Research Journal, 1 (1). 106-114.
• Firestien, R.L. (1990). Effects of Creative Problem Solving on Communication Behaviors in Small Groups.  Small Group Research, 21 (4). 507-521.
• Taylor, D.W., Berry, P.C., & Block, C.H. (1958).  Does Group Participation When using Brainstorming Facilitate or Inhibit Creative Thinking. Administrative Science Quarterly, 3(1), 23-47.
• Hartman, B.D. (2010). Challenges in Testing the Effectiveness of Brainstorming. Unpublished research paper.  Buffalo State College, Buffalo, NY.
  

Registration opens and website goes live for HOW TO Create, Innovate and Lead Change

BUFFALO, N.Y.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–In late June, hundreds of leaders in creativity, innovation and change management will gather in Buffalo, NY, – the birthplace of “brainstorming” – for the Creative Problem Solving Institute Conference: HOW TO Create, Innovate, and Lead Change.

“We are very happy to have CPSI back in Buffalo.”

The Creative Problem Solving Institute (CPSI) returns to Buffalo, June 21 – 25, hometown of its founder, Alex Osborn, inventor of “brainstorming” and the Creative Problem Solving method.

Osborn’s seminal work in creativity education in the 1940s and 1950s was fully realized when Dr. Sidney Parnes and Dr. Ruth Noller established a permanent academic home for the International Center for Studies in Creativity (ICSC) at Buffalo State in 1967. The first and oldest degree-granting program in creativity in the world, the ICSC has achieved an international reputation for scholarly research and teaching that focuses on developing creativity, leadership, decision-making and problem solving skills.

“We are very happy to have CPSI back in Buffalo.” says Gerard Puccio, Chair, International Center for Studies in Creativity at Buffalo State College. “While many may know Buffalo’s history in creative problem solving, they may not realize how extensive the practice is today. CPSI’s return highlights the region’s leadership in the field of teaching innovation and change management.”

He added, “Now more than ever, people need to think creatively in order to cope with today’s challenges. Organizations, too, need people who can manage change, and who understand the process of innovation.”

What makes the Creative Problem Solving Institute different is that participants learn HOW to use creative process, tools and techniques, HOW to be more creative and How to lead change. Participants design their own experience based on interest and time - from one to six days, choosing from core courses, elective workshops, speakers and activities.

“While CPSI is chock-full of inspirational speakers and hundreds of guests with whom to network, unlike other conferences, participants also attend skill-building and mind-warping classes.” says Victoria Cliche, CEO of The Creative Education Foundation, which runs the annual event. “Participants actively engage instead of passively listen. They are surrounded by people across industries instead of from a single industry. When they leave they possess new skills and abilities and know how to initiate the changes they want to see in their world.”

To register and to review program details, please visit www.cpsiconference.com or call: 508-960-0000.

The Creative Problem Solving Institute (CPSI) is run by the Creative Education Foundation, Inc. (CEF), a 501(c)(3) headquartered in Amherst, Massachusetts.

The website is now live & registration is open! Visit: www.cpsiconference.com

Wishing You Many Moments of Beauty
&
A Year of Abundance in 2010

Warmest Regards,

The Creative Education Foundation Staff

PS.
Keep an eye on our website, we are about to officially launch it!

Art by Rachelle Moes @ www.rachellemoes.com