Stay Divergent保持分歧
The heart of improvisational brainstorming is a well-managed flow of divergent thinking. As defined in the Introduction, divergent thinking allows ideas to radiate from a single point of origin (a problem, a challenge, a question, a need) and leaves those ideas free to head in any direction. The goal is to see how far away from the point of origin you can go and how many ideas can be listed. Such ideation is not to be hampered by self-judgment in the person thinking up an idea, or by a fear of judgment from other participants.
即兴头脑风暴的核心是发散性思维的管理良好。如引言中所定义，发散性思维允许思想从单个起源点传播（问题，挑战，问题，需求），并使这些思想朝着任何方向前进。目的是了解您可以离开原点有多远，可以列出多少个想法。提出想法的人的自我判断，或害怕其他参与者的判断，都不会妨碍这种想法。
An embrace of divergent thinking means that the mud and muck in the water are accepted as part of the process right along with the flecks of gold. In the divergent thinking phase failure is encouraged, even celebrated, so that failure (just like risk taking) becomes irrelevant. Again the point here is not that a business is better off seeking ideas that fail, but that truly great ideas emerge when people feel free to fail.
拥护分歧的思想意味着，水中的泥土和污垢与金的斑点一起被接受为过程的一部分。在发散性思维阶段，失败被鼓励甚至被庆祝，因此失败（就像冒险一样）变得无关紧要。同样，这里的要点不是说企业最好寻求失败的想法，而是当人们随意失败时就会出现真正的好主意。
For divergent thinking to succeed, the creative process must be clearly separated from the urge to edit, analyze, question, and refine.Ideation is a creative process, and creation is always messy (no matter how elegant the oil painting, you can be sure there are dirty brushes and spattered paint in the artist’s studio). The participants in a brainstorming session must allow for this and accept that there is no one single correct way to create. (Paint-by-numbers creation will give you a lot of safe,less-messy, “inside the box” ideas—that someone else actually created.)
为了使分歧思维成功，必须将创作过程与编辑，分析，质疑和提炼的冲动明确分开。意识形态是创作过程，创作总是凌乱的（无论油画多么优雅，您都可以肯定艺术家的工作室里有脏刷子和飞溅的油漆）。头脑风暴会议的参与者必须考虑到这一点，并接受没有一种正确的创建方法。（数字绘画创作将为您提供许多其他人实际上创造的安全，少麻烦的“盒子内”的想法。）
That said, creativity is still a defined process. When a session moves into divergent thinking, this is the time to be fearless and bold and to actually celebrate mistakes. There’s no tally of failures and success; it’s all about participation. There’s no “best answer” but simply an effort to pile up as many answers as can be thought up. By focusing on the sheer number of ideas (quantity over quality), success in the divergent thinking phase increases the probability for success in the convergent thinking phase. The bad ideas inspire the good ideas, and vise versa. The editing process (convergent thinking) will come later and will offer plenty of time to focus the ideas, remove the “bad ideas,” find the “best answer,”and fine-tune the raw concepts into productive, utilitarian ones.
也就是说，创造力仍然是一个确定的过程。当会议进入分歧思维时，这是无所畏惧和大胆并实际庆祝错误的时候。没有失败和成功的合计；都是关于参与。没有“最佳答案”，而只是努力积累尽可能多的答案。通过集中于大量想法（数量胜于质量），发散思维阶段的成功增加了融合思维阶段成功的可能性。坏主意会激发好主意，反之亦然。编辑过程（融合思维）将在以后出现，并将提供大量的时间来集中思想，消除“坏主意”，找到“最佳答案”，并将原始概念微调为富有成效的，实用的概念。
Remember that the divergent/creation process is completely different from the convergent/editing process. Maintaining a disciplined approach to divergent thinking in a roomful of talented people, especially critical thinkers, can be tricky. Humans have a tendency to adopt mental framing, and in a corporate setting we are quick to think about the parameters, the cost, the logistics, the rules and regulations,and even the people that would prohibit us from doing something differently—why we can’t do it.
请记住，分歧/创建过程与收敛/编辑过程完全不同。在一大批才华横溢的人才（尤其是批判性思想家）中保持纪律严明的方法来发散思维可能会很棘手。人们倾向于采用心理框架，在公司环境中，我们会迅速考虑参数，成本，物流，规章制度，甚至是那些会禁止我们以不同方式做事的人-为什么我们可以不做。
Have you ever been in a brainstorming session in which an idea that’s presented is almost immediately rejected because somebody deems it too costly or not likely to be successful (“We tried that before and it did not work”)? All of a sudden this session switches from one of free-flowing ideas to one in which there are right answers and wrong answers. The conformity pressure to commit to the group and the task becomes inverted; now, instead of each member not wanting to be the one who isn’t participating (not wanting to be the last one in the river), each member is thinking that he or she doesn’t want to be the one to speak up and risk looking foolish (to get in the river at all).
您是否曾经参加过一次集思广益的会议，在会议中提出的想法几乎立即被拒绝，因为有人认为它太昂贵或不太可能成功（“我们之前尝试过，但没有成功”）？突然之间，本次会议从一个自由流动的想法转变为一个有正确答案和错误答案的想法。服从团队和任务的整合压力变得相反；现在，不是每个成员都不想成为不参与的成员（不想成为河牌中的最后一个成员），而是每个成员都以为自己不想成为一个发言的成员，并且冒着看起来很愚蠢的风险（完全涉足河中）。
When divergent thinking is truly embraced the notion of “risk taking” actually disappears. When everybody in the meeting enthusiastically accepts every idea, then nobody is really taking a risk and everybody is free to contribute. Oddly when the notion of risk taking disappears people are emboldened to take tremendous risks. The as�sessment of all that risk taking is really only a consideration in the next process, when convergent thinking and judgment is (re)applied. In the divergent phase the concept of risk doesn’t exist—it’s all about participation and generating the greatest number of ideas. This is a prime area for the leader of a brainstorming session to lead by example and intentionally submit “bad” ideas that would never work.
当真正接受分歧思维时，“冒险”概念实际上消失了。当会议中的每个人都热情地接受每个想法时，没有人真正冒风险，每个人都可以自由地做出贡献。奇怪的是，当冒险的概念消失时，人们胆敢冒巨大的风险。当采用（重新）融合的思想和判断时，对所有冒险的评估实际上只是下一步的考虑。在分散阶段，风险的概念不存在-风险全在于参与和产生最多的想法。这是集思广益会议的领导者以身作则并有意提出永远行不通的“坏”想法的主要领域。
The leader should be willing to present truly ridiculous ideas early in the process to demonstrate that it is acceptable to “fail” this way at this time.There is some common and very dangerous corporate conventional wisdom concerning idea creation: that editing in real time, while we are creating, will actually speed up the process and save everyone time.
领导者应该愿意在过程的早期就提出真正荒谬的想法，以证明此时接受这种“失败”是可以接受的。关于思想创造，存在一些常见且非常危险的公司传统观念：实时编辑，在创建过程中，实际上可以加快流程并节省每个人的时间。
Like a reverse epidemic, this obstacle to divergent thinking can spread from the group to the individual and manifest itself in the form of self-judgment and self-editing. For some it is a choice to censor their ideas in real time and try to fine-tune them into great ideas before they voice them—the assumption being that thinking and talking more “realistically” (negatively) is a sign of seriousness and intelligence. Others have made a less cognitive decision and have fallen into the subconscious habit of judging their own ideas while they are trying to create.
就像反向流行病一样，这种发散思维的障碍可以从群体传播到个人，并以自我判断和自我编辑的形式表现出来。对于某些人来说，可以选择实时审查他们的想法，并在他们说出想法之前尝试将它们微调成好主意-假设认为思考和交谈更加“现实”（消极）是认真和智慧的标志。其他人则没有那么多的认知决定，他们陷入了潜意识中，在尝试创造自己的想法时会判断自己的想法。
Whatever the case, the idea is that we will reduce the overall time spent on a project by pulling convergent thinking into the divergent phase. In truth this misconception creates huge blocks to creativity and collaboration and is counterproductive. You actually end up spending significantly more time straddling the two processes—judging on the fly—than you would by clearly separating each process and respecting the different focus of each. To sum up, people in any business setting will save significant amounts of time by keeping creativity and judgment as two very separate processes.
无论哪种情况，我们的想法都是通过将趋同的思维带入分歧的阶段，从而减少在项目上花费的总时间。实际上，这种误解为创造力和协作创造了巨大障碍，并且适得其反。实际上，您花费在跨两个流程（在运行中进行判断）上的时间比通过清楚地分离每个流程并尊重每个流程的不同重点要花费更多的时间。综上所述，在任何业务环境中，人们都可以通过将创造力和判断力保持为两个非常独立的流程来节省大量时间。
网友评论