ATP 2-33.4, page 57

Core Army Analytic Techniques 18 August 2014 ATP 2-33.4 5-3 5-10. A two-phase, eleven-step structured process is often used to elicit the most information from the brainstorming sessions. This process is described below:  Phase 1—Divergent Thinking Phase:  Step 1. Distribute a piece of stationery with a re-adherable strip of adhesive on the back, and pens or markers to all participants. Typically, 10 to 12 people work best.  Step 2. Pose the problem in terms of a focal question. Display it in one sentence on a large easel or whiteboard.  Step 3. Ask the group to write down responses to the question, using key words that will fit on the small piece of stationery.  Step 4. Stick all the notes on a wall for all to see—treat all ideas the same.  Step 5. When a pause follows the initial flow of ideas, the group is reaching the end of their collective conventional thinking and the new divergent ideas are then likely to emerge. End the “collection stage” of the brainstorming after two or three pauses.  Phase 2—Convergent Thinking Phase:  Step 6. Ask the participants as a group to rearrange the notes on the wall according to their commonalities or similar concepts. Talking is discouraged. Some notes may be moved several times as notes begin to cluster. Copying some notes is permitted to allow ideas to be included in more than one group.  Step 7. Select a word or phrase that characterizes each grouping or cluster once all the notes have been arranged.  Step 8. Identify any notes that do not easily fit with others and consider them either isolated thoughts or the beginning of an idea that deserves further attention.  Step 9. Assess what the group has accomplished in terms of new ideas or concepts identified or new areas that need more work or further brainstorming.  Step 10. Instruct each participant to select one or two areas that deserve the most attention. Tabulate the votes.  Step 11. Set the brainstorming group’s priorities based on the voting and decide on the next steps for analysis. 5-11. Brainstorming can be used in developing threat COAs and in anticipating the actions of other types of threats (state and non-state as well as organizations, groups, and individuals) that can influence the commander’s area of interest. Brainstorming is also effective in developing recommendations for information collection and targeting strategies. (For example, an analytical team in Afghanistan may conduct a brainstorming session to develop observables and indicators for Taliban shadow government activities in Kabul province.) 5-12. Brainstorming is one of the most widely used group idea generation tools today, capitalizing on the idea that grouping people together is more effective than letting participants work alone. Conducting a structured brainstorming session is most effective if we recognize and avoid the common brainstorming pitfalls: blocking, evaluation apprehension, and personality faceoff.  Blocking refers to the human inability to effectively develop new ideas while keeping old ideas in active storage in short-term memory. When people cannot immediately input their ideas because they have to wait for someone else to describe theirs, they often end up judging or editing them, or even forgetting them altogether. Even when people do get a chance to describe an idea during brainstorming, they may get to offer only one or two comments before someone else breaks in. The larger the brainstorming group, the bigger the amount of blocked participants, and the fewer the ideas produced compared to an equal number of people generating ideas independently.  Evaluation apprehension refers to the experience of being anxious about being negatively evaluated or not positively evaluated. In other words, it is the concern for how others are evaluating us.  Personality faceoff refers to the clash of personalities between people. Overpowering people try to dominate the activity. Passive people try to get by unnoticed. Stubborn people get