Research Based Improvements to the Value Workshop Industry – Part 3

Facilitation Best Practices and Processes and Mental Tools

In the last two articles, we first discussed why and how facilitation has moved to include both in-person and virtual studies and then provided some physical recommendations for group facilitation. Now, we move from the physical into the mental while focusing on influencing the participants’ thought process.

Transformational leadership can positively influence participants through intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, idealized influence, and inspirational motivation. One issue we often see as facilitators of week-long workshops pertains to the demand for participants to shift through many lenses. We go from asking them to be creative in one stage then immediately shift to requiring evaluation using more constrained and logical thinking. This pivot can be mentally demanding with no proper preparation. Therefore, to cushion the shift, here are some of our favorite mental tools to guide participants forward with less mental strain.

Emphasizing Psychological Safety and Risk-Taking:

Although using collaborative tools will propel your technical ability to conduct a study forward, no study will flourish without the right environment. Creating a safe environment for sharing novel and radical ideas is vital. As facilitators it is our job to foster a culture that supports risk-taking and reduces the fear of judgment. The fear of judgement contributes to production loss through evaluation apprehension if not managed properly.

Generally, for a successful Value Methodology Study, criticism should be withheld during idea generation, and the evaluation of ideas should be deferred to a later stage of the problem-solving process. This is the go-to process if there is not a strong group cohesion and established psychological safety. However, is this the correct process in all settings?

Interested in learning more on psychological safety? We’ve got you covered.

The Betterment Rule:

Rather than solely accepting the normal recommendations to rule out criticism during idea generation, Harvey and Kou (2013) argue that processes focused on evaluation within groups can indeed foster creative involvement. Their research suggests that continuous or simultaneous assessment of ideas can actually support groups in maintaining goal-oriented focus, integrating feedback, leveraging the diverse perspectives of members, and enhancing overall creativity.

However, the opposition to allow evaluation during creativity is highly dependent on the group climate and the ability of the facilitator to manage psychological safety by encouraging risk-taking norms, trust, commitment to the task, and norms for innovation. It’s as its said, “Motivational processes like psychological safety and risk-taking culture stimulate the expression of novel and radical ideas” (Nijstad, Berger-Selman, & De Dreu, 2014; Shin & Eom, 2014).

So, as facilitators, we come to a crossroads. How do we encourage uncriticized creative brainstorming while simultaneously encouraging beneficial evaluation within a psychologically safe space?

We recommend the incorporation of both strategies; this is called the “betterment rule”. If someone criticizes or recognizes infeasibility during the unfettered creativity process, they must brainstorm a way to “better” the idea or make it feasible.

This allows for a redirection of behavior while still increasing the number of ideas generated and encouraging “piggybacking.” This process also establishes the encouragement for risk-taking and lays the groundwork for a healthy group climate with established norms of innovation* and participation.

By gamifying the process of adding onto ideas, we believe it reduces the psychological impact where the participant who first gave the idea feels less “attacked” and engages with the process of betterment and piggybacking.

*Note: “Norms of innovation” refers to the established standards and expectations within a group that promote and support creative thinking and the generation of novel ideas. These norms guide how group members interact, share ideas, and approach problem-solving while creating an environment conducive to innovation.

Moving through the Divergent/Convergent Thinking Model:

Participants are tasked with being in the right mental state at the right time. But what is the right mental state?

As we step through the process of Value Methodology (VM), we first engage in divergent thinking— which peaks during creativity—and then collapse into convergent thinking as evaluation begins.

Divergent thinking is a thought process used to generate creative ideas by exploring many possible solutions. It involves breaking away from traditional, linear thought patterns and considering a variety of perspectives and possibilities.

Convergent thinking, on the other hand, focuses on finding a single, well-defined solution to a problem. It involves analyzing and whittling ideas to identify the most effective and feasible option. As facilitators, it’s our job to manage the thought process within these stages and navigate the abrupt shift from divergent to convergent thinking. To manage this feat, we prime participants to achieve the desired mental state.

Priming Participants:

Just as an athlete requires a warm-up and stretching before strenuous exertion, so do study participants require mental priming. Using priming activities relevant to the workshop’s stage is necessary.

The most common and important tool used for priming in VM studies is Function Analysis*. This activity begins the divergent thinking stage and expands participants’ understanding of the project while encouraging creative thinking utilizing two-word combinations.

*Note: Function Analysis is a core component of the Value Methodology as defined by SAVE International, the professional association for the advancement and promotion of the Value Methodology. Function Analysis involves identifying, defining, and categorizing the functions of a project, product, or process to better understand its purpose and improve its value.

Although Function Analysis is foundational to group priming, there are plenty of additional priming tools to utilize alongside it.

Spreading Activation – Accessing Long-Term Memory (LTM) Recall:

Long-Term Memory Recall (LTM) is a process we as humans use all the time. How we access it is important due to interrupting the creative flow to search it. This information can be both implicit memory as well as explicit memory.

Implicit memory are memories that are automatically retrieved and used without our conscious awareness. Explicit memory involves memories that can be consciously recalled but tend to require more effort.

The first thoughts that rise to the surface are implicit memories which can act as blockers for accessing explicit memory. You’ve experienced this before personally through the “Tip of the Tongue” phenomenon; this is where your implicit memory blocks your retrieval of the specific memory or information you’re searching for. It also acts as an impedance for new ideas to be formed due to the fixation of the implicit memory.

Overcoming these mental blocks can allow access to deeper, better solutions, but participants must be primed to face this.

Here are some priming activities that help bypass that Implicit Memory Bias Retrieval Sets:

• Pictorial Puns: Images where puns/play on words are implied.
• Rebus Puzzles: Puzzles utilizing a combination of images and letters to depict a word or phrase.
• Remote Associate Test (RAT): A test utilized to allow creative problem solving.

Many of these activities can be performed quickly and as needed. These are especially helpful if the team is returning the next day, and the Function Analysis is now at least a day old.

Repetition Priming and Contextual Shifts – Accessing LTM then Piggybacking:

When independent brainstorming stagnates (also known as thought failure), either through brainwriting or using the electronic white board, the group should reconvene and shift focus to collaboratively continue idea generation. Oftentimes, others’ ideas inspire additional thought that normally would not have occurred. This works extremely well with large groups.

Here is a proposed activity that can be performed in both large and small groups to prime the participants of the study to Access the LTM and then Piggyback. This activity mimics the study process of creativity but in a smaller format and implements a contextual shift from the workshop material. (Small in this context refers to an abridged creativity session. The activity itself should only take 10-15 minutes.) This contextual shift is important as it enables one to break past implicit memory blockers through incubation effects*. So, if they are working on a bridge reconstruction for San Diego, this is a contextual shift to a potentially silly prompt, allowing the team to step away from the problem for these 15 minutes to renew their thinking process.

*Note: The incubation effect is a powerful phenomenon that highlights the importance of taking breaks and allowing the subconscious mind to process information. By stepping away from a problem, individuals can reduce mental fixation, facilitate unconscious processing, and ultimately enhance creativity and problem-solving abilities.

This priming activity poses the challenge, “move the company’s office underwater to improve relaxation and creativity among employees.”

The pure silliness of this question allows participants to engage in radical and novel ideas as they attempt to brainstorm possible solutions. The more ridiculous it seems, the more primed team members will be to search for out of the box solutions.

For this example, you would give a couple categories that the group can brainstorm under, and they can choose which ones they want to focus on*. The ones used on this example are, Relocate Physically, Simulate Environment, and Stimulate Emotion.

*Note: We have tried to allow people to come up with ideas without categories, but the participants tend to struggle as they wrestle with the silliness of the prompt and actual ideas.

The team starts off brainstorming individually in a single category for about five minutes; the facilitator should require each person to fill out at least five ideas. The participants will then move to someone else’s idea list and improve upon or generate five new ideas, using the previous participants ideas for inspiration.

This exercise primes participants creatively and encourages them to search their LTM Recall before attending or piggybacking off of others’ ideas. This sets the stage for priming the repetition of individual thought failure—expanding the range of ideas—and then tending to other’s ideas—increasing the total number of ideas.

If the participant skips the stage of individual brainstorming, piggybacking off others ideas begins immediately and that participant reduces the total output of ideas and range of ideas, leading to the illusion of group productivity.

The illusion of group productivity is a cognitive bias where individuals believe that a group’s performance or productivity is higher than it actually is. This phenomenon occurs when group members overestimate the effectiveness and efficiency of their collective output compared to individual work. Despite the belief that groups inherently generate better outcomes, the actual productivity and quality of results may be lower than perceived.

Abrupt Shift from Peak Divergent Thinking to Convergent Thinking:

Priming participants for breakthrough of thought failure is vital to productive creativity, but that is not the only form of priming needed. Moving from the Creativity Phase into the Evaluation Phase requires intentional priming as well.

This priming is important to enable the group’s transition into a more logical and acceptable selection process. For this to work the facilitator must navigate the group back to highly promising and valuable ideas by eliminating unfeasible ideas.

An example of a quick and effective 5-minute transition activity is the “Reflection and Highlight” exercise. Participants take a moment to individually reflect on the brainstorming session, jotting down the ideas that stood out to them the most or that they found most intriguing. Then, in a rapid round-robin format, each person shares one idea that caught their attention and briefly explains why. This activity helps shift the group’s mindset from generating ideas to critically evaluating them, setting the stage for the upcoming voting process by focusing attention on standout concepts. A full discussion will happen after voting concludes.

It is ok to now have production blocking during this stage, as the participants are now transitioning to logical thought processes. The important effects to gain from this activity is re-engagement of each participant through each person getting a turn, and a focus on potentially valuable ideas that may be missed if people don’t really understand it. This is also the time for the facilitator to help redirect the evaluation process back to feasible and potentially valuable ideas.

The evaluation stage in the workshop is intended to find the most valuable ideas formed during creativity while potentially creating stronger, new ones to move forward with for development. When using the pareto principle*, it is important to note that the number of votes does not automatically mean that it is a valuable idea; instead, it helps direct attention to the item for deliberation. Dissenting opinions are encouraged during this section to avoid social matching and potentially missing critical flaws in ideas that will be caught during the presentation or implementation phase.

*Note: The pareto principle essentially states that roughly 80% of all consequences (in this case, promising ideas) result from only 20% of causes (in this case, brainstormed ideas).

Conclusion:

In the rapidly evolving landscape of group facilitation, our approach must adapt to harness the full potential of both physical and mental strategies. By combining physical tools with strategic mental priming, we create an environment where participants can thrive creatively and analytically. As we continue to refine these methods, our commitment to fostering innovation and maximizing value in every project will remain vigilant.

The integration of these research-based evolutions into our facilitation practices will not only enhance the efficiency of our workshops but also drive more innovative and valuable outcomes.

Thank you for your engagement and dedication to advancing the field of Value Methodology. Let us continue to embrace these evolving practices to lead more effective and impactful workshops by finishing up this four-article series with temporal strategies.