Breaking the Brainstorming Myth: Why Groupthink Fails Innovation
In the fall of 1958, a group of advertising executives gathered in New York City to solve a seemingly insurmountable problem: how to sell life insurance to a generation that preferred instant gratification over long-term planning. Their solution? A high-energy brainstorming session modeled after Alex Osborn’s revolutionary “rules of ideation.” Osborn, co-founder of the advertising firm BBDO, had popularized the concept of brainstorming in his book Your Creative Power, where he argued that ideas flowed best in judgment-free environments.
The technique quickly became a corporate staple, heralded as the gold standard for fostering creativity and collaboration. But decades of research and real-world experience have revealed a harsher reality: traditional brainstorming often stifles innovation, amplifies dominant voices, and leads to mediocrity rather than breakthroughs.
The Reality Check: Productivity in Solitude
In 2012, Google embarked on a rigorous internal study called Project Aristotle to uncover what makes teams successful. Surprisingly, the company’s research found that group brainstorming was far less effective than cultivating psychological safety—an environment where team members felt safe to take risks and share ideas without fear of judgment.
Google’s findings echoed earlier research from Yale University, which demonstrated that individuals generate more and better ideas when working alone compared to group brainstorming sessions. The phenomenon, known as “production blocking,” occurs when group dynamics prevent people from fully articulating their thoughts. When one person dominates the conversation or the group gravitates toward a single idea, others often withhold their insights, leading to missed opportunities.
The Myth in Action: A Cautionary Tale from Nokia
Consider the case of Nokia in the late 2000s. Once the dominant player in the mobile phone industry, the company faced increasing competition from Apple and Samsung. To spark innovation, Nokia’s leadership turned to brainstorming sessions, inviting cross-functional teams to generate ideas for the next big thing. These sessions were vibrant and enthusiastic, but they rarely produced actionable results.
Internal analyses later revealed that the brainstorming process suffered from “anchoring bias,” where early suggestions set the tone for the rest of the discussion. Additionally, a culture of deference to senior management meant that employees hesitated to challenge established ideas. As a result, Nokia failed to recognize the transformative potential of the smartphone until it was too late.
A New Approach: The Power of Independent Ideation
If traditional brainstorming fails, what works better? Many companies are discovering the value of independent ideation before collaboration. A landmark study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that hybrid models, where individuals first work on problems alone and then share their ideas with a group, consistently outperformed traditional brainstorming.
Take Amazon as an example. Known for its “working backward” approach, Amazon requires employees to draft detailed narratives or press releases for new ideas before presenting them to a group. This method ensures that each proposal is thoroughly thought out and less likely to be influenced by groupthink. The practice has been instrumental in developing groundbreaking products like the Kindle and Alexa.
The Case of Pixar: Structured Creativity
Pixar Animation Studios offers another compelling case study. The company’s famous “Braintrust” meetings are often cited as an example of brainstorming done right. However, closer inspection reveals that these sessions are anything but traditional. Instead of freewheeling idea generation, Pixar’s Braintrust focuses on providing constructive feedback on work that has already been done.
For instance, during the development of Toy Story 2, the Braintrust identified significant narrative flaws in the early drafts. What followed wasn’t a chaotic explosion of ideas but a structured discussion aimed at refining specific aspects of the story. The result? A critically acclaimed film that solidified Pixar’s reputation for excellence.
Breaking the Cycle: Practical Steps for Leaders
Leaders looking to break free from the brainstorming myth can implement these evidence-based strategies:
Encourage Independent Thinking: Before convening a group session, ask team members to generate ideas independently. Use tools like anonymous digital platforms to collect these ideas, ensuring that quieter voices are heard.
Define Clear Objectives: Set specific goals for collaboration. Is the session about generating new ideas, refining existing ones, or solving a particular problem? Clarity reduces the likelihood of meandering discussions.
Create Psychological Safety: Foster an environment where team members feel comfortable sharing unconventional or incomplete ideas. Emphasize that the goal is not to reach consensus but to explore diverse perspectives.
Experiment with Hybrid Models: Combine individual ideation with structured group feedback. For example, Google’s Design Sprint framework allows participants to work independently before coming together to share and critique ideas.
Measure Outcomes: Track the results of your ideation processes to identify what works and what doesn’t. Use these insights to refine your approach over time.
The Future of Collaboration
The myth of brainstorming persists because it aligns with our cultural bias toward extroversion and group dynamics. But as companies like Google, Amazon, and Pixar demonstrate, the most innovative solutions often emerge from a delicate balance of independence and collaboration. By rethinking how we approach teamwork, we can unlock the full potential of our organizations—and finally put the brainstorming myth to rest.
For CEOs and leaders, the message is clear: the next great idea won’t come from shouting louder in the boardroom. It will come from creating the conditions where every voice can be heard, and every idea has a chance to shine.
All the best,
Jim