Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 14 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Wednesday October 25 2023, @09:38PM   Printer-friendly

When we're confronting a vexing problem, we often gather a group to brain­storm. We're looking to get the best ideas as quickly as possible. I love seeing it happen—except for one tiny wrinkle. Group brainstorming usually backfires.

In brainstorming meetings, many good ideas are lost— and few are gained. Extensive evidence shows that when we generate ideas together, we fail to maximize collective intelligence. Brainstorming groups fall so far short of their potential that we get more ideas—and better ideas—if we all work alone. As the humorist Dave Barry quipped, "If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be: 'meetings.' " But the problem isn't meetings themselves—it's how we run them.

[...] Collective intelligence begins with individual creativity. But it doesn't end there. Individuals produce a greater volume and variety of novel ideas when they work alone. That means that they come up with more brilliant ideas than groups—but also more terrible ideas than groups. It takes collective judgment to find the signal in the noise and bring the best ideas to fruition.

Source: time.com

From HIDDEN POTENTIAL by Adam Grant

I am sure most of you have spent time "brain storming" ... was it productive or wasted time ?


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday October 26 2023, @03:30AM (2 children)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Thursday October 26 2023, @03:30AM (#1330290)

    a problem that lends itself to pair programming, especially when one of the pair has no confidence that they can do it correctly.

    Was going to mention this myself...has anybody else here been on a paired programming team? I was for a year, but they cut my position before I got really familiar with the codebase :P So I don't feel qualified to comment on how well the idea works.

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Thursday October 26 2023, @11:48AM (1 child)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday October 26 2023, @11:48AM (#1330319)

    In my experience, paired programming works brilliantly in very specific circumstances. Doing it all day every day is too much for me. Doing it for a 2-4 hour session with a "compatible" partner can be as productive as 12+ hours of either partner working alone. At most, I used to do that 2 or 3 days a week, and generally no more than 6 or 8 days in a month. YMMV, and I have certainly also worked with partners where 30 minutes was about the limit of productive paired work.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by coolgopher on Thursday October 26 2023, @09:45PM

      by coolgopher (1157) on Thursday October 26 2023, @09:45PM (#1330393)

      I agree with Joe. There are situations where pair programming really enhances productivity, and there are situations where it does the opposite. The more fiddly and complex the problem, the more likely a second brain is to be valuable. Cases where it's clear where you're going and how to get there, a second brain is more likely to be a distraction (and it bored).