- 相關(guān)推薦
頭腦風(fēng)暴等于浪費時間？
Brainstorming was invented by advertising executive Alex Osborn in 1939 and first published in 1942 in his book "How to Think Up."
頭腦風(fēng)暴由廣告執(zhí)行官Alex Osborn首創(chuàng)于1939年，并出現(xiàn)在他19421年的著作How to Think Up中。
This is a typical description, from James Manktelow, founder and CEO of MindTools, a company that promotes brainstorming as a way to “develop creative solutions to business problems”:
這是一個很經(jīng)典的概念，James Maktelow提及，他是MindTools的創(chuàng)立者兼首席執(zhí)行官，而這所公司則把頭腦風(fēng)暴作為一種“產(chǎn)生解決商業(yè)問題的創(chuàng)造性方案”的方法推而廣之。
Brainstorming is often used in a business setting to encourage teams to come up with original ideas. It’s a freewheeling meeting format, in which the leader sets out the problem that needs to be solved. Participants then suggest ideas for solving the problem, and build on ideas suggested by others. A firm rule is that ideas must not be criticized — they can be completely wacky and way out. This frees people up to explore ideas creatively and break out of established thinking patterns. As well as generating some great solutions to specific problems, brainstorming can be a lot of fun.
頭腦風(fēng)暴一般運用于商務(wù)場合，用以激發(fā)團(tuán)隊產(chǎn)生創(chuàng)意理念。這完全是一種隨心所欲不受約束的會議模式，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者們就會把有待解決的問題提出來。然后會議參與者便把自己的想法提出來，然后再基于他人的想法再提出自己的想法。這種思維模式有一個慣例，就是不對任何看法做出評判——因為有些想法實在是太跳脫古怪了。這樣的方法能夠解放人們的思想從而更有創(chuàng)造力地發(fā)現(xiàn)新點子并打破既有的思維模式，還能夠為某些問題得出恰當(dāng)?shù)慕鉀Q方案，因此頭腦風(fēng)暴是一件很有趣的事情。
Osborn claimed significant success for his technique. As one example of brainstorming’s effectiveness, he cited a group of United States Treasury employees who came up with 103 ideas for selling savings bonds in 40 minutes. Corporations and institutions including DuPont, IBM, and the United States government soon adopted brainstorming.
Obsborn認(rèn)為這種技巧是非常成功的。就頭腦風(fēng)暴的有效性的一個例子，他提到了美國財政部的工作人員在40分鐘內(nèi)能夠想到了103種推銷儲蓄債券的方法。包括Dupont和IBM在內(nèi)的一些公司或機(jī)構(gòu)，甚至是美國政府內(nèi)部都陸續(xù)采用頭腦風(fēng)暴的方式解決問題。
By the end of the twentieth century, its origins forgotten, brainstorming had become a reflex approach to creating in many organizations and had entered the jargon of business as both a noun and a verb. It is now so common that few people question it. Everybody brainstorms; therefore, brainstorming is good. But does it work?
在20世紀(jì)末，頭腦風(fēng)暴的起源已經(jīng)被遺忘了，但它已經(jīng)成為各大組織機(jī)構(gòu)的一種習(xí)慣性思維模式了，同時也作為行業(yè)術(shù)語中的一個動詞和名詞使用。如今頭腦風(fēng)暴已經(jīng)非常普遍，幾乎沒有人對它提出過質(zhì)疑。每個人都頭腦風(fēng)暴，所以頭腦風(fēng)暴就是好的，但它真的管用嗎?
Claims about the success of brainstorming rest on easily tested assumptions. One assumption is that groups produce more ideas than individuals. Researchers in Minnesota tested this with scientists and advertising executives from the 3M Company. Half the subjects worked in groups of four. The other half worked alone, and then their results were randomly combined as if they had worked in a group, with duplicate ideas counted only once.
關(guān)于頭腦風(fēng)暴有效性的觀點建立在簡單的測試假設(shè)上。有這么一個假設(shè)：團(tuán)體總會比個人產(chǎn)生的想法多。在美國中西部的明尼蘇達(dá)州，有研究人員就這一觀點對采礦制造公司的科學(xué)家和廣告執(zhí)行者們進(jìn)行了測試。有一半的受試對象被分配在四人小組里面工作，而另外的一半則獨立工作，然后他們的測試結(jié)果就會隨機(jī)結(jié)合起來，如同他們在一個小組里面工作一樣，如果是重復(fù)的想法只算作一次。
3M company：Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company
(美國)明尼蘇達(dá)采礦制造公司
In every case, four people working individually generated between 30% and 40% more ideas than four people working in a group. Their results were of a higher quality, too: Independent judges assessed the work and found that the individuals produced better ideas than the groups.
在每種情況下，四個單獨工作的員工比四人小組工作的產(chǎn)生的點子比例多出30%到40%。同時他們的點子也是高質(zhì)量的：中立的評估者評估了工作的難度并且結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)，單獨完成工作的員工比團(tuán)隊合作的員工產(chǎn)生更好的點子。
Follow-up research tested whether larger groups performed any better. In one study, 168 people were either divided into teams of five, seven, or nine or asked to work individually. The research confirmed that working individually is more productive than working in groups. It also showed that productivity decreases as group size increases.
后續(xù)的研究測試了團(tuán)隊的規(guī)模是否與他們的表現(xiàn)成正比。有這樣一個研究，其中的168名員工要么被分配到5人，7人或9人的小組里工作，要么被分配為獨立工作。研究證實了獨立工作確實比團(tuán)隊合作更具創(chuàng)造力。同時研究也發(fā)現(xiàn)創(chuàng)造力與團(tuán)隊的規(guī)模成反比的關(guān)系。
The conclusion: “Group brainstorming, over a wide range of group sizes, inhibits rather than facilitates creative thinking.” The groups produced fewer and worse results because they were more likely to get fixated on one idea and because, despite all exhortations to the contrary, some members felt inhibited and refrained from full participation.
得出的結(jié)論是：“團(tuán)隊進(jìn)行頭腦風(fēng)暴，在一個大規(guī)模的團(tuán)隊里，只會抑制而不是促進(jìn)創(chuàng)造性思維的產(chǎn)生。”團(tuán)隊合作所產(chǎn)生的點子之所以相對少和不足的原因在于，團(tuán)隊人員更傾向于妥協(xié)某一固定的想法，以及，因為團(tuán)隊里的特有的訓(xùn)導(dǎo)，讓某些員工無法全心投入地輕松表達(dá)自己的想法。
Another assumption of brainstorming is that suspending judgment is better than assessing ideas as they appear.
另外一個關(guān)于頭腦風(fēng)暴的假設(shè)就是，對點子的延遲評判比即時評估來得有效。
Researchers in Indiana tested this by asking groups of students to think of brand names for three different products.
印第安納州的研究者們測試了這個假設(shè)：詢問多組學(xué)生對三種不一樣商品品牌名字的看法。
Half of the groups were told to refrain from criticism and half were told to criticize as they went along.
在這些組別中，有一半的學(xué)生被限制了對品牌的評判，而另外一半則要求在這過程中不停地做出自己的評判。
Once again, independent judges assessed the quality of each idea. The groups that did not stop to criticize produced more ideas, but both groups produced the same number of good ideas. Deferring criticism added only bad ideas. Subsequent studies have reinforced this.
再一次，中立的評估者評估每一個學(xué)生點子的質(zhì)量。一直給出評判的小組能夠想到更多的想法，不過兩個測試小組都有相當(dāng)數(shù)量的好點子。延遲判斷只會增加糟糕的想法。后續(xù)的研究進(jìn)一步驗證了這個觀點。
Research into brainstorming has a clear conclusion. The best way to create is to work alone and evaluate solutions as they occur. The worst way to create is to work in large groups and defer criticism.
關(guān)于頭腦風(fēng)暴的研究有一個明確的結(jié)論。最佳的工作方式就是獨立工作并在提出解決方案的時候及時作出評估。而最糟糕的工作創(chuàng)造方式則是在規(guī)模大的團(tuán)隊里工作和延遲評判。
Steve Wozniak, Steve Jobs’s cofounder at Apple and the inventor of its first computer, offers the same advice:
Steve Wozniak, 蘋果公司的創(chuàng)始人之一及其首臺電腦的發(fā)明者，提供了相一樣的建議：
“Work alone. You’re going to be best able to design revolutionary products and features if you’re working on your own. Not on a committee. Not on a team.”
“獨立工作。通過自行努力，你就能夠設(shè)計出最具有革命性的產(chǎn)品和功能。這不是一個委員會能做到的，也不是一個團(tuán)隊能做到的。”
Brainstorming fails because it is an explicit rejection of ordinary thinking — all leaps and no steps — and because of its unstated assumption that having ideas is the same as creating. Partly as a result, almost everybody has the idea that ideas are important.
頭腦風(fēng)暴之所以不奏效原因是它明確拒絕常規(guī)思維——都是大跳躍沒有小步伐——也因為它的不確定的假設(shè)：有想法如同創(chuàng)造。因此在某種程度上，幾乎每個人都被困在了“點子很重要”的死胡同里。
According to novelist Stephen King, the question authors signing books get asked most often — and are least able to answer — is “Where do you get your ideas from?”
根據(jù)小說家Stephen King的說法，作者在為書本簽名時最常被提問的問題，也是最難回答的問題就是：你的靈感來源是什么?
Ideas are like seeds: They are abundant, and most of them never grow into anything. Also, ideas are seldom original. Ask several independent groups to brainstorm on the same topic at the same time, and you will likely get many of the same ideas.
靈感就像是種子：它們是大量的，但大多數(shù)都無法長出點什么。再者，靈感是極少獨創(chuàng)的。如果同時就同一話題讓多個獨立的小組進(jìn)行頭腦風(fēng)暴，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)有很多同樣的想法。
This is not a limitation of brainstorming; it is true of all creation. Because everything arises from steps, not leaps, most things are invented in several places simultaneously when different people walk the same path, each unaware of the others.
不僅僅是頭腦風(fēng)暴，所有事物都有這樣的局限。因為萬事的發(fā)展都是一步接一步，而非一步跳到另一步。許多發(fā)明也是在不同地方同時產(chǎn)生的，只因不同的人走了同一條道，而沒有意識到別人也在做同樣的事。
For example, four different people discovered sunspots independently in 1611; five people invented the steamboat between 1802 and 1807; six people conceived of the electric railroad between 1835 and 1850; and two people invented the silicon chip in 1957.
舉個例子，有4個不同的人各自在1611年發(fā)現(xiàn)了太陽黑子;有5個人在1802年和1807年間發(fā)明了輪船;有6個人在1835年和1850年間構(gòu)想了電氣軌道;還有兩個人在1957年發(fā)明了硅片。
When political scientists William Ogburn and Dorothy Thomas studied this phenomenon, they found 148 cases of big ideas coming to many people at the same time and concluded that their list would grow longer with more research.
當(dāng)政治學(xué)家William Ogburn和Dorothy Thomoas研究這個現(xiàn)象的時候，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)那些意義非凡的想法當(dāng)中，有148例同時出現(xiàn)在許多人的腦海里，并且他們認(rèn)為隨著研究深度的增加，這個名單會擴(kuò)大。
Having ideas is not the same thing as being creative. Creation is execution, not inspiration. Many people have ideas; few take the steps to make the thing they imagine.
有想法不等同于具有創(chuàng)造力。創(chuàng)造是一種執(zhí)行力，而不是激發(fā)力。許多人都有想法，但是很少人能夠花一點功夫在這些想法上。
http://www.dgxbdz.com/【頭腦風(fēng)暴等于浪費時間？】相關(guān)文章：
浪費時間的說說04-30
狂風(fēng)暴雨的句子02-08
狂風(fēng)暴雨的文案10-25
寧夏冬至吃頭腦07-28
狂風(fēng)暴雨驚雷的說說11-01
外面狂風(fēng)暴雨的說說10-20
描寫狂風(fēng)暴雨的句子12-06
狂風(fēng)暴雨的文案集錦12-30