MS799
[Editor’s Note: This Blast from the Past article was initially published in Army Logistician (the former title of Army Sustainment) in the January–February 1976 issue, volume 8, number 1.]
Have you ever called a staff meeting and after it was over kept a few members of your staff to mull over a problem and then had someone throw out the answer after just a few seconds? And was the answer so patently obvious that everyone felt foolish for not having thought of it before? Almost everyone is familiar with the often-overlooked word “brainstorming,” but how many military managers are familiar with the procedures and applications of brainstorming?
Brainstorming can actually be considered as nothing more than a verbal staff study. Everyone connected with the military has at least some familiarity with the written staff study format — statement of the problem, assumptions, facts bearing on the problem, courses of action, conclusions, and recommendations. Innovate and think of brainstorming as an oral staff study. This technique can be used in day-to-day workings of middle managers and top executives in any kind of organization. The brainstorming concept can be used to augment aggressive, dynamic leadership. These simple techniques provide the steps that can help to solve the most complex and highly sophisticated technical problem or a relatively sensitive personnel problem. The middle manager in many organizations is fortunate because usually his work force is small enough for him to include every member in a meeting and gain their individual participation. Many divergent ideas can often be generated this way.
Whether the manager is at the middle level or at the highest level, brainstorming procedures remain virtually the same with only minor exceptions. The high-level manager, obviously, cannot call together his entire work force, but he can select a cross-sectional group to wrestle with the problem at hand. In many military organizations, selection is delineated through a grade structure that leaves the commander only one course of action — that is to exploit the synergistic capability of his command group or staff. Take care not to exclude nontechnical people from the brainstorming group even though the problem is highly technical. Quite the opposite approach should be taken, for nontechnical members often provide the divergent ideas that lead to innovative solutions. This is where the total assets of a command can be used by the commander to gain a wealth of ideas and knowledge.
Once the group is selected and the objective is defined, the manager must instruct the group to present only positive statements, but make clear that any idea, regardless of how outlandish it may sound, should be presented. Any idea that stimulates other ideas should be introduced immediately into the discussion. Quantity of ideas should be stressed to the group. The manager should designate someone in group to record the ideas brought out in the session or make notes of them himself. This may be done informally on butcher paper or a plain note pad, but the ideas must be preserved for future analysis.
After the manager has elicited ideas from the staff, the real work begins. There are many different methods of analyzing the ideas, and this becomes the “pick and shovel” part of the operation. If the manager wants to continue with the group to further avail himself of the existing synergy, he can use what is commonly known as the Osborne technique. The group’s role in this technique is nothing more than providing data for the commander or manager to use in making a decision. The Osborne technique is a definite, viable management tool, closely paralleling the staff study. However, when comparing it to a staff study, the commander or manager must make his own innovations, which will not follow exactly the rigid staff study format.
The manager or commander can use the Osborne technique or modify it to suit himself. There are five major areas in which trade-offs between the formal staff study and the Osborne technique can be made. Each of the five major areas is discussed in separate sessions. They are not autonomous or unrelated and each session should be considered as an integral part of the process to achieve a viable solution. The sessions are supported primarily by the inherent synergy of the group.
The first area is fact finding. This is where it is decided just what facts are wanted for the study. The second area is problem definition, identifying and specifying the problem. Idea finding is the third area, and it brings out from the group the many diverse actions related to solving the problems. Solution finding is the fourth area, and its function is to identify the alternatives bearing on the problems. This area also helps determine the feasibility of courses of action that have been proposed. The decisions on what to do with the data that have been developed are carefully weighed. Finally, the fifth area covers the acceptance finding. The questions of who, what, when, where, and how are dealt with in this area. Alternatives are weighed and culled, and methods of implementing them are examined. Here, the proof of whether the work was worthwhile manifests itself.
After the group, through its interactions, has exploited the process and provided many ideas, the commander or manager must then earn his money. He must decide which ideas are beneficial and which ones are infeasible. He must decide which ones to act upon, to hold in abeyance, and to disregard. Brainstorming is nothing more than a tool for the manager or commander to use in obtaining more information on which to base decisions.
Private industry profitably uses this technique or a similar method of their own with minor variations. The technique takes advantage of time, eliminates individual bias, and provides a broader perspective of an objective. The major advantage of brainstorming is that the manager can institute the procedure immediately because he has ready access to people, the only resource the technique requires. By channeling everyday discussions along the lines indicated, even an informal coffee break can be turned into an extremely beneficial idea-producing session.
Remember that creative problem-solving techniques are augmentation to management principles and not the panacea. This is just one more method to obtain vital information to assist in making accurate timely decisions.
--------------------
CPT W. John Stoddart was an instructor in the Installation and Financial Management Committee at the Army Logistics Management Center, Fort Lee, Virginia. He received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Nevada and a Master of Business Administration degree from Babson College.
--------------------
This article was published in the fall 2026 edition of Army Sustainment Professional Bulletin.
RELATED LINKS
Army Sustainment on Line of Departure
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Sharing