Brainstorming Methods

One of the most important processes in our Innovation Management System(IMS) is generating a large number of good ideas. We used the following methods to come up with ideas:

1. Overview of Idea Generation

Generating ideas is most effective using the following approach, and by repeating this process, ideas are refined and can evolve into more innovative concepts.

This method involves repeatedly alternating between divergence and convergence. “Divergence” creates as many idea seeds as possible, while “convergence” evaluates their validity and practicality. This results in ideas that are both innovative and realistic.

2. About Brainstorming

Brainstorming is a collaborative activity designed to overcome inhibitive tendencies and promote creative thinking. In brainstorming, groups gather to share their ideas or solutions to a particular problem or question, regardless of how unconventional or outlandish the ideas may be. The goal is to generate many ideas in a short period of time and foster an environment where participants can freely express their creativity without fear of criticism or instant judgment. After a brainstorming session, ideas can be refined and examined to find practical solutions.

Brainstorming is highly effective in the “divergence” phase of idea generation. To conduct a more effective brainstorming session, it’s important that participants follow these key rules:

♣️ Brainstorming Rules

Listen attentively a. Speak one at a time, listen with interest, and remember that everyone is equal. b. Aim for creative dialogue rather than debate. c. Keep comments short and concise so everyone can participate.
Focus on quantity, not quality a. Avoid immediate judgment or criticism. That comes during the convergence phase. b. Separate divergence from convergence; during brainstorming, generate as many ideas as possible, even wild ones.
Stick to the topic a. Don’t let associative thinking stray too far from the original topic. Return to the main topic as needed.
Be free-spirited a. Let go of embarrassment or fear of failure; speak up or write down your thoughts freely. b. Listening without criticism, as mentioned in rule 1, is crucial.
Build on others’ ideas a. Expand on other people’s suggestions and develop them further.
Visualize a. Write down ideas as keywords on sticky notes or similar media. b. Illustrating ideas can make them even better.

For successful brainstorming, it’s best to work in small groups of 3-5 people, as this makes it easier to create a conducive atmosphere. Also, when conducting the enhanced brainstorming described in section 3, having multiple groups can be advantageous.

3. Enhanced Brainstorming

To further develop the idea seeds generated in section 2, we established an enhanced brainstorming method. By using the following three techniques, the idea seeds can be further refined:

📟 KJ Method The KJ Method was devised by cultural anthropologist Jiro Kawakita (professor emeritus at Tokyo Tech) to efficiently organize fragmented information and ideas. This method organizes collections of idea seeds by finding new or hidden meanings, leading to new ideas.

For example, if we use the KJ method to organize popular foods in Japan (ramen, sushi, udon, hamburger, curry, motsunabe, carbonara, soba, gyoza, eel, tenshinhan).
Simply grouping them as “noodle dishes” (udon, ramen, carbonara, soba) is just categorization.
However, grouping them as “foreign foods adapted to Japanese style” (ramen, carbonara, curry, tenshinhan) reveals a new perspective.

By reorganizing idea seeds with the KJ method and restarting brainstorming, new idea seeds can be generated.

4. On Divergence and Convergence

The idea seeds generated through sections 2 and 3 won’t fully reveal their potential unless acted upon. By applying appropriate selective pressure, they will evolve into more practical ideas. Brainstorming is purely a divergent stage.

In the convergence phase, it’s important to actively engage in criticism and judgment, which were entirely avoided in sections 2 and 3, and narrow down the ideas. During this phase, it’s crucial not to expand again or overturn previously made decisions. Once convergence is complete, the process cycles back to step 1 for further idea generation. By repeating this cycle, more refined and innovative ideas can be established.

Human Practices Maturity Model

The Human Practices Maturity Model is a self-assessment framework published by iGEM for evaluating Human Practices work. It consists of six evaluation axes: Reflecting on design decisions, Exploring and reflecting on context beyond the lab, Incorporating diverse perspectives, Anticipating positive and negative impacts, Responding to human practices work, and Approaching limitations with integrity.

▼

Human Practices Maturity Model

Maturity of HP Work 1 - Reflecting on design decisions

Level	Description
Low Level	No actions to consider social-environmental context of the project to inform project decisions.
Low-mid level	Some limited engagement with stakeholders to inform basic design decisions.
Mid-level	Early stakeholder engagement to inform basic design decisions.
Mid-high level	Early stakeholder engagement; Comprehensive and holistic implementation in project design; Limited documentation.
High level	Extensive and transparent documentation; Iterative stakeholder engagement; comprehensive and holistic implementation in project design.

Maturity of HP Work 2 - Exploring and reflecting on context beyond the lab

Level	Description
Low Level	No actions to understand contexts.
Low-mid level	Partially understanding the contexts of the project but not so detailed, complete or not so related; the information is mainly collected by secondary research.
Mid-level	Good understanding of the project’s context; Collect information by thorough research including primary research.
Mid-high level	Good understanding of the project’s context; Collect information by thorough research including primary research; Have good understanding about the relations between the contexts and projects.
High level	The requirement of Mid-high Level ; The knowledge of contexts help with the project design; (optional) Team even have reflective ideas about the contexts such as improving regulation.

Maturity of HP Work 3 - Incorporating diverse perspectives

Level	Description
Low Level	No effort to mapping stakeholders (industry / markets, communities, individuals, etc) that would be affected by the project.
Low-mid level	Demonstrate robust rationale for identifying stakeholders; mapping stakeholders (industry / markets, communities, individuals, etc) that would be affected by the project, their relationship with themselves and with the team; list some of their understandings and real needs based on efforts to engage with them.
Mid-level	Demonstrate robust rationale for reaching out stakeholders; - broaden perspectives by adding to the mapping communities and people who might not be affected, to know more about their perception of projects and other comment; list which perspective and options have been incorporated or not into the project.
Mid-high level	Engage with stakeholders in a participative and cooperative way, discussing their perspectives and needs; well document this process; exhibited the rationale behind the choices to incorporate or not the different perspectives; be critical in relation to the needs and perspectives of the diverse stakeholders and with what can actually be solved or not with the projects.
High level	Enlarge the ability to learn from and consult diverse communities and stakeholders, including those who might hold critical views towards the project; be able to develop feedback mechanisms that encourage stakeholders to participate in each project change; robust documentation on how the feedback was incorporated into the project.

Maturity of HP Work 4 - Anticipating positive and negative impacts

Level	Description
Low Level	Not present any reflection on possible positive or negative impacts of the project.
Low-mid level	At some point in development, lists some positive and negative impacts that the project can have in general terms.
Mid-level	Anticipate positive and negative impacts from the beginning of the project; consider different dimensions (economic, social, scientific, educational, etc.); constantly adapting the list of impacts according to the development of the project.
Mid-high level	Demonstrate the willingness, capabilities and skills to either alter the project or develop sufficient countermeasures to mitigate such risk when the technique/knowledge developed by the project is likely, no matter how remotely, to be misused or create ethical, social, legal problems.
High level	Engaging with relevant stakeholders to find alternatives that would reduce risk whist increasing benefits, allowing project to progress.

Maturity of HP Work 5 - Responding to human practices work

Level	Description
Low Level	Do some human practices work; human Practices work have not been integrated in to projects, or have not been exhibited through documentation.
Low-mid level	Do good human practices work; these works are partially integrated into projects design/execution; documentation of this process.
Mid-level	Do good human practices work from the beginning; these works are mainly integrated into later stage (execution) of projects; good documentation of this process.
Mid-high level	Do good human practices work from the beginning; these works can and have been integrated into early stage of projects (purpose/design); good documentation with some reflection.
High level	Human practices work plays a substantial role in team’s scientific, technical, safety and/or communication decisions, from the project’s beginning to its end.

Maturity of HP Work 6 - Approaching limitations with integrity

Level	Description
Low Level	No consideration of project limitations.
Low-mid level	Notional consideration of project limitations; no alternatives proposed.
Mid-level	Basic analysis of project’s strengths and weaknesses.
Mid-high level	Advanced and transparent examination of strengths and weaknesses; assessment of improvement areas and potential; basic adjustments of project.
High level	Transparent assessment of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the project; assessment of improvement areas and potential; documented roadmap of adapting project to opportunities and threats.

Other Consideration: Creativity and Originality

Originality/unusual approaches without precedence within iGEM is a sign of maturity in advanced innovative thinking. This presents another feat of higher advanced maturity.

We planned, within the framework of our project, to explore and reflect on the context of the project within society, anticipate future positive and negative impacts, design appropriate research, and examine the project’s feasibility by addressing its limitations. This aligns with common goals in iGEM and Human Practices activities. Therefore, we decided it would be appropriate to use this model as an evaluation framework.