Double Brainstorming

Choose this exercise

Purpose: Generate and prioritize recommendations on a single problem from both specialized and cross-functional viewpoints.

Use it when: Use when a project touches distinct disciplines and teams need ideas that balance competing functional priorities.

Skip it when: Skip when the group has fewer than 8 people, when participants lack distinct stakeholder viewpoints, or when the team must execute an existing plan without re-evaluating options.

Group arrangement: Two sequential groupings: first grouped by card letter into role teams of 2 to 6 people, then regrouped by card number into cross-functional teams of 2 to 6 people.

Timing: UWT suggested 35 minutes based on Thiagi's two ideation rounds, consolidation, and voting.

Materials and tools

• One index card per person pre-labeled with a letter-number code (such as A1, A2, B1, B2)
• Blank scratch paper or note pads for each team (used for initial drafting and final team submissions)
• One writing pen per participant
• Wall chart, chalkboard, or whiteboard to display compiled recommendations
• Five dot stickers or markers per participant for voting

Before participants arrive

1. Select a core challenge prompt relevant to the organization (for example: 'How can we increase customer retention next quarter?'). Write it visibly on the main board.
2. Determine the number of roles (letters) and number groups (numbers) so team sizes stay between 2 and 6 members. For example, for 8 people use 4 roles (A-D) and 2 numbers (1-2); for 12 people use 3 roles (A-C) and 4 numbers (1-4); for 16 people use 4 roles (A-D) and 4 numbers (1-4); for 30 people use 5 roles (A-E) and 6 numbers (1-6). Distribute any extra participant across existing codes.
3. Prepare letter-number index cards matched to the participant count.
4. Post the role definitions corresponding only to the active letters visibly in the room.

Say this to open

Today we tackle our central challenge from two distinct angles. The question is on the board. You each have a card with a letter and a number. Your letter assigns your initial team and your functional role. First, you will generate ideas solely from that assigned viewpoint and pick your favorite ideas to carry forward. After that, we regroup by card numbers into mixed teams. There, you combine perspectives, debate trade-offs, and deliver five top recommendations.

How to run it

1. Form role teams and ideate 8 minutes

   Deliver opening script (1 minute). Participants gather with others sharing their card letter (1 minute). Teams spend 5 minutes generating ideas strictly through their assigned stakeholder lens, writing thoughts on scratch paper. During the final minute, each person selects their single top idea to carry forward into the mixed round.

2. Regroup into cross-functional teams 2 minutes

   Call time. Direct participants to find everyone sharing their card number and form new tables. Each table now holds members representing distinct functional perspectives from the first round.

3. Cross-pollinate and select five recommendations 15 minutes

   Each person takes 1 minute to share their single top idea from their role team. The mixed team then debates trade-offs across all viewpoints and expands or adapts suggestions. Together, the team selects exactly five agreed recommendations, writes them on a sheet of scratch paper, and hands it to the facilitator. Participants may write proposals on paper instead of speaking aloud.

4. Consolidate and vote 6 minutes

   The facilitator writes all submitted recommendations onto the central board, merging direct duplicates with whole-room consent. Each participant receives five dot stickers (or makes five pen marks) and places them next to any five preferred recommendations on the board.

5. Debrief outcomes 4 minutes

   Highlight the five recommendations that received the most votes. Pose two debrief questions to the room, taking two or three brief spoken comments for each.

Debrief questions

• Which initial role recommendation changed the most once other viewpoints examined it?
• Where did two functional perspectives clash most sharply, and how did your mixed team resolve that tension?

Finished output: A consolidated list of group recommendations on the central board with votes identifying the top five priorities.

Remote

Assign letter-number codes via chat or direct message. Run the first brainstorm in letter-named breakout rooms (Room A, Room B). Announce time, close breakouts, and send participants to number-named breakout rooms (Room 1, Room 2). Each mixed room pastes five proposals into a shared digital whiteboard or document. The facilitator pastes all submissions onto a common board, then facilitates merging direct duplicates with whole-room consent. Participants vote using five digital stamps or sticky stars.

Hybrid

Keep remote attendees in dedicated remote letter and number rooms when participant counts permit. If mixing remote and in-person members, place in-room clusters with remote participants using a dedicated laptop and speakerphone at that table. In all cases, record final proposals on a shared digital whiteboard or document so co-located and remote attendees view and vote on the exact same text.

Access and participation choices

• Participants may submit written notes on scratch paper or in shared chat rather than speaking aloud in groups.
• Any participant may opt out of active role advocacy to serve as team scribe or timekeeper.
• Visible definitions for each active role remain posted throughout the session for quick reference.

If the session gets stuck

Attendance does not divide evenly across letter and number combinations.

Assign extra participants an existing letter-number combination (for instance, two people hold B2). Never create a number group with only one person. If a departure leaves an isolated number, merge that person into an adjacent number team.

Participants drop their assigned role during the first round and converse generally.

Visit the table and ask: 'How would your specific stakeholder react to that suggestion?' Point directly to their posted role definition card.

Terms used here

• Divergent thinking: Generating a wide variety of distinct options without early critique.
• Convergent thinking: Evaluating, combining, and prioritizing options to arrive at agreed choices.