Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 52549ec4dd71faa462cd25e9bdc1c948b4f0eb5d71639244a4854fadddcba7b1

# Forced Connections

Small groups examine an unrelated stimulus object, catalogue its concrete attributes, and translate those qualities into fresh concepts for a specific problem. They cluster the resulting ideas, prioritize promising options with dot votes, and develop the top choices into actionable proposals.

**Time:** 45 minutes. Source documents suggest 30 to 60 minutes; this 45-minute plan balances stimulus breakdown, divergence, sharing, and actionable development.
**People:** 4 to 24. Small groups of 3 to 5 participants (for 4 or 5 people, form a single group)

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Generate non-obvious solution concepts by intentionally mapping unrelated stimulus attributes to an existing problem statement.
**Use it when:** Use during ideation workshops when a group is stuck in familiar thinking, has exhausted direct brainstorms, or needs lateral concepts for a complex challenge.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the group is new and uncomfortable looking silly, when the problem is a straightforward logistical fix, or when immediate convergent analysis is required.

## Materials and tools

- 1 random physical object per small group (such as a rubber duck, whisk, compass, or tennis ball)
- 1 flip chart pad or A3 sheet per small group
- 5 pads of sticky notes per small group
- 1 marker per participant
- 3 dot-voting stickers per participant
- 1 shared wall or large whiteboard for posting ideas
- 1 countdown timer

## Before participants arrive

1. Display the core challenge or 'How Might We' question clearly on a central flip chart or screen.
2. Arrange tables with flip chart paper, sticky notes, and markers for groups of 3 to 5.
3. Keep stimulus items hidden in an opaque bag or box until the second step.
4. Dedicate clear wall or board space for the whole-room clustering and voting phase.

## Say this to open

Welcome. We are exploring our challenge from an unexpected angle. I will give each group a completely unrelated physical object. Your task is not to solve the problem with the item itself, but to pull out its concrete traits and force links back to our challenge. The stranger the initial connection, the better. Write down wild ideas first; we will extract practical concepts afterward.

## How to run it

### 1. Frame the challenge and model a connection (5 minutes)

Read the posted problem statement aloud. Give participants 2 minutes for clarifying factual questions. Model the mechanic using a pre-selected object before handing anything out: show an umbrella, list the attribute 'repels water', and say, 'What if we created an automated shield that absorbs routine inquiries before they reach our inbox?' Remind everyone to hold back criticism and stay divergent.

### 2. Examine stimulus and catalogue attributes (5 minutes)

Hand one random object from the bag to each small group. Direct groups to handle their object, inspect its physical qualities, functions, materials, and motion. Instruct one person per group to record at least eight distinct attributes on their flip chart paper (such as flexible, hollow, clicks into place, reflective). Call time at 5 minutes.

### 3. Force connections to the problem (15 minutes)

Direct participants to examine each attribute on their list and ask: 'If our solution had this property, what would that look like?' Everyone writes ideas individually on sticky notes, one concept per note, aiming for at least ten notes per table. If an idea sounds odd, have them write it down anyway without debate. Group members may also build verbally on each other's ideas.

### 4. Post connections and share highlights (8 minutes)

Ask each table to select their three most provocative sticky notes and send one member to post them on the central board. Give groups up to 1 minute each to highlight their posted ideas from their seats. While groups finish, cluster notes with obvious overlaps into loose themes on the board.

### 5. Prioritize with dot votes and develop next steps (12 minutes)

Hand 3 sticky dots to each participant. Give everyone 3 minutes to review the board and place dots on the concepts that offer the most promising starting points. Select the top 2 to 3 voted concepts. Assign one concept to each table to develop for 5 minutes: answer 'What is the practical version of this idea?' and 'What is one concrete next test?' Collect final summary sentences on the board.


## Debrief questions

- Which stimulus attribute sparked an angle you would not have found through direct brainstorming?
- When did a seemingly absurd idea reveal a genuinely useful operational concept?
- How can our team use this attribute-mapping approach when we get stuck on future problems?

**Finished output:** A clustered board of lateral ideas, 2 to 3 prioritized concept candidates, and documented next-step development notes for each chosen concept.

## Remote

Use breakout rooms of 3 to 5 people. Display the problem statement in the main room. Place a distinct high-resolution image of an everyday object (such as a stapler, bicycle bell, or pinecone) in each breakout workspace on a digital whiteboard. Groups record attributes on digital stickies, create connections, copy their top 3 stickies to a central board, and vote using digital stamps before returning to breakouts to develop actionable proposals.

## Hybrid

Seat in-person participants at small tables and assign remote participants to online breakout rooms of 3 to 5. Hand physical objects to in-person tables and assign digital image cards to virtual groups. All groups post their top three stickies onto a unified digital board projected in the room and shared on screen. Run dot voting and the final development step simultaneously on the shared board.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may contribute by handling the object, calling out traits, writing sticky notes, or synthesizing themes during clustering.
- Anyone may pass on speaking during the room-wide share by nominating a peer spokesperson or placing notes silently on the board.
- Provide text descriptions of object attributes for participants with visual or tactile sensitivities.

## If the session gets stuck

**A group only lists surface traits like color and size, leading to shallow connections.**

Prompt them on behavior and utility: ask how it operates, how it breaks, how it moves, or what sounds it makes.

**Participants dismiss connections immediately as impractical or silly.**

Remind the room that evaluation belongs in the final step; instruct them to capture every wild idea on paper first so the underlying principle can be extracted later.


## Terms used here

- Attribute: A concrete physical property, function, material, or behavior of an object.
- Lateral thinking: Solving problems through indirect, non-obvious associations and fresh entry points.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in WorkshopBank, which attributes the lineage of forced connections to Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall (1972), Fritz Zwicky, and Edward de Bono's lateral thinking methods.

Retained the core mechanic of attribute extraction followed by forced problem mapping and the 5-phase structure documented in WorkshopBank. Structured the timing to a 45-minute workshop block, adjusted subgroup sizing to 3 to 5 people so all counts between 4 and 24 divide cleanly, modeled an explicit umbrella example before distributing items, and paced sharing so groups post notes first before giving brief spoken highlights.

[WorkshopBank](https://workshopbank.com/tools/forced-connections)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/forced-connections-workshopbank/