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: 2881dc1183d571456a7e3ba135a75066cf8f089574b1492d482f5555ee4c9cbc

# Reverse Brainstorming

Participants generate deliberate ways to cause, worsen, or guarantee failure for a specific challenge. They then flip those negative ideas into constructive safeguards and actionable solutions.

**Time:** 45 minutes. WorkshopBank lists 30 to 60 minutes with 45 minutes as the standard baseline; step times sum exactly to 45 minutes.
**People:** 4 to 24. Subgroups of 3 to 5 people at separate tables, or a single circle for 4 to 6 people.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Surface hidden risks, root causes, and novel solutions by deliberately brainstorming ways to cause failure before reversing them into practical ideas.
**Use it when:** Use when standard brainstorming stalls, groups default to safe or stale ideas, or teams need to examine risks and blind spots before launching an initiative.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the issue involves active interpersonal conflict, raw grief, or personal blame where negative framing can feel dismissive, or when a purely technical problem has only one correct answer.

## Materials and tools

- 2 flip chart stands with paper pads (or wall space with large chart paper)
- Sticky notes in two distinct colors (one color for reverse ideas, one color for flipped solutions; roughly 20 of each color per subgroup)
- Broad felt-tip markers (1 per participant)
- Small dot stickers for voting (3 to 5 stickers per participant)
- 1 digital countdown timer

## Before participants arrive

1. Write the positive problem statement clearly on the first flip chart sheet (for example: 'How do we ensure new hires feel supported in their first 30 days?').
2. Write the inverted negative prompt on a second flip chart sheet and keep it covered or turned away from view until Step 2.
3. Place markers and both colors of sticky notes on each table.

## Say this to open

Welcome. Today we tackle this challenge from the opposite direction. Instead of asking how to fix it, we will brainstorm how to guarantee complete failure. This breaks through polite answers and exposes real friction. Let us review the target challenge first.

## How to run it

### 1. Frame the target challenge (5 minutes)

Display the original problem statement on the first flip chart. Read it aloud. Ask the room to confirm the boundary of the topic. Answer clarifying questions about scope, but do not allow anyone to propose solutions yet.

### 2. Reveal the reverse question (5 minutes)

Uncover the second flip chart showing the inverted question (for example: 'How could we guarantee that new hires have the most confusing, frustrating first 30 days possible?'). Explain that absurd, extreme, or disruptive tactics are welcome. Provide one neutral sample: 'Never give them computer login credentials.' Instruct participants to write one destructive idea per note on the designated negative-color sticky notes.

### 3. Generate negative ideas (10 minutes)

Start the timer. In subgroups of 3 to 5, participants write and post as many ways to cause failure as possible. Prompt them to consider policies, communication, timing, and tools. Stop when groups reach 15 to 20 negative ideas or time expires.

### 4. Flip negatives into solutions (12 minutes)

Instruct groups to review each negative note and ask: 'What is the constructive opposite, or what underlying need does this highlight?' Participants write practical solutions on the second color of sticky notes and post them directly beside the negative notes. If an exact opposite is trivial, instruct them to ask what preventative measure would remove the risk.

### 5. Prioritize solutions (8 minutes)

Hand out 3 dot stickers per participant. Subgroups post their top flipped solutions on the main wall. Everyone walks past the board and places their dots on the ideas they believe offer the highest practical impact. Tally the top 3 to 5 ranked items.

### 6. Debrief and close (5 minutes)

Bring the room together to review the top-voted solutions. Ask two debrief questions from the run sheet. Record initial owners or immediate next steps for the winning ideas.


## Debrief questions

- Which reverse idea exposed a risk or habit that already happens in subtle ways?
- How did focusing on deliberate failure shift the types of solutions you generated compared to usual discussions?
- What is the single most actionable safeguard or improvement we can start this week?

**Finished output:** A board of paired failure-modes and counter-solutions, culminating in 3 to 5 prioritized, dot-voted action items.

## Remote

Set up a shared digital canvas with two distinct column templates per breakout room: red notes for 'Ways to Cause Failure' and green notes for 'Flipped Solutions'. Run Step 1 and 2 in the main room. Send groups of 3 to 5 to breakout rooms for Steps 3 and 4. Call everyone back to the main room for Step 5 and use the platform dot-voting or reaction tool to vote on aggregated solutions.

## Hybrid

Pair in-person attendees with a designated table laptop or station so remote participants join small group breakout discussions directly. Have each hybrid table post directly onto a shared digital board rather than physical paper so remote and co-located participants can read and move sticky notes simultaneously. Run voting digitally for all participants.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may contribute by writing sticky notes silently, speaking ideas aloud to a table scribe, or typing directly into a digital board.
- Anyone may pass during voting or open discussion without giving a reason.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants generate direct opposites that are too obvious or unhelpful (for example, flipping 'ignore emails' to 'read all emails instantly').**

Ask the group: 'What underlying boundary, tool, or system would solve the frustration highlighted by this bad idea?'

**Negative ideas touch on existing personal conflicts or start pointing fingers at colleagues.**

Intervene immediately and reframe the observation at a process level: 'Let us focus on workflow rules and system failures, not individuals. What policy or tool creates that trap?'


## Terms used here

- Reverse Brainstorming: An ideation technique that asks participants to deliberately solve for failure before converting those failure points into preventive ideas or solutions.
- Dot Voting: A quick selection method where each person uses a limited number of adhesive stickers or digital dots to indicate their preferred choices on a shared board.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in WorkshopBank documentation. WorkshopBank notes historical links to Alex Osborn's brainstorming rules and Charles S. Whiting's 1958 'Reversal-Direct Method'.

Retained the 5-phase core mechanic (Frame, Reverse Question, Negative Generation, Flipping, and Prioritization) documented by WorkshopBank. Standardized the running time to a solid 45-minute workshop session, set clear group limits (4 to 24), added concrete scripts, and specified exact sticky note color coding and hybrid accommodations.

[WorkshopBank](https://workshopbank.com/tools/reverse-brainstorming)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/reverse-brainstorming-workshopbank/