Tidiness vs creativity5/17/2023 ![]() ![]() Progress requires clashing and fusing - not compromising or postponing - different perspectives.įrancesca Gino rightfully maintains that criticism works only when it leads to enhancing and improving an idea. In her research on the power of dissent, Charlan Nemeth shows that debate and criticism do not inhibit ideas rather, they stimulate them. To create breakthroughs, it is necessary to leverage the contrasts that come from critique instead of escaping them. It is the combination of “but” and “and” that creates real progress, enabling the team to see both positive and negative components and allowing each iteration to go even deeper into the analysis. You and the entire team will then be ready to dive deeper into the next iteration. First, she provides a critique, which enables you to receive precious and specific information, see weaknesses in your half-backed idea you couldn’t spot yourself, and therefore learn. In order to build on your idea, your colleague does not just add a new improved proposal. Note that the “but” anticipating the “and” is essential. This kind of constructive interaction encourages a deep cycle of critical dialogues that can lead to a coherent, breakthrough idea. Others can jump in with their critiques and proposals during the process. Then you do the same: You acknowledge Idea B, provide a constructive critique, and develop a new, even more improved result. When you propose Idea A, a colleague first addresses what he perceives to be a flaw in it, provides constructive feedback (this is the “but”), and then suggests a possible way to overcome or avoid the flaw, yielding Idea B (this is the “and”). The rule of “Yes, but, and.” We suggest combining the best features of criticism with the best of ideation. And the team would miss the opportunity to dive deeply into the original idea. You would perceive the new proposal as an unrelated diversion or, most likely, a different conflicting perspective. Yet without critical feedback, you would hardly understand why your original idea did not work. The rule of “Yes, and.” The notion of building on an idea, rather than criticizing it, in order to maintain a creative flow might sound like a good thing. If someone uses the existence of a flaw to kill the idea, a great innovation may be missed. This is especially true for the most innovative ones because they dive into unexplored spaces. The rule of “Yes, but.” The problem with this rule is that ideas, even if truly exceptional, often have major flaws. ![]() ![]() We therefore propose a different approach: the rule of “Yes, but, and.” To explain how this rule works, let’s first discuss why criticism alone (“Yes, but…”) and ideation alone (“Yes, and…”) do not work. Our view, the product of years of studies of and participation in innovation projects, is that effective teams do not defer critical reflection they create through criticism. It encourages design by committee and infuses a superficial sense of collaboration that leads to compromises and weakens ideas. (In 1999, in the ABC Nightline video “The Deep Dive,” which ignited the design thinking movement, criticism was stigmatized as negative.) In IDEO’s online teaching platform, the first rule of brainstorming is “defer judgment.” To make this rule even more practical and straightforward, others have reworded it to say: “When a person proposes an idea, don’t say, ‘Yes, but…’ to point out flaws in the idea instead, say, ‘Yes, and…’” - which is intended to get people to add to the original idea. Aversion to criticism has significantly spread in the last 20 years, especially through the advocates of design thinking. One of the most popular mantras for innovation is “avoid criticism.” The underlying assumption is that criticism kills the flow of creativity and the enthusiasm of a team. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |