---
description: 'Deep expertise for Method 4: Brainstorming — advanced facilitation techniques, creative block recovery, and convergence frameworks'
applyTo: '**/.copilot-tracking/dt/**/method-04*'
---

# DT Method 04 Deep: Advanced Brainstorming Techniques

On-demand deep reference for Method 4. The coach loads this file when users encounter complex ideation scenarios requiring advanced facilitation techniques, creative block recovery, structured convergence evaluation, or cross-industry solution transfer that exceed the method-tier guidance.
The method-tier's Ideation Facilitator and Convergence Guide coaching hats provide foundational divergent and convergent support; this file extends those hats with specialized protocols for challenging brainstorming environments.

## Advanced Facilitation Techniques

The method-tier file covers three ideation techniques: Constraint-Informed Generation, Perspective Multiplication, and Scenario Expansion. The techniques below provide structured protocols for generating higher-quality, more diverse ideas when standard approaches produce insufficient breadth or novelty.

### Brainwriting Protocol

Silent written ideation removes verbal dominance bias and produces more ideas per unit time than traditional brainstorming. In the 6-3-5 variant, six participants each write three ideas, then pass their sheet to the next person who builds on those ideas across five rounds.

* Each participant writes three ideas in five minutes without discussion.
* Sheets rotate to the next participant, who reads existing ideas and adds three new ones that build on or diverge from them.
* After all rounds complete, the group reviews the full set together for clustering.
* Adapt for smaller teams by increasing rounds or allowing participants to hold multiple sheets simultaneously.
* For solo sessions with an AI coach, the user writes three ideas, then the AI generates three building ideas from different perspectives. Alternate for several rounds to simulate the rotation effect.

Coaching prompt: "Before we discuss any ideas aloud, try writing three solution concepts silently. What emerges when the pressure of group conversation is removed?"

### Morphological Analysis

Decompose the problem into independent dimensions and systematically combine attributes to generate novel combinations that free-form brainstorming misses.

* Identify three to five independent dimensions of the problem (for example, user, interface, timing, location, trigger).
* List two to four possible values for each dimension.
* Create combinations by selecting one value from each dimension and evaluating the resulting concept.
* Focus on unusual combinations that surface non-obvious solutions rather than confirming expected ones.

Coaching prompt: "What are the independent dimensions of this problem? If you mix unexpected values across those dimensions, what solutions appear?"

### Provocation Technique

Deliberately state an impossible or illogical starting point to break mental fixation and open unexpected solution directions. The provocation prefix "Po" signals that the statement is intentionally wrong.

* State a provocation that violates a core assumption: "Po: the operator never touches the machine."
* Extract the movement from the provocation: what principle or approach does the impossible statement suggest?
* Generate practical ideas inspired by the movement rather than the literal provocation.
* Use provocations when ideation produces variations of the same approach rather than distinct alternatives.

Coaching prompt: "State something deliberately impossible about this problem. What practical ideas does that impossibility inspire?"

### Attribute Listing and Modification

Enumerate the attributes of an existing solution or process and systematically modify each one to generate ideas that incremental thinking overlooks.

* List the attributes of the current state: materials, timing, sequence, participants, tools, outputs.
* For each attribute, ask what happens if it doubles, halves, reverses, combines with another, or disappears entirely.
* Document the most promising modifications as candidate ideas for clustering.
* This technique works well for improving existing processes where entirely novel solutions are less likely than targeted modifications.

Coaching prompt: "List the key attributes of the current approach. What happens when you reverse or remove each one?"

### Round-Robin Forced Connections

Sequential idea building forces associative thinking and prevents the group from settling into a single solution direction. Each participant must connect their contribution to the previous one.

* The first participant states a rough solution idea.
* Each subsequent participant must build a new idea that connects to or transforms the previous idea in a specific way.
* Connections can extend, invert, combine, or redirect the prior idea.
* After one full rotation, start a new chain from a different constraint scenario or stakeholder perspective.

Coaching prompt: "Take the last idea shared and transform it. What new direction emerges when you extend, invert, or combine it with a different constraint?"

## Creative Block Recovery

The method-tier acknowledges that ideation momentum stalls and recommends introducing new constraint scenarios or perspective shifts. The techniques below provide structured recovery protocols for when standard energy-sustaining interventions produce diminishing returns.

### Assumption Reversal

List the assumptions underlying the current problem framing and systematically reverse each one to reopen directions the team dismissed prematurely.

* Ask participants to state what they assume must be true about the problem or its constraints.
* Reverse each assumption and explore what solutions become possible under the reversed framing.
* Not every reversal produces viable ideas, but the exercise breaks fixed thinking patterns and reveals hidden constraints the team imposed on itself.
* Return to normal framing after generating ideas from reversals, carrying forward any concepts worth exploring.

Coaching prompt: "What are you assuming must be true here? What solutions appear if that assumption is reversed?"

### Random Input Technique

Introduce an unrelated stimulus and force connections between the stimulus and the problem space. The distance between stimulus and problem drives novelty.

* Select a random word, image, or object with no obvious relationship to the problem.
* Ask participants to list attributes of the random input: what are its properties, behaviors, and associations?
* Force connections between those attributes and the problem: "How does this property map to our challenge?"
* The discomfort of forced connections is productive. Ideas that feel awkward often contain the most novel principles.

Coaching prompt: "Pick something completely unrelated to this problem. What happens when you force a connection between its properties and your challenge?"

### Constraint Manipulation

Temporarily add, remove, or invert a constraint to shift the ideation frame. This technique works when the team has exhausted ideas within the current constraint set.

* Remove a constraint: "What if cost were no object?" Generate ideas, then ask which principles survive when the constraint returns.
* Add a constraint: "What if it had to work in complete darkness?" New limitations force new approaches.
* Invert a constraint: "What if the user wanted the process to be slower?" Inversion reveals hidden value assumptions.
* Document which ideas survive constraint restoration. Those ideas contain principles transferable to the real constraint environment.

Coaching prompt: "Remove the constraint you find most limiting. What ideas emerge? Now bring the constraint back. Which of those ideas still holds?"

### Cross-Domain Perspective Adoption

Adopt the viewpoint of someone entirely outside the domain to bypass domain-locked thinking, distinct from the method-tier's in-domain stakeholder perspective rotation. Effective perspectives include users from different industries, historical figures, children, or fictional characters.

* Select a perspective distant from the current domain: "How would a chef approach this manufacturing problem?"
* Generate ideas from that perspective without filtering for feasibility.
* Extract the underlying principles from perspective-driven ideas and translate them back to the actual domain.
* Rotate through three or more perspectives to generate ideas that a single viewpoint cannot reach.

Coaching prompt: "How would someone from a completely different field approach this? What principle behind their approach transfers to your context?"

## Advanced Convergence Frameworks

The method-tier file covers philosophy-based clustering and basic transition criteria for moving from divergent to convergent thinking. The frameworks below provide structured evaluation and prioritization methods for when initial clustering produces too many viable themes or when the team needs quantitative input for Method 5 concept development.

### Impact/Effort Matrix

Position clustered themes along two axes: stakeholder impact (value delivered) and implementation effort (complexity, cost, time). This framework identifies quick wins, strategic investments, and low-priority items.

* Map each theme to a quadrant: high-impact/low-effort (quick wins), high-impact/high-effort (strategic investments), low-impact/low-effort (fill-ins), low-impact/high-effort (deprioritize).
* Use stakeholder value implications from the clustering rationale to assess impact rather than team opinion alone.
* Effort estimates at this stage remain rough. The goal is relative positioning, not precise estimation.
* Quick wins often make strong candidates for Method 5 concept development because they build momentum and demonstrate feasibility.

Coaching prompt: "For each theme, where does it fall on impact versus effort? Which themes deliver the most stakeholder value for the least complexity?"

### Dot Voting with Constraints

Structured voting where participants allocate limited votes across themes with distribution rules that prevent popularity bias and ensure breadth of evaluation.

* Each participant receives a fixed number of votes (typically half the number of themes, rounded up).
* At least one vote must go to a theme the voter did not personally contribute to during ideation.
* No more than two votes can go to a single theme, preventing dominant ideas from absorbing all support.
* Tally results and discuss themes with high variance (some voters enthusiastic, others uninterested) because they may represent polarizing but innovative approaches.
* For solo sessions, the user applies the same distribution rules across themes. The constraint of voting for themes not personally originated still applies: allocate at least one vote to an AI-generated or externally inspired theme.

Coaching prompt: "Distribute your votes across themes, but at least one must go to an idea that did not come from you. Where do the surprising concentrations appear?"

### Concept Clustering with Gap Analysis

After initial philosophy-based clustering, systematically validate coverage against the problem dimensions from Method 3 and the stakeholder perspectives explored during ideation.

* List the problem dimensions and stakeholder perspectives identified in Methods 3 and 4.
* Check each dimension and perspective against the current theme set: which are well-represented, which are underrepresented, and which are absent?
* Absent dimensions may indicate a gap worth returning to divergent thinking to address, or they may represent areas the team consciously deprioritized.
* Document gap decisions explicitly: "We chose not to address [dimension] because [rationale]." This prevents rediscovery of the same gap later.

Coaching prompt: "Looking at your themes against the problem dimensions from Method 3, which dimensions lack representation? Is that a deliberate choice or an oversight?"

### Weighted Desirability/Feasibility/Viability Scoring

Assign preliminary D/F/V scores to each theme with explicit weighting based on project priorities. This framework prepares structured input for Method 5 concept development rather than final evaluation.

* Score each theme on desirability (stakeholder want), feasibility (technical possibility), and viability (business sustainability) using a simple 1-3 scale.
* Apply project-specific weights: a research project may weight desirability highest; a cost-reduction initiative may weight viability highest.
* Use weighted scores to rank themes for Method 5 prioritization, not to eliminate themes outright.
* Document scoring rationale for each theme to support Method 5 concept development with traceable justification.

Coaching prompt: "Score each theme on desirability, feasibility, and viability. Given your project priorities, which dimension deserves the most weight?"

## Cross-Pollination from Analogous Industries

Cross-industry transfer is absent from the method-tier. Analogous industries face similar structural challenges with different solutions, and mining those solutions for transferable principles produces ideas that within-domain brainstorming cannot reach.

### Manufacturing to Software Transfer

Physical production line concepts translate to digital workflow problems when abstracted to their underlying principles.

* Kanban (visual workflow limits) maps to work-in-progress management and task sequencing in digital systems.
* Andon (immediate stop-and-fix signals) maps to real-time alerting and escalation protocols in software operations.
* Poka-yoke (mistake-proofing through physical constraints) maps to input validation, confirmation dialogs, and irreversible-action safeguards.
* Ask what physical constraint drives the manufacturing solution, then identify the analogous constraint in the target domain.

Coaching prompt: "What manufacturing practice solves a similar structural problem? What principle behind it transfers to your context?"

### Healthcare to Manufacturing Transfer

Patient safety systems address high-stakes coordination challenges that parallel manufacturing quality and safety requirements.

* Surgical checklists (pre-procedure verification) map to pre-operation equipment verification and startup protocols.
* Sterile field discipline (contamination prevention through zoning) maps to cleanroom protocols and environmental control procedures.
* Shift handoff protocols (structured information transfer) map to manufacturing shift changeover communication and knowledge continuity.
* Healthcare systems assume human fallibility as a design constraint. Manufacturing environments benefit from the same assumption.

Coaching prompt: "Healthcare assumes people will make mistakes and designs around that. How would that assumption change your approach to this manufacturing challenge?"

### Energy to Healthcare Transfer

Grid reliability and predictive maintenance patterns address monitoring and uptime challenges applicable to healthcare equipment and patient care systems.

* Predictive maintenance (sensor-driven failure anticipation) maps to medical device monitoring and preventive service scheduling.
* Load balancing (distributing demand across capacity) maps to patient flow management and resource allocation across care units.
* Redundancy design (backup systems for critical functions) maps to failover protocols for life-critical medical equipment.
* Energy systems prioritize continuous availability under variable demand, a pattern that transfers directly to healthcare environments with unpredictable patient volumes.

Coaching prompt: "Energy systems maintain reliability under unpredictable demand. What reliability patterns from grid management apply to your healthcare monitoring challenge?"

### Analogy Mining Protocol

A structured process for identifying the abstract principle behind an analogous solution and mapping it to the current problem constraints. Use this protocol when direct technique transfer is insufficient.

* Identify the structural challenge in the current problem: what type of problem is this? (coordination, reliability, throughput, error prevention, resource allocation)
* Search for industries that solved the same structural challenge under different constraints.
* Extract the abstract principle behind their solution: what makes it work, independent of domain-specific details?
* Map the principle to the current domain's constraints: what form would this principle take given our materials, users, and environment?

Coaching prompt: "What type of problem is this at its core? What industry solved that same type of problem, and what principle made their solution work?"

* All DT coaching artifacts are scoped to `.copilot-tracking/dt/{project-slug}/`. Never write DT artifacts directly under `.copilot-tracking/dt/` without a project-slug directory.
