Brainstorming · Business Analysis Notes

What it is#

The BABOK® Guide describes brainstorming as a way to generate many ideas in a group through non-judgmental discussion. Variations include individual brainstorming and brainwriting, where ideas are written rather than spoken.

Leffingwell and Widrig make the structure explicit: brainstorming has two phases, generation and selection, and they should never mix. Generation is about quantity; selection is about quality.

Andersen describes written variants and follow-on techniques that fix known weaknesses of the classic spoken session:

Crawford slip method: participants write ideas on slips or cards. It gives anonymity, which helps when conflicts in the group would stifle open discussion. In a card-passing or gallery-wall variant, people can also build on each other’s ideas.
Nominal group technique: gives everyone an equal voice. Each person writes ideas, the ideas are pooled and clarified, then each participant privately picks and ranks up to five (five points for the most important down to one). The facilitator adds up the points.
Affinity diagram (KJ method, after Jiro Kawakita): ideas on sticky notes are grouped silently by the participants, then the groups are named and links between them drawn. It reveals connections that logical discussion misses.

When to use it#

When you need options: solution ideas, causes to investigate, risks, features, names.
When planning the analysis approach or preparing for elicitation, to explore what might matter.
When a group is stuck in one way of thinking.

When not to use it, or what to add: brainstorming depends on the participants’ creativity, and organizational culture or tense relationships can suppress it. If one person dominates, use brainwriting or the nominal group technique. If you need to explore one person’s knowledge in depth, use Interviews. For more systematic idea generation, see Methods for Generating Alternatives.

How to do it#

Prepare (from the BABOK Guide):

Define the topic as a clear question, for example “How could customers learn the status of their repair without calling us?”
Set a time limit.
Invite a facilitator and a small group; the BABOK Guide suggests six to eight participants with varied perspectives.
Explain the process and expectations.
Agree in advance the criteria you will use to evaluate ideas.

Generate:

Share ideas without discussing or criticizing them. Record every idea where all can see it.
Encourage unusual ideas and building on other people’s ideas. Do not limit the number of ideas.
If the group is uneven, have everyone write ideas silently first, then share in turns.

Select (combining the BABOK Guide and Leffingwell and Widrig):

Prune ideas that are clearly unworkable. Leffingwell and Widrig note that a fair number of wild ideas is a good sign the group thought freely.
Group duplicates and related ideas; an affinity diagram works well here.
Clarify: ask each idea’s author to state it in one sentence so everyone reads it the same way.
Prioritize against the agreed criteria. Options include nominal-group ranking, cumulative voting (Leffingwell and Widrig caution that it tends to work only once per project, because people learn to game it), or weighted categorization: each participant labels each idea critical, important or useful, and the scores are summed with weights of 9, 3 and 1.
Wrap up: send the final list to participants and record the next steps.

Example#

At The Workshop (a fictional chain of 12 bike-repair shops), the analyst runs a 45-minute session with two workshop managers, two mechanics, two front-desk staff and a developer. The question: “How could customers learn the status of their repair without calling us?”

In ten minutes of silent writing and round-robin sharing, the group produces 34 ideas, including automatic text messages, a status page, a screen in the shop window, photos sent by the mechanic, and a “call me only if it’s late” option. After pruning and grouping, eight ideas remain. Weighted categorization gives this top three:

Idea	Critical	Important	Useful	Score
Automatic message at each repair stage	6	1	0	57
Message when waiting for parts, with new date	4	3	0	45
Online status page with booking number	2	3	2	29

The results go into the backlog as candidate stories.

Common mistakes#

Judging ideas during generation → hold all evaluation until the selection phase; the facilitator enforces this.
A vague topic → phrase one clear question.
The loudest voice wins → use silent writing, round-robin sharing or the nominal group technique.
No criteria for selection → agree criteria before the session.
Ideas recorded in the facilitator’s words → let authors clarify their own ideas in one sentence.
No follow-up → send results and next steps, or people will not invest next time.

Checklist#

The topic is one clear question.
Time limit, facilitator and six to eight varied participants are set.
Evaluation criteria are agreed in advance.
Generation and selection are kept separate.
Everyone had an equal chance to contribute.
Ideas were pruned, grouped and clarified by their authors.
A prioritization method was applied and the result recorded.
Results were sent to participants.

Sources and further reading#

IIBA. A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABOK® Guide), version 3. International Institute of Business Analysis, 2015. Technique 10.5 “Brainstorming”.
B. Andersen. Business Process Improvement Toolbox. ASQ Quality Press, 1999. Ch. 9 (Crawford slip method, nominal group technique, affinity diagram).
D. Leffingwell, D. Widrig. Managing Software Requirements: A Unified Approach. Addison-Wesley, 2000. Ch. 10–11 (requirements workshops, brainstorming and idea reduction).
Business analysis training materials (practice examples and templates): course slides on planning and monitoring.