N
ominal Group Technique (NGT) is a process for generating and evaluating ideas. It is a form of brainstorming, but NGT has always had its own identity as a separate technique. The goals of Nominal Group Technique and Structured Brainstorming are the same—the generation of good, innovative, and viable ideas. NGT differs from Structured Brainstorming in several important ways.Most important, ideas are presented one at a time in round-robin fashion.
When to Use It
NGT prevents the domination of a discussion by a single person. Use it whenever there is concern that a senior officer or executive or an outspoken member of the group will control the direction of the meeting by speaking before anyone else. It is also appropriate to use NGT rather than Structured Brainstorming if there is concern that some members may not speak up or if the issue under discussion is controversial and may provoke a heated debate. NGT can be used to coordinate the initial
conceptualization of a problem before the research and writing stages begin. Like brainstorming, NGT is commonly used to identify ideas (assumptions, hypotheses, drivers, causes, variables, important players) that can then be incorporated into other methods.
Value Added
NGT can be used both to generate ideas and to provide backup support in a decision-making process where all participants are asked to rank or prioritize the ideas that are generated. If it seems
desirable, all ideas and votes can be kept anonymous. Compared with Structured Brainstorming, which usually seeks to generate the greatest possible number of ideas—no matter how far out they may be—NGT may focus on a limited list of carefully considered opinions.
The technique allows participants to focus on each idea as it is presented, rather than having to think simultaneously about preparing their own ideas and listening to what others are proposing—a situation that often happens with Structured Brainstorming. NGT encourages piggybacking on ideas that have already been presented—in other words, combining, modifying, and expanding others’
ideas.
The Method
An NGT session starts with the facilitator asking an open-ended question, such as, “What factors will influence …?” “How can we learn if …?” “In what circumstances might … happen?” “What should
be included or not included in this research project?” The facilitator answers any questions about what is expected of participants and then gives participants five to ten minutes to work privately to jot down on note cards their initial ideas in response to the focal question. This part of the process is followed by these steps:
* The facilitator calls on one person at a time to present one idea. As each idea is presented, the facilitator writes a summary description on a flip chart or whiteboard. This process continues in a round-robin fashion until all ideas have been exhausted. If individuals have run out of ideas, they pass when called upon for an idea, but they can participate again later if they have another idea when their turn comes up again. The facilitator can also be an active participant, writing down his or her own ideas. There is no discussion until all ideas have been presented; however, the facilitator can clarify ideas to avoid duplication.
* When no new ideas are forthcoming, the facilitator initiates a group discussion to ensure that there is a common understanding of what each idea means. The facilitator asks about each idea, one at a time, in the order presented, but no argument for or against any idea is allowed. It is possible at this time to expand or combine ideas, but no change can be made to any idea without the approval of the original presenter of the idea.
* Voting to rank or prioritize the ideas as discussed in chapter 4 is optional, depending upon the purpose of the meeting. When voting is done, it is usually by secret ballot, although various voting procedures may be used depending in part on the number of ideas and the number of participants. It usually works best to employ a ratio of one vote for every three ideas presented. For example, if the facilitator lists twelve ideas, each participant is allowed to cast four votes. The group can also decide to let participants give an idea more than one vote. In this case, someone could give one idea three votes and another idea only one vote. An alternative procedure is for each participant to write what he or she considers the five best ideas on a 3 × 5 card. One might rank the ideas on a scale of 1 to 5, with five points for the best idea, four points for the next best, down to one point for the least favored idea. The cards are then passed to the facilitator for tabulation and announcement of the scores. It may then be desirable to have a second round of voting to rank the top three or five ideas.
Relationship to Other Techniques
Analysts should consider Structured Brainstorming and Virtual Brainstorming as well as Nominal Group Technique and determine which technique is most appropriate for the conditions in which it will be used.
Origins of This Technique
Nominal Group Technique was developed by A. L. Delbecq and A. H. Van de Ven and first described in “A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science VII (July-August, 1971): 466-491. The discussion of NGT here is a synthesis of several sources: James M. Higgins, 101 Creative Problem Solving Techniques: The Handbook of New Ideas for Business, rev. ed. (Winter Park, Fla.: New Management Publishing Company, 2006);
www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/idea-creation-tools/overview/nominal-group. html;
http://syque.com/quality_tools/toolbook/NGT/ngt.htm; and www.mycoted.com/Nominal_Group_Technique.
5.4 STARBURSTING
S
tarbursting is a form of brainstorming that focuses on generating questions rather than eliciting ideas or answers. It uses the six questions commonly asked by journalists: Who? What? When?Where? Why? and How?
When to Use It
Use Starbursting to help define your research project. After deciding on the idea, topic, or issue to be analyzed, brainstorm to identify the questions that need to be answered by the research. Asking the right questions is a common prerequisite to finding the right answer.
The Method
The term “Starbursting” comes from the image of a six-pointed star. To create a Starburst diagram, begin by writing one of the following six words at each point of the star: Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. Then start the brainstorming session, using one of these words at a time to generate questions about the topic. Don’t try to answer the questions as they are identified; just focus on developing as many questions as possible. After generating questions that start with each of the six words, ask the group either to prioritize the questions to be answered or to sort the questions into logical categories. Figure 5.4 is an example of a Starbursting diagram. It identifies questions to be asked about a biological attack in a subway.
Relationship to Other Techniques
This Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How approach can be combined very effectively with the Getting Started Checklist and Issue Redefinition tools in chapter 4. Ranking, Scoring, Prioritizing (chapter 4) can be used to prioritize the questions to be worked on. Starbursting is also directly related to the analysis of cause and effect as discussed in chapter 8.
Origin of This Technique
Starbursting is one of many techniques developed to stimulate creativity. The basic idea for Figure 5.4 comes from the MindTools Web site at www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newCT_91.htm.
Figure 5.4 Starbursting Diagram of a Lethal Biological Event at a Subway Station
Source: A basic Starbursting diagram can be found at the MindTools Web site:
www.mindtools.com/pages/article/worksheets/Starbursting.pdf. This version was created by the authors.