Reflection - Visulaization

Challenge & Selection  I work for an automotive Tier 1 supplier. I received from an engineering department a very

specific need (specific design criteria) that they collected from their customers. My task was

to facilitate a brainstorming session with experts from diverse technical fields. As an output

they expected to have a portfolio of product ideas that they can further investigate. The

challenge was dual. Firstly the need addressed a very well known problem. Secondly there

was a trivial solution for the problem. So I expected that the minds of the participants will be

highly biased and so it will be hard to come up with a diverse solutions.    Accordingly I planned a meaningful, visual space to let them play with the “what if” question.

In this space they were invited to start from scratch and build up a new solution from basic

elements. (As a reference for visual tools I used S. Brown, J. Macanufo Gamestorming:

Playbook for Innovators, Rulebreakers and Changemakers) I picked a modified ​4C matrix for

initial node generation. A table based ​forced ranking of the combination of nodes, product

ideas. Finally based on the ranking the idea portfolio was visualized on an ​impact & effort

matrix ​(map).     Application  In the first step we collected nodes in the 4C matrix addressing one cell at a time. The

modified 4C had the following elements:

● use ​c​ases (ways how the imaginary product is used)

● c​haracteristics (technical features of the solution)

● c​omponents (HW, SW elements that could be a part of the product)

● c​hallenges (potential difficulties in solving the problem)

In the following step solution proposals (product ideas) were generated from the nodes. A

coherent set of nodes from each element of the 4C were grouped into an idea, represented

by a row of a table with 2x3 columns. I mean by coherent set e.g.: a set of technical features

that can be used to cover certain use cases, etc. In the first two column they grouped use

cases and characteristics. Based on this the participants gave an impact ranking to the idea

(3rd column). In the 4th and 5th column they put components and challenges respectively

and used it to give an effort rank (6th column). Showing how difficult to develop the product.    Finally, in accordance with the rankings we put the ideas on an impact & effort map. Based

on the landscape seen there the participants reviewed the idea portfolio and modified it in a

way to cover the 3 meaningful quadrants of the map and thus have a balanced portfolio.

(Low impact-high effort quadrant should be avoided if there are other choices)    Insight & Approach  The obligation to select coherent sets of freely generated nodes of the 4C matrix forced the

participants to come up with distinct ideas around the trivial one, and even far from that. It

even helped them to understand that the thing which is a trivial idea for a first glance, can be

understood in different ways. Thus it is several valuable idea in reality. The impact & effort

map helped to refine the result of the pure forced ranking. Participants organically tended to

draw areas on the map instead of points to represent where an idea is situated. They made

bigger, smaller circles just like snake- and tower-like drawings.    Even though I tried this visual space for the first time, it worked quite well in general, but

there were some takeaways for me as a facilitator: The first version of the impact & effort

map showed that we have majority of the ideas in the cash cow quadrant (low effort - high

impact). The participants realized that this cannot be true. Consequently they tried to fix it

somehow, but they could not really do it. I think this happened because the range during the

forced ranking was not set and/or I did not pay enough attention to give proper guidance.

The second issue was that the participants got really excited on a completely new idea and

they spent a lot of time discussing feasibility. This diverted them from working out other

ones. So I believe we left some good ones undiscovered. Next time I will make sure that

they stay focused on their task and try to come up with a tangible example to set the ranges

for forced ranking.

