I am curious as to how you get people to overcome constraints in idea generation when the solution involves say students. I think some people may be hesitant to suspend reality enough to say "let's just let students do whatever they want, whenever they want in the hallways with no teacher supervision" when that type of thinking naturally would have people thinking "WHOOAA THAT'S A REALLY REALLY BAD IDEA".

does this only only work in some instances? or does it matter who you put in the room or how you frame the question?

I like this concept and use it quite frequently when brainstorming although it gets me come criticism. The team of people I work with are all optimists, and they like to see the best in every idea, which blinders the fallacies and then we find ourselves after the fact trying to problem solve a solution to something else.

I like to treat every solution as a "worst idea" even if it is good. how is this idea bad? how might it fail? how does it fall short? what are the gaps? it helps to push thinking for solving those issues on the front end as opposed to having two separate sessions.

I like this idea but would have issues I think implementing it in my organization based on a culture that is very routinized and "solution oriented" I don't think it would lend itself to this type of system, even though it would probably lighten the room and generate some creative solutions. I normally like to challenge solutions presented with worst case scenarios and as such am seen as a pessimist (I call it being a realist), but I think this accomplishes a similar goal.

Oh man, does this speak to me. In my experience, sometimes people who have been in education awhile tend to be the worst at seeing new solutions. "This is how we've always done it"

-- well, it's not working anymore.... --okay, well let's try to make it work...

that's a viable option, but let's also not exclude that there might be newer tools available to make the solution more efficient, or let's involve newer people with fresher mindsets and get their opinions.

I think this sometimes limits innovation in my school at least.

As a Director of Technology at a school, I really like this idea, but I think investment in this type of strategy lies with the audience's perceived value of technology. We have some leaders who would sit in on these sessions and while it would be innovative to use tech to put new laces on old shoes, would rather put old laces on old shoes just because they don't like the new laces. getting buy in here could be challenging if you do not have the right people in the room, but then are you limiting creativity by excluding those people?

When we think about brainstorming we normally consider getting creative with an idea and not trying to limit that creativity in any way. But you still have to come in with some "Framework" in mind for getting the goal in place, otherwise with all these options available a creative session can become unproductive and have the complete opposite effect. I think identifying what type of session and the best tool to use before hand is important to ensuring that everyone is at least rowing in the same direction using the same appropriate quality tools to get there. not correctly identifying the tool for the session can create issues.