Some MBM mental models are more equal than others. The Challenge Process, essential to driving innovation, is one of those.  Yet despite the centrality of Challenge in an MBM culture, we tend to exploit only a portion of its potency.

The goal of the Challenge Process is “to find a better way” using the tools of “brainstorming and continual questioning.” These tools are complementary, the first creative and the second analytic. Yet we tend to focus on the analytic side, perhaps because “Challenge Process” conjures an image of challenging someone’s idea. Or perhaps because so many MBM mental models embed economic thinking that aids analysis. Or maybe we’re just naturally critical.

For whatever reason, this tendency creates an imbalance in the Challenge Process. It’s not that we spend more time analyzing; that may be entirely appropriate. The problem runs deeper: the analytic nature of “continual questioning” is antagonistic to the creative process.

If you have ever participated in a brainstorming session, you know the one cardinal rule: suspend judgment. No evaluations. Why? Because as soon as you start evaluating them, ideas stop flowing. The creative process grinds to a halt.

Efficient creativity requires us to suppress our inclination to immediately raise questions. To the extent that you introduce continual questioning into your brainstorming session, you will have fewer and probably less creative ideas to choose from.

To realize the full potency of the Challenge Process, you need to keep these two complementary components, brainstorming and questioning, separate and become adept at moving back and forth between them.

What do you think about this view of the Challenge Process? Do you find yourself continually questioning (or being questioned) to the detriment of generating new ideas?

Challenge Process