Q: I often use the KJ method to generate ideas, but it stops at brainstorming and I don’t do much in the way of writing.
A: What a waste!
Even if at the illustration stage you somehow think, “A is why B is,” but when you put it in writing and write, “A is why B is,” it’s like, “What? Is that really true?” Isn’t that a logical leap?” You will start to feel like, “What? This is a chance for creativity, [Questions encourage verbalization.
Why is it B if it’s A?” and then you realize, “If A, then C, and if C, then B.”
- This is something that had not yet been verbalized, but now it has appeared in the form of C and can be used for future thought components.
- This newly acquired component can make the text more compelling and help you better understand what you see in future activities.
Another pattern is, “I assumed it was ‘B’ because it’s ‘A,’ but it’s not, okay?” This can also be the case.
- It’s funny when you say, “A, therefore C, and C, therefore B?”
- ‘What we’re calling this C, there’s a C1 and a C2, and they’re two different things, and we were getting confused by calling them both C.’
- In this case, the concept that we used to call by the term C is newly divided into C1 and C2, allowing us to perceive the world at a higher resolution.
- Related: Cognitive Resolution.
Diagramming in the KJ method is like looking at the scenery from an airplane, while narrating is like landing in a city and taking in the sights. It is a waste to look at a sightseeing spot from above and think you have experienced it; you can actually walk around the city and see what it has to offer.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/文章化しないのはもったいない using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.