• Continuing on from the recent story about how all “multi-person idea generation” methodologies naturally involve “the cost of convincing everyone that it is beneficial to do so” and “the cost of educating everyone on how to do it,” many people don’t take this into account.

  • The more people, the higher the cost, but there is an advantage to having more than one person: “A strong incentive to verbalize the unverbalized is generated.

  • I don’t know of any advantage to being more than three people.

  • So it would be good to focus on the “two-person” method instead of trying to do it with a large number of people at once.

  • There are two ways of doing things, one in which the partner can be educated on how to do it beforehand, and the other in which he or she cannot, and the latter can be used in more situations. First published 2014-05-21

Read this in 2018 to supplement

  • It is only when you and Mr. A generate a “strong motivation to verbalize what is not verbalized” that you and Mr. A
    • Tell Mr. A what you think.
    • I ask Mr. A questions and elicit answers from him.
  • There are two, and what I am imagining here is the latter.
    • clean language, and the idea that techniques that encourage others to verbalize may be beneficial.

Different context, but quite relevant.

The basic rule is “1 person → 2 persons → Entire”.


This page is auto-translated from /nishio/大勢ではなくまず二人から 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.