Aurora: We often recommend generating ideas as a group in-person, but for many teams that
just isn’t always possible.
Remote ideation can be challenging, but it is definitely possible to effectively collaborate
even if you’re in a geographically distributed team.
Kate: In fact, remote ideation opens up several options for generating group ideas, making
it a useful tool even when you could actually meet in the same physical space.
When you're planning to conduct remote ideation, the first thing to have to decide is whether you want
to ideate synchronously or asynchronously.
Aurora: Synchronous ideation would be most similar to conducting an in-person workshop.
In synchronous ideation sessions, team members contribute ideas together, in a pre-arranged,
fixed period of time.
For example, everyone might hop onto a video meeting or screen-sharing platform for an
hour to conduct the session.
Kate: Asynchronous ideation, on the other hand, allows people to contribute ideas to
a shared document or message thread over a longer period of time.
For example, you could use a dedicated Slack channel or a Google Doc where people could
add their ideas whenever something came to mind.
Aurora: Each of these methods have both upsides and downsides.
Synchronous ideation allows for more team-building, and can get results in a short amount of time
because it’s more intense and focused.
But, you need to find and set aside time on everyone’s calendar, and you might have
to deal with more group dynamics issues, like uneven communication from the various team members.
In addition, it can be hard to find the right tool to allow everyone to remotely participate,
especially if you want to be able to share sketches.
Kate: With asynchronous ideation, team members can
contribute whenever their schedule allows, which gives people the time and space to let
things marinate and maybe they end up with a greater number of ideas.
However, this can also lead some people to overthink and second-guess ideas before contributing
them.
Also, people can easily lose interest and forget to revisit the shared document to continue
contributing ideas.
Lastly, asynchronous ideation takes more time: not only in terms of allowing people to contribute
over the course of a few days, but also because people must spend time getting back up-to-speed
each time they revisit the document.
Aurora: Neither method is necessarily better than the other, and each have their place
in your ideation practice.
Synchronous sessions might work best when you need to generate and choose an idea quickly,
to be able to move forward in the design process.
Or when the situation is complex, and requires more back-and-forth discussion, and the ability
to talk through potential solutions together.
Kate: Asynchronous ideation is great when there isn’t a fast-approaching deadline
and so you have the luxury of a longer timeline to contribute ideas.
Gathering ideas asynchronously can also be a life-saver when everyone’s schedule is
packed or maybe everyone is in conflicting time zones, so finding a specific common time
to meet is nearly impossible.
Aurora: And of course, it doesn’t have to be an
either-or situation!
You could conduct a synchronous ideation kickoff meeting to talk through the issue at hand
and perhaps capture some of the team’s initial ideas, then open up a shared document or thread
for people to continue asynchronously contributing their ideas for a designated period of time
after that meeting.
Or you could gather the ideas asynchronously for a few days leading up to a shared, synchronous,
ideation session.
Kate: Try out a few different formats and tools for remote ideation to find what works
best for your team.
You’ll likely find that each ideation session calls for a different solution.