Submitted by lilith on
As a follow up to a previous question I had posted, I am asking for some input on how to suggest MT. In particular, the Feedback Model.
My department will be meeting with HR and a consultant to review the results from a survey conducted by HR. After the review, we have the choice to decide as group if we would like to perform "mind mapping" or brainstorming. I have not done mind mapping, I don't know what it is. I would prefer to suggest MT tools.
My question is, how to introduce MT with this consultant present? We have been working with this consulting firm for almost 5 years. Not much has changed in the 5 years we have been working with this consulting firm.
Right now, I am thinking of the "And, not But" cast.
Any other ideas? I appreciate all input.
Do not take what I say personally, I am giving you professional advice having been in charge of learning and development for my division for five years.
I caution you against projecting your beliefs onto others. There are at least three different learning styles, one visual, where mind mapping may resonate more. I'm somewhat surprised that HR is focusing on only one solution.
To answer your question, I would remind you to pre-wire the meeting. In this case talk to the others in the room besides the consultant, prior to the meeting to determine their interest in MT.
If you go head to head with MT versus mind mapping or MT versus brainstorming, without pre-wiring you face long odds of success. If it's possible to suggest a strategy where all three are offered in a form of beta testing, then you may be able to bundle MT in there with the others.
apples and oranges
It seems like you are comparing apples and oranges here. Mind mapping, brainstorming, and MT are not incompatible or mutually exclusive.
Mind mapping and brainstorming are methods of thinking through causes and solutions, and rapidly generating a lot of ideas around a topic - in this case, results of a survey - whereas most of the "MT tools" you've learned in the podcasts are going to be your solutions. With any methodology used to analyze complex problems, the effectiveness of the meeting and the quality of the results is going to correlate strongly to the skill of the facilitator. Suggesting that the facilitator conduct the review the MT way, without him/her having training on how it's different, probably won't get you better results.
I'd let them use whatever methodology they are most comfortable with to analyze the survey results, and instead focus on how you can bring really good content into the meeting. What kind of content can you bring to the meeting? Well, you can bring an arsenal of SOLUTIONS pulled from the MT podcasts. And you can suggest those as part of the meeting, regardless of the format/methodology being used to analyze the problem. For example, if the analysis of survey results shows that people feel they don't get enough input from their managers, that's when you chime in and talk about the trinity and how it has worked for you. If the analysis shows a trend where people are complaining of too much time spent in "useless" meetings, that's when you suggest what you've learned from MT about how to run meetings effectively. If the mind map has a section on how the performance appraisal system needs improvement, you can suggest that regular one on ones and feedback help prevent surprises and make it easier for the manager to write an accurate and complete review. You see the pattern...
(By the way, please spend 5 minutes on the wiki page for Mind Mapping to learn what it is before you dismiss it. To say you'd rather not use it just because you don't know what it is strikes me as less than stellar.)