Nearly 80 years ago, advertising executive Alex Osborn introduced the concept of brainstorming.
His insight was simple but powerful: if people felt safe to share ideas without judgment, creativity would flourish.
He had a number of rules: Suspend criticism, aim for quantity, build on each other’s thoughts — and better ideas would emerge.
For decades, brainstorming became the default method for generating ideas in organisations, classrooms, and workshops.
In fact for many people, it was the only way to generate ideas.
And yet, despite its popularity, traditional brainstorming has long struggled to deliver on its promise.
The problem with brainstorming
I have found the following issues with even the best run brainstorming sessions:
Not everyone thinks at the same speed or in the same way.
Some people need quiet reflection, others think visually, some process internally before speaking.
In a live group setting, these differences often work against creativity rather than supporting it.
And worse, the group needs to slow down to its slowest member.
There is also an issue of social loafing. The idea that you can rely on the ideas of others (e.g. Julie is the creative one, lets leave it to her).
Lound voices can dominate (it’s why when i run groups i put the loudest voices in their own group), this gives the introverts some space to contribute.
Then there is the issue of self-editing (e.g. this is a silly idea) or public editing (e.g. the leader crosses their arms).
Then there is the issue of group think.
Once a direction emerges, alternative perspectives quietly disappear.
Ironically, the very activity designed to expand thinking often narrows it.
And from my experience there is little thought about how to evaluate ideas, enhance these or what are the next steps.
And lastly brainstorming is usually treated as a single event: “Let’s get everyone in a room and come up with ideas.”
It relegates creative thinking to a once a quarter event rather than the building of a muscle you can use every day.
There’s little structure for what happens before or after — how ideas are developed, combined, or meaningfully evaluated.
So while brainstorming remains well-intentioned, it’s often inefficient, uneven, and emotionally draining.
A Big Leap Forward: Brainstorming to the power of AI.
When generative AI arrived, many assumed it would simply replace brainstorming:
“Why get a group together when AI can generate 100 ideas in seconds?”
But this misses something important.
AI doesn’t just generate ideas — it changes how humans think, especially when used well. The real opportunity isn’t human or AI brainstorming. It’s human × AI brainstorming, designed around switching between individual and collective thinking.
This is where brainstorming evolves — not by abandoning Osborn’s insight, but by upgrading it.
Brainstorming to the power of AI
A better approach looks like this:
1. Individual thinking — powered by personal AI
Before any group discussion, each person works individually with their own AI.
They might:
- Generate three ideas
- Create an image or metaphor representing an idea
- Explore a “what if” that feels risky or unfinished
This happens privately, without judgment, pressure, or performance.
Why this matters:
Everyone arrives with something to contribute. Originality increases. Confidence rises. Quiet thinkers have just as much material as fast talkers. AI becomes a thinking partner, not a shortcut.
2. Switch to team thinking — humans × AI
Now the group comes together.
Instead of starting from zero, the team works with AI to:
- Enhance the strongest ideas
- Connect ideas that might combine into something better
- Evaluate ideas using clear criteria — energy, feasibility, emotional pull
AI supports the conversation, but humans lead the judgment. The room shifts from idea generation to sense-making.
This is where collective intelligence shines.
3. Switch back — from ideas to action
After the discussion, individuals or sub-teams take ownership. AI is used again to refine, test, prototype, or plan next steps.
The process is no longer a one-off brainstorm. It’s a loop — individual ↔ team, divergent ↔ convergent, creative ↔ critical — powered by deliberate switching.
Why this works
This model solves the original problems of brainstorming rather than amplifying them.
- It respects individual differences
- It reduces social pressure and groupthink
- It separates idea generation from evaluation
- It turns AI into a multiplier of human insight, not a replacement
Most importantly, it reframes brainstorming as a skill, not an event — a way of moving fluidly between modes of thinking.
From brainstorming to better thinking
Osborn gave us a breakthrough for his time. But the world — and our tools — have changed.
Today, the most powerful ideas don’t come from shouting ideas into a room or asking AI for a list. They come from switching: between solo reflection and shared dialogue, between imagination and judgment, between human intuition and machine intelligence.
That’s brainstorming — to the power of AI.
And it’s only just beginning.