Ideally we would like to brainstorm on a level playing field, one where everyone can speak plainly, stating ideas just as the person wished them to be stated without fear of judgment or reprisal. A playing field where a person's ideas are valued for the quality of the idea, not because of who said it. An environment where judg- ment of ideas is reserved until after all of the options have been presented and then evaluated in a way that efficiently structures the discussion to include everyone's opinion.

In recognition of these human dynamics, many advanced facilitation practices were developed to reduce conformity pressures. The most common techniques include: breaking up the large group into smaller teams; using Post-It notes, brain-writing sheets or idea cards to brainstorm silently; voting or assigning value with colored sticky dots which are then tallied and used to determine the direction of the session. These and many other paper-based techniques are simple, effective, and for the most part work well. We could say that they are the "first generation" of advanced meeting practices, making sophisticated use of flipcharts, paper, marking pens and whiteboards.

But now we have a different set of communication tools that are software based. These tools have allowed us to revolutionize meeting practices through
the development of the Electronic Meeting System (EMS).

Today's reality is a meeting room where every person has her own computer linked to a Local Area Network (LAN). Specially designed EMS groupware allows each person to type in ideas that are instantly shared with the entire group. Brainstorming takes place anonymously which encourages honest and open communication. There is less need to be "right" so bolder and potentially more revolutionary ideas are contributed more frequently.

Group synergy increases as "piggybacking" off one another's ideas becomes as easy as typing in a subsequent thought. A database keeps track of all ideas so the group can evaluate qualitatively via electronic discussion or quantitatively by voting, rating, ranking or placing them into categories. Results detail which ideas the group considers appropriate for further discussion and how much they agree or disagree on their value. If an idea is considered inappropriate by the group, this has been determined anonymously so no one need fear "loss of face." This makes it easier to support someone else's ideas and back down on your own position. It also cuts down on "violent agreement," "grandstanding" and other "being right" related meeting dynamics. Subsequent verbal discussions are therefore more focused and productive. In addition, everyone leaves the meeting with a printed report that details everything said, in their own words rather than paraphrased by a scribe.

The most important thing that people leave with however, is a sense that they were heard and that their ideas had a fair shake. This builds a very important dynamic for the brainstorming team. They have worked together for a common good not a personal gain. Their next efforts may be a little more open, with a little less focus on "being right" and a lot more interest in "doing the right thing." As the old saying goes, "nothing succeeds like success"!

Is this a dream come true? Not exactly, like all collaboration techniques it must be carefully woven into the fabric of a meeting's design with careful attention to strike a balance between computer-based and traditional meeting techniques. Nor is it beyond first generation. Certainly new technologies will find their way into the meeting room that, like EMS employ the best of what we know with the latest computer-based efficiencies.

Electronic Meeting Systems are just another step in our evolution as we learn to communicate more openly, listen more intently and continuously improve our world as collaborators.