Knowledge base
Articles about what goes wrong when a group decides together, and what does work. Written from the practice of Group Concept Mapping.
What happens when a group decides together.
In almost every workshop it is not the best idea that wins, but the one voiced first. What exactly happens there, and what you can do about it.
A questionnaire feels objective, but mostly measures what its author already had in mind. What you miss, and when something else serves you better.
Agreement in the room says little. What does make support visible, and why division is more useful than consensus.
The energy of a good session rarely survives the following week. What goes wrong between meeting and decision, and how to fix it.
Choices you make up front that shape the outcome.
The question you start with sets the limits of what can come out. One word of difference produces either unusable or genuinely sharp themes.
Fewer than you would think, and the number matters less than the spread. What the figures say about group size.
Two axes instead of one show where to start, and why the easiest topic is seldom the right one.
What the figures and the map do and do not tell you.
Some statements sit firmly within one theme, others float between them. That floating is not noise but a finding.
Teachers and administrators rarely look at the same problem the same way. Measuring that difference is more useful than smoothing it over.
A map shows what is at play. A causal model shows what carries through when you intervene in one place.
Accountability, and where the method comes from.
The method is not only a workshop format but a recognised research method. Where it fits in a research design.
Language models can take a lot of work off your hands, but not the step that matters. Where the line runs.
