mind mapping in executive education applications and outcomes

Journal ofManagementDevelopment18,4

390

Journal of Management Development,Vol. 18 No. 4, 1999, pp. 390-407.# MCB University Press, 0262-1711

Mind mapping in executiveeducation: applications and

outcomesAnthony J. Mento

Loyola College in Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Patrick MartinelliJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, and

Raymond M. JonesLoyola College in Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Keywords Executives, Management education, Outcomes

Abstract Developed by Tony Buzan in 1970, mind mapping is a revolutionary system forcapturing ideas and insights horizontally on a sheet of paper. This paper illustrates the techniqueof mind mapping, and highlights its specific applications in a variety of contexts based on ourwork in executive education and in management development consulting. Positive outcomes of theapproach are described as well as reactions of executive students to mind mapping. We concludewith a rationale of why we believe mind mapping works with executives.

In our Executive MBA (EMBA) program, which was established in 1973 and isone of the ten oldest in the USA, students must skillfully balance a full-time job,social life, and full load of graduate courses simultaneously for the duration ofthe two-year program. Professors strive to continuously improve the content oftheir courses by having student teams design marketing studies, consult withsmall businesses (Lamond, 1995), run simulated international businesses(Nicholson, 1997), and design information systems for local businesses.Educators in management development programs also strive to enhance theprocess, the way in which courses are delivered ( i.e. team taught, cross-functional, distance learning). We are actively involved in discovering (throughconsulting and reading) and applying active learning methodologies developedfor industry or the military to enable students to become more effective atanalyzing, integrating, and consolidating new information. We also strive toincrease the effectiveness and quality of our students' learning in order toprovide them with a competitive advantage in the marketplace.

Storyboarding, a creativity-enhancing and problem-solving technique(Humes et al., 1995) taught to our students, was developed by Walt Disney in1928 and extensively and successfully applied in a total quality managementeffort by utility company Florida Power and Light. This was the first Americancompany to win the coveted Japanese Deming prize (Hart et al., 1989). Anotheractive learning method used at our school (all the work reported here wasaccomplished when all three authors were affiliated with Loyola College) since1991, is mandatory development of lessons learned by each student based onhis or her learning from and reflection on class assignments, team projects, and

Mind mapping inexecutiveeducation

391

prior career experiences (Barclay, 1996). This learning-after-doing reflectionexercise, described by Garvin (1995) as a process rarely used by most USorganizations, was introduced to our school in 1991 by a colleague who learnedthe technique in the US military. Refer to Sullivan and Harper (1996) whendiscussing After Action Reviews and the Center for Army Lessons Learned andBaird et al. (1997).

One of the most frequently used pedagogical techniques in graduatebusiness programs involves the use of case teaching. Teachers who are adeptat lecturing are not necessarily effective case leaders (Christiansen and Hansen,1987; Shapiro, 1985). Successful case teaching requires patience, a willingnessto encourage open student participation, and (perhaps most importantly) anability to subtly stimulate productive dialogue over a long period of time(Barnes et al., 1994; Rangan, 1995). We have found mind mapping to be apowerful tool for case teaching, especially in EMBA programs, where studentsare required to gather, interpret, and communicate large quantities of complexinformation. It is an extremely effective technique for sharpening the thinkingand learning process (Buzan, 1989).

Mind mapping is a creativity- and productivity-enhancing technique thatcan improve the learning and efficiency of individuals and organizations. It is arevolutionary system for capturing ideas and insights horizontally on paper. ``Itcan be used in nearly every activity where thought, planning, recall orcreativity are involved'' (Buzan, 1989). Starting with a central image and keywords, colors, codes, and symbols, mind mapping is rapidly replacing the moretraditional methods of outlining and note taking in workplaces around theworld (Margulies, 1991). The proliferation and use of mind mapping softwarehas and will continue to accentuate this trend. Figure 1 is an adaptation ofTony Buzan's (1989) mind map of the uses of mind maps. (Buzan inventedmind mapping and the term mind map is a registered trademark of the BuzanOrganization, 1990). Figure 1 depicts six main uses of mind mapping as mainbranches emanating from the central idea. Detailed associative ideas are shownradiating from each of these main branches.

Visual note taking has existed for centuries, as evidenced by cave drawingsof primitive man, hieroglyphics of ancient Egypt, and sketches of greatthinkers such as Michaelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci. According toMargulies (1991), before we learn a language as children, we visualize picturesin our mind which are linked to concepts. Unfortunately, creative channels areoften blocked when children are trained to write only words in one color onlined paper.

A mind map allows the user to record a great deal of information on onepage, and to show relationships among various concepts and ideas. Visualpresentation of ideas helps one to think about a subject in a global, holisticsense and increases mental flexibility. On a mind map structures of the subjectcan be seen in a way that is not possible with linear outlines. Think of the lasttime you prepared a lecture or wrote a paper. How difficult was it to get started?How exactly did the process flow? When creating an outline, the writer has to


392

wait until the first idea appears, Roman numeral one; then wait until anotherthought comes that follows in exact order and is a subset of the first one.Obviously our brains do not work that way; we have numerous thoughts,images, mental pictures, and impressions that occur simultaneously. Linearnote-taking systems such as outlining cannot keep pace with the complexity ofour thoughts but mind mapping can.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the technique of mind mapping andto highlight specific applications in a variety of contexts based on our work inexecutive education and management development consulting. We providespecific examples of mind maps that our students have produced, and describepositive outcomes due to this approach. Pilot data regarding studentexperiences with mind mapping are briefly discussed and our paper concludeswith why we believe this technique works.

What is mind mapping?Mind mapping was developed by Buzan in 1970 (Buzan and Buzan, 1996) afterreviewing research on the psychology of learning and remembering. Accordingto Buzan and Buzan (1996):

The mind map is an expression of radiant thinking and is therefore a function of the humanmind. It is a powerful graphic technique which provides a universal key to unlocking thepotential of the brain. The mind map can be applied to every aspect of life where improved

Source: Buzan (1989)

Figure 1.Uses for mind maps


393

learning and clearer thinking will enhance human performance. The mind map has fouressential characteristics:

(1) The subject of attention is crystallized in a central image.

(2) The main themes of the subject radiate from the central image as branches.

(3) Branches comprise a key image or key word printed on an associated line. Topics oflesser importance are also represented as branches attached to higher level branches.

(4) The branches form a connected nodal structure.

Mind mapping represents a powerful aid for stimulating whole brain thinking(Buzan, 1989). It engages the often inactive right hemisphere of the brain byemphasizing spatial and visual language; it focuses on spurring creative aswell as logical thought patterns. Whole brain thinking has become moredesirable in today's business environment as firms must innovate to meetintense competitive pressures. Survival and growth in the marketplace demanda continuous stream of new and different products and improved processes forcreating and delivering value. Integrative and creative thinking requires theprocess of left- and right-brain thinking to produce synergistic outcomes.

Left- and right-brain thinkingThe upper brain is divided into two equal parts, the left and right hemispheres.The right hemisphere controls the left side of the body and the left hemispherecontrols the right. The two sides are connected by the Corpus Callosum, a hugecomplex of fibres that allows both sides to be in constant communication witheach other. Discovery of the dual nature of the human brain is usuallyattributed to the physiological psychologist Robert W. Sperry (1968). Sperry'spioneering split-brain research and his work on neurospecificity was rewardedwith the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1981 and the National Medal of Science in1990, among other awards. Concurrent with Sperry's work was that of Ornstein(1977) who garnered worldwide fame for his studies of brainwaves andspecialization of brain function. The essence of what Sperry and Ornsteindiscovered was that the two sides of a person's brain, or cortices, dealdominantly with different types of mental activity. In most people, the leftcortex is concerned with logic, words, reasoning, numbers, linearity, andanalysis ± the so-called academic activities. The right cortex is more in the``alpha wave'' or resting state; it deals with rhythm, images and imagination,color, daydreaming, face recognition, and pattern or map recognition (Buzan,1989).

Zaidel (1983) continued Sperry's work at the University of California. Hediscovered that each hemisphere contains many more of the ``other side's''abilities than was previously thought, and that each hemisphere is capable of amuch wider and more subtle range of mental activities (Buzan, 1989). Buzan(1989) provides evidence suggesting that Einstein, Picasso, Cezanne, and daVinci apparently used both sides of their brain in producing their most famouscontributions. When human beings are effective at thinking creatively, they useboth hemispheres. Failure to strike a balance in the double brain results in less


394

than optimal creative thought and application. In some cases, an imbalance canresult in dysfunctional thinking and suboptimal outcomes like groupthink(Janis, 1983).

In the Western world, thinking shows a decided bias toward the use oflinear thought patterns when processing information, perhaps due to a highregard for Newtonian perceptions of the universe. Whatever the reason,formal learning activities in primary, secondary and post-secondaryeducation traditionally stress linear thinking by emphasizing logic,sequence, and quantification. Linear thinking and decision making relyheavily on analysis, ordering of information in a definite pattern, and use ofprecise taxonomy. De Bono (1990) distinguishes between the two thoughtprocesses when he asserts that linear thinking is essentially selective in that``. . . one selects the most promising approach to a problem, the best way oflooking at a situation. With lateral thinking one generates as manyalternative approaches as one can''. For De Bono, vertical thinking isselective; lateral thinking is generative.

If creativity relies on a Tao that balances the positive aspects of both lateraland linear thought processes, what mechanism is needed to accomplish thisdesired effect? How can an organization encourage thinking that is generativeas well as selective and provocative as well as analytical? How can anorganization stimulate non-sequential thought? Stated another way, how canorganizations internalize in their members a need to question continually allparadigms related to existing products and processes. Mind mapping providesthe answer; it is a tool that requires the use and interworking of both upperbrain hemispheres (Buzan, 1989).

How students learn how to develop mind mapsOne way we introduce students to mind mapping is by presenting anintroductory lecture that includes the history of the approach (Buzan, 1970), theright brain-left brain distinction (linear versus generative or lateral thinking),and some uses for mind mapping. This takes about one hour, then students areinvolved in one or two hands ± on exercises facilitated by the professor. Toprovide a sense of realism and practical utility for mind mapping, students nextwork on a specific pre-assigned case study. Randomly configured teams arechosen and asked to focus on a particular aspect of the case, i.e. they areassigned one specific case question. Student teams are encouraged to discussthe question as a group for about 20 minutes, then each student is asked togenerate his or her own mind map based on the specific assigned team casequestion. As students work on the assignment, the professor roams theclassroom in order to identify which student from each team produced the bestand most effective mind map for class presentation. One person from each teamis carefully chosen to present their mind map to the class. We are careful here toensure that students are exposed to a variety of different types of mind maps,some containing hand-drawn icons and pictures and others being simply wordsand ideas.


395

An alternative to this approach,when time is of the essence, is to send eachstudent enrolled in the course a packet of information a few days before classbegins containing: 1) a brief description of mind mapping; 2) a more descriptivediscussion (six pages) of mind mapping information found on the Internetusing the alta vista search engine for the key words ``Mind+Map''. Thisinformation includes a set of mind mapping ``laws'' developed by Buzan (1989)which include:

. Start with a colored image in the center.

. Use images throughout your mind map.

. Words should be printed.

. All printed words should be on lines, and each line should be connectedto other lines.

. Words should be in ``units'', i.e. one word per line.

. Use colors throughout the mind map.

. The mind should be left as free as possible to make associations andconnections.

In addition, a set of five or six excellent mind maps from previous classes, aswell as a short course-relevant article is included in the packet sent to studentsto allow them to practice mind mapping.

To also get students thinking in terms of mind mapping, the first class andmuch of the future class board work developed by the professor is in the formof a mind map. For example, in the first class the agenda is mind mapped andsuperimposed on the overall course logic and sequencing of material that isfound in the syllabus. This role modeling is an effective impetus to the mindmapping process based on informal student feedback after the first few classesin different courses.

Applications of mind mappingBecause of its robust ability to evoke generative or non-linear thinking, themind map has been used in many ways. Some of the more popular usesinclude writing, meeting management, project management, brainstorming,activity lists, visual aids, memory improvement, note taking, teaching,studying, personal growth, and presentations. One of the first ways that weused mind mapping with our students was to capture the essence or keypoints of an assigned reading in the form of descriptive mind maps.

Descriptive mind mapsOur experience in EMBA programs provides a snapshot of the use of mindmaps. In a typical executive MBA course, a number of articles or readingsare assigned each week centering around a particular topic. In most cases,all of the articles are related logically to a business case to be discussed. Forexample in our Leadership and Organizational Behavior course when


396

performance appraisal and managing networks of relationships arediscussed, we assign these articles: ``Managing your boss'' (Gabarro andKotter, 1993), ``Deming's demons'' (Bower, 1991), and ``A solution to theperformance appraisal feedback enigma'' (Meyer, 1991). Students areexpected to read all of the material for each class and remember the essenceand key concepts of each article. For the fall semester of 1997 we asked aspecific student or team of students to mind map particular articles for eachclass. Figure 2 depicts a team's mind map of the ``Deming's demons'' article.Dr Deming's central ideas of learning from the Japanese, that cooperationnot competition is the basis for optimizing a system, that theory is thefoundation of knowledge, and that intrinsic motivation (pride and joy in thework) are primary determinants of worker behavior, are captured within thewavy diagonal line. Ideas to the left of the wavy diagonal enclosure suggestpoor practices and outcomes related to practicing management byobjectives and management without theory. Process and outcomes inharmony with Deming's thinking are displayed to the right of the wavyenclosure.

One student from each team was asked to brief the class on the mind mapfor a particular article. An unanticipated benefit of a well-developed mindmap was that students were able to give concise, clear descriptions of the key

Figure 2.Mind map of Deming'sdemons (1991) article


397

points of an article without notes or apparent nervousness. It is important tonote the use of icons and symbols in mind maps. One explanation of whystudents are able to deliver confident presentations without notes goes backto the inherent nature of mind mapping. It is a non-linear technique whichallows the user to capture idiosyncratic information of importance. Users aremore likely to remember because they select the information to go in themind map, organize and display it in non-linear format for recall, andinternalize it because it is their unique representation of the information.According to Buzan and Buzan (1996), the more one learns and gathers newdata in an integrated, radiating, organized manner, the easier it is to learnmore.

Along these lines, Schneider and Bowen (1995) note that people naturallyform a ``cognitive schema'' (a type of mind map) in their minds that allows themto make efficient sense of how different things in the world work. Theseschema organize how we experience the world and determine how we integrateinformation from our surroundings. New information is integrated into existingschema, even when the information is different from what we have experiencedin the past. For example, in a service situation, if service has been great in thepast, a not-so-great experience may not readily change our overall impression.The reverse is also true; if service has traditionally been poor and we have asingle good experience, our overall impression is that it remains poor. As a rule,it takes a significant amount of different information to change a customer'sprevailing impression of a business' service quality.

Integrative mind map applicationsAs the fall semester progressed, we moved past descriptive mind maps to thosethat captured key insights and concepts from a number of articles. Theadvantage of this approach is that it enabled higher-order thinking by forcingstudents to go beyond concrete thinking to a more analytical and conceptualapproach. With this method, students were asked to integrate three differentreadings into a case analysis and to capture the essence of a week's worth ofwork on a one-page mind map. For this particular situation, the topic wasleadership; the readings were ``Four star management'' (Finegan, 1987), Ch. 6 inThe Essence of Leadership (Locke and Associates, 1991), and the Kouzes andPosner Leadership Model (Kouzes and Posner, 1987). The case to which all ofthe readings were logically related was Mahatma Gandhi and the video Gandhi(Briley, 1983). Figure 3 displays one team's integrated mind map. The mainbranches of the mind map include the four key components of Locke'sleadership model: motives and traits; knowledge, skills, and abilities;developing a vision; and implementing the vision. The associative ideas andimages radiating from the branches integrate events in the Gandhi case andvideo with ideas from Kouzes and Posner and ``Four star management''.

Students were required to see logical connections and common themes andconcepts between the readings and the case and video. Although this mind maptook the team many hours to produce, it effectively captured the majority of


398

key learning for the week. The team that produced the mind map commentedthat producing a written case analysis (which the team was required to do)after the integrative mind map was completed was fairly simple. This was thefirst integrative mind map that a team developed and it was so well done thateveryone in class requested a copy.

Figure 3.Team developedintegrated mind map ±Mahatma Gandhi case


399

Mind mapping with the case analysis processWe use business case studies on a regular basis and have found mind mapping tobe a powerful analytical tool. To maximize the effectiveness of case analysisclasses, these classes must be carefully planned and orchestrated (Rangan, 1995).For each class during the semester, we assign three or four articles to augment thecase to be analyzed. The readings are carefully chosen to provide both a context aswell as important concepts to help students understand the case. For each class, aspecific student is assigned on the first day of the semester a specific article orreading to mind map, as part of his or her grade. A typical class begins as follows:we introduce the topic, establish the context, and deliver a brief lecturette. Toreview the week's assignment, each student who has been assigned a mind mapfor that particular day brings a transparency to class as well as copies for everyonein class. The students explain their mind maps, answer any questions and areasked to conclude their presentations with the three most important things theywill take to their job as a result of mind mapping the readings. After the studentshave finished their presentations and answered questions from the class (30-45minutes), we proceed with the case analysis phase of the class. For each caseassigned during the semester, students receive a set of three to seven casediscussion questions (part of their syllabus on the first day of class). The explicitpurpose of case discussion questions is to cue and sensitize students to importantissues in the case, and help them prepare for the case discussion.

We conduct the case analysis in one of two ways; the first approach involveswriting the overall theme of the case on the board in the center box of a to-be-developed mind map. The professor then generates a number of key issues thatgo on the ``branches'' around the central theme. For example, we use the Tibergcase as an opening case in our leading change course. In the center box of themind map, we write ``Tiberg ± key change issues''. (The Tiberg case concerns afumbled attempt by the newly hired VP of purchasing, Mr Porte, to impose asignificant top-down change within a decentralized organization.) Typicalconcepts laid out on ``branches'' emanating from the central box are:

. culture of the organization;

. power base for Mr Porte;

. problem definition;

. implementation process;

. political issues;

. recovery strategy; and

. role of strategists, implementors, and recipients.

We identify as many branch issues as there are executive MBA (EMBA) teams(most EMBA programs use a team format from the first day of classes). Eachteam member is assigned one of the specific branch concepts to work onindividually for ten minutes. The professor then facilitates the development ofone mind map for the entire class as each individual's input is solicited in a


400

focused brainstorming fashion. After about 45 minutes of questions, discussion,and evaluation, the board is filled with key ideas that capture the essence of thelearning outcomes of the case. This approach involves both linear and non-linear thinking since structure (left-brain thinking) is provided to students viathe branch concepts of the mind map, developed by the professor. This mindmap is later refined, as key concepts are consolidated and integrated.

A second approach frequently involves facilitation of the case discussion bya pre-assigned team. The facilitating team presents their agenda on anoverhead and briefly reviews the key facts in the case using a timeline (ifappropriate). The team then randomly divide the class into five teams. Underthis scenario, the number of teams created corresponds to the number of casediscussion questions previously provided all students in preparation for theday's class. Each extemporaneously created team is asked to mind map one ofthe case discussion questions. (One advantage of random assignment ofstudents to teams for the exercise is that students work together with classmembers other than those on their formal teams with whom they have beenassociated for the past two years.) Each extemporaneously created team workson the assigned question as a group for 15 to 20 minutes, and is expected togenerate a mind map on flip chart paper or transparency for presentation to theclass. A representative from each team presents their team's mind map to theclass and fields any questions. Using this approach to mind mapping for caseanalysis produces five mind maps corresponding to the number of teamsassigned discussion questions to work on. With this approach, the discussionquestions provide the structure or guiding logic for the exercise.

The third use for mind maps in case analysis occurs at the end of class. Ourgoal in this instance is to capture final student meaningful insights fromstudents, as well as provide a sense of closure to the class' work for that day.We write ``Today's lessons learned'' in the center of the mind map and askstudents to think about what they have learned from preparing for classindividually, thinking about the material, and class discussion. Students areallotted ten minutes to reflect individually and to generate ideas. This processcan be conducted in teams after initial individual reflection, or left as anindividual exercise. If time permits, one advantage of the team approach is thatit allows team members to reflect on and share their lessons learned, and testthem for clarity before presenting to the class as a whole. When time does notallow for this approach, the mind map is developed by calling on classmembers to share the important ``take aways'' that they will remember. Classends with distribution and discussion of a mind map prepared by the professorthat contains key lessons and learning outcomes developed from teaching thecase over the years to a variety of clients and students. This closing handoutprovides a bounded structure for creative ideas generated by the class as awhole in developing the last mind map. The way in which we use mindmapping in our case analysis classes involves a blending of structure andcreativity (left- and right-brain thinking). The structure is provided by theprofessor who specifies core concepts to work on (in the Tiberg case), uses


401

previously assigned discussion questions in the second example, and, in thefinal example, asks students to integrate lessons learned developed by the classin the final mind map with those provided in the structured handout. Theintegration of all of these activities occurs with a required assignment forstudents to develop a two-page personalized set of lessons learned for eachclass during the semester.

Mind maps and group process analysisA key component of our EMBA program first-year skills-building component isbuilding effective teams (Rushmer, 1997). Students are required to work in teamsat their first meeting, in a three-day, in-residence session that meets before theformal academic part of the program begins. During the residence, students learnand experience team development as they work together on challengingproblems in various performance contexts (Katzenbach and the RCL team, 1995).Students are taught to be very cognizant of their team's group process (i.e. howthey function as a group, whether or not they adhere to the mutually agreed-uponnorms on team functions that members have developed as a team (``code ofconduct''). Towards the end of the semester, in the leadership and organizationalbehavior course, each team performs an analysis of their group's functioning,using a mind map format. The class assignment focuses on team strengths,weaknesses, and suggests opportunities for improvement.

Existing teams use team-building concepts to identify specific areas forimprovement. For existing teams, team building involves three steps. The teamfirst conducts a diagnosis of how it is functioning. A useful tool is the teamprocess checklist used extensively with our clients for team process diagnosis. Atthis point, a meaningful mind map should be generated by an individual teammember or by the team. The mind map is used as a primary tool to facilitate thenext step, discussing group process data. At this point the team is tasked with thethird step, formulating an acceptable action plan to improve the team process. Atypical action plan focuses on redefining team roles and responsibilities, changingmeeting patterns and decision making, and more clearly defining goals andobjectives (Beer and Holland, 1989). A mind map is used to facilitate this actionplanning phase. The team-building process described for existing teams is acontinuous improvement activity that requires periodic follow-up.

Positive outcomes from the mind mapping processA number of our executive students have made clear and forceful presentationsusing only a transparency of their mind map and with no fumbling with notecards. After carefully developing their mind maps, these same executives areable to handle challenging and probing questions in a confident and succinctfashion, without hesitation. We believe that self-confidence and mastery of thepresented material can be attributed to information which is better rememberedsince it has been captured and stored spatially, rather than linearly.

In our management development training programs and consultingactivities with various firms, we ask our students to reflect carefully on


402

significant blocks of new learning material that we have covered and generatea set of lessons learned. This standard assignment stems from our strong beliefthat self-reflection is extremely critical for learning, and that writing personallessons learned is the best way for students to own and remember importantmaterial (Daudelin, 1996; Barclay, 1996). Capturing learning based on one'swork experiences is one of the building blocks for establishing a learningorganization. We typically ask our clients to reflect on new learning concepts,ideas, frameworks, and materials in a way that is personally meaningful totheir lives. Specifically we ask them three questions:

(1) ``What did you learn?''

(2) ``Why was it important?''

(3) ``How can you apply it?''

For the authors, use of mind maps has become almost second nature. We usemind maps to develop the agenda and plans for each class, which allow forconsiderable flexibility and last-minute improvements. We typically beginwriting papers by developing a detailed mind map which serves as the maindriver to the process of creative thinking. In developing a managementdevelopment program for first-level supervisors, one of the authors first mindmapped the overall themes to be developed in the three-day training session.More detailed mind maps were developed with colleagues that depicted adetailed hour-by-hour agenda of the materials and concepts to be presented aswell as learning outcomes desired. The unanticipated advantage was that themind maps could be presented to our clients and to explain where we were goingwith the training and why and how it fitted their needs. In addition, changescould be quickly made in pencil or electronically to the mind maps andconnections could be made between non-obvious topics as the discussionprogressed.

Some time ago, one of us noticed that he was mentally mind mapping the homilydelivered by our parish priest during the Christmas service. He quickly arrived atthe conclusion that it lacked a basic underlying logic related to the key theme!

What our students tell us about the mind mapping processPreliminary data collected from pilot questionnaires with over 70 executivestudents generally indicate that they are very pleased with the power andsimplicity of the technique, and its significant advantage over linear note takingfor recall and creative thinking. Those who are most enthusiastic about usingmind mapping are like ``apostles'' of the technique, passionately spreading theword to their spouses, children, and colleagues at work. All of our samplerespondents agreed that one becomes much better with mind mapping with timeand practice in a variety of different contexts. Respondents also agreed that mindmaps that are used for integrating sets of materials (as seen in Figure 3) tend tobe more highly valued than mind maps used for purposes of description.


403

Not everyone is enamored with the technique . Although in our pilot sampleof 70 students there were a number of students with technical degrees, threefrom this subsample tend to prefer the top-to-bottom bullet outline approach tonote taking and idea generation. We believe that the difficulty these studentshave with mind mapping rests more with our explication of the process thanwith the logic and content of the concept itself. Mind mapping would be a veryeffective tool for these individuals to practice using since it allows one to breakaway into right brain or more creative thinking. Dee Hock, a founder of theVisa credit card and a member of Fortune magazine's Business Hall of Fame,argues about creativity:

The problem is never how to get new, innovative thoughts into your mind, but how to get oldones out. Every mind is a room packed with archaic furniture. You must get the old furnitureof what you know, think, and believe out before anything new can get in. Make an emptyspace in any corner of your mind, and creativity will instantly fill it (Waldrop, 1996).

The following unsolicited quotes pertaining to mind mapping were receivedfrom four of our executive students as part of the lessons learned assignment inthe leading organization change class:

Student 1.

The introduction to "mind mapping" was truly an introduction to me. I guess I considermyself a "visual" person, whereby I can remember where on the page of a reading a certainsentence or thought appeared. For me, that's a first remembrance ± better than the content ofthe message itself. Consequently, utilizing "mind mapping" to convey to the class (and tomyself) the meaning of some of our readings was a revelation.

It seems so strange when one learns something new such as a technique like ``mindmapping'' and the process is so simple to understand and to integrate into one's studymethods that you find yourself seeing things in ``mind mapping'' ways.

I even started taking notes using a ``mind mapping'' technique. Then I noticed that Dr________ used ``mind mapping'' as he filled the walls with lecture material. Then theculminating realization ± my challenge of change is the use of ``mind mapping'' to learnthings in a new way with both retention and understanding not always existent in the past.

Student 2.

The first tool I was exposed to in this class was mind mapping. I must admit, at first glance, Icould not understand how it could be useful or exactly why I should try to apply this tool. As Ireflect, I am disappointed that this was my first impression. I would like to think that onething I got out of this program is open-mindedness and a more innovative approach tobusiness, organizations, and problem solving. None the less, I was skeptical. However, afterseeing the mind maps that have been presented so far, I am really pleased with this tool. It is agreat way to get all of our ideas on the table, make some sense and order of them and see the"big picture". When reading books or business documents, often times so much informationis presented that it is difficult to organize and truly understand the total meaning andconcept. This tool goes a long way to solve that problem. Additionally, a big problem myorganization has when having meetings is that the groups are usually very large and a fewplayers dominate. If this tool is used, everyone's ideas are acknowledged and considered. Onewould think a tool would not be necessary, but my experience has been that without somediscipline, there are people who do not ``get their say''. Unfortunately for the organization,these could be the best learnings and ideas. Finally, for me personally, I plan to use this tool toprepare for presentations. Currently, I feel as if sometimes my delivery is not as smooth as itcould be because my thoughts are not organized well.


404

Student 3.

The last thing I wanted to mention was that I was excited to learn about mind mapping. I hadnot heard of this, and I find it to be a fascinating exercise. I have never been fond of publicspeaking but I think that this type of mapping will make speaking in public and evenchairing meetings more productive and less threatening.

Student 4.

Mind maps are a very effective means of note taking. They are highly personalized (whendone properly) and can be used very effectively for presentations. I was fortunate to have thetask of preparing a mind map for ______________. I was able to talk at length about anarticle I had read only twice and at times during the presentation I added to the article. I alsotested the usefulness of mind maps by not looking at it for three days before the presentation.The result: I was happy with my presentation and now I have a useful tool to add to myrepertoire. In addition, one of my many weaknesses before starting this program was fear ofpublic speaking. I have overcome this challenge and the mind map will only increase myconfidence.

From other student comments and our own observations, it helps to besomewhat artistic when developing mind maps because the use of icons orsymbols can be very powerful. Fortunately, mind mapping software existswhich greatly facilitates the development of mind maps, including suchpackages as Visio and Mind Man and Visi Map. Competently developed mindmaps can also be created with Power Point. These packages significantlyenhance the use of mind mapping for either public explanation or instructionalpurposes.

Mind mapping and metaphorical thinkingAnother subtle but very useful outcome of mind mapping is that it introducesstudents to the efficacy of using metaphors in their thinking processes. Byadding a visual and spatial dimension to generating and selecting information,mind maps show how metaphors promote ease of understanding when oneelement of experience is described in terms of another. Using mind maps leadsto the realization that metaphors are a very useful means for interpreting,understanding, and communicating complex phenomena. (Refer to theHartwick College teaching case Jesus and the Gospels.) Through developmentand use of mind maps, students are better able to conceptualize how oneelement of a business situation can be understood in terms of another throughbenchmarking; grasp the advantage to be gained by quickly achieving acomprehensive view of business situations; understand how illustrativelanguage gives important identity to business situations; and realize thatfigurative thinking provides new ways to gain useful insights. (For analternative view, Carr (1997) cautions about the potential perils of metaphor-based mindframing.)

A powerful example of mind mapping lessons learned was experiencedrecently with a group of 40 executives. Following a tour of the Gettysburgbattlefield on which the bloodiest battle of the American Civil War was fought,


405

various executives were asked to reflect on what lessons they had learned fromthe tour that could be utilized in their businesses. Without exception everyonereported to the larger group in a mind mapping format.

Summary and conclusionsMind mapping brings a renewed sense of enthusiasm to the classroom becauseit tends to increase one's sense of competence in mastering the assignedmaterials. In effect, mind mapping serves the purpose of enhancing one'sintrinsic motivation (i.e. those aspects of work that we do joyfully just for thesake of doing). Deming (1994) discusses this phenomenon when he says thatpeople are motivated to produce high quality work when they take ``pride andjoy in the work''. Regardless of the reading load or complexity of the articles,mind mapping allows a user to grasp and depict the essence of each article on asingle page. By analyzing a series of mind maps one is able to refine andintegrate work across readings and articles into one coherent set of ideas,which are easily manageable and understood. The restriction of using just onepage to capture the essence of an article or book chapter forces one to beefficient and thoughtful in choosing those concepts and ideas that are mostimportant for understanding and for remembering.

Perhaps mind mapping is best explained by Buzan and Buzan (1996). Theystress that mind mapping works because it involves radiant thinking which isthe natural and virtually automatic way in which human brains function. Theystate:

Your brain's thinking pattern may thus be seen as a gigantic, branching association machine(BAM) ± a super bio computer with lines of thought radiating from a virtually infinite numberof data nodes. This structure reflects the neuronal networks that make up the physicalarchitecture of your brain.

. . . From this gigantic information processing ability and learning capability derives theconcept of radiant thinking of which the mind map is a manifestation. . .a mind map, which isthe external expression of radiant thinking always radiates from a central image. Every wordand image becomes in itself a subcentre of association, the whole proceeding in a potentiallyinfinite chain of branching patterns away from or towards the common centre. Although themind map is drawn on a two-dimensional page it represents a multi-dimensional reality,encompassing space, time and colour.

Research by Sperry (1968), Ornstein (1977) and Zaidel (1983) . . . ``would leadyou to conclude that a note-taking and thought organization techniquedesigned to satisfy the needs of the whole brain would have to include not onlywords, numbers, order, sequence, and lines, but also colour, images,dimensions, symbols, visual rhythms; in other words, mind maps'' (Buzan,1989). The nature of the mind map is concerned with the function of the mind,and can be used in nearly every activity where thought, recall, planning orcreativity is involved (Buzan, 1989).

Our work is now focused on systematically examining the relationship ofmind mapping to the reflection process required in developing lessons learned(Garvin, 1995). In addition we are examining an optimal way to combine mindmapping and storyboarding (Forsha, 1995) to significantly enhance learning,


406

memory, and creativity. Our future research is designed to extend the use ofmind mapping. To the extent that executive readers are not involved with thispowerful cognitive technique, the following vignette may be provocative. Werecently worked with the top management team from the US subsidiary of alarge UK multinational. They conducted a strategy review utilizing mindmapping. They subsequently presented this strategy to their UK headquartersgroup in mind mapping format. Within that firm, mind mapping is nowbecoming a global activity. Be forewarned that mind mapping may become apart of your competitor's competitive advantage.

References

Baird, L., Henderson, J.C. and Watts, S. (1997), ``Learning from action: an analysis of the center forarmy lessons learned'', Human Resource Management, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 385-95.

Barnes, L.B., Christiansen, C.R. and Hansen, A.J. (1994), Teaching and the Case Method: Text,Cases, and Readings, 3rd ed., Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Barclay, J. (1996), ``Learning from experience with learning logs'', Journal of ManagementDevelopment, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 28-44.

Beer, M. and Holland, P. (1989), Note: An Introduction to Team Building, No. 9-489-095, HarvardBusiness School Publishing, Boston, MA.

Bower, J.L. (1991), Deming's Demons, No. 9-391-070, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Briley, J.(1983), Gandhi, Attenborough, R. (Producer and Director), RCA/Columbia Pictures HomeVideo, Columbia Pictures, Burbank, CA.

Buzan, T. (1970), Make the Most of Your Mind, Colt Books, Cambridge.

Buzan, T. (1989), Use Both Sides of Your Brain, 3rd ed., Plenum, New York, NY.

Buzan, T. and Buzan, B. (1996), The Mind Map Book: How to Use Radiant Thinking to MaximizeYour Brain's Untapped Potential, Plume, New York, NY.

Carr, A. (1997), ``The learning organization: new lessons/thinking for the management of changeand management development'', Journal of Management Development, Vol. 16 No. 4,pp. 224-37.

Christiansen, C.R. and Hansen, A.J. (1987), Teaching and the Case Method, 2nd ed., HarvardBusiness School Press, Boston, MA.

Daudelin, M.W. (1996), ``Learning from experience through reflection'', Organizational Dynamics,Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 36-49.

De Bono, E. (1990), Lateral Thinking: Creativity Step by Step, HarperCollins, New York, NY.

Deming, W.E. (1994), The New Economics: for Industry, Government, Education. 2nd ed.,Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Advanced Engineering Study,Cambridge, MA.

Finegan, J. (1987), ``Four-star management'', Inc., January, pp. 42-51.

Forsha, H.I. (1995), Show Me: The Complete Guide to Storyboarding and Problem Solving, ASQCQuality Press, Milwaukee, WI.

Gabarro, J.J. and Kotter, J.P. (1993), ``Managing your boss'', Harvard Business Review Reprint93306, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Garvin, D.A. (1995), Putting the Learning Organization to Work: Learning after Doing, HarvardBusiness School video No. 7099.


407

Hart, C.W.L., Maher, D. and Montelongo, M. (1989), Florida Power and Light QualityImprovement (QI) Story Exercise (A), No. 9-689-041, Harvard Business School Publishing,Boston, MA.

Humes, D., Thompson, G.W. and Noyes, D.G. (1995), Make Your Meetings Count: HowStoryboarding with Ideas Can Help Your Work Team Plan, Solve Problems, Make BetterDecisions, 2nd ed., Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, IA.

Janis, I.L. (1983), Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign Policy Decisions andFiascoes, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, MA.

Jesus and the Gospels, Case Study 6-317, Hartwick Classic Leadership Cases, HartwickHumanities in Management Institute, Hartwick College, Oneonta, New York, NY.

Katzenbach, J.R. and the RCL Team (1995), Real Change Leaders: How You Can Create Growthand High Performance at Your Company, Times Business, New York, NY.

Kouzes, J.M. and Posner, B.Z. (1987), The Leadership Challenge: How to Get ExtraordinaryThings Done in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Lamond, D.A. (1995), `Ùsing consulting projects in management education: the joys and jitters ofserving two masters'', Journal of Management Development, Vol. 14 No. 8, pp. 60-73.

Locke, E.A. and Associates (1991), The Essence of Leadership, Lexington, New York, NY.

Mahatma Gandhi, Case Study 9-437, Hartwick Classic Leadership Cases, Hartwick Humanitiesin Management Institute, Hartwick College, Oneonta, New York, NY.

Margulies, S. (1991), Mapping Inner Space: Learning and Teaching Mind Mapping, Zephyr,Tucson, AZ.

Meyer, H.H. (1991), `À solution to the performance appraisal feedback enigma'', Academy ofManagement Executive, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 68-76.

Nicholson, A. (1997), ``Bringing management reality into the classroom ± the development ofinteractive learning'', Journal of Management Development, Vol. 16 No. 5-6, pp. 38-52.

Ornstein, R. (1977), The Psychology of Consciousness, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, NY.

Rangan, V.K. (1995), Choreographing a Case Class, No. 9-595-074, Harvard Business SchoolPublishing, Boston, MA.

Rushmer, R. (1997), ``What happens to the team during team building? Examining the changeprocess that helps to build a team'', Journal of Management Development, Vol. 16 No. 5-6,pp. 316-28.

Schneider, B. and Bowen, D.L. (1995), Winning the Service Game, Harvard Business School Press,Boston, MA.

Shapiro, B.P. (1985), Hints for Case Teaching, No. 9-585-012, Harvard Business SchoolPublishing, Boston, MA.

Sperry, R.W. (1968), ``Hemispheric deconnection and unity in conscious awareness'', ScientificAmerican, Vol. 23, pp. 723-35.

Sullivan, G.R. and Harper, M. (1996), Hope Is Not a Method: What Business Leaders Can Learnfrom the American Army, Random House, New York, NY.

Tiberg Company (1987), No. 9-487-079, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Waldrop, M.M. (1996), ``The trillion dollar vision of Dee Hock'', Fast Company, Vol. 1 No. 5,pp. 79-84.

Zaidel, E. (1983), `À response to Gazzaniga: language in the right hemisphere: convergentperspective'', American Psychologist, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 542-6.

mind mapping in executive education applications and outcomes

Documents