Random entry: force a random stimulus into the problem
Open a dictionary to a random word, then connect it to the problem — the forced association breaks the current pattern lock.
Why it works
The brain is primed to follow familiar associative pathways when confronting a known problem. A randomly introduced stimulus has no logical connection to the problem, forcing the mind to construct a bridge between two unrelated domains. That bridging process activates conceptual combinations not accessible from within the problem’s own frame — this is the same mechanism that makes analogical reasoning and creative metaphor productive.
How to do it
- State the problem clearly in one sentence.
- Open a book, dictionary, or random-word generator to a completely arbitrary word or image.
- List five attributes or associations of the random word without filtering.
- Force-fit each attribute back to the problem: "How could [attribute] change our approach to [problem]?"
- Generate as many bridges as possible before evaluating any of them.
Evidence
Remote-associates and forced-association tasks produce genuine creative outputs in lab settings; the random-entry technique is a practical application of the principle that distant conceptual combinations generate novel ideas. The specific technique is practitioner-reported and widely used in design contexts. (mechanistic)
Laboratory evidence supports forced association as a creativity technique generally; de Bono’s specific random-entry format has not been compared to controls in published trials.
Common mistake
Choosing a word that feels "relevant" rather than truly random, which defeats the mechanism — the point is to import a frame with no prior connection to the problem.
Practice this with IX Coach
More practices for Lateral Thinking, Made Practical
- Provocation (PO): make a deliberately absurd statement to escape the pattern
Prefix an impossible or absurd idea with "PO" to signal it is a provocation, not a proposal — then follow it to see what it unlocks.
- Concept fan: map the solution space before picking a direction
Expand from specific solutions to the broader concept behind them, then generate alternatives at the concept level.
- Challenge: systematically question why things are done the way they are
Ask "Why must this be this way?" for each element of the problem — not to be contrarian, but to find which constraints are real.
- Systematic alternatives: generate three more explanations before deciding
Force yourself to generate at least three alternative explanations or interpretations before committing to the first plausible one.
- Reverse brainstorm: solve the opposite problem first
Ask "How would we guarantee the worst possible outcome?" — then invert every answer.
- Use a stepping-stone idea: an intermediate impossible idea
Generate a deliberately impractical intermediate idea to use as a bridge to a practical one you could not have reached directly.
Related concepts
- Six Thinking Hats, Made Practical
Parallel thinking as an alternative to adversarial debate
- Osborn’s Brainstorming Rules, Made Practical
The original four rules, the mechanisms behind them, and what the research actually shows
- Divergent Thinking: Generating Many Ideas
Generating quantity, separating ideation from judgment, and why group brainstorming disappoints
Free to reuse under CC BY 4.0: cite or embed this practice · more practices graded Plausible mechanism