Reverse brainstorm: solve the opposite problem first

Ask "How would we guarantee the worst possible outcome?" — then invert every answer.

Why it works

The forward problem (how do we achieve X?) often stalls because existing mental models tightly constrain what solutions seem plausible. The reverse problem (how do we guarantee failure?) is usually much easier to brainstorm, because failure modes are less value-laden and easier to generate without self-censorship. Inverting the failure list produces a set of suggestions unconstrained by the social pressure to seem reasonable.

How to do it

1. State the goal: "We want to achieve X."
2. Restate it as its opposite: "How would we guarantee we never achieve X?" or "How would we make this as bad as possible?"
3. Brainstorm freely on the negative version — the worse the better.
4. Invert each failure mode: if A causes failure, then not-A is a candidate success lever.
5. Evaluate the inverted list for actionable insights.

Evidence

Inversion as a thinking tool is endorsed across multiple problem-solving traditions (Charlie Munger’s "invert, always invert"; premortem analysis in decision science). Premortem research shows that imagining failure before a project begins reveals overlooked risks that forward planning misses. (observational)

Klein’s premortem research is about project risk identification; the inversion as a creative-solution-generation technique is an extension of that principle, not separately trialed.

Sources

• Klein (2007), performing a project premortem, Harvard Business Review

Common mistake

Generating polite or surface-level failure modes ("we don’t communicate well enough") rather than genuinely devastating ones — the more extreme and specific the failure, the more useful the inversion.