idea generation being measured as an output of 2 strangers brainstorming on a random product seems too distant from the scenario in which most creative ideas ar

idea generation being measured as an output of 2 strangers brainstorming on a random product seems too distant from the scenario in which most creative ideas are actually created. my experience in real-world enviros: + no single variable is dominant across all + trust can be important and often is easier to build in-person + pairs or teams with trust can innovate over any medium + a degree of randomness can be helpful and feels underrated to me. it can help us see through blind spots, assumptions, or biases which we didn't realize we had by taking a conversation to a place in which we may not have otherwise taken it, or making us think through a problem in a different way. this randomness can come from many places, including 'outsiders' (experts in other domains is great, but so are newbies)