Delphi vs. Brainstorming: Choosing the Right Path for Group Decision-Making

 Decision-making in groups is a critical process for organizations, governments, and research communities because collective input often generates stronger, more resilient solutions than individual decision-making alone. Among the wide range of group decision-making methods, the Delphi technique and brainstorming represent two contrasting but highly effective approaches. Each method has unique strengths, limitations, and ideal contexts of use. By comparing and contrasting these approaches, we can better understand when and how they can contribute to sound decision-making.

The Delphi technique is a structured process that relies on anonymity, iteration, and expert input to reach consensus. Originally developed by the RAND Corporation in the 1950s for military forecasting, Delphi is now widely applied in business, healthcare, and policy development (Hsu & Sandford, 2007). Participants, usually subject-matter experts, respond to questionnaires in multiple rounds. After each round, responses are aggregated and shared with the group, allowing individuals to refine their answers without the pressure of direct confrontation (Mahajan et al., 1976). The process continues until a clear trend or consensus emerges. For example, a hospital system might use the Delphi technique to forecast future staffing needs by collecting repeated input from physicians, nurses, and administrators until common priorities are identified. The strength of Delphi lies in its ability to minimize bias from dominant personalities and to leverage expertise in a systematic way.

Brainstorming, on the other hand, is a far less formal process that encourages free-flowing ideas in a group setting. Coined by advertising executive Alex Osborn in the 1940s, brainstorming is designed to foster creativity by suspending judgment and encouraging participants to generate as many ideas as possible, no matter how unconventional (Osborn, 1993). Ideas are captured and evaluated later, after the session. For instance, a product design team might hold a brainstorming session to develop new features for a mobile app, where every participant contributes freely before the group refines the list into actionable concepts. The value of brainstorming is its ability to encourage participation, inspire creative thinking, and generate a wide variety of ideas in a short period of time.

The two methods share some similarities. Both rely on group input, emphasizing the principle that collective intelligence is often greater than individual insight. Both also attempt to reduce the limitations of individual decision-making by drawing on multiple perspectives. Additionally, each method has been adapted for digital platforms, making them accessible to distributed teams. Online brainstorming tools, such as Miro or MURAL, allow virtual idea generation, while Delphi has been integrated into survey platforms to reach experts across geographical boundaries (Okoli & Pawlowski, 2004).

However, the differences between Delphi and brainstorming are more striking. Delphi is highly structured, relies on iteration, and is designed for achieving consensus on complex issues (Hasson et al., 2025). Brainstorming is unstructured, fast-paced, and oriented toward idea generation rather than convergence (Paulus et al., 2023). Delphi tends to be slow and resource-intensive, requiring multiple rounds of surveys, while brainstorming can be completed in a single session (Hsu & Sandford, 2007). Moreover, Delphi’s anonymity protects participants from groupthink and social pressures, while brainstorming often risks dominance by louder or higher-status participants unless carefully moderated (Paulus & Nijstad, 2019).

Ultimately, the choice between Delphi and brainstorming depends on the decision-making context. Delphi is ideal for situations requiring expert judgment, long-term forecasting, or sensitive issues where bias needs to be minimized. Brainstorming is more appropriate for creative problem-solving, product design, and environments where innovation is valued over consensus. Organizations that understand these distinctions can deploy the right method for the right situation, or even combine both approaches, using brainstorming to generate ideas and Delphi to refine and prioritize them.

 

References:

Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2025). Revisiting the Delphi technique - Research thinking and practice: A discussion paper. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 105119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2025.105119

Hsu, C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 10. https://doi.org/10.7275/pdz9-th90

Mahajan, V., Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (1976). The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(3), 317. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150755

Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations, and applications. Information & Management, 42(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002

Osborn, A. F. (1993). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem-solving (3rd ed.). Creative Education Foundation.

Paulus, P. B., Baruah, J., & Kenworthy, J. (2023). Brainstorming: How to get the best ideas out of the “group brain” for organizational creativity. In Elsevier eBooks (pp. 373–389). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-91840-4.00019-0

Paulus, P. B., & Nijstad, B. A. (2019). The Oxford handbook of group creativity and innovation. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190648077.001.0001