I'm confused because I seem to be in more than one group.
Q: I'm confused because I feel like things can be looked at from many different sides and can categorize materials into multiple groups.
A: There is nothing wrong with that feeling.
Jiro Kawakita himself gives such an example in his association between islands of illustration.
https://gyazo.com/d70464b986bec83bc0d4cbe3c8b3227a
C is also like A and D, and in another sense like B and E. These double or triple lines of relationship are called crossed circles. For example, let's say you are struggling with the grouping phase before diagramming.
https://gyazo.com/7e1ec337ae18cce4aa150195e5696a8a
"C has a strong relationship with A, and a strong relationship with B, so which one should we stick with..."
If there is a strong relationship between both, why not one group of three?
https://gyazo.com/6cb805402fd309fde36789034b61957a
Why did you consider "A and B are different groups"?
Because A and B are not similar?
For example, how about this case
https://gyazo.com/e2098e253713f18561866c498074e2b3
Front cover "Cylindrical columns look both circular and square."
Circles and squares are not similar, seemingly unrelated, but they are connected through the cylinder.
Are you unconsciously ignoring these patterns?
Not necessarily "different groups because they don't look alike."
When you "collect things that seem to be related," do you implicitly define "related" as only "similar?"
I was curious about the use of the word "classification" in the question text. Classification is a narrower concept than KJ-method grouping, since classification is "to gather similar things together.
I think that there are cases where people have a chance to think once about whether the above cases apply to them and still say, "I still want a different group.
For example, a case like this
https://gyazo.com/d78990c25b34c37e06b319000b5cace3
E is closely connected to everyone in A-D, so I want him to be one of them, but he's also closely connected to everyone in F-I, so I want him to be one of them. If we put them all in one group, it would be too big, and A-D and F-I would fight with each other because they consider each other to be strangers to the other's camp...
In such cases, duplicating E will clear up the problem.
https://gyazo.com/07fc9411f361f657bc94b2c66a3cdb6f
If you make it a cross circle or connect the two E's with an equal when you illustrate it later, you'll know what I mean.
Sometimes when I try to put two groups like this and then put a nameplate on each one, I realize that I was focusing on different aspects of E!
The content of one label E can be verbalized in more detail in E after the fact by being placed in a different context.
The opinion of Jiro Kawakita.icon on a case similar to this is that "E should be ape". I often see people who resolve two or three small groups to form a larger group. This is because one or two pieces seem to be related to both Group A and Group B, and they try to solve the dilemma by creating a combined group of A and B, avoiding the one-sidedness of putting one of the pieces in either group. Instead, it is better to keep a monkey or two away from the problem and group A and B separately in a small eye. If it is natural, the A group, the B group, and the separate monkey pieces will all be grouped together in the second stage of grouping. (Continuing Ideas p.60-62) This means the idea that "the next step will be this form
https://gyazo.com/6cb805402fd309fde36789034b61957a
relevance
---
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/複数のグループに入りそうで戸惑う using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.