The term "KJ method" is vague
https://gyazo.com/a267bec405e211196d0566cec5be6fae
1: The "KJ method" was created.
Jiro Kawakita called it the "paper-kire method," and Tadao Umesao suggested the name "KJ method" (KJ method Let the chaos speak for itself p.212).
The purpose of this method was to "summarize" a large amount of qualitative data collected through fieldwork to find out what I wanted to know.
2: Jiro Kawakita taught the KJ method to others, and in the process, "the KJ method can be applied to various purposes," and it was applied to various purposes by Jiro Kawakita himself and others.
Because the objectives are different, the methods are also slightly different.
https://gyazo.com/a267bec405e211196d0566cec5be6fae
Jiro Kawakita uses the term "KJ method in the narrow sense" to refer to the original KJ method to distinguish it from these various KJ methods.
However, this is ambiguous when there are multiple narrowly-defined KJ methods, so I decided to call it "Beginning KJ method" on this page.
3: Let's call one of the many and varied applications of the KJ method a "KJ-legal workshop"!
https://gyazo.com/bb9caf5ba9dfdf8337ea2a94969d3b94
Imagine a workshop where you gather a large group of "people who have never studied the KJ method", write down their ideas on sticky notes, and discuss them together in groups.
The nature of the KJ method, which is "done for a large number of people who have never studied KJ before," made this the "first experience with KJ" for many people.
As a result, a lot of people recognized that "this is the KJ method."
However, this "KJ legal workshop" is at odds with the "Beginning KJ method" in many ways
川喜田二郎.icon The KJ method is not powerful without individual work.
川喜田二郎.icon 50 KJ method assumes 10 hours
So those who recognize this "KJ legal workshop" as "KJ method" will be confused when they read Jiro Kawakita's author
KJ method" is a low-resolution language, so it is necessary to improve the resolution of the language.
remarks
Some people say "this is not the correct KJ method" based on the fact that the KJ Workshop conflicts with the Beginning KJ method in many ways.
You have a point in that "this method is different from the KJ method in the beginning."
On the other hand, the choice of the word "right" has the bias of thinking that being different is a bad thing, imho.
It is natural that there are differences in methods since the purpose is different, and Jiro Kawakita himself has created a number of "methods different from the original KJ method" (pulse discussion, Expedition Net, Fireworks to think about, etc.; see The flow of birth of fireworks to think about). The flow of birth of fireworks to think about])
https://gyazo.com/cff575dca22b831cce37e9053c3a77d0
The quality of a method is determined by whether it is useful in achieving the objective. It is not determined by the degree of agreement with the beginning KJ method.
Related On the correctness of the KJ method.
---
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/KJ法という言葉は曖昧 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.