Beyond Mind Mapping

Vic's Picks and BiggerPlate competition

Late as always, but better than never...

A couple of weeks ago Vic Gee launched the "Vic's Picks" and "Vic's Faves" sections in his encyclopaedic Master List of visual mapping software. This is the most comprehensive collection of visualisation software tools anywhere, with 290 live entries. The amount of work behind that goes into a project on this scale is hard to comprehend; and as Vic points out, with this much information, it is equally hard to know where to start choosing. So the opportunity to learn from someone who has taken the time to study so many products is invaluable. On behalf of everyone who uses these tools, thank you Vic for your tireless (and unsponsored) work.

I am also pleased to see Biggerplate going from strength to strength. The biggest and best thought out catalogue of user-submitted MindManager maps anywhere, it is well worth a browse if you use MindManager. Liam has just announced a competition to win 5 license superbundles, and I am delighted that Power Markers is one of the products that you can win, together with Mindjet's MindManager 9 and Oympic's Opti-Suite for MindManager. So get your favourite maps uploaded and feel free to post a link to them below, and I and the kind readers of this blog will help to get you into the competition ;-)

Power Markers version 2: dashboard maps by design

I read with interest Chuck Frey's recent Mind Map Insider report "Everything you ever wanted to know about dashboard mind maps but were afraid to ask". There are some good ideas there, but also a couple that will send you down the wrong path; one example appears to summarise dynamic information, but the data is actually entered manually. Another would be frustratingly inefficient to use, requiring you to review the whole map at each visit and keep it up to date by moving things from one list to another. The theme behind these dashboard maps seemed to be holding up a mirror to the features of mind mapping software, rather than exploiting it for a higher purpose.

The fence at which nearly all dashboard map designs fall is this: a tree diagram provides only one perspective. It can't be a top-down view of a project and a list of critical things to do by the end of this week, in the same picture. Each may contain the other, but the secondary role will be compromised in some way, requiring you to work harder to extract it. If your dashboard map consists of lists of things to do, it will be hard to step back and see the big picture. If your dashboard map is the big picture, you will have to be careful not to overlook something crucial that might be out of view while you are blue-sky thinking. Neither compromise augers well for maps that should be ergonomic and efficient to use in the long term.

Power Markers for MindManager version 2 was released on the Olympic web site last week, and addresses this exact problem. Power Markers enables you to design effective dashboard maps by focusing on projects and overviews in the map, and letting Power Markers compile the lists in a side window. So you get two views of the same subject - a graphical overview as a map, and a set of sorted lists that work as shortcuts to any part of the map, even the deeply buried areas. Power Markers calculates lists dynamically, and can show you lists like "unfinished items due this week" without you needing to manually deduce and assign that status.

There is also a free white paper about the design of dashboard maps, which defines the seven key factors that make a map into a dashboard map - no subscription required!

Power Markers v2 breaks new ground in the business model for add-ins. Most extensions with real value have a price tag attached, so you have to open your wallet for a second time - and while MindManager remains the gold standard in mind mapping desktop software, it could never be accused of being cheap. But Power Markers Standard edition is free to use, and does not require a license key. The Standard edition supports up to 15 lists per map, which is plenty for many applications. The download includes two template dashboard designs that need only 15 lists. To use more than 15 lists requires a license key, but you can make that decision when you get to that level, rather than being pressured by a time-limited trial.

A dashboard map is a snapshot of a process, and the design of the dashboard sets out the key staging points in that process. At one level, it is like a sophisticated version of the "Whack a Mole" arcade game, where your job is to keep hitting the moles down as they pop up. When no more appear, your project or process is either finished, or someone pulled the plug.

If you are an experienced MindManager user, the sense of control over a map that is provided by the Power Markers Hot Lists is quite a revelation. Your maps quickly divide into two types - the ones that use Power Markers, and the ones that don't. They each have a very different feel to them. You don't need them everywhere, but in places where you do, they can literally transform the usability of a map.

If you use a defined process with your clients or colleagues, and can profile the status of a situation or project in 15 lists or less, then Power Markers v2 gives you a simple way to document and share your expertise for free. Over the coming months I hope to publish some more dashboard templates, and would be very glad to share examples from others too.

I would like to thank everyone who took part in the version 2 beta and took the time to send suggestions and feeback. Here are the links again:

• The white paper on designing dashboards with MindManager
• Download Power Markers from the Olympic web site (requires MindManager 7 or 8 for Windows)
• Power Markers on Prezi, for a little light entertainment!

GTD webinar with David Allen

My respected friend and colleague Eric Mack will be presenting a webinar together with David Allen on 28th April, entitled Getting Things Done with IBM Lotus Notes.

Eric is founder of ICA and has created the highly-regarded eProductivity for Lotus Notes product, which implements GTD in Notes.

Hopefully there will be a mention or two of GyroQ for eProductivity in there as well!

I am so pleased to see this business going from strength to strength. Eric has invested a huge amount of effort into it and overcome many obstacles on the way.

I will be there and I hope you will be too. Registration is at

www.eproductivity.com/gtdwebinar

 

Getting the measure of “mind maps”

One aspect of information maps or “mind maps” produced by mind mapping software is the wide range of uses, and the variety of maps that can be produced. Given this diversity, is there a common way to profile them?

Trying to measure things helps us to improve them, even if it’s not a very scientific or accurate measure.  An “Information Dependency” (or “D”) factor for maps can be estimated as

D = H / P

where

• H is the amount of subject information that still remains in the author’s Head (or heads) after creating the map,  and
• P is the amount of “standalone” subject information that has been captured on Paper (or on the screen).

The ratio D indicates how dependent the map is on information, knowledge and context that is available only to the authors, requiring supporting explanations if anyone else needs to understand it.

A high value for D means the primary role of the map is as a reminder or aide memoire. High-D maps often use plenty of images, colour coding and single-word topics. The structure is not especially important. The map may be a short term brainstorm, or a revision aid, or a step in the process of understanding a complex situation or problem. All of these are perfectly valid uses for mind maps. Note that high-D maps need not necessarily be the work of just one person. It is often said that the best way to achieve “buy-in” for a map is to involve others in its creation. What this does is increase the size of the audience who understand the goals of the map, and for whom it is a reminder of discussions, negotiations and consensus. Collaborating with others doesn’t necessarily change a high-D map into a low-D map. High-dependency maps are, by definition, not suitable for sharing with an unfamiliar audience without any guidance. They can sow the seeds of confusion and create barriers to understanding.

By contrast, low-dependency maps are designed to get as much of the subject information as possible into the map, and leave as little as possible in the author’s heads. Low-D maps have a lower apparent “information density” because they make fewer assumptions and use less jargon. (Jargon is any form of abbreviation for a trusted audience - not just technical terms). Low-D maps use fewer images, and their design is often more influenced by style than by trying to code meaning. They have a clear message and structure, and stronger patterning. They are used for navigation, presentations and overviews, and are often limited in size. For non-mapping audiences, the presentation format usually needs to conform to a passive environment, e.g. a static image of a map in a slide or on a page. This takes away the interactive navigation that would allow a larger map to be used. However, several of the vendors now offer interactive viewers that work in a web browser.

As a map author, it can be very difficult to tell the difference between your low-D and high-D maps. Everything looks like low-D to you.  When you read something, you automatically add your own meaning to it, which is hard to discriminate from the original text. To check whether your map really has the low dependency factor that you hope it has, you have to test it on others. Or you can leave it until you have forgotten the contents and context, and review it again yourself in a few years time. You may be surprised at how a brilliantly insightful map becomes less than obvious when far removed from its context.

Which is better, high-D or low-D? Of course, neither is. They both offer value in their own ways, although a high-D map where low-D would be expected will cause problems.

So here’s an interesting question – in fact, quite a curious one. How many of the leading mind mapping software vendors use low-D maps to communicate real information on their web sites? By this, I don’t mean showing a picture of a map, or examples of how you might use one, but actually using a map to convey key messages and navigate resources. I have not searched extensively, but a quick tour of the leading names shows that hardly any seem to use their own products to communicate with us on the main pages of their site. Why is that? Collaboration is a strong theme in mind mapping software at the moment. Selling a concept is collaboration for mutual benefit – important messages need to be conveyed, understanding achieved and action taken - yet there seems to be little confidence in using maps to support this. I don’t only want to see examples of what I might be able to do with the product if I invest enough time – I want to see it in action (conceptually and physically) in front of me, dealing with the comprehension issues that accompany any new proposition.

I would love to hear the rational explanations of why maps are not suitable, not appropriate, not technologically practical, not representative, not what people expect, too niche, too radical, not proven and so on… these are surely the exact barriers that users of the products face within their own organisations. The industry is keen to move on from mind mapping, but actions speak louder than words, and one conclusion to be drawn from a brief visit to the shop fronts is that the value of visual mapping software is something that users create and consume personally. We should be trying harder to widen that restriction.

Or, if you are a vendor and use low-D maps to communicate on your web site, please feel free to share them here!

Solving the "single-parent" issue in mind maps

One of the fundamental characteristics of trees is that topics in a map can have one and only one parent topic (apart from the central topic, which has none). If a node has more than one parent, then the diagram is not a tree, but a network.

Networks are flexible and useful, while trees require more discipline and organisation. They reward this effort by being better at focusing and summarising, because they can be collapsed.

The "single parent issue" frequently appears as an ambiguity in the "best" way to arrange topics - there are occasions where a topic clearly belongs under two different headings at the same time, and needs to be viewed in different ways at different times.

Suppose you are writing a specification for a new project. Starting at the highest level, you can set out the major objectives of the project, then break them down into areas and specific outcomes. But in the real world, projects are never perfectly defined and completely executed. The specification will probably include things that must be done, things that are optional, and things that would be nice if we have spare time, which we never do. The specification is conditional - it is a superset of what might actually happen, and important modifiers are embedded throughout the document.

For the purposes of communicating the project and keeping the detail in context, a top-down description is natural and helpful. But for those who are familiar with the project, this top-down contextual description gets in the way. What they really need is a view of the essential, optional and would-be-nice items so that they can prioritise their work. But if the project specification were drawn up this way, by grouping like items together, it would be much more difficult to get an overview and to interpret the context of a specific "would be nice" item.

This is the "single parent issue" in action. A specific item, such as a project outcome, rightfully belongs both in the context of the wider project, and in the context of its implementation priority. Both views are needed at different stages in the project, and each masks the other, so that living with only one is not easy. There are many other ways to label and group the actions in a project - who is doing them, when they are being done and so on. You can see how databases got invented.

Mind mapping software typically deals with this graphically, as this is a principle of mind mapping. Topics belonging to groups that overlay the organisation of the main tree are marked up with the same markers to represent their group memberships. Colour coding or symbols are used to trigger mental association. If two items in a list of ten are coloured red, then it is natural to assume that they are red for the same reason, and share some common characteristic implied by their colour. You can see at a glance where the red items are, and zoom in on them.

Well, I say "see at a glance". This is only viable if your map is small enough to be seen at a glance. Perversely, this is less likely to be true for electronic maps than pen-and-paper ones. Electronic maps tend to be larger, and rarely viewed or even viewable all at once - which is the value that software brings. A mark-up technique that relies on visual recognition and navigation gets cumbersome if you have to surf the map to find all the instances of a particular marker. There is every chance that you will miss a couple, or get sidetracked on the way.

Mindjet's MindManager has a "Power Filter" tool that allows you to choose markers, then hides everything except the matching topics and their parents. This keeps some of the context of each qualifying topic, but the output is not so easy to work with, and you still need to manually surf a large map to check all the instances. It can also hide related information and surrounding context that could be useful when reviewing the map.

The Power Markers for MindManager add-in from Olympic solves this issue by creating an always-in-view lists of topics organised by marker, so that you can simultaneously see the information in your map grouped in more than one way. In the map window, you can see your specification document arranged as a nicely-organised hierarchy. In the "Hot List" window you can also see topics grouped by their markers, regardless of where they are in the map. Clicking on an item in the Hot List takes you to that part of the map. You don't need to sacrifice your "big picture" to zoom in to selected details. For example, you can see all the "must do" features of your project in one place, and focus on that list, returning to the context of the bigger map when you need to.

Power Markers Hot List (click for full sized image)

This technique is simple on the surface, but actually reveals a lot about the ergonomics of using mapping software. When you are drafting out the big ideas, the map workspace is where your thinking takes shape. The process of building a structure to which detail can be added inevitably brings new insights and ideas. But when you have a working map that you are comfortable with, you more often need to drill straight into specific details to make progress with the project. Many times I have experienced the annoyance of knowing that there is a certain topic in a large map (e.g. with a hyperlink and login details on it), but having to spend time hunting for it, because the navigation from the top level was not actually as clear as I thought it was. Being able to see key topics and go to them in one click provides a wormhole straight to the frequently-used or currently active parts. This spares you the torture of picking through a map that made perfect sense when you wrote it, but seems to have rearranged itself since!

For MindManager 7 and 8 users, you can get a copy of the above map and experiment with it yourself:

Download Power Markers Demo map

There are some subtleties about using markers to ensure items get included in a list of peers, as opposed to using them to visually highlight something in the map itself. The separate Hot List approach means that you can mark topics in a low-key way or even invisibly, while still accessing them as a group. For maps with lots of coded information in them, this avoids the "Christmas tree" effect where the sheer volume of icons and colour coding starts to distract from the flow of the text.

How does this actually solve the "single parent" issue? In the map, a topic can only appear once, under one heading. But in the Hot List, the same topic might appear several times under different headings, controlled by the markers that are applied to it.

Response to Peter Abrahams' "four generations" article

Peter Abrahams of IT-Director.com recently posted an article, also commented upon by Chuck Frey, arguing that collaborative mind mapping software represents a fourth generation of evolution of mind mapping technology. I don't agree with this interpretation, and here's why.

The first generation, pen and paper (or whiteboard), is still the preferred medium for many occasions, so is not outdated or superseded by electronic versions.

The second generation is electronic implementation of mind maps with computer software. This is worthy of being regarded as a different generation, because it builds on the concepts of the first, but adds fundamental capabilities that did not exist in the first. Specifically, the ability to expand and collapse information allowed us to deal with ten, twenty or a hundred times more information than could be sensibly managed in a physical form. This meant that mind map visualisations could be used in previously inaccessible or impractical areas, and allowed mind maps to become serious knowledge management tools. All the other features of electronic mind mapping, such as attaching files and links, or real-time collaboration, do not change this basic premise. We could (and still do) collaborate in real time with first generation technology; you don't need the Internet for that. Agreed, you can now collaborate at a distance, but this is a convenience, not a fourth generation. I think that Peter's third and fourth generations of mind mapping software are enhancements to the second, and not new generations.

So what will the third generation look like? I hope it will be an "unbundling" of mind mapping technology, and an escape from the silos of information that dedicated "mind mapping" tools are creating. The feature sets of many mind mapping tools are overloaded with import and export capabilities, which itself tells a story. They expend just as much effort trying to integrate with "normal" technology as they do on exploiting the fundamental power of visualisation. You could say they have a stereotypical English persona: "Sorry, I'm a mind map. Sorry." I look forward to the day when electronic mind mapping stops apologising, ceases to be a parallel universe, and is just one of the choices we have to access and manage information in a variety of activities. Mind Mapping software clients are to mind mapping what e-mail clients are to everyday work; I don't want all my e-mails grouped together inside an e-mail application, I want them embedded in whatever project or piece of work they relate to, in whatever visual format that may take. I want to be able to have an e-mail conversation from within a mind map, without going through technological hoops trying to get two separate applications to liase with each other. I want to be able to click the "mind map view" tab in Google, Word or PowerPoint. While we have standalone mind mapping applications, this will not happen.

Mind mapping technology is the third generation, not more sophisticated mind mapping applications. I hope!

Events and new goodies

Intelligent Visual Mapping As a Systematic Framework for Business Success
October 2-3, 2008
College of St. Elizabeth
Morristown, New Jersey, USA 

This one-and-a-half day event focuses on the business and academic applications of mind mapping, concept mapping and flow charting. The speakers include Chuck Frey, author of the Mind Mapping Software Blog, Stephanie Diamond,  Arjen Ter Hoeve, Wallace Tait, Kyle McFarlin, and Adam Clayman. Click here to register.

Mind Mapping for Teams
July 17th 2008
Tower Hotel, 12th Floor
St Katherine’s Way,
London E1W 1LD, England

This free workshop focuses on the application of MindManager software in teams and is aimed at team leaders and managers who want to deploy visualisation within their teams. Speakers include Dr. Ian Corner, Peter Urey, Alan G, Brown and Yours Truly. There are two 2-hour sessions so you can choose morning or afternoon attendance. Click here to register. I look forward to meeting you there!

New comparison chart of Web-based Mind Mapping tools
Published by Chuck Frey, this detailed and extensive chart compares 60 features of the top Web-based mind mapping tools. If you are interested in Web-based mind mapping software, this will save you a lot of research. I'm sure that when Mindjet's Web client is out of beta, Chuck will add it to this useful resource.

And last but by no means least...
Eric Mack launches preview of eProductivity for Lotus Notes
After one of the best-managed beta trials I have ever witnessed, Eric Mack has launched the preview of eProductivity for Lotus Notes, a GTD implementation for Notes from someone with a unique and world-class knowledge of both. Gyronix are supplying GyroQ for eProductivity as a component of this system, allowing you to capture and send ideas, actions and more straight into Notes from a pop-up window. If you are a Lotus Notes user and intrigued by the possibility of getting your e-mail inbox to empty every day, then grab one of these preview places fast, before they disappear.

ResultsManager articles and webinar

ResultsManager articles available for download

Further to some postings discussing less well understood topics in the GTD_MindManager Yahoo! Group, which is focused on the use of ResultsManager and GyroQ for Mindjet MindManager, I have had requests to make these articles available in a more permanent form. The link below is a PDF document containing the following:

• From doing to reviewing - what it really means to do a review, and how to interpret your Action dashboards at a different level
• How In-trays work - an overview of how the In-tray concept works in maps and dashboards
• How Inheritance works - the ways that ResultsManager takes advantage of tree-shaped project plans to minimise the amount of re-entry of task information.

Download 3_ResultsManager_Articles.pdf

ResultsManager Webinar on Wednesday August 8th at 9:30am PDT

Sign up for a free Webinar with my colleague Nik Tipler of Gyronix, to learn the 5 basics of using ResultsManager to deliver projects; Activities, Funnel Timelines, the Daily Action Dashboard, Inheritance and setting out your first project. Even if you don't see yourself ever using ResultsManager, you will learn some useful techniques for working visually with projects that don't rely on extra software.

Sign up at

https://www.gotomeeting.com/register/140864469

Spiral Presentation Maps and Virtual Donuts

Software mind maps are frequently used and abused as a presentation tool, as a refreshing alternative to endless bullet points. Done well, they can make complex concepts much clearer. Done badly, they can alienate even the friendliest of audiences.

A key advantage of software mind maps over other presentation tools is what happens below the waterline of your presentation iceberg. 90% of the value of a presentation is created in the preparation. The 10% that the audience sees is merely the final flourish. If there is little or nothing below the waterline, your iceberg will capsize at the slightest push. PowerPoint® hardly helps at all when it comes to building foundations, as most of the features are aimed at the part the audience sees. Software mind maps offer fewer visual tricks, but are much more helpful in structuring and developing your presentation, because you can visualise and verify the relationships between the concepts that you want to communicate. A presentation prepared from a mind map is likely to be far better thought out than one prepared straight to bullet points.

There are a "few rules of thumb" that help with most business presentations:

• Use an inductive rather than a deductive approach; tell your audience what your conclusion is, then justify it, instead of presenting a trail of clues followed by a big surprise
• Tell them what you are going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them what you have told them
• Most presentations overrun, so use a strategy that ensures you get your key points across even if you get cut short
• Aim your presentation at the right audience, so that the call to action is compatible with their remit
• Leave them wanting to know slightly more, rather than worn down by exhaustive detail.

Most of the map-based presentations I have seen have started on a step-by-step walk through the topics of a map, drilling straight down to the first great-great-grandchild of the first main topic and crawling onwards from there. This usually cancels out the benefits of tree structures as a way to encapsulate big ideas first, then break them down into more detail only later when the audience is warmed up and receptive.

There is no single template for a map-based presentation that would work in all cases, but there are some principles that will help many:

• Always use statements and not headings in a presentation map. The topics are your bullet points, and will be the written record of your presentation. Headings alone will be meaningless without the words. Provided you don't make the mistake of simply reading out the map to your snoozing audience, statements give them the chance to scan ahead, which they love to do - so that they get an idea of how the whole thing fits together. Some presenters don't like scanning ahead because they think it distracts attention. If the audience is prone to distraction, they will distract themselves with anything that moves. It's better that they distract themselves with reading your presentation than with what is happening in the corridor.
• Use the structure of the map to address different levels of audience, so that you don't have to reveal more than they really need. Software mind mapping tools will let you show or hide different levels of topics. Provided you use statements instead of headings, this lets you "layer" your presentation very effectively. Think about the map as a set of donut-shaped rings. The ring nearest the centre of the map is for your executive audience, who have short attention spans and grasp big ideas quickly. The next ring is for management, who are going to need a better understanding of the implications in order to deliver it. The outer ring is for the people who actually do the work, who will need real details. The true benefits of the tree structure become evident here, because you can position detail in the context of bigger ideas.
• When presenting, start at the one o'clock main topic and walk through your map in a spiral, addressing the executive level first, then the management level, then the detail if it is appropriate. This takes you on a complete tour of your map in at least three passes, which helps your audience feel comfortable from the outset about the scope of your presentation, and critically, the way it is represented by your map. This might disappoint the few who enjoy suspense and surprises, so it is up to you as a presenter to make it entertaining and engaging in other ways, instead of by playing with the content. That's like playing with food, and you can remember being yelled at for that. If your audience is still with you when you complete your tour through the management level, then they are ready for the detail. If you have already lost their good will, or are running out of time, then more detail would not have helped and could even have set you back.

This template gives you some ideas on structuring the content, and the kinds of information that you might include at the different levels. The numbers on the topics represent the presentation order.

So when using software mind maps to prepare and deliver presentations, use statements, translate different audience levels to layers, and develop a spiral route through your map to keep your audience on track. And don't forget the donuts.

Last call for Eric Mack's Webinar

If you haven't yet signed up for Eric Mack's Mindjet Webinar on Wednesday 28th March at 10am PDT / 6pm BST, it's not too late. Eric will demonstrate some innovative knowledge and action management techniques involving Lotus Notes, MindManager and Getting Things Done. Sign up for the free Webinar at http://tinyurl.com/2v3zom.

Chuck Frey of Innovation Tools has published a comparison of Web-based mind mapping software. This situation is changing all the time, with all the current offerings still in beta (or at least still developing very fast). While it is useful to have a comparison of features and functions, their value depends very much on what kind of user you are. Most Web-based services will appeal to smaller companies or individuals, who have never really considered themselves likely targets for industrial espionage. But larger organisations with significant intellectual property to protect, and with strong in-house IT policies and capabilities, will always hesitate to use a solution hosted elsewhere. It is doubly unfortunate that mind maps are excellent at capturing intellectual capital. If I wanted to know what my competitor was up to, I would be happy with one good mind map in place of ten spreadsheets. Mindomo will offer a business solution, where you can install the software on your own servers and make it available within your Intranet or VPN. Although this will not be a concern or a practical option for individual users, it is an important distinction for business users in this marketplace.