As a adjunct to learning about "Commander's Intent", the USMC's Warfighting provides a fairly simple background of theory.
Invariably, you get a lot of good thought.
The reason I have found over the years is that great designs are iterative and by giving out a starting point - even if it is wildly wrong, the team can use that to build upon.
If you simply say "give me a design" you get a lot of hesitancy, especially when in a group environment like a whiteboarding with the team.
If you say "here is an idea, whats wrong with it" you get a lot more engagement from the team because the people involved don't have anything at risk, instead each individual only stands to gain should they be able to improve the design.
If there is a headstrong tech in the group who is divergent in opinion, this approach can provide him with an opportunity to say exactly why his opinion differs and an alternate plan inclusive of his comment can be drawn in parallel and then either direction can be taken. with the other plan as a backup.
Sources of Power by Gary Klein[1] is a great read about decision making and there's a whole chapter about communicating intent and motivation.
"When you communicate intent, you are letting the other team members operate more independently and improvise as necessary. You are giving them a basis for reading your mind more accurately."
The U.S. Army actually uses a Commander's Intent statement, which was streamlined into:
- Here's what I think we face.
- Here's what I think we should do.
- Here's why.
- Here's what we should keep our eye on.
- Now, talk to me.
Obviously this can be applied to any organization. It's always in your best interest to tell someone why they should be doing something and not just what they should be doing.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Sources-Power-People-Make-Decisions/dp...