InnovationFlow product capability
QR Participant Input
QR Participant Input collects live workshop contributions through a mobile form and facilitator review queue.
Beginner-friendly guide · 4 min read
What QR Participant Input does
QR Participant Input collects live workshop contributions through a mobile form and facilitator review queue.
QR Participant Input lets many workshop participants contribute through their own devices while a facilitator reviews submissions. It improves speed and breadth without removing the need for curation and discussion.
Participants should know the prompt, how their data will be used, whether names are visible and what happens after submission. Contributions enter a review queue rather than automatically becoming accepted strategy records.
This is an InnovationFlow facilitation capability. It supports participation and structured capture while preserving the facilitator’s role in interpretation, clean-up and routing.[1][2]
This guide describes the role of the capability in a governed strategy process. It does not present the software feature as a named academic method.
Fast collection and accountable acceptance are separate stages.
- 1Clear prompt→
- 2Mobile contributions→
- 3Review queue→
- 4Facilitator curation→
- 5Accepted tool items
Original InnovationFlow illustration. Example values and software behaviour are explained in this guide; method sources are listed below.
Understand the method
The parts in plain language
Contribution prompt
Ask one clear question connected to a defined tool and explain the level of detail expected.
Illustrative example
What external change could materially affect our 2030 service strategy? Include one source or observation.
Accessible participation
Provide a short link or QR code, sufficient time and an alternative route for anyone unable or unwilling to use a device.
Illustrative example
Participants can submit independently before ideas are shown for group discussion.
Facilitator review
Check relevance, clarity, duplication, sensitive content and provenance before editing, merging, accepting or dismissing items.
Illustrative example
Two similar signals are merged while both participant sources remain visible.
When to use it
- In workshops where many people need to contribute simultaneously.
- When mobile entry is faster and more inclusive than taking turns at one shared screen.
A practical workflow
- 1
Define a clear contribution prompt and target tool.
- 2
Open the access code or QR route and explain privacy expectations.
- 3
Collect submissions into a review queue.
- 4
Edit, merge, accept, dismiss and route items with visible provenance.
Fictional worked example
Example: a PESTLE workshop
This example is illustrative rather than a reported case. Forty participants submit external signals during a strategy session.
Observation:Participants add 73 signals from different functions and regions.
Implication:The method captures breadth quickly.
Observation:Several entries are internal weaknesses or unsupported opinions.
Implication:Reclassify or dismiss them with a visible reason.
Observation:Twelve curated signals are selected for implications and priority.
Implication:Participation feeds analysis rather than replacing it.
From analysis to decision
How to interpret the result
- 1Explain privacy and visibility before collection.
- 2Do not equate volume with representativeness.
- 3Retain submitter context and facilitator decisions in lineage.
Practical interpretation guidance from InnovationFlow. Refer to the method sources below for the underlying approach.
What a useful output looks like
Common pitfalls
- Participation volume is not the same as representative evidence.
- Explain whether names, notes or submissions are visible to others.
References and method basis
- [1]Delbecq, A.L. and Van de Ven, A.H. (1971). A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466-492. Source ↗Peer-reviewed research
- [2]Phaal, R., Kerr, C., Ilevbare, I., Farrukh, C., Routley, M. and Athanassopoulou, N. (2016). On self-facilitating templates for technology and innovation strategy workshops. Centre for Technology Management Working Paper Series, No. 8. Source ↗Peer-reviewed research
This guide synthesises the named sources into practical questions for strategy and innovation work. It does not claim that using a tool by itself produces a successful decision.