Thinking is Tough…

… or maybe I should say ‘high quality thinking’ is difficult.  It’s fairly straight forward to think through a binary decision, or even a short list of options, to a well-defined problem.  You weigh the pros and cons of each choice, and then make a call.  But how many of those simple problems do you get in a day, a week, or a month…?,… not many.  Business issues today are much more complex.  Not only due to the interrelated factors and factions in play, but also due to the far reaching ramifications that can result.  Let’s face it, most of us are far more comfortable in making the decision and implementing that decision,… than we are in thinking deeply about the decision to be made.  I guess it’s that ‘take action’ driver-driver style in most management profiles. But the consequences can be pretty severe, if you solve the right problem in the wrong way,… or even worse, solve the wrong problem altogether. 

We have a model that works pretty well at Steelcase, in terms of the steps in working through a new idea/innovation/development/strategy.  It’s called the Critical Thinking Model.  There are four well defined steps or phases one moves through – Think, Point-of-View, Plan-to-Implement, and Implement.  What we found in taking employees through this model, is their overwhelming comfort and inherent skill in working on the ‘get it done’ side (Plan & Implement).  At the same time, they expressed a need for more (training, tools, opportunities to practice) when it comes to the Think piece.  So we began to study the subject of thinking, especially as it relates to complex systems.

The good news is, it’s something we can all learn to do better.  There are lots of approaches and their associated tools.  Whether you call it Systemic Thinking, Parallel Thinking, Creative Thinking, Lateral Thinking, or my favorite Design Thinking,… it’s all basically the same thing.  There is also a long list of methods/tools for each; from de Bono’s 6 hats, Mind Maps, Value Webs, Fishbone Diagrams and so on.  Interestingly they all have a similar process framework.  It starts with problem discovery, to problem framing (critical), to problem solving.  Problem discovery is generally achieved through observation and experience.  But don’t assume the problem is obvious, it may require extensive searching to even find the problem.  Then in framing, one shapes the problem by probing, questioning and challenging it, in order to define the real problem.  Framing is also when goals and assumptions (often flawed) are clarified and scope is defined.  Then the fun begins, as one explores possible solutions to the problem.

Another common thread to each of these ‘thinking’ approaches is the importance of doing this work in a space that supports sharing, discovery and ideation.  Think of it as a Thinking Space.  It would have lots of surfaces, both ‘smart’ digital surfaces and ‘dumb’ tackable/magnetic surfaces, useful for displaying/capturing individual and group thoughts.  It would have tools for comparing, contrasting, highlighting one option vs. another.  In addition, there would be reference materials, books, and certainly access to the World Wide Web and its ‘horn-o-plenty’ of content.

Bottom line, complexity is here to stay, and solving complex problems is a very real measure of success between competitors.  And I repeat, quality thinking can be learned.  You don’t need to be a genius,… as Dietrich Dörner is quoted in his new book The Logic of Failure, “Geniuses are geniuses by birth, whereas the wise gain their wisdom through experience.  And it seems to me that the ability to deal with problems in the most appropriate way is the hallmark of wisdom rather than of genius.”  So get executive backing to creating a culture of great thinkers, pick an approach, give your employees the opportunity to learn and experience thinking done well (and give them a Thinking Space to do it in).  You will be amazed at the untapped potential for success. 

Do you think…?

Comments

[Richard Clarke]

I agree entirely with the comments about design awareness, and would go further to suggest that employees are also looking to work in vibrant environments which epitimise world class standards. Short term thinking on costs to provide lesser environments leads to lower standards in recruitment,performance and utimately reflects on a company's standing in the marketplace.

[Catherine Marsden]

Some office environments especially in 'blue chip organisations' have definitely become more a meeting place for ideas exchange and framework.

The boardroom table in some organisations has lost it's importance to a new way of thinking, brain storming, a space oasis of analysis, projecting and implementation.

To enable employers to retain staff, they must be design aware, choose comfortable and well furnished surroundings which will inspire and motivate 'thinking'.