“Stop and think. And then think on”
ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY
THINK was a one-word slogan developed by IBM founder Thomas J. Watson, Sr. It appeared in IBM offices, plants and company publications in the 1920s and in the early 1930s began to take precedence over other slogans at IBM. It eventually appeared in wood, stone and bronze, and was published in company newspapers, magazines, calendars, photographs, medallions – even New Yorker cartoons – and it remained for years the name of IBM’s employee publication. You can still find echoes of Watson’s motto in the brand name of IBM’s popular notebook computers: the ThinkPad.
“IF YOU DON’T THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE, YOU CANNOT HAVE ONE.”
John Galsworthy, Swan Song, from The Forsyte Saga, 1928
“I think, therefore I am,” observed René Descartes in 1637. This short diversion into 17th century philosophy is, perhaps surprisingly, relevant to the way we run our businesses today. This is because understanding the complexity of how we think is essential if we are to create strong, appealing companies.
To weave the six Rs into a framework capable of developing and delivering a successful strategy with ‘stick-to-itivity’, we must begin with the first element: THINK. This reflects how fundamental thinking is to all business activities. Far from stating the obvious, it is essential to examine ‘thinking’ in detail since it is much more complex and difficult to get right than we might assume. Taking Descartes’ basic premise of thinking proving existence, consider how much more enriched and successful existence and, by implication, business decisions would be if the quality of thinking were improved: ‘I think better, therefore I am more successful.’
Even today, thinking skills are often poorly understood. Thinking involves complex, multidimensional patterns and processes of identifying, analyzing and synthesizing information. For decision making to be of the high standard needed to deal effectively with today’s business issues, we need to cut through this complexity and acquire the necessary skills. In essence, we need to relearn how to think.
CRITICAL THINKING
It is common to associate critical thinking with being negative. This is a mistake. Critical thinking is actually about approaching issues without bias, and it involves assessing information and considering situations rationally, fully and with an open mind.
Whenever a decision has to be made, an overwhelming number of factors – from facts and subjective beliefs to past experiences and uncertainty, can obscure the issue and cloud your thinking. We’ve all been there, struggling to find a way through a problem. The solution is to use ‘purposeful reflective judgment,’ which is the hallmark of critical thinking, to reach a conclusion or course of action. Logic and rigor guide critical thinking; problem-solving and questioning steer it. It explores. It teases out subtleties. It separates opinion from fact. Critical thinking is an intellectual approach that considers everything through a wide lens of accuracy, clarity, credibility, depth, precision, relevance and significance.
Edward M. Glaser, in the landmark study, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking (Teachers College, Columbia University, 1941), defines critical thinking as, “The ability to reflect on problems and use logic and reason to solve them.” This should be applied consistently, as Glaser notes, “Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends.”
The Watson-GlaserTM Critical Thinking Appraisal is a popular way of testing skills in critical thinking. It involves a grueling array of statements that the candidate has to assess as true, probably true, probably false, false, or contains insufficient data. Knowing how to distinguish between true and probably true or false and probably false is astonishingly hard. Add insufficient data as another possibility and the intricacy of the test skyrockets. To cut your way through the possibilities and pick one option requires complex cognitive processing.
This is an immense challenge for a short test and applying it continually in our everyday lives is even more daunting. While that may leave us feeling that this requires too much effort, we should be mindful of the rewards. This level of hard work, dedication and thinking skills is essential to plotting an organization’s path to sustained profit and growth. It is a critical form of competitive advantage and without it, a company is likely to be one of the also-rans that come in behind the leaders.
Why critical thinking, and why now?
Critical thinking strips away emotions and preconceived notions. It is a tool for gathering and exploring evidence at face value. This open-mindedness, in conjunction with in-depth cognitive processing, leads to appropriate and actionable ideas and solutions.
“SEEKING TO KNOW IS ONLY TOO OFTEN LEARNING TO DOUBT.”
Antoinette du ligier de la Garde Deshoulieres, 1638-1694
You may be wondering: why so much emphasis on critical thinking? While it has always been valuable, critical thinking is even more important today in these times of unprecedented volatility, complexity and opportunity, than ever before. In fact, precisely now, during this time of deep, rapid change, critical thinking goes hand and hand with decision making in organizations – and this need will certainly continue and most likely, intensify. Significantly, critical thinking skills are not just for top decision makers, they apply across industries, to jobs at all levels and in all areas of concern and specialization.
The reason is not hard to find: the marketplace has expanded. In fact, it has exploded. It is without question, global in scope. This includes spheres of influence and activities outside an organization’s walls, as well as within. Diversity characterizes people, places, and roles – bringing a world of new ideas, influences, arguments and challenges to the fore. Transactions occur at an accelerated pace around the clock. Information flows at the same, seemingly non-stop basis. Logic, objectivity and reliability: we need them now more than ever if we are to navigate this new, complex landscape successfully.
The characteristics of critical thinkers
Critical thinking has a universal application. An interdisciplinary tool, it describes how a person addresses situations and tasks and resolves issues and problems. Critical thinkers ask questions and probe. They don’t accept assertions or arguments without putting them through their own, detailed filter. They are independent and exceedingly rational.
In the essay Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts, (Insight Assessment, 2010 Update, p.11) Peter A. Facione lists several attributes that define critical thinkers. These include:
• Inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of issues
• Concern to become, and remain, well-informed
• Alertness to opportunities to use critical thinking
• Trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry
• Self-confidence in one’s own abilities to reason
• Open-mindedness regarding divergent world views
• Flexibility in considering alternatives and opinions
• Understanding of the opinions of other people
• Fair-mindedness in appraising reasoning
• Honesty in facing one’s own biases, prejudices, stereotypes or egocentric tendencies
• Prudence in suspending, making or altering judgments
• Willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest reflection suggests that change is warranted
To these attributes Peter Facione attaches the characteristics that ‘the experts’ would add, which include:
• Clarity in stating the question or concern
• Orderliness in working with complexity
• Diligence in seeking relevant information
• Reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria
• Care in focusing attention on the concern at hand
• Persistence though difficulties are encountered
• Precision to the degree permitted by the subject and the circumstances
A CRITICAL THINKER IS: ANALYTICAL, BALANCED, FOCUSED, INQUISITIVE, INTENT, NEUTRAL, ORGANIZED, QUESTIONING, RELEVANT AND RESPONSIBLE.
Now, we should apply all the information we have learned up to this point and build a profile of a critical thinker.
How to be a critical thinker
There is no disputing the fact that critical thinking can make an immense difference to a company’s fortunes. It is a prime source of competitive advantage and in tomorrow’s markets, this edge over competitors will be crucial. This leads to the obvious question: if we need it, how do we get it? So, can we acquire critical thinking skills? The general consensus is that critical thinking is a skill that can be learned. To be more accurate, it is a set of skills. There are a number of techniques to help us with this task. One approach, which is offered by Pearson Education, covers skills in six core areas: interpretation, analysis, evaluation, self-regulation, inference and explanation.
1. Interpretation. We are surrounded by an overwhelming amount of information. From all of this data we must be able to identify what is significant and relevant and what is not. To do this, we need to be able to sort and filter all the available information; make things clear by understanding and refining the evidence further, and interpret the information accurately.
2. Analysis. When analyzing and assessing all the information, arguments, data and viewpoints, it is important to notice any patterns, connections and correlations. Any assessment will highlight the core issues and illuminate incorrect or conflicting data and ideas.
3. Evaluation. The quality of critical thinking depends on how you evaluate the evidence. Your analysis will only be as good as your ability to assess the reliability, value and priority of the information and ideas presented. It is important, therefore, to scrutinize each piece of information critically and rigorously in order to test its validity and importance.
4. Self-regulation (also known as meta-cognition). As with any skill, self-awareness and the ability to scrutinize, check and improve your own thinking is necessary. This is to ensure that you do not arrive at erroneous conclusions due to thinking traps or flaws in your approach.
5. Inference. Once the ideas and arguments have been gathered and assessed, you can then glean further information from all this data by inferring more arguments, ideas and other details that, even if they are not known for certain, could be considered reasonable suppositions. This helps to broaden the reach of the existing data, to reveal useful information that might otherwise remain hidden.
6. Explanation. With the facts, arguments, ideas and suppositions gathered, interpreted, prioritized, assessed and evaluated, the task of explaining how you arrived at your conclusion remains. By subjecting your methods and reasoning to this extra layer of criticism you will test the reliability of your conclusion. Clearly, the reliability of any decision is only as good as the quality of the evidence and reasoning it is based upon. Also, by correcting any thinking flaws, you will improve the quality of future decision making. Furthermore, by showing others how your analysis and treatment of evidence and ideas can be relied upon, you are more likely to persuade them to follow your recommendations.
Avoiding the pitfalls of critical thinking
Most experts agree that critical thinking can be taught but there is one significant caveat: it takes some doing! Although, like many other things, the more that we use critical thinking, the better we become at it. In Critical Thinking Means Business: Learn to Apply and Develop the NEW #1 Workplace Skill (Pearson Education, 2009) Judy Chartrand, Heather Ishikawa, and Scott Flander offer a helpful framework for sharpening these skills. They call it the RED Model, which stands for:
“THE MORE ONE THINKS, THE BETTER ADAPTED HE/SHE BECOMES TO THINKING.”
Ernest Dimnet, The Art of Thinking
Recognize Assumptions
Evaluate Arguments
Draw Conclusions
These are the principles of critical thinking. What’s more, they are a sequence of steps to use when processing information upon which to base a decision. Challenge, check sources and find the most rigorous way to uncover the truth and arrive at the most appropriate decision. However, this is easier said than done. For further insight, it is useful to consider the halo effect, mentioned earlier. This is the theory put forward by Phil Rosenzweig in The Halo Effect… and the Eight Other Business Delusions That Deceive Managers (Free Press, 2007). To review, the halo effect refers to a tendency toward cognitive bias. In other words, the halo effect extends a trait or judgment about one object or person to others. It could be positive or negative and exists beyond product marketing, pertaining to the entire commercial sector and everyday life as well. Rosenzweig wrote this book because during 25 years, he had seen, “so much nonsense – unsupported claims by famous gurus and self-described ‘thought leaders,’ sweeping assertions based on poor data, and simplistic stories that claim to be rigorous research. Worse, most people – including many very smart managers, consultants, and journalists – can’t tell the difference between good and bad research. The Halo Effect is an attempt to raise the level of discussion in the business world, and to sharpen our skills of critical thinking about management.” No wonder, then, that he dedicated the book to “clear thinking about business in management.”
The message we can take away from this for developing our own critical thinking skills is watch out for the halo effect however subtle it may be, and guard against it.
Another tip comes from the article Becoming a Critic of Your Thinking (Criticalthinking.org, ©2009 Foundation for Critical Thinking) by Linda Elder and Richard Paul, who recommend the following points to improve critical thinking:
• Clarify your thinking
• Stick to the point
• Question questions
• Be reasonable
“Question questions” – what does this mean? The authors go on to explain, “Be on the lookout for questions. The ones we ask. The ones we fail to ask. Look on the surface. Look beneath the surface. Listen to how people question, when they question, when they fail to question. Look closely at the questions asked. What questions do you ask, should you ask? Examine the extent to which you are a questioner, or simply one who accepts the definitions of situations given by others.”
Clearly, the way that people think, both as individuals and collectively within organizations, affects the decisions that they make in ways that are far from obvious and rarely understood. John Hammond, Ralph Keeney and Howard Raiffa in their article in the Harvard Business Review provided some of the most intriguing research and insights in this area (see John S. Hammond, Ralph L. Keeney and Howard Raiffa, The Hidden Traps in Decision Making, Harvard Business Review, September-October 1998).
Avoiding all of the following traps requires the recognition that they exist and an understanding of the traps that are the likeliest to cause you problems.
• The anchoring trap is where we give disproportionate weight to the first piece of information that we receive. This often happens because the initial impact of the first information, our immediate reaction to it, is so significant that it outweighs everything else, ‘drowning’ our ability to effectively evaluate a situation.
• The status quo trap biases us toward maintaining the current situation – even when better alternatives exist. This might be caused by inertia or the potential loss of face if the current position were to change.
• The sunk-cost trap inclines us to perpetuate the mistakes of the past, because ‘We have invested so much in this approach that we cannot abandon it or alter course now.’
• The confirming evidence trap, also known as confirmation bias, is when we seek information to support an existing predilection and discount opposing information. It can also be shown as a tendency to seek confirming evidence to justify past decisions. Often, this tendency is manifest by people seeking to support the continuation of the current favored strategy.
• The over-confidence trap makes us overestimate the accuracy of our forecasts. Closely linked to confirming evidence, the over-confidence trap is when a decision maker has an exaggerated belief in their ability to understand situations and predict the future.
• The framing trap is when a problem or situation is incorrectly stated, completely undermining the decision-making process as a result. This is often unintentional, but not always. Clearly, how an issue or situation is seen is important in providing the basis for developing an effective strategy or decision.
• The recent event trap leads us to give undue weight to a recent, and quite probably dramatic, event or sequence of events. This is very similar to the anchoring trap, except that it can arise at any time – not just at the start – and cause a misjudgment.
• The prudence trap leads us to be over-cautious when we make estimates about uncertain factors. It is shown by a tendency to be extremely risk averse, and is particularly likely to occur when there is a decision dilemma: a situation when the decision maker feels that continuing with the current approach carries risks, and that taking an alternative course of action also carries risks.
As well as thinking flaws and coping patterns, there are two potential pitfalls resulting from the culture or environment of the organization. They can be thought of as extremes at opposite ends of the same spectrum: fragmentation and groupthink.
Fragmentation occurs when people are in disagreement, either with their peers or their superiors within the organization. Usually the expression of emerging dissent is disguised or suppressed, although it may appear as ‘passive aggression.’ Dissenting opinion can often fester in the background, for example, it can be mentioned informally in conversation, rather than clearly raised in formal situations, such as meetings. Fragmentation is corrosive, hindering effective analysis and decision making, and can worsen when the views of one grouping are dominant. It also feeds off itself in a self-sustaining cycle, with any move to break it cynically seen as one side’s attempt to gain dominance. It can therefore become locked into the organization and be extremely difficult to reverse.
Groupthink is the opposite of fragmentation. It occurs when the group suppresses ideas that are critical or not in direct support of the direction in which the group is moving. The group appears to be in agreement or certain about something but is neither. This may be caused by many factors. For example, past success can breed the belief that a team is infallible and therefore produce complacency. Groupthink may occur because the group is denied information or lacks the confidence or ability to challenge the dominant views of the group. People may be concerned about disagreeing, either because of past events, present concerns or a fear of what the future might hold, and so will seek safety in numbers.
Groupthink is exacerbated by the fact that cohesive groups tend to rationalize the invulnerability of their decision or strategy, and this in turn inhibits critical analysis and the expression of dissenting ideas. The effect is an incomplete survey of available options, and a failure to examine the risks of preferred decisions.
Groupthink can occur in organizations where teamwork is either strong or weak. As with fragmentation, groupthink is also self-sustaining. Moreover, the longer it lasts, the more entrenched and ‘normal’ it becomes in people’s minds and behaviors. After a short time, it is also very difficult to reverse.
Having explained the pitfalls, what are the solutions? A great deal has been written about the rational, process-driven approach to decision making but the psychological aspects are at least as interesting and are only recently beginning to be understood. In his book, ‘Think on Your Feet’ writer Jeremy Kourdi highlights several techniques for decision makers in turbulent times.
• Be bold and don’t fear the consequences of decisions – we tend to overestimate the consequences, good and bad, of our choices. We also tend to discount our ability to make the right choice. This results from ‘loss aversion’: the view that a loss will hurt more than a gain will satisfy. Remember, the worst case scenario might never occur and even if it does, people invariably have the psychological resilience to cope.
• Trust your instincts and emotions – we have evolved to make good decisions and manage their implementation, so don’t ignore our evolutionary advantage. Sometimes quick decisions work best precisely because you have picked up on the key pieces of information quickly and then responded. More time will simply lead to information overload and other distractions.
• Be prepared to play the devil’s advocate – this search for flaws and failings will strengthen your decisions and illuminate the factors affecting a particular decision as well as other issues, such as biases. This means being aware of confirmation bias and using it.
• Avoid irrelevancies – when making a decision we can be faced with irrelevant information that distorts our perception, as described in the anchoring trap. The solution is to be ready to question the context of the information. What are you basing your perceptions on, and is it really relevant?
• Reframe the decision – this will help you view the issues from a new perspective.
• Don’t let the past hold you back – the sunk cost highlights our tendency to stick with previous choices because we have invested so much already. Don’t do it. It is invariably a mistake to stick with something just because it was a past choice, if other, better alternatives exist.
• Challenge groupthink – people are often afraid to comment or act because of social pressure. This is a poor excuse. Find out what people really think and use that to help you decide.
• Limit your options – this is the paradox of choice: the more options we have, the harder life can be. Choose the most promising options, this can help to remove pressure and clarify your thinking. This highlights the point that we are fixated with choice, believing more to be better. In truth, less choice can be more satisfying, or it may simply be worth delegating the decision to someone else who is better qualified. The challenge is to make sure that as far as possible, you enjoy what you are doing, and that the decision is made by the best person in the right way at the right time.
This has been quite an intense look at learning how to think critically. In summary, mastering critical thinking takes concerted effort. It entails thinking about thinking with an emphasis on truth and quality when making decisions. By adopting these techniques and this mindset, you will be better equipped to make the right decisions and lead your company to a strong, successful future. This is not the end of the story, however, when it comes to thinking skills. The next technique we will look at is strategic thinking.
STRATEGIC THINKING
We hear the term ‘strategic thinking’ often enough but what does it really mean? ‘Strategy’ is a very overused word but it simply means the plan that will move us from where we are now to where we want to be. Basically, it’s thinking that goes above and beyond our everyday, working interests. It’s big, it’s broad. It’s global, it’s goal oriented. To get a fuller picture of what it is and what’s involved we can look to how the experts describe it and then consider their views on how it helps and how we can become better strategic thinkers.
Strategic thinking at work
Rich Horwath, President of the Strategic Thinking Institute (at strategyskills.com), believes, “Strategic thinking is defined as the generation and application of business insights on a continual basis to achieve competitive advantage.” He goes on to segment strategic thinking into three disciplines:
1. Acumen – perceiving and creating insightful business ideas and plans
2. Allocation – determining where and how resources should be directed and how they should be divided between activities
3. Action – taking the necessary actions to execute strategy to ensure goals are achieved
Next, any look at strategic thinking would be incomplete without a reference to Jeanne Liedtka whose ideas have stood the test of time. In Strategic Thinking: Can it Be Taught? (Long Range Planning, 1998, Vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 120-29), she attempts to clarify the meaning of strategic thinking. Why does she bother to do this? She points out that the expression ‘strategic thinking’ is used frequently – perhaps too frequently. The problem is that with overuse, it runs the risk of becoming watered down and indistinct. She makes a very important distinction between how the word is used and what it means, writing, “Most often, it appears that the term ‘strategic thinking’ is used to denote all thinking about strategy, rather than to denote a particular mode of thinking with specific characteristics.”
To set the record straight, she developed The Liedtka Model of Strategic Thinking. This identifies the major elements that comprise the following process:
1. Systems perspective. This refers to the ability to take an end-to-end approach when processing information and evaluating actions. Analysis proceeds step by step along a continuum to identify trends, relationships and patterns of significance in order to create value.
2. Intent focused. This element is defined as the ability to consistently channel efforts, avoid distractions and remain focused on the task. It combines elements of “direction, discovery, and destiny.”
“THE DIFFICULTY LIES NOT SO MUCH IN DEVELOPING NEW IDEAS AS IN ESCAPING FROM THE OLD ONES.”
John Maynard Keynes
3. Thinking in time. Strategic thinking is about ‘thinking in time.’ That is, it traverses the past, the present and the future. For example, the past is a marker of what has gone, while opportunities exist in the present, and the present is the jumping off point for achieving the goals of tomorrow.
4. Hypothesis driven. Strategic thinking combines critical and creative thinking in a sequential approach that develops and tests hypotheses.
5. Intelligent opportunism. An important aspect of strategic thinking is the ability to recognize new realities and capitalize on them. It scans information on an ongoing basis and assesses and reassesses positions along the way.
Figure 11.1: The Liedtka Model of the Elements of Strategic Thinking
How to be a strategic thinker
The benefits that strategic thinkers bring to their organizations are considerable. For example:
• They help organizations and colleagues remain open to emerging opportunities. In fact, this ‘intelligent opportunism’ will make them more responsive to local opportunities.
• They have a holistic view – in other words, firms that succeed at embedding a capability for strategic thinking throughout their organizations create a new source of competitive advantage, because their system perspective allows them to redesign their processes for greater efficiency and effectiveness.
• Their intent focus makes them more determined and less distracted than their rivals.
• Their ability to think in time will improve the quality of their decision making and their speed of implementation.
• A capacity for hypothesis generation and testing enables creative and critical thinking to be incorporated into their processes.
Strategic thinking addresses difficult matters; it is not the domain of easy answers. A complex process, strategic thinking has been likened to the scientific method, which consists of seven distinct steps. For example the Harvard Business School recommends a seven-step process for strategic thinking.
“ACQUIRE THE WISDOM OF BIG-PICTURE THINKING.”
John Maxwell, Thinking for a Change
First in the seven-step process, you should be ready to extend your frame of reference from business-as-usual to a panoramic view. In other words: think big. That will prepare you for the next phase, which is to understand your organization’s goals over time. Step three echoes Jeanne Liedtke’s ‘systems perspective’: you should connect the dots and note any trends and accompanying patterns and issues. You are now at the point where you can apply your creative instincts to generate ideas that capitalize on opportunities and limit possible risks. Finally, steps five, six, and seven call for evaluating findings, prioritizing them into actionable points, and then making the hard decisions in light of available resources.
Strategic thinking is reflective and externally oriented: it scours the environment for meaningful events and developments and it seeks to connect the pieces into logical chains. It embraces and sprouts new ideas and it leads to new and more creative ways of doing things. Forward thinking, it aims to extend possibilities in order to create extra value and generate the right results. Without a doubt, it’s a valuable weapon in the arsenal of thinking skills that drive sustained growth and profit.
A STRATEGIC THINKER IS ABLE TO EVOLVE THEIR THINKING AND IS: INSIGHTFUL, INTUITIVE, OPEN-MINDED, OPPORTUNISTIC, RECEPTIVE, RESULTS-ORIENTED, RIGOROUS, TOLERANT OF RISK AND VISIONARY.
In their book, Thinking Strategically (W.W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1991), Avinash Dixit and Barry Nalebuff define strategic thinking as, “[t]he art of outdoing an adversary, knowing that the adversary is trying to do the same to you.” They added a further definition in their later book, The Art of Strategy (W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2008), “It is also the art of finding ways to cooperate, even when others are motivated by self-interest, not benevolence. It is the art of convincing others, and even yourself, to do what you say. It is the art of interpreting and revealing information. It is the art of putting yourself in others’ shoes so as to predict and influence what they will do.”
This is an interesting development. Our brief examination of strategic thinking has led us to the realization that there are now new and evolving needs that are changing the nature of strategic thinking. Today, strategy is about more than coming up with new and impactful ideas. It entails engaging and aligning resources. For example, Avinash Dixit and Barry Nalebuff underscore the role of game theory in developing inherent skills into those for effective strategic thinking. They also discuss the need to generate support and confidence to move forward. In essence, they bring into play what are widely regarded as the soft skills in order to achieve success.
Strategic thinking is dynamic and powerful. It helps executives to manage change and navigate uncertainty, both of which are sweeping over the business landscape and set to continue that way well into the future. There is no question that strategic thinking is the pathway to competitive advantage; creating value depends on it. Although learning these skills will require considerable effort, the payoff is well worth the effort. After all, strategic thinking culminates in strategic action. We have now reviewed critical and strategic thinking; in the next section we shall look at the last thinking skill: lateral thinking.
LATERAL THINKING
You could be forgiven for asking ‘surely critical thinking and strategic thinking are enough, why do we need lateral thinking as well?’ Apart from the obvious point that the more tools we have available to deploy the better equipped we will be to make decisions, there is another reason why lateral thinking matters now more than ever before: as we have continually said, the world is changing and it is changing rapidly.
In 2008, an article called, Lateral thinking and agility are essential in a changing world (The Banker, May 2008, pp. 156-59). In it, eight retail banking executives offered their views on how to succeed in their industry. Their views are summed up by the title, and it goes on to say:
“In many parts of the world, the global economy is being driven as much by trade in information, ideas and services, as by trade in physical goods. Organizations that were able to achieve success and predominance through sheer productivity and massive scale are now fewer and far between. Increasingly, it is the ability to think laterally, to operate on an agile basis, to react to global trends quickly and, above all, to innovate that will determine the sustainability of an organization in future.”
“DISCOVERY CONSISTS OF SEEING WHAT EVERYBODY HAS SEEN AND THINKING WHAT NOBODY HAS THOUGHT.”
Albert von Szent-Gyorgyi and Irving Good
This view is echoed among other business leaders and it is easy to see why. Lateral thinking, with its wide-angled view of the world and its challenging, creative and insightful approach, is perfectly suited to dealing with today’s global markets, volatility and constant uncertainty. This vantage point is extremely valuable in good times and especially, in bad. Why? One major feature is that it approaches situations in ways that are off center. By seeing things differently, new opportunities are revealed that may never have been uncovered any other way.
What is lateral thinking?
• A heuristic for solving problems, where you try to look at the problem from many angles instead of tackling it head-on (see wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn).
• Using reasoned thought in a non-standard or non-linear logical way to find a solution to a problem (see en.wiktionary. org/wiki/lateral_thinking).
• Attempting to solve a problem by using non-traditional methods in order to create and identify new concepts and ideas (see www.teach-nology.com/glossary/terms/l/).
• Methods of thinking concerned with changing concepts and perception (see india.smashits.com/wikipedia/Lateral_ thinking).
• Escaping from habitual mind patterns (or logical sequential thinking) in order to solve problems or explore new ideas. Techniques include: deliberate and provocative challenging of preconceptions and a rejection of yes/no thinking (see securitybeyondborders.org/global-security-glossary/global-security-glossary-l/).
• Thinking that finds solutions in ways that do not seem obvious (see www.thutong.doe.gov.za/ResourceDownload.aspx).
What do these definitions tell us? Clearly, lateral thinking holds a prism up to a situation enabling us to peer through multiple panes and provocative points of view and perspectives. This is no place for those without the ability or desire to look beyond the obvious, to see more than others can see. It’s bold, yet subtle. It is a place of logical imagination.
By comparing the three thinking skills, we will see why all are important and why lateral thinking in particular brings a unique and invaluable aspect to decision making.
• Critical thinking attacks an issue, situation, or problem front and center. It seeks to strip away bias, emotions and preconceived notions to determine the most appropriate response.
• Strategic thinking takes a forward looking, rigorously rational, yet innovative approach, to derive insights and ultimately decide on the most advantageous way to proceed.
• Lateral thinking shakes things up. It takes us out of our comfort zone to allow other perspectives and possibilities to surface.
“I LIKE TO SAY THAT YOU CANNOT DIG A HOLE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE BY DIGGING THE SAME HOLE DEEPER. LATERAL THINKING IS FOR CHANGING CONCEPTS AND PERCEPTIONS.”
Edward De Bono
Critical and strategic thinking reside in the realm of ‘vertical thinking.’ They get to an endpoint by stacking up information piece by piece and analyzing the sum total logically. Lateral thinking does not. It arrives at a solution sideways, as the word ‘lateral’ suggests. It deliberately seeks to break the mold, step outside the lines, so as to inspire creativity. In this way, it challenges convention and develops distinctly new propositions. It brings to mind the famous quote by Ford Motor Company founder Henry Ford, “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Progress is not made by adhering to what has gone, to past thinking and methods. Like Ford, we need to take our thinking to new places, push beyond the frontiers, to explore the unthinkable, imagine what others cannot – this is what lateral thinking gives us.
The term ‘lateral thinking’ was conceived by Edward de Bono. He explains that lateral thinking is concerned not with playing with the existing pieces, but with seeking to change those very pieces. It is concerned with the perception part of thinking. This is where we organize the external world into the pieces we can then process. So, while creativity and lateral thinking are linked, they are not the same thing. One important point is that lateral thinking leads to greater creativity. The benefits of acquiring this skill are clear, as de Bono says, “It empowers people by adding strength to their natural abilities, which improves teamwork, productivity and, where appropriate, profits.” It enriches all business activities, elevating the quality of strategy and enhancing problem-solving skills. Crucially, Edward de Bono vehemently believes that lateral and creative thinking can be learned.
How to be a lateral thinker
A good starting point is to realize that lateral thinking can be used in many, many situations. It is particularly useful when facing change and uncertainty or when an issue or problem would benefit from a radically new approach. When you need to move your company from the traditional, business-as-usual onto a new path that fits it for the challenges ahead, lateral thinking has much to offer.
“IN THIS TIME OF INTENSE CHANGE, COMPANIES HAVE BEEN CONDUCTING LATERAL THINKING SESSIONS FOR TEAMS TO COME UP WITH A RESERVE OF BREAKTHROUGH IDEAS.”
Edward de Bono
Edward de Bono has developed several techniques to help us acquire the necessary skills for lateral thinking. As in any process, lateral thinking sessions begin with the planning stage. This is where ‘focus tools’ are applied that solidify the state of current thinking, problems and wish lists. They help teams to gain agreement on the agenda and guidelines for lateral thinking sessions. The remaining steps in the process are: generating ideas, sorting and building/ assessing. For many people, the most useful and fun part gets underway with Edward de Bono’s tools for generating ideas, which include:
• Alternatives/Concept Extraction. List alternatives and then find concepts to link them. This provides a base for developing new ideas.
• Challenge. Ask “why” repeatedly. This enables you to discard assumptions and to identify new vantage points.
“IMAGINATION IS MOREIMPORTANT THAN KNOWLEDGE.”
Albert Einstein
• Random Entry. Choose objects and disparate information and associate them. This will help to form new patterns.
• Provocation. Use role reversal, hyperbole, and exaggeration. These ‘triggering’ methods will spark ideas.
• Disproving. Subject widely accepted ideas to extreme scrutiny, and see where that leads. This will help you see new options and will reveal new paths to take.
• Word/Picture Mapping. Start with one word or picture and add others, in order to extract new ideas. This creative tool is a clear and powerful way of developing understanding, linking concepts, exploring ideas and sparking imagination.
Edward de Bono’s techniques have proven so popular that the field of lateral thinking has attracted many business academics. Paul Sloane is one of the most respected, and his insights have helped many companies. He opens minds to new possibilities and vistas with a range of techniques that can help us become better lateral thinkers. These include asking “what if?” questions. Briefly, these sessions begin with the facilitator posing a situation or a problem. Then the facilitator asks the “what if?” question – again and again, as if reluctant to see each answer as the definitive conclusion. These repeated inquiries push us beyond the traditional realm of thinking into a more radical realm – and ultimately leading us to useful insights and innovations.
The significance of lateral thinking to strategic development is emphasized by Paul Sloane in The Leader’s Guide to Lateral Thinking Skills. Paul Sloane makes the point that, “The conventional leader is fine when what is needed is command and control of a well-defined process. But for rapid and discontinuous change, the lateral leader is better equipped. He or she focuses on developing the skills of the team in innovation, creativity, risk-taking and entrepreneurial endeavors. The lateral leader manages change by initiating it.”
LATERAL THINKERS ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE: EXpERIENTIAL FLEXIBLE, IMAGINATIVE, INNOVATIVE, INQLHSITIVE, INTUITIVE, NON-JUDGMENTAL, OBSERVANT, PROVOCATIVE AND UNORTHODO X.
Another useful technique that Paul Sloane applies is to see the issue in a series of lateral thinking puzzles that take the form of ‘fill-in-the-blanks.’ You start with a statement that is realistic but improbable, and then you have to recreate the set of circumstances that led up to the situation. There are many possible explanations but only one that the originator had in mind. The answer is likely not the obvious one, rather it is the one that he describes as the most satisfying.
Not only is lateral thinking highly productive, there is also a strong element of fun. Just as comedians look at the world in different ways, lateral thinking sessions can lead to unexpected, often amusing scenarios. This isn’t a trivial point: it is all about gleaning new ideas from seeing the world in a different way. This essentially comes from the same challenging, often irreverent and imaginative place as the humorist’s vantage point.
IF YOU WANT TO OUT-COMpETE YOUR OPPONENTS, YOU HAVE TO OUT-THINK THEM.
Critical, strategic and lateral thinking all play a vital role. They help us build stronger organizations capable of generating more revenue. There is no doubt that thinking skills will impact all of the six Rs. More than that, the six Rs will improve our thinking skills by informing our judgments and providing a clear focus. All three approaches will reveal how to improve relationships and reputation; they will remind you why the company exists or even inject new purpose; and they will suggest ways of motivating others. Quite simply, by scrutinizing and challenging strategy (in fact, all business activities), and by identifying and developing new ideas, you will lead your company to a more resilient future. In essence, the power of critical, strategic and lateral thinking skills can be summed up with the following advice: if you want to out-compete your opponents, you have to out-think them. One question still remains: is it necessary to use all three styles? The answer is: sometimes yes; sometimes no. They are complementary. So the key is to develop all these skills and use them as needed.
By applying critical, strategic and lateral thinking skills to all of the issues facing the business, including external issues, we will be better able to develop and maximize new opportunities as well as avoiding potential problems and challenges. Crucially, successful businesses cannot succeed by operating in a way that is disconnected or fails to take account of all the issues influencing its future. It is the whole business that matters, including the external setting it operates in, and managing this challenge provides the focus for the next chapter.
Finally, we should end this chapter, as we started, with the words of René Descartes in Le Discours de la Methode, “It is not enough to have a good mind, the main thing is to use it well.”