William Nozak | Harper’s Hut Shaved Ice
Every mind wanders, and other minds take the two second rocket ship to space. These are the same minds sitting to the left and right of you at meetings. So how can a group of ADD/ADHD, stargazers, narcissists, and the catatonic produce results in a group setting? Unintentionally, this group dynamic further diminishes outcomes by the production of noise, friction, and destructive interference. Dissonant cacophony. Is that the descriptor for your meeting?
In a court room a judge does her best to listen to the arguments set forth by the attorneys, but what is taking place is the posturing of two perspectives: adversarial thinking. For instance, in this approach if I think of something that will weaken my argument then I would not say it. In this system why would anyone divulge contrary findings? How does this style of information gathering get us closer to the truth? It does not. Instead of adversarial thinking, Edward De Bono Author of Six Thinking Hats proposes the constructive alternative parallel thinking. How does this relate to business owners? Instead of starting meetings from a debate mindset, with two or more stances of opposing interpretation, look in the same direction at the same facts at the same time. Parallel thinking.
Consider each new decision as a destination and each choice as the route to the destination. Without a map, how can anyone with certainty take the best route to the destination? Secondly, how can they consider themselves informed enough to travel to the destination in the first place? Parallel thinking is the building of a map. De Bono teaches organizations six directions a team must look in order to develop the map: (1) facts, neutral and objective, (2) emotional, feelings, likes, dislikes, (3) difficulty, dangers, caution signs, (4) value, benefits and positive optimism, (5) growth, creativity, possibilities and new ideas, (6) the overarching big picture, management of the thinking process, and the control of the process. When we look in one direction at the same time, decisions are more informed, teams are more on-board, and our decision making atlas is more complete.
Too often our personalities trend us toward thinking through solely one “hat.” The example is the critic or the optimist. Parallel thinking forces the thinker to think in one direction at a time. No longer does it allow one “hat” thinking, or is it my idea or yours, but instead, what is the best decision and route to that destination, according to the map that has been constructed. If your meetings are long and unproductive, ruled by the loudest most aggressive, intelligent, or highest ranking person in the meeting, consider parallel thinking. For more blogs by this author visit www.harpershutshavedice.me or Harper’s Hut Blog. For a more thorough understanding of parallel thinking read Six Thinking Hats.