Thinking Behavior
There are only two sorts of thinking behavior:
1. YOU WANT TO THINK: You have a way of doing something, there are no problems and you can carry on doing things in exactly the same way — but you want to see if there is a better way. Could it be done faster? Could it be done in a simpler way? Could it be done at less cost? Could it be done with less errors, wastage, pollution, danger etc.? These are the key questions that are asked in any improvement exercise. This sort of thinking is extremely important in business, in engineering, in government etc. where there is an emphasis on efficiency, effectiveness and cost cutting. The same thing applies almost as much to personal life. The difficulty is that you are not forced to do this thinking but have to want to do it.
2. YOU HAVE TO THINK: There is a problem you cannot solve. There is a dilemma that makes it difficult to reach a decision. There is a conflict that is growing worse. There is a need for a new idea and you cannot get one. You need to find an opportunity but cannot do so. In short you are stuck. You cannot move ahead. You have no choice. You have to think. There is no routine way of tackling the situation. Ordinary thinking will not help you. You have to think hard.
~ * ~
WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT OUR BRAIN, A SELF ORGANIZING SYSTEM?
If the brain sets up patterns, what can we do? Do we not just have to follow the patterns?
Imagine a slope. You place a ball at the top of the slope and the ball rolls down the slope. The ball is rolling down the slope on its own — but you have chosen to place the ball at the top of the slope.
Imagine that the slope is quite wide and at the bottom there is a matchbox. Your task is to knock the matchbox over. You cannot just place the ball anywhere at the top of the slope. You choose a position such that the rolling ball will hit the matchbox.
In exactly the same way, thinking is a combination of what the mind does and what we set it up to do.
Add up the numbers 5 + 11 + 16. That is easy enough. Some people might find it easier if the numbers were arranged one under the other (see the image below). Some very young people might find it easier if they were put down as dots in a row and then you just count all the dots. In this example we see how we can arrange things so that the mind finds it easier to work.
If you are asked to tell which of two similar square shapes is the bigger you might have a hard job estimating the difference. But if you are able to place one square over the other, you can instantly see which is the bigger. Again we have re-arranged things to make the mind's task easier.
~ * ~
Carpenters and Thinkers
My favorite model for a thinker is that of the carpenter. Carpenters do things. Carpenters make things. Carpenters do things step by step. Carpenters deal with the physical substance of wood — so we can see what they are doing.
So the model of the carpenter provides us with all the elements of thinking skill that I shall be describing in this book.
ATTITUDES: The attitudes with which we approach thinking.
PRINCIPLES: The guiding principles that make for good thinking.
HABITS: The routines we seek to make automatic.
BASIC OPERATIONS: The fundamental operations of thinking.
TOOLS: The thinking tools we practice and use deliberately.
STRUCTURES: Formats in which we hold things for convenience. Always keep in mind the model of the carpenter as he or she goes about constructing things.
~ * ~
GOOD ATTITUDES
... Everyone has to think — everyone can think.
... Thinking is a skill that can be developed.
... I am a thinker.
... I can get better and better at thinking.
... Thinking may require a deliberate effort.
... Things that appear complicated at first can often be made more simple.
... Take one step at a time.
... Separate your ego from your thinking. Look at your thinking objectively.
... The purpose of thinking is not to be right all the time.
... Listening and learning is a key part of thinking.
... Always be humble - arrogance is the mark of a poor thinker.
... Thinking should be constructive, not negative. It is not enough to attack and to prove the other party wrong. Start out trying to be constructive and to take things further.
... Explore a subject instead of arguing about it.
... The other party in an argument usually has something useful and constructive to say, if you make the effort to pick this out. Instead of just looking for points of attack, try to see what is of value in an opposing position.
... People with differing points of view are usually right according to their own special perception. Instead of considering others stupid try to see their perception and why they hold the view they hold.
... It is possible to be creative and to have new ideas.
... Do not be afraid to try out ideas.
... At any point in thinking there may be alternatives that you have not yet thought of.
... Avoid dogmatism even when you do feel that you are right.
~ * ~
THE SIX THINKING HATS
The six thinking hats is a method for doing one sort of thinking at a time. Instead of trying to do everything at once we 'wear' only one hat at a time. There are six colored hats and each color represents a type of thinking.
WHITE HAT: Facts, figures and information. What information do we have? What information do we need to get?
RED HAT: Emotions, feelings, hunches and intuition. What do I feel about this matter right now?
BLACK HAT: Caution. Truth. Judgement. Fitting the facts. Does this fit the facts? Will it work? Is it safe? Can it be done?
YELLOW HAT: Advantages, benefits, savings. Why it can be done. Why there are benefits. Why it is a good thing to do?
GREEN HAT: Exploration, proposals, suggestions, new ideas. Alter-natives for action. What can we do here? Are there some different ideas?
BLUE HAT: Thinking about thinking. Control of the thinking process.
ROLE-PLAYING
... 'Let's have four minutes green-hat thinking on this.'
... 'What are the facts? Some white-hat thinking, please.'
... 'Be realistic. Put on your black hat'
... 'Switch from the black hat to the yellow hat for the moment.'
USE OF THE HATS
1. YOURSELF:
You can choose to put on a hat in order to tell others the sort of thinking you are going to do.
... 'Putting on my black hat I am going to point out what is wrong with the idea...'
... 'I am going to put on my red hat because I have a hunch this is all a trick. I do not know why but that is my hunch’
... 'Putting on my green hat I want to put forward a new idea. Why don't we let people buy their motor-cycles from us?'
... 'I want to do some yellow-hat thinking here. There are the following good points about the idea...'
... 'We do not seem to be getting anywhere. Putting on my blue hat I suggest we make clear what we are trying to do.'
2. SOMEONE ELSE: When talking to someone else you can ask that person to put on a particular hat, to take off a particular hat or to switch hats. This allows you to request a change in thinking —without offending the other person.
... 'Please give me your black-hat thinking on this matter. We do not want to make any mistake.'
... 'Never mind what we can do. I just want some white-hat thinking. What are the facts?'
... 'That is what you feel about it. Now take off your red hat.'
... 'I am going to ask you to switch from black-hat thinking to some yellow-hat thinking.’
3. GROUP: When working with a group the leader of the group, or anyone else, can ask individuals in the group – or the whole group – to put on, take off, or switch hats. This use is similar to use with one other person - except that more people are involved.
... 'Let's all try three minutes of green-hat thinking’
... I want to know what you all really feel about this project - so some red-hat thinking from each one of you.'
...'l think we need some white-hat thinking here. Do you all agree?'
... 'Some blue-hat thinking, please. Suggestions on the direction our thinking should take.'
MENTAL IMAGES FOR REMEMBERING THE HATS:
White hat: Think of blank paper. Think of a computer print-out. The white hat means neutral information. It is not a matter of argument or making suggestions. White-hat thinking focuses directly on the available information.
Information is very important for thinking, so it is useful to have a way of being able to focus directly on information. Under the white hat there are three key questions:
1. What information do we have?
2. What information is missing?
3. How do we get the information we need?
RED HAT
Think of fire and warm. The red hat is for emotions, feelings, hunches and intuition.
In a way the red hat is the opposite of the white hat. The white hat seeks to put down the objective facts and is not interested in what anyone feels about them - facts are facts. The red hat is not interested in the facts but only in people’s feelings.
BLACK HAT
Think of a stern judge. Think of someone who gives you a black mark if you get something wrong.
The black hat is certainly the most used of all the hats. In some ways it is also the most valuable of the hats. The black hat prevents us from making mistakes and doing silly things.
The black hat is concerned with truth and reality. The black hat is the hat of critical thinking: Is this right?'
Under the black hat come a number of questions:
1. Is it true?
2. Does it fit?
3. Will it work?
4. What are the dangers and problems?
YELLOW HAT:
Think of sunshine and optimism. The yellow hat is full of hope but as it is a logical hat the reasons behind the hope must be given.
In general, the yellow hat is looking forward into the future: 'If we do this, then these benefits will arise...’
The yellow hat can also be used for looking backwards into the past: 'This thing happened. There were a lot of harmful effects. But there were also some good effects — let's put on our yellow hat to find the good effects.'
The yellow-hat thinker asks himself or herself the following questions:
1. What are the benefits?
2. Why should it work?
GREEN HAT
Think of grass, trees, vegetation and growth. Think of the energy of growth and fertility. Think of shoots and branches.
The green hat is the 'active' hat.
The green hat is the hat for creative thinking. In fact, the green hat covers both uses of the word ‘creative'.
1. Creative thinking may mean bringing something about or making something happen. This is similar to constructive thinking. The green hat is concerned with proposals and suggestions.
2. Creative thinking may mean new ideas, new alternatives, new solutions, new inventions. Here the emphasis is on ‘newness'.
The white hat lays out the information.
The red hat allows feelings to be put forward.
The black and yellow hats deal with logical assessment. So it falls to the green hat to be the action hat under which ideas are put forward.
When you are asked to put on the green hat you are being asked to come up with suggestions and ideas. This is active thinking, not reactive thinking.
The five main uses of the green hat are as following:
1. Exploration
2. Proposals and suggestions
3. Alternatives
4. New ideas
5. Provocations
BLUE HAT
Think of the blue sky. The sky is above everything. If you were up in the sky you would be looking down at everything below. With blue-hat thinking you are above the thinking: you are looking down at the thinking. With blue-hat thinking you are thinking about thinking.
The blue hat is the overview. The blue hat is the process control. The blue hat is like the conductor of the orchestra. With all the other hats we think about the subject matter, but with the blue hat we think about our thinking.
The blue hat covers the following points:
1. Where are we now?
2. What is the next step?
3. Program for thinking
4. Summary
5. Observation and comment
~ * ~
SEQUENCIAL USE OF HATS:
What is the correct sequence in which the six hats could be used?
There is no single correct sequence because the sequence Will vary with the circumstances. You are free to make up your own sequence but some rules or guidelines are given here.
1. Each hat may be used any number of times in the sequence.
2. In general it is best to use the yellow hat before the black hat since it is difficult to be positive after you have been critical.
3. The black hat is used in two ways. The first way is to point out the weaknesses in an idea. This should then be followed by the green hat, which tries to overcome the weakness. The second use of the black hat is for assessment.
4. The black hat is always used for final assessment of the idea. This final assessment should always be followed by the red hat. This is so that we can see how we feel about the idea after we have assessed it.
5. If you believe that there are strong feelings about a subject, you would always start the thinking with the red hat in order to get those feelings out into the open.
6. If there are no strong feelings you would start with the white hat in order to collect information. After the white hat you would use the green hat to generate some alternatives. Then you would assess each alternative with the yellow hat followed by the black hat. You would then choose an alternative and finally assess your choice with the black hat followed by the red hat.
The major difference in sequence is between the two situations: seeking an idea; reacting to an idea.
Seeking an Idea:
The sequence of hat colors might be:
WHITE: To gather available information.
GREEN: For further exploration and to generate alternatives.
YELLOW: To assess the benefits and feasibility of each alternative.
BLACK: To assess the weaknesses and dangers of each alternative.
GREEN: To develop further the most promising alternatives and to make a choice.
BLUE: To summarize and assess what has been achieved so far.
BLACK: To make the final judgement on the chosen alternative.
RED: To find out the feelings on the outcome.
Reacting to a Presented Idea:
Here the sequence is different because the idea is known and, usually, the background information is also known.
RED: To find out the existing feelings about the idea.
YELLOW: To make an effort to find the benefits in the idea.
BLACK: To point out weaknesses, problems and dangers in the idea.
GREEN: To see if the idea can be modified to strengthen the yellow-hat benefits and to overcome the black-hat problems.
WHITE: To see if available information can help in modifying the idea to make it more acceptable (if the red-hat feelings are against the idea).
GREEN: Development of the final suggestion.
BLACK: Judgement of the final suggestion.
RED: To find out the feelings on the outcome.
Short Sequences:
Quite often short sequences of the hats are used for various purposes.
YELLOW/BLUE/RED: For quick assessment of an idea.
WHITE/GREEN: To generate ideas.
BLACK/GREEN: To improve an existing idea.
BLUE/GREEN: To summarize and spell out the alternatives.
BLUE/YELLOW: To see if the thinking has had any benefits.
~ * ~
TOOLS FOR THINKING >>>
OUTCOME AND CONCLUSION
... 'You have been thinking for twenty minutes — what is the outcome?'
... 'The five minutes' thinking time is up — what is the outcome?'
... This meeting has gone on for three hours. We have had a lot of discussion. What is the outcome?'
In general, there seem to be two possible answers to that question:
... 'Here is the solution to the problem. Here is the answer. Here is the decision. Here is the conclusion.'
... We do not seem to have gotten anywhere at all.
When the thinking has to come to an end what is the outcome? Is it just a matter of either a specific answer or nothing at all? If there is not the specific answer, have we been wasting our time?
If you do not seem to be getting anywhere then thinking is not enjoyable. So it is important to pay attention to the outcome of any thinking. The outcome is not just a matter of right answer or no answer. There are many possible outcomes of thinking, but we can simplify them into three types of outcome:
1. Better map (exploration)
2. Pin-pointing needs
3. Specific answer
BETTER MAP
At the end of your thinking you should have a better map of what you have been thinking about. If nothing else, you have gone over the territory. You have explored. You have a better idea of the information, concepts and feelings in the matter.
PIN-POINTING NEEDS
After thinking about a matter you should have a much clearer idea about why you cannot go further, about why you cannot reach a conclusion.
It may be that there is a need for some vital information and you cannot proceed without that.
SPECIFIC ANSWER
This means that you have come to a conclusion; have reached a decision; have arrived at a design; have a specific plan or strategy; have a solution to the problem; have an answer to the question.
~ * ~
THE FIVE-MINUTE THINKING FORMAT
One Minute
- Be clear about the purpose of the thinking
- Be clear about the focus
- Be clear about the sort of outcome you need
- Be clear about the situation
Next Two Minutes
First of all, you explore the subject in terms of information and your own experience. Then you start to have some ideas.
- Is there an obvious answer?
- What are the usual answers here?
- In very broad terms what would I like to do?
- How can I put that wish into practical action?
- What other ways are there?
Next One Minute
This is the stage of choosing or deciding.
- What alternative is most likely to work?
- Which alternative would be most acceptable in practice?
- Which alternative best fits my needs and priorities?
- Which alternative best fits the circumstances of this thinking exercise?
Final One Minute
If you have reached a conclusion, answer or decision, test it out by going through the reasons why you think it will work. You may have time to compare it with other possible solutions to show why the one you chose is better.
If you do not have a final conclusion, you should spend this minute defining the outcome of your thinking in another way.
What have you learned through thinking about the subject?
What alternatives have you considered (even if you could not decide between them)?
What alternative approaches might there be — even if these are not solutions?
What further information you really need?
What are the sticky points?
What are the key problems?
Output:
At the end of the five minutes you must be able to give your output. You must be able to do this directly without waiting to be asked questions.
~ * ~
FORWARD OR PARALLEL
There are two main directions of thinking: forward or parallel.
You can walk along the path, or you can pause and look around at the garden.
In forward thinking if we are at A we move forward to B and then to C. If we have both A and B, then we move forward to C. In other words, where we get to is determined by where we are now.
In parallel thinking we have A and then B and then C, all in parallel. They are not determined by each other. They exist in parallel. We can look around to find them.
There is food on the table. And we are hungry. So let us sit down to eat. This is forward thinking.
In parallel thinking we might say: there is bread on the table; there is butter on the table; there is soup on the table etc., etc. All these exist in parallel.
Strangers standing around in a crowd are parallel. A woman moving towards someone she recognizes as a friend is 'forward'.
The key question for parallel thinking is: What else is there?
This means what other things, what other alternatives. What other points of view, what other perceptions etc.?
The key question for forward thinking is:
So what follows?
If we have 'this' then what follows? Where do we go from here? What can we deduce?
It is obvious that 5+3 give the answer 8. That is forward thinking.
The answer 8 could have been the result of 5+3. But it could also have been the result of 4+4, 7+1 and 6+2. This is parallel thinking.
We use parallel thinking for exploring both what is there and also possibilities.
We use forward thinking for going forward to solutions or conclusions.
The two key questions to ask as a habit of thinking are:
- “What else might there be?”
- “So what follows?”
~ * ~
LOGIC AND PERCEPTION
Perception is how we see the world around us.
Logic is how we make the best use of those perceptions.
The two main aspects of perception are: breadth and change.
So the key habit questions to ask are:
- How broad a view am I taking?
- In what other ways is it possible to look at things?
One shoe salesman wrote: “This is a terrible market – no one wears shoes.” The other salesman wrote: “This is a wonderful market – no one wears shoes.”
~ * ~
CAF: Consider All Factors
CAF is an attention-directing tool. CAF is a tool designed to increase the breadth of perception. What are the factors that have to be considered in this matter?
The more you use the tool in a deliberate manner the more of a tool it becomes. If you are shy about mentioning the tool, it does not become usable as a tool but remains as a weak attitude.
~ * ~
APC: Alternatives, Possibilities, Choices
This is another attention directing tool. Instead of moving ‘forward’ with our thinking we look at ‘parallel’ possibilities.
There are many sorts of alternatives:
PERCEPTION: The same thing can be looked at in many different ways.
ACTION: Alternative courses of action that can be taken in a situation.
SOLUTIONS: Alternative solutions to a problem.
APPROACHES: Different ways of tackling the problem in order to find a solution.
EXPLANATIONS: Alternative explanations of how something happened. Alternative hypotheses in science.
DESIGN: Alternative designs, each of which fulfils the purpose of the design (machines, buildings, posters etc.).
Sometimes we are forced to look for alternatives because the traditional way does not work. Sometimes we want to look for alternatives because we believe we might find a better way than the one we now use. If someone tells you that there are only two possible solutions to a problem, you might spend a few moments thinking of further alternatives. You may or may not find further alternatives, but it is always worth spending some time looking for them.
Perhaps the most difficult thing to do is to stop to look for alternatives when you do not have to. Gillette invented the safety razor when he stopped to look for an alternative way of shaving. We often assume that things are done in the best possible way, but that is not always so. Often things are done in that way for historical reasons or because no one has tried to find a better way.
Whenever you set out to look for alternatives you must be very clear about the purpose of the alternative.
... I want alternative ways of blocking this hole.
... I want alternative ways of carrying water to that point.
... I want alternative suggestions as to how this system might fail.
'I want alternative colors for the carpet' is quite different from 'I want alternative ways of covering the floor'. If you just say, 'I want alternatives to a carpet,' it is not clear whether you want alternative ways of covering the floor or alternatives that are as warm as a carpet. As with CAF, the more formally and the more deliberately the tool is used the more valuable it becomes as a tool.
~ * ~
VALUES
In mathematics and in logic puzzles it is enough to get the right answer. Real life is very different because values are involved. Values are part of thinking. Values usually involve other people. A logically correct solution to a problem may be unacceptable because it goes against people's values (which may be illogical).
If we are going to think in the real world, we have to be conscious of values in all our thinking.
In all thinking there are two key questions which should become a thinking habit. These questions should be asked routinely whenever we are thinking about something:
1. What are the values involved?
2. Who is affected by the values?
Both yellow-hat and black-hat thinking are concerned with values. With yellow-hat thinking we look for the benefits. With black-hat thinking we look for the problems and dangers.
In looking at values we need to look at the people involved. The specific OPV (Other people’s views) tool is explained in the next few pages.
In looking at values we need to look at the “Consequences” of any action. The specific C&S tool is explained in the next few pages.
In looking at values we need a quick way of assessing the “Plus, Minus and Interesting” aspects. The specific PMI tool is explained in the next few pages.
~ * ~
OPV: Other People’s Views
The world is full of people. Thinking is done by people. Thinking affects people.
The two key questions are:
1. Who is affected by this thinking (action)?
2. What are the views (thinking) of those affected?
The OPV and values are very closely linked because the views of those affected are going to be determined by the values involved. So in doing an OPV we need to look closely at the values involved.
Two sides in an argument: One obvious use of the OPV is to consider the thinking of both sides in an argument or conflict. If you are on one side of the conflict, you make an effort to see things from the other side.
This effort to see the other point of view or other perception of the situation must be objective. How do they see things?
~ * ~
C&S: Consequences and Sequel
Never mind about the 'sequel' part. treat this perception tool as 'consequences'. The tool is pronounced 'C and You could make a case for saying that this is the most important of all the thinking tools in real life. If your thinking is going to result in action of any sort (decisions, choices, plans, initiatives etc.) then that action is going to take place in the future. So you have to look at the consequences of that action.
Will it work out?
What are the benefits?
What are the problems and dangers (risks)?
What are the costs?
TIME SCALE
IMMEDIATE: The immediate consequences of the action.
SHORT-TERM: What happens after the immediate.
MEDIUM-TERM: What happens when things have settled down.
LONG-TERM: What happens much later. The actual timings will vary from situation to situation. For example, with a new electric power station, immediate is five years, short-term is ten years. medium-term is twenty years and long-term is up to fifty years. With a quarrel with your friend, immediate is now. short-term is one day, medium-term is one week, and long-term is one month.
For each situation set the specific time scales before starting to do the C&S.
RISK
Will it work out as I hope it will?
What might go wrong?
What are the actual dangers?
Another way of looking at risk is to ask yourself:
What is the worst thing that can go wrong?
If you can imagine the worst and still face it, you may want to go ahead with your action.
You could also ask:
What is the ideal (best) outcome?
In between these two you might ask:
What is the most likely outcome?
CERTAINTY
You can never be certain about the future. You can never have full information about the future. That is one of the reasons why thinking is so important. When we look at the future with a C&S there are different levels of certainty or uncertainty.
I am sure that things will turn out like this.
This is the most likely outcome.
It could be like this, or like this.
This is a possibility - but I cannot be sure.
I have no idea what will happen.
We often do have to act with low levels of certainty. We cannot always wait for full certainty (which may never become available). The important point is to be aware of the level of certainty. If you really are guessing - then know that you are guessing.
~ * ~
PMI: Plus, Minus and Interesting
Many highly intelligent people use their thinking to back up or defend their immediate judgement of a matter. The PMI is a perception-broadening tool (attention-directing) which forces a thinker to explore the situation before coming to a judgement.
The PMI is an exploring tool and also an evaluation tool. Let us see what we will see if we look in all directions.
At first sight the PMI may look like a mini-version of the six thinking hats. It resembles the yellow hat, black hat and green hat (interesting). There is a resemblance, but the PMI is directly concerned with good (plus), bad (minus) and interesting points. The black hat is not concerned with minus points directly but with judgement of how something fits facts or experience. Also the black and yellow hats do have to be logical, whereas the PMI does not —and can even include feelings.
The PMI is a very simple, overall, exploration scan.
INTERESTING
... 'Interesting to see what would happen ...'
... 'Interesting to see what this might lead to ...'
... 'What would happen if ...'
You can use phrases like this in order to collect the interesting points. Interesting points are neither good nor bad but points of interest. Interesting points are observations and comments. Neutral points (neither good nor bad) also come under interesting.
SCAN
The PMI is a scanning tool. It is not a matter of thinking of the points as they come up and then dropping each point into a box labelled. P. M or I. It is a matter of specifically looking in the Plus direction first and noting what you see (ignore any other points); then looking specifically in the Minus direction and noting what you see (ignore any other points); and finally looking specifically in the Interesting direction.
Always keep the PMI sequence in that order (Plus points first, then Minus, then Interesting).
~ * ~
FOCUS AND PURPOSE
KEY QUESTIONS
All thinking habits have some key questions that we should be asking ourselves all the time. For focus and purpose these are:
What am I looking at (thinking about) right now?
What am I trying to do?
You can ask yourself such questions from time to time in your thinking. You can raise such questions at a meeting which seems to be getting nowhere.
SETTING THE FOCUS
Just as we need to be aware of the focus and purpose so we should also be able to set the focus and purpose.
What do you want to focus on?
Both from moment to moment and also in setting a thinking agenda (blue hat) you should be able to pick out and define different focus areas — and what you want to do with each focus area.
TYPE OF THINKING
We can consider four broad types of thinking:
EXPLORING: Looking around, increasing our knowledge and aware-ness of the subject. We want to make a better map of it.
SEEKING: Here we have a definite need. We want something. We want to end up with something specific. We may need a solution for a problem. We may need a design or a new creative idea. We may need to resolve a conflict.
CHOOSING: There are a number of alternatives and we have to make a choice or decision. There might be just one action course and our choice is whether to use it or not.
ORGANIZING: Here all the pieces are present just as the pieces of a puzzle might all be present. We have to put the pieces together in the most effective way. We move things around. We try one way or another. We use various thinking tools (AFC OPV. C&S etc.). Designing a house is part of creative thinking and part of 'seeking' thinking. Putting the house up is part of organizing thinking. Laying out a plan and carrying out the plan can both be part of organizing thinking.
CHECKING: Is this correct? Is this right? Does it fit the evidence? Is it safe? Is it acceptable? This is black-hat thinking or critical thinking. We react to what is put before us. We judge it. We check it.
~ * ~
AGO: Aims, Goals and Objectives
Pronounced: A-G-O
This is another of the CoRT perception-broadening, attention-directing tools.
AGO is related to the thinking habit of wanting to know the focus and purpose of thinking at every moment. AGO, however, is more concerned with the over-all purpose or objective of the thinking than the moment-to-moment focus.
What is the objective of our thinking?
What do we want to end up with?
As soon as you have a clear view of the ideal outcome of your thinking effort — then you have a clear AGO.
ALTERNATIVE DEFINITIONS OF THE OBJECTIVE
An AGO is often a matter for discussion. Someone may do an AGO and others may not be happy with the definition of the objective that has been suggested. It is always worth trying alternative definitions. There is no one right way of defining a problem (until after you have solved it) but some ways are much more helpful than others.
SUB-OBJECTIVES
On the way to a distant town there may be other towns that we pass through on the way. So we may set up sub-objectives on the way to solving the over-all problem. This is related both to breaking down the big problem into smaller ones and also to picking out focus areas. Deciding between these definitions is not important. What is important is to know the objective of the thinking that is taking place.
What is the objective of our thinking?
What is the focus at this moment?
~ * ~
FIP: First Important Priorities
This attention-directing tool is pronounced 'FIPP'.
Many of the attention-directing tools are designed to broaden perception (CAF, CBS, OPV, PMI, APC). This is part of 'parallel' thinking: what else? We try to add to the list just as we try to think of more factors in CAF. With FIP as with AGO we try to narrow things down.
FIP is concerned directly with priorities. With FIP we direct attention to priorities.
What are the priorities here?
Not everything is of equal importance. Some things are much more important than others. Some values are much more important than others.
The FIP tool is related to the AGO tool and also to focus and purpose. because just as we need to know our objective at the beginning so we also need to know our priorities.
The objective is what we are trying to reach. The priorities are the guidelines which tell us how we get there. Priorities are things that have to be taken into account. These are usually priority values and priority factors.
INCLUDE AND AVOID
Some priorities have to be included. Safety is a priority that has to be included in any thinking on airplanes and air traffic. Human rights and justice are priorities that have to be included in law and police matters. Ease of manufacture is usually a priority that has to be included by designers. Cost is a factor that has usually to be included in setting up any business — so are profits.
Some priorities have to be avoided. We should try to avoid pollution. We should try to avoid sharp edges and detachable pieces in toys for young children. We should try to avoid fear in medical care. We should make it difficult to cheat systems (fraud). We try to reduce risk.
Through language we can sometimes convert one type of priority into another: we should seek hygiene in food retailing; we should avoid food contamination. We should seek efficiency in energy use; we should avoid energy waste.
HOW MANY PRIORITIES?
When you look at a list of factors (for example in choosing a holiday) you might find that all of the factors seem to be priorities. Usually a case can be made for the importance and value of most things — if we try hard enough. But the point of FIP is to force us to make choices: what are the really important things (not what would we like to have).
So it is useful when doing a FIP exercise to set an artificial limit on the priorities. This limit could be three. four or five. You cannot go beyond these. You may be able to condense several factors or values into one priority.
In serious matters you need not stick to this artificial limit. but such a limit provides good thinking discipline.
~ * ~
If you want to go through a review of reading done till now by the author, refer to this: “FIRST REVIEW SECTION” in the book at page 141.
~ * ~
PART THREE
BROAD AND DETAIL
Moving from broad idea to detailed idea and back again is both an important thinking habit and an important thinking operation.
... 'Get me a drink.'
... 'Get me a soft drink.'
... 'Get me a lemonade.'
We move from the broad to the detailed. In this case there are three levels. The detail level is always the one we can carry out. If any soft drink would do. that would be the detail level.
... 'I am going to reward him.'
... 'I am going to give him some money as a reward.'
... 'I am going to give him $50 as a reward.'
Again we move from the broad intention to the actual detail of what is to be done. In much of our thinking we do have to be detailed and specific and sometimes being 'broad' means being unable to give a detailed answer. But there are other times when it is very useful to be able to work at the 'broad' level.
GENERATING ALTERNATIVES
In a concrete floor there is a hole that is filled with water. You want to get the water out of the hole.
... 'I could suck the water out.'
... 'I could lift the water out.'
... 'I could displace the water.'
Each of these is a broad idea, a general method or a broad concept. Once we have the broad idea we then go on to see in what ways that broad idea could be carried out as a detailed idea. 'Suck the water out' suggests a pump or a siphon. 'Lift the water out' suggests a small bucket, spoon, sponge or mop. 'Displace the water' suggests putting in stones or even a plastic bag filled with water and then removing these objects later.
Instead of immediately trying to find the detailed idea it is often more useful to define some broad ideas. Once you have the broad idea, you look around for actual ways of carrying it out in a detailed way.
EXTRACTING THE BROAD IDEA
If we are seeking to improve or change something, the way we do it is to extract the broad idea. Once we have the broad idea we can do two things. We can see if a different broad idea may serve the purpose (what we want to achieve). Or. we can see if the broad idea can be carried out in a different and better way.
What are we trying to do?
What is the broad idea here?
Is there a better broad idea?
How else can we carry out the broad idea?
CONCEPT AND FUNCTION
We often use a lot of different words to describe the 'broad idea'.
broad idea
general method
principle
broad concept
concept
function
In some cases, it is more appropriate to use one word rather than another.
... 'What is the function of this switch?'
... 'The concept in this course is teach-yourself.'
... 'The principle is that of paying people by what they actually produce, not by time.'
... 'The general method we use here is to separate casualties into three groups: those who can wait; those who cannot be saved; those who need urgent attention.'
BASIC THINKING OPERATIONS
We will look at the three basic operations that a carpenter performs as an analogy to the thinking operations.
The cutting operation, The sticking operation and The shaping operation.
THE CUTTING OPERATION
You cut a piece of wood, you cut a piece of cake, you cut a slice of watermelon. ‘Cutting’ means that you do not want the whole thing. You want to remove part of the whole.
When we direct attention to part of the world around us we are ‘cutting’ a piece out of the whole. So all attention directing is a form of cutting.
FOCUS: We direct attention to part of the whole. We may eventually pay attention to the whole but do it bit by bit.
EXTRACT A FEATURE: From the whole situation we pull out or extract a feature. This is much used operation in thinking and is the basis of other operations.
ANALYSIS: When we extract a feature we can leave the rest behind. With analysis, however, we seek to be comprehensive. There should no left-overs. We seek to break down the situation into parts or pieces. These parts and their relationship describe the whole situation.
EXPANSION: Suppose there is a drawing of a square. You could pay attention to the whole square. Or, you could pay attention to just a corner of the square. When we pay attention to the whole square we are really cutting that square out of its surroundings. Expansion means taking a bigger cut which includes not only the square but more of its surroundings. Though ‘expansion’ seems to be the opposite of ‘cutting’ this is not really the case. The mind is just taking a bigger view of the surroundings.
So expansion and exploration are actually part of the ‘cutting’ process of thinking. Think of a wide-angle lens on a camera. This takes a bigger picture.
THE STICKING OPERATION
The sticking operation is where things are put together and they do not just fall apart. If you put two random things together for no reason at all and no connection develops between them, they remain 'unstuck'. Placing two pieces of wood together is not sticking the pieces together. For that there must be some sort of attachment or glue.
CONNECTIONS: The mind is very good at making connections. These may just be associations. Things have occurred together in space or time, so there is an association. Sometimes the link is stronger and there is a functional connection. If we place things together in a group or category, there is a linking factor (or factors) which all members of the group possess.
RECOGNITION: This is a fundamental thinking operation that arises directly from connection. What is before our eyes (or ears etc.) connects up with a pattern we already have stored in our mind. So we recognize the object and know what to do with it.
Pattern recognition and extrapolation into the future are based on a combination of recognition and checking.
SYNTHESIS: This is where we deliberately put things together to produce an effect. Writing any sentence is an example of synthesis. Combination of any sort is a form of synthesis (which was originally supposed to be a combination of thesis and anti-thesis).
CONSTRUCTION: This could be regarded as being the same as synthesis but I prefer 'construction' as this has a broader meaning. Synthesis suggests putting together what is now present. Construction may imply building things up step by step.
DESIGN: This is a form of construction. Things are put together in a certain way to achieve a defined objective. in design there are elements of creativity and, sometimes, aesthetics.
In general, the 'sticking operation' consists of two things:
1. Recognizing connections that are there.
2. Putting things together for a purpose.
THE SHAPING OPERATION
The carpenter has a shape in mind. The carpenter may even have that shape drawn up on a piece of cardboard (a template). As the carpenter shapes with the plane he or she continually checks the emerging shape against the planned shape.
It is this constant checking between the desired shape and the actual shape that is the basis of the thinking operation of shaping.
In fact, the operation could be called 'checking'.
JUDGEMENT: Is this correct? Does this fit what I know? Does this fit the facts? These are all aspects of black-hat checking. There is something against which we are checking or judging what is placed before us.
In real life, ‘assessing’ is often a complex form of both exploration and judgement. We explore the effects of a planned action both now and into the future. We then just those effects against norms.
MATCHING: Here we set out with specific needs and then check to see whether what we find matches those needs. Whenever you ask a question you are setting up a need for information. When you are given an answer you check whether the answer matches your needs.
HYPOTHESIS: Usually we check what we find against something that we already know (laws, facts etc.). With a hypothesis we imagine a possible mechanism (or explanation) and then see how well evidence supports that hypothesis. In speculation (what if...?) we do the same. We throw up tentative and even provocative ideas and then seek to check them out. Scientific thinking includes the ability both to set up such hypotheses and also to check them out.
COMPARISON: Often in judgement or checking we compare something in front of us with something we have in mind. With comparison we may have two (or more) things in front of us and we set about comparing them. In essence this means looking for points of similarity and points of difference.
~ * ~
TRUTH, LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
In practical terms there are two sorts of truth. There is 'game truth' and 'reality truth'.
GAME TRUTH: If you set up a game with rules and definitions, matters which agree with those rules and definitions are true and matters which do not agree are false.
REALITY TRUTH: How true are our ideas and information to the actual real world? We rely on perceptions and imperfect knowledge. From time to time even scientists are convinced they are right — but find out they have been mistaken. Reality truth is very important for most practical thinking. Even with mathematics there is a stage in which our perceptions of the real world have to be translated into symbols.
We live in a practical world and we do have to get on with things. We have to make decisions and plan action. We cannot always wait for absolute truth. So there are different levels of practical 'reality truth' that we use.
1. Checkable truth. You can check something again and again and always come up with the same answer. Other people can check it and will also get the same answer. It is quite possible that everyone's methods of checking (or instruments) are intrinsically faulty.
2. Personal experience. We tend to believe the evidence of our own eyes. But we can be mistaken. Memory may play tricks on us. There is illusion, deception and even hallucination.
3. Second-hand experience. That what other people tell us. Even if an-other person is sincere and reliable, that person may have got the information from someone who is not so reliable. In any case people may be reliable and sincere and yet mistaken.
4. Generally accepted. It is part of the culture or accepted know-ledge. The earth goes around the sun. Deficiency of vitamin C will cause scurvy. We only need to look back in history to see that over and again generally accepted ideas turn out to be false.
5. Authority. The authority of parents, teachers, reference books, scientists, religious leaders can provide a higher check on truth than is available to most people — so we tend to accept these matters. Again, history has shown us that authority can be mistaken.
THINKING HABIT
As part of our thinking habits we should always be asking the question:
What is the truth value here?
You then determine the truth value level, as in the examples about the cow. You need not accept everything you are told. You can try to check things (especially information) for yourself.
Perhaps the most important difficulty in thinking, particularly where other people are involved, is the 'claimed' truth value.
... 'This is so.'
... 'This is absolutely true.'
... 'This is always true.'
If that is the claim made for the truth value, then you need to check the value very closely. On the other hand, if the claim is more modest, you might accept it.
... This is sometimes the case.'
... 'I remember reading that.'
... 'This could be true.'
... 'Someone once told me.'
There is always the balance between the claimed truth value and the actual truth value.
Unfortunately, in thinking and argument, people tend to be dogmatic and certain in order to make their point. Also, our normal everyday habits of logic often make us insist on words like 'all'. 'always', 'never' because without these absolutes the logic would not work. If we were just to say 'by and large', 'in general', 'on the whole', 'in my experience', we would be closer to the truth but unable to use the power of inclusion/exclusion logic.
LOGIC
With logic we move from the present position to a new. one. No new outside information is coming in. We work forward from what we have (deductive logic).
Our first examination of truth value was whether something corresponded with reality.
Our second examination of truth value is whether something follows from what we have (according to the line of argument).
The habit questions to be asked are:
Does this follow?
Even more important is the question: "Must this follow (as claimed)?"
A logical argument depends on something that must follow. If we are content ‘it can follow’ then that is a suggestion and an exploration (and useful as such).
~ * ~
LOGIC, INFORMATION AND CREATIVITY
We very often forget that the 'must follow' of a logical argument is actually based not on logic but on a lack of creativity or information.
A man enters a room in which there is a beautiful crystal vase. The room is sealed. No one can enter the room. There are no windows or apertures into the room. Ten minutes later the man comes out. The vase is found broken in the room. He denies breaking the vase. But surely he must have broken the vase — there is no other possible explanation.
We need creativity or information to think of the possibility of a high-pitched tone shattering the glass. Once we have such thoughts, we can no longer say he 'must' have done it. That is what a good criminal lawyer is all about.
Creativity suggests alternative outcomes.
By definition contradictory things cannot both exist. The difficulty is to decide whether two things really are contradictory. We have love—hate relationships and in Japan it is perfectly possible for someone to be friend and not-friend because the Japanese do not have the Western horror of contradictions.
The original purpose of critical thinking was to uncover the truth by attacking and removing all that was false - so the truth would be revealed. This has a considerable value in discouraging the sloppy use of language, concepts and false arguments, but it lacks generative and constructive power.
To be sure the removal of weaknesses - as in black-hat thinking - will strengthen an idea, but that is not enough for constructive thinking.
Critical thinking does have a value as does one wheel on a motor-car. But the teaching only of critical thinking is quite insufficient.
Reactive thinking by itself is insufficient.
Water puts out fires.
Water is a liquid.
Gasoline is a liquid.
So gasoline should put out fires.
Critical thinking would point this out as a classic error of reasoning. John loves eating oysters. John is a boy. Peter is also a boy - so Peter must love eating oysters. We can easily see that this does not follow.
The reasoning might have gone differently.
All the liquids I have ever come across (water, mud, milk, urine) put out fire.
This may be due to their liquid nature which prevents air getting to the fire.
Gasoline is a new liquid (which I have not come across before) so it is reasonable to suppose it might put out a fire.
This line of inductive reasoning seems quite valid. It is only my experience with gasoline or knowledge about gasoline which tells me otherwise.
~ * ~
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES?
'There is something wrong with this thermometer. The reading won't go higher than 96 degrees but the water seems to be boiling. Shouldn't it read 100 degrees?'
Everyone knows that water boils at 100 degrees centigrade (212 degrees Fahrenheit). Right? Wrong. Water boils at 100°C only at sea-level. If the air pressure decreases as you go up a mountain, water boils at a lower temperature. So the scientific truth that water boils at 100°C holds only under special circumstances.
Salt is good. Salt makes food taste better. The human body needs salt. But too much salt on food tastes bad.
In all these examples something which seems to be obvious and true turns out to be true only under certain circumstances.
Whenever we claim a truth we need to specify the circumstances under which the truth holds.
Often both parties to the disagreement are right - but under different circumstances.
Does this mean that all truth is relative? Not at all. It means that some truth is relative. It is just that we have to be careful with those words 'all' and 'always' which are the foundation of our usual logic. We could say 'by and large' instead of 'always' but if we do want to say 'always' we need to define the circumstances. There are some exceptions to most generalizations.
THINKING HABIT - We need to get into the thinking habit of asking an important question:
Under what circumstances is this true (does it apply)?
~ * ~
HYPOTHESIS, SPECULATION AND PROVOCATION
Hypothesis, speculation and provocation are very important thinking skills for progress, change, science and creative thinking of any sort. Unfortunately, most traditional approaches to thinking ignore these important matters.
Hypothesis, speculation and provocation allow us to play in our minds. We try out new things. We carry out the 'thought experiments' that Einstein used to generate his powerful ideas.
JUMP AHEAD
In push thinking, we say:
“This is so – and as a result that follows.”
In pull thinking we say:
“This could be so and if we make this jump then that might follow.”
LEVEL OF SPECULATION
The levels of certainty range from the full certainty of good logic to the deliberate provocation of lateral thinking.
CERTAIN: The result of good logical deduction.
REASONABLY SURE: Not yet absolutely certain but very likely indeed. Just needs final confirmation. Also anything to do with the -future where absolute certainty is difficult.
GOOD GUESS: We know it is a guess but it is a good guess and certainly the best available guess.
POSSIBLE: This is no more than a possibility. There is not much supportive evidence but it is a possibility. Sometimes it is no more than 'just possible'.
TENTATIVE: This is 'flying a kite'. This is putting forward an idea that is not thought to be very reasonable to see what effect it has.
PROVOCATION: Here there is no claim at all for reasonableness or probability. A provocation is designed to get us out of our usual thinking. The provocation can be signaled with the word 'po', which indicates that it is indeed a provocation. 'Po cars should have square wheels.'
---
CREATIVE ATTITUDE
In argument and in much of thinking we want to confirm what we already know. With a creative attitude we want to move forward to something new.
Speculation allows us to open up new possibilities and then to pursue these possibilities.
Speculation allows us to set up new frames so that we can look at the evidence in a new way.
Speculation and provocation allow us to develop deliberate creative thinking tools to get us out of the traditional thinking patterns.
Without speculation we can get the steady development and improvement of an idea, but we are not likely to get a really new idea.
The creative attitude involves risk and play and trying things out.
BUSINESS THINKING
New initiatives, new ventures, new enterprises are all examples of speculative thinking. The idea is put together and then we seek to check it out through collecting information and doing market re-search. There may still be an element of risk — even though the entrepreneur is convinced that he or she is logically correct.
In launching new products or new strategies there is always speculative thinking: 'What if we do this ...?' The response of competitors has to be guessed at.
Because business is always dealing with action and with the future there is always speculation. Should we then not try to reduce the amount of speculation rather than to increase it? We need to do both at the same time. We need to reduce speculation and risk by collecting information, using monitoring and having back-up strategies. At the same time, we need to increase the speculation in terms of new ventures and new directions and new methods.
~ * ~
LATERAL THINKING
There are different levels of definition. 'You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper.'
Trying harder with the same ideas and the same approach may not solve the problem. You may need to move 'laterally' to try new ideas and a new approach.
'Lateral thinking is for escaping from established ideas and perceptions in order to find new ones.'
Our existing ideas have been established by particular sequences of experience. We tend to defend the established ideas and to see the world through the established perceptions. Lateral thinking is a means of escaping from the existing ideas and perceptions in order to find better ones.
'A self-organizing information system allows incoming information to organize itself into patterns. These patterns are not symmetric. We need a means for cutting across patterns (moving laterally). Lateral thinking provides that means.'
Obviously this is a technical definition and will not mean much to those who do not understand what is meant by a self-organizing system. This is the technical definition of lateral thinking and indicates that it is more than just a descriptive term. Lateral thinking is based on information behavior in self-organizing systems.
The specific meaning of 'lateral thinking' covers the use of specific techniques which are used to help us generate new ideas and new perceptions. This is directly concerned with creative thinking.
The general meaning of 'lateral thinking' covers thinking that sets out to explore and to develop new perceptions instead of just working harder with the existing perceptions. In this sense lateral thinking is closely connected with perceptual thinking. Many of the attention directing tools (CAF, OPV. C&S) are part of this general exploration of lateral thinking.
~ * ~
PROVOCATION AND PO
We come now to the specific techniques of lateral thinking. These techniques can be used deliberately by a thinker who needs to generate a new idea.
... 'Po cows can fly.'
... 'Po cars have square wheels.'
Both the above statements are totally unreasonable. They are contrary to experience and to the truth. Why should we make such absurd statements?
Provocation goes beyond hypothesis and speculation. In hypothesis and speculation, we guess that something might be so but we cannot yet prove it. With provocation, there is no pretense whatever that something might be true.
Because a provocation is not intended to be true we need some way of signaling to our listeners that a statement is put forward as a provocation — otherwise the listeners might think we have gone mad. We need a specific signal word for a provocation. Ordinary language does not contain such a word. The word 'suppose' and the phrase 'what if ...' are too weak, since they can be used to signal guesses that might be true. So several years ago I invented a new word, 'po'.
The word 'po' means: 'What follows is put forward directly as a provocation.' The letters 'p' and 'o' can be taken to represent “Provocative Operation”. Although it seems crazy and directly contrary to normal logic, a provocation is actually a logical operation in a patterning system.
SETTING UP PROVOCATIONS
Where do provocations come from? How do you set up your own provocations?
RECEIVED PROVOCATIONS: You hear or read a stupid remark. This remark is not intended as a provocation. It may be intended as a serious idea or as a silly idea (for a laugh). You have a choice. You can dismiss the idea or you can choose to treat the idea as a provocation. Radar was invented this way. Some mad person suggested that a radio beam could be used to shoot down airplanes. From this crazy idea (because the power of such a beam was very low) came the useful idea of using the radio beam to 'detect' airplanes.
So you can choose to treat any received idea as a provocation.
REVERSAL: You look at the way things are normally done and then you deliberately go in the opposite direction. We normally try to make wheels as round as possible — so let us make them 'un-round' or square. You normally pay to buy goods -- so let us have the store 'paying' the purchaser. This might have led to ideas like trading stamps. What is the normal direction? What is the reverse (opposite) direction?
ESCAPE: In this method you look at some feature that we normally take for granted in the situation (it should never be a negative feature) and then we drop that feature or cancel it. For example, we take for granted that watch dogs should bark. We drop that feature — escape from it — and so we get: 'Po watch dogs do not bark'. This leads on to the idea of small highly intelligent watch dogs that do not bark. Instead they quietly slink off into a corner where there is a button they have been trained to press. This button sets off a sophisticated alarm and security system — it could also trigger a tape-recorder playing a recording of many dogs barking.
WISHFUL THINKING: This should not just be a mild desire, like reducing the cost of an object by 10 per cent, but it should be a fantasy. You can say: 'Wouldn't it be nice if ...' Wouldn't it be nice if polluting factories were downstream of themselves on the river? This leads to the practical idea of legislating that inputs from the river must always be downstream of the output — so the factory is the first to sample its own pollution.
OUTRAGEOUS: Quite simply this covers anything at all which you want to set up as a provocation. Po cars are made of spaghetti. Po breakfast cereals should grow in their packets. Po everyone votes every day on government decisions. This last provocation could lead to the idea that each day at 10 pm every householder would switch on an electric fire if that householder disagreed with an announced policy. The surge in electricity usage could instantly be measured at the power station — so giving an instant total vote. For a vote of agreement, you switch on the fire at another time.
In general people are much too timid about setting up provocations. You are protected by the word 'po'. A provocation is meant to be a provocation. Whether you can use the provocation is not important. If you are setting up good provocations, at first you might only be able to use half of them. As you become more skilled at 'movement' you will be able to use more of them. A weak or timid provocation is very little use.
You should say: 'Here is my provocation.' Then you try to make use of it. It is a two-stage operation. Do not think of how you might use the provocation as you are setting it up.
~ * ~
MOVEMENT
A provocation is useless if we cannot do anything with it. We use 'movement' to move from the provocation to a new idea. Provocation and movement go together as a combined process.
The most important thing to keep in mind is that 'movement' is different from judgment. Many traditional approaches to creative thinking talk about 'delaying judgement' or 'suspending judgement' but this is much too weak. Just refusing to 'judge' does not indicate what the thinker should do instead. 'Movement' is an active operation that we can use deliberately. As we practice the operation of 'movement' we become more skilled at this operation. Eventually we can become so skilled that we are able to get 'movement' from almost any provocation.
With judgement (black-hat thinking) we compare what is before us with what we know. If what is before us is wrong. we reject it. With 'movement' we are operating outside the judgement/truth system. With movement we look at what is before us (usually a provocation) and we see how we can 'move' forward from this to a useful new idea.
WAYS OF GETTING MOVEMENT
There are a number of ways of moving forward from a provocation. Some of these ways are given here. These ways can be practiced until skill in the operation of movement has been built up. Without such skill lateral thinking is not effective. It is not too difficult to set up provocations — the skill lies in getting movement from these provocations.
ATTITUDE: There is the general attitude of 'movement'. We make a general effort to go forward from the provocation. What does this lead to? What does this suggest? Where does this take me? What is of interest here?
MOMENT-TO-MOMENT: This may be the most powerful way of getting movement. We visualize the provocation in action — no matter how absurd this seems. So we visualize cows flying. We visualize a car bumping along on square wheels. We visualize a plane landing upside down. As we visualize these things we watch for what happens moment-to-moment. This is totally different from seeing what happens 'in the end'. In the end the car with square wheels would shake to pieces. In the end the plane landing upside down would crash. it is this moment-to-moment observation of the provocation in action that can lead to new ideas.
EXTRACT A PRINCIPLE: Could we pick out or extract some principle from this provocation and then make use of this principle in a practical idea? In looking for a new advertising medium we might say: 'Po we should bring back the town crier.' in the operation of the town crier we find an interesting principle: you cannot 'switch off' the town crier. We take this principle and look around for a medium we would be unable to switch off. We think of advertising tele-phones. If you did not want to pay for a call you press a special button and get a free call — but at intervals advertising messages come on the line and interrupt your conversation. In addition to extracting a principle we can also extract a key feature or a specific aspect of the provocation. This becomes a sort of 'seed' that we take to plant in order to grow a new idea.
FOCUS ON THE DIFFERENCE: How is this different from what we normally do? What are the points of difference? By focusing on these points of difference we seek to move on to a new idea. The difference between a plane landing upside down and the right way up is that in the upside-down position the wings would give down-ward thrust. This leads on to the idea of 'positive' landings. From this we can actually get to some useful ideas — such as cancelling a negative bias to get instant extra lift in an emergency.
Focusing on the difference is extremely important when a thinker is faced with that most powerful killer of new ideas, the phrase: 'This is the same as ...' You suggest a new idea and this is dismissed by someone using that phrase. The phrase is so powerful because it does not attack the idea but simply indicates that it is not worthy of any attention since it is already known or being used. The only way to counter this phrase is to say: 'It may seem the same as (something) but let us focus on the difference ...' You then proceed to list the points of difference.
SEARCH FOR VALUE: Is there any value at all in this provocation? Are there any directly positive aspects? Are there any special circumstances under which the provocation would have a direct value? The provocation 'Po ambitious employees should wear a yellow shirt or blouse' leads to several interesting ideas. For example, in a service business a customer would always try to choose a service assistant wearing a yellow shirt or blouse.
The more our minds become sensitive to value, the abler we become to sense value in almost everything — including provocations.
Once we have detected the value, we strengthen it, build upon it and try to make it practical. A dog detects a faint scent. The dog pursues that scent. The scent gets stronger. Finally, the dog has tracked down its quarry. In the same way we can 'scent' value and can pursue that scent until we find value strong enough to be the basis of a new idea.
INTERESTING: What is 'interesting' about this provocation? The term ‘interesting' covers many of the other ways of getting movement. There may be an interesting point of difference. There may be an interesting principle. 'Interesting' forms the third part of the PMI attention-directing tool that was described earlier in this book. A creative person notices and seeks out what is interesting. You may have to make the effort to find out something interesting.
~ * ~
THE RANDOM WORD
The 'random-word' method is a powerful lateral-thinking technique that is very easy to use. It is by far the simplest of all creative techniques and is now widely used by people who need to create new ideas (for example, for new products). I first described this technique many years ago.
The history of inventions and ideas has many instances where a valuable creative idea seems to have been triggered by a chance happening (like the apple that is supposed to have fallen on to the head of Newton and inspired his concept of gravity as a force).
It is said that Archimedes, playing around with the soap. (or some other object) in his bath, suddenly hit on the idea of how to test whether a crown was made of real gold or not (by the difference between the weight of the crown in water and out of water). Do we have to sit around and wait for chance events to spark a new idea? Do we have to sit under trees and wait for an apple to fall on our heads? We can do that. But we can also get up and shake the tree. We can produce our own chance events. That is exactly what we do in the random-word lateral-thinking technique.
GETTING THE RANDOM WORD
We cannot choose the stimulus word because, if we chose the word, that word would merely fit in with our existing ideas (that would be the basis for the 'choice'). So instead of choosing the word we get a word by chance. That is why it is called a 'random word'.
You could have a bag full of thousands of words written on slips of paper. You put your hand into the bag and pull out one word.
You could think of a number of a page in a dictionary: say page 87. Then you think of the position of a word on that page: say the sixth word from the top. You open the dictionary at that page and count down to the sixth word. Here is your random word. If it is not a noun, keep going down until you come to the first noun.
You can close your eyes and circle your index finger above an open newspaper. You bring your finger down on to the newspaper and take the noun nearest to your finger.
You can have a list of sixty words (like the list given opposite). You glance at the seconds reading on your watch. If the reading shows 27 seconds you just take the 27th word from your list. If your watch can deal with 1/100ths of a second, your list can have 100 words and then you stop the reading (on a stop watch) and use that number to get a word.
It is much easier to use nouns than verbs, adjectives or adverbs. If you construct a list of your own, they should be well-known words with many associations, functions or features. Always try to use the first word you get. If you do not like the first word and try for another, and another, you are just waiting for a word to connect with ideas you already have. This is no use at all. So if the first word you get does not work move on to another technique and only try the random word again later.
USE OF THE TECHNIQUE
We want some new ideas about copiers.
The seconds reading on the watch shows '19' so the word is 'nose' (from the list given here).
We say: 'Copier po nose.'
Nose suggests smell.
What value could smell have (movement)?
Perhaps a copier could give off different smells depending on what was wrong with it. So we could use smell as a fault indicator. If your copier is not working you just sniff. The smell will immediately tell you what is wrong.
You are asked to entertain some people and have to find something for them to do. The watch reading is 49 seconds, so the word is 'heart'.
You might think of the little red 'heart' symbol that is now often used to mean: 'I "heart" New York' (I love New York). So you set the group the task of suggesting other symbols that might suggest various things such as: I 'hate' New York; I 'don't know anything about' New York; I 'laugh at' New York; I 'am saddened' by New York.
So the technique is very simple to use.
We follow the associations and the functions of the stimulus word.
We use the various methods of movement. We use aspects of the word as a metaphor.
Do not take too many steps in making the connection because if you take too many steps you will simply get back to ideas you already have and will not be using the special stimulating value of that random word.
Do not start out by putting down a list of aspects of the word because you will then just go down the list to find the aspect which fits ideas you already have. instead, think of some one aspect of the random word and try hard to work with that aspect. Only after a good try should you go on to another aspect.
~ * ~
PRINCIPLES OF THINKING
1. Always be constructive.
2. Think slowly and try to make things as simple as possible.
3. Detach your ego from your thinking and be able to stand back to look at your thinking.
4. At this moment, what am I trying to do? What is the focus and purpose of my thinking?
5. Be able to ‘swipe gears’ in your thinking. Know when to use logic when to use creativity, when to seek information.
6. What is the outcome of my thinking – why do I believe that it will work?
7. Feelings and emotions are important parts of thinking but their place is after exploration and not before.
8. Always try to look for alternatives, for new perceptions and for new ideas.
9. Be able to move back and forth between broad-level thinking and detail-level thinking.
10. Is this a matter of ‘may be’ or a matter of ‘must be’? Logic is only as good as the perception and information on which it is based.
11. Differing views may all be soundly based on differing perceptions.
12. All actions have consequences and an impact on values, people and the world around.
~ * ~
PART 4
THINKING STRUCTURE – TO/LOPOSO/GO
This is a very simple five-stage general-purpose thinking structure. This structure or framework can be applied to most thinking situations.
Each of the five steps in the structure is represented by a syllable. All five syllables have a consonant followed by '0'. This is so the structure is easy to remember.
TO:
Where are we going 'TO'?
'TO'wards what are we going?
What is the objective?
What is the destination?
What do we want to end up with?
What is the focus?
Problem definition and alternative problem definitions.
Use of the tool AGO to define objectives.
Use of the blue hat to define where we want to go.
The syllable 'TO' indicates the objective of our stage we need to define very clearly what we are not enough to have only a vague and general idea the thinking. This must be precisely spelled out. This first step in the process should not be rushed. We should try with a clear statement.
LO:
The word 'LO' comes from the old English word 'to look'. We sometimes might say lo and behold'. Some hymns use the expression. it means 'look at this'.
What have we here?
What is the scene?
What information do we have?
What information do we not have?
White-hat thinking.
Use of CAF. What are the factors to be considered?
Use of OPV. Who are the people involved here?
What is the context of the thinking? It may be friendly, antagonistic, legal, emergency etc.
What are the attitudes involved?
Who is doing the thinking?
What is the terrain?
The 'LO' stage is the stage of looking around. What is available? What are the pieces of the puzzle? This is exp'LO'ratory thinking. This is parallel thinking. We are scanning to see what we can see. We are not trying to reach conclusions. At the end of this stage we want to have collected all the information we need — or specified what we would like to have. We want a good map of the scene. We want a list of factors that have to be considered. We want to know the context of the thinking. We want to know who is involved. Think of an explorer who is given the task of mapping out a new country.
PO:
This is the 'PO' syllable that I invented to signal provocation in lateral thinking. Here the use is similar but broader. Here under 'PO' we put forward possible ideas as well as provocations.
What are the alternatives?
Use of the APC tool to generate alternatives.
Putting down some 'broad-idea' alternatives and then going on to work out the detailed way of carrying out these broad ideas.
Suggestions.
Proposals.
Possibilities.
Hypotheses.
Speculations.
Constructive ideas.
Green-hat thinking. What comes up under 'PO' will depend somewhat on the nature of the thinking needs. If action is called for there will be action alternatives. If a problem has to be solved there will be solution alternatives. If an explanation is needed there will be alternative hypotheses. This 'PO' stage is the stage of green-hat thinking, which means it is the generative stage. We put forward ideas and suggestions.
At this point we do not decide between the alternatives put forward. We just present them all in parallel.
'At this point we have four possible explanations of why the plane crashed.'
'At this point we have these three alternative solutions to the problem of future water supplies.'
'At this point we have four alternative suggestions as to where we can hold the party.'
'At this point I have two alternative things that I would like for my birthday.'
All the alternatives should be put forward. There should be no pre-selection at this stage. but you may group the alternatives to indicate the most feasible.
SO:
This is the ordinary language word 'SO' which is used in one of its meanings.
'SO' what does this amount to?
'SO' what do we have here?
'SO' what do we do next?
This is the stage of choice between the possible alternatives.
We compare and examine the alternatives.
We need to come down to one choice of action (or explanation).
We do a FIP to assess the priorities.
We check the alternatives against the priorities and against the objectives of the thinking.
We assess each alternative using PMI. C&S and OPV.
What would happen if we used this alternative (C&S)?
What are the benefits and values (yellow-hat thinking)?
Does this fit what we know (black-hat thinking)?
What are the dangers and problems (black-hat thinking)?
We also seek to modify or improve ideas after black-hat thinking has pointed out the weaknesses.
The input to the 'SO' stage is a number of alternatives.
The output from this stage is a choice, decision or conclusion.
In cases where a single conclusion, decision or choice is not possible, the outcome has to be defined very carefully. What is the sticking point? Where have we got to? A new thinking task may be defined and the whole thinking process repeated on this newly defined task.
At the end of the 'SO' stage there must always be a clearly defined outcome.
'The conclusion is that we should stand firm and not give in to the demands.'
'I have finally decided that I want a camera for my birthday.'
'The decision is that we hold the party in John's barn.'
'The choice is that we offer the job to Mr. Jones.'
'The outcome is that we cannot make a decision. This is because we do not have the costs of the alternative plans. We must now proceed to get those costs.' 'The outcome is that none of the suggested sites is suitable. We must now try to find some new sites.'
'The outcome is still disagreement. We have a clearer understanding of the positions on each side but no agreement. The sticking point is payment for weekend work'
Anyone who is not happy with the definition of the outcome at the end of the 'SO' stage is entitled to put on a blue hat and to say that he or she is not satisfied and that a further attempt should be made to define the outcome.
In cases where action is needed (as with a doctor) it may not be possible to wait until there is more information. The best possible decision under the circumstances is the one that is used.
GO:
This is the normal use of the word 'GO' and it implies action.
Let's 'GO'.
'GO' forward into action.
Where do we 'GO' from here?
If there is no decision, choice or conclusion at the end of the 'SO' stage, then the 'GO' stage defines the action steps that must now be taken. This may involve collecting more information. Having a further thinking session. Setting a deadline.
What is the plan of action?
How do we implement this?
What practical steps do we take?
How do we put this into effect?
How do we monitor progress?
What is the fallback position?
The output of the 'GO' stage is always action. There must always be a definite output from this 'GO' stage. Imagine you are walking. You take the next step. There must be a direction in which you take the next step. The output of the 'GO' stage is action for a purpose. 'Doing nothing' is only acceptable if this is actually a positive action. For example, not lowering prices because a competitor lowers prices. Or, not giving in to ransom demands. 'Doing nothing' as a result of indecision is not acceptable.
'Here is the action plan.'
~ * ~
ARGUMENTS AND DISAGREEMENTS
This is a very common thinking situation. Or, rather, it is a very common situation that needs more thinking than it usually gets. People have different views or opinions. People want to do different things. One person feels that another person should do a particular thing and the other person disagrees.
The range extends from quiet intellectual arguments to fierce emotional disagreements and disputes.
For checking your “EMOTIONS ANS FEELINGS”: Use the RED hat frequently.
PERCEPTIONS:
Perception, and not logic, is the basis of most disagreements and disputes. Each of the parties is being perfectly logical on the basis of his or her perceptions.
The three basic steps in the settlement of disagreements can also be applied to perceptions:
1. These are my perceptions. This is how I see the situation.
2. This is how I think you see the situation.
3. How do you see the situation?
SIMILARLY, FOR VALUES:
1. These are my values (relevant to the situation).
2. This is how I see your values.
3. What are your values?
SIMILARLY, FOR LOGIC:
1. This is the logic of my argument.
2. I believe this is the logic of your argument.
3. Tell me, once again, what is the logic of your argument.
EMOTIONS
In the end all decisions and choices are emotional. On the whole we do not feel this is a very good way to make decisions or choices, so we sometimes try to apply some thinking.
The purpose of thinking is to so arrange matters that when we do finally make the 'emotional choice' it is on a much better basis.
Most choices and decisions are based on three emotions: greed, fear and laziness.
GREED: More money, achievement, being ahead, being noticed, acquiring more skill, getting new friends, being better at your hobby, better self-image etc. I am not using 'greed' in a bad sense but in the sense of achievement and of wanting more.
FEAR: Fear of making a mistake, fear of being silly, feat of upsetting others, fear of the unknown, fear of losing money, insecurity of any sort, fear of change. Fear may prevent us making one type of decision and fear may force us to make another type of decision.
LAZINESS: In a sense this is the opposite of greed but it also has elements of fear. Not being motivated, not wanting to make an effort, being content, not wanting the bother and hassle of doing something, not wanting to be caught up in complicated matters, not wanting problems, wanting an easy life.
When you have made a decision it is a useful simple check to say to yourself: 'What contribution have greed, fear and laziness made to this decision?'
No comments:
Post a Comment