I came across this Harvard Business Review article (“The Two Traits of the Best Problem-Solving Teams”) and not only is it awesome, but it has much to say about the power of harnessing different thinking styles, and how absolutely critical a safe environment is for creativity and problem solving. And learning.
There are two important points in this article: one, that cognitively diverse groups are better problem solvers than groups that are overloaded with any particular cognitive style; and two, that the benefits of cognitive diversity are only realized if the environment is safe. Let’s look at the idea of cognitive diversity first, and next week we’ll make the connection to safe learning environments.
I will cop to the fact that I’m fascinated by the concept of cognitive diversity. We do indeed think about the world in different ways, use different approaches, and have different lenses through which we see. We have different ways that we learn. Of course, as humans we tend to unconsciously assume that everyone sees things the same way we do! To avoid that trap we have to actually pay attention; we have to be willing to step outside of ourselves and consider not only that other people have different perspectives, but that they may well actually just think (and feel) in a way that’s different than ours. Our understandings can be so much deeper if we’re aware of this and can work with it.
My fascination stems in large part from experience — the experience of so many meetings over so many years where we couldn’t seem to move the ball forward, or it felt like we were just plowing the same furrow over and over again, or where I got that actual knot in the stomach because of the unspoken tension and conflict that ended up silencing those divergent viewpoints. You can see this happen in groups with low cognitive diversity (when too many people think the same way) and in groups that don’t understand cognitive diversity and the positive impact it has (when someone comes at things from a different angle and we unconsciously become uncomfortable or defensive). These are the sorts of frustrations we experience when different ways of thinking aren’t considered, welcomed, or respected.
But with just a little awareness of the different ways people think, and of our own thinking style, we can help create a better and more effective problem solving space for the people we work (and learn) with.
Tools to assess how we think are everywhere. They’re so ubiquitous that you’re a rare person indeed if you’ve never “typed” yourself in some way. You may have been Myers-Brigg-ed, DiSC-ed, Enneagram-ed, or any number of other assessments, and they all have something valuable to teach us about the way we think. And they help us understand how and why other people think differently.
One of my recent favorites is the Thinking Wavelength from Tom Paterson’s StratOp strategic planning process. The Thinking Wavelength exercise gives you insight into your relationship with a number of dimensions, including risk aversion, tolerance of ambiguity, and how you feel about change. But beyond learning about yourself, the Thinking Wavelength helps you see how including different cognitive styles is an essential ingredient for effective teamwork and a robust learning environment. It’s a great reminder that there are other thinking styles, and that the real power is in the combination of thinking styles within a group. It’s rocket fuel for learning.
No one “thinking wavelength” is better than the others, and we benefit greatly from the mindful inclusion of many wavelengths. And yeah, it does feel easier and more comfortable to work with others who share our thinking style, but we’re simply missing out if we don’t have a diversity of styles around the table, with space, respect, and safety for all. The kinds of learning that lead to breakthrough and innovation depend on that diversity.
If you’d like to learn more about the power of cognitive diversity, see “Teams Solve Problems Faster When They’re Cognitively Diverse,” also in Harvard Business Review.
Vive la différence.
