Embracing Diversity thru Self Awareness

Last week, I discussed the importance of asking both Why? and How? questions in solving problems. This week, let me expand the discussion further to answer the following question: Is this diversity necessarily a good thing when it comes to solving problems? We tend to assume that we’ll get better results from groups of people from different backgrounds and possessing a variety of skills than we would from groups with a single orientation. That means diversity of many types, not only differences of culture, ethnicity and gender, but also variety of expertise, intellectual perspective, values and interests. They are all important for collaborative public policy.

We may believe in the value of diversity from intuition, ideological conviction and personal experience. But do we have rigorous models and empirical evidence to support this belief?

Cognitive Diversity

All forms of diversity are not equally effective. It’s the differences in perspectives and methods of approaching problems that most often lead to better outcomes. This is what is called cognitive diversity. Variety in the way problems are framed and interpreted helps a group get unstuck when a single approach can’t produce a workable solution.

It comes to us naturally, without forethought. Our way of looking at the world is not something we typically question. It just is. We accept it and expect that others will do the same. In fact, we may go so far as to think that others are “wrong” and we are “right” in the way we look at the world.

Differing ways of looking at the world, interpreting experience, solving problems and predicting future possibilities work together to produce a distinctive mental tool set. Groups with this sort of variety consistently outperform groups working with a single problem-solving perspective.

Identity Diversity

When it comes to convening a collaborative policy group, though, diversity usually refers to cultural, ethnic and gender balance. Identity diversity, satisfies the crucial need for fairness and equity, but, by itself, doesn’t ensure better problem-solving. Again, the picture is complicated because there are many forms of identity diversity – culture, gender, age, socio-economic status, among others. The evidence points to cultural diversity as having the most significant impact.

Variety of cultural and ethnic backgrounds often correlates with more creative and effective solutions than other types of identity diversity. That’s because differing cultural perspectives, language and experience can also mean different ways of thinking and defining problems.

A group of people who can look at a problem in opposite ways is much more likely to come up with innovative solutions than one dependent on a single perspective. Cultures develop their own sense of what’s important and what the mind needs to focus on, and that leads to very different ways of defining and solving problems. So cultural difference is most effective when it’s also characterized by cognitive difference.

That link, however, may not always exist. People from differing ethnic or cultural backgrounds may acquire the same training, skill sets and experience as people from the prevailing culture. In that case, they’ll likely think about things in the same way, and the deeper differences disappear. Other types of identity differences can also add richness of thought, but the data link cultural and ethnic identity with the greatest overall benefit.

So, don’t stop with cultural diversity. Also make sure that participants don’t all rely on the same toolsets to solve problems. The group needs to have a rich variety of perspectives, interpretations, methods of solving problems and approaches to predicting the future – that is, all the elements of cognitive diversity. That added dimension increases the likelihood that such groups will find a more creative and effective result.

Preference Diversity

Probably the first thing that comes to mind in putting together a collaborative group – indeed its main purpose – is to include the full range of interest groups most likely to be affected by a decision – and most likely to oppose it if they are excluded. What about diversity of interests? Isn’t that essential to coming up with a better solution than one devised by a group representing a single interest?

Not necessarily. In fact, the most consistently disruptive element is divergence of interests and values – or preference diversity. That’s understandable since interest groups tend to complete with one another and fight to get their needs met. Drawn into a collaborative group, they are often not communicating well but still battling over fixed positions. Even if the group also possesses variety in problem-solving tools and cultural perspectives, divergent goals work against the beneficial effect they can have.

Groups with diverse cognitive toolboxes and diverse fundamental preferences have higher variance performance (they locate better outcomes and produce more conflict). So, if such groups can find a way to work together, they are likely to excel in producing creative solutions. But if they can’t get along, they can fail pretty badly.

Collaborative Leadership

What does that mean for an executive who wants to convene a group with just these characteristics? Is it as risky as a roll of the dice?

Not at all. Evidence shows that these complex groups get off to a rough start, often because they have to negotiate over the definition of the problem to be dealt with. There are many other reasons, such as hostility to new ideas, poor communication, efforts to control agendas, and so on. Over time, however, they can learn to work together more effectively. A key reason for success is good group management.

The best way to achieve effective group dynamics is to manage the process with collaborative leaders, possibly working with professional mediators and facilitators. In other words, people with the experience and skills to help groups work through conflict. The divisive force of fundamentally differing interests is strong and requires skill to manage effectively. Nothing will guarantee success, but effective group management can make all the difference in helping people learn how to get along and collaborate effectively.

Whether or not you agree with these methods and conclusions, they make a powerful case for the value of diversity.

Do you focus only on Diagnosing a problem? Or, Are you actually a Troubleshooter?

Have you ever noticed that some people are always looking at “Why?” When faced with obstacles or a problem occurs, they want to know the root cause. They focus on getting to the bottom on things, to diagnosing the problem. They primarily look backwards to track what led to the problem. This can be productive and helpful as it prevents the same problem from recurring. It can also be unproductive and even destructive when it turns into a pursuit of blame and shame.

Or maybe you have noticed that some people always seem to be looking at “How?” For them, when a problem presents itself, they start looking at alternatives. They want to know how to fix it, how to spin it into something different, or how to troubleshoot for next time. They tend to be looking forward, anticipating the outcomes and looking for ways to manage them. This can be productive and helpful when it works to make lemonade out of lemons. It can also be unproductive and even destructive when it ignores the diagnostic work needed in the here and now.

When faced with a problem, which are you more likely to ask first – Why? or How?

I find that knowing this about myself has been helpful, particularly when I listen to questions asked by someone I am collaborating with. If we both go straight into How? mode, we may miss out on some diagnostic work that needs to be done. We can also miss out on informing others about early process steps that need to be remedied or reconsidered. We just plow ahead, fixing it for next time.

On the other hand, if I go into How? questions when working with a Why? oriented person, we might as well be speaking different languages. We can easily get stuck going two very different directions. I’ll be asking questions like “How should we proceed?” and my co-collaborator will be asking “Why didn’t this work?” Both questions have merit. I can make a well-reasoned case for either of them, and I can understand that each of us is naturally inclined to pursue the question path that we usually do… But there is no good in getting stuck, so one of us has to yield.

When I yield, I do it with great trepidation. First, because the Why? questions sometimes involve finger-pointing, a practice I try to avoid at all times. I am fine with “a problem happened, now let’s move forward.” I don’t need to know who did what wrong. At least not now. I like to have things back on track before I worry about such things, if I do at all. The second reservation I have about yielding is that I don’t want to waste time. Sometimes, looking backward and lamenting what is in the past (the one thing we cannot change!), takes more time than I feel it is worth. I get frustrated by what seems like analysis paralysis to me.

Given my choice, I’d make a dozen attempts and finally get it right vs. taking time to analyze the first failed attempt at something. I now know that this drives some people crazy. They think I am taking unnecessary risks, that I am the one wasting time, that without logical analysis and diagnosis my efforts are all going to be in vain.

Neither of us is right, at least not all of the time. Sometimes, it is appropriate to slow down and look backwards before proceeding. Other times, plunging ahead and leaving the past behind is the better strategy. The trick is in knowing how to use both approaches. Or at least in accepting that there are two approaches, and the one you prefer is not always the best choice. Respecting that others have an alternate point of view makes each one of us more effective in problem solving, collaborating and connecting.

Next time you are faced with a problem, pay attention to the kinds of questions you ask. Are they predominantly Why? or How? questions? Who around you is asking the other type? That person is someone who can counter-balance your perspective, someone who may drive you crazy at the very same time they are the best partner you could ever wish for. After you have gained this self-awareness and found this foil to balance your perspective, try this stretch exercise: Stop asking your preferred question and force yourself to ask the other one. If you are, like me, someone who tends to ask How? force yourself to ask Why? You’ll learn even more about yourself in this exercise and will come to appreciate others’ perspectives differently, too.

Quantum Physics of Belief – Thought Energy Manifesting into Events

In the past few weeks, I was writing on how scientific and business research shows that human thoughts and beliefs have an effect on the physical world, with no intermediary action. In other words, thoughts and beliefs directly impact the unfolding of events. There seems to be some confusion among some readers who have asked for clarification on how this occurs. Let me share an overview of what my research is revealing here.

In running a business, even if the business model is well designed and perfectly suited for the market, we would all recognize that success and high profitability are not guaranteed. We realize that there are many elements we can’t completely control, such as the capabilities of the competition, the decisions that customers will make, and the countless choices made by employees each day. It would be impossible for a business to design these elements in a manner that would guarantee success.

My experience tells me that chance is not as random as we believe, and the way to reduce the uncertainty in business is through shaping the beliefs and intentions, or thought energy, of the business organization. When a business organization has a particular, positive thought energy, events are more likely to occur in a manner that is fortuitous for the business. This doesn’t mean that action is not required, because it definitely is. It simply means that the elements that can’t be controlled through action tend to unfold more frequently in favor of the business.

I don’t think it would be possible for anyone to ‘prove’ that an organization’s thought energy directly impacts how events unfold. The important thing to note is that we never even try to architect the unfolding of such events. These kinds of things happen consistently in businesses, which had very positive thought energy.

Did you see the movie Apollo 13? Do you remember Tom Hanks, Ed Harris and Ron Howard who directed the movie from 1995? It was a true story of how NASA got the crippled Apollo 13 space craft back to earth after the oxygen/power supply failed half way through the flight mission. It was a testament to the teamwork, leadership, problem solving and human synergistics.

In that movie, I distinctly remember the Flight Director Eugene Kranz (played by Ed Harris) saying two powerful things: “Failure is NOT anOption.” And “I will not allow that [negative] thought to exist in this space” (even if it was only a thought by a crew member!)

Kranz knew either consciously or subconsciously the power of thought; The power of, how we frame an event and how the framing of the event has a massive impact on the outcome of that event; That a thought in an environment has real power… real impact; Even if it is not verbalized.

Napoleon Hill in his book ‘Think and Grow Rich’ wrote, ‘Thoughts are Real Forces’; as have many other gurus and teachers of metaphysics for hundreds of years. I am quoting scenes from Apollo 13 movie into this blog to illustrate the power of managing group thought and group energy. The words are really about ‘integrity of thought’ or ‘aligned thought’. Kranz had every brain in that NASA teamed, aligned and focused; pushed almost to the limits of human creativity and ingenuity, all focused on getting those 3 astronauts back alive.

What negative thoughts are there in your business you need to clear out?

What plans are all your brains aligned on with the laser like focus of the NASA Apollo 13 mission?

Take a look at the movie clips and ask how you can use that energy and focus in your business.

The economic space and the economic environment we are in right now will either swallow you up or be a time of massive opportunity for all of us.

Harness the thought, energy and focus to make it a massive opportunity.

Failure is NOT an option.

FIVE Signs That Say you are NOT Business Savvy

Do you own or lead a business? If so, you will need to do a lot of background work before you can be successful in your professional venture. The very first diagnostic activity is whether you have good leadership skills. Here are five signs that say you should NOT be a business owner – do you recognize any of these as describing you?

1.    Non-existent communication skills – when you run a business you need to know how to communicate effectively. This is the first and the last of not just good but great leadership skills. You need to be a people’s person. If you are a grouch by nature, an introvert, it is very doubtful that you would be able to develop a successful network or a worthy customer base.

2.    You cannot decide – a good businessperson can and is often required to take split-second decisions; hard decisions. Are you good with taking decisions? This is a very important trait among leadership skills without which your business will definitely flounder and fail. If you are an indecisive person, forget about being a business owner.

3.    You are an ‘I, me, myself’ type of person – leadership skills are a must if you want to run a business successfully; and not into the ground. For this you need to have a basic humility about yourself so your employees would feel motivated to work; which in turn, would attract more business. If you are an egotistic maniac, you will not last too long in this field.

4.    You cannot face unpleasantness – possessing good leadership skills does not mean that the path to success is all milk and roses. As the head of your business, your employees and customers would often create unpleasant situations that require confrontations and arguments. Are you afraid of unpleasantness or confrontations? If yes, business is not your cup of tea.

5.    You are not ready to work hard – leadership skills do not come by wishing for it; neither does success. It takes hard work, great efforts and a lot of time. Do not, for one single moment, think that because you are the owner and head of your business you can cut yourself slack. On the contrary, as the head and leader you would often be required to put in double the efforts of others. You need to be disciplined about your business, which in turn will motivate your employees to give their best. If the leader is lazy, the employees will follow suit. The result would be a disaster for your business.

No one is born with any of these leadership skills. The good news is that anyone can acquire these skills. It is never too late to seek help and set yourself up for success.

Is Analysis Paralysis Stopping You From Taking Action?

Analysis Paralysis is where you can’t make any forward progress because you bog yourself down in details, tweaking, brainstorming, research, and… anything but just getting on with it. Sound familiar?

It’s something I struggled with. Partly out of fear of failure, partly because I love the idea-generation phase of projects, mostly because I am an analysis geek on occasion.

There is hope though, even for chronic cases.

It’s not actually about setting your sights low, or dropping your personal standards. What you have to do is identify those things you have to get right from the get-go, those items that do need analysis, and what can be fixed later.

While it is perfectly natural to want to spend time thinking about a project, especially one with an element of risk, there comes a point where any more thinking is counter-productive and you need to start making some progress.

1.     What do you absolutely have to do for the project to be a success?

2.     What tasks can absolutely not be put off while later?

3.     What are the most painful items to change post launch?

4.     What could realistically go wrong?

With procrastination it always comes down to just doing it but discovering the reasons why you aren’t (other than being a lazy geek making excuses!) can be very helpful in getting your sorry behind working. Analysis Paralysis often comes from learned behavior over several years. Either it has proven beneficial, so you do a little more thinking and planning each time, or not enough planning has caused problems so each occasion you get a little more cautious.

It never fails to surprise me how different the world seems when my analysis faces reality. We all get some things right while other things seem to come from outer-space and no amount of thinking would have predicted it. Thinking on your feet is often as important as any amount of analysis.

7 Tips to Help Overcome Analysis Paralysis

1.     Plan

You still need a plan no matter what, but this time round, over planning is not allowed. Think of what are the things that you need to know before you start and get a grasp of it. Brain storm for what would be the most painful thing to change and get more information and make a wiser decision. Be sure to know, what are the things that could possibly go wrong and try to prevent them. Be proactive rather than reactive.

2.     Set a Deadline for Your Planning Session

Allocate a deadline for your planning session and be strict with yourself and only spend that certain amount of time for planning. When we have a specific time slot for planning, we will have a lesser tendency to over plan.

3.     Just Start

When you finished your planning session, stop asking yourself “what if” questions. Just start doing it and learn everything that you do not know along the way.

4.     Forgo Perfection

I know there is a Mr (or Ms) Perfection inside you and you want to get everything perfect on the get go but it is highly not possible that everything will turn out the way you want to be in the first place. Just forget about perfection and start taking action.

5.     Momentum

Once you start your project, do not stop and think too much again. Just have a list of to-do items, regardless whether it is big or small and keep on completing the task.

6.     Learn To Make Decision

This is an important skill that can help to overcome analysis paralysis. By knowing how to make a faster and wiser decision, we can take action faster and get more things done. Practice your decision making skills by setting a 5 seconds rule to make your daily decision. (Ex: What beverage am I going to have? Coke or lemon tea.)

7.     Find an Action Taker

Find someone who is able to take action easily. Whenever you are stuck with analysis paralysis, find them and talk to them about your problem. Most likely you will get a positive reply and get the momentum you need to get going.

 

Parting Words

These tips worked fine for me in helping me to take action and also to achieve results. Analysis without action does not help you to have any kind of positive results. Now, you have the tips to help you overcome analysis paralysis, why don’t you go start something that will help to enhance your life today?

Finally, Stop thinking about it and start doing something.

Life – Dinner Principle

The “Life-Dinner” principle is valid not only in the relationship between a parasite and its host, but also in a great many other inter-species and intra-species interactions. This principle was originally identified (and named) in systems of the predator and prey type. Put simply, rabbits run faster than foxes for the simple reason that they are running for their lives, while the fox is only concerned about its supper. But the rabbits always stay a little faster than the foxes; because a fox can afford to go without dinner sometimes, but a rabbit can never afford to BE dinner. So the foxes always push the rabbits to go faster. You decide which is the more potent motivator.

But, this isn’t an article about motivations, but rather a very simple principle with far reaching consequences: Priorities matter. Things survive for a reason. Existence implies viability.

Therefore we should always be on guard when given easy answers to hard questions and simple metrics to explain complex businesses.  Life is much more complicated than dinner.

Rabbits, Foxes and Cuckoo Birds

Let’s draw some analogy between the culture and business by thinking deeply about things like rabbits, foxes and cuckoo birds.

Rabbits that are born slow are more likely to get eaten, enlarging the proportion of fast rabbits in the gene pool. Foxes that are fast enough to catch the slowest rabbits survive and continue to propagate, but only need to be fast enough to stay well fed.

If foxes became too efficient or rabbits became too slow, neither would survive. All of rabbits would get eaten and the foxes would either starve or have to seriously change their business model.

The cuckoo story is more bizarre. They have evolved to lay eggs that look so much like those of other birds that they are able to drop them in their nests, leaving the unsuspecting victims to do the hard work of nurturing the cuckoo offspring.

Why haven’t the other birds evolved a defense mechanism against the ruse?  Most likely the costs would outweigh the benefits. They nurture far more of their own eggs than those of the deceitful cuckoos and that’s what they need to do in order to thrive.

Expending the energy of a few dinners is more than worth it when life hangs in the balance.  Nature is a great optimizer.

Life and Dinner in Business

Once you become aware of the Life-Dinner principle you start seeing it everywhere. All too often, it is put in clichéd terms of “long-term vs. short-term,” but it’s really about the difference between having a true commitment to excellence and just keeping up appearances.

Consider the following example:

Leadership vs. Optimization: Optimization is about getting more of what you want with fewer resources.  Leadership is about getting your people to want what you want. Leadership requires not only investment, but serious dedication to the overall mission.

It’s easy for an outside consultant to come in and optimize. Leadership doesn’t show up in excel spreadsheets and there are always ways to squeeze out a few points of margin for a few quarters. By then, the consulting project will be over and impressive ROI results will have been delivered.

Issuing directives is always easier than building a consensus. Organizational charts always look better when they are simple and streamlined. The real world, however, is quite a bit messier.

A False Choice

Many would like to pose the Life-Dinner principle as a tradeoff – do you want to eat today or tomorrow? It isn’t that simple. You have to do both.  What is really at issue is whether you truly want to win or just put up stats and make it look good.

Top professional athletes understand this. They don’t ask, “Is it better to practice hard or play hard?” To be at the top of your sport, field or industry you need to constantly work to be your best every day, even when no crowds are cheering and there is no relevant balance sheet item.

Here is an important note: doing your best and being your best does not mean being at your peak at all times. There is a natural ebb and flow of our energy, attention, and intention across each day. Some days you do better thinking than on other days. Some days you are better listener than on other days. Doing your best means being the best you can be in any given moment, even if you know you have done better on other days. Similarly, being your best varies from day to day and from time to time. One cannot be upbeat and enthusiastic all the time. Being your best means getting the most out of a particular moment, even if other moments felt a lot better.

Most of us operate under a myth in business and often in life in general. We think of it as the 110% rule. There is this unfortunate and unrealistic belief on the part of many leaders that they and their people can and should show up and operate at ‘110%’ every day. The danger is that dinner is always more obvious than life. At the end of the day, you know if your belly is full or not.

So, How Do You Measure ROI?

In our quest for measurable ROI, we forget that the term is meaningless without clear objectives. Are we evaluating only for our dinner or for our life as well?

·   Are we happy with brand awareness or do we also measure brand attributes such as quality, value and other category specific measures of satisfaction?

·   Are we satisfied with marketing campaigns that produce sales, or are we working towards consumer advocacy?

·   Do we measure only sales and profits, or are we pushing for an increasing return on capital?

Research studies have shown that the best companies spend years determining which factors drive their business. Key metrics are specific to a company’s strategy and culture and are therefore often elusive. There is no textbook answer.

Dinner is simple. Life is complicated. Don’t let anyone ever tell you differently.

How the Brain Works to Make Decisions

This is a really good book if you have got the same interest as I in how the brain works to make decisions: How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2009).

Here’s what I have learned about the duel between the rational brain and the emotional brain, and how it might apply to sales, business communications and influencing people…

There is a flaw in our thinking habits called the framing effect, which is a part of decision biases called loss aversion. It explains why people are much more likely to buy meat when it’s labeled 85 percent lean instead of 15 percent fat. Also, why twice as many patients opt for surgery when told there’s an 80 percent chance of survival as opposed to a 20 percent chance of dying.

Neuroscientists hooked people up to an fMRI (functional MRI) imaging machine to look at which parts of their brains lit up while making gambling decisions. Here was the gambling game they asked them to play:

Imagine that you are playing a simple game whereby you are given $50 and asked to decide between two options:

1.     All-or-nothing gamble, in which the odds are 40% you will keep the entire $50, and 60% that you will lose everything.

2.     A sure-thing: if you choose this option you get to keep $20.

If you are like most people, you take the 2nd option, the sure $20. Next, they asked people to play the game again. The risky gamble hasn’t changed, but here are the options that are offered:

1.     All-or-nothing gamble, 40% chance of keeping entire $50, and 60% chance lose it all.

2.     Sure thing: but it’s framed as a loss of $30 instead of a gain of $20.

These two gambles are the same, they are just framed differently. In both cases, you walk away with $20 of the original $50. But the different descriptions strongly affect how people play the game.

When the choice is framed in terms of gaining $20, only 42% chose the risky gamble. When it was framed in terms of losing $30, 62% of people opted to roll the dice.

What is interesting here is that they were able to see in the brain: those people whose gambling decisions were influenced by the prospect of losing $30 were misled by an excited amygdala, part of the emotional brain that evokes negative feelings. Whenever a person thinks about loss, the amygdala is activated.

But the others who were not swayed by the framing effect also had activated amygdala, they also experienced negative feelings. They were able to look past their feelings and realize that the options were the same.

What made the difference? They had more elevated activity in the pre-frontal cortex, the rational brain. These people were able to feel their feelings, and choose to ignore them. They were able to make better gambling decisions because they regulated their negative emotions.

How do you regulate your emotional brain so that you can make more rational decisions? Awareness. By simply being aware that our emotional brain is sending negative feelings, we can decide to ignore it. The ability to become aware of our brain’s processes is called metacognition, and it’s a skill that can be developed.

We know when we are angry. Every emotion comes with the ability to think about it, to label it, to try to figure out why we are feeling it. Sometimes a feeling may make no sense, as in the case of this gambling game. We can deliberately choose to ignore the emotional brain.

The question is when to ignore it and when to pay attention to it. We don’t always know or take the time for it. And because emotions can also help us make better decisions, the key is being able to discern.

Think of things that no one else thinks of

In my previous blog, I suggested a few pointers on how to think 'out-of-the-box.' This week, I am going to elaborate a little more on innovative thinking with a slight twist. How can you think of things that no-one else thinks of? 


The answer is by deliberately taking a different approach to the issue from everyone else. There are dominant ideas in every field. The innovative thinker purposefully challenges those dominant ideas in order to conceive new possibilities.


Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, who discovered Vitamin C, said, “Genius is seeing what everyone else sees and thinking what no-one else has thought.” If you can identify the standard viewpoint then survey the situation from a different viewpoint you have an excellent chance of gaining a new insight. When Jonas Salk was asked how he invented the vaccine for polio he replied, “I imagined myself as a virus or cancer cell and tried to sense what it would be like.”


Ford Motor Company consulted Edward de Bono, who put forward the concept of lateral thinking, and asked the question, "How can we make our cars more attractive to consumers?" De Bono approached the problem from another direction and re-phrased the question, "How can Ford make the whole driving experience better for their customers?" And, he came up with a suggestion that Ford should buy up car parks in all the major city centers and make them available for Ford cars only. His remarkable idea was too radical for Ford who saw themselves as an automobile manufacturer with no interest in the car parks business.


The spectators at the Olympic Games in Mexico City in 1968 were amazed to see a young athlete perform a high jump with his back to the bar. Until then, every high jumper 'rolled' over the bar with his or her face down. Dick Fosbury introduced an entirely new approach, the 'flop', leaping over with his back close to the bar and his face up. Fosbury was ranked 48th in the world in 1967; yet in 1968 he caused a sensation when he won the Olympic Gold Medal with his unprecedented technique and a leap of 2.24metres. What he introduced was literally a leap of the imagination - and it revolutionized high jumping. Nowadays all the top jumpers use his method. He thought what no-one else thought and conceived a new method.


How can we force ourselves to take a different view of a situation? Instead of looking at the scene from your view try looking at it from the perspective of a customer, a product, a supplier, a child, an alien, a lunatic, a comedian, a dictator, an anarchist, an architect, Leonardo da Vinci and so on. Apply the ‘What if?’ technique. Challenge all the common assumptions. If everyone else is looking for the richest region, look for the wettest. If everyone else is facing the bar then turn your back on it.


If you had to study a valley, how many ways could you look at it? You could look up and down the valley; you could scan it from the riverside or stand and look across it from each hillside. You could walk it, drive along the road or take a boat down the river. You could study a satellite photo. You could peruse a map. Each gives you a different view of the valley and each perspective adds to your understanding of the valley. Why not do the same with any problem? Why do we immediately try to frame a solution before we have approached the problem from multiple differing perspectives?


The great geniuses did not take the traditional view and develop existing ideas. They took an entirely different view and transformed society. Picasso took a different view of painting; he saw cubes, shapes and impressions instead of accurate images. Einstein imagined a new approach to physics; a world where time and space were relative. Darwin conceived a different view of the origin of species; he saw how they might have evolved rather than been created. Each of them looked at the world in a new way. In a similar fashion, Jeff Bezos took a different view of book retailing with Amazon.com, Stelios took a new perspective on flying with Easyjet, Swatch transformed our view of watches and IKEA changed the way we buy furniture.


If we can attack problems from entirely new directions then we can think of things that conventional thinkers miss. It gives us unlimited possibilities for innovation.

__________________________________

Surya M Ganduri, PhD. PMP. is the founder and president of eMBC, Inc., an international firm specializing in strategic and executive leadership development processes that Help People Succeed in an Evolving World. His company is dedicated to helping organizations and individuals manage strategic change, innovation, cultural transition, and goal achievement. Surya has over 26 years of business experience in management consulting, leadership development, executive coaching, process improvements, organizational development and youth leadership. Contact Surya at s6ganduri@eMBCinc.com. For more information, visit www.eMBCinc.com or contact eMBC, Inc., directly at (630) 445-1321.