cRITICAL THINKING – PROCESS VS CONTENT AND CONCIOUS COMPETENCE

In today’s business world life is becoming more specialized and we are relying to a greater extent on technical experts to keep it this way and also to see that trouble shooting is done correctly and effectively. Still we have situations where problems are recurring in organizations without the root cause being found and decisions made without much commitment. At KEPNERandFOURIE we contest it is all about process…not just process alone but process combined with content.

Process vs. Content
A thinking approach is a process whereby problem solvers approach a problem in a specific way. Have you ever heard the saying “if you have a problem, stand away from it and try to approach it from a different angle!” I could never figure out how you could do that with single-dimensional information and how you would be able to stand away from it and approach it in a different way.

Let us explain…problem solvers learn how to gather information by asking questions and asking for reports to answer the tough questions. Some of these questions are good and some are not so good, in every instance you get the information asked for but you may not know if that piece of information is relevant or not. We’ve found that in most cases an overload of information can rather confuse the analytical process rather than enhancing it. Too much information can confuse the most brilliant mind at times. At TDI we contest that you only need to ask 21 questions and when you get the information for those questions that you should have enough information to solve the problem.

We have done exactly that over the last 25 years and never had a situation where we could not help a team to solve their problem. Through this process we’ve come to realize that we’ve found that elusive “different angle of looking at a problem” that most people are commenting about but do not know how to do.

Let’s take an example of what we mean by process versus content. Let’s take the situation of a $100, 000 check going missing. You have the record that the check has been sent and the client has proof that they did not receive it. The typical “content mind” would then start to ask questions such as:

  • Who sent the check?
  • When was it sent?
  • Where was it sent to?
  • How long does it take for a check to arrive at its destination?
  • Have we made sure that it left our premises?

So it will go on until the answer is found or not found and the check in question cancelled and a new one issued.

In the case of the “process mind’ the questions would be a bit different and the following is an example of that:

  • Which check went missing? Answer is the $100, 000 check.
  • Which other similar checks could have gone missing but did not? Answer, the checks less than $100, 000.
  • Why would a check of $100, 000 go missing and the other checks less than that were all received? Answer, because checks $100, 000 and over must be countersigned by the CEO in New York. Answer, maybe this check is still at the CEO’s office in New York.

This is just a simple example of how to ask the questions differently and also demonstrating to you that you still need the information from the technical expert. We use 7 sets of these questions to ask the relevant questions and to get relevant answers.

5 Sets of critical thinking
The thinking displayed above could be applied in the following areas as indicated by the diagram bew:

For each one of the above 5 processes or thinking approaches the trainee receives training and skills in three approaches, namely;

  • Thinking on Your Feet – the ability to phrase the correct questions in discussions as each situation develops
  • Intuitive – the ability to utilize the expertise and gut feel of experienced people to solve the problem quickly and effectively
  • Investigative – the ability to use an investigative research approach to solve a persistent complex problem

Conscious competency
A technical expert in their specific field cannot be expected to be the expert in all other fields coming into play in his/her business situation. Even so, we expect the System Engineer or Sales Person to solve problems in a totally unrelated field.

Effective problem solving under all circumstances must rely on a good problem solving approach (something that would be robust enough for any situation) and the appropriate technical experts around the table. Each time someone from TDI gets involved with a client’s problem we always insist that we need to know who is around the table. In every situation we’ve asked the client to change the faces around the table to increase our chances of arriving at a solution.

We have a saying “if a problem could not be solved by a team, the person with the information was not invited!” So, we need a process (problem solving approach) and the right people around the table to solve problems and if we can learn and use this process under different circumstances then we should be able to adjust to changed situations and still provide a solution.

 

Thinking Dimensions International. Company No: 03853752
Registered office:  50 Broadway Westminster London SW1H ORG