Edward de Bono, the inventor of lateral thinking, has been a prolific writer on the brain and thinking for almost 40 years. In formulating my view of organizations as dynamic networks of ongoing, self-organizing conversations during the 1990s, my thinking was stimulated as much by de Bono’s early writings on the ‘mechanism of mind’ as it was by the emerging theories on the application of the complexity sciences to organizations.
The theory and practice of informal coalitions therefore draws a number of analogies from de Bono’s work. At the same time, the complexity strand of thinking in informal coalitions leans heavily towards that articulated by the Ralph Stacey ‘school’ at the University of Hertfordshire’s Complexity and Management Centre.
This series of posts will seek to bring these two strands together, by suggesting that the theories underpinning de Bono’s notion of lateral thinking provide some interesting and provocative parallels with Ralph Stacey’s complexity-based view of organizational dynamics.
Later posts in the series will include: Part 2: Non-linear dynamics; Part 3: Language, conversation and pattern breaking; and Part 4: Leadership implications.
Lateral reinforcement for Stacey’s views
Many management theorists are turning to the complexity sciences to gain insights into the way that organizations work and to look for ways of improving performance. As Stacey and his colleagues point out, many of those taking up these theories do so in a way that simply presents existing views on organizational dynamics in new jargon – a management fad. Within this, most writers seek to make a direct link between complexity science and organizations, seeing these as Complex Adaptive Systems. In contrast, Stacey makes a compelling case for using the complexity sciences instead as sources of analogy for human action.
De Bono’s work is ordinarily linked neither with complexity theory nor the study of organizational dynamics. However, the ideas set out in this series of posts, amongst those that he introduced almost forty years ago, offer some ‘lateral’ reinforcement for Stacey’s views.
Self-organization and the patterning process
First, de Bono describes the mind as a self-organizing, patterning system. He argues that the mind does not organize information but instead provides an environment for incoming information to organize itself into patterns. He goes on to explain that these patterns are self-reinforcing and self-replicating. It is precisely because the mind is a dynamic, pattern-creating and pattern-using process that we can operate at all. Without this self-organizing and self-replicating behaviour, we would not be able to function – having to learn things afresh every time that we encountered them.
However, this same patterning nature of the brain is also self-limiting, in that thinking can become stuck in particular patterns. De Bono saw this as a necessary flaw in the brain’s mode of operation (and self-organizing systems in general), which spurred him to invent the concept and practice of lateral thinking.
Organizations similarly become ‘locked into’ their own, socially constructed patterns of cultural assumptions and the characteristic patterns of thinking and behaviour that flow from them. These can help to reduce internal complexity and uncertainty by ‘codifying’ norms of behaviour, expectations and so on. As de Bono would predict, though, the patterns that help people to create a sense of meaning, and that allow them to negotiate their way through the organizational world in an ‘orderly’ way, can also constrain their ability to act in other ways. Established ways of thinking and acting tend to trap individuals - alone and collectively - within their own, socially constructed worlds and prevent them from noticing and engaging with other emerging possibilities.
Continuity and change
De Bono argues that this natural patterning process of the mind is one of reinforcement and continuity – the more a pattern is triggered by incoming information, the more likely it is to be triggered in the future. Continuity, then, arises from this self-replicating and self-reinforcing tendency. However, because the patterning process is asymmetrical, he also acknowledges the capacity for novelty to occur from this same process.
Novelty is about pattern breaking rather than pattern reinforcing. And de Bono argues that this can arise in a variety of natural ways, such as through confusion and misunderstanding, mistake, chance, emotion and humour. It can also result from the pooling of ‘information’ during everyday conversation, especially where there is disagreement. Although the outcome of this might be the dominance of one person’s viewpoint rather than a joint exploration.
Where novelty arises through any of these processes, de Bono sees this as reflecting a sudden insight switchover to a different pattern around which self-organization continues to occur. Because this process is also self-maximising, the new pattern tends to take over completely. De Bono advocates the use of deliberate stimulation (such as lateral thinking techniques) to facilitate this process because, although novelty will occur naturally, it is likely to be haphazard and inefficient in terms of a specifically desired outcome (eg the solving of a specific problem or the development of an innovative idea in a specific area of focus).
__________
See Part 2: Non-linear dynamics
Part 3: Language, conversation and pattern breaking
Part 4: Leadership implications
__________
Relevant books by de Bono: Mechanism of Mind (UK or US); Lateral Thinking (UK or US); Lateral Thinking for Management (UK or US)
Related books by Stacey: Complexity and Management (UK or US); Complex Responsive Processes (UK or US).
Comments