Step 5: Create New Thinking
Getting people to think through problems often leads them to find the solution - but in some instances people spin in circles. When their existing though patterns do not lead them out of a dilemma, the need to think about the situation in a new way.
The author suggests a model he calls "create," a sloppy anagram for a three-step process: evaluate the current reality, explore alternatives, and tap their energy, which he will explain further.
Evaluate the Current Reality
Reality is a highly subjective concept: each person has an idiosyncratic understanding of a situation based on his personal experiences and perceptions - and often suffering from the limitation of those experiences and perceptions. One of the fastest ways to solving a dilemma for a person mired in their own reality is to ask them to step back from their perspective and look at the problem from a different angle.
From a functional perspective, the mind seeks efficiency - and the most efficient way to process new information is to compare it to our existing mental maps. If the new information does not fit our maps, it is necessary to create a new map - but our first inclination is to attempt to force it to fit an existing one that's "close enough" to move forward. In many instances, a person who is spinning on a dilemma recognizes that it is not a good fit but has not yet given up on struggling to make it fit.
When we encounter a person who is mentally stuck, our first inclination is to offer suggestions and share ideas - but at this point, it is too soon. There's ample opportunity in the next phase (explore alternatives) - but first, you must get them to recognize that they are trapped by their perception of the situation, and get them to evaluate their current reality.
The author suggests that you begin by asking questions about their perception: How important is this problem? How much of a disaster would it be if you are unable to solve it? Then move on to more specific questions based on their responses. In particular, be attentive to nonverbal cues (expression and the speed of their responses) to determine when they are beginning to think, rather than automatically reporting what they have already concluded.
When a person begins to think, they are open to alternatives. And until they have begun to think, they are not.
Explore Alternatives
Once the discussion has moved away from reporting to considering, it's time to move to the next phase. An analogy is that causing a person to think generates energy, and once the energy has been generated, it must be channeled to productive use buy considering not what is, but what might be - and when we step outside our limited perception of reality, the possibilities are infinite.
Permission and placement remain important in making this transition: we now understand the problem, recognize that the previous way of thinking has not identified a solution, and sense that it might be productive to consider other alternatives. "Are you OK to talk about some new ideas?"
The other person will be receptive to suggestions - but per the earlier discussion, it is very important to restrain yourself from handing them a ready-made solution. The questions you should ask are along the lines of "What are some possible actions you could take?" OR if the other person isn't able to conceive of possibilities, to suggest ways in which they might uncover them - whether it's considering the problem from another person's perspective, ways to gather additional information to understand the problem better, etc.
It's especially valuable to give people problem-solving tools - the author provides an example in which a supervisor suggests that the employee use a spreadsheet to gather data and develop a solution model. If this approach is successful, he will likely try the spreadsheet approach to solve future problems.
A word of caution: in helping people think through their problems, we need to be aware of out own filters. Our first inclination is to over-emphasize, and to talk about what we, ourselves, would do in a given situation. The "if I were you" approach comes across as arrogant and narcissistic: it is the equivalent of "I am better and smarter than you, so you should imitate me."
Another point of caution: be aware of our own agendas. We are also strongly inclined to be self-serving, and point people to a solution that are beneficial to ourselves, rather than those that have the most positive outcome for the other person, or even the most effective solution to the problem. Especially in a superior-subordinate relationship, the subordinate has a duty to serve their superior's interests, so we feel justified in doing so. When we feel this is appropriate, we should be explicit about it.
It's also important to pose suggestions gently - give them something to consider, not an order to follow. Unless it's your intention to command blind obedience, make it clear that the other person has the option to accept or reject your suggestion. If it is your intention to command blind obedience, consider whether that's appropriate - and be well aware that you are sacrificing their development and undermining their morale for the sake of a quick solution.
Tap Their Energy
The author's description of this step seems more in the nature of an element that is used throughout: people are far more enthusiastic and energetic in exploring and pursuing their own ideas than they are about being told what to think and to do. As such, you cannot assume that they will share your level of enthusiasm, but you must tap into their own.
Remember also that the power of an idea is short-lived: people are very energetic about pursuing a fresh idea, but fail to follow through when that initial burst of energy is gone. So a leader can help with the formulation of a plan, including steps to be achieved, and then monitor their progress and nudge them along when necessary.
One insight: guide them to be specific while their energy is still flowing. If a person cools off too much, they being to doubt their ideas, or other priorities may get in the way. The chances they will follow through are greater if specific plans are laid during the time when they feel energized by the idea.
Deadliness are also important - most people multitask and are focused on what must be done right now, setting aside those things that can be done later. A task without a deadline can always be done later, and later, and later, until later becomes never.
Another way leaders can keep employees on track is simply by asking about their progress. To make a suggestion and never ask about it again is a signal that the idea was not that important. Merely asking for an update sends the message that it is important, and they are expected to be making progress.
Since ideas are easily forgotten, it's also advisable to guide a person to undertake some tangible activity related to their insight - generally following the notion that "if you want to remember something, write it down." From a neuroscience perspective, the mere act of writing something down, even if it is never looked at again, reinforces the connections and helps to organize thoughts. It's also suggested that having a physical artifact (a printed spreadsheet rather one stored digitally) is more effective as a reminder.
(EN: I recall seeing a study on this, done with university students. The study compared students who did not take notes during lectures, students who took notes but did not review them, and those who took notes and did review them. Naturally, the last group scored best, but the difference between the first and second groups was dramatic.)
Putting the Model Together
The author provides another contrived hypothetical dialogue to illustrate the "create" model in action. It's repetitive and provides no new information. Of particular importance is that this model is more linear in nature - you generally don't skip about much, but follow the pattern from challenging a person's mindset, getting them to explore ideas, and encouraging them to take immediate action.