REFLECTION>INSIGHT>ACTION>RESULTS

April 2006, Issue 1

Welcome to the first issue of The Leader's Advocate !

I recently conducted a training workshop for a group of technical project managers on strategic thinking and asked the group to identify the place and time where they do their best thinking. Out of 25 participants, only one person indicated they do their best thinking at work during traditional work hours. For everyone else, it was while exercising, first thing in the morning, before going to sleep, or on vacation.

As a doctoral student, I often spend mornings with a coffee mug in hand, my cat on my lap, and a pile of journal articles on my dining room table while the sun slowly rises and illuminates my condo. This quiet time gives me the opportunity to read the literature in the field of human and organization development and reflect on the implications of these ideas for my clients and my own life. In my own professional practice and doctoral program, intentionally creating the time and space to reflect is the only way I can gain insight, integrate newly gained knowledge and enhance the quality of my decisions.

In my work as an executive coach, I find that many of my clients struggle with the stressful pressing demands of their lives and professions to the point of feeling overwhelmed. Unfortunately, many get caught in the trap of simply reacting to their world instead of proactively shaping it. As a result, they often inadvertently create more problems than they solve because the decisions they make are poorly thought out. A major part of my work as an executive coach is helping these leaders think through and anticipate the impact of their ideas. 

In this initial issue of The Reflective Leader we will think about thinking — exploring models of leadership thinking as one strategy for improving overall leadership effectiveness.  Future issues will examine other aspects of leadership functioning including leading teams, risk-taking, influence, resilience and career management. Let me know what this triggers for you as you stop and reflect on your own thinking styles.

— Kevin

 

Strategic Thinking: 3 Views, 3 Layers

An increasing number of leadership clients I work with as an executive coach are faced with the need to think and act more strategically in their decision making and planning. Historically, many organizations dismantled their cumbersome strategic planning processes years ago because they had produced plans that sat on a shelf in a big binder with little impact on their business. The shift in the past decade has been toward using strategic thinking skills in real time to create more robust plans, decisions, and outcomes.

Research suggests that there are three views of strategic thinking: creative or divergent thinking, critical or convergent thinking, and systems or “big picture” thinking. As creative thinkers, we are able to develop compelling visions for what could be. Our critical thinking brain allows us to start with the end in mind and identify the path toward the vision. It also allows us to create best-case and worst-case scenarios, examine our underlying assumptions and make sense of data. Systems thinking gives us the ability to understand the far-reaching impact of our decisions and plans, as well as to identify patterns that underlie behavior in our organizations.

Using the metaphor of an onion, there are three layers to consider when we seek to build our capacity to think strategically: organizational level, team level and the individual level.

Layer 1: Organizational

To what extent does your organization support or block strategic thinking among your people?

So many organizations inadvertently place roadblocks in front of their managers in terms of innovation and new ways to approach challenges. One organization I consulted with had very rigid boundaries between business units and departments. As a result, very little synergy could occur between these areas. Another organization I consulted with also suffered from the consequences of what I call “corporate hubris.” The company’s leaders saw their company as a big fish in a small pond and thus had little motivation to scan external trends in their industry.

As a result, they missed some significant trends in their customer base and regulatory environment. Whether it's compensation systems, organizational structures, or policies, it is essential for leaders to examine their organizational context to determine if any of these factors might be blocking their people from thinking and acting strategically.

Layer 2: Teams

To what extent do you or your team support or block the strategic thinking ability of the team as a whole and the individuals on the team?

The reality in most organizations is that strategic thinking, decision making and planning efforts usually happen in a team context. Group dynamics, as well as other aspects of team functioning, can make or break efforts to help people think more strategically. An example: Susan, a director in a financial services company, led a team of seven senior managers and hired me to help improve their team functioning. After collecting data from each person on the team, it become apparent that the team members had no sense of shared vision for what they were trying to create, believed they did not have adequate resources to fulfill their basic duties, and were confused about their role responsibilities. Thus, the team’s ability to think strategically as evidenced by creating innovative new strategies was disabled because they were unaware of the greater context for their work. Because they perceived that they did not have adequate resources to accomplish their existing roles, they also assumed that thinking strategically would result in more work — so why bother?

Layer 3: Individuals

To what extent do your own thinking habits support or block your ability to think strategically?

There are two perspectives to consider at the individual layer — your natural style of brain functioning and the process you use to cope with adversity.

A number of assessment tools are available that identify an individual’s preferred approach to thinking and making decisions. One self-assessment tool I have used, the Brain Styles Inventory, developed by the Brain Technologies Corporation, identifies four types of thinking based on an individual’s preference: precision thinking, open-ended thinking, feelings-powered thinking and aim/act thinking. Assessing one’s preferred style of thinking enables a leader to create strategies to mitigate biases or blind spots.

In my work as an executive coach, I’ve discovered that high functioning leaders have a good sense of their natural abilities and styles. Thus, they recognize where they add value and acquire the support they need to complement their strengths. For example, one leader I worked with had a natural preference toward open-ended creative thinking. Therefore, he made sure to identify and engage others who brought precision thinking abilities to his team.

Every leader I have coached has communicated to me implicitly or explicitly his or her desire to be able to mine opportunities out of challenging situations. Yet, the process of thinking through adverse situations to find opportunity does not happen instantly and involves both thinking and emotions. Adversity often calls forth bold new ways to think and act, but leaders have to progress through various states of mind to achieve these insights.  A 2002 study conducted by researchers Charles Stoner and John Gilligan identified a three-step coping model that successful senior leaders experience when they are faced with adversity: (1) disillusionment, (2) introspection, and (3) transformation. These researchers interviewed several dozen highly successful senior-most leaders in various organizations to learn more about strategies they use to bounce back from adversity.

Disillusionment is an unavoidable stage of coping. Effective leaders recognize this stage won’t last forever and acknowledge the importance of this stage as the “crucible” that helps to loosen the grip of old ways of thinking. Stage 2, introspection, often involves a reflective review of ones’ purpose, values, and what can and cannot be controlled. In stage 3, successful leaders are able to reframe problems into opportunities and gain perspective on what they can and cannot control in a given situation. The study found that a major factor that helps leaders advance to stage 3 is tapping support networks consisting of colleagues, peers, and mentors who can help them make sense of what happened, gain perspective and bounce back powerfully.

Thinking strategically about challenges in order to create winning solutions is an essential leadership competency. By considering the three layers of the onion, as well as the three views of thinking styles, you can gain greater insight into your challenges as well as create an environment that helps your people achieve outstanding results.

Recent Research

On the Web

Strategic Thinking: A Discussion Paper
http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/research/knowledge/strathink_e.htm

The Canadian Public Service Commission has produced a wonderful research article on strategic thinking and strategic planning.

The CEO Refresher: The Strategic Thinking Mindset
http://www.refresher.com/!mindset.html

An interesting article about strategic thinking skills, written by a retired US Army organization development leader.

In Print

The New Strategic Thinking by Michel Robert
(McGraw-Hill;2005)
Drawing upon a significant body of experience as an organizational consultant, Robert offers a number of examples that bring to life various components of his strategic thinking model. The author suggests that “strategic thinking is akin to ‘picture painting’ whereby the management … literally ‘draws’ a picture … of what they want the business to look like at some point in the future.” Strategy (what we are trying to achieve) and operations (how we are trying to achieve it) are organizational competencies that the author believes few organizations have mastered together. Companies that are proficient at both have strongly distinguished themselves in the market — Southwest Airlines, Johnson & Johnson, Wal-Mart, and Intel. These companies also avoid a prime mistake in the strategizing process — they focus on strategy for the future, not the present. Overall, Robert’s book is a very rich source for insight on strategic thinking.

Strategic Thinking: An Executive Perspective
by Cornelis A. De Kluyver (Prentice Hall; 1999)
De Kluyver bases his book on a working definition of strategy: “the act of positioning a company for sustained competitive advantage by focusing on unique ways to create value for customers.” In order to develop such a strategy, he suggests that an integrated approach of rational analysis and creative synthesis is essential. Further, De Kluyver explores the importance of assessing factors in the external strategic environment, such as economic conditions, and provides methods for assessing their relative strength and degree of uncertainty associated with their occurrence. From an internal perspective, the author discusses how exploring internal resources as both enabler and disabler of change is critical for determining which strategic direction to take. He concludes by discussing strategic positioning at a business-unit and a corporate level, as well as the implications of positioning ones’ organization globally.

____________________________________________________

Leap Advocates is a Washington, DC-based professional services firm that strives to help create resilient teams, leaders and organizations. We offer executive and career coaching, learning programs and organization development (OD) consulting services. For more information, please contact Kevin Nourse at 202.462.6252 or knourse@leapadvocates.com

© 2006 Kevin Nourse. Duplication and distribution is authorized with attribution.