I guess the hackneyed phrase is "think outside the box". It is easy to dismiss the cliche. However, when you are searching for business growth it is useful to test many options. It is probably unforgivable, given the risks, not to establish the options fully.
Classic examples include:
- only considering local markets
- not agreeing why a product or service is attractive to you (by what criteria, and what importance each has)
- only considering organic growth options
Failing properly to review the options is natural. Decisions are often time pressured, and it can be hard to persuade colleagues to spend time on things that are not obvious. This can be especially the case if there is no established method for reviewing options more openly before selecting the key elements on which to focus. Who wants to argue against the flow and the status quo?
"Inside the box" thinking may well include the right answers, but there is a strong probability that it will not. It is critically limited thinking, constrained by existing ideas and structures; by "the most familiar".
Here are some of the reasons why thinking gets constrained:
- attention is narrowly focussed and no-one on the board has the experience or wisdom to take a step back
- there is no "normal" process of debate that includes more divergent ideas
- creative thinking is thought of negatively; perhaps seen as "madcap", "unstructured" or "distractions" (which are also a result of poor thinking or process; there is no inevitable logic to such attitudes)
- failure to notice any of the above happening
I suspect the last is the most common. It is very human only to notice the weather as it changes, but I would be interested to hear your views.
At each significant point of decision, a balance of research, discussion and agreement is needed. Good process can take you through all of these rapidly.
No comments:
Post a Comment