Adaptive Strategies Blog

I have been fascinated with the quote attributed to the French biologist, Louis Pasteur, that “chance favors a prepared mind.” Consequently I wrote a book in 2006 with Jeanie Egmon from Northwestern University that focused on the skills (eight in all) we saw in leaders who were prepared for the future. (Go to www.PreparedLeader.com for an overview of the book and our thoughts behind it.) Anyway, given the level of uncertainty I see across the economy, I decided to return t that theme for a number of posts about getting ready for the future.

Here’s the challenge: Are you ready for the challenges and opportunities in your path from today to tomorrow?

Let me start with comments about the prepared mind skill of challenge.

We are pretty comfortable at challenging others’ thoughts and decisions. We’re sure that many authority figures (bosses, coaches, legislators, generals, etc.) are intellectual wimps and that we could do their job better than they. Sometimes we’re right. However, we’re often judging based on our biases, not our own ability to think well.

Everyone has opinions; are your opinions build on a solid foundation?How can you assess your ability to think and, consequently, challenge yourself to improve?

Try using Benjamin Bloom’s levels of cognitive ability. (Bloom was a U of C professor who studied thought processes that are used in learning. Google him to learn more.)

Bloom concluded that there are six levels of thought. Moving from the lowest to the highest they are: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. At what level is your thinking? What underpins your opinions? Try the following example and then create some of your own.

Most of us know that General Motors is in a world of hurt, so let’s use their problem to understand the levels of thinking and to test our thinking.

• Knowledge – can you recall specific information? What are the products and services provided by GM? What nameplates have been eliminated? Which remain?
• Comprehension – can you state a problem in your own words? What is the major problem faced by GM and its unions as it emerges from bankruptcy?  
• Application – can you apply concepts to the “real world?” How has the labor contract trapped both parties? How does this apply to your workplace?
• Analysis – can you distinguish between facts and inferences? How is the  situation at Ford different from the situation at GM?
• Synthesis – can you put the parts together to form a whole, with emphasis on proposing alternative solutions? Can you design an organizational structure and new “social contract” that is agreeable to both management and unions at the new GM?
• Evaluation – can you judge and evaluate actions and outcomes based on a defined set of criteria? Maybe you love the government’s approach? Maybe you hate it. Here’s the tough question: What would you do to “fix” GM?

Maybe it was unfair to test your thinking about GM? What if I asked a similar set of questions about the war in Afghanistan? (Many of us hate it; but do we understand it?) What about your company’s strategy? (Why think about it? I’m sure “they” have everything under control.)  And then there are your views of our health care system. (“I’m sure it’s broken, but they need to fix it without raising taxes. It’s not my problem”) Hmmmm.

I now challenge all of us to move up the scale of Bloom’s levels of thought. We have plenty of knowledge and most of us are pretty good at comprehension. However, if my view of the world is representative of reality, we are sorely lacking in the widespread capability of the higher levels of this taxonomy.

The world of sound bites and “factoids” is a sterile world when it comes to good examples of the skills needed to synthesize and evaluate. What do you see? Are you worried?