Viewpoint - Viewpoint

On the first day of “Psychology of Behavior in Organizations,” the professor asked our doctoral cohort to reflect, in writing, on the question “How do you learn?” I answered very quickly: “I learn,” I wrote, “by asking questions.”

I have found that, quite often, those around me misunderstand the aim of my questioning.  If I ask a question to which they already have an answer, they assume I just don’t know what they know (which is sometimes true), and they begin to instruct me. Sometimes, though, I already possess the answer they have.  My question is really intended to challenge the knowledge we all accept as right and true.  It’s an attempt to reexamine my assumptions so that I see the problem or theory or topic from as many different perspectives as possible.

I began to research team processes that use questioning as a technique for discovering novel solutions to problems, and, in so doing, I settled on action learning theory, a process in which learning occurs as people work together on real-time work problems. While action learning can be an individual or an organizational process, it is typically utilized in a team setting of 5 to 8 participants.  Learning takes place through deep questioning of previously held knowledge and beliefs. This group questioning process promotes what experts call divergent learning and divergent thinking. In western culture, most of our education is delivered in a convergent learning style. In fact, I.Q. tests are explicitly designed to measure only convergent thinking abilities.  Studies have shown that action learning increases divergent thinking in participants, and in fact, that divergent thinking increases with the number of action learning processes participants experience.

Divergent thinking has been positively linked to creativity. Divergent thinking emphasizes developing multiple perspectives on concrete experiences, and heightened awareness of meaning and values in learners. Yet divergent thinking and learning is the one learning style least represented in MBA programs, business training courses and K-12 pedagogy!

A good example of the difference between convergent and divergent learning can be found in the contrast between how Japanese school children are taught math versus methods used for teaching American and German children the same skills.  American and German math teachers begin the lesson by presenting the math problem and demonstrating the solution.  The students are then asked to memorize the solution, and test their memory through repetition of similar problems.

Japanese teachers approach the same math problem differently, by posing a mathematical issue and asking the students to formulate their own understanding of what the problem is.  Students are asked to work out both the problem and solution to the best of their ability, utilizing cognition skills of analyzing, inventing, and testing.  The Japanese method develops divergent thinking skills, while the American and German method does not.  Interestingly, in the study that compared these teaching methods, the Japanese math students were the third highest achievers out of 41 countries studied. The Germans were 23rd and the Americans placed an abysmal 28th.

It’s possible then, that action learning, and other processes of deep questioning, could provide significant remediation of divergent learning and thinking skills such as associative fluency, creative problem solving and the ability to delay closure. In a recent article in Harvard Business Review entitled “The Innovator’s DNA,” the authors attempt to define what, if anything, differentiates innovative people from the rest of the population. The authors break down their answer into five “discovery skills” they claim innovators possess: associating, observing, experimenting, networking and questioning.  In analyzing how innovators use questioning, they point to the fact that these questions are not designed to elicit a correct answer, but instead to challenge a widely held belief.  Rather than working to make existing processes and functions work a little better, these innovators (according to the article) want to challenge the very assumptions underlying those processes.

Questioning the status quo can lead to the breakdown of hegemony and help to promote greater diversity. Diversity within work groups has been shown to be a source of novel ideas. In order to effectively utilize the benefits of diversity, organizational leaders and their employees must explore challenging questions such as:

• What are our current organizational norms around seeking knowledge and sharing it?
• Is knowledge acquisition the domain of upper management?
• How does the firm treat women, minorities, and the disabled?

These are important questions, because when some sub-groups within an organization feel they operate outside the mainstream, they begin to adopt the dominant behaviors and interaction styles and sublimate their own identities or, worse yet, leave the organization, taking their talents with them.  Opportunities for divergent thinking are lost.  Furthermore, when people suppress their own identity to blend with the mainstream, they reduce their social interaction and withhold ideas for fear that if their opinions are outside the accepted norms, they will experience even greater marginalization. Those holding power and making decisions on knowledge sharing systems and structures might not even be aware of the hegemony within their organization.  According to Acosta (2004, p.2), some questions leaders seeking innovation might ask include:

• Who defines the questions – i.e., who defines what and how new information is allowed into the organization at what level of strategy or practice?
• Who is “sent” to acquire new information? Who is recruited in (“grafted”) to bring new expertise? How are they and their knowledge assimilated into the organization?
• Who is involved in the interpretive process that converts “data” into “wisdom” and consequently decides on strategy and action steps?  Who are seen as insiders in communities of practice?

This disciplined questioning not only models the kinds of questioning that leads to learning and innovative thinking, but can uncover those “inconvenient truths” hidden within unexamined norms and unquestioned social practices.  The deepest organizational learning occurs when the status quo is held up to constant questioning. Organizations seeking greater innovation capacity should abandon their expert stance and instead, adopt a questioning-and-discovery oriented point of view, in which nothing is accepted at face value, and healthy skepticism is the norm.

References:
Acosta, A.S. (2004).  A diversity perspective on organizational learning and a learning perspective on organizational diversity. Academy of Management Proceedings, D1-D6.
Cropley, A., & Cropley, D. (2008). Resolving the paradoxes of creativity: An extended phase model. Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(3), 355-373.
De Haan, E., & de Ridder, I. (2006). Action learning in practice: How do participants learn? Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58(4), 216-231.
Dyer, J.H., Gregersen, H.B., Christensen, C.M. (2009). The innovator’s DNA. Harvard Business Review, 87(12), 61-67.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J.M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–44.
O’Neil, J., & Marsick, V. J. (2007). Understanding action learning. New York: Amacom.
Raelin, J. (2006). Does action learning promote collaborative leadership? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(2), 152–168.
Silvia, P.J., Winterstein, B.P., Willse J.T., Barona, C.M., Cram, J.T., Hess, K.I., Martinez, J.L., & Richard, C.A. (2008).  Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Exploring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68-85.

----------------------------------

Biography

Julia Fischer Baumgartner, PsyD

Julia is an expert in divergent thinking and creativity coaching. Her background in the fine arts affords her particular respect for the creative aspirations of business leaders. Working with them, she digs through and questions absolutely everything in order to get to the heart of their vision. Then she helps make their vision ubiquitous, resonating at every level of the organization. She understands the kinds of thinking and management approaches that drive organizations to sustainable competitive advantage when innovation counts. Doctor of Psychology in Organizational Consulting, Julia has more than 20 years of experience in both management and the arts. She’s a former free-lance director (she holds a MFA degree in Directing), and served as the co-artistic director of the critically acclaimed 15 Head – a theatre lab, in Minneapolis, MN.

###

Comments: