|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
Six
Thinking Hats®
The Six Thinking Hats
Corporate Program is a
simple & powerful tool that
will change the way people
think. It promotes the kind
of innovative thinking and
creative problem solving
that is vital to success in
today's changing economy &
technologies.
|
|
Workshop Objectives:
|
|
*
|
Replace one dimensional
thinking with Six
Dimension Thinking (from
emotion to facts, positive
to negative, critical to
creative). |
|
*
|
Make your thinking more
deliberate and generate
more ideas |
|
*
|
Identify alternatives,
stimulate innovation and
solve problems faster |
|
*
|
Improve Team Work and lead
better meetings |
Who
Should Attend |
|
Team Leaders,
Facilitators,
Department/Divisional
Managers who want more
productive meetings &
stronger performance. |
Benefits:
|
|
*
|
Foster collaborative
thinking and interaction
by keeping egos and "turf
protection" in check |
|
*
|
Reduce the adversarial
approach in all
alternatives |
|
*
|
Promote the use of
different ways of thinking
so that people don't get
trapped by negative or
critical approaches |
|
*
|
Develop a framework that
encourages different kinds
of thinking & provides
more open, creative
climate for discus |
|
*
|
Create parallel thinking
to harness ideas from
everyone in the
organization |
|
*
|
Make time for creative
thinking to develop
alternative and innovative
solutions |
|
*
|
Run more effective and
productive meetings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE NEED TO CHANGE THINKING BEHAVIOR
We have developed many excellent thinking
tools for argument and analysis.
Our information technology methods are
constantly improving. But we have
developed few tools to deal with our
ordinary everyday thinking - the sort of
thinking we do in conversations and
meetings.
In fact, our traditional thinking methods
have not changed for centuries. While
these methods were powerful in dealing
with a relatively stable world (where
ideas and concepts tended to live longer
than people), they are no longer adequate
to deal with the rapidly changing world of
today where new concepts and ideas are
urgently needed.
"Our traditional thinking methods…..are no
longer adequate to deal with the rapidly
changing world of today…."
|
|
HISTORICAL
BACKGROUND
The fall of the Roman Empire in Europe was
followed by the Dark Ages. The so - called
barbarian hordes swept across what had
been the civilizations of Rome and Greece.
Scholarship, reading, writing, and
thinking were only preserved in the great
monasteries and abbeys of the Church.
Naturally, the thinking that took place in
the monasteries and abbeys was concerned
with theology and with preserving the
doctrine and dogma of the Christian faith.
Then came the Renaissance. The Renaissance
was brought about by the discovery of the
classic thinking methods of the ancient
Greek philosophers. This "new thinking"
provided a breath of fresh air. Humanity
was given a more central role in the
universe. Thinkers were allowed to use
reason to work things out. Logic was now
allowed.
It is hardly surprising that this new
thinking was eagerly embraced by the
"humanists" or non - church thinkers
because it gave them a framework for
thinking and also for challenging the
church. At the same time, this new
thinking was embraced by church scholars
such as Thomas Aquinas of Naples, who
fashioned Aristotelian logic into a
powerful, argumentative way of proving
heretics wrong. So the two main thinking
groups in Western culture adopted, with
eagerness, this classic Greek thinking.
"Church scholars…..fashioned Aristotelian
logic into a powerful, argumentative way
of proving heretics wrong"
|
|
ARGUMENT AND
CRITICAL THINKING
To this day, Western culture depends on
this type of thinking. In family
arguments, in business discussion, in the
law courts, and in governing assemblies,
we use the thinking system of the Greeks,
based on argument and critical thinking.
I sometimes refer to prominent
philosophers of this day as the "gang of
three". Who were the famous Greek gang of
three, and how did they form the thinking
habits of Western culture?
|
|
THE GANG OF THREE
SOCRATES (469 - 399 B.C.)
Socrates was trained as a "sophist".
Sophists were people who played with words
and showed how careful choice of words and
showed how careful choice of words could
lead you to almost any conclusion you
wanted. Socrates was interested in
challenging people's thinking and, indeed,
getting them to think at all instead of
just taking things for granted. He wanted
people to examine what they meant when
they said something. He was not concerned
with building things up or making things
happen.
"From Socrates we get the great emphasis
on argument and critical thinking"
From Socrates we get the great emphasis on
argument and critical thinking. Socrates
chose to make argument the main thinking
tool. Within argument, there was to be
critical thinking: Why do you say that?
What do you mean by that?
|
|
PLATO (C. 427 - 348 B.C.)
Plato is generally held to be the father
of Western philosophy. He is best known
for his famous analogy of the cave.
Suppose someone is bound up so that the
person cannot turn around but can only
look at the back wall of the cave. There
is a fire at the mouth of the cave. If
someone comes into the cave, then the
bound person cannot see the newcomer
directly but can only see the shadow cast
by the fire on the back wall of the cave.
So as we go through life, we cannot see
truth and reality but only "shadows" of
these. If we try hard enough and listen to
philosophers, then perhaps we can get a
glimpse of the truth. From Plato we get
the notion that there is the "truth"
somewhere but that we have to search for
it to find it. The way to search for the
truth is to use critical thinking to
attack what is untrue.
|
|
ARISTOTLE (384-322
B.C.)
Aristotle was the pupil of Plato and the
tutor of Alexander the Great. Aristotle
was a very practical person. He developed
the notion of "categories", which are
really definitions. So you might have a
definition of a "chair" or a "table". When
you come across a piece of furniture, you
have to judge whether that piece of
furniture fits the definition of a chair.
The object cannot both be a chair and not
be a chair at the same time. That would be
a "contradiction". On the basis of his
categories and the avoidance of
contradiction, Aristotle developed the
sort of logic we still use today (based
largely on "is" and "is not"). From
Aristotle we get a type of logic based on
identity and non - identity, on inclusion
and exclusion.
|
|
THE OUTCOME OF THE GANG OF THREE.
So this was the gang of three. The outcome
was a thinking system based on the search
for the "truth". This search was going to
be carried out by the method of argument.
Within argument there was to be the
critical thinking that sought to attack
"untruth". This attack was going to use
the methodology of Aristotle's logic.
|
|
THE PERVASIVENESS OF ARGUMENT
To this day, argument is the basis of our
normal thinking. The purest form of this
type of thinking is in the law courts
where the prosecution takes one side of
the argument and the defense the other
side. Each strives to prove the other side
wrong. The "truth" is to be reached by
argument.
|
|
THE INADEQUACY OF
ARGUMENT
There is a place for argument, and
argument is a useful tool of thinking. But
argument is inadequate as the main tool of
thinking.
Argument lacks constructive energies,
design energies, and creative energies.
Pointing out faults may lead to some
improvement but does not construct
something new. Synthesizing both points of
view does not produce a stream of new
alternatives.
"In my view, we would have been at least
three hundred years ahead if our thinking
had not been limited to the argument method"
Today in business, as elsewhere, there is a
huge need to be constructive and creative.
There is a need to solve problems and to
open up opportunities. There is a need to
design new possibilities, not just to argue
between two existing possibilities.
|
|
PARALLEL THINKING: AN ALTERNATIVE TO
ARGUMENT
Traditional argument is totally useless for
such a design process. Instead, we need
Parallel Thinking ®, where each
thinker puts forward his or her thoughts in
parallel with the thoughts of others - not
attacking the thoughts of others.
The Six Thinking Hats method is a practical
way of carrying out Parallel Thinking. This
method is of fundamental importance because
it provides us, for the first time, with a
practical method of constructive thinking.
We now have a more constructive alternative
to argument or drifting discussion.
"We now have a more constructive alternative
to argument or drifting discussion"
It is important to understand this very
fundamental nature of the Six Hats method in
order to appreciate the importance of the
method. The Six Hats system is not just
another gimmick. This system provides an
alternative to that most basic of thinking
procedures: the argument.
|
|
Parallel Thinking at
Work
In traditional adversarial thinking, A and
B are in conflict. Each side seeks to
criticize the other point of view. The Six
Hats method allows Parallel Thinking. Both
A and B wear each hat together as they
explore all sides of an issue. Adversarial
confrontation is replaced by a cooperative
exploration of the subject.
ADVERSARIAL
Mr. A Ms. B
"This proposal won't work" "Yes, it will."
Parallel
Mr. A
"The development costs are high."
Ms. B
"Some components are hard to find".
Mr. A
"We could produce this with existing
equipment".
Ms. B
"it's light weight and would ship easily".
|
|
UNBUNDLING THINKING
When we think in the normal way, we try to
do too much at once. We may be looking at
the information, forming ideas, and
judging someone else's ideas all at the
same time.
The Six Hats method allows us to un-bundle
thinking. Instead of trying to do
everything at once, we separate out the
different aspects of thinking. This way we
can pay full attention to teach aspect in
turn. Think of full color printing, where
the basic color separations are made and
then each basic color is printed
separately into the same sheet to give
full color printing.
In the same way, we separate the modes of
thinking and then apply each mode to the
same subject in order to end up with full
color thinking on the subject.
There is suggestion that the chemical
setting in the brain (neurotransmitters,
etc.) may be different when we are being
positive from when we are being negative
and from when we are being creative. If
this proves to be so, then there is an
absolute need to separate out the
different components of thinking in order
to do each properly. It would be
impossible to have one brain setting that
was ideal for all sorts of thinking.
"Instead of trying to do everything at
once, we separate out the different
aspects of thinking. This way we can pay
full attention to each aspect in turn".
|
|
SEPARATING EGO AND PERFORMANCE
If you do not like an idea, then you are
not going to spend much time thinking of
the benefits or good points of that idea.
This is because if you uncovered
sufficient good points for the idea to be
accepted, then you would have "lost" the
argument.
With the Six Hats method, however, the
thinker can be specifically asked to give
a yellow hat "performance". This is a
challenge to the thinker, who will not
want to appear unable to perform this way.
So yellow hat thinking gets done even by
someone who does not like the idea. In the
course of this yellow hat thinking, ideas
may turn up which cause the thinker to
change his or her mind. It also can happen
the other way around. A euphoric supporter
of an idea can be asked to do a black hat
performance. This may turn up difficulties
that reduce the previous euphoria.
"Because the Six Hats system quickly
becomes a neutral game, the method
provides a very convenient way to switch
thinking or to ask for a certain type of
thinking"
|
|
SWITCHING MODES
If you ask someone not to be so negative,
that person may be offended. But if you
ask the person to do yellow hat thinking,
there is no reason to be offended. You
might also say, "That is good black hat
thinking; let us have some more of it."
"Later you would say, "We have had a lot
of good black hat thinking. Now, what
about switching to the yellow hat?"
Because the Six Hats system quickly
becomes a neutral game, the method
provides a very convenient way to switch
thinking or to ask for a certain type of
thinking. This is not easy to do in any
other way without offending the people
involved
|
|
INCREASED AWARENESS
Because there is now a simple and
practical way of referring to different
modes of thinking, people become aware
that they are stuck in one mode or
another.
"I think I have only been doing red hat
thinking about this".
"We should make a deliberate yellow hat
effort here".
People can now comment on their own
thinking and can also comment on the
thinking of others. The Six Hats method
allows an increased awareness of what
thinking is actually being used on any
occasion.
|
|
WHO IS USING THE SIX
THINKING HATS?
The method is widely used at Prudential
Insurance (the largest insurance group in
the world), and the former president of
Prudential, Rob Barbaro, used the Six Hats
frame work every day with his staff.
Siemens has over 35 certified Six Hats
instructors working with employees
throughout its European offices. Boeing is
just now taking up the hats in the United
States. The hats are also in use at
Honeywell, Motorola, Eli Lilly, Cargill,
Fidelity Investments, National
Semiconductor, and in many other
companies. Healthcare groups, financial
institutions, chemical and pharmaceutical
companies, manufacturers, and utilities
are just a few of the industries using Six
Hats. At the time this revision was
published, over 100,000 people had been
trained in the hats in 35 countries
|
KEY BENEFITS
Below are some of the key benefits clients
find in using the Six Thinking Hats.
Works - they see results immediately
| |
Simple to learn, use, and implement
Not dependent on others (you can use
it by yourself)
Modified behavior without attacking it
Empowers
Can be used at all levels
Improves cross - cultural interaction
Reduces conflict
Encourages cooperation
Enhances quality of thinking
Supports other change initiatives
Is available worldwide |
|
|
|
|
Copyright All rights reserved IDEAS
Management Consultants |
|
