A Synthesis in Three Parts
Leaders. Decision Makers. Uncertainty. Change. Impact. What are you waiting for? http://t.co/m0xLYzB5ug #leadership #creativity
— Matthew Brady (@matthewbradyhk) December 4, 2014
Elevator Pitch
|
|
|
White Paper
If we are to believe Sir Ken Robinson, ALL of us are born creative. Yet over time, it gets gradually 'educated' out of us – a poor grade here, a parental comment there, society’s disapproval elsewhere - so that by the time we are adults, what was once the flame of creativity in childhood has become a dying ember. But all is not lost; creativity can be cultivated, nurtured and reignited, just as long as we set ourselves along that path. Embracing creativity creates opportunities to develop something new, to view the familiar in a new light, to see the previously concealed, and to open the mind to where ever it will take us. Creativity lets us see possibilities where none existed before and approach the known with a new perspective. With the world moving at an ever faster pace day by day, the information available, and the challenges faced, are becoming more and more complex. To be able to distill the essence of any situation to its core, and be able to see the abstract in any development, is to understand the greater implications of a decision and hopefully make better ones for the many lives that leaders impact
As people who make decisions daily that affect millions, leaders and decision makers need to be able to approach problems and issues with creativity, to adopt new paradigms to address problems, to seek new solutions, to ‘think outside the box.’ An important way this can be done is in the way leaders approach problems; as we looked at in the patterning exercise, there are fairly standard, linear decision making models. What leaders need to do is to go beyond these, because the world today is full of constantly evolving variables. Leaders need to view their decision making processes as cycles, clouds, or even as the old atomic structures:
As people who make decisions daily that affect millions, leaders and decision makers need to be able to approach problems and issues with creativity, to adopt new paradigms to address problems, to seek new solutions, to ‘think outside the box.’ An important way this can be done is in the way leaders approach problems; as we looked at in the patterning exercise, there are fairly standard, linear decision making models. What leaders need to do is to go beyond these, because the world today is full of constantly evolving variables. Leaders need to view their decision making processes as cycles, clouds, or even as the old atomic structures:
We can further enhance our creativity, or at least our receptiveness to new ideas, by cultivating new ways of thinking by exposing ourselves to different disciplines – sciences, literature, music – which give us a window into different ways of viewing the world. Two of the great leaders of the 20th century, Winston Churchill and Theodore Roosevelt, were not only great leaders, but also very accomplished in other disciplines: Churchill as a painter, writer, and speaker; Roosevelt as an accomplished author, naturalist, and hunter. Both of these men had diverse and varied personal experiences and interests that allowed them to see the world through different prisms, reflecting Root-Bernstein’s statement ‘creative people have always combined many ways of feeling and knowing simultaneously.’ (p.309.) Their experiences gave them ‘vision’ and they were able to transmit their vision in more understandable terms to the masses, a connection that belied their upper class, patrician backgrounds.
The need for a diverse and varied educational experience was indeed the philosophy behind the ‘classical educations’ (what might now be called multidisciplinary education) that people of earlier generations were inculcated with. Specialization was shunned; individuals studied the arts, sciences, humanities and physical education and were taught critical reasoning and expression. Root-Bernstein relate the statement from Bauhaus that ‘The only real schooling...trains the mind, the body, and the spirit to strive for synthesis. The challenge in modern life and education still remains to reintegrate poetry and physics, art and chemistry, music and biology…(p. 313) and ‘…we must implement a multidisciplinary education that places the arts on the same level as the sciences. (p.317) This educational philosophy lies behind Sir Ken Robinson’s strongest criticisms of our education system today – that it is too narrowly focused and ignores three fundamental aspects of learning and intelligence: that it is diverse – people have different aptitudes and learn in different ways; that it is dynamic – it is interactive; and that it is distinct – it is individualized. However, under the current system we have adopted an industrial and mechanized mindset for a process that is human and organic. He believes strongly that our natural ‘creativity’ is being gradually educated out of us, and in order to change this trend, we need to radically change the way we educate our children – in a human and organic manner that takes into account students’ interests and passions.
Travel and experiencing other cultures is another avenue that can open up our minds to entirely new ways of thinking, culture, art and music, religion and conceptions of the world. We may be exposed to ideas that may be very different from our own and which may stimulate our own thinking in entirely new directions. This was Steve Jobs’ point, that creative people ‘… were able to connect experiences they’ve had to synthesize new things. And the reasons they were able to do that that they have had more experiences or they have thought more about their experiences than other people.’ (Henriksen et al, p.18.)
Developing our observation and perception skills allows us to see things in ways that can potentially enhance creativity. Sometimes, it comes from recognizing that in the most mundane, everyday experiences there is something that can be seen in an entirely new light. Other times, it involves taking the familiar and rearranging it to create something entirely new. In my interview with Tom Agna, he had some very interesting observations about the ways his creativity comes about;
‘You are not ‘inventing’ anything; you are looking at the ‘details’ of things from a new and different perspective. He related, “…its telling people about life, a slice of life. As a performer, I see myself as the representative of the entire audience.” He related that if he is in a situation where he needs to produce something, he does consciously begin to ‘attune’ himself to being more observant. That, though, does not always produce tangible results, and it is sometimes hard to get the ideas flowing. In those cases, it’s just a matter of getting something on paper and once that starts, the ideas start to come. He does not know where they come from, but he knows when to trust his instincts. That sometimes involves taking risks. And as importantly, he keeps his ‘ego’ and ‘filters’ in check and does not prejudge his own or others’ ideas. Just starting with an idea can lead to connections that he never saw at the beginning, suggesting a confirmation of the statement ‘The deeply individual nature of the process suggests that creativity does not follow a straight and narrow path, and that it cannot be predicted.’ (Henriksen et al, p.18)
Or, as comedian Aaron Freeman put it, ‘Everything in your life ends up in your act.’ (Root-Bernstein, p. 326.)
To bring this into the classroom, and my areas of history and leadership/decision making, there are ample opportunities whereby these can be studied in a cross-disciplinary fashion. History (being history) lends itself to applications across disciplines – art, music, natural science, and social science. ‘We must emphasize the transdisciplinary nature of education.’ (Root-Berstein, p.318) Being able to track developments in each of these disciplines, and putting them in an historical perspective in relation to other historical developments, would not only lend richness to the study of multiple events, but also facilitate a deeper understanding of the interrelatedness of world developments, as changes in one arena (say, science) will frequently precipitate upheavals in another (religion or the political arena.) Another transdisciplinary example is in the IB system. Both psychology and history are offered at the top levels. To design an interactive class that incorporates the study of leadership and decision making from a psychological perspective, including the theoretical, experiential, and practical, and tying it to specific historical events and individuals would be a more realistic way to explore the psychology and application of leadership and the decision making process to history.
Nearly every seminal moment in history has required ‘decisions’ and leadership, whether the American Revolutionary era, the Civil War, the race struggles in the 50s and 60s, or Vietnam. Likewise, in a global context, the Napoleonic Wars, WWI, the 1930s, the Cold War. In each situation, decisions that were made by various leaders had far reaching consequences that affected millions and whose impact is still felt today. To put students in the position of decision makers in those situations would make the study of the respective subject a more ‘real’ experience and not just some event that occurred years ago.
My vision is to create a course that would utilize all forms of teaching media to cover a specific historical period, a crisis period, or series of events - books, video/movies, simulation games, even field excursions where possible. But the core of the course would be leadership and decision-making modules, or ‘events’ where the students are placed in simulations or role-playing positions. Events that could be modeled in this way (depending on the course topic/era) could be the US Constitution debates; the state’s rights debates, secession and the start of the Civil War and the Civil War; Lincoln’s cabinet during the war; the Berlin Airlift of 1948; the Vietnam War, the race struggles of the 50s and 60s, or the Cuban Missile Crisis – literally any major US or global historical event. Students will be placed in decision-making teams; they could be a task force, Congressional delegation, a National Security team, a Cabinet, or a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) team. Throughout the course term, there would be ‘decision points’ – significant ‘inflection times’ where important decisions or events are occurring and where decisions or advice need to be given. Each group would be provided with specific pieces of information at each ‘decision point,’ and different groups may get different pieces of information, according to who/what they represent. They would then be required to make decisions or provide policy advice based on their understanding of what they have studied, the situation, competing priorities, and any other outside information sources. This will be done amidst changing situations with imperfect and/or inaccurate information, much as decision makers must react today to situations where there are gaps in information.
The students would then be required to present their decisions, to justify and argue them, and then explain as to how they were reached. Not so different from the real world.
Embarking on this course would tap each of the skills we have examined in this course and achieve what Root-Bernstein described as ‘synosia is the natural and necessary result of imaging, analogizing, modeling, playing, and transforming.’ (p.307.) Students in this class would apply these skills in the following manner:
· ‘Perceptions’ of an issue;
· Developing frameworks for decision making (‘patterning’);
· Thinking about the crucial elements of the situation (‘abstracting’) and how to represent those. Drawing connections with past experiences or related experiences to reach decision frameworks (‘analogizing’);
· Feeling the pressure and making decisions ‘in their gut’ (‘embodied thinking’); and putting oneself into the role of various individuals (‘empathizing’);
· ‘Modeling’ a situation by playing through the various scenarios (game theory);
· And of course ‘playing’ – but since its a role play, they won’t have to suffer the consequences of their decisions.
The result would then be drawing it all together (‘synthesizing’) in order to come up with decisions. As Root-Berstein state, ‘synesthesia is the key to not only experiencing but also to understanding things at a much deeper level than is possible using single modes of perception.’(p.304.)
My course will place students in a front-line role as leaders and decision makers, experiencing history 1st hand, with its pressures, uncertainties, and the need to justify and explain decisions. By requiring them to broaden their sources of information and to take into account other factors (because no decision exists in a vacuum), they will gain an understanding of the competing choices that every leader is forced to make, as well as the context that their decision is being made in. With this will go the satisfaction of decisions well made, or the disappointment of ones that went awry (and the subsequent fall out – but without the real-world consequences!)
References:
Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & the Deep-Play research group (2014). ‘Twisting knobs and connecting things: Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century.’ Tech Trends, (58)1, P. 15-19.
Robinson, K. (February 2006) TED Talks: Sir Ken Robinson: ‘How Schools Kill Creativity.’
Robinson, K. (April 2013) TED Talks: Sir Ken Robinson. ‘How to Escape Education’s Death Valley.’
Root-Bernstein (1999), Sparks of Genius: The 13 Thinking Tools of the World’s Most Creative People. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York.
The need for a diverse and varied educational experience was indeed the philosophy behind the ‘classical educations’ (what might now be called multidisciplinary education) that people of earlier generations were inculcated with. Specialization was shunned; individuals studied the arts, sciences, humanities and physical education and were taught critical reasoning and expression. Root-Bernstein relate the statement from Bauhaus that ‘The only real schooling...trains the mind, the body, and the spirit to strive for synthesis. The challenge in modern life and education still remains to reintegrate poetry and physics, art and chemistry, music and biology…(p. 313) and ‘…we must implement a multidisciplinary education that places the arts on the same level as the sciences. (p.317) This educational philosophy lies behind Sir Ken Robinson’s strongest criticisms of our education system today – that it is too narrowly focused and ignores three fundamental aspects of learning and intelligence: that it is diverse – people have different aptitudes and learn in different ways; that it is dynamic – it is interactive; and that it is distinct – it is individualized. However, under the current system we have adopted an industrial and mechanized mindset for a process that is human and organic. He believes strongly that our natural ‘creativity’ is being gradually educated out of us, and in order to change this trend, we need to radically change the way we educate our children – in a human and organic manner that takes into account students’ interests and passions.
Travel and experiencing other cultures is another avenue that can open up our minds to entirely new ways of thinking, culture, art and music, religion and conceptions of the world. We may be exposed to ideas that may be very different from our own and which may stimulate our own thinking in entirely new directions. This was Steve Jobs’ point, that creative people ‘… were able to connect experiences they’ve had to synthesize new things. And the reasons they were able to do that that they have had more experiences or they have thought more about their experiences than other people.’ (Henriksen et al, p.18.)
Developing our observation and perception skills allows us to see things in ways that can potentially enhance creativity. Sometimes, it comes from recognizing that in the most mundane, everyday experiences there is something that can be seen in an entirely new light. Other times, it involves taking the familiar and rearranging it to create something entirely new. In my interview with Tom Agna, he had some very interesting observations about the ways his creativity comes about;
‘You are not ‘inventing’ anything; you are looking at the ‘details’ of things from a new and different perspective. He related, “…its telling people about life, a slice of life. As a performer, I see myself as the representative of the entire audience.” He related that if he is in a situation where he needs to produce something, he does consciously begin to ‘attune’ himself to being more observant. That, though, does not always produce tangible results, and it is sometimes hard to get the ideas flowing. In those cases, it’s just a matter of getting something on paper and once that starts, the ideas start to come. He does not know where they come from, but he knows when to trust his instincts. That sometimes involves taking risks. And as importantly, he keeps his ‘ego’ and ‘filters’ in check and does not prejudge his own or others’ ideas. Just starting with an idea can lead to connections that he never saw at the beginning, suggesting a confirmation of the statement ‘The deeply individual nature of the process suggests that creativity does not follow a straight and narrow path, and that it cannot be predicted.’ (Henriksen et al, p.18)
Or, as comedian Aaron Freeman put it, ‘Everything in your life ends up in your act.’ (Root-Bernstein, p. 326.)
To bring this into the classroom, and my areas of history and leadership/decision making, there are ample opportunities whereby these can be studied in a cross-disciplinary fashion. History (being history) lends itself to applications across disciplines – art, music, natural science, and social science. ‘We must emphasize the transdisciplinary nature of education.’ (Root-Berstein, p.318) Being able to track developments in each of these disciplines, and putting them in an historical perspective in relation to other historical developments, would not only lend richness to the study of multiple events, but also facilitate a deeper understanding of the interrelatedness of world developments, as changes in one arena (say, science) will frequently precipitate upheavals in another (religion or the political arena.) Another transdisciplinary example is in the IB system. Both psychology and history are offered at the top levels. To design an interactive class that incorporates the study of leadership and decision making from a psychological perspective, including the theoretical, experiential, and practical, and tying it to specific historical events and individuals would be a more realistic way to explore the psychology and application of leadership and the decision making process to history.
Nearly every seminal moment in history has required ‘decisions’ and leadership, whether the American Revolutionary era, the Civil War, the race struggles in the 50s and 60s, or Vietnam. Likewise, in a global context, the Napoleonic Wars, WWI, the 1930s, the Cold War. In each situation, decisions that were made by various leaders had far reaching consequences that affected millions and whose impact is still felt today. To put students in the position of decision makers in those situations would make the study of the respective subject a more ‘real’ experience and not just some event that occurred years ago.
My vision is to create a course that would utilize all forms of teaching media to cover a specific historical period, a crisis period, or series of events - books, video/movies, simulation games, even field excursions where possible. But the core of the course would be leadership and decision-making modules, or ‘events’ where the students are placed in simulations or role-playing positions. Events that could be modeled in this way (depending on the course topic/era) could be the US Constitution debates; the state’s rights debates, secession and the start of the Civil War and the Civil War; Lincoln’s cabinet during the war; the Berlin Airlift of 1948; the Vietnam War, the race struggles of the 50s and 60s, or the Cuban Missile Crisis – literally any major US or global historical event. Students will be placed in decision-making teams; they could be a task force, Congressional delegation, a National Security team, a Cabinet, or a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) team. Throughout the course term, there would be ‘decision points’ – significant ‘inflection times’ where important decisions or events are occurring and where decisions or advice need to be given. Each group would be provided with specific pieces of information at each ‘decision point,’ and different groups may get different pieces of information, according to who/what they represent. They would then be required to make decisions or provide policy advice based on their understanding of what they have studied, the situation, competing priorities, and any other outside information sources. This will be done amidst changing situations with imperfect and/or inaccurate information, much as decision makers must react today to situations where there are gaps in information.
The students would then be required to present their decisions, to justify and argue them, and then explain as to how they were reached. Not so different from the real world.
Embarking on this course would tap each of the skills we have examined in this course and achieve what Root-Bernstein described as ‘synosia is the natural and necessary result of imaging, analogizing, modeling, playing, and transforming.’ (p.307.) Students in this class would apply these skills in the following manner:
· ‘Perceptions’ of an issue;
· Developing frameworks for decision making (‘patterning’);
· Thinking about the crucial elements of the situation (‘abstracting’) and how to represent those. Drawing connections with past experiences or related experiences to reach decision frameworks (‘analogizing’);
· Feeling the pressure and making decisions ‘in their gut’ (‘embodied thinking’); and putting oneself into the role of various individuals (‘empathizing’);
· ‘Modeling’ a situation by playing through the various scenarios (game theory);
· And of course ‘playing’ – but since its a role play, they won’t have to suffer the consequences of their decisions.
The result would then be drawing it all together (‘synthesizing’) in order to come up with decisions. As Root-Berstein state, ‘synesthesia is the key to not only experiencing but also to understanding things at a much deeper level than is possible using single modes of perception.’(p.304.)
My course will place students in a front-line role as leaders and decision makers, experiencing history 1st hand, with its pressures, uncertainties, and the need to justify and explain decisions. By requiring them to broaden their sources of information and to take into account other factors (because no decision exists in a vacuum), they will gain an understanding of the competing choices that every leader is forced to make, as well as the context that their decision is being made in. With this will go the satisfaction of decisions well made, or the disappointment of ones that went awry (and the subsequent fall out – but without the real-world consequences!)
References:
Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & the Deep-Play research group (2014). ‘Twisting knobs and connecting things: Rethinking Technology & Creativity in the 21st Century.’ Tech Trends, (58)1, P. 15-19.
Robinson, K. (February 2006) TED Talks: Sir Ken Robinson: ‘How Schools Kill Creativity.’
Robinson, K. (April 2013) TED Talks: Sir Ken Robinson. ‘How to Escape Education’s Death Valley.’
Root-Bernstein (1999), Sparks of Genius: The 13 Thinking Tools of the World’s Most Creative People. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York.