Editorial Reviews. Review. "Ned Herrmann and Ann Herrmann-Nehdi know more about the brain than anyone. If you want to function better, this is a must read.". Ned Herrmann, Ann Herrmann Nehdi pdf download. The Whole Brain Brain Business Book, Second Edition: Unlocking The Power Of Whole Brain Thinking In. The Whole Brain Business Book: Your Guide to Better Thinking in the 21st Thanks to the power of Whole Brain® Thinking, you can apply what we know about.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Hindi|
|Genre:||Politics & Laws|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, or by The Whole Brain in Action in BUSINESS. 9. “Whole Brain Thinking Model™ has given our managers a critical new business planning, strengthening their teams and boosting efficiency. The Whole Brain Business Book book. Read 8 reviews from the world's largest community for readers. In the hot area of mind research and its applications.
Or at least discuss them with people whose strengths align with those other thinking styles. Whole Brain thinking can reveal possibilities we may inadvertently overlook if we rely too heavily on our dominant thinking patterns.
Yet, just as our bodies need exercise to develop strength and resiliency, our brain also needs to flex its mental muscles. Developing your competencies and honing your expertise requires time and effort even in your natural areas of preference.
And like physical exercise, incorporating mental calisthenics within your daily activities as well as setting aside time for dedicated practice will yield optimum results. The idea is to become just a little bit more comfortable using those less preferred thinking styles so you can leverage them more easily when the situation warrants. Not sure how to do that? Keep at it. It will become easier the more you do it and you will reap the benefits. Insight 2 An actionable way to implement the Big Idea into your life No One Is Smarter than Everyone "We need to figure out how to listen for, and leverage, the differences in thinking on our teams, especially when we are facing tough new challenges.
However, to truly unleash the full potential of our organizations and families , we would be wise to tune into and then utilize the thinking styles of our co-workers and family members. Actively manage the creative process. Abrasion is not creative unless managers make it so. Before problems surface, devise clear, simple guidelines for working together. For example, one group decided to handle conflict by stating that anyone could disagree with anyone else about anything, but no one could disagree without saying the reason.
When scheduling a project, create time for both divergent thinking uncovering imaginative alternatives and convergent thinking focusing in on one option and then implementing it.
Depersonalize conflict when it does arise. Acknowledge that other approaches are not wrongheaded, just different. Innovate or fall behind: the competitive imperative for virtually all businesses today is that simple.
Achieving it is hard, however, because innovation takes place when different ideas, perceptions, and ways of processing and judging information collide.
That, in turn, often requires collaboration among various players who see the world in inherently different ways. As a result, the conflict that should take place constructively among ideas all too often ends up taking place unproductively among people who do not innately understand one another. Disputes become personal, and the creative process breaks down.
Generally, managers have two responses to this phenomenon.
On the one hand, managers who dislike conflict—or value only their own approach—actively avoid the clash of ideas. They hire and reward people of a particular stripe, usually people like themselves. Their organizations fall victim to what we call the comfortable clone syndrome: coworkers share similar interests and training; everyone thinks alike. Because all ideas pass through similar cognitive screens, only familiar ones survive.
For example, a new-business development group formed entirely of employees with the same disciplinary background and set of experiences will assess every idea with an unvarying set of assumptions and analytical tools. Such a group will struggle to innovate, often in vain.
They act as if locking a group of diverse individuals in the same room will necessarily result in a creative solution to a problem. The manager successful at fostering innovation figures out how to get different approaches to grate against one another in a productive process we call creative abrasion. Such a manager understands that different people have different thinking styles: analytical or intuitive, conceptual or experiential, social or independent, logical or values driven.
She deliberately designs a full spectrum of approaches and perspectives into her organization—whether that organization is a team, a work group, or an entire company—and she understands that cognitively diverse people must respect the thinking styles of others. She sets ground rules for working together to discipline the creative process. Above all, the manager who wants to encourage innovation in her organization needs to examine what she does to promote or inhibit creative abrasion.
Creative abrasion can be productive. We have worked with a number of organizations over the years and have observed many managers who know how to make creative abrasion work for them. In order to create new ideas and products, such managers actively manage the process of bringing together a variety of people who think and act in potentially conflicting ways. How We Think What we call cognitive differences are varying approaches to perceiving and assimilating data, making decisions, solving problems, and relating to other people.
These approaches are preferences not to be confused with skills or abilities. For instance, you may prefer to approach problems intuitively but in fact may be better trained to approach them analytically. Preferences are not rigid: most people can draw on a mixture of approaches and do not live their lives within narrow cognitive boundaries. We often stretch outside the borders of our preferred operating modes if the conditions are right and the stakes are high enough.
That said, we all tend to have one or two preferred habits of thought that influence our decision-making styles and our interactions with others—for good or for ill. We all have preferred habits of thought that influence how we make decisions and interact with others.
The most widely recognized cognitive distinction is between left-brained and right-brained ways of thinking. This categorization is more powerful metaphorically than it is accurate physiologically; not all the functions commonly associated with the left brain are located on the left side of the cortex and not all so-called right-brained functions are located on the right. Still, the simple description does usefully capture radically different ways of thinking.
An analytical, logical, and sequential approach to problem framing and solving left-brained thinking clearly differs from an intuitive, values-based, and nonlinear one right-brained thinking. Cognitive preferences also reveal themselves in work styles and decision-making activities.
Take collaboration as opposed to independence. Some people prefer to work together on solving problems, whereas others prefer to gather, absorb, and process information by themselves.
Each type does its best work under different conditions. Or consider thinking as opposed to feeling. Some people evaluate evidence and make decisions through a structured, logical process, whereas others rely on their values and emotions to guide them to the appropriate action. The list goes on. Abstract thinkers, for instance, assimilate information from a variety of sources, such as books, reports, videos, and conversations.
They prefer learning about something rather than experiencing it directly.
Experiential people, in contrast, get information from interacting directly with people and things. Some people demand quick decisions no matter the issue, whereas others prefer to generate a lot of options no matter the urgency.
One type focuses on details, whereas the other looks for the big picture: the relationships and patterns that the data form. Not surprisingly, people tend to choose professions that reward their own combination of preferences.
Their work experience, in turn, reinforces the original preferences and deepens the associated skills. Therefore, one sees very different problem-solving approaches among accountants, entrepreneurs, social workers, and artists.
Proof to an engineer, for example, resides in the numbers. But show a page of numerical data to a playwright, and, more persuaded by his intuition, he may well toss it aside. Within any profession, there are always people whose thinking styles are at odds with the dominant approach. The best way for managers to assess the thinking styles of the people they are responsible for is to use an established diagnostic instrument as an assessment tool. A well-tested tool is both more objective and more thorough than the impressions of even the most sensitive and observant of managers.
Dozens of diagnostic tools and descriptive analyses of human personality have been developed to identify categories of cognitive approaches to problem solving and communication. All the instruments agree on the following basic points: Preferences are neither inherently good nor inherently bad.
They are assets or liabilities depending on the situation. For example, politicians or CEOs who prefer to think out loud in public create expectations that they sometimes cannot meet; but the person who requires quiet reflection before acting can be a liability in a crisis. Distinguishing preferences emerge early in our lives, and strongly held ones tend to remain relatively stable through the years. Thus, for example, those of us who crave certainty are unlikely ever to have an equal love of ambiguity and paradox.
We can learn to expand our repertoire of behaviors, to act outside our preferred styles. But that is difficult—like writing with the opposite hand. Managers who use credible personality assessment instruments find that their employees accept the outcomes of the tests and use them to improve their processes and behaviors.
How We Act All the assessment in the world means nothing unless new understanding brings different actions. Personality analysis instruments will help you understand yourself and will help others understand themselves.
The managerial challenge is to use the insights that these instruments offer to create new processes and encourage new behaviors that will help innovation efforts succeed. Understand yourself.
Start with yourself. When you identify your own style, you gain insight into the ways your preferences unconsciously shape your style of leadership and patterns of communication. You may be surprised to discover that your style can stifle the very creativity you seek from your employees. Consider the experiences of two managers of highly creative organizations.
Each was at odds with his direct reports—but for very different reasons.
Jim Shaw, executive vice president of MTV Networks, is a left-brained guy in a right-brained organization. Said Shaw: I have always characterized the creative, right-brained, visionary-type people here as dreamers. So if you find a programme that you feel may work for you, there is a good chance that even your stronger belief is helping feed your success, rather than some secret sauce.
It is equally quite probable that a selection of many items from many programmes can work too. There may be no right or wrong single answer.
That said, the authors believe that their techniques of analysing and using our brains to its full potential can help transform a business at every level. No job too small, no project too ambitious. Can it work for you?