Being in the middle of complex change means living with tension.
- Short-term vs. long-term
- Tactics vs. strategy
- Simplicity vs. complexity
- Technology vs. humans
- Established practices vs. custom solutions
- Agility vs. stability
- Centralized vs. decentralized
- For-profit vs. for-purpose
- The many vs. the few
- Old vs. new
- Local vs. global
To handle this environment, we often turn to committees to determine the “best” solution. Encourage people to pitch the value of their proposal. Debate the pros and cons. And then select from a list of options.
With so many stakeholders and needs to address, disagreements are common. We watch factions form around professional or ideological boundaries.
Or worse, everyone always agrees.
In a past post, we talked about ways to take advantage of the tension by quickly shifting between viewpoints and perspectives.
So when I picked up a copy of “Creating Great Choices” by Jennifer Riel and Roger L. Martin, I was excited to see that they have an entire framework for not only recognizing alternative viewpoints but using them to create solutions that are even better than the original options.
Integrative thinking
The book asserts that our choices don’t need to be binary or fixed.
If we feel like we need to choose between a handful of options, then we’re often stuck with the “least bad” choice. Or we might compromise to the point where no one’s happy with the outcome.
Instead, the authors suggest embracing the tension between conflicting viewpoints. With a handful of cognitive tools and guiding questions, combining elements of seemingly opposite ideas can help us design new solutions that serve our stakeholders and values.
Decision making then becomes about, “synthesis not settling.” The authors call these solutions “integrative answers.”
The book was full of great tips and examples, but I’ll share a handful of my favorite insights here and how they apply to portfolio management.
1. Decision-making processes are often heavy on evaluation, low on creativity
Often in portfolio and product management, decisions are made between discrete choices. We define decision making criteria and set about deciding which project is worth working on first. We look to frameworks (or our enterprise role model) for guidance and weigh the tradeoffs of options.
By the time we’re ready to make a decision, the options are often fixed. Typically there’s not a lot of flexibility to use the decision-making process as an opportunity to open up the creative process again. Integrative thinking offers an alternative.
2. Our mental models are more influential than we realize
We can’t experience everything in the world. So we pull the data that we can access, apply it through our filters and infer cause and effect. As we go through life and add more data to the model, we increase our confidence in its validity.
And then get frustrated when people don’t agree with us.
We point out the evidence that makes our case. And just get more push back. So we retreat back to the group of people who agree with us and commiserate about the people who don’t “get it.”
The authors suggest that we need to stop assuming that our mental model is the only valid model. And get curious about other models.
This is why cross-functional teams are so important at the portfolio level. But assembling a diverse team isn’t enough.
We also need conversations, sketches, and prompts designed to draw out the underlying reasoning behind recommendations and behaviors. So that the invisible mental models guiding us become as tangible as any other prototype or slide deck we’d rally around and debate.
“The more implicit our models of the world, the more likely we are to struggle to understand why we do what we do and why we get the results we get. Many bad decisions can be tracked to unarticulated models of the world and the unsurfaced assumptions behind them.”
– Jennifer Riel and Roger L. Martin
3. Work on your metacognition, empathy, and creativity skills to make better decisions
Have you seen any of these scenarios play out in cross-functional teams?
- Each team member breaks off a piece of the problem and tackles it individually from their own viewpoint, coming back to the group to piece the findings together.
- Team members are hesitant to cross role boundaries and question each other.
- Team members debate the overall approach until everyone is run down and decides to concede to one view just to move on.
Moving past cross-functional stalemate requires focusing on these three skills to take advantage of the value of opposing mental models:
- Metacognition- Analyze your thinking.
- Empathy- Leverage your natural ability to understand other people’s viewpoints.
- Creativity- Give yourself permission to use existing options as building blocks, not discrete choices.
Why are these skills so important for portfolio management?
Metacognition
Since portfolio management is at its core about decision making and allocating resources, understanding your mental models of what’s valuable and how to create that value can help you evaluate your own thinking and recognize alternative models.
Empathy
Your portfolio serves multiple stakeholders, so it helps to understand how their mental models are different from your own.
Creativity
Best practices were best in their own circumstances and time. To move beyond “best,” especially when dealing with limited resources and rapid changes, we have to be able to move beyond applying what’s been tested in the past toward designing a future that fulfills our values.
4. Leverage the extremes to build better solutions
There’s so much pressure on leaders to pick a vision and stick with it. But living with conflicting models can actually help you design a solution that’s even better.
The authors recommend following this process with two solutions at the extreme ends of the spectrum:
- Articulate the models: Make implicit thoughts about each model tangible.
- Examine the models: Identify similarities, differences, assumptions, and cause and effect forces.
- Explore possibilities: Combine elements of each model to determine if there’s an alternative way to address your values.
- Assess the prototypes: Test your assumptions and how well the solution will work in reality.
What could this look like in the portfolio process?
Articulate the models
For a given problem within your portfolio, clarify the problem you’re aiming to solve and pick two extreme opposing answers to that problem.
For example, if the problem was about how could we improve the customer experience,
What if the company chose a completely centralized approach?
Alternatively, what if we went with a decentralized approach?
Sketch each model, learn about how it works, if it differs depending on the stakeholder viewpoint, and explore the benefits of each.
Examine the models
How are the models similar? Different?
How does cause and effect play out in this model?
What kinds of assumptions make this model work? When do they fall apart?
How do the benefits of the models align with your company or personal values?
Sometimes this discussion can help the group tease out what they really value when making a final decision.
Explore possibilities
How could you pull out the components of each extreme that map to your values?
Could you use a component from one extreme to make the other extreme a better solution?
Break apart the problem in a way that you can combine each extreme model to a different part and end up with a better solution overall?
Assess the prototypes
Like any other portfolio initiative, you can design small experiments to test if your solution solves the problem and is desirable, feasible, and viable.
Sometimes it seems like life and work mean constantly choosing from a menu of options. But we’re not limited to tradeoffs and compromises. With integrative thinking, we can take advantages of tension and opposing viewpoints to design and build better solutions.
How will you apply these tips to your next decision?