I have a really annoying habit

From strategic deep dives to mentoring sessions, when clients ask me should we be doing A or B, I am very likely to respond – Yes.

They generally look puzzled, thinking I’ve misheard them. Which one?, they ask again? A or B?

Both I say.

How can we do both?

Now that’s a question worth asking.

When we are locked in binary thinking, rationalist thinking that implies we can always make a right decision between two alternatives, we miss the possibility that a different answer is possible. One where both A and B are true. And not just true. More than that, they are necessary.

Danish physicist Niels Bohr famously said: “The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.”

How can that be? Surely we can and should make clear decisions between different alternatives?

Yes we should.

We should when we are dealing with linear problems where the outcomes are predictable, analysis can determine a set of plausible choices and where cause and effect are predictable and traceable. Either or choices work incredibly well, for instance, when a course of action has clear metrics for success and failure, or is determined by compliance or safety requirements. Will you ride to work today, walk, take the bus or jump in the car? Each choice has trade-offs, but you can only do one at a time.

Where it gets tricky is when things are a bit foggy. When the pathway forward is not clear – where multiple plausible paths exist – and cause and effect can’t been seen. Where the world around us morphs before our eyes in ways that we don’t, and can’t, foresee. Where, rather than comply with our carefully designed plans, the world refuses to cooperate and the future emerges apparently of its own free will and despite our best efforts.

This is the world of paradox. A world where co-existing, apparently incompatible states are the norm and rational thinking reaches its limits. In short, though we hate to admit it, things become a bit incomprehensible.

We struggle to see the wood for the trees and the next best step to take. Our uncertainty increases while confidence in decisions decreases. We start second guessing ourselves - maybe flip-flopping from one path to another.

If you’ve ever been faced with delivering annual shareholder return and investing for the future, introducing change without destabilising the organisation, or committing to a strategic direction and responding to market shifts (trade tariffs anyone?), you’re dealing with paradox. If none of those are you but you’re parenting a teenager who needs boundaries and freedom to grow you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about. And here’s the rub, we often have multiple paradoxes playing out simultaneously.

If you’re struggling to make an either/or choice, chances are you’ve met with a paradox and it’s time to shift beyond rational thinking.

It’s time for adaptive thinking.

How can adaptive thinking help? Systems thinker Kenneth Boulding has some comforting advice. Rather than trying to dial up our usual rational thinking approaches – more data, more analysis, more experts – we can take advantage of what Boulding calls the ‘inside track’. Simply put, since we are part of the very systems we are trying to understand, we can use intuition and experiential knowledge, alongside analytical thinking, to better sense, understand and make decisions about what to do.

The greater the amount of complexity, the more important being able to apply adaptive thinking becomes.

One of the best ways to do that is bring together diverse perspectives to explore the possibilities that lie within the paradox in question. This helps in many ways, not the least of which is because our own frames of reference, by definition, are bounded by our experience and knowledge - we each have blind spots. So, the more complex the circumstances the more important it is, when sensing what is going on, to ensure we have multiple points of view on hand to look at matters from different angles. Likewise when it comes to deciding how to proceed, a range of alternative paths need to be considered and used to monitor how things are going.

You may suspect that these conversations are not always easy. That surfacing and working with different perspectives, world views and experiences isn’t straightforward. It’s not and it shouldn’t be.

We’re not after the echo chamber that is groupthink.

We’re after insight, possibility and innovation. We’re after alignment on purpose and pathways. We’re after creative tension and robust discussion. We shouldn’t shy away from it. In fact, we should actively move towards it. All are part of the bedrock of effective adaptive thinking. Without them we are not truly able to engage with the complexity of the issues in front of us and move, collectively, towards a desired outcome.

By now you’re probably thinking about some of your own challenges and trying to decide if binary or adaptive thinking is most suited.

If you can’t decide - try adding one more plausible issue to the problem.

If you find yourself answering yes to should we be doing A, B or C it’s time to stop forcing binary, either/or choices. Its time to adopt adaptive thinking.

And to add an annoying habit to your repertoire. You’ll thank me later.

.