6 Strategies for Creating Powerful Cross-Discipline Teams :

Our Human Brain is wired to be irrational, Here’s how you can overcome that.

A little bit of background to the set the scene before talking about strategies:

The disdain for the logical mind seems to be prevalent. A sort of twisted badge of honor worn by the shortsighted.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is an astrophysicist and orator who is often able to translate obtuse and highly conceptual theories about the imperceptible inner workings of our universe into a language that goes beyond just making the information understandable, he manages to make it captivating.

While Mr. Tyson manages to grapple with some of humanity’s most complex ideas and come out on top, there is a concept he seemed incapable of coming to terms with:

The cultural acceptance and pride associated with being unskilled with math and logic. This might seem counterproductive in this brave new world where “Survival of the Smartest” is the new law of the jungle.

Mr. Tyson, in a conversation with the somewhat controversial author and scientist Richard Dawkins, asked the question with some visible pain. Anecdotally speaking, Why do so many people seem proud of a lack of understanding of logic tasks like mathematics.

There probably isn’t a single answer, but it probably lies deep within the primordial nooks and crannies of the human brain.

In nature, in the times when we were both hunter and prey, thoughtful and meaningful contemplation was rarely rewarded.

In our early kill or be killed days we had to quickly absorb information and make life or death decisions. Is that rustling in the bushes tonight’s dinner or a painful and gruesome end. A decision in this context is based on broad generalizations, personal experience and a heavy leaning towards safety over success.

It’s a larger societal challenge we can see play out around us with alarming results.

“How does this tie into designing great products?”

So what is your goal when creating a “cross discipline team”?

Hopefully the idea is that each team member understands and has a full spectrum of empathy that starts with the user/consumer of the product or service and permeates throughout.

Typically, the door doesn’t swing both ways.Engineering team members often have powerful insight, or at least have an informed opinion into how the product would best be formed for its consumer while Design will rarely offer any insight into how product should be structured. This is mainly anecdotal but I think most readers will have observed this in practice at least once.

It’s an interesting phenomenon, to use a specific example of a software product, where Design will violently reject an understand of the computer science concepts and technology that will make the product a reality. On the other hand, folks in engineering have a desire to influence the design of the consumers’ experience with the product. If One hasn’t experienced this phenomenon ask around and certainly others in your organization have observed this.

That’s not to say that an engineers perspective on a product or service’s experience are ideal, well formed or even just not horrible — but that’s not the point.

The willingness to venture into unfamiliar territories

The willingness to get out of their comfort zone is what’s powerful here, since the figurative door into the so called “right hemisphere” is a one way door naturally configured by our primordial brain to swing from rational or “left hemisphere” into the emotional or “right hemisphere”

Specialization is for Insects.

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

Why bother? Let “creative” people be creative and “technical” people be technical.

We must reject the premise of this assertion. Let’s rearrange that statement and cross-function the hell out of it.

Encourage people to be creative with technology.

Everyone working on the product should be involved in every aspect that is going to make that product or service a reality, each person can have a specialization but bringing creative problem to each layer of the product is only going to make the end result cheaper, faster and better. “Creative” people can bring unconventional thinking to how engineering challenges can be overcome and “technical” people can bring structure and when we remove these labels and just have “people” we can channel all of that power into making a product that will provide positive impact for its consumers.

Strategies for super-charging cross discipline teams

OK, so how do we do this?

1. Invest in your people in a 70/30 split.

If you have a staff that you expect to have any kind of longevity invest in their growth 70–30. 70% project/billable and 30% formal training. This training should be formalized, progress measured and in a field outside of that person’s comfort zone.

Whats that? You say you don’t have budget for this? You’re paying for it anyway , in turnover, in inefficiency and in unrealized product outcomes.

Does your organization have a training budget? Tuition stipend? Tuition reimbursement? Many larger organizations have these programs in place and , speaking from experience, they go almost completely unused.

2. Break down doors that divide.

Remove cultural barriers for cross-functional empowerment. Lavish praise on those who get out of their comfort zones, find ways to get people talking about those left brain things our brains are fighting to keep out.

Each situation will be different, so it will be up to you to find a way but at the end of the day it can’t be acceptable for anyone to reject logic challenges like math, science, engineering, etc

3. Reduce or eliminate jargon.

Jargon happens. Acronyms happen. Stop it. Theses are walls that keep valuable people out. That’s probably not completely possible, but the more we can ‘humanize’ the language we use in problem solving the easier it will be for everyone to contribute.

4. Blur borders.

When you draw the map of your team, don’t have clearly defined borders between disciplines. Encourage and demand cross pollination so you can…

5. Apply right brain thinking to left brain problems and vice versa.

So, left brain or “technical” people are said to be able to solve problems after understanding the problem and all the relevant data.

While right brain or “creative” people are able to make connections between unrelated things and come up with unexpected solutions that aren’t immediately apparent.

So… why wouldn’t you want to apply right brain thinking to left brain problems? Wouldn’t you want someone who can find solutions where no one else saw them, to overcome technical challenges that your competition couldn’t?

6. Empower logical thinking.

Encourage thoughtful analysis, research, testing and verification. “Going with your gut” can be OK as a starting point, but get your people into a scientific mindset.