The Future Starts with a Question
Ozmo Futures
Colin Shiner
Two ways of thinking
Among the many ways of approaching the somewhat abstract concept of thought, two “philosophies” have received a lot of attention in current business literature. On one hand, critical thinking or analytical skills are among the most sought after traits for employees and job seekers, at least according to popular business literature. And on the other hand, leadership and organizational development specialists are increasingly touting the benefits of something often called “mindfulness”. While exploring the emergence and implications of these two schools of thought could be the subject of several books, here we are more concerned with highlighting the shift of perspective that occurs when approaching something from the tradition of “mindful awareness” or from the tradition of “critical thinking”. Here are a few illustrative examples:
Critical thinking seeks to marshal arguments and balance perspectives.
Mindful awareness pays attention to how the stream of being and thought are moving in relation to something, and without passing judgement, allows the mind to imagine what else might exist below the surface.
Critical thinking is about weighing evidence and making decisions.
Mindful awareness is about recognizing that things which seem to be in conflict may simultaneously co-exist.
Critical thinking stems from the need to reach a conclusion.
Mindful awareness grows from a willingness to sit amidst dissonance and tension, without attempting to silence a way of looking at something because it doesn’t appear to fit.
Well-structured critical thinking is complex, but ordered and precise.
Mindful awareness is curious about how a given way of looking at something makes it seem more connected or more disconnected from the whole.
Both are useful when used separately. When they work together, they become invaluable. When they become one and the same, “value” is no longer a factor that limits thought.
Limiting and Liberating
Sometimes, limiting thought is exactly what we want to do. Considering an endless expanse of alternatives and possible scenarios is mentally taxing, and at some point, reflection loses its transformative potential if it isn’t accompanied by action.
Asking, “when can you commit to having the report finished?” or “who has the experience and is willing to assume responsibility for coordinating this special task force?” are framed in a way that closes the scope of future possiblity and solicits a response rooted in concrete, time-bound action. (The interested reader should look up a collection of essays called, Conversations for Action, by Fernando Flores and Maria Flores Letelier)
Sometimes, however, limiting thinking leads us to frame things in a way that makes it harder to experience the capacity for depth that we have as humans.
“…in reality, we probably aren’t even addressing the root of the concern that prompted us to ask those questions in the first place.”
The potential for liberation becomes especially powerful when we think about our relationships. In a relationship (whether it’s with family, colleagues, friends, or a partner) the questions, “Will this person be satisfied with me? With my performance? With my beliefs? With who I am?” or “Am I good enough for this person?”, are limiting questions that – apart from likely damaging the potential of the relationship – are also probably not a particularly helpful way of framing the question.
Reflecting on how these questions are constructed, a few things stand out. First, they imply a belief that our present understanding of someone else’s thinking is a faithful replication of their perspective. They then ask us to judge our own future potential through the filter of our current ability to comprehend another person’s perspective. Essentally, in posing those questions, we’re asking ourselves to make leaps of judgement that we aren’t fully able to comprehend. This means we probably won’t get a response that helps us understand the relationship better, and on the other hand, the questions are so vague that we probably won’t get a response that promotes constructive action either. So while we could ask these question and get an answer, we aren’t really addressing the root of the concern that prompted us to ask those questions in the first place.
It’s important to note that asking deeper questions isn’t necesarily just a matter of perspective. In the above example, incidentally, changing our perspective still doesn’t let us move into a different reflective space. The inverted questions “Is this person enough for me?” or “Will I ever be satisfied with this person?”, are still limiting questions that don’t allow us to get at the underlying nature of the relationship.
“The result… is that we direct attention away from our own role in shaping the future”
Similarly to before, these questions direct us to make a judgement about the future based on what we are presently thinking about someone. They also imply a belief that our current knowledge and our memory of shared experiences with someone paint an accurate representation of the future experiences we could build in colaboration with that person.
The result of these frames is that we direct attention away from our own role in shaping the future and our ability to construct meaning from our perceptions, and instead we subtly confer the creative power to realize shared future experiences to someone else. As a consequence, we give up the potential to have a real conversation with a loved one, or to transform a working relationship with a colleague. To do these things, we need to ask a different type of question.
While this impact is perhaps most visceral in the context of personal relationships, the same thing can happen in our relationships with clients, customers, or even an entire value chain of actors. In the most profound sense, relationships are at the core of every organization, community, and business in human society. Fortunately, when we need to ask the deeper questions, the liberating question can help.
Consider the shift in perspective that happens when instead of asking, “what do our customers want?”, we ask, “what might it look like for us to open our creative process to our customers?”. Or instead of asking, “how can I make my employees more productive while we’re all working from home?”, trying, “what am I paying attention to that leads me to believe that our company isn’t as productive as I think it needs to be?”. “how might I gain an entirely different perspective on what our employees are dealing with right now?”, or, “how might we empower and engage our employees, providers, and clients in evolving our communications flow?”
“In the most profound sense, relationships are at the core of every organization, community, and business in human society.”
Both types of questions seek to address a concern, both types are clearly phrased and both can get an answer. But in one version of these questions, we’re looking for the “right” answer; the one that “gets results”. In the other variants of these questions, we open the scope of possiblity in a way that allows us to see what else might be out there. “Getting it right” becomes secondary to getting clarity about what exactly “it” is, and understanding what we could do to make it real.
Breaking free of being “right”
Part of what allows us to frame these questions differently is a decentering of our ego. Here, it’s important to note that in this context, ego is not a synonym for conceit. Being conceited is when we believe ourselves to be superior to others. Ego is the opposite. Being in a place of ego is when we think and act as if we depended on someone else’s validation of our present actions in order to decide which actions to take in the future. While conceit places itself above the need for approval, ego places itself under that need.
“…when we allow ourselves to flow beyond those voices, we enter a creative space in which we are free to fully participate with those around us in making our shared reality.”
Decentering the ego gives us a third option. It allows us to step outside the framing that measures our worth by its relative position to approval. And not just other’s approval, but our own approval too. That little voice in the back of our head that insists that our “comfort zone” is fine, that different is dangerous, that starting something isn’t worth the effort unless you can guarantee results, and of course you can’t, so what even try – that voice can whisper louder than some people shout. But when we allow ourselves to flow beyond those voices, we move into a creative space in which we are free to fully participated with those around us in making our shared reality.
Unsurprisingly, this type of participation is best learned by doing. Existing outside of the ego is a realization that becomes a habit. And while it can be understood conceptually fairly rapidly, to experience its transformative power it has to be learned experientially. Learning the practice of existence beyond ego expands our ability to participate fully, whether we’re with a loved one, in a heated discussion with a client or co-worker, or reflecting by ourselves while socially distancing during a public health crisis.
Learning, however, takes practice. Most of us have been conditioned from an early age to live in a place of ego. Some of us, in trying to shed the ego, have developed a habit of conceit. We are therefore faced with a challenge. Neurologically, habits are difficult to change because with each repetition, the brain rewires itself make it easier for us to apply the same mindsets, thoughts, and behaviors that worked for us before to similar circumstances in the future. As we learn to use these mindsets and behaviors in more and more circumstances, it gets harder and harder for us to try out a different response.
This is where mindful awareness really shines. When trying to break out of a way of thinking or a habitual way of doing things, even the way we think about change can be counterproductive to moving anywhere. On the surface it seems counterintuitive, but a growing body of research shows that when we really want to change a habit, we should stop trying so hard.
Instead, we should start by paying attention to what we pay attention to. Just notice. Don’t judge it, don’t evaluate yourself, don’t try to force it. Just gently become aware of how you’re looking at things. Of what you do in response to them. Next, it’s time to get curious. When you catch yourself feeling boxed in by the future, mentally explore what it might look like to change your perspective. Ask someone you wouldn’t normally go to for advice what they think. Listen to their response and let your mind process what it is that they’re seeing that you aren’t. And remember, the point isn’t to make you or anyone else change their mind. You aren’t validating your point of view and you aren’t picking apart someone’s counterargument. In this moment, being right is irrelevant at best and debilitating at worst. You’re just gaining perspective.
“Being ‘right’ is irrelevant at best and debilitating at worst.”
As you get more comfortable with the practice of awareness, you might find that your mind feels more flexible. You’ll get better at digging below the surface and seeing your train of thought expand into possiblities. You might start to listen not just to what people say, but also to how they say it. You’ll notice when a question or a comment narrows the scope of the future and when it broadens the realm of possibility. You yourself will get better at limiting the future and invoking focused, coordinated action when that is what you truly want to do, and inviting deeper participation from those around you when you recognize an opportunity to create something new.
The future starts with a question. Are you paying attention to how you ask it?
References
Aviles, P. and Dent, E., 2015. The Role of Mindfulness in Leading Organizational Transformation: A Systematic Review. The Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 20(3), pp.31–55.
Business.linkedin.com. 2020. The Most In-Demand Hard And Soft Skills Of 2020. [online] Available at: <https://business.linkedin.com/talent-solutions/blog/trends-and-research/2020/most-in-demand-hard-and-soft-skills> [Accessed 1 May 2020].
Flores, F., 2013. Conversations For Action And Collected Essays.
George, B., 2012. Mindfulness Helps You Become a Better Leader. Harvard Business Review, [online] Available at: <http://mindful-leaders.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/HBR-Mindfulness-Helps-You-Become-a-Better-Leader.pdf> [Accessed 1 May 2020].
Hrvisionevent.com. 2020. 10 Job Skills You’ll Need In 2020 And Beyond. [online] Available at: <https://www.hrvisionevent.com/content-hub/10-job-skills-youll-need-in-2020-and-beyond/> [Accessed 1 May 2020].
Rowson, J., 2011. Transforming Behaviour Change: Beyond Nudge And Neuromania. The Social Brain Project. [online] RSA. Available at: <https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/rsa-transforming-behaviour-change.pdf> [Accessed 1 May 2020].
Smith, K. and Graybiel, A., 2016. Habit Formation. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, [online] 18(1), pp.33–43. Available at: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4826769/> [Accessed 1 May 2020].
Trudeau-Poskas, D., 2020. Soft Skills Are 2020'S Hard Skills — Here’s How To Master Them. [online] Forbes. Available at: <https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2020/01/29/soft-skills-are-2020s-hard-skills-heres-how-to-master-them/#9a8cf9d70f27> [Accessed 1 May 2020].
