KEY POINTS:
Every organisation has a few people who always seem to challenge the way things are done. Those at the top want the company to zig while these people say it should zag.
Those contrarians can be annoying. They may complain about something that does not even seem important
to others. HR may even be called to sort out the problem.
But it's time to rethink their position in the scheme of things. The problem may not be "them"; it could be you. After all, it's easy to work with (and manage) people who think like you. The question is: How effective are you when working with people who do not think like you?
Ignoring those people may have tangible effects on your bottom line.
There is much research to show that businesses make poor decisions that lead to a failure of one kind or another - and which was predicted by some in the business. The problem was that no-one would listen to "them."
These people may have been in the wrong position to be listened to, or perhaps their ideas were simply too different. People with ideas are often ignored if they don't fit the current way of thinking in a business.
The beginnings of a solution can be found in recognising that we solve problems in different ways. This difference was well illustrated in a cartoon I saw recently.
It showed two characters. One said, "Question everything!" while the other asked, "Why?" Those who ask "why?" tend to operate within the current rules and are often seen as being very effective. They get on with the job without challenging the status quo. Those who "question everything" challenge the status quo. This is often seen as unproductive and negative.
But if you have both the "why" types and the "question everything" types in your organization, why not harness both their
abilities?
The "question everything" approach starts with identifying the current way of doing something and then changing it. Often those best at this approach start by discovering that the current way may not, in fact, be a problem. They may uncover assumptions that were once made but no longer apply.
They'll question every assumption and see if it's still valid. If one is not, they'll change the assumption and see what new solutions arise.
Those who do this will likely come up with many ideas knowing that some will be weak. They see it as part of the creative process: To create a great solution you start with a bunch of average ideas.
It is clear that this can be annoying for others who are more pragmatic. The "why" approach starts with looking at the current problem, seeing what worked in the past, and looking to make improvements on it. The logic then follows that every minor improvement adds to the bottom line - and often it will.
The difference between these strategies is well illustrated in a column I wrote about "dual flush thinking". In North America, as elsewhere, the large amount of water wasted in toilets has been a problem.
The "why" solution that emerged is the new six-litre, single flush toilet. This saves about 40 per cent of wasted water compared with the old 11-litre toilet.
In New Zealand, however, someone "questioned everything" and noticed that each flush does not need to be the same. The resulting dual flush 6/3-litre toilet saves over 60 per cent of wasted water. North America has yet to discover the dual flush.
So, would you kill the "question everything", "dual flush" ideas in your business?
Instead of killing their ideas, why not harness their style and challenge them to focus on your problems?
Change your decision making process to consider two solutions:
* The "why" approach that leads to better solutions.
* The "question everything" approach that leads to different solutions.
Then compare the two solutions that emerge. Some problems only need a better solution whilst others create more value with a different one. You may discover ideas that improve the quality of your company's decisions.
And that translates to a bottom line difference.
* Ed Bernacki is an international speaker on innovative thinking, currently based in Canada but formerly in New Zealand.
