So, as always, we should begin with definitions. Convergent thinking "is oriented toward deriving the single best (or correct) answer to a clearly defined question. It emphasizes speed, accuracy, logic, and the like and focuses on recognizing the familiar, reapplying set techniques, and accumulating information" (Copley, 2006, p. 391). Its opposite, divergent thinking, is where we come up with "multiple or alternative answers from available information. It requires making unexpected combinations, recognizing links among remote associates, transforming information into unexpected forms, and the like" (p. 391). What is really interesting is that solutions found from divergent thinking in answer "to the same question [...] may vary substantially from person to person but are of equal value. They may never have existed before and are often novel, unusual, or surprising." (p. 392).
So we can think of convergent thinking of being familiar, satisficing and effective answers, while divergent thinking yields novel, varied and unconventional answers. Depending on our roles and our personal habits and inclinations, we may be more practiced in one of these thinking types, but not the other (Copley, 2006; Guthrie, 2022).
Both thinking patterns have value, both have limiters and delimiters (Guthrie, 2022). Copley provided an excellent table showing the patterns and processes (2006, p. 392):
Sometimes problems require a logical, familiar, optimised, safe and secure answer (Copley, 2006). At other times, when we face 'wicked' problems, we need an unconventional, wide-ranging, boundary-seeking range of options (Copley, 2006) which means as one answer gets knocked out, we have something else to shift to. These are fluid situations where one right answer is simply too limiting.
However, divergent thinking can mean we do not necessarily weight our results well, or that we prioritise our range of answers. We may get paralysed in choosing optimal answers. We need to have frameworks for evaluating those answers which we find. This is where convergent thinking models can help us (Guthrie, 2022).
Brainstorming is where we should be using divergent thinking (Buzan, 1988; Guthrie, 2022). We place no limits on our thinking. It is when we move to prioritisation and weightings that we shift into convergent thinking (Guthrie, 2022).
Depending on our training and natural inclinations, we are likely to be better at one stage in the process over another. And usually, in corporates, we are better at convergent thinking. However, Guthrie (2022) suggests that can improve our divergent thinking by brainstorming ideas; by asking questions (of ourselves, particularly imagining 'what if' questions which might help us think more laterally about barriers; having a korero with others; or having a hui); by trying to connect all that we know in a mind map (Buzan, 1988); by doing something else to enable "the boys in the basement" to create some connections while we aren't looking (King, 1998, p. 60).
Let's get better at walking both paths.
Sam
References:
Buzan, T. (1988). Super-Creativity. St. Martin's Press.
Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391-404. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13
Guthrie, G. (January 19, 2022). Divergent vs. convergent thinking: how to find the right balance. Nu Lab. https://nulab.com/learn/strategy-and-planning/divergent-vs-convergent-thinking-how-to-find-the-right-balance
King, S. (1998). Bag of Bones. Scribner
No comments :
Post a Comment
Thanks for your feedback. The elves will post it shortly.