Forms of Problem Solving and Effects Management … MP 2011.pdfnature, people and living things,...
Transcript of Forms of Problem Solving and Effects Management … MP 2011.pdfnature, people and living things,...
Running head: FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 1
Forms of Problem Solving and Effects
on Employee Empowerment
______________________
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of Master of Arts in
Management Consulting and Leadership
______________________
Rebecca Surmont
May, 2011
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING i
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT iii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction to Problem 2
Research Question 2
Significance of Study 2
Limitations of Study 3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Conflict and Problem Solving 4
Improvisation 6
Study of Emotions and Solution Seeking 9
Role Playing 10
Brainstorming 11
Creativity and Strategic Planning 13
Scenario Planning 16
The Workarts 16
Employee Empowerment and Creative Leadership 21
Employee Engagement 27
Benefits of Feeling Good 28
Traditional Conflict Resolution and Decision Making Approaches 30
Traditional Approaches 30
Solution Types 31
New Models Needed 33
Three Simple Decision Models for Leaders 35
Summary 35
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING ii
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Overview 39
The Strategic Plan 39
Missed Opportunities 41
Assertion around Limitations 42
CHAPTER 4: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary 44
Conclusion 45
Recommendations 47
TERMS 49
REFERENCES 50
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING iii
ABSTRACT
This study and research examines three sides of an issue to determine what avenues are available
for making critical decisions, both short and long-term. This examines a situation where a leader
and his board vied for control within an organization and the consequential dissipation of that
organization. It reviews methods of creative problem solving and decision making as it pertains to
empowering employees (or boards hired by directors) and traditional and not so traditional ways of
dealing with conflict. Finally, the researcher recommends considerations for leaders of
organizations when they face conflict or have employees who are in conflict.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 2
“A mindful system is not a slave to its own hierarchy” (Andrade et al, 2008 p. 33)
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem
This study began as an exploration of traditional and creative ways of dealing with conflict
and making decisions in a business setting. Given the creative roots of this researcher, there was a
desire to explore creativity in general and its use for decision making within a business environment
. Having worked in creative environments and then more tightly structured business environments,
it was apparent how many employees were disengaged from the pulse of the more tightly structured
company. This inspired this researcher into reviewing conflict, decision-making and empowerment
as it relates to creativity. Additionally, a project emerged which involved the researcher in assisting
with creating a three year strategic plan with a leader who was engaged in conflict with his board.
How creative problem solving could assist in long-term planning also became part of the research.
The goal of this researcher‟s work is to help leaders and organizations achieve better organizational
results through collaboration and seeing more create ways of viewing decision making.
Research Question
This researcher wanted to know how using more creativity in the workplace would affect
employee empowerment and decision making. This would pertain to decision making on all levels,
resolving conflict and generating better ideas.
Significance of Study
This study was conceived from a special interest of the researcher and an experience. First
was an interest in how creativity and arts can influence organizational behavior, empower
employees, improve leadership and organizational health and aid in resolving conflict and
generating new ideas. The second was the experience of creating a strategic plan with a leader who
was involved in conflict with his board, a conflict which resulted in the dissipation of the entire
organization.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 3
This study is to provide an awareness of methods that leaders can use to 1) view and resolve
conflicts 2 make decisions and 3) employ more creative approaches in order to have better short
term and long term planning for the organization. It also examines opportunities for stronger
engagement that leaders could use to get more from their employees long-term.
Limitations of Study
This research did not work with the leader and board of the aforementioned organization in a
creative manner. This researcher is providing recommendations based on hindsight and more fully
understanding the dynamics at play. There is qualitative evidence that suggests that creativity is
valuable and even necessary in work environments as long as it remains focused on a purpose (and
is not creativity for creativity‟s sake).
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Conflict and Problem Solving
Conflict happens. No matter how much one may try to prevent it or avoid it, it will always
exist. Conflict is a natural part of existence but unfortunately “conflict is frequently viewed as a
problematic condition, one that needs to be reduced, eliminated or overcome” (as cited in Andrade,
Plowman & Duchon, 2008, p. 23) and as a result, people can get really torn up emotionally over
how to deal with it. This common notion about conflict does not frame it as something potentially
useful or even natural but as a “dis-ease” which requires fixing or is to avoided at best. Because
anxiety and emotions accompany conflict and even get confused with the conflict itself, it is too
often viewed as a problem rather than an opportunity. Just as having too much conflict can lock an
organization in a state of homeostasis, prohibiting movement, so can not having any conflict at all.
While equilibrium can provide a sense of comfort in the familiar and predictable, the dynamics of
nature, people and living things, does not lend itself to ongoing equilibrium. Long-lasting
equilibrium inside organizations is an illusion.
Organizations desire to maintain equilibrium more than they desire exploring possibilities
beyond and entering into a conflict zone where stakes feel higher and risk feels greater.
Understanding dynamics of conflict and dealing with it creatively can result in delving deeper into
understanding the underlying values behind conflict and can manifest a potentially better future
state for all involved. Conflict is often viewed as a breakdown in communication (Andrade et al.,
2008) and not as a new point of departure and possibility, so leaders within many organizations try
to “settle” conflicts and use reductionistic decisions for the sake of keeping equilibrium and saving
time. Andrade et al. argue,
“rather than need reduction or elimination, conflict is the fuel that drives system
growth and enables learning and adaptive behaviors, making innovation possible.
Instead of focusing on conflict reduction, managers are advised to encourage
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 5
mindfulness, improvisation, and reconfiguration as responses to conflict that enable
learning and effective adaptation” (2008, p. 23).
If we view organizations as complex adaptive systems, then fluxing through states of order
and disorder becomes the phenomenal law and an organization is always somewhere on this
pendulum of order and disorder. Conflict has the potential of splitting ideas, people, concepts,
business units, and teams and can create temporary disequilibrium and movement toward a new
state of order. This process is self-renewing if individuals within that system realize that it is
elemental to a natural system and do not resist and fight their way around it. This researcher would
suggest that not all organizations are ready to make this shift in thinking and that they would prefer
to develop and maintain more traditional means of dealing with conflict in order to resume
“business as usual”. Indeed “The conventional view of conflict as a dysfunction that can be reduced
or eliminated is incompatible with the view of organizations as complex adaptive systems”
(Andrade et al., 2008, p. 30).
If one considers the manner in which people respond to conflict and decision making rather
than how they focus on the conflict itself, it would follow that there would be more opportunity for
learning and developing within an organization as well as shifting focus from the problem at hand
to solution finding. When focusing on problems, one cannot at once, see the solution. In group
situations, people often get locked into either/or, binary thinking as their emotional attachments
increase relative to the situation at hand because their own sense of belonging feels threatened. "It
seems that a great deal of group energy is poured into dealing with (these) opposites but that each
method for 'disposing' of the conflict becomes a stimulus for a new set of group tensions, with sides
often being taken over whether the discord itself should be confronted or ignored" (Smith & Berg,
1997, pp. 9-10). With this in mind, the paradoxical emotional energy surrounding the conflict is
often evident to outsiders such as managers, consultants, or third party helpers, but to participants
themselves are unaware. They become stuck.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 6
Improvisation
“Because complex systems are inherently unpredictable, the ability to improvise is
important” (Andrade et al., 2008, p. 32). What exactly does improvisation have to do with decision
making or resolving conflict? Leaders and employees make decisions every day with all kinds of
known and unknown variables. Some demand short term attention and others, long-term. When
dynamics come into conflict, we enter into the realm of the unknown, of ambiguity, and naturally
have a desire for answers or resolution. Improvisation moves decision-making strategies into the
creative realm where parties collaborate, brainstorm, even engage in artistic projects to create new
shared meaning and possibilities for forward movement. Improvisational interventions can be very
useful in getting people and organizations “unstuck”. It can also become an on-going part of how
these people interrelate in an organization. It is important to recognize that not all businesses will
be ready or willing to participate in such activities and would rather rely on more rational methods
of movement.
Improvisation doesn‟t ignore limitations within the situation or system nor does it imply
there are no rules or strategies. Improvisation provides a road map or a score, much like a musical
score, that can anchor ideas, provide freedom within those boundaries and a safe zone to practice
movement. Improvisation does not suggest a “free for all” because structure is necessary in order to
improvise- whether one is improvising on solutions or ideas. Improvisation does not focus on
“rightness” or “wrongness” but possibilities. It thrives when openness and spontaneity are available.
It is not a lack of decision making as people improvise decisions all the time based on what is
perceived to be the most readily available resources bounded by their own perceived limitations.
Improvising with a larger range of resources entails putting aside a firm hold on existing values and
beliefs and opening up to new metaphors and shared beliefs. It requires pushing boundaries away
from the familiar with a greater sense of latitude around the idea of success. In actuality, knowing
the limitations within which improvisation can occur can actually provide a greater freedom of
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 7
exploration. Improvisation is also based on the idea of saying “yes and” rather than “no but”, the
latter which stops exchange and dialogue completely.
As Andrade et al. declare, “Thus, the lesson it seems, is that organizations can create
melodies, such as mission statements, and vocabularies, such as shared values, that invite
improvisation. Organizations can establish a vocabulary that encourages listening, learning, and re-
thinking in the face of ideas that seem at odds with each other (2008, p. 31). They further concur
that organizations cannot learn, grow and innovate in conditions of tranquility, that is, in the
absence of conflict (Andrade et al., 2008). This would suggest that improvisation is a creative
process that comes about as a result of conflict, of energy, that is moving in more than one direction
and is intersecting all the time. Just as there are no hard and fast rules in a dynamic system except
to say that it is dynamic and always changing, a culture that embraces this concept would, according
to these researchers, be a culture that is constantly in a state of improvisation; capable of continually
creating and renewing itself (Andrade et al., 2008). This defines the condition of a healthy and vital
organization.
With this view, other forms of conflict resolution may offer only prescribed remedies, thwart
creativity and potentially kill innovation. If an organization‟s goals are to increase creativity and
innovation, and not all organizations‟ goals are, it would follow that employing improvisational and
creative forms of problem solving, would increase engagement and employee happiness. It is not
always easy letting one‟s guard down in order to resolve a conflict about which one feels strongly.
Dialogue is an art that involves metaphoric persuasion. This is not the primary language of business
nor is it something people exercise on a daily basis. In business environments, dialogue is not
entirely encouraged as managers are hired to make decisions and prescribe remedies for their
subordinates. When in conflict, deciding a clear winner and loser can make an outcome seem very
simple and can allow for an easy way to get to the “other side”. A deeper dialogue and shift in
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 8
perspective of participants, which can only come through exploration, imagining and discussion,
however, would be necessary in a creative problem solving environment.
One company in the Twin Cities, Minnesota, teaches improvisation techniques based on
saying, “yes and” as a rule for stimulating greater collaboration and listening skills that affirm rather
than negate the sharing of ideas. It reminds leaders and employees that they serve functionally and
are players in the drama of the work stage and how they show up and play in the scene is equal to
the level of performance success. Improvisation also provides a way to create humor in the
workplace and helps to sharpen wit and remove self-censoring barriers. Further, actual theatrical
improvisation involves identifying status levels, something all organizations understand. Since
status is perceived to equate to power, knowing who is truly in the power seat and when (such as in
a project or task) can be very empowering, identify high value contributors and those who don not
contribute. Status shifts but power structures often shift less. So, status helps to level playing fields
and demonstrates organizational dynamics.
Yankelovich (2000) states, “One should not underestimate how difficult it is to break
ingrained habits of not-listening, to break out of your wall of guarded reserve in order to offer acts
of empathy, or to develop this skill of digging out of your own and other peoples‟ transferences in a
non-judgmental fashion” (2000, p 14). He refers to this defensive nature as “battle gear” (2000) and
suggests that people are used to engaging in this manner and he implies that it does not move people
forward in developing empathy or understanding of one another. It begs the question whether
people in organizations are being led to win over one another, win together and whether winning
involves learning at all. True learning would require a letting down of defenses and reorganization
of information and conclusions. It would require organizational self-referencing; an awareness of
how the organization behaves and moves.
Smith and Berg (1997) state that
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 9
"…in groups, the search is for the single point of tension that prompts the
split between individuals or subgroups and the group as a whole. Most
often the split becomes the focus of emotion and activity while the source
of the split, the confusing and self-referential connection between the
opposing forces, remains unexamined, hidden from view by the power of
contradiction to define reality. The paradoxical quest is the search for the
link that one cannot see" (1997, p. 151).
The “quest” in this situation is the search for understanding the “strange attractors”; the issues that
are perceived to be different, even polarizing, but have their roots in similar places and values and
which can unite and create rather than divide and destroy. The latter being the typical attitude
around how conflict is viewed. Too many times emotional tensions ride high but the links to
understanding why are hidden. People get “too close” and cannot see beyond their own positions.
The act of engaging creatively with others to arrive at better options and find solutions to
problems is done in countless ways: improvisation, poetry, role playing, brainstorming, scenario -
planning, and the creation of new stories and metaphors that ground and redefine values and
experiences. More traditional ways of dealing with conflict are popular as well such as mediation,
consensus and negotiation which will be addressed later. These tools are also employed with the
intention of creating better quality results. “When opposing viewpoints are brought together in a
free exchange, the resulting conflict may be resolved by the creation of new solutions which either
reorganizes or incorporates the different viewpoints” says Hoffman, Harburg, & Maier (1962, p.
206).
Study of Emotions and Solution Seeking
This group of researchers studied a conflict between subordinates and their supervisor
regarding a certain work process. The researchers note that the authority figure is likely to dominate
a group in a business environment…his dominance interfering with the free expression of differing
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 10
opinions and reducing the possibility of the emergence of creative solutions to problems (Hoffman
et al., 1962, p. 206). In their study, they found that an increased commitment on the subordinates‟
viewpoint incited emotion and conflict and therefore, created a stronger platform for deeper creative
problem solving. This bottom-up emergence of ideas forced their superiors into a position of having
to either quell the subordinates‟ energies and demand compliance or use their ideas and gain
commitment. The researchers concluded that conflict of ideas causes groups to search for
alternatives and thereby to improve the quality of their solutions (Hoffman et al., 1962). In this case
study, the superior ended up working with the subordinates in creating a better solution rather than
telling them what it was going to be.
Role Playing
In this same experiment, they (Hoffman et al., 1962) conducted a role-play wherein
subordinates (Group A) were instructed to strongly uphold their values regarding a particular work
process and to use this energy to create greater conflict with their superiors. In essence, they were
instructed to not back down. The other group, Group B, was instructed to not hold so tightly to their
values when in conflict with the superiors. The result was that greater possibility for creative
outcomes occurred when subordinates in Group A infused the engagement with superiors from a
place of high value and beliefs. This condition set the stage for creative problem solving simply
because it created more conflict and more emotional motivation. In this way, “increasing the
subordinates' commitment so that their point of view could effectively oppose that of the authority
figure may be regarded as a way to introduce conflict” (Hoffman et al., 1962, p. 206) cause
bifurcation, or a splitting off from the current condition and provide the conditions for creative
problem solving. This demonstrates that where there is greater emotional attachment to values,
greater conflict can ensue and that this conflict can be a tool to create positive change. Looking at
this dynamically, sometimes conflict is actually needed in order to change, transform or renew an
organization. Sometimes, however, it can kill it. The result would depend on how it is dealt with
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 11
and the quality of ideas that manifest as a byproduct of participation. This idea supports the
organization as a dynamic and changing system where conflict can be utilized in order to move out
of stasis into a more creative state and ultimately to a new form of order.
Brainstorming
One popular means of exploring ideas for problem solving is brainstorming. Many studies
have been done on the efficacy of brainstorming in opening up possibilities for exploration. One
group of researchers, however concluded that group brainstorming did not yield as good of results
as individuals did brainstorming on their own (Nemeth, Personnaz, Personnaz, & Goncal, 2004).
Central to typical brainstorming practices is the rule to not judge ideas as they are put forth but to
see what transpires from group input. One might surmise that in a group, extroverts would likely
take over this activity thus not allowing for everyone to share in equally. Nemeth et al., state “that
given the emphasis on harmony, most researchers have assumed that conflict, especially anything
resembling criticism, reduces group creativity” (2004, p. 366). Harmony in this context would
equate to a state of equilibrium. This is the potentially self-censoring that occurs while waiting for
others to contribute. As we have explored, creativity can create movement toward equilibrium or
disequilibrium. This group of researchers posits that brainstorming in a group is less useful in idea
generation because of the “wait period” that blocks production of ideas when one is waiting for
others in the group. This is what they refer to as “harmony”. They also found that debate actually
brought about more idea generation than simply brainstorming. It is possibly due to the fact that
debate keeps people focused on issues and not on the “personal” (Nemeth et al., 2004). They assert
that brainstorming in a manner in which participants have the opportunity to openly criticize ideas
that are presented provides better opportunities for acknowledging and respecting differences and
elucidating better ideas.
In their experiment, they examined three groups. Group A they gave no instructions to other
than to brainstorm as many ideas as they could. Group B was told the same but was reminded not
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 12
to criticize the ideas presented. Group C was instructed to engage in debate and encouraged to
openly criticize ideas while brainstorming was occurring. The results found that the debate method
showed that using criticism did not inhibit idea generation at all but stimulated it more (Nemeth et
al., 2004). These researchers feel with the evidence at hand that more authentic responses are
provided using this method as well as more authentic differences exposed than in trying to find
harmony in typical brainstorming sessions, which minimizes differences (Nemeth et al., 2004). In
this way, all participants are encouraged to share openly and honestly and improvise. A skilled
facilitator creates the environment providing a space of safety while members maintain their
significance through their contributions.
This researcher has used brainstorming without participants providing immediate feedback
or criticism and has found it to be a useful tool in idea generation, inviting everyone in the group to
participate. Critiques are certain to be given in the elimination or distillation process of
brainstormed ideas but in order to generate the most possibilities for idea, a certain amount of
personal restraint can be valuable in order to let others (namely introverts) get involved. Nemeth et
al. might see restraint as a compromise. Not every organizational culture is open to brainstorming,
let alone between subordinates and superiors. Nor are all cultures ready for openly criticizing ideas,
especially those put forth by superiors in vertically striving organizations. What can be concluded
is that brainstorming does engage participants and can be a way to explore new ideas and bypass
immediately recognized differences to find deeper commonalities. In the process of exchanging
ideas when brainstorming or in dialogue, it is important for participants to be active listeners.
Wheeler (1991) notes how important it is for people to express their point of view by using “I”
words (the first person), explore ideas thru brainstorming, evaluate the ideas and choose a plan,
decide on a test period, then evaluate the test period. It is important that participants continue to
speak on their own behalf and take ownership of their ideas. This in itself can be an empowering
exercise.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 13
In the technology field in more recent years, software developers have also looked for ways
to create brainstorming and idea gathering and sorting tools for individuals and organizations. They
have become increasingly popular especially in working with teams in order for members to see
groupings of similar and dissimilar ideas and to generate dialogue and decision-making around
them. These mind-map and brainstorm tools have names like Ideafisher, Mind Map, Thought Path,
ParaMind, and ThoughtOffice and can be found on-line. These products are evidence that
brainstorming continues to be an effective and widely accepted tool for idea generation.
Creativity and Strategic Planning
When faced with making strategic plans which undoubtedly involve multiplicity of ideas,
there are many ways to view decision making options. Cognitive mapping could be a simple way to
get an overview of the current state and desired future state as well as what would need to occur in
order to arrive at the future state. What this map provides is a visual picture of “point A” (current
state) and what steps would be needed in order to get to “point B” (desired future state) and what
obstacles might be in-between. One might think of it as a storyboard. According to Beinhocker and
Kaplan “The annual strategy review frequently amounts to little more than a stage on which
business unit leaders present warmed-over updates…take few risks in broaching new ideas, and
strive above all to avoid embarrassment” (2002, p. 49). They maintain that there is some “mystic
hope that good will come” (2002) as a result. What they are referring to are traditional ways that
strategic planning sessions have been done- rational, top-down, data-driven, and lacking in
imagination and passion and not in full utilization of the inherent talent and opportunities dwelling
deeper in the organization‟s employees.
Strategic plans are often used as a means of measuring efficacy in terms of financial returns.
However, creative tools exist by which to view more than financial data. After all, organizations are
more than data. They are human systems and require more thoughtful approaches than in decades
past. Creativity doesn‟t minimize the importance of an abundant bottom line but rather provides a
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 14
means to look at other possibilities which could drive business in new ways; even in ways that those
in non-leadership positions envision. Brews asserts that "managing the creativity implicit in strategy
formation is a completely different discipline from managing operations" (2005). While operations
entails finding efficiency and cost savings initiatives, creative solutions can also be explored in how
to do this. It is important to note that creative engagement is not a one-time only activity. Creativity
does not need to remain solely an intervention when movement is stuck and decisions are hard to
make. It would ideally become an on-going and integrated process of exploration underlying
business culture starting at the top of leadership and empowering the ranks below to think beyond
data and standard practices. This concept puts more feedback loops in organizational decision
making.
Organizations need both strong operations (linear functions) and strategic innovation (non-
linear). While operations exist to minimize risk, innovation requires it. Again, this conflict of
interest need not be considered a negative tension but an energizing one. These two arms do not
need never to hug. Strong operations can provide the means by which a company is able to take
creative risks. Being aligned with the goal or mission however, can bring these two sides together in
more collaborative and synergistic way.
When viewing difficult problems or trying to solve them with “difficult people”, it is easy to
stop forward movement altogether. Again, conflict, because it is created out of energy in more than
one direction, provides a perfect place for friction to transform into quality fiction - a new story that
can transform the current one. This is “reframing”, a way of looking at things with a new lens.
Beinhocker and Kaplan see strategic planning as two-fold; to build prepared minds and to increase
innovativeness of a company‟s strategies (2002). Using creative fiction to imagine possibilities can
provide a backdrop for new stories, new initiatives and even rituals in the workplace. It shifts focus,
reorients and enables people to preparing their minds for thinking further than logical “next steps”.
Beinhocker and Kaplan also encourage working in small groups during strategic planning sessions
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 15
to make sure that participants feel at ease. If strategic plans involved more scenario-planning, they
wouldn‟t draw a direct line from A-Z but look more like a tree with various limbs of possible
choices. "If imagination and creativity are the starting points to successful innovation, it does no
harm to consider strategy as creative fiction” (Brews 2005 p. 6).
Briggs and Reining state that:
"Cognitive scientists posit that concepts that are initially activated cause
the activation of other closely related concepts. These then cause the
activation of still other(s) which in turn activate others…When one line
of thinking is exhausted, people cannot readily switch to a new
perhaps more productive, line of thinking...Lacking additional external
stimuli to activate a new part of the knowledge network, people tend
to think 'inside the box'. This condition is called 'cognitive inertia'" (2010,
p. 131- 132).
What this means is that one single idea or word or metaphor, will lead to another and
another until finally, because our logical (left) brain is working so hard, it stops creating more ideas-
or at least- quality ones. At that point one finds oneself in a state of inertia. The external stimuli to
which the researchers refer could be an intervention such as an activity that engages participants
into the creative (right) brain, or gets them out of their thinking and into their experiencing. This
would serve as a rejuvenating opportunity for continued problem solving. This also means that
when one is exhausted, pushing forward may not be the best idea if the goal is quality ideas. Smith
and Berg note that when groups are working together "The group usually must run into its own
resistance to doing the task and make that resistance visible to itself before it is ready to work
constructively on the task that drew the individuals together in the first place"(1997, p. 42). This is
what it means to be self-referencing. What has to happen then is a breakdown in the existing
structure that provides the space for a new one to enter into.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 16
This mental inertia happens all the time when people become saturated with data,
knowledge or ideas and hit a “wall”. One can see this especially on teams and groups working
together. At some point, thinking only gets them so far. Something else is needed in order to break
up the activity because the left brain isn‟t the place where imagination is rooted. It is the logic not
the vision.
Scenario Planning
Shoemaker (1995) writes about “scenario planning” which is much like posing futuristic
fiction such as mentioned above and imaging possibilities from a variety of places. Training oneself
to view multiple possible scenarios increases creative thinking processes and better prepares one for
action and decision making when crucial times arise. It also puts situation before data (Shoemaker,
1995) which can often be difficult to grasp. When looking at scenario planning, there is what one
knows and what one doesn‟t know, so imagining “what ifs” brings greater knowledge to decision
making. He says, "Managers who can expand their imaginations to see a wider range of possible
futures will be much better positioned to take advantage of the unexpected opportunities that will
come along" (1995, p. 25). Montgomery sums it best when he states, “Equally important to the task
(of finding an organizations' purpose in this case) is the right-brain activity in which managers are
almost universally less well schooled. Creativity and insight are key, as is the ability to make
judgments about a host of issues that can't be resolved through analysis alone" (2008, p. 58). One
might argue that imagining future possibilities is a waste of time because visioning is not based in
the reality of now. While that is a logical argument, visioning and creativity is not a logical process
as these processes are located in the right brain, better known as the place of metaphor and emotion.
The Workarts
While all of these approaches serve to remove old barriers, employ new limitations and idea
sharing, they are also all collaborative. All of them involve participants working together and all
create significance for participants by doing so. Using the arts, in general, is also another way to
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 17
arrive at new metaphors and organizational fiction because of its non-linearity and symbolic or
impressionistic nature. Artistic exploration creates new learning opportunities and learning can
promote more highly adaptive organizations and happier, more engaged employees.
Using the arts in leadership development, business strategies, mediating conflict and
innovation are not new ideas. They are tools that in many cases are not readily available to the
typical office employee- especially in larger organizations. Sometimes this is known as Artworks,
Business Arts or Workarts. The 'work arts' is a name given to the use of art in the work place that
serves as a medium for furthering understanding and collaboration. Perhaps it is a trend but the use
of improvisation, jazz, dance, theater, song is being used in companies to "defamiliarize" employees
from their habitual ways of working, seeing and experiencing their workplace (Barry & Meiseik,
2010, p. 1505) something later referred to in this paper as “institutional memory”.
In a study in the UK, a consulting firm uses poetry study with leaders in organizations to
explore topics that are relevant to that organization‟s needs. In a case study, the consultants used a
poem about decision-making to see how it could affect the performance of leaders‟ teams. The
consultants began asking a very important question of the leaders: “Are your theories (business
related ones) based on your perceived need to get more emotion and heart into the business world?”
(Buswick, Morgan, Lange, 2005, p. 35). The answer was “Yes”. They noted that "the desire for
pursuing the shortest distance between A and B, another dominant mode in business thinking, won't
get you anywhere at all when you're faced with a poem" (Buswick et al, 2005, p. 35). This kind of
exploration doesn‟t ask “what does this mean” but “how does this relate?” This is the realm of
metaphor and a chance for these leaders to see thinking as more than just arriving at logical
conclusions. This kind of exploration is precategorical and not causal (Buswick et al., 2005) which
means that there is little rational connectivity happening in relating concepts to one another at first
because the left brain has yet to make commentary on the process itself. This is not a process of
looking at how one thing creates another but how relativity is found in dissimilar things.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 18
The writer, David Whyte, has also worked extensively in corporations using poetry as a
means for leaders to reflect upon their organization, invigorate members and re-imagine the modern
workplace as a soul-enriching environment. Modern writer, Daniel Pink, also concludes that “right
brainers will rule the future” (the subtitle of his book, A Whole New Mind) of companies because of
their use of non-linearity and intuitive talents which can unlock hidden gems for companies to use
and thrive upon.
Anslie who uses poetry with psychoanalysis, said “among the things that psychoanalysis and
poetry have in common is the act of transforming by finding a new way of saying things” (1978, p.
26). This is exactly what businesses must do all the time in order to remain competitive, while
harnessing the talents of its employees. Creative problem solving can be like a creation of a new
poem- a new language wherein everyone‟s experiences and ideas are validated and transformed. It
could provide an opportunity for something familiar to arise out of the unexplored and unfamiliar.
Taylor and Larkin write about a study where dance was used to help leaders better
understand space, line, timing, energy, and rhythm (2009). If one learns to view a situation through
an artistic lens, one can embody an experience and not merely “think” about it in logical ways. One
can then thoughtfully make conclusions which were not previously available, bypassing intellectual
understanding and meaning-making. This stands to lend a greater sense of empowerment to the
participant as well because they alone own their experience and outcomes.
This researcher came across yet other interesting experiment mentioned by Barry and
Meiseik (2010) about a company in France that used Legos with managers in order to create a
physical representation of the business and strategic landscape they perceived. One should not
suppose that high powered leaders in Fortune 100 companies would be eager to start playing with
Legos brought out by a consultant. Indeed, a consultant might lose every ounce of credibility in the
first few seconds and never get it back. It takes a certain kind of leader to be open to playfulness
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 19
that exploration requires. Whatever creative means is utilized, the final created artifact must
“catalyze novel distinctions or context shifts” (Barry & Meiseik 2010, p. 1520).
Because art rises above definition, unlike business metrics that underlie performance
strategies, work arts can make apparent what language initially cannot- it makes movement
apparent and the inner, subconscious psychological workings of an organization.
“To the most general characteristics of the inner activity, the following
movements must correspond: to striving, advancing movements;
to resistance, retreating movements; to inner progress, a continuation of
movement; to standstill interruption of movement; to feelings of
resistance, inhibition and tensions, those movements will correspond
which are directed against physical resistance and thus arouse increased
pressure sensations” (Adler, 1956, p. 220)
and thereby create a condition, which if acted upon by an outside force, could cause a great release
of built-up energy. Creative activities make the invisible visible and reveal what could not have
been articulated or known beforehand. They raise awareness and possibly even resistance, which
can also be a valuable learning opportunity.
Sometimes it is about looking at problems or challenges through the arts and sometimes it is
about creating an environment that better stimulates employees and re-orients them, such as
hanging paintings on walls or implementing a mural, importing music into the work place,
rearranging the design elements of an office. Some companies, however, do not give much thought
at all to how creativity affects the work environment, productivity, engagement, processes or
interpersonal relations.
Creative problem solving is a way of engagement and does not necessarily mean some
artistic activity is needed or that any intervention is required. It is a dynamic practice. And, when
practiced regularly, provides access to new ranges of possibilities than simply keeping one‟s nose to
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 20
the grindstone, accepting routine as the highest standard, using data to determine outcomes or
choosing solutions simply based on hierarchy or status. Being that people and organizations are
always in flux and not static by nature, relying on traditional top-down, vertical organizational and
decision making models may very well be an outdated model since our modern world is changing
so quickly and no single leader could possibly have all the best answers. With four generations
working together, each having certain values that reflect them, engagement, understanding ,
empathy and collaboration is essential for successful organizations. Whether these creative forms
are on-going or act as interventions to catalyze movement, a certain degree of improvisation is
natural and even helpful. Using other methods such as role-playing, brainstorming, even poetry
painting and dance, can lead parties into a problem solving arena that is not only more fun than
traditional ways but enables them to more deeply connect and understand one another, potentially
leading to major shifts in their own worldviews.
These and other methods help to reframe situations. Effective leaders know how to create
new frames and are prepared to succeed or fail in bringing about desired changes. “Consciously or
not, we all read situations to figure out what scene we‟re in and what role we‟ve been assigned so
that we can respond in character. To use a theatrical analogy, it‟s important to ask ourselves
whether the drama is the one we want and to recognize that we have latitude as to which character
to play and how to interpret the script” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 339). When individuals can
identify their role clearly, they have greater sense of control over themselves and therefore, greater
empowerment. The key here is recognition of this control.
All the aforementioned tools for looking at conflict and decision making in order to incite
movement have grounding in the creative brain. This brain does not act alone. Collaborative,
emotional and metaphorical referencing in any artistic engagement, requires the left brain to
reorganize information in a way it can understand since the ideas arrived upon cannot understand
themselves. This is when learning occurs. There are numbers of lenses that can be used which can
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 21
be employed but only when the actual resistances and emotional anxieties can be incorporated into
the learning, can the transformational organizational work begin.
Employee Empowerment and Creative Leadership
What exactly does employee empowerment suggest? According to Gupta and Kurian (2006)
“empowerment often refers loosely to processes for giving subordinates (or workers in general)
greater discretion and resources; distributing control in order to better serve both customers and
organization” (Gupta & Kurian, 2006, p. 29). Empowerment is both an internal quality as well as
external opportunity. Managers can at once empower their subordinates and subordinates must also
experience the feelings of empowerment. When both of these are true, employees are more engaged
and willing to participate in decision making on higher and deeper levels to the degree that
managers are willing to provide those opportunities and sometimes much more. "Skillful
followership, then inevitably involves acceptance of some degree of ambiguity and uncertainty"
(and) "The four elements that followers want from leaders are: authenticity; significance;
excitement; and community" (Goffee & Jones, 2006, pp. 24- 26). This sounds much like Alfred
Adler and his emphasis on safety, belonging and significance.
Followers in organizations create leaders as much as leaders create followers but
subordinates are not always part of the decision making that leaders engage in, which can lead to
apathy, mistrust, loss of safety, significance and belonging. In an empowering business culture,
both leaders and followers take part in levels of decision making and idea generation which
contribute to actions that align with the vision and mission. In this culture “whenever possible,
managers and supervisors can empower others through sharing decision-making and responsibility”
(Wilson, 2010, p. 10). "Managers empower people by sharing information, providing structure,
developing a team-based alternative to hierarchy, offering relevant training opportunities and
rewarding them for the risks and initiatives they are expected to take (Gupta & Kurian, 2006, p. 35).
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 22
This concept is relatively new in the modern business culture. Given the dominance and
history of authoritarian leadership, Gupta and Kurian (2006) outline a growing trend in employee /
authority relationship that started in the 1970‟s when there was a new focus on “participation”
which involved managers getting employees to participate more in what happens at the office or on
the shop floor. The 1980‟s brought involvement, which Lawler suggests was about asking
employees what they think about things within the organization and gaining some influencing
ability (Lawler, 1988). The 1990‟s and 2000‟s, has brought empowerment. Perhaps these concepts
are different terms for roughly the same ideas but it is clear that involving employees and not just
telling them what to do is very important in motivational and productivity practices.
It is not surprising that these concepts have changed as new generations with different
values join the workforce. It is doubtful that empowerment would have as much meaning to a
Traditionalist (pre-Baby Boomer) than a Millenial (someone born after 1985) for instance. What is
clear is that these generations bring these kinds of values into the workplace, challenge the status
quo and seek to make meaningful changes in how decisions are made and the extent that employees
and not just top leadership get to influence the business.
Gupta and Kurian make the assertion that “empowered persons are balanced, confident,
aware, vital, caring and ready. Those who are empowered are not depressed, confused, aggressive,
divisive, or wishy-washy” (2006, p. 30). If this is an accurate assumption or measurement, then one
might conclude that disempowered people/employees whether they are personally disempowered or
disempowered by their superiors, could have a detrimental effect on the organization as a whole and
make for difficult decision making and productive outcomes. Not all decisions can be made by
lower ranking subordinates and clearly leadership needs to be responsible for the business at the end
of the day, but if employees are empowered internally, they can still feel good about the
work/efforts they do and feel like their voice is being heard. There is an appropriateness a leader
must consider in putting decision-making power into their employees' hands. When supportive
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 23
leadership is in place, then employee creativity is higher. When a more authoritarian style is in
place, employee empowerment is less (Zhang & Bartol, 2010). If creativity is active, we can assume
that empowerment is occurring.
Leaders are locked in responsibility for the entire organizations‟ success or failure. Good
leaders require time for considering more than just process and bottom line. Some workaholic
leaders do not give themselves breaks from the daily requirements, which can make them
ineffective and burnt out in the long-run. This is one reason why empowered employees can be
beneficial to leaders who are spread very thin. However, "The generally effective executive often
exhibits what might be called controlled momentary irresponsibility. He recognizes that this attitude
is virtually necessary for the free play of imagination (Levitt, 2002, p. 139). The key word here is
“effective”. This momentary irresponsibility suggests moments of discovery, risk-taking, and non-
linear thought that maintains value and mission driven goals but is perceived as a rupture in
employees‟ expectations of that leader. In order to be effective then, leaders must create breaks
from the daily grind and learn to exercise imagination in order to renew thought processes. It
provides time for the leader to take a mental recess and reformulate directional choices in terms of
the social fabric of the organization relative to the market and other external influences.
Individual psychologist, Alfred Adler said a strong leader must recognize himself as
someone that does not fit a common mold and that he moves with the greater interest of others, in
this case, an organization and the people it serves. The criterion of this sort of leader is great,
according to Adler and s/he must have:
“A strongly developed social interest in the first…An optimistic outlook and
sufficient self- confidence are just as necessary. The leaders must be
endowed with the capacity for quick action; he must not be a dreamer or
an onlooker; he must have an ease in making contact with people; and he
must possess tact so as not to frustrate the assent of others. His
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 24
preparation and training must be above the average. He must, in a word,
be a real human being who possesses courage and skills. In him becomes
realized what other men dream about” (Adler, 1956, p. 450).
While this description may seem the recipe for the creation of a legendary reformer or world leader,
it evokes a sense of duty, discipline, training, self-awareness and social engagement that is the
making of an effective leader in any organization.
Since organizations are created to achieve order (Levitt, 2002), without some disorder,
movement would cease. Creative changes create a rift in the “business-as-usual order” of
organizations and therefore, ambiguity. Leaders must be careful regarding which creative changes
are the most purpose-filled when it comes to the overall goals and mission of the organization.
His/her own future depends on it. Whether or not the leader is the creator of a new idea, without
committed implementers and followers, an organization can be at risk. Thus both ideas and those
empowered to carry them out are absolutely necessary; ideas should not be merely egocentric
engagements that have no greater value to the organization.
Bolman and Deal (2008) express the nature of creative leadership best by explaining
contrasting approaches in leadership styles reflected in a model in their book, Reframing
Organizations, Artistry, Choice and Leadership:
One is a rational-technical mind-set emphasizing certainty and control.
The other is an expressive, artistic conception encouraging flexibility,
creativity and interpretation. The first portrays managers as technicians;
the second sees them as artists….Art is not a replacement for engineering
but an enhancement. Artistic leaders and managers help us look beyond
today‟s reality to new forms that release untapped individual energies and
improved collective performance. The leader as artist relied on images a
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 25
well as memos, poetry as well as policy, reflection as well as command and
reframing as well as refitting (Bolman & Deal, 2008, pp. 20-21).
Thus, the values of employees are important to consider. “For any form of involvement to
work, most employees have to want to learn, grow, develop, contribute, and take on new
responsibilities”(Lawler, 1988, p. 203). This is the internal empowerment that cannot come from an
outside source. If employees maintain these qualities, they can create an underlying culture within
an organization that is similar in characteristic. What is most important, however, is whether the
leadership embodies these qualities or not.
One would hope that if a leader is in his/her position that he/she is an empowered individual
but this researcher would not assert that this is a given or bet on it as a consistency. Some leaders
are more process driven and do not necessarily concern themselves with empowerment or
engagement ideas – until they experience an unraveling of sorts or a serious conflict that warrants
deeper investigation into the organization. Some are traditional in their approaches to leadership
and ideas around “success”. But, “In the absence of this kind of process (involvement), they
(leaders) run the risk of managing in a way that compromises the potential effectiveness of the
organization according to Lawler (1988, p. 204).
Twyla Tharp, American dancer and pioneer choreographer, interviewed many leaders in
NYC. One of them told her: “It‟s rare to come across something truly original in a corporate
environment. Most, if not all your good ideas, are probably sitting somewhere in your files or are
locked up in the brains of the people who have worked at your company for years” (Tharp, 2006, p.
68). He referred to status quo learning or “institutional memory” which dominates business culture
and is the antithesis to the kind of innovation that comes when collaboration and horizontal
leadership is in place. That is, where leadership is more one of function than status and power. One
of the most important realizations in a work environment regarding creativity is that many do not
know what this means or how to use more of their creative energies in their work environment.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 26
Perhaps the leaders are not very naturally creative and the organization reflects it. Or, quite
possibly, one is afraid of looking silly, being embarrassed, overstepping boundaries or empowering
themselves by bringing ideas to the table. Perhaps that culture doesn‟t support subordinates in
bringing ideas when their superiors do not have them first. Other reasons might be the perception
that a good idea will cost money or others will see it as self-indulgent (Tharp 2006). Creative ideas
can be seen as a distraction from what is really important or what necessitates immediate attention.
Unfortunately, when great change is needed, without creative energies and ideas, businesses may
not have the ability to imagine themselves new opportunities or flex muscles outside of the kind
institutional learning that employees have only known.
Tharp writes about muscle memory of dance. Businesses too have muscle memory and
muscle groups they tend to utilize more than others. Imagine a dancer who has trained for years.
This dancer may retire at an early age but when asked to dance 20 years later, muscle memory and
physical vocabulary is still very accessible. What is the muscular vocabulary of a business? What
are the various muscles in place and to what degree do they contract and extend? How fast can they
move and how quickly do they find resistance? When they bruise, do they heal quickly? This
vocabulary can be measured by the extent to which creative flexing in the “off – season” (a time of
non-peak performance) as much as when market or client demands them with respect to how
leaders and employees engage horizontally; challenge existing limitations and empowering each
other in more collaborative ways and thereby produce results that are aligned with the vision and
serve stakeholders. These questions relate to both operational and innovative processes and
strategies.
Many years ago, a famous performer once told this researcher “know your limitations”. He
referred to clarify around boundaries as well as knowing one‟s strengths and weaknesses. Just as in
improvisation, if one is clear about limitations, one consciously moves in and out of them. In the
theatrical context, the limitations referred in that exchange, took the form of physical constraints,
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 27
stage space, actual ability of the performers, and available resources for production. Even with very
little, a performance could be deep and rich but only if the limitations are clear. The same stands
true for organizations. Leaders must make their organization a study every day in terms of
limitations and be aware of how these become the muscle fibers of the organization. This means
having greater knowledge in how to access them under a variety of circumstances. Knowing them
also means one has opportunity to challenge the assumptions of what lay beyond them. It is
important to note that sometimes when an individual or organization feels or looks “stuck” it is
because the mind is stuck or people are not effectively collaborating. A body at rest stays at rest. So,
creating physical movement in and with the body (organization) activates other knowledge centers,
as well as the emotional centers. Simply, more of the brain is at work when the physical body is
active. In a literal sense, any physical movement is also pre-verbal and so, there is no right or
wrong context that can be ascribed to what is created or what is experienced when the physical and
emotional body is engaged. This also shifts thinking into the right brain. Keep in mind that
movement must be purposeful and outcomes aligned with vision in order to be productive.
Movement in itself does mean people will be productive. What organizations want though is
efficiency of movement and therefore, higher productivity, agile muscles as well as ample
resources.
Employee Engagement
“With regard to empowerment, supportive, positive, social relationships are necessary for
well-being…there are data suggesting that well-being leads to good social relationships and does
not merely follow from them”(Diener & Seligman, 2004, p. 1). They further state, “desirable
outcomes, even economic ones, are often caused by well-being rather than the other way around”
(Diener & Seligman, 2004, p. 1). If this is the case, then empowered employees are contributing
more to an organization‟s bottom line and un-empowered ones would contribute less either
consciously or unconsciously. And, "the advantages of the involvement approach are said to
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 28
include higher quality products and services, less absenteeism, less turnover, better decision
making, and better problem solving - in short, greater organizational effectiveness” (Lawler, 1988 p.
197).
Gupta and Kurian mention that "people need to release tension. Empowerment should be
also analyzed from this angle…(it) can be used as a tool to get rid of emotional tension” (2006, p.
36) that exists within organizations. This comment infers that people who are not empowered
suffer more from emotional tension than those who experience empowerment at work. If there is
more emotional tension in the workplace, one might conclude that there is a greater propensity for
lower productivity, depression, needless conflict and emotional unrest. Depending on the goal of
the organization, however, empowerment may not be an important issue to leadership or employees
and from a cultural standpoint, it may be an alien concept.
Personal empowerment may run contrary to traditional ways of working and understanding
the hierarchy of function versus role. Despite this idea there “seems to be no question that
employees enjoy the opportunity to participate in problem solving. As a result, they are often more
satisfied with their work situation, are absent less, and are less likely to leave the company”
(Lawler, 1988, p. 198) Furthermore, “Studies reveal that experiencing more positive emotions on
the job is associated with both better performance and higher levels of organizational citizenship”
(Diener & Seligman, 2004, p. 11).
Benefits of Feeling Good
Empowerment, involvement and engagement- all of these have to do with feeling good
about one self. Who doesn‟t like to feel good? With studies showing that people who feel good,
perform better, one needs to ask what else contributes to well being and how can it become a part of
an organization in order to reap the advantages? Harter (2003) defines four things needed to
improve well-being in the workplace: One, a basic need in the workplace begins with clarifying
expectations resources and equipment being provided. Two, employees should feel that they are
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 29
contributing to the organization and making deeper connections of their own work toward social
interest. Three would be a sense of belonging. The fourth idea is to create an environment in which
employees have opportunity to talk about their growth and progress. If an organization can provide
for the basic needs to do the job, clear expectations, a sense of belonging and significance with the
safety to dialogue and freedom to collaborate, one might very well have a perfect recipe for an
empowered organization that is highly generative, flexible and adaptive and more profitable.
With greater positive feelings come happier employees. Happier employees are more prone
to solving problems in ways that emphasize positive outcomes over negative. Positive and
empowered people engage with others more than withdrawing would allow and in so doing, may be
more prone to preventing potential conflict than starting it up. If attitudes are positive then
organizations when faced with great change and disorder, would experience less negativity and
resistance around change and find greater ease by which to deal with it. With these behaviors comes
“a bonding of individuals through a sense of caring"(Harter, 2003, p. 219). Call is empathy even.
Involvement, engagement and empowerment; all three concepts are very closely related but
empowerment seems to be the concept that provokes the deepest feeling of well-being while Harter
argues that engagement is linked more to “how people perceive their tangible rewards" (2003, p.
219). Gupta and Kurian however, state that, “empowerment involves allowing workers to actually
make the decisions that affect their work activities” (2006, p. 31) while Lawler (1988) proposes that
involvement is about asking what employees think. Whatever one calls it, a sense of well-being and
productivity is key to creating opportunities for more positive emotions in the workplace and
“positive emotions broaden scope of attentions, cognition, and action and build physical,
intellectual, and social resources … (that is thought to) lead to more enduring thoughts and actions
that then lead to successful business outcomes within organizations" (Harter, 2003, p. 210). Of
course, there are multi-generational differences in what empowerment looks like. We have seen that
idea of having empowerment in the workplace is rather recent in the history of work. That being
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 30
said, the idea of infusing positive emotions with work related tasks is also rather new. Ask any
traditionalist or baby boomer.
Traditional Conflict Resolution and Decision Making Approaches
Positive business outcomes rely on employees‟ abilities to manage themselves and deal with
change happening around them and that includes conflict, a natural part of the human dynamic.
People within organizations do not necessarily share the same styles of communicating, world
views or personal values. This can easily lead to interpersonal conflict. Further, lack of resources
and understanding of roles and hierarchy also contribute to conflict (Brett, 1984). “Conflict arises
between two or more parties when they are linked in a power-dependency relationship; that is, each
wants something from the other that is not easily attainable elsewhere” (Brett, 1984, p. 664).
Through this lens of viewing conflict, conflict is reduced to looking at power motivators and the
desire for the parties each to have their own winning outcomes. This is clearly a winner and loser
scenario where someone retains dominance. This is different from the creative collaboration visited
earlier in this review.
Fisher views conflict “as an incompatibility of goals or values between two or more parties
in a relationship, combined with attempts to control each other and antagonistic feelings toward
each other" (2000, p. 1). Protagonist vs. antagonist is a story everyone knows well and can identify
with. This is the “oldest story in the book”. Perhaps people can disagree without feelings
antagonistic. In any case, Pondy asserts in a more traditional way of looking at conflict that, "Most
frequently the study of conflict has been motivated by a desire to resolve it and to minimize its
deleterious effects on the psychological health of organizational participants" (1967, p. 307). While
any intelligent organization would want to minimize a threat to its vitality, we will look at some
types of conflict and ways that traditionally have been used to resolve them and make decisions.
Traditional approaches. Fisher (2000) defines five different levels of conflict:
Interpersonal, role, intergroup, multi -party and international. Most of what organizations deal with
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 31
is interpersonal, intergroup as well as role and multi-party when other stakeholders are involved.
Global companies and those dealing across cultures will at some point also encounter conflict
originating from differing cultural values. Traditional ways of handling conflict have been known to
be forms of mediation, bargaining, conceding, threats, and tactics. These approaches do not
necessarily have as the goal a change in attitudes or beliefs or values but rather, they are a way of
reaching a solution often with one party winning the conflict and the other, not. This sounds like
traditional “institutional memory” referred to previously. Brett (1984) suggests that when talking
about power dependency as in between managers and subordinates, bargaining is the way of solving
problems and "although both parties may be satisfied with the results, only in special
situations….will a true integrative solution be forthcoming" (Brett, 1984, p. 668).
Solution types. An integrative solution, which is more akin to collaborative problem
solving, is about understanding the other person‟s values and perspective on the “mutual work on
solving the problem so it‟s a win-win” (Brett, 1984, p. 668). Brett urges that concessions attempt to
reduce the difference between parties who are in conflict (Brett, 1984) with the intention to create
harmony. Where there is a reduction in difference, there is a minimizing of the values that each
party holds. In a concession where bargaining is part of the process, parties must give up something
in order to arrive at a solution. The consequence is that one party could come away with feeling like
they had to give up too much in order to end the conflict and the dynamics and understanding
between parties does not necessarily change for the better. It is unavoidable but also essential that
an organization must determine what is most valuable; a culture of avoidance, concession or one of
engagement. Therefore, “the effect of conflict must be evaluated relative to some set of values"
(Pondy, 1967, p. 307). These values represent specific points of view on both individual and
organizational levels.
Taking points of view and trying to sway someone from theirs is a tactical way of trying to
resolve conflict and make decisions (Brett, 1984). Tactics (including threats) require one party to
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 32
give up something by being swayed to the other side in order to reach the goal. This form of
problem solving can become much like a tit-for-tat (Brett, 1984) where each party tries their best to
convince the other to come over to their point of view. With conceding, each party gets to give up
something in order to create a more equal footing in the argument. Brett (1984) also reminds us of
inquisitor ways of bargaining where a third party hears both sides and determines the course of
action from there. This form takes the power of decision making out of the hands of those involved
and into someone else‟s and in fact, disempowers the parties ability to reach solutions together.
This third party could be someone who maintains a strong bias toward one party or issue or whose
values are very different from those parties involved. Each party reports their side of the argument
to a third-party negotiator in this form of problem solving and it is on this platform that our current
judicial system is structured (Brett, 1984). This is also not unlike how many organizations resolve
conflicts where problems are brought before a manager or supervisor and they determine the “best”
outcome.
In a mediation model, once again each party presents their views to a third party and attempt
to bridge gaps and narrow differences. Mediation tends toward narrowing conflict to practical terms
that are manageable but they note that this form is not a way to engage with one another on the level
of individual worldview (Danesh & Danesh, 2004). With that, underlying values and deeper
understanding of one another is not necessarily changed or attained in this form of problem solving.
What is cost of engagement at this level? This researcher would conclude that mediation and
conceding have their root in efficiency because deeper levels of engagement and understanding take
more time but also have deeper and more far-reaching, positive effects. If parties are connected to
one another while in conflict and sharing their perspectives, this provides social value to both sides.
"Institutional mediation, by not promoting this conscious interaction at the level of worldview, can
therefore have the unintended consequence of normalizing particular attitudes toward the meaning
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 33
and nature of conflict” (Danesh & Danesh, 2004, p. 2) and thereby, potentially minimize cognitive
ability in solution creation.
New models needed. Moving organizations to a more collaborative and value-based form of
decision making where world views can be examined through collaborative inquiry, Brett refers us
to a study in the 1980‟s the helped to redefine ways of solving conflict. Referring to Fisher and
Ury‟s work, he lists the steps known as “principled bargaining” where there are five issues to take
into account:
1. Focus on the interests and not positions of both parties.
If there is a focus on the interest of the parties and not on what their position is, a deeper
understanding of participants‟ values, motivations and striving can become more apparent as well
any potentially shared values. If focus on position remains priority, it is less likely to create forward
movement because positions are merely anchored platforms but not states of being.
2. Separate the people from the problem.
If participants are able to be separated from the problem, it removes the tendency to equate
the person with the problem. This depersonalization provides an opportunity to respect one another
and stay focused on solutions than petty, personal concerns.
3. Invent options for mutual gain.
Parties have the opportunity to creating collaborative results and ways to achieve
satisfaction with outcomes. Inventing options is a bit like envisioning different scenarios, opening
thoughts to other possibilities. Fisher and Ury‟s research, however demonstrates that people rarely
see a need for inventing new options because they see their own as being the correct one (as cited in
Brett, 1984, p. 673).
4. Invent objective criteria.
This entails creating new benchmarks toward which both parties can move. The criteria becomes
the new platform that both can agree upon. “Once a standard is agreed on, there need be no further
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 34
negotiations over the issue because the settlement terms are implicit in the objective standard”
(Brett, 1984, p. 674).
5. Know your BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) (as cited in Brett,
1984).
This refers to a negotiator needing to know what other kinds of options are available in the
case where parties still cannot settle. In decision making, people employ their own standards to a
desired outcome. Sometimes, they put their foot down and walk away. Other times, they look for
options such as in shopping for the best value or a “good deal”. Being clear on ones values is
important in negotiation processes and in understanding why those values are important a. If one
knows their “best alternative to a negotiated agreement”, they know what they are willing to accept
as a minimal standard for agreement. They know “what they stand for”.
These approaches provide opportunities for the negotiator to provide solutions if the parties
cannot agree or work together but the goal is to not have the parties have to give up something in
him or herself in the process or take outcomes too personally. This is a more creative approach than
the more traditional ones previously viewed and it moves parties into more of a win/win
opportunity. It also eliminates a sense of competition that underlies conceding, arbitration, third
party authoritarian solutions and potentially mediation as well. Eliminating competition can
provide an opportunity for greater trust and even minimize potential future conflict as well.
Principled bargaining would fall into the integrative approach that is more cooperative, interest-
based, and agreement based (Cross & Rosenthal, 1999).
If traditional conflict did not have as its goal a change in attitude of the parties involved, this
new model does. Cross and Rosenthal (1999) concur that attitude changes do not equate to parties
liking one another but that the desired goal is to help them perceive each other with less suspicion,
greater trust and gain a better understanding of the other's view of the conflict. A win/win effort
focuses on the needs and limitations of both rather than emphasizing strategies designed to conquer
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 35
(Fisher, 2000) such as in the antagonist/protagonist dilemma. With this win/win approach, Fisher
continues, "attitudes and behaviors are directed toward an increase of trust and acceptance rather
than an escalation of suspicion and hostility" (2000, p. 5).
When conflict occurs, there is a desire to be right and to be able to predict positive results
and win over the competition, whether it‟s a coworker or a market competitor or customer. While
this is natural, the dominant cultural pattern within business tends to focus on what is right and the
leadership who gets to decide so. Rightness is based often on data and also on knowledge (albeit
limited) of leadership. Rhetoric defines cultures. Rhetoric of “rightness” underlies business culture.
It is this kind of rhetoric Valentine refers to as “metonymy”. Metonymy is the language of rightness
or correctness (2002). Metaphor, on the other hand, provides more freedom of expression, more
openness to how ideas, results, and values can be explored and expressed. In metaphor, we expand;
in metonymy we limit. Solving the problem of binary thinking to him doesn't mean yielding "to
logical solutions or to the accumulation of data, because life is bigger than logic or data" (Steed,
2005, p. 51). After all, in business, leaders are dealing with divergent problems. It would stand then
that relying on logic only would be a detriment to the integrity of the organization.
Three Simple Decision Models for Leaders
Leaders may not always know to what extent they should involve others in the decision
making processes. After all, they are supposed to lead the others. Lunenburg mentions three models
of decision making that can be used on their own whether they incorporate additional creative
means. These three models are a way for a leader to determine how best to go about making crucial
decisions. The criterion for choosing which model is based on: Forces of the leaders, forces of the
decision maker, forces in the situation and long-run goals (Lunenberg, 2010). The Models reviewed
are: Vroom-Yetton-Jago's decision tree, Tannenbaum and Schmidt's shared model and Nash's
synergistic model (2010). What these models demonstrate is that a leader's ability to solve a
problem on their own can be limited and they may have much to gain by employing the collective
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 36
knowledge and experiences of others. Leaders need to identify the pressures and constraints of the
situation and long-range or short-range strategies and determine how best to move forward and
how much to involve the group in the matter. These models all provide a means by which a leader
can determine the extent he or she should involve others in decision making. They can also be
useful for parties engaged in conflict over their own decisions.
In the Vroom-Yetton-Jago decision tree as outlined in Lunenburg‟s article (2010, p. 3), the
seven following questions are asked of members in order to determine the best decision-making
model. They are:
1. Is there a quality requirement such that one solution is likely to be more rational than
another?
2. Do you have sufficient information to make a high-quality decision?
3. Is the problem structured?
4. Is acceptance of decision subordinates critical to implementation?
5. Is it reasonable certain that your subordinates would accept the decision if you were to make
it by yourself?
6. Do subordinates share the organizational goals to be obtained in the solving this problem?
7. Is conflict among subordinates likely in the preferred solution?
Given the answers to these critical questions then provides a mapping for how best to make
the decision. “The model represents an important improvement over rational decision-making
theory with implications for shared decision making” (Lunenberg, 2010, p. 4). The Tannenbaum
and Schmidt model also posits a range between “boss-centered leadership and subordinate –
centered leadership” (2010, p. 4). In this model, however, movement goes to a more subordinate-
centered place through careful enrollment, questioning and posing solutions to the members with
the leader making the decisions based on this information and feeding it back to the group. This is
true double-loop feedback and is an opportunity for greater employee empowerment.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 37
Finally, the Synergistic model requires participants including the leader to practice active
listening, responding to ideas, reinforcing ideas and clarifying any that require it. (Lunenberg, 2010,
p. 7). This model is by its nature a shared-decision making model and provides a very simple but
important way of looking at problems and working together. It would be naïve to suggest that
everyone in everyone company should have a chance to be involved in high level decision making.
Decisions are made every day on all kinds of levels within organizations and businesses. Not all
employees have the competency or understanding of the bigger pictures nor should they necessarily.
They should know what the mission of the company is though. Businesses are not democratic
either. They require leadership by those who can direct action in times of crisis and make decisions
that guide and encourage rather than stifle or oppress.
Summary
In the past, the focus within organizations to resolving conflict and making decisions has
been to rely on managers and leaders to help facilitate reaching an ending. Decisions have a sense
of finality about them and so does the word „resolution‟. However, in viewing people and
organizations as dynamic by nature, the idea of an “ending” may seem antithetical to the goals of
creative problem solving which would be to provide a place for a new beginning; one where
decision making is collaborative and value-creating because the solution is a “win-win” and not a
competitive solution or “win-lose”. In collaborative forms of decision making, parties are
creatively engaged and empowered by superiors to share their perceptions and worldviews. They
attempt to understand the other and focus on results that provide benefit to both parties rather than
trying to simply “win” or maintain power over the other. From the research found on empowerment,
one may conclude that in organizations where people engage creatively in decision making and
resolving conflict, they actually empower themselves and become more valuable to the organization
as a whole.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 38
Research shows that the more empowered people become, the more positive their attitudes,
the more productive they are and the less likely they are to engage in negative forms of behavior.
Conflict in itself is not something to be avoided but if used constructively can be a valuable
feedback tool to the organization regarding values, beliefs, processes, policies etc. Conflict exposes
gaps where more creative solutions can be born therefore, squelching creative engagement by
simply trying to end conflict or creating winners and losers, does not necessarily help an
organization learn, grow and thrive. Lastly, empowered employees who are provided opportunities
to engage in decision making feel good about their contributions and thus feel better about how the
organization values them. Research demonstrates that these employees would be less likely to
engage in forms of decision making or conflict resolution that didn‟t provide value on both sides.
Research shows that an increase in collaboration and creative values within organizations and that
conflict can actually fuel these concepts. Also, leaders are more open to embracing creative
activities in order to free up parts of the brain (and organization) in order to view situations and
ideas with new lenses.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 39
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
Overview
In the summer of 2010 this researcher worked with the leader and founder of a non-profit
organization, Correctional Transitional Services Inc. (CTSI) to create a strategic plan with the
intention of presenting it to his board. It was his hope that they would approve it and together, the
organization would find alignment and move forward on the initiatives that a SWOT analysis, a
matrix that explores strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, revealed to be most
imperative. The underlying context of this meeting and desire for a plan was that this leader and his
board had been at odds for quite some time. They were not in agreement on the function of each
others‟ roles, or the vision, mission, direction and goals of the company. The leader and the board
were sparring for control over these areas and action plans. This researcher was hired to work with
the Executive Director on this plan in the heat of the conflict and while they were able to complete a
general outline for a new strategic plan, they did not get the chance to flesh it out fully nor deliver it
to the board because soon after, the board found a loop-hole in the governing by-laws and had the
director removed from the company. In essence, the hiring of this researcher was a strategy as well
as the strategic plan itself. Call this a strategy within a strategy.
The Strategic Plan
The strategic plan, because it was created with the executive in the middle of a conflict, was
intended to be a means by which to create unity with the board. Both the director and the board
were frustrated that an operating budget was already six months overdue. The director intended to
demonstrate to the board that he had a solid plan for the organization both fiscally and visionary and
that he was prepared to move forward.
When a leader, organization or consultant creates something new in an established pattern in
a system, it bifurcates, or splits off from the previous condition or state. This process creates
temporary disorder and simultaneously creates movement toward a new direction. There is often
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 40
disorientation in the time it takes to settle into a new change initiative. If done too late or not well, it
can lead to dissipation of the entire preexisting structure. This is unfortunately what happened at
CTSI. Existing structures such as unclear expectations, patterns of conflict and lack of unity were
well established so trying to create a strategic plan was the intervention that was hoped to set a new
course for everyone in order to achieve a healthier future state.
To provide a brief summary for the method used, this researcher utilized an ordinary SWOT
analysis to get an assessment of what the director perceived to be true about the organization, the
external and internal forces working for and against it and its strengths and weaknesses. This
researcher believes in hindsight that the director was deluded in thinking that his position and
authority were simply stronger than his scheming board members‟. Because of his passionate and
high emotional engagement with the mission of the company he had started, he was slow to
relinquish control. He also felt he was the expert on where the company needed to go so he and
board lacked trust in one another. This leader wanted immediate solutions to what he saw was the
most important issue- the board‟s lack of involvement. He fully blamed the board for not having
committed to their roles, mission, and for the lack of an operating budget. It is always the hope of a
consultant that whatever tool is used, it elucidates some new information for the client and their
simple SWOT provided some insight into the state of things and most notably into the leaders‟
recognition that he could not continue to function without a solid team and without giving up some
control to an assistant director. This realization was a big breakthrough.
This researcher and the director had hoped that presenting a cohesive Strategic Plan would
entice board members to enroll in a clear vision and mission of the organization. When the board
suddenly ousted the director, however, it became apparent that enrollment and engagement had
been long lost in this organization and CTSI had been surviving primarily through the director‟s
passion and that of some employees. Apparently the board had a strategy of their own in mind but
lacked the foresight in what they were going to do after their coup. In retrospect, the hiring of this
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 41
researcher seems too late because the quality of engagement between the leader and his board had
been long spoiled due to an unwillingness on both parts to overcome conflict in an effective manner
and make decisions around decision-making. Without alignment, this organization was like a river
flowing in two opposing directions, overflowing its banks with no one available to redirect it.
Missed Opportunities
What might have steered the outcome differently would have been an on-going dialogue,
engagement with one another and a creative process, whereby board members and the director
expressed their differences, similarities, roles, and expectations through their own stories and why
they felt compelled to be a part of this organization in the first place. Each may have an opportunity
to offer visual or narrative depictions of how they saw themselves functioning within the framework
of CTSI‟s vision and mission. Of course, collaborative exploration for arriving at a new vision and
mission in the first place would have been necessary and ideally, it would have been done with both
board and leadership participation.
It appeared to this researcher that the previous strategic plan prior to the one being created
was not clear on a number of items. What was clear was the leader was leading from a passionate
heart-felt place and the board leading from logical head-space. The director‟s passion and mission
was not measuring up to the operational understanding and expectations of the board. The parties
were singing two different songs. Without both a head and heart a body cannot survive. The same
goes for an organization. Also working at cross purposes cannot create alignment, at least without
some kind of intervention.
There is a danger in expediency when it comes to decisions making. There are certain
elements of any given situation which one cannot perceive; there is always more to a story and a set
of circumstances. A leader may only see a partial view and be basing decisions on limited
knowledge. Extending the opportunity to others within the organization for perspective could prove
extremely valuable. When time becomes a pressure under which decisions must be made, one tends
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 42
toward “fixing the problem” rather than exploring possibilities and many times, exploration is often
seen as taking too much valuable time away from finding solutions. What leaders frequently do not
consider is that quality solutions are more apt to become available through the inclusion of others.
In the case of CTSI, this researcher concludes that both parties made decisions in haste and without
full awareness of potential consequences. Neither party had seemed to explore scenario planning
and thought through what might happen should they not find common ground again. As well, it
seemed that they both wanted similar outcomes but did not know how to support one another
systemically in order to see the manifestation. Exploring ways to deal with the misunderstandings
which were the core of conflict instead of simply fighting over whom was more right than the other,
might have provided a very different result for this organization. Also, employing the input of other
stakeholders within the organization may have shed new perspectives on the situation as well as
contributed to more shared responsibilities and opportunities to delegate to other capable people. At
the time this paper is being written, the organization CTSI (Correctional Transitional Services Inc.)
is no longer in operation.
Assertion around Limitations
While this researcher is not an expert in conflict resolution, she asserts that when emotional
conflict is at a pinnacle, distance from the problem needs to be created in order to view it
objectively and not take it personally. Once this is achieved, parties can return to the creative table,
and find more suitable solutions than they would have otherwise through some of the means already
referred to earlier. In CTSI, if the board and director had been able to personify in some creative
manner, the issues they perceived as preventing the organization from fulfilling its goals,
obligations and mission, they may very well have been able to break through limiting views and
found common ground again. This researcher does not believe CTSI was a “learning organization”,
a place where strategic thinking or collaboration was part of the institutional muscle. Rather, there
was a secret hope that the executive director, if he provided the best “plan”, it would compel the
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 43
board to see the “correct” way. Likewise, the board, in believing the director lacked vision and
leadership, hoped that they would replace the director with someone they better understood; who
“spoke their language”.
Alas, while the leader was shifting his focus on visualizing where they could go together, the
board was focused on how the organization was operating on a purely business level. Again, an
organization needs both the head and heart. Because the members could not find the merging, it
perished. Somehow earlier in their conflict, a good “cognitive rupture” could have proven useful.
Clearly, cognitive inertia within both parties was bounded by their own limitations and anger was
left to dominate the communication. At an earlier time, a cognitive rupture could have come in a
variety of forms, including some of which were part of the research in this paper. Sometimes
isolated logic just cannot bridge mutual understanding. That is why creative engagement can be so
transformational. However, for as powerful as new language and metaphor can be, in all situations,
timing of interventions is critical.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 44
CHAPTER IV: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Research shows that conflict has traditionally been seen as a problem but not typically as an
opportunity for creating change and innovation. More recent trends in viewing organizations as
dynamic in nature have helped in reframing conflict as a natural part of life. That being said,
learning how to navigate conflict and the emotional landscape surrounding it can be quite
challenging and depend on factors such as how much time and resources are available and other
constraints. Traditional ways of handling this energy would involve an authority or third party
playing a direct role in determining the outcome rather than facilitating people or groups to work
toward mutually beneficial ones or ones that may provide better long-term solutions. Many
variables shape how decisions must be made or how leaders think they must be made within their
organization. They have choices as to what extent they wish to engage or empower their employees
and how much latitude they will have in influencing the business climate.
There has been more recent research on the use of creativity in organizations to increase
productivity, employee engagement, innovation, reward and motivate employees. That modern
businesses would contract with consultants who specialize in music, art, poetry, creative writing,
dance etc. demonstrates a value in how these activities shift brain activity, provide avenues for
collaboration and the creation of new lenses and open up to more metaphorical thinking over
logical. They also invite differences, elicit dialogue and because there are no “wrong or right”
answers, leave plenty of room for ambiguity, another natural part of dynamic life in an organization.
There is more writing now than ever before on the use and importance of creativity in the
workplace which is to say that workplaces historically were more transactional spaces, operating
often on organizational values which are separate from personal ones. Growing in market share
makes sense. Dealing with the complexities of post-modern challenges of globalization and values
that define multiple generations in the workplace do not always make sense to leaders although
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 45
many leaders get rewarded based on results that provide higher returns on investments. Leaders also
often still seek absolutes and guarantees of success when taking on a new initiative. This delusion
can be costly. There is a risk element avoiding conflict and a risk element if one doesn‟t. If the goal
of business is to avoid risk, then it is likely that business would seek to avoid conflict too. “Playing
it safe” could postpone the pain of dealing with difficult decisions later. This reason alone can be
motivation for leaders to create cultures that empower their employees to be contributors to the
social fabric and mental muscle of the workplace.
It is clear as with CSTI, that conflict can be debilitating but research also shows that conflict
can be just the thing to get people emotionally involved and search for better ways to improve
something within their work environment. Understanding that conflict is a natural phenomenon and
is not something that needs to be feared or avoided at all costs, may lessen the degree of anxiety that
people may feel when faced with it. While some conflict escalate to the point of not being able to
see clearly through them, an outside mediator or other third party might be a viable solution but
research also shows that what is most important is that employees feel good about themselves and
the outcome.
Conclusions
In traditional, vertical, organizations decisions are still predominantly made at the “top”.
What research shows is the trend toward or at least lip-service toward more horizontal organizations
where decision making is shared among a variety of stakeholders. Of course with more people “in
the mix” of decision making, differences of values become more apparent. Strong and effective
leaders strive to create unifying vision toward which all members work for the sake of the
organization. However, because people are different, ways of making decisions, identifying needs,
gaps, opportunities, resources, etc. can become sources for emotional unrest and interpersonal and
intrapersonal conflict. When this occurs, leaders must have the awareness and preparedness of how
best to treat these situations and participants. Time parameters and market demands are pressures
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 46
which elicit quicker and more short-term decisions. Building in longer time periods in which to
explore strategies and expect new results could provide great opportunity for innovation. Time costs
money but decisions not fully thought through can be fatal. Because of the pressures for leaders to
create success, various decision making models exist to help them identify conditions and situations
which reveal the degree with which to involve others. Knowing whether the desired solution is a
short-term one or long-term is necessary and will influence decision making processes as well.
The language of business as a place of “rightness” still takes precedence over a place where
metaphor and new language can live, breath and be born. Goal driven language dominates
operational tasks and remains the normal rhetoric throughout business cultures. The conflict
between operational efficiency and the creativity that drives innovation and expansion and better
quality human relationships can be very healthy. However, the manner in which these pieces
operate are very different and require metaphoric comparisons in order to bridge understanding.
While several studies in this review focused on leaders engaging in creative tasks that likely
stretched their comfort zones, they also demonstrated though the very act of doing so that these
more playful approaches proved useful and insightful to their particular issue. A leader must
determine to what extent they are willing to let themselves think, experience, learn and grow from
more of a multi-disciplinary approach that incorporates art processes. There is no cookie-cutter
approach to planning interventions around “stuckness” or cognitive inertia when it comes to leaders
or teams or the organization as a whole. Thinking so would be naïve. It would also be naïve to
believe that high powered, authoritarian leaders or those representing traditionalists and baby
boomers would think artistic engagement or Work Arts is even a viable approach. This may not
resonate at all. It may actually seem childish. Again, there is an optimum time within which an
intervention is likely to have a positive outcome. Waiting too late as in the case of CTSI, can be
detrimental in saving an organization that already faces dissipation.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 47
Using metaphors to stretch thinking is important for organizational health and in seeing
situations and opportunities differently whether in creating strategic planning sessions or dealing
with pressures from stakeholders or conflict with or among stakeholders. Just as physical health is
good for people, organizations need healthy ways of dealing with change and emotions around
conflicting change. Change will happen both inside and outside the organization. The questions
remain when it does, will the business be ready to transform? Will it have the right muscles ready to
react with intelligence and ease and collective energy? Will employees have the ability to change
direction and will leadership be able to guide resistance into alignment?
Employees, especially those in younger generations, want to be in jobs that challenge them
and provide opportunities for learning. They want to feel valued and want their jobs to reflect the
values they hold. If employers in leadership positions do not come to terms with how younger
generations will demand employment terms, they are deluding themselves into believing that old
business and leadership models are just are relevant today as they were several decades ago. They
are not – at least not in the long-term.
Recommendations
Taking the methodology and research review, it seems apparent that leaders within
organizations can benefit greatly from setting clear agreements around how they will deal with
conflict beforehand, that is, at the outset of the new partnership. Having an understanding in the
beginning can greatly help when a crisis occurs. Also, for leaders to dig into the deeper parts of the
organization is wise. Without employees feeling acknowledged or valuable to the business may
make them less productive and apathetic as well as greatly resistant to future change initiatives.
Further, it may lead to the loss of talent where leaders least expected to find it.
This researcher would recommend that companies build teams based on collaboration to
enhance safety, sharing, significance and unity, and to harness talent to keep movement alive. Since
it is often difficult to know which employees embody the “heart” of the organization or the “head”,
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 48
it would be wise for leaders to identify them and forge strong union around the two
concepts/parties. Leaders could benefit greatly from letting go of traditional ways of conducting
business and relating to subordinates and indeed, many have. However, many also miss the boat in
knowing how to engage and empower their employees or encourage them to make decisions that
could have positive lasting impact within the organization. Because leaders must be accountable in
ways other employees do not, it is critical they have a deeper level of awareness of how they lead
and under what circumstances they are willing to let others step up and influence direction and
decision making. Some leaders are mission driven and represent the pulse of an organization and
others are driven by ROI and are rigid in processes. There is a place for all kinds but perhaps what
business requires is business “yoga”. Yoga means to “yoke”, or unite. Yoga brings together breath,
control and physical movement within strict limitations that encourage play and exploration and it
requires practice in order to become good at it. Since business environments stress success based on
high levels of competency, technical ability and knowledge and return on investment, perhaps one
thing it‟s missing is the art of practice in the movement zone.
It is up to leaders to be aware of what their organizations are practicing. Since people self-
organize, they may be practicing a different instrument than what leaders think. Therefore, focusing
on alignment, vision and flexibility in thought will at least provide employees (or board members)
with clear direction and latitude to get there.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 49
TERMS
Creativity: collaborative participation in a business setting that implies a certain level of conflict
and exploration around solving it
Conflict: “the fuel that drives systems growth and enables learning and adaptive behaviors,
making innovation possible” (Andrade et al, 2008, p. 23).
Empowerment: “make (someone) stronger and more confidence, especially in controlling their
life and claiming their rights” (OED 2006, p. 570).
Improvisation: “is not breaking with forms and limitations just to be „free‟, but using them as the
very means of transcending ourselves” (Nachmanovitch, 1990, p. 84).
Complex Adaptive Systems: a term which describes the dynamic nature of life and the ability of
living things to self-organize in ways that perpetuate patterns of behavior and that this
behavior is based upon the understanding of the environment and responses to its changes.
WorkArts: a term used to describe the use of Art (ie: painting, dance, music, poetry, theater) as
methods of exploration within a business environment.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 50
References
Adler, A. (1964). The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler. New York: Harper and Row.
Ainslie, G. M., & Seiden, H. (1978). Recurrent spontaneous themes in group poetry therapy. Art
Psychotherapy, 5(2), 55-60.
Andrade, L., Plowman, D. A., & Duchon, D. (2008). Getting past conflict resolution: A complexity
view of conflict. Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 10 (1), 23-38.
Barry, D. & Meisiek, S. (2010). Seeing more and seeing differently: Sensemaking, mindfulness, and
the workarts. Organization Studies, 31(11), 1504-1530.
Beinhocker, E. &. Kaplan, S. (2002). Tired of strategic planning? The McKinsey Quarterly ,
[Special Edition] 49-57.
Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (2008). Reframing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brett, J. (1984). Managing organizational conflict. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 15(5), 664-678.
Brews, P. (2005). Great expectations: Strategy as creative fiction. Business Strategy Review,
16(3), 6-10.
Briggs, R. & Reinig, B. (2010). Bounded ideation theory. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 27(1), 123-144.
Bryson, J. M. (1988). A strategic planning process for public and non-profit organizations. Long
Range Planning, 21(1), 73-81.
Buswick, T., Morgan, C., & Lange, K., (2005). Poetry in the boardroom: thinking beyond the facts.
Journal of Business Strategy, 26(1) 24-40.
Cross, S. & Rosenthal, R. (1999). Three models of conflict resolution: Effects on intergroup
expectancies and attitudes. Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 561-580.
Danesh, H., & Danesh, R., (2004). Conflict-free conflict resolution process and methodology
[Abstract]. Peace and Conflict Studies, 11(2), 55-85.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 51
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. American
Psychological Society, 5(1), 1-31.
Deiser, R. (2010). The new word for alignment: Convergence. Chief Learning Officer , (April) 50.
Fisher, R. (2000). Sources of conflict and methods of conflict resolution. International Peace
and Conflict Resolution School of International Service , The American University, 1-6.
Ford, C., Sharfman, M., & Dean, J. W. (2008). Factors associated with creative strategic decisions.
Creative Strategic Decisions, 17(3), 171-185.
Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2006). The art of followership. European Business Forum, 25, 22-26.
Gupta, A. D., & Kurian, S. (2006, Jan-March). Empowerment at work: The dyadic approach.
Vision, 10(1), 29-39.
Harter, J., Schmidt, F., & Keyes, C. (2003). Well-being in the workplace and its relationship to
business outcomes: A review of the gallup studies. In C. L. M. Keyes, & J. Haidt (Eds.)
Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well lived, (pp. 205-224). Washington, DC.
American Psychological Association.
Hoffman, L. R., Harburg, E., & Maier, N. R. (1962). Differences and disagreement as factors in
creative group problem solving. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64(3),
206-214.
Lawler III, E. (1988). Choosing and involvement strategy. Academy of Management Executive,
2(3), 197-204.
Levitt, T. (2002). Creativity is not enough. The Innovative Enterprise, (August) 137-145. Retrieved
from http://apps.business.ualberta.ca/mlounsbury/techcom/readings/levitt.pdf
Lunenburg, F. (2010). Models of decision making. Focus on Colleges, Universities, and Schools,
4(1), 1-9.
Montgomery, C. A. (2008). Putting leadership back into strategy. Harvard Business Review,
86(1), 54-60.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 52
Nemeth, C. J., Personnaz, B., Personnaz, M., & Goncalo, J. A. (2004). The liberating role of
conflict in group creativity: A study in two countries. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 34(4), 365-374.
Nachmanovitch, S. (1990). Free play: The power of improvisation in life and the arts. New York:
G. P. Putnam‟s Sons.
Pondy, L. (1967). Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science Quarterly ,
12(2), 296-320.
Rahman, N. & DeFeis, G. L. (2009/10). Strategic decision-making: models and methods in the face
of complexity and time pressure. Journal of General Management, 35(2), 43-60.
Rechkenrich, J., Anderson, J., & Markides, C. (2008). The strategy of art. Business Strategy
Review, 19(3), 5-12.
Shoemaker, P. J. (1995). Scenario planning: A tool for strategic thinking. Sloan Management
Review, 36(2), 25-29.
Smith, K. & Berg, D. (1997). Paradoxes of group life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Soanes, C., & Stevenson, A. (Eds.). Oxford English Dictionary. (2006). Oxford University Press,
(2nd
ed., revised). 570.
Steed, R. (2005). The play's the thing: Using interactive drama in leadership development.
Journal of Business Strategy, 26(5), 48-52.
Taylor, S. A. & Ladkin, D., (2009). Understanding arts-based methods in managerial development.
Academy of management Learning and Education, 8(1), 55-69.
Tharp, T. (2003). The Creative Habit. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Wheeler, M. S. (1991, Fall). Six steps to successful conflict management. Family Psychologist,
7(4), 23-24.
Valentine, V. (2002). Repositioning research: A new mr language model. The Market Research
Group, 44(2), 163-192.
FORMS OF PROBLEM SOLVING 53
Wilson, J. (Dec2009/Jan2010). The art of delegation and empowering pthers. PT in Motion, 1(3),
10.
Yankelovich, D. (2000). Conflict management: The magic of dialogue. Head Start Bulletin, 68, 13-
14.
Zhang, X., & Bartol, K., (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The
influence of psychological empowerment, instrinsic motivation, and creative process
engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 107-128.