"An in-depth study of the impact communication has on organizational culture, and how culture influences individual and organizational behavior. Students will examine communication and the impact it has on individual performance, organizational structure and cultural environment. This course will also examine different theories and methods of communication linked to a variety of leadership models and the development of technical competencies. Students are required to demonstrate basic computer-based competencies."
--Siena Heights University
Four Main Conceptual Blocks
Charles Jacobson
Organizational Leadership—Siena Heights University
LDR630—Organizational Culture and Communication
Dr. James Loughran
April 23, 2023
Organizations can find it challenging when it comes to solving problems. Organizations can solve problems either analytically or creatively (Whetten & Cameron, 2002). Solving problems analytically focuses on getting rid of problems, whereas, solving problems in a creative manner is creating something new (Covey, 1998, as cited in Whetten & Cameron, 2002). Whetten and Cameron (2002) describe four conceptual blocks that inhibit creative problem-solving in organizations. These blocks include constancy, commitment, compression, and complacency. Understanding these blocks and methods of working through them can be a substantial benefit to organizations and their creative problem-solving abilities.
Definitions
Constancy
Constancy can be broadly defined as organizations problem-solving the same way as they always have. Constancy can have a negative effect on creativity as the tendency to remain constant does not allow for change. Two ways that this is done are through vertical thinking and using single-thinking language.
Vertical Thinking
Vertical thinking is the process of defining a problem in a singular manner and not deviating or altering the process (Whetten & Cameron, 2002). While this method might be good for simple problems complex problems may require more flexibility to come to better solutions.
Single-Thinking Language
Single-thinking language refers to thinking of problems using only one type of language. Whettten and Cameron (2002) write that most people think in verbal language. Other forms of thinking language can include symbolic, sensory, feelings and emotional, and visual. Opening oneself up to non-verbal thinking can release the creativity needed to solve complex problems (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Commitment
Commitment is the act of sticking with an original point of view and ignoring new information that might lead to a different conclusion (Whetten & Cameron, 2002). A good example of this is a detective who may think they have their suspect, and all future evidence is included or excluded based on their preconceived idea. Whetten and Cameron (2002) explain that two aspects of commitment that inhibit creativity are stereotyping based on past experiences and ignoring commonalities.
Stereotyping Based on Past Experiences
When people stereotype on past experiences they frame the new problem by looking at similar problems and their corresponding solutions from the past. While this can be an effective way of dealing with problems, it may not be the best, it can prevent better solutions from coming to fruition as the old methods are simply relied upon to define future actions (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Ignoring Commonalities
When people are unable to make connections between information that can appear dissimilar is a common commitment block. Many times people commit to a point of view and it clouds their vision for identifying commonalities that they may have connected had they been open to analyzing the data with an open mind (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Compression
Compression can be defined as looking at a problem with a narrow lens. Weeding out data that might end up being important before it is fully analyzed could be a form of compression, as could making assumptions. Whetten and Cameron (2002) list artificially constraining problems and not separating figure from ground as forms of compression.
Artificially Constraining Problems
Artificially constraining problems is putting constraints on possible solutions because of personal bias. Not allowing the range of possible actions merited by the problem can be detrimental to finding the best solutions. Not being able to separate the un-important from important information can cause possible solutions to be lost (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Separating Figure from Ground
Separating figure from ground is on the opposite side of the spectrum from artificially constraining problems in that it is allowing too much information to be involved in the process. When there is too much information the problem cannot be defined in a manner that provides a focused solution. The real crux of the problem cannot be determined and an effective method of solving the problem cannot be produced (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Complacency
Complacency is just what it sounds like. It is less about making bad decisions and more about not making decisions at all. Sometimes laziness, fear, insecurity, or ignorance take the lead and cause inaction to take place. Bias against thinking and noninquisitiveness are two examples of the complacency block (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Bias Against Thinking
Bias against thinking is the thought complacency block that is defined as not taking the time to think. Many times people value acting over thinking, but taking time to think of alternative paths is very important in causing creative change. Sometimes people do not want to think at all, it is always much easier to do what has always been done, but not always the most effective. Whetten and Cameron (2002) reference that in Western cultures there is a tendency to think with the left hemisphere of the brain which focuses on logic and analytics, whereas the right hemisphere of the brain is more creative. Instilling the process of taking the time to think before acting and thinking differently.
Noninquisitiveness
Noninquisitiveness is the act of not asking questions to further the discussion to try to understand a concept more deeply. Sometimes people are afraid to ask questions for fear of appearing uninformed. Fear of asking questions and gaining more information may also be connected to the fear of understanding that their original thoughts were wrong (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Discussion
Constancy
Constancy is the act of doing things the same way someone always has. Solutions to problems can be developed over time through experience, however, it can be easy to become complacent and use the same old solutions when similar problems arise. This constancy block of using old solutions prevents ideas for new solutions from being discovered. This vertical thinking can be detrimental as solutions do not evolve over time. Thinking in another language, instead of thinking in words, such as thinking in emotions or symbols, can be an effective way to look at a problem in a new light. The pros of continuing to use old solutions are that they are proven to work, they are quick and easy to implement as they have been used in the past, they are comfortable, and do not require much extra thought. The cons for the continued use of old solutions are that the old solution may no longer be the best solution and although they are comfortable to work with it can help to create a stagnant culture where it becomes difficult for people to move outside their comfort zones (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Commitment
Commitment block is a little confusing as aspects of it are on opposite sides of the spectrum. Stereotyping based on past experiences can be part of the commitment block, but so can ignoring commonalities. It is important to hit the middle of this spectrum by focusing on finding commonalities to solve the problem, but not letting them cause you to stereotype the problem to the point where you get trapped in vertical thinking mode. Finding commonalities and using them to lead you to a conclusion instead of forming the conclusion based on past experiences is key to not experiencing commitment block. Commitment block occurs because it is comfortable to frame new things in old ways, it is easy to plug new information into old mental databases, and it seems like a logical thing to do. However, it blocks the possibility of new better solutions from moving to the forefront (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Compression
Compression block is another that seems to have components that are on opposite ends of the equation. Looking at problems with a personal bias can be a factor in suffering from compression block, but so can not being able to glean important information from extraneous information. Having an open mind and access to different points of view can help with removing personal bias from the equation. Also working to whittle the problem down to its lowest common denominator can help to get rid of extraneous information that may cloud what the real problem is (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Complacency
Complacency can be caused by not wanting to think, either because it is a person’s nature to act rather than think, bias against thinking, or because they just do not want to put any effort into thinking about the situation. This could be a result of them having a vertical thinking attitude that they know the solution and do not feel they need to spend time thinking about different solutions. Complacency blocks can also occur because of noninquisitiveness which could result from a fear of asking questions because they may be perceived as not as knowledgeable as they would like to be, or their fear of looking uninformed (Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Tools to Help Leaders Promote Communication-Based Creativity
Fortunately, there are many tools available to leaders to help improve communication-based creativity. One of the key traits of being a creative problem solver is being a flexible thinker. Flexible thinkers remove any self-imposed constraints as they pertain to thinking (Whetten & Cameron, 2002). Whetten and Cameron (2002) write that there four generally recognized stages to the creative problem-solving process which include preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification. The process goes from gathering data (preparation) to thinking about the data (incubation) and coming to a solution (illumination), and finally evaluating the solution to its effectiveness (verification). Whereas, Proctor (2020) argues there are six steps that make up creative problem-solving, including objective finding, fact-finding, problem finding, idea finding, solution finding, and acceptance. Proctor’s six-step approach addresses the topics of finding the problem, which is a great way to emphasize the need to define the problem as part of the compression block and idea finding which addresses the vertical thinking aspect of the constancy block.
Action Plan
Conceptual Blocks
Constancy
Problem: Solving problems the same as always
Solution: Revisit the problem, use brainstorming, think of the problem in another language (symbols, feelings)
Commitment
Problem: stereotyping based on past experiences and not finding commonalities
Solution: Use past experiences to help start the process, but be open to different paths the information leads
Compression
Problem: personal bias and separating important information from extraneous information
Solution: include others different points of view, be a flexible thinker, break problem down to its lowest level
Complacency
Problem: bias against thinking and noninquisitiveness
Solution: understand thinking is as important as action, make sure asking questions is encouraged
Examples from Personal Experience
I had a difficult time with conceptual blocks. When I became mayor I came from managing a small business where I was responsible for making decisions based on the experience I brought to the job. As mayor, I had to work with different people on a variety of topics of which I may or may not have had much experience. I also had to try to keep the seven-member commission working together. I had been a commissioner, however, the mayoral role on the commission is very different. As commissioner, I would come to meetings prepared with my research and ready to battle to get my point of view to be the chosen action. As mayor, I had to come with an open mind to help facilitate the commission to come to a good solution, without too much animosity to preserve our future working conditions. Having an inquiring mind requires more emotional maturity than having an advocacy mind (Thompson, 1993), and my time as commissioner helped me to become more mature.
As commissioner, I was guilty of vertical thinking as I spent time studying the problem and formulating my argument to try to get it passed. I would define artificial constraints to help make my position the one that the commission would choose. The artificial constraints would be a way to exclude others’ ideas. Noninquisitiveness was an issue because if I asked questions it could show that I did not understand the problem as I should, it could also open the door for other’s arguments to gather steam. Nonthinking was also an issue. My background was leading a small business, so if we wanted to change direction it was simple and fast. As a part of the city government, there was nothing simple or fast, so sometimes I just wanted to get moving on something right away instead of dragging it out and talking it to death.
When I was mayor I took a more collaborative approach and told the commission that I did not care if they voted against me on a topic as long as they came to the meeting prepared. This set the stage for everyone to come together and be heard. It helped to allow people to feel comfortable to ask questions because it was not a zero-sum game of win or lose, but a place where we all had input, so everyone felt like they contributed (Luijk et al., 2017). Little wins like getting a small change in an ordinance to bring it a little closer to what an individual commissioner would have liked, even if they did not like the ordinance in general were important in keeping our team working together. Fluency and flexibility of thought were encouraged as ways to make our commission stronger in making effective decisions by communicating better (Sternberg, 1999; as cited in Whetten & Cameron, 2002).
Conclusion
It is very easy to become complacent and rely on methods that have been time-tested to provide solutions for current problems which are similar to past problems. However, it is evident that creative problem-solving can not only help find solutions to problems but can be effective at finding better solutions. Flexible thinking and being open to others’ points of view are extremely important when it comes to being a creative problem solver. Tools such as brainstorming and not committing to a path too soon can help give time for ideas to expand. Having a welcoming, non-judging environment allows people to feel more comfortable sharing their ideas and asking questions which produces better results as information can be shared and condensed to narrow down the problem’s scope (Odland et al., 2017).
References
Luijk, L., Krüger, M.,Zijlstra, B.,Volman, M. (2017). Inquiry-based Leadership: The influence of affective attitude, experienced social pressure, and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Administration. 55. 00-00. 10.1108/JEA- 12-2015-0114.
Oldland, E., Currey, J., Considine, J., & Allen, J. (2017). Nurses’ perceptions of the impact of Team-Based Learning participation on learning style, team behaviours and clinical performance: An exploration of written reflections. Nurse Education in Practice, 24, 62-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2017.03.008
Proctor, T. (2020). Creative problem-solving techniques, paradigm shift and team performance. Team Performance Management, 26(7), 451-466. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-06-2020-0049Links to an external site.
Thompson, M. P. (1993). The Skills of Inquiry and Advocacy Why Managers Need Both: Communication Forum Commentary Collective Inquiry Roadblocks to Inquiry: Immaturity and Insecurity Building a Culture of Inquiry the Leader's "New Work" how do we do it? REFERENCES. Management Communication Quarterly : McQ (1986-1998), 7(1), 95. https://sienaheights.idm.oclc.org/login? url=.? url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly- journals/skills - inquiry- advocacy-why-managers-need-both/docview/232854495/se-2
Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. M. (2002). Developing Management Skills. Pearson Education.