Tapping into your subconscious for ideas

The Jakarta Post, Features, 30 September 2007
Dewi Susanti & Kayee Man

Have you ever woken up from a dream with a weird, but reassuring feeling that you'd solved a problem that has been bugging you for a while?

Unfortunately, we don't come up with solutions to our problems through dreams very often, as our dreams are often disjointed from reality. But through dreams, psychologists -- pioneered by Sigmund Freud -- have attempted to peek into humans' subconscious minds to reveal the troubled souls within.

But we could use our dreams to come up with unusual ideas and think outside of the box, so to speak. Unusual ideas are often what give us a competitive edge.

Suppose you want to open a restaurant because, well, great restaurants draw a lot of people in, and we all know that restaurants have potential for high profit margins. But what makes restaurants great?

People, services, and products come to mind when we think about great experiences we've had in restaurants. But many stores in developed countries have evolved beyond these basics to cater for many varieties of needs and to create experiences for their customers.

A good example is the REI store in Seattle that not only sells outdoor gear, but also boasts a 20-meter-high climbing "mountain", a 155-meter-long hiking trail, 30 pitched tents, a Rain Room to check whether the gear is truly waterproof -- even a dirty pool for campers to test water purifiers."

By the end of its first year, REI store was visited by 1.5 million people, and designated as a National Park Service information station (Kelley, 2001: 196, 203).

The REI not only sells products; they are selling experiences. Unusual experiences draw people in.

You may start wondering then, how one could come up with great ideas for restaurants? We could start with people, services, and products as the basic ingredients for great experiences we've had in restaurants.

But rather than thinking about these categories in our usual way, let's think about them independently from one another and see what great ideas we can come up with.

'Forced association' produces ideas

Let's start with the people. What kinds of people can you think of? You may want to brainstorm first, independent of your idea for a great restaurant. Our list includes: grandmothers, children, pilots, students, astronauts, rock climber, fisherman, soccer player, dancer, musicians, etc.

Then think of the kinds of people you want to attract and whom should you employ?

Next, brainstorm about services. Our list includes the obviously related dining services (restaurants, cafes, airplane food service, etc.) and other unrelated services such as postal services, the Internet, graphic design services, travel agents, call centers, real estate agents, brokers, florists, etc. What kind of services would you want to provide through this restaurant?

Finally, consider the products. Directly restaurant-related are types of food (Italian, Chinese, French, Vietnamese, Mongolian, Ethiopian, Spanish, etc.) and drinks (soft drinks, punches, coffees, teas, smoothies, alcoholic drinks, etc.).

But let's branch out a little to think of other products that are not related to restaurants. Here's what we come up with: art papers, books, clothing, camera, eyeglasses, bags, gadgets, shoes, golf clubs, and so on. What products could you sell in the restaurant?

Suppose we are open to any kind of ideas for this restaurant; we may want to go for the kinds of restaurants that do not already exist in Jakarta. How do we go about it?

One way to find ideas is through an idea finding tool known as "forced association", which is also a term introduced by Freud.

To engage in forced association, we simply pick randomly our separate ideas from each of the three categories above (people, services, and products). Let's say we get grandmothers, florists, and camera. What ideas could you get from these words?

Well, perhaps the restaurant is the place where grandmothers could come and learn making flower arrangements, which would be displayed in this restaurant for picture-taking moments with the whole family. So it's a fun and emotion-arousing restaurant full of families and flowers.

Let's try other random picks through the categories. Say we have rock climbers, graphic design services, and smoothies. Perhaps the restaurant could have a rock climbing wall and sell nutrient-filled smoothies for health conscious young entrepreneurs.

But where does that leave the graphic design services? We could think of it literally as a two-in-one lounge and graphic design house, or it could be a restaurant where everything is designed and packaged to make you become conscious of health and the environment.

Our family restaurant full of families and flowers, or a healthy lounge for entrepreneurs, or a fully-designed experience of good healthy food, fun and environmentally conscious experiences are unusual experiences (which by the way, we haven't seen in any restaurants here in Jakarta).

By forced associating three words from three categories, you could come up with your own ideas for restaurants with unusual experiences. And who knows, if you really have the motivation and start-up capital, you could actually implement one that you think would make a good business.

Delving into the subconscious

Now that we hope we have convinced you with why we should go for unusual ideas, it's time to persuade you into the idea of tapping into your subconscious mind.

But after having kept you attention throughout the entire article, we actually no longer need to persuade you, as forced association is one of the tools that help us gain subconscious-like ideas. So without realizing it, we have led you through the thinking process needed to trigger your own subconscious-like ideas.

If forced association is not to your liking, there are other ways of getting unusual, subconscious-like ideas too. In the 1920s, when Freud's ideas of psychoanalysis had gained some popularity, tapping into the subconscious mind was one of the main fascinations of art movements known as Dada.

Some of its exponents later founded Surrealism -- whose better-known artists include Rene Magritte (whose painting is featured in the film The Thomas Crown Affair, with Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo) and Salvador Dali (whose painting of soft watches, better known in the art world known as The Persistence of Memory, is one of his most-remembered paintings).

The Surrealists created many devices to purposefully get non-logical ideas; one of them is forced association, which has been described at length by us above. The Surrealists also use another tool called cadavre exquis (exquisite corpse), which when applied in writing, is a form of idea-generating process that involves several people coming up with a story line without a set target (no, we didn't use this technique to write this article!)

If you are familiar with the discussion groups in Facebook, the social utility on the Internet, you would probably know this game: someone starts a post with a three-word sentence, then another posts additional three-word sentence, and so on until some kind of story line is gained through the process. This is one form of cadavre exquis.

A more visual method, collage, is also one of the tools widely used by the Surrealists. A collage is a picture that is created by cutting and pasting parts from different pictures, prints, photos, newspapers, magazines, clothes, found objects, and almost everything you could think of onto a common surface.

You can try this: think of a problem for a few minutes then put it out of your mind. Get some old magazines and/or objects, let your mind go and start cutting, arranging and pasting.

When you feel (note: not think) you are done, return to the problem you started off with and see if you can gain insights to how your visual piece relates to or give you ideas to solve your problem.

What you could get through these tools are unusual ideas or images that may be completely abstract or bizarre, but may reveal your subconscious mind and may give you ideas on how to solve the problem you are facing.

At the very least, going through this kind of thinking process will not only train your thinking and imagining capacity, but is a lot of fun and entertaining.

Ergo: Tap into your subconscious mind!

Thinking Languages

The Jakarta Post, Features, 16 September 2007
Published as "Use the most appropriate language to get through"
Kayee Man & Dewi Susanti

Ever experienced tearing your hair out over not being able to get through to someone?

We have. What's wrong with the people who just don't get it? With some afterthought, we conclude that most of the time, we're just not using the right language to communicate with people.

There are close to 7,000 languages around the world. One can never be certain about too many things, but we would bet our bottom dollar that it would be impossible to learn all the languages in the world in one's lifetime.

So what language or languages should we learn so that people understand us?

Should we strengthen our English, the language considered by many to be the lingua franca? Or learn Mandarin, the most widely spoken language in the world? Or Spanish, the third-most widely spoken language in the world?

Or, perhaps Bahasa Indonesia, the local language?

You might have read Bill Bryson's book The Mother Tongue (1990). In it, he wrote about a German engineer posted to China to work in a German business venture. We can only imagine what it's like for the German engineer to speak English to the Chinese plant manager who can't speak German.

Funnier perhaps is Bryson's story of some companies from four non-English speaking European countries that formed the joint venture called Iveco.

English was the chosen working language and one of the founders commented "it puts us all at an equal disadvantage."

Funny for observers, perhaps. But if you already have been in situations similar to the stories, you won't see this situation bringing much laughter to the poor souls who were probably tearing their hair out trying to be understood.

You most likely can relate to the fact that even being fluent in English does not provide a solution to communication problems in the era of globalization.

Think 'visually'

Before you rush out to sign up for Mandarin or English or Indonesian classes, consider signing up instead to learn a universal language that most of us are not fluent or fully trained in: the visual language.

J. A. Adams, in his book Conceptual Blockbusting (2001), suggested that there are three problem-solving languages or, if you prefer, languages we think with. The three are: verbal (which we are using to think and write for this article), mathematical, and visual.

In our training, we have worked with many people who automatically use their verbal or mathematical knowledge to solve problems.

This doesn't come as a surprise as we are well trained in using words and mathematics in school. The downside in doing this is that not all problems can be solved verbally or mathematically.

Consider this problem used as an example by Adams: "One morning, exactly at sunrise, a Buddhist monk began to climb a tall mountain. A narrow path, no more than 30 to 60 centimeters wide, spiraled around the mountain to a glittering temple at the summit.

The monk ascended at varying rates of speed, stopping many times along the way to rest and eat dried fruit he carried with him. He reached the temple shortly before sunset.

After several days of fasting and meditation he began his journey back along the same path, starting at sunrise and again walking at variable speeds with many pauses along the way.

His average speed on the descent was, of course, greater than on the ascent. Prove that there is a spot along the path that the monk will occupy at both trips at precisely the same time of day." (Adams, 2001, p. 4)

We won't give you the answer just yet. To heighten your chances of solving this problem, remember that one big hint has already been given (consider using something other than words or math to solve this problem).

If you did make an attempt to solve this problem, did you use words or math? How easy or hard was it for you to not use numbers and equations?

Kayee likes to think mathematically and logically (she even reduced a new organizational structure into a mathematical equation). When she tried this and other problems, even knowing that she should not be thinking mathematically, the symbols and equations kept popping into her head.

She couldn't get away from them. What made it hard for Kayee to get away from the math was partly habit, but also, at the time, the lack of an alternative language at her disposal.

Dewi, trained in the visual arts and as an architect, is a visual thinker. If you too are a visual thinker, you may have the answer to the problem by now.

Try to produce the following two images in your mind: a person ascending a mountain on a spiral path (hold this image), a person descending a mountain on a spiral path (hold this image). Now, overlap these two images and you will have one person ascending and one person descending the same mountain. Where the two people meet is the point where their paths coincide.

The mathematically inclined among you may ask: so where exactly is the meeting point? How far in kilometers from the base of the mountain? What are the bearings? But did the problem ask for a specific spot, or just a spot? The point is that with some problems, we can only answer them without the exactness that some of us are accustomed to.

Use props

Recently, when working with some high school students on the problem, we found that knowing that it was necessary to think in images was not enough. For these students, it was a challenge to retain the above images in their heads.

As a helping tool, Dewi offered them a mosquito repellent that was lying around the room, with a shape like a cone to represent the mountain. We also gave them two toothpicks to represent the monk: one going up, and one going down. The students saw the solution at once. Having a concrete object to handle helped their thinking.

Using props is a very common teaching strategy for young children but less common for adults.

In our view, using props as teaching or communication tools should not be determined based on age but on (you can probably guess by now) the language in which a learner or listener feels most comfortable thinking.

Some of us may not only think more effectively visually but also concretely and kinesthetically, meaning, we need to be handling concrete objects to understand and problem solve.

Next time you are faced with a problem, think first: which is the best language to solve the problem with? Is it with words, math, or images? It may be one of these or a combination of them.

Effective use of language

Returning to our question of which is the best language to learn: In our opinion there is no one best or universal language.

Know your problem; figure out which language (verbal, mathematical or visual) is the most appropriate for the problem. Be aware of your own language preferences so you know when it becomes a hindrance to your thinking.

When communicating to others, gauge your listener's thinking language preference and design your message as much as possible using this preferred language.

If your listener doesn't seem to understand your chain of words, describe an image for him to see in his head and ask, "do you see it now?"

If your listener can't see what you are describing, can you put your message across using mathematical symbols and equations?

If you are not sure in which language your listener thinks best, package your message in a way that will tap into the use of all three thinking languages!

Even if you are multilingual in several languages, you strengthen your thinking and communication abilities only verbally.

If you broaden your repertoire of languages to include the more universal mathematical and visual languages, not only will this help you in thinking about and solving problems, they may also be your bullets in getting through to people.

On Positivity

The Jakarta Post, Features, 26 August 2007
Published as "Positive thinking can be spread beneficially"Dewi Susanti & Kayee Man

We are sure you have been around people who seem to sap every last bit of motivation, hope or happiness inside you. Like The Dementors coming out of Harry Potter, the presence of these people seems to highlight every negative aspect of life, often to the point that you no longer see the point of doing what you do (or living!).

Yet, we also think that there are people contrary to The Dementors. You can feel yourself being filled with positive energy just by being in the same room with them. When these people speak, you become inspired, and you realize that even your most impossible dreams are achievable.

Be it a one-on-one conversation, a meeting, a small or a big company or community and even in a country, negativity and positivity spread. Through this article, we argue that more than anything and at all levels of society, Indonesian people, culture and the nation desperately need positivity.

A major part of our work relates directly to teaching creativity to children both formally and informally. Although it takes up 80 percent of our human resource focus and energy, it brings in substantially less than that in our revenue. This issue brings regular headaches for us.

The problem does not only come from financial pressure but also, more frequently, from the fact that it has not been easy to find and to retain good and motivated teachers.

Being the one mostly responsible for the training of our teachers, Kayee has invested much time in developing our staff professionally; this has included two-month-long induction training for new teachers, and at one point, a full-year train-the-trainers program. Naturally, when a teaching staff member decides to leave the company for one reason or another, Kayee is hit the most by the reality.

Her dilemma stems from the fact that people who are motivated are also those who are more likely to want to continue developing themselves by taking further study or greater challenges beyond those that the company can offer at present. Meanwhile, maintaining (or facilitating) motivation has not been easy amid the changes and uncertainties brought about by imminent departures of team members.

It was in the midst of a mini-crisis of motivation in our teaching team that Kayee's husband, Heri, stopped by the office from his trip to a Kalimantan jungle. He seemed to feel very inspired by what he saw there: a company that conducts selective logging, with its good practice understood by every employee from all levels with an immense sense of pride.

Immediately, we felt ourselves being filled with Heri's positive energy and within minutes, we found several ideas on how we could improve upon what we were doing. It was then we realized that like negativity, positivity is contagious.

In a recent national workshop on widening public participation in urban management and planning, Dewi presented a comparative study between Jakarta and Bangkok, concluding that despite similarities in the problems being encountered by both cities, Bangkok has a strong network among different stakeholders.

It is this network that makes it possible for a more solid and active civil society in Bangkok. It enables strong participation in urban management and planning of the city, and incorporation of the poor as active contributors in solving their own problems.

Negative-minded participants reasoned with Dewi that it was impossible to achieve the kind of network-based participation in urban management and planning of Jakarta because Jakarta is more heterogeneous in population than Bangkok.

Dewi and her research colleagues from the Institute for Ecosoc Rights concur that the direct application of what works in Bangkok is not possible in Jakarta. However, Dewi thinks that rather than thinking why it would not work, it would be more productive to think about how to make it work.

Later in the same event, participants from several cities throughout Indonesia called for the establishment of a network among government officials, NGO activists and academics alike -- a positive move leading toward more concrete action. More than 20 attendees made suggestions as to what the network could be used for.

Many, however, wanted to share their problems: why things would not work as planned, what resources were not available to account for their shortcomings. Fortunately, the negativity was reversed by someone from Surabaya who shared the news that the city has won several awards for its Kampung Improvement Project.

He proposed that the network could also be used to share success stories in overcoming urban problems; how the network could encourage good practices by giving out awards.

While the impossibility of applying Bangkok's system directly to Jakarta is a discouraging note, the suggestion to use a network as a means of sharing success stories is an encouraging note. The former leads us nowhere, while the latter brings us a glimmer of hope to support action.

We hope by now we have convinced you why it is important to spread positivity.

Upon hearing the news about selective logging from Kayee's husband, we started thinking about ways we could generate positivity. Even when other people are inspired by what we do, it is not easy to maintain inspiration as a constant in our work.

Within our team, we remember our teaching staff used to come out of class sharing stories about their students and what happened in classrooms. Not all of the stories were of success.

In fact, most of them were not. But from these, we knew that teachers were engaged with what they did. More importantly, the sense of encouragement and camaraderie generated through sharing experiences in a positive manner can be very inspiring.

Beyond our team, it helps to go out and meet or to bring in other people working in different fields. It helps to talk about our stories -- again, sharing not only our challenges but also our successes. We often get a good sense that we are on the right track after we come back from meeting outsiders.

It also helps to hear about success stories coming from the outside as in the case of Bangkok described above.

At times, being positive means finding another angle to look at a situation -- an angle that enables solutions to be found.

Amid so many problems facing Indonesia as a country, it does help to hear a few success stories here and there, to learn about a few good practices by government officials, activists, academics, practitioners, professionals, or simply regular people going about their daily activities.

The next time you hear about some initiatives being done by anyone -- be it in informal conversations, in meetings, in your company, in your community -- instead of thinking why these initiatives would not work, think about how they could, or what you could do to support them.

If you can't be positive, it would help to simply keep your negativity to yourself.

Positivity is contagious. Spread yours around!

Loose Thinking

The Jakarta Post, Features, 12 August 2007
Published as "Freshen Up Your Thinking to Seek Solution"
Kayee Man and Dewi Susanti

Dewi once saw a child, who, upon coming into a room and seeing assorted color papers on the floor, immediately jumped onto the "pool" of paper and started "swimming" with excitement and joy.

We know a child who was the Queen of the Land of Solian, in which lived a monster called Sak-Din-Doong. If you want to see the monster, you would need a passport to enter (which she also designed). What a fresh way to look at the world around us!

We don't think our little friends' brains were sprayed with air freshener. Rather, we think they have a system going on inside that enables them to circulate the stale air within.

The circulation system is what we would call "loose thinking": "Loose" as in spontaneous, free association, letting go of the brakes on your imagination and on what's possible.

It's not so much installing a circulation system as ridding our brains of a clogged filter. Our brain naturally has such a circulation system, but over time, the more trained our brains are through education and social norms, the more clogged our brains become with the way things are or the way things should be.

But why is it important, you may wonder.

Loose thinking is important because it brings us fresh perspectives in looking into the problems we face in our everyday lives, in finding solutions and new ideas for products or services or a completely new way of conducting business altogether.

For a simple or major breakthrough, we need to loosen up our thinking.

The Polaroid camera is an example of the fresh angles naivet‚ can bring.

After posing for some photographs, Jennifer Land, aged 3, asked her father how long it would be until she could see them. Her father, inventor Edwin Herbert Land, followed up on her question and invented the Polaroid camera.

While being naive has its merits for fresh thinking, we wouldn't want to remain in a naive state forever -- knowledge and know-how also have their merits.

After seeing something with a fresh mind, it takes knowledge and know-how to develop and refine an idea into something useful or effective.

'Thinking something different'

While most of us would throw out a moldy dish as a knee-jerk reaction, Alexander Fleming observed that the bacteria around the mold growing in a lab dish had died, and thereby discovered penicillin.

From this initial discovery in 1928, it took more than a decade and much more researchers' tinkering before penicillin was first used as a drug for medical treatment in 1941.

As Hungarian-U.S. biochemist, Albert Szent-Gyorgyi (1893 -1986) observed: "Discovery consists of looking at the same thing as everyone else and thinking something different."

Thus we said to our 12-year-old friend Calvin, who still looks at the world with a fresh mind in the midst of being educated and asked him: Without having to give up our accumulation of knowledge (which is obviously very useful), how can we maintain a fresh mind with which to question the world around us or to get new ideas?

So what tips did we get in maintaining freshness in our thinking?

• Sit around and observe your surroundings. What questions do you have?
• Get bored, that will get you started with your thinking.
• Wake up with a question, especially if you have just had a dream.
• Observe children without interfering with their interactions and learn from how they see the world.
• When you see an everyday object, try to see the object in a different way. Calvin used the sofa as an example. We normally think of a sofa as on object to sit on, but we can also think of a sofa as something to jump on because of its springs and the soft landing it provides.

Our experience in working with children tells us that they are invaluable resources when a new perspective is needed. Our experience with children enabled us to see (and use) garden lamps as stoves to fry eggs on, to discuss the possibility of converting body fat into an alternative source of energy and in exploring engineering possibilities for dams on the beach.

Thus, we also suggest the following:

• Give children objects or pictures they have never seen before (this will be very helpful to you if the object of picture is a product you need to develop or improve) and ask them what they think it is; what they think it does; how they think it works and what their opinions are of the object.
• When you happen to be with children, don't talk down to them. Have a "proper" conversation with them and learn how children see the world or their environment.

Both of these suggestions also work with people from different age groups, cultures, backgrounds or professional training.

Austen, aged 7, suggested to laminate cars in response to the question of how to preserve them. This may also be an idea a tukang laminating might come up with.

A doctor may suggest an anti-aging injection and a funeral director may suggest the use of formalin to preserve cars. If you don't have access to such a diversity of people, imagining yourself to be someone else and asking what would this person think of may bring you the freshness you need in your thinking.

Let your imagination run free

W.W. Gordon and G. M. Prince, co-developers of a problem-solving technique called Synectics, described the process of "fresh" thinking as "making the familiar strange". This means breaking existing mental connections to see things in a new way.

In synectics, analogy is the mechanism used by people to deliberately make the familiar strange.

Without having to go through the whole process of synectics, G.A. Davis, in his book Creativity is for Forever, suggested that we stimulate our analogical thinking by asking the following questions:

• What else is like this?
  
• What have others done?
• What could we copy?
• What has worked before?

When we ask these questions to think of ways of how related problems have been solved (direct analogy), Davis suggested that examples from nature are effective triggers for generative thinking.

For example, in finding a solution to packaging potato chips without breaking them and to reduce shipping costs, Pringles Potato Chips copied the example of wet leaves from nature -- wet leaves pack snugly together without breaking.

We can also use personal analogy, imagining ourselves to be part of the problem we are trying to solve.

Einstein imagined himself to be traveling on a sunbeam, which inspired his theory of relativity. Oka, our co-worker, has a beloved Vespa (with an attitude) that had a rear lamp that did not work.

Imagining himself to be his feisty Vespa ("Don't do anything funny with me, don't even think about it!"), Oka conceded defeat and found his solution in hanging a light in a tube around his neck that dangles on his back when he takes his Vespa out.

The simplest thing we can do to stimulate the freshening of our minds is literally to think twice about something.

Kayee is staring at a dictionary that is on her desk at the moment; in pushing herself to think twice about the dictionary, she no longer sees a book filled with words and their explanations, but a fan in the form of a ball of flapping papers.

We can deliberately freshen up our thinking by being around imaginative people (young or old), freeing up our minds to imagine and being curious about our surroundings.

We can imagine ourselves to be other people -- part of the problem we are trying to solve or look for examples in nature for inspiration.

Imagination is our mental freshener, make sure you have yours handy.

Balancing Efficiency with Creativity

The Jakarta Post, Features, July 29, 2007
Published as "How to balance efficiency with creativity"
Dewi Susanti & Kayee Man


Any company or institution needs to have a workable system in order for the organization to function properly. For most of us, our first instinct is to ensure effectiveness and efficiency in such a way that productivity and therefore profit-making can be maximized.

As part of planning, and in relation to the future projection of what we aim to achieve, we often need to create a plan along with a system that organizes people and supporting instruments to nourish the plan. We maintain that people and instruments of support should abide by this system in order to achieve the goal.

But we should be aware that the system, rather than serving to support the plan and the goal, often turns into rules that become set in stone. This means that adhering to the rules to achieve a goal becomes more important than the goal itself. As such, it doesn't provide enough room to accommodate changes, to respond to opportunities that we find along the way and, more importantly, to encourage creativity to occur during the process.

Through this article, we aim to discuss how a rigid system could also mean not taking advantage of the ability of human resources to be creative and to make decisions. We will give several examples of work systems that undermine or encourage human capacity, and invite suggestions for how we might strike a balance between creativity and efficiency.


Efficiency vs. flexibility

In the past three years, Dewi has been thinking about going back to school. She started applying for scholarships and, last year, passed the application process and was nominated as a candidate to receive a scholarship for a PhD program. She applied for several, and was accepted into a master's program at a top university of her first choice. Assuming that scholarship programs were created for giving suitable and motivated candidates an opportunity to study, Dewi appealed that her scholarship application fund the master's program.

She met with the executive director of the institution administering the scholarships and was informed that the scholarship she had been nominated for could not be used to support the master's program and that the institution had little authority over the decision-making process for the scholarship program.

She was advised to reapply for the scholarship program, which could specifically be used for the master's program. The application process would take another year. While she realized that the system must have been made in order to avoid individual bias over a candidate, the institution's role had been diminished to the rigid administrative processing of the applications.

The system not only undermined the thinking abilities of the people who work for the institution, but also wasted resources unnecessarily.

The advice to reapply entailed that the institution would have lost its human resources time and a considerable amount of funding that had been used to help Dewi get into a university. Multiply this by the hundreds of candidates that have been in similar conditions with Dewi over the course of decades and you will get a picture of the huge loss that could have been used to fund more scholarships instead.

A system designed for effectiveness in this case had resulted in a stifling of individual contribution, wasteful use of resources and, in Dewi's view, missing the aim of the organization for which it was established.

This example represents one of the many traps that are often encountered at large companies and institutions. How do we create an accountable and efficient system while allowing individual contribution and flexible decision-making?

*****

3M is another example of how growth can stifle individual contribution. The company is well-known for its inventiveness. Many of its products, like Post-it notes, masking tape, Scotch cellophane tape were products that 3M literally stumbled upon, rather than invented out of purposeful and planned strategy. 3M's inventiveness is often attributed to its rule that allows employees to allocate up to 15 percent of their time to projects that are a product of their own interests.

Yet, a recent article in Business Week Online (June 11, 2007) indicated that even 3M stumbled on hard times when it came to remaining innovative in this highly competitive world. In the past decade, the company has not produced anything that could justify its legacy. The article reported that it was due to a different shift in the management of the company, and the introduction of Six Sigma as an attempt to make 3M more efficient.

This more efficient system apparently also stifled creativity at 3M. Indeed, effective and efficient systems do not seem to go along well with encouraging individual creativity and decision-making.

How, we wonder, may we bring the two together?
The answer seems to be counterintuitive: loosen up the system.


Creativity can boost effectiveness

We shall illustrate this with the example of the architecture of Stata Building, the center for Computer Sciences and Artificial Intelligence at MIT, designed by Frank Gehry who is most well-known for his Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.

Architectural critic Robert Campbell recently wrote about the building with lots of unprogrammed (unplanned for) space: " ... an efficiency expert would call it a total waste," and pointed to the incoherent organization of the corridors that causes people to get lost in the building.

But most of the occupants seem to love the incoherent organization of the corridors that put them into chance meetings with people from different departments, and for the many unprogrammed spaces that allow informal chats and meetings to happen across the disciplines.

In an interview with Frank Gehry, Campbell revealed that the architect intended for the seemingly obscure organization of the corridors and spaces because the brief specified: " ... there are seven separate departments that never talk to each other. [But] when they talk to each other, if they get together, they synergize and make things happen, and it's gangbusters." (Business Week Online, June 19, 2007.)

This brings us to the point that creativity can provide effective solutions to problems. The process of getting there and the outcome often do not take us through the most efficient way, but if it effectively solves the problem, should we not give more room for creativity?

Effective and efficient systems would, as in our effective and efficient building example above, see unprogrammed systems and spaces as wasteful, and accordingly, decisions would be made for what is seemingly optimally and financially more viable.

But as we have seen from both 3M and the Stata Building examples, if anything, it is the unprogrammed spaces and systems that provide buffer zones for creative ideas to happen.

Allowing time for employees to come up with new ideas has been shown by research to be an essential element for creativity to occur within an organizational context. Yet again, this is counterintuitive to the efficient systems espoused by highly organized workplaces.

The challenge is how to create a system that allows enough room for flexibility and creativity while at the same time ensuring that the system is not so relaxed that efficiency and productivity are undermined. This challenge also lies in finding the appropriate laxity within a specific culture.

*****

In the first four years since the founding of our company, Kayee set out a company policy for flexible working hours. Anyone could come in late or leave early as long as deadlines were met and meetings started on time. Realizing that people have different productive times and sometimes have to take care of personal matters, the aim of this policy is to cater to individual needs while still tapping into their productive and creative hours.

But over the course of the years, it became harder and harder to maintain such a system, because people came in late even when meetings had been announced in advance, and deadlines were not met.

What Kayee realized in the end was that it would take a high level of self-discipline and individual respect for the system and everyone involved for the system to work. In the end, to her great dismay, Kayee abolished flexible working hours.

An overly rigid system stifles individual creativity. We are still searching for the organizational formula for the laxity needed for creativity in an efficient system, within an Indonesian cultural context (or is it our company culture?).

How might we create a buffer zone for creativity within an Indonesian context? All suggestions are welcome.

On Self Motivation

The Jakarta Post, Features, July 15, 2007
Published as "How to maintain self-motivation"
Kayee Man & Dewi Susanti

Oka, our coworker, recently asked Kayee: what keeps you going when you're motivation is low?Specifically, he was referring to work. Off the top of her head, Kayee answered that it was a vision of her future that keeps her going when it gets tough. She also answered on behalf of Dewi -- it wasn't that difficult. Dewi prefers working to socializing, so when she's in the office, work is her only option, really.

We're surrounded by people with varying levels of motivation. We hit a trough in the office when the configuration of people with low motivation resulted in what appeared to be more like a plague of the unmotivated. We are a small team and the phenomenon recurs periodically. At times, it really does feel like a chronic disease that is incurable.

Money can only motivate people so far: We can always dangle a carrot in front of people to edge them along, but the carrot doesn't seem to stretch that far along the path of motivation. Goals and challenges are useful as motivators if they are meaningful to individuals.

We, being idealists, believe that the key to a successful organization is to have a team of intrinsically motivated people. That is, people who work because they get self-satisfaction from what they do and because they want to do what they have to do. Which brings us back to our coworker's question: What enables us to keep working when we're not really in the mood to do what we have to?

Kayee has already suggested looking to the future. When confronted with a task that she'd really prefer to leave until tomorrow (ideally, for all eternity), what boots Kayee into action is the big picture she has in mind for what she wants to achieve.

Also, seeing how a task, which she'd love to see disappear by the wave of a magic wand, actually fits into the big picture. When the dreaded task realizes itself as a necessary piece of the jigsaw of one's vision of life, one would or should just get on with it.

Of course, this requires one to have a strong vision of oneself in the future. Lets call it a self-vision. Martin Luther King set us a great example when he said, "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.'"


Self-discipline strategies

Even with strong self-vision, to crank out the work that is the bane of one's life requires self-discipline: "I shall not leave my chair until this piece of writing is done. I shall reward myself with a long chitchat with friends when the 50 powerpoint slides are done" are just a couple of strategies Kayee uses. Kayee's biggest motivator for being self-disciplined in getting work done is the image of an evening at home without a laptop on her bed.

Dewi does not think that she is as self-disciplined as her brother who would wake up early on weekend mornings and run for an hour and do weightlifting for two hours in the afternoons (she would rather sleep in or lounge), or like her architect friends who would enter competitions just to entertain their minds. So Dewi's strategy for being self-disciplined is to set goals that have externalities to them. These can come in several ways.

The first is to be mindful that missing a deadline will affect other people. Being immersed in a team means that if she (or anyone else) misses the deadline, it will affect other people's work and the progress of the team. Dewi just would not want to bear the responsibility of dragging the whole team back and being on the blame.

The second externality is to align some of her work with goals that are set up by external institutions. In anything she does, she likes to think how doing one thing can serve more than one goal.

For example, while teaching an architectural studio, she would combine it with researching on how students learn, what modules tick them off more than others, what motivates them, etc. While doing this, she would think of how what she has learned could fit into a theme for a conference or seminar somewhere with set deadlines for submission of abstract and paper. If one goal fails to motivate her (for example students being lazy), then she has another to look forward to.

But apart from these externalities, like most people who challenge themselves to do something, Dewi would incrementally raise her own bar in doing things.

Like her brother who would incrementally add either time or weight or speed to his exercises, Dewi would incrementally challenge herself to do better training (albeit using the same underlining module), not to repeat what she has done before or the way she has done it, to aim for more prestigious conferences or seminars, etc.

Now, self-discipline calls for self-control. Kayee must confess that, at times, it takes nothing less than being handcuffed to her laptop to control herself from moving away from her work space to the point of distraction.

We see it a lot happening in our office: the inability to control one's body and mind to physically be at a work station and mentally be focused on some task. If being strong-willed isn't your forte, we suggest the following: Lock yourself in an empty room and give someone the key.


Learning from our mistakes

What we have witnessed over the years is the tendency to apportion blame when work doesn't get done. The problem with this is that we tend not to blame ourselves when things don't go as planned at work. We blame others: The system, the policies, the process, the management, the leadership are common victims of blame.

Our contention isn't that the above are never the cause of work failures, but that a lack of self-management is often as much to blame as external forces when things go wrong or do not get done at work.

After sitting down with a number of coworkers for a chat (read: "tell me why your work isn't done"), Kayee can conclude with some authority: A big contributor to why workers don't get work done is because they cannot manage their time and tasks. Which leads us to our next point: we need to self-reflect.

Self-reflection is a very uncomfortable process, because it often means admitting to our own shortcomings and failures. Perhaps in Kayee's cases, these have been so blatantly clear that attempting to lay blame on others would just be a waste of energy. Now, we know better than to get into self-defense mode; when things go wrong, we ask ourselves how and why did things go wrong and what was our role in the failed process.

Having a sense of humor helps, as does accepting the fact that we can't be perfect and as the cliche goes ... we can all learn from our mistakes and failings and be better workers. Self-reflection deflects self-defense. We really should start doing some serious thinking when everything and everyone else is at fault except me.

Finally, self-reflection should lead to self-adjustment. What have I learned? What did I do well? What should I do differently in the future? What should I do to do better next time? are only some examples of what we should expect from productive self-reflections. In short, a future self-image can drive us to be self-disciplined in our work. This can keep us going when our motivation is low to complete tasks.

Being self-disciplined requires self-control and self-management. Self-management requires one to self-reflect so that we can self-adjust. What is the result of all this?

Harry Emerson Fosdick said it best: "No horse gets anywhere until he is harnessed. No stream or gas drives anything until it is confined. No Niagara is ever turned into light and power until it is tunneled. No life ever grows great until it is focused, dedicated, disciplined."

Admittedly, it can be very tiring mentally to have to be on top of all things at all times. What does our friend Oka do when he has reached this point? He watches movies and reads inspiring books. Dewi signs up for yoga retreats. It's called self-rejuvenation!

Vision & Change

The Jakarta Post, Features, 1 July 2007
Published as "Vision, change and life goals"
Dewi Susanti & Kayee Man

As you go about your daily life and routine, both personally and professionally, how often do you wonder where your life is heading and how your present activities might contribute to your life in the future? Or do you tend to live for the day and not get too worried about where you are heading in life?

Having a personal goal, a vision for a company, an objective for a project are all important things to have -- or so we've heard from many.

But as most of us know by experience, our path toward a goal, a vision, or an objective, doesn't come in a straight red-carpeted line with people on both sides to cheer us on along the way. More often than not, the road toward our intended destination is obscure, dotted with roundabouts, full of ups and downs with seemingly no road signs or people around to guide us.

Alternatively, there is a temptation to dwell in a cozy corner we have encountered and be reluctant to move on. When we have a clear view of what's before us, surrounded by people whose company we enjoy and love, why would we choose to set our feet on an unclear path?

Why leave a comfort zone you already have now for an obscure goal that you may or may not achieve? Sure, if it gets you to where you want to be, the chances are you will feel more satisfied. But there is also the risk of losing the security you already have -- security that you will most likely never get back if you took the plunge.

This contemplation may come to most people who are going through major change in their lives -- be it personally or professionally -- such as those thinking about leaving a job, changing their career path or moving to a foreign place or country.

Similarly, companies are also faced with having to make major decisions. These may require them to cut back on employees, change regulations, terminate production or alter lines of business.

Change is a natural course of life. As noted by Henry A. Wallace, "The only certainty in life is change". Prevailing circumstances can force change to happen, but at other times, deliberate change is needed to realign one's self.

Yet if we have a clear goal, vision, or direction, we may not have to worry so much about the risks involved.

Here's why: When someone makes a decision, he is really diving into a strong current that will carry him to places he had never dreamed of when he first made the decision. We wished we had come up with that preceding sentence, but real credit is due to Paulo Coelho in his best-selling book The Alchemist.


Many ways to Rome

Like sailing in the sea, life often takes us to experiences and places we had never dreamed of. Like getting to a destination in the sea, life very much represents the Indonesian saying of banyak jalan menuju Roma (there are many ways leading to Rome); as in the sea, there is no set road leading to the destination.

Yet, like sailing in the sea, without a goal, the boat will drift away with no set trajectory and, at the end of the day, the boat will probably get lost in the big ocean, going nowhere. Of course, the journey of life itself can mean as much as reaching a goal. Perhaps we'll use an illustration from The Alchemist to make our point.

The Alchemist tells a story about a shepherd boy who wants to find the secret of turning metal into gold. While on his way to find an alchemist who would become his teacher, the boy meets a man who gives him a spoon filled with oil, and asks him to take the spoon around a city without spilling the oil.

Seeing this as a test, the boy had his focus on the oil, making sure it doesn't spill. When he returns, however, the man asks him what he saw in the city. The boy admits he didn't see anything. So the man sends him off again, to make sure the boy would see the city the second time around. Having never visited the city, the boy was really excited, forgot about the oil in the spoon and spilled all of it.

The man then said: "The secret of happiness is to see all the marvels of the world, and never to forget the drops of oil on the spoon".

Like the boy, we tend to be either focused on the drops of oil -- the objective of one's life at any given moment -- or on the marvels of the world, the enjoyment of living itself. Although a balance between the two is hard to find, it is not impossible to align what we are currently working on with our objectives in life, and enjoy the process at the same time. Just for good measure, we must also throw in the need and ability to adapt to or create change along the way.

In their highly acclaimed book Built to Last, James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras maintain that it is not enough for a company to have a goal. In their words: "But core ideology alone, as important as it is, does not -- indeed cannot -- make a visionary company. A company can have the world's most deeply cherished and meaningful core ideology, but if it just sits still or refuses to change, the world will pass it by."


Boeing policy for change

The authors tell the story of the time Boeing, which up until the World War II was producing military airplanes, decided to develop a prototype for commercial jet aircraft. The decision was made despite the fact that 80 percent of their business had come from the Air Force, the sales reports for commercial airlines in both the United States and Europe were not interested in a commercial jet from Boeing and that the prototype would cost them roughly a quarter of Boeing's entire corporate net worth.

Boeing's decision made it become a major player in the commercial aircraft industry and brought the jet age into commercial airline traveling. Boeing also left behind McDonnell-Douglas, which "made the explicit decision to stick with piston propellers and take a cautious wait-and-see approach to commercial jet aircraft. Douglas waited and saw Boeing fly right past and seize dominant control of the commercial market. ... in 1958, Douglas introduced the DC-8, but never caught up with Boeing" (Collins & Porras, 1991, p.91-92).

If we pay close attention to the changes that have occurred in the past decades, we will realize that changes have happened at an exponential rate in comparison to previous decades. Informational technology is probably the most obvious example of life-altering changes.

Nowadays, a personal computer (PC) is a common feature in a household. Most of us reading The Jakarta Post are likely to have one computer in our offices and another at home. Yet, the PC is a foreign, intimidating object for people of our parents' generation.

Our ability to adapt to these changes is the key to our being able to survive and compete within the workforce. And if we want to stay ahead -- set the trend, so to speak -- the chances are we will have to create changes that others will have to adapt to.

In the words of Sam Walton, founder of Wal-Mart, "You can't just keep doing what works one time, because everything around you is always changing. To succeed, you have to stay out in front for that change."

To reiterate: it is important to have an objective in life either in the form of personal aspiration or a vision for a company. Yet, while living toward this objective, we should also enjoy the marvels of the world and be open to and even drive changes.

Resistance to change is a major block to creativity and problem solving (James L. Adams, professor emeritus at Stanford University).

Without our openness to and drive for change, we will not only undermine the achievement of our own life goals but also shut out our own chances of contributing to progress in society.

Admitting Mistakes

Features, The Jakarta Post, June 17, 2007
Published as "Admitting mistakes crucial to seeking solutions"
Kayee Man and Dewi Susanti

Sorry seems to be the hardest word, coos Elton John.

Whether it is the hardest word to say or not, Kayee's friend advises people in romantic relationships that during moments of tension "Always say sorry first, then find out what you have done wrong."

A little extreme perhaps, but from Kayee's field research, also proven to be very effective.

Saying sorry is effective. Just imagine how you would feel if you have been offended or wronged by a person; what would be your reaction if the person did not want to acknowledge his or her mistake and to apologize for it?

The chances are you would hold a negative feeling against the person and would probably share such sentiments in your social circles. Even the most positive-minded people need emotional outlets.

Let's say you "couldn't give a toss" about the person you have offended. Why would saying sorry -- no matter how hard it is -- still be important?

If our human tendency is to tell others how we have been wronged, the offender's reputation would be marred. This happens in everyday working and in public relationships.

If word of mouth is your best marketing tool, then word of mouth can also be your worst negative publication. Whether you say sorry or not when it is needed will affect your reputation and integrity.

So what are you like when it comes to saying sorry? Why do some people find it harder to say sorry than others? We would venture to guess that pride and ego hold some of us back in saying it.

Whilst we can be here all day discussing why many of us find it hard to admit mistakes, we know for sure that not admitting a mistake when it has been made can be very detrimental -- not only for personal relationships but also for seeking solutions.

Depending on the nature of the mistake, not admitting one can possibly have catastrophic consequences.

Sydney Finkelstein wrote in his book Why Smart Executives Fail how, in the year 2000, the Japanese company Snow Brand did not react to reports of outbreaks of food poisoning caused by their milk product until some 60 hours after the first reported incidents.

Five days after the first reported incident, some 6,000 people had become sick. According to Finkelstein, "consumers and the media were outraged that top executives in Tokyo had not even acknowledged the incident, let alone taken responsibility" (p. 116).

He attributed the occurrence of this event to the company's culture where it was not acceptable to make or admit mistakes.

Admitting mistakes is really a two-step process: Acknowledge you have made a mistake or done wrong, then apologize. The more positive-minded would add another step to the process: Learn from the mistake and improve the situation if necessary.


One bad thing leads to another

Compare Snow Brand's reaction to a corporate mistake of Johnson and Johnson's. In 1982, the latter recalled 30 million bottles of Tylenol pills after seven people died from cyanide-laced pills (Time magazine, April 30, 2007).

Imagine if Johnson and Johnson did not admit to this shortcoming in their packaging? How many more people might have died could be anyone's guess.

Johnson and Johnson, however, chose to deal with the situation and introduced tamper-proof packaging.

In Finkelstein's book, it was reported that recently, American budget airline JetBlue's CEO David Neeleman embarked on a week-long media apology tour following 100,000 travelers being stranded after "bad weather decimated its operating ability -- in one case JetBlue passengers were left on a snowed-in runway for more than nine hours."

Neeleman was reported to have used the "s" word in national newspaper ads: "Words cannot express how truly sorry we are for the anxiety, frustration and inconvenience that you, your family, friends and colleagues experienced."

To improve the situation, Neeleman implemented a customer Bill of Rights and promised to reimburse customers for similar events in the future.

Whilst admitting corporate mistakes may be necessary as a dual-pronged approach to positive public relations and convincing customers to continue the consumption of a product, we have many lessons to learn from these stories from a damage-control or mini-crisis management perspective.

Dewi and a colleague recently started a creativity training course with some university students, arranged through the faculty of the university.

The first session started an hour after its initial schedule. In the second session, more than half of the students did not show up for class and, to rub salt in the wound, the students who did turn up were again an hour late. Dewi and her colleague decided consequently to cancel the training.

The faculty was more apologetic to the students who did turn up than to the two of them.

Dewi and her colleague explained to the faculty that they could not go through with the training if students did not commit to it, and that their positions as outsiders did not make it possible for them to speak directly with the students.

Obviously, the two were not happy with the incident.

So what happened next? Bad public relations for the offenders -- which was exactly what happened to the university in question.

Bad attitude of the students, equally bad attitude of the faculty and poor handling of the situation by the faculty were the news of the day.

Are we not all too familiar with a situation such as this in our everyday working lives?

Then came a twist in events. The following day, the administrator from the university called. He apologized for the students' behavior. He admitted and apologized for being defensive. He offered a solution to ensure the incident would not occur again.

Positive news of the faculty spread. Appreciation of his courageous conduct improved how we viewed his integrity as a person. Damage to personal relationships was fixed.


Being constructive

Whilst the kind of mistakes we make in our everyday lives may not cause catastrophes or affect too many people, negative outcomes of not admitting our mistakes can nonetheless have detrimental consequences.

As we have already mentioned, personal relationships can be damaged. More importantly, doors to solution-finding remain stubbornly locked.

Admitting a mistake and apologizing for it is key -- if not crucial -- to unlocking the door to find a positive way forward.

As we have noted, it's not easy to admit you have made a mistake. See mistakes from this perspective instead: Who doesn't make mistakes?

Even the smartest people in our times admit to making mistakes.

An example is Samuel Johnson, regarded as one of England's greatest literary figures and a lexicographer. According to AskOxford.com, he defined "pastern" as the "knee" of a horse (it is in fact a part of the horse's foot), and when asked why, he simply replied, "Ignorance, Madam, pure ignorance."

Secondly, we also know it's extremely hard for some of us to say "I'm sorry." Considering, though, the big cost to our reputation, we should definitely consider other ways.

Here are some alternatives: "Please forget about what I've said or done"; "I shouldn't have said or done that"; "I know it would've been better if I did this instead"; "The way I behaved wasn't right, can we try again?"; "I thought about what happened."

For the brave: "It was purely my mistake."

Kayee has observed that even young people have found a way to admit mistakes without denting their street-cred.

If you ever want to try it their way, try saying: "Sorry, my bad." ("My bad" here means "my mistake".) To indicate "We're good", follow with a high-five, casually done.

In addition, if face-to-face apologies prove too taxing for apology newbies, there are different ways to send the message, too: over the telephone, text messages, e-mail, apology card, flowers, chocolates, balloons.

If you can imagine it, you can use it.

Sorry may be the hardest word to say. But saying sorry can reverse ill feelings, open the way to finding solutions, and may even result in improvement of your personal and professional reputation.

Don't let your pride and ego become blocks to the path of constructive action.

Creativity vs. Efficiency

An interesting article on 3M's struggle between efficiency and creativity at Business Week.

Overcoming Miscommunication at Work

Features, The Jakarta Post, 27 May 2007
Dewi Susanti & Kayee Man

Have you ever felt frustrated with your coworkers or employees because they do things that are counterproductive to what you or your team are doing?

If you are not an especially patient and forgiving person, the chances are you would respond yes to this question. Even if you are an especially patient and forgiving person, we bet you have also encountered such frustrations.

Excuses could range from misunderstanding, miscommunication, misaligned goals and so on. Fair enough. But if this happens repeatedly, it feels easier just to drop everything and quit. In the long run, such situations can only affect the bottom line of any organization negatively.

This article will focus more specifically on the issue of miscommunication -- what causes the situation, and how to overcome it.


Assumptions and interpretations

Several weeks ago, in working with her team to achieve a goal, Dewi e-mailed to her coworkers what she expected from each one of them. Soon enough, she received e-mails from a colleague with some questions. Dewi clarified what she meant to the whole team and since she didn't receive any follow-up e-mails, assumed her message had gone through clearly.

A few days later, one team member asked to meet with Dewi. Lets call her Jo. Jo told Dewi that Sam, another team member, had misinterpreted Dewi's e-mail. Instead of asking questions to clarify, Sam went ahead and apparently overlooked the work that had been done by Jo. Like any normal person, Jo was livid. After sorting the problem out with Jo and Sam, Dewi reflected on what happened, in the hope of avoiding similar frustrations from flaring up in the future.

Dewi identified three factors at work that cause miscommunication: First, the communicator and his assumptions. Second, the receiver and her interpretations. Third, the interpersonal skills of both communicator and receiver.

What assumptions do communicators make? In our example, the communicator delivered a message to another person and an assumption was made that an absence of response meant a clear message was given and that the message was completely understood by the other person. Complications arise when communicators are in superior positions to receivers of the message. The receivers may not ask any questions for fear of asking wrong or stupid questions that may reflect badly on them.

The second factor relates to how receivers interpret messages from the communicator. Have you ever played the game Chinese whispers or watched the television show where a group of people stand in a row and relay a message from one end to the other by whispering? If you have, then you would know that by the time the message gets to the last person, the content of the message is distorted from its initial form and meaning. Often in games like this, the receivers of the message are not allowed to ask questions, which exacerbates the distortion of the message's content.

The third factor that causes miscommunication is the interpersonal skills of both the communicator and the receiver. These skills are our ability to understand other people and to look at things from other people's points of view.


Communication preferences

So how do we rid ourselves of these culprits of miscommunication?

One of the key factors is honing our interpersonal skills, both as a communicator and receiver of messages. When we want to communicate something, it helps to know whom we are communicating with and what their background is. This information can help us figure out what the intended receivers may or may not be interested in and how we can get through to them. When we are the receivers of the message, the same rules apply. The more we know about who is communicating with us and what their intention is, the more likely we can gauge what message they want to pass on to us.

From our example above, it should be clear that asking questions and clarifying meanings also prevent miscommunications from occurring. Receivers will not make the wrong interpretations and communicators will not assume receiver understanding. Making sure that everyone is "on the same page" is one of the very basic things we can do to ensure effective communication.

As part of our understanding of the people we are communicating with and to enhance the clarification process, it helps to know one's preferred means of communication.

From our observations, some people prefer meeting in person to communicate with others, some talking on the phone, others communicating through written means. Have you ever met people who seem to be constantly in meetings? Call them at any time of the day and they are mostly with other people, be it at meetings, at this or that restaurant or cafe.

There are those who prefer talking on the phone. You never see them without their cell phone and if for one reason or another their cell phone died, they get rather jittery.

Lastly, there are those who prefer communicating through e-mail. This group is happiest when they can be connected to the high-speed Internet. They are happy working away in front of a computer screen, and can sit for many hours without getting bored. They go to a great extent to avoid meetings or calls, much preferring to use text messages, e-mail or e-chatting. Those who prefer to meet in person are not likely to respond to communication sent via written means.

As an example, Kayee had been communicating with a university associate for over a month without any response. She made a phone call to the associate to confirm the death of the project. Lo and behold, it only took a phone call to breathe life back into it!

On the other hand, those who prefer to communicate through written means usually do not like meetings. If you are dealing with people who like to meet, communicating with them through text messages, e-mails, or chatting may not be the way to go -- especially if you have something urgent to discuss.

At the very least you should call them and ask whether or not they have read your messages. In meetings, rather than giving them soft copy, give them hard copy. Some people need to see people and things to get the message through. An understanding of others' preferred means of communication gives us clues as to how we can get through to others.

The last key to effective communication is empathetic reflection. After the initial passing on or receiving of messages, spend a little time to digest what message you think you have passed on to others, or what message you think others want to pass on to you.

If you have to communicate with a project group for a rather long period, it helps to have briefings throughout the duration of a project to improve communication within the team and to check in with team members that all are still moving in the same direction toward the same goal.

*****

To recap, communication can be improved, first by asking ourselves what kind of assumptions we are making and whether or not they are correct. Second, we need to question what kind of interpretations can be made from the message, and whether or not they are correct. Third, we should try to reverse our role and understand the message from others' standpoints. Knowing others' preferred means of communication will help. Fourth, it doesn't hurt to ask questions and clarify the messages, and to check in with one another to ensure we have indeed made the right assumptions and interpretations.

An Indonesian proverb sums it succinctly for us: Malu bertanya, sesat di jalan (if you are shy in asking questions, you will get lost on the way).

Being in Control of Your Thinking

The Jakarta Post, Features - 13 May 2007
Kayee Man & Dewi Susanti


Have you ever felt your life is spinning out of control? Kayee feels it all the time. A few years ago, she read an academic piece that suggested a balanced life is a myth. She has never agreed more. Dewi feels her life is out of control in other ways. At times, she has felt her life is being taken over by people she doesn't even know!

Many of us feel our lives are beyond our control one way or the other, so much so that sometimes we are not aware that we are living lives that in most parts are made of small choices that we can control. These small choices are conscious decisions that we have to make almost every single day of our adult lives. The decisions involve one thing that we can be in control of: our thinking. We're not talking about mind control but being in control of our thinking process.

Different circumstances call for different types of thinking. Other types are accessible to most of us, but the type of thinking that makes up creative thinking is most often identified as divergent and convergent thinking.

Divergent thinking is what we are doing when we try to look for many ideas to solve a problem. The notion that divergent thinking is a main creative ability was the result of many years of research spurred by the Presidential Address given by the eminent psychologist Guilford at the American Psychological Association back in 1950. He called for psychometric and factor-analytical approaches to distill the component abilities of the creative person. Thereafter, many associated divergent thinking with creative thinking, and often, the two terms were used synonymously. When one is generating ideas, one is thinking divergently.

Convergent thinking, on the other hand, is selecting and deciding in order to arrive at a conclusion. Critical thinking, which we do all the time, is part of convergent thinking. The role of convergent thinking was given emphasis over the past 30 to 40 years in the development of the Creative Problem-Solving model by various researchers.

When we need to think creatively, what kind of thinking do we need? Most people we have come across in training sessions have answered divergent thinking -- of course, if we need new ideas, we need to do generative or divergent thinking: true.

But what happens if we only think divergently -- if we only generate ideas? We will have a pool of ideas that's for sure, but a pool of raw and un-judged ideas. What will follow? At this point, you've probably guessed that convergent thinking is needed to sieve through the ideas in order to arrive at an idea that works and can be developed into an action plan for implementation.

Many people associate creativity with thinking only. We define creativity as generative (divergent) followed by evaluative (convergent) thinking resulting in an implementation plan and action. So the first secret to being in control of your thinking is to be able to differentiate between divergent and convergent thinking and having the ability to think both divergently and convergently.

Creative solutions need both divergent and convergent thinking. If you need to generate ideas, think divergently; if you already have the ideas and you need to select from them, think convergently. Being aware of the type of thinking you need to do will enable you to deliberately set yourself on the thinking path you need to travel on.

How can we tell when we are thinking divergently or convergently? The answer is that the two types of thinking look and feel different.

Divergent thinking looks like a bird's eye view of the world. Imagine you are in a hot-air balloon that is slowly rising above the earth, and you have with you a Polaroid camera. You are peering through the lens from afar, you travel higher and higher into the sky to expand the view of possibilities of what to shoot. With the whole world at your disposal, what do you want to capture with your camera?

After looking at the possibilities, you may decide to zoom in on a continent -- your first convergence. Once you've zoomed in, you decide to slowly bring your hot-air balloon down toward the continent and that you'll zoom further into a specific country -- your second convergence. Note now that you're able to see more detail as your view or choice of possibilities shrink.

As you are zooming in or converging, you are probably asking yourself questions: what kind of image do I want to capture? Do I want to explore culture or nature? Will zooming in on this place fulfill my purpose or desires? You are evaluating each option now leading yourself nearer and nearer to a decision.

All very well and good, but how does being able to differentiate and being aware of the types of thinking help us control our thinking?

Let's use the same example of images of the world to capture them through your polaroid lens. You start traveling high into the sky to explore possibilities. But before you have reached a reasonable height, a place catches your attention. The place caught your attention because it happened to be somewhere you know. You need to lower your balloon so you can start zooming into this place with your lens; what you see through your lens triggers your memories.

You are reminded of the last time you were there with some friends, a moving picture comes to your mind of you and your friends getting lost in the city and not having any money to return to the hostel; you were almost mobbed by some drunkards. As you are lost on this track of thought, you shiver and bring yourself back to the real world. You ask yourself, where are you? What are you doing? Then you remember that you were supposed to be exploring. Exploring ... that's right, exploring possibilities for interesting shots! Now where were you in your thinking?

Zooming in on the place you knew brought you on a thought detour. Having been brought back to where you were supposed to be, mentally, you start thinking of other alternatives of where to go for the shooting.

You raise your hot-air balloon again so you can zoom out until you are met with another place and are reminded of ... there you go again, you take another thought detour!

What was happening with your search for possibilities here? You started to zoom out or diverge on your possibilities but you didn't get very far because each time something caught your attention, you immediately zoomed in or converged and lost track of your divergent path.

Here we come to the second secret of creative thinking: diverge first before you converge. This makes logical sense, but in our habitual way of thinking, we rarely allow ourselves to truly diverge before converging.

If we learn to be aware of our own thinking, we can reset our thinking once we become aware that we not engaging in productive thought.

If we go back to our first snippet, of flying higher and higher up into the sky (divergent thinking -- zooming out) resulting in seeing many possibilities before we zoom in (convergent thinking), our divergent thinking is not interrupted because we have suspended our judgment momentarily. Our divergent thinking is not disrupted by thoughts of critical evaluation or convergent thinking.

Our second snippet of zooming out in our thoughts but zooming in immediately before we have built up a pool of possibilities illustrates how the process of thinking up ideas can be disrupted by unproductive thoughts.

Next time you need to think up new ideas, zoom right out before you start zooming in to hone in on your solution or answer.

Emile Chartier has said that having an idea is dangerous if it is the only idea you have. If we don't stay long enough on the path of divergent thinking, we will likely settle on the first idea that comes to mind. The first ideas that come to mind are often tried and tested -- we know them already, which is why we can recall them so quickly. In short, our idea will not be new.

On the other hand, if we stay on the path of divergent thinking for too long, we will not be able to take action, so we also need to learn to stop at some point in order to converge to a solution that works and can be implemented.

To sum up: learn to differentiate between divergent and convergent thinking. Next time you need a new idea, diverge first before you converge. Zoom right out in your thinking before you zoom in.

When you can handle your thinking just as you can zoom in or out at will like using a powerful camera lens instead of a polaroid camera, then you are in control of your thinking.

Making Decisions

The Jakarta Post
Features - 29 April 2007
Published as "Overcoming Fear of Making Decisions"

In working with employees and with students, we often come across people who are unsure of what to do when given open ended problems. This article will focus on decision making and discuss blocks that may create fear for making decisions and ways to overcome them.

In the early years of developing creative thinking in children using visual arts as a media, Kayee met a girl of seven who, when asked to choose materials, wouldn’t even move from her seat. She was very quiet to begin with, that even during one on one discussion she would only whisper her ideas. But when Kayee asked her to select the material to visualize her idea, she literally cringed.

What it took at the end was for Kayee to hold her hand while she chose among the variety. Even then, every time she picked up a material, she would ask Kayee for reassurance that it was indeed alright for her to decide.

This instance was one of the many examples we later encountered in many of our students, and not just in the young. Dewi, who also teaches design for freshman students in a private university in Jakarta, is often troubled by students who have difficulties in dealing with open ended problems. Most of them, at the beginning of the semester, would ask so many questions when being given a task, for the fear of being wrong.

Dewi usually asks them to come up with several solutions they could think of, and select one that they think would solve the problem best. But many of them usually have a hard time in selecting one out of the proposed solutions to a problem. They often ask Dewi which one she prefers or try to guess which one Dewi likes and make their decision based on this perceived preference of their lecturer.

In the first instance of the young girl, we figured her fear was not only because she was very timid, but also because she was not used to being asked to make her own decisions. After some time being with us, she eventually opened up and became more confident in making choices on her own.

What we often advise parents, teachers, and adults working with children is to give children opportunities to make acceptable choices. For example, when going out with children, we can ask them to choose what clothes they want to wear if there is no dress code to worry about. If there is a dress code, we can show them choices of clothing they can wear, and let them choose. Likewise with places to eat, snacks to buy, things to do, shoes to wear, etc.

Reassurance, encouragement, and a lot of practice in the case of the young would do the magic. With a lot of practice in making decisions for themselves, children have more confidence in their ability to think and make decisions for themselves. With a lot of reassurance and encouragement, they know that they are being trusted, which in turn will improve their self-esteem.

In the second instance of the undergrad students, Dewi often asks her students why they are afraid of making decisions. Most of them would immediately say that they are afraid of being wrong, being laughed at, or being labeled as weird. Some also say that they are used to rely on or being told which decision to make by their lecturers.

In addition to the problem of not being used to making their own decisions, older people are more aware of their social environment, and are more likely to conform to the culture they are immersed in.

In the Eastern culture, decisions are often made by the elderly or the more respected people in any given group. In previous generations, and even today, children and the younger ones don’t normally have a say in the decision making process. They grow to be dependent upon their group leaders to make decisions on their behalf.

Some, if not most, of Dewi’s students at the university level choose to major in an area either because their parents or others close to them told them to, or because it was a compromised decision, catering more to their parents’ desire than their own passion.

But as we grow older, we are more likely to be held responsible for making our own decisions. The problem is that when we are not used to making our own decisions, not only do we feel uncomfortable with the responsibility placed on us, but we may actually think that we are not supposed to make decisions.

Being conditioned not to think for themselves most of their lives, in the context of Indonesia, we have seen many repercussions from those who are not used to independent thinking, those who think they are not supposed to think, those who don’t have the confidence to make a decision based on their own judgment, those who are too lazy to think for themselves, and those who don’t want to bear the responsibility of decision making.

In the work situation, similar situations also occur although in an even more complex ensemble that may camouflage the inability to make decisions.

In work organizations in Indonesia, especially in smaller companies, specialization is rare and there are many shades of grey area between work that fall directly within our job description, and those that are definitely beyond the responsibility of our role. As a result, many of us are often demanded to multi-task. Faced with such situations, how do people deal with the extra decision making responsibilities that come with each task?

We have seen different reactions, from those who would rather stick to their job description similar to the seven year old girl who cringed at the idea of having to make a decision, those who (like Dewi’s university students) ask so many questions and need so much guidance that we would rather work on the problem ourselves to save time and frustration, to those who pretend they are working on the problem, but end up creating more problems. The challenge is how to remove the fear of making decisions so that tasks get completed without having to issue step-by-step instructions.

Similar to how we approach this problem with the young, we could start by giving the people in question small decisions to make, and to provide some supervision to ensure and reassure that the decision making process is going well. As the person gains better judgment and confidence, we can reduce the amount of supervision given while providing plenty opportunities for the individual to practice and become comfortable with making small decisions. Over time, the scale of the decisions can be increased as confidence in the decision maker and our confidence in them grow.

But what if you are one of the persons who are having difficulties in making decisions? As a start, you could try to identify what is causing the problem. It could be related to the more general reasons that we have explored in this article, but there could be more personal reasons that may require some honest self-reflection.

Similar to our previously explored strategies, you could start by giving yourself small decisions to make. When facing a problem, try to first think about possible solutions for the problem. If you feel you need more information or guidance, find an experienced person you can trust to discuss how you have thought about the problem and how you arrived at the possible solutions. Your advisor will be able to help you generate some criteria which should help guide your thinking and decision making.

Whether you are dealing with simple or complex decisions, refer to the parameters of the problem and the objectives that you are trying to achieve before evaluating and ranking the solutions based on how each would best respond to the objectives and parameters of the problem.

Be deliberate in crossing out the solutions that you know do not meet the objectives and parameters for the given problem. On the other hand, remain open to and be mindful of solutions that have potential for solving the problem that need more refinement and development. These general decision making principles are applicable whether you are making simple decisions or are using complex decision making tools in evaluating solutions.

For simple decisions, you can simply rank the solutions based on the order of personal preference. Complex solutions may require the use of evaluation tools.

However, tools and strategies only help map out the strengths and weaknesses of different solutions. Tools and strategies will not make the decision for you – their role is to help you make better-informed decisions. Afterall, if all decisions can be made by computation without an element of risk, what is the role of humans in the decision making process?

What we should aim for is to recognize that there is always an element of risk in decision-making and pluck up the courage to take those risks. In short, we need to be comfortable with the idea of making decisions and the responsibilities that come with it.

As you go about making decisions, applaud your risk taking spirit and seek people you can trust to encourage you. Celebrate your courage and the mistakes and failures along the process. Trials and errors help us become better decision makers.