Thoughtcraft 1.3: Kinds of Thinkers
Individuals have different predilections in their thinking. These predilections may be defined in terms of the scheme I have just laid out, or in terms of some other scheme. Thus, to use my scheme, we may rightly say that so-and-so is “an explainer.” Such a person, provided the communications skills match the thought processes, is likely to be a good teacher. Similarly, we often identify a person as a visionary.
When thinking becomes an interpersonal activity, that is, when a group must think, it may be helpful or even essential that it include individual thinkers having a certain mix of predilections and skills. For example, a consumer products company may bring together its most visionary minds in order to conceive new products, but if explaining and puzzle-solving are too little present, such a group may conceive only of products which won’t work in the real world, or which the company is not well suited to produce or market.
If a person is too imbalanced in favor of a particular mode of thinking, he or she may be ill-suited to thinking with a team. If the imbalance extends to an inability to value the other modes of thought, then, as in the example just given, the visionary may resent the reality-testing supplied by explainers and puzzle-solvers. In business, it is more often the case that a company thrives for some period by understanding its environment very well, through explanatory thinking and by exploiting opportunities in that environment through puzzle-solving, but is lost when there has been no visionary thinking to predict or create environmental changes.
It is especially important that the leader of any thinking group be able to perceive and value balance in the modes of thinking.