Optimistic, Collaborative, Persistent. These words form an apt summary of the mindset needed to channel our creative energies – particularly when the challenge at hand appears daunting. Often, I find myself struggling for space and time to reflect on my mindset. In this age and especially in India, our culture amplifies cynicism, public discourse is divisive and the collective impulse is for instant gratification. Consequently impressions get formed. Unconsciously, my own views on the subject at hand get anchored, invariably solidifying with repetition. Lazily or otherwise, I am drawn towards well articulated opinions about how everything is wrong, who is to blame and why we need to act disruptively now – and even start believing it. I become part of the noise, the anxiety and not part of the solution.

How then, does one form an approach towards solving such problems?

I start by reminding myself of one my fundamental beliefs , of how I see the world:

If history tells us anything, it is this: we can overcome pretty much any challenge if we actively search for solutions rather than just create anxieties, if we work together constructively rather than point fingers at each other, and if we work hard to get things done rather than complain about the lack of progress.

From the article :The Secret to Unlocking the World’s Potential in an Age of Anxiety

With this lens, I’m reflecting on what I’ve read and heard & distilling those insights here on the three adjectives of the mindset – or what they mean to me.

Critically Optimistic

It would be naive to jump onto the bandwagon of optimism as an impulsive, reactionary antidote to the unpleasant feelings evoked by the noisy, negative discourse. Reflecting to ascertain if the objective response should be that of optimism would involve our ability to think critically. The initial reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic, as it evolved in China, was that of naive optimism (albeit from a distance) almost everywhere across the globe. It led to needless risk taking and poor judgement with respect to containment measures, that may now result in loss of human lives at a scale unknown in this generation.

To quote Maria Popova, “To live with sincerity in our culture of cynicism is a difficult dance — one that comes easily only to the very young and the very old. The rest of us are left to tussle with two polarizing forces ripping the psyche asunder by beckoning to it from opposite directions — critical thinking and hope“

Critical thinking without hope is cynicism. Hope without critical thinking is naïveté.

Maria Popova of Brainpickings.org in Hope, Cynicism, and the Stories We Tell Ourselves

She goes on to explain, “Finding fault and feeling hopeless about improving the situation produces resignation — cynicism is both resignation’s symptom and a futile self-protection mechanism against it. Blindly believing that everything will work out just fine also produces resignation, for we have no motive to apply ourselves toward making things better. But in order to survive — both as individuals and as a civilization — and especially in order to thrive, we need the right balance of critical thinking and hope.”

It is also true that our beliefs shape our actions & those actions, when amplified collectively, can shape the outcome. As  William Isaac Thomas articulated regarding self fulfilling prophecies, “if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences”.

How do we then reconcile these seemingly divergent ideas of optimism and critical thinking? They are only divergent if there is enough information to arrive at a clear answer, which obviates the need for optimism – a rarity when confronted with complex problems. Solving for these usually involve building scenarios, weighing probabilities and updating our understanding as things unfold. Optimism is not about ignoring contrary information, but a mindset of accepting things as they are and yet continuing to look for solutions.

Collaborate for Collective Genius

Innovation in such contexts is not about individual genius, but about collective genius, usually from people with different skill sets or perspectives. To create such environments deliberately, leaders first need to see their own roles differently. Bill Coughan who led google’s infrastructure says, “I lead a volunteer organization. Talented people don’t want to follow me anywhere. They want to co-create with me the future. My job is to nurture the bottom-up and not let it degenerate into chaos[…] I’m a human glue, I’m a connector, I’m an aggregator of viewpoints. I’m never a dictator of viewpoints.”

With this mindset, leaders set out to create, as Linda Hill, professor at Harvard and author of “Collective Genius: The Art and Practice of Leading Innovation”, says, “communities that have three capabilities: creative abrasion, creative agility and creative resolution”

“Creative abrasion is about being able to create a marketplace of ideas through debate and discourse. In innovative organizations, they amplify differences, they don’t minimize them. Creative abrasion is not about brainstorming, where people suspend their judgment. No, they know how to have very heated but constructive arguments to create a portfolio of alternatives. Individuals in innovative organizations learn how to inquire, they learn how to actively listen, but guess what? They also learn how to advocate for their point of view. They understand that innovation rarely happens unless you have both diversity and conflict.”

“Creative agility is about being able to test and refine that portfolio of ideas through quick pursuit, reflection and adjustment. It’s about discovery-driven learning where you act, as opposed to plan, your way to the future. It’s about design thinking where you have that interesting combination of the scientific method and the artistic process. It’s about running a series of experiments…”

“Final capability is creative resolution. This is about doing decision making in a way that you can actually combine even opposing ideas to reconfigure them in new combinations to produce a solution that is new and useful. When you look at innovative organizations, they never go along to get along. They don’t compromise. They don’t let one group or one individual dominate, even if it’s the boss, even if it’s the expert. Instead, they have developed a rather patient and more inclusive decision making process that allows for both/and solutions to arise and not simply either/or solutions.”

… if I’m trying to do something that’s truly new, I have no answers. I don’t know what direction we’re going in and I’m not even sure I know how to figure out how to get there

Anonymous

The process of creating collective genius is neither structured nor linear. It is collaborative but also iterative and a tad messy.

Persist, Pivot and know when to stop

Rosabeth Moss Kanter, in her HBR article, says: When you’re getting something new going, the difference between success and failure is often a matter of time: how long you give it before you give up. Efforts that begin with high hopes inevitably hit a disappointing sag. In the messy middle, unexpected obstacles pop up because the path is uncharted. Fatigue sets in. Team members turn over. Impatient critics attack just when you think you’re gaining traction. Tough challenges almost inevitably take longer and cost more than our optimistic predictions. That’s why persistence and perseverance are important for anyone leading a new venture, change project, or turnaround. But the miserable middle offers a choice point: Do you stick with the venture and make mid-course corrections, or do you abandon it?

“Everything can look like a failure in the middle.”

Kanter’s law

Remembering the objectives and rationale of the project or initiative; having well defined metrics to act as guide-rails is the starting point on good governance. Companies have also built more formal structures with “gate decisions” that are usually taken by a committee, to retain objectivity. Also having a clear set of questions to reflect on can help in remaining objective when progress and morale are low. Here is a suggested list:

Is achieving the set objective still valuable?

Are there clear alternatives, if this effort is stopped?

Is the team still committed and focused? Are adequate resources available?

Are there signs of progress? Are trends positive?

Will the situation get worse if this is stopped?

To sum it up, we use the mindset of optimistic, collaborate and persistent to bring focus on the process and not the daunting goal. We measure progress and watch the impact compounding. Like everything that compounds, we expect early results yet it takes time and a few clicks for serious momentum to become visible.