Getting beyond the left-brain/right-brain debate

Collaboration is a muscle « PREV | NEXT »: Personal communications...in bulk

Experience designer and strategist Peter Merholz over in Harvard Business Publishing calls a 'time out' on our growing boosterism for 'design thinking' in the world of business -- a la Daniel Pink's Whole New Mind. Is creative problem-solving important to the process? Sure it is, says Merholz, but so are a range of other skills and perspectives on BOTH sides of the brain. His complaint is that 'design thinking' has become such a myopic focus. Says he:

Design thinking is trotted out as a salve for businesses who need help with innovation. The idea is that the left-brained, MBA-trained, spreadsheet-driven crowd has squeezed all the value they can out of their methods. To fix things, all you need to do is apply some right-brained turtleneck-wearing "creatives," "ideating" tons of concepts and creating new opportunities for value out of whole cloth.

It's understandable for creative individuals -- especially those in the nonprofit arts -- to grab onto any business mythology that underscores their value. We certainly made hay out of Richard Florida's Rise of the Creative Class, even though many waving the book at city council members didn't actually read it (and didn't realize they were promoting bars, nightclubs, raves, and bohemian culture rather than the nonprofit arts). And we continue to milk the idea that the ''MFA is the new MBA,'' as Daniel Pink claims so famously in his work.

The problem isn't that we're wrong about the importance of creative thinking, just that we're a bit vague and overzealous about its sovereignty. Even Daniel Pink was actually arguing for a new balance, not a regime change (the book was called a WHOLE new mind, after all). And he's had trouble clarifying the position, as well (per this Washington Post response to his Nancy Hanks Lecture last year).

If artists, arts leaders, and arts organizations really want to engage the conversation about their value and importance to business, community, and beyond, we all might benefit from some critical analysis and balanced thinking. We can't just hop from slogan to slogan to slogan and expect to be taken seriously. As Merholz concludes:

The supposed dichotomy between "business thinking" and "design thinking" is foolish.... Instead, what we must understand is that in this savagely complex world, we need to bring as broad a diversity of viewpoints and perspectives to bear on whatever challenges we have in front of us. While it's wise to question the supremacy of "business thinking," shifting the focus only to "design thinking" will mean you're missing out on countless possibilities.

October 13, 2009 7:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) |

5 Comments

By karen on November 2, 2009 10:14 PM

We have an evolved brain that seeks survival. Its content is our template. Balance. Look at the whole...hello......holistic. All parts have relevance. Focus on one part to prove ones (ego) point of view blocks the function of the whole.

So as I see it (oh dear, ego?) We cannot find any answers to anything when we separate the parts from the whole and say....this part holds the key to the whole truth......this is crazy, ego driven, blind thinking....and our block to knowing anything.

By Craig Cortello on October 17, 2009 4:48 AM

Well stated. Weren't Einstein and Edison creative thinkers within the context of science.

The point that I like to make is that any creative pursuit (such as the Engineering exercises noted above or playing a guitar solo) has the effect of strengthening one's capacity for creative thought across all endeavors.

By Heather Good on October 16, 2009 10:55 AM

Great post, Andrew.

Another common misunderstanding is that creating works of art is activity that takes place purely on the "creative/right brain" side of the equation. As any working choreographer, composer, sculptor, or poet knows, it takes both sides of the brain to move ideas into structure.

By Trevor O'Donnell on October 13, 2009 11:42 AM

I was at John Zorn's fine National Arts Marketing & Development Conference last weekend where I was surprised and gratified to hear presenters describing creativity as a potential detriment to effective arts management. Too much creative thinking and too little focus on analytical thinking, as it turns out, can undermine even the most well intentioned arts initiatives. Who knew? (Full disclosure: I was one of the presenters saying this.)

Yes, we have to be careful about over-promoting the value of art in business, but to be fair, we should probably also open ourselves up to a little more business in art.

I love John Shibley's "thinking that works" idea. Maybe this is the new mantra that will bridge the divide. (I just Googled the phrase and didn't see anyone using it - anyone have time to write a book?)

By John Shibley on October 13, 2009 9:51 AM

So true. I worked as a consultant in the business world for 20 years before making the switch to the Arts. You want creative? Watch a bunch of Harley Davidson engineers wrestling with the problem of how to cool an engine without messing up a bike's aesthetic, or a group of GE plant managers designing the floor of a factory so no one gets injured. The best leaders in the profit world can't afford the luxury of self-serving distinctions between kinds of thinking -- they need THINKING, period, thinking that works -- and are gratefully agnostic about which side of the brain it comes from.