Integrative Thinking

The latest management fad or the new horizon in management? Whatever may be the case, it certainly grabs your attention.
In an article in HBR (Harvard Business Review), Roger Martin, the dean of Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto tries to get into the head of successful business leaders and analyze their unique way of synthesizing conflicting ideas.
Many books have been written about the decisions and the results achieved by great executives but he takes the less trodden path to deconstruct and analyze the causality of these actions – their decision making process itself. He says that many times we have two opposing ideas in our heads. While conventional thinkers usually panic or simply settle for one alternative or the other, integrative thinkers are able to creatively resolve the tension between these two ideas by generating a new one which is an eclectic mix of the best points in both the original ideas. He has extensively studied the actions of and interviewed many highly successful executives like Jack Welch, Larry Bossidy, etc to establish his viewpoint.

What is a key takeaway from the article is his conclusion that integrative thinking is not an innate quality but may be developed and perfected over time with awareness and a conscious approach towards the integrative thinking concept. Not only was this article an interesting read, but it also got me thinking about my own personality. I used to think this as a quirk in my own thinking that whenever I am faced in a multifarious situation with equally strong and often conflicting alternatives, I tend to be very careful about taking a particular stance. Most of the times, I ponder over the matter for a long time until I am absolutely certain of the actions and their implications. In most cases, it’s not an either-or decision. For example, in the Toastmasters club that we are trying to set up, there were various views on the cost structure we can propose to the management.
1. Company pays the entire fees associated with the club.
2. The company pays only the $125 chartership fee but the membership fees should be borne by the members themselves.
Now the first option can be very effective in attracting potential new members. But the problem, I have found out from other Toastmasters with similar fee structure, is that many members register with the club just to get it on their CV but never show up again. This is certainly not desirable from the club’s point of view
While the 2nd option is very effective in getting the company’s approval, it hits the members very hard – on their pockets. So this is certainly a deterrent for any potential new member.
After discussing this over with a lot of people, I have come to the conclusion that a hybrid fee structure is the most effective solution. I present to you option 3 (drum roll):
3. Company pays $125 charter fees and $20 new member fees. But the $27 recurring fee is paid by the member himself. However, whenever the member completes say 5 speeches (50% of CTM certification), the company reimburses 50% of the fees paid by the member till date. And on completing 10 speeches (CTM certification), he gets back the rest of the membership fees paid till date.
This structure is genial on the pockets of both parties concerned and performance based as well, in the sense that a member gets back the fees based on his involvement in the club.
Now that’s integrative thinking!