Vertical thinking, on the other hand, is a problem-solving approach that favors a selective, analytical, structured, and sequential mindset. The focus of vertical thinking is to arrive at a reasoned, defined solution.
Aspect
Explanation
Definition of Vertical Thinking
Vertical Thinking is a problem-solving and decision-making approach that focuses on finding solutions and making decisions within the existing framework or established paradigms. It involves analyzing a problem or situation by applying existing knowledge, rules, and conventional thinking patterns. In vertical thinking, individuals or organizations typically follow a linear and structured process to reach conclusions or solve problems. This approach relies on established procedures, historical data, and accepted practices to guide decision-making. Vertical thinking is often associated with traditional and well-established industries or fields where stability and adherence to existing standards are prioritized. While it can be effective in routine situations, vertical thinking may limit the exploration of innovative or unconventional solutions. It contrasts with lateral thinking, which encourages creativity and the exploration of alternative perspectives.
Key Concepts
Several key concepts define Vertical Thinking:
– Conventional Wisdom
Conventional wisdom is a central concept in vertical thinking. It involves relying on established beliefs, procedures, and norms as the basis for problem-solving and decision-making. Decision-makers often adhere to what is considered “common sense” within their industry or field. Conventional wisdom provides a stable and familiar foundation for decision-making.
– Linear Process
Vertical thinking typically follows a linear and step-by-step process to arrive at solutions or decisions. This process may involve data analysis, rule application, and adherence to established guidelines. A linear process ensures systematic problem-solving.
– Preservation of Norms
Vertical thinking often prioritizes the preservation of existing norms and practices. Decision-makers may be hesitant to deviate from established standards and may resist change that challenges the status quo. Preservation of norms maintains stability and consistency.
– Experience-Based
Vertical thinking draws heavily on past experience and historical data. Decision-makers rely on what has worked in the past as a guide for addressing current challenges. Experience-based decision-making leverages accumulated knowledge.
Characteristics
Vertical Thinking is characterized by the following attributes:
– Structured Approach
A structured and systematic approach is a hallmark of vertical thinking. Decision-makers follow a defined process, often based on established procedures and guidelines. A structured approach ensures consistency and reliability.
– Risk Aversion
Vertical thinking tends to be risk-averse, as it prioritizes adherence to existing norms and practices. Decision-makers may be cautious about implementing new or untested ideas that could disrupt stability. Risk aversion minimizes potential disruptions.
– Incremental Progress
Progress in vertical thinking is often incremental, as it builds upon existing knowledge and practices. Innovations or changes are typically small and aimed at refining existing processes. Incremental progress ensures continuity and gradual improvement.
– Industry Compliance
Vertical thinking aligns with industry or regulatory compliance. It is well-suited for industries where adherence to established standards and regulations is critical for safety and quality. Industry compliance ensures conformity and reliability.
Examples of Vertical Thinking
Vertical thinking is commonly found in various industries and contexts:
– Manufacturing
In manufacturing, vertical thinking is prevalent when optimizing production processes and ensuring product quality. Manufacturers often rely on established quality control procedures and industry standards to maintain consistency and reliability. Vertical thinking supports manufacturing efficiency.
– Healthcare
In healthcare, vertical thinking is essential for ensuring patient safety and medical standards. Medical professionals follow established protocols, clinical guidelines, and evidence-based practices to make decisions about patient care. Vertical thinking prioritizes patient well-being and safety.
– Financial Services
In the financial industry, vertical thinking guides investment decisions based on historical market data, economic indicators, and established investment strategies. Financial analysts may use conventional portfolio management techniques and risk assessment models. Vertical thinking aims to optimize financial performance within established parameters.
– Education
In education, vertical thinking is evident in curriculum development and assessment methods. Educators often follow established educational standards and learning objectives when designing courses and evaluating student performance. Vertical thinking ensures educational consistency and alignment with learning goals.
Benefits and Considerations
Vertical Thinking offers several benefits and considerations:
– Stability and Reliability
Vertical thinking provides stability and reliability in decision-making. It ensures that decisions are based on established practices and industry norms, reducing the likelihood of unpredictable outcomes.
– Industry Compliance
In highly regulated industries, vertical thinking ensures compliance with safety, quality, and legal standards. It helps organizations avoid violations and legal issues by adhering to established guidelines.
– Efficiency in Routine Situations
Vertical thinking is efficient for routine and well-understood situations where established procedures are effective. It minimizes the need for complex problem-solving and allows organizations to operate smoothly.
– Limited Innovation
One of the considerations of vertical thinking is that it may limit innovation and the exploration of unconventional solutions. It can hinder creative thinking and the ability to adapt to rapidly changing environments. Organizations may miss out on opportunities for disruptive innovation.
Lateral thinking is a business strategy that involves approaching a problem from a different direction. The strategy attempts to remove traditionally formulaic and routine approaches to problem-solving by advocating creative thinking, therefore finding unconventional ways to solve a known problem. This sort of non-linear approach to problem-solving, can at times, create a big impact.
Lateral thinking is a creative approach to problem-solving that endeavors to break down traditional notions of vertical or conditioned thinking.
Practitioners tackle problems with reasoning that is either disruptive or not immediately obvious.
These individuals are the classic “out of the box” thinkers who use indirect methods to see problems from multiple perspectives and discover innovative solutions.
Lateral thinking is often associated with brainstorming and by extension, writer and philosopher Edward de Bono who noted that “You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper.”
The Six Thinking Hats model was created by psychologist Edward de Bono in 1986, who noted that personality type was a key driver of how people approached problem-solving. For example, optimists view situations differently from pessimists. Analytical individuals may generate ideas that a more emotional person would not, and vice versa.
The method encourages brainstorming teams to wear six colored hats with each individual adopting a specific personality whose unique perspective challenges ideas and stimulates discussion.
Understanding vertical thinking
Unfortunately, vertical thinking is how most people view the world. Vertical thinkers analyze, process, and utilize information in a sequential, patterned, or direct way to arrive at a solution.
Since each step must be relevant to the previous step before the individual can move forward, vertical thinking does not lend itself to creativity or experimentation.
Instead, decisions are made based on the best available knowledge.
Vertical thinking also places more importance on the past in determining how a current situation may have occurred or a future situation may be mitigated.
Examples and Case Studies
Innovation and Product Development: When developing new products or services, companies may use lateral thinking to come up with innovative ideas. They may organize brainstorming sessions where team members are encouraged to think outside the box and explore unconventional solutions to customer needs or market challenges.
Problem-Solving in Business: In business, lateral thinking can be applied to tackle complex problems, such as improving operational efficiency or finding new revenue streams. Teams may use techniques like mind mapping or random word association to stimulate creative thinking and generate new ideas.
Design Thinking: Lateral thinking is a fundamental aspect of designthinking, a problem-solving approach that emphasizes empathy, creativity, and experimentation. Design thinkers seek to understand users’ needs deeply and explore various solutions to meet those needs.
Entrepreneurial Ventures: Entrepreneurs often rely on lateral thinking to identify unique business opportunities and create disruptive products or services. They may challenge conventional industry practices and explore novel ways to address customer pain points.
Marketing and Advertising: In marketing and advertising, lateral thinking can lead to groundbreaking campaigns and ideas that capture consumers’ attention. Advertisers may use unexpected and creative approaches to communicate messages effectively.
Educational Approaches: In education, lateral thinking can be encouraged to foster creativity and critical thinking skills in students. Teachers may design activities that require students to think outside the box and explore different perspectives.
Personal Problem-Solving: In personal life, individuals can apply lateral thinking to find solutions to challenges they face. For example, when facing a career change, lateral thinking may involve exploring alternative career paths or creative ways to leverage existing skills and experiences.
Key takeaways:
Lateral thinking is the process of developing many creative solutions to problems without casting judgment on them. Vertical thinking is more selective and structured and uses reason to arrive at a solution.
Lateral thinkers focus on overlooked aspects of a problem, while vertical thinkers tend to look to the past to decide how to proceed in the present or the future. Lateral thinkers are also comfortable breaking free from the status quo with vertical thinkers more likely to follow sequential steps and rely on the available knowledge.
Despite the distinctions between the two thinking methods, note that neither should be used in isolation all of the time. In essence, vertical thinking helps determine whether any of the numerous ideas generated from lateral thinking are valid or viable.
Key Highlights:
Lateral Thinking vs. Vertical Thinking: Lateral thinking is a creative problem-solving approach that encourages unconventional and non-linear thinking to find innovative solutions. Vertical thinking, on the other hand, is structured and sequential, focusing on arriving at reasoned, defined solutions.
Lateral Thinking Characteristics: Lateral thinkers employ indirect and disruptive reasoning, viewing problems from multiple perspectives to discover novel solutions. This approach is associated with “out of the box” thinking.
Six Thinking Hats: Edward de Bono introduced the Six Thinking Hats method, where team members adopt specific personalities represented by colored hats to challenge ideas and stimulate discussion during brainstorming sessions.
Vertical Thinking Characteristics: Vertical thinking relies on sequential, patterned, and direct reasoning, which does not often lend itself to creativity or experimentation. Decisions are based on available knowledge, and it emphasizes the past in understanding current or future situations.
Applications of Lateral Thinking: Lateral thinking is used in various fields, including innovation, problem-solving in business, design thinking, entrepreneurial ventures, marketing, education, and personal life to foster creativity and unconventional problem-solving.
Key Takeaways: Lateral thinking is about developing creative solutions without judgment, while vertical thinking is more structured and selective. Both approaches have their merits, and they can complement each other to arrive at valid and viable solutions.
Convergent thinking occurs when the solution to a problem can be found by applying established rules and logical reasoning. Whereas divergent thinking is an unstructured problem-solving method where participants are encouraged to develop many innovative ideas or solutions to a given problem. Where convergent thinking might work for larger, mature organizations where divergent thinking is more suited for startups and innovative companies.
The concept of cognitive biases was introduced and popularized by the work of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in 1972. Biases are seen as systematic errors and flaws that make humans deviate from the standards of rationality, thus making us inept at making good decisions under uncertainty.
Second-order thinking is a means of assessing the implications of our decisions by considering future consequences. Second-order thinking is a mental model that considers all future possibilities. It encourages individuals to think outside of the box so that they can prepare for every and eventuality. It also discourages the tendency for individuals to default to the most obvious choice.
Lateral thinking is a business strategy that involves approaching a problem from a different direction. The strategy attempts to remove traditionally formulaic and routine approaches to problem-solving by advocating creative thinking, therefore finding unconventional ways to solve a known problem. This sort of non-linear approach to problem-solving, can at times, create a big impact.
Bounded rationality is a concept attributed to Herbert Simon, an economist and political scientist interested in decision-making and how we make decisions in the real world. In fact, he believed that rather than optimizing (which was the mainstream view in the past decades) humans follow what he called satisficing.
The Dunning-Kruger effect describes a cognitive bias where people with low ability in a task overestimate their ability to perform that task well. Consumers or businesses that do not possess the requisite knowledge make bad decisions. What’s more, knowledge gaps prevent the person or business from seeing their mistakes.
Occam’s Razor states that one should not increase (beyond reason) the number of entities required to explain anything. All things being equal, the simplest solution is often the best one. The principle is attributed to 14th-century English theologian William of Ockham.
The Lindy Effect is a theory about the ageing of non-perishable things, like technology or ideas. Popularized by author Nicholas Nassim Taleb, the Lindy Effect states that non-perishable things like technology age – linearly – in reverse. Therefore, the older an idea or a technology, the same will be its life expectancy.
Antifragility was first coined as a term by author, and options trader Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Antifragility is a characteristic of systems that thrive as a result of stressors, volatility, and randomness. Therefore, Antifragile is the opposite of fragile. Where a fragile thing breaks up to volatility; a robust thing resists volatility. An antifragile thing gets stronger from volatility (provided the level of stressors and randomness doesn’t pass a certain threshold).
Systems thinking is a holistic means of investigating the factors and interactions that could contribute to a potential outcome. It is about thinking non-linearly, and understanding the second-order consequences of actions and input into the system.
Vertical thinking, on the other hand, is a problem-solving approach that favors a selective, analytical, structured, and sequential mindset. The focus of vertical thinking is to arrive at a reasoned, defined solution.
Maslow’s Hammer, otherwise known as the law of the instrument or the Einstellung effect, is a cognitive bias causing an over-reliance on a familiar tool. This can be expressed as the tendency to overuse a known tool (perhaps a hammer) to solve issues that might require a different tool. This problem is persistent in the business world where perhaps known tools or frameworks might be used in the wrong context (like business plans used as planning tools instead of only investors’ pitches).
The Peter Principle was first described by Canadian sociologist Lawrence J. Peter in his 1969 book The Peter Principle. The Peter Principle states that people are continually promoted within an organization until they reach their level of incompetence.
The straw man fallacy describes an argument that misrepresents an opponent’s stance to make rebuttal more convenient. The straw man fallacy is a type of informal logical fallacy, defined as a flaw in the structure of an argument that renders it invalid.
The Streisand Effect is a paradoxical phenomenon where the act of suppressing information to reduce visibility causes it to become more visible. In 2003, Streisand attempted to suppress aerial photographs of her Californian home by suing photographer Kenneth Adelman for an invasion of privacy. Adelman, who Streisand assumed was paparazzi, was instead taking photographs to document and study coastal erosion. In her quest for more privacy, Streisand’s efforts had the opposite effect.
As highlighted by German psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer in the paper “Heuristic Decision Making,” the term heuristic is of Greek origin, meaning “serving to find out or discover.” More precisely, a heuristic is a fast and accurate way to make decisions in the real world, which is driven by uncertainty.
The recognition heuristic is a psychological model of judgment and decision making. It is part of a suite of simple and economical heuristics proposed by psychologists Daniel Goldstein and Gerd Gigerenzer. The recognition heuristic argues that inferences are made about an object based on whether it is recognized or not.
The representativeness heuristic was first described by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. The representativeness heuristic judges the probability of an event according to the degree to which that event resembles a broader class. When queried, most will choose the first option because the description of John matches the stereotype we may hold for an archaeologist.
The take-the-best heuristic is a decision-making shortcut that helps an individual choose between several alternatives. The take-the-best (TTB) heuristic decides between two or more alternatives based on a single good attribute, otherwise known as a cue. In the process, less desirable attributes are ignored.
The bundling bias is a cognitive bias in e-commerce where a consumer tends not to use all of the products bought as a group, or bundle. Bundling occurs when individual products or services are sold together as a bundle. Common examples are tickets and experiences. The bundling bias dictates that consumers are less likely to use each item in the bundle. This means that the value of the bundle and indeed the value of each item in the bundle is decreased.
The Barnum Effect is a cognitive bias where individuals believe that generic information – which applies to most people – is specifically tailored for themselves.
First-principles thinking – sometimes called reasoning from first principles – is used to reverse-engineer complex problems and encourage creativity. It involves breaking down problems into basic elements and reassembling them from the ground up. Elon Musk is among the strongest proponents of this way of thinking.
The ladder of inference is a conscious or subconscious thinking process where an individual moves from a fact to a decision or action. The ladder of inference was created by academic Chris Argyris to illustrate how people form and then use mental models to make decisions.
Goodhart’s Law is named after British monetary policy theorist and economist Charles Goodhart. Speaking at a conference in Sydney in 1975, Goodhart said that “any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes.” Goodhart’s Law states that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
The Six Thinking Hats model was created by psychologist Edward de Bono in 1986, who noted that personality type was a key driver of how people approached problem-solving. For example, optimists view situations differently from pessimists. Analytical individuals may generate ideas that a more emotional person would not, and vice versa.
The Mandela effect is a phenomenon where a large group of people remembers an event differently from how it occurred. The Mandela effect was first described in relation to Fiona Broome, who believed that former South African President Nelson Mandela died in prison during the 1980s. While Mandela was released from prison in 1990 and died 23 years later, Broome remembered news coverage of his death in prison and even a speech from his widow. Of course, neither event occurred in reality. But Broome was later to discover that she was not the only one with the same recollection of events.
The bandwagon effect tells us that the more a belief or idea has been adopted by more people within a group, the more the individual adoption of that idea might increase within the same group. This is the psychological effect that leads to herd mentality. What in marketing can be associated with social proof.
Moore’s law states that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles approximately every two years. This observation was made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965 and it become a guiding principle for the semiconductor industry and has had far-reaching implications for technology as a whole.
Disruptive innovation as a term was first described by Clayton M. Christensen, an American academic and business consultant whom The Economist called “the most influential management thinker of his time.” Disruptive innovation describes the process by which a product or service takes hold at the bottom of a market and eventually displaces established competitors, products, firms, or alliances.
Value migration was first described by author Adrian Slywotzky in his 1996 book Value Migration – How to Think Several Moves Ahead of the Competition. Value migration is the transferal of value-creating forces from outdated business models to something better able to satisfy consumer demands.
The bye-now effect describes the tendency for consumers to think of the word “buy” when they read the word “bye”. In a study that tracked diners at a name-your-own-price restaurant, each diner was asked to read one of two phrases before ordering their meal. The first phrase, “so long”, resulted in diners paying an average of $32 per meal. But when diners recited the phrase “bye bye” before ordering, the average price per meal rose to $45.
Groupthink occurs when well-intentioned individuals make non-optimal or irrational decisions based on a belief that dissent is impossible or on a motivation to conform. Groupthink occurs when members of a group reach a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the alternatives and their consequences.
A stereotype is a fixed and over-generalized belief about a particular group or class of people. These beliefs are based on the false assumption that certain characteristics are common to every individual residing in that group. Many stereotypes have a long and sometimes controversial history and are a direct consequence of various political, social, or economic events. Stereotyping is the process of making assumptions about a person or group of people based on various attributes, including gender, race, religion, or physical traits.
Murphy’s Law states that if anything can go wrong, it will go wrong. Murphy’s Law was named after aerospace engineer Edward A. Murphy. During his time working at Edwards Air Force Base in 1949, Murphy cursed a technician who had improperly wired an electrical component and said, “If there is any way to do it wrong, he’ll find it.”
The law of unintended consequences was first mentioned by British philosopher John Locke when writing to parliament about the unintended effects of interest rate rises. However, it was popularized in 1936 by American sociologist Robert K. Merton who looked at unexpected, unanticipated, and unintended consequences and their impact on society.
Fundamental attribution error is a bias people display when judging the behavior of others. The tendency is to over-emphasize personal characteristics and under-emphasize environmental and situational factors.
Outcome bias describes a tendency to evaluate a decision based on its outcome and not on the process by which the decision was reached. In other words, the quality of a decision is only determined once the outcome is known. Outcome bias occurs when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events without regard for how those events developed.
Hindsight bias is the tendency for people to perceive past events as more predictable than they actually were. The result of a presidential election, for example, seems more obvious when the winner is announced. The same can also be said for the avid sports fan who predicted the correct outcome of a match regardless of whether their team won or lost. Hindsight bias, therefore, is the tendency for an individual to convince themselves that they accurately predicted an event before it happened.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
Discover more from FourWeekMBA
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
