On this web page, I enter into a virtual dialog with Distinguished Chair, Roger Malina.  Dr. Malina holds a dual appointment at the University of Texas at Dallas, as professor of Arts and Technology and physics.  Malina is a physicist, astronomer and executive editor of the Leonardo publications at MIT Press.  He is a leading contributor to the international dialog on design and innovation.

To follow the dialog, go to http://talkwithroger.com

I would not argue with my fellow scholar’s new understanding of the human brain, but point to the fact that our new understanding of the brain function does not negate the work of Nobel Laureate Roger Sperry’s work of dual modalities of thought within the brain.  Although, his work was conducted in the sixties, his exploration of split brain symptoms is the ideal metaphor to a psychological phenomenon explored by Dr. Betty Edwards and Dr. Jerre Levy in the eighties.  It’s not an idea of old science, but an ideal metaphor that describes a perspective that affects our thinking, actions and decisions how we approach life.

There are disciplines that benefit from a certain perspective and approach to life.  In the extreme, the artist accesses the abstractions of life and articulates this vision in a fashion that is consumed with the senses; while, the engineer is firmly grounded in the discipline of science and expresses themselves in practical applications.  This requires two completely different disciplines of thought.  For an even more extreme scenario, I have overlaid the artist’s approach to life to the business person’s need for efficiency, organization, structure and profits.  The two perspectives are far apart; yet, the business community talks about the need for innovation.  The issue is artists innovate as if breathing, but suffocate in the structured environment of a business.  The business person prospers in the delineated lines of an organization and flounders in the abstractions of innovation.  The two perspectives can co-exist, but never fully integrate or collaborate.

From personal experiences and empirical evidence, I see dominant traits which influences the way people interact with the world.  Since the focus of my work is creativity and innovation, I have identified the traits that embrace, practice and promote creativity, and those that do not.  The shorthand that best serves my purpose is the term right and left brain thinking.  The individual who accesses and utilizes a “whole brain” approach is practicing Design Thinking, which I will address at a later time.

My request:  Do not use the science of the brain, to be confused with the exploration of the mind, and a distraction from the conversation of creativity.  As the physicist David Bohm once lamented, disassembling the watch will not help one understand time.  I believe our efforts to observe the firing of neurons as we map the brain, does not provide insights into the abstractions of creativity which occurs between the cells.

 We live in a time that specialization, silos of knowledge and segmented schools of influence are being reshaped, reformed, and reconsidered. They are becoming less relevant and no longer leading industry innovation. The walls between disciplines are crumbling. Unfortunately, we’re still not fully embracing these exciting times as the decision makers are firmly planted in the old paradigms of Cartesian thinking. Communication departments are no longer built on journalism, but expression. The schools of business must embrace the social aspects of business communication and individualized, long-tail elements of customer service and product development. My mission is to lead this charge, the challenge is to be recognized as a holistic thinker, not limited by a diverse set of interests and skills, but an asset because of a broad, Design Thinking perspective, and ability to negotiate many disciplines. I’m continually surprised by the prevalent place of decisions, and predominant group think that is confused by too many areas of interest. This degree of diversity and broad scope of specialties is the future! Finding leadership who recognizes this reality is the challenge.

Graphic Resume

The dchair is a seat designed to facilitate dialogue.

The seat is created considering proximity, balance, and designated rules and prompts that promote efficient communication. The seat design forces participants to face each other at a designated distance with established prompts to focus the communication. The dchair is designed to accommodate six participants.

Images and brief description can be found HERE.

View comments to see links to all students tags.

Image created by ATEC, Digital Imaging student, Kirstyn Smith.

View comments to see links to all students tags.

Image created by ATEC, Digital Imaging student, Joseph Anthony.

Digital Imaging class discusses next project.

My answer:
I operate under the assumption that we live in a predominately left-brain world. I think it is rare to find people that are comfortable negotiating the abstract and the disciplined thought processes. My mother was an artist and father an engineer, I credit this with a start to my comfort in both worlds.

I don’t disparage left-thinking. I think it is necessary to create organizations, manage people, and “make the trains run on time.” But, I believe we extend one extreme perspective to all decisions and approaches. I don’t believe you want the artist running the accounting department, but I also don’t always want the engineer designing the user interface on my communication technology of choice. I wrote a book called, “Right” and the premise is there is a right time, with the right people, when utilizing the right-brain perspective is needed. I attach this to the classic business growth graph of when you want to innovate and when managing is best. I think C. Christensen did a brilliant job of distinguishing between sustaining ideas and disruptive ideas, (He uses technology where I placed “ideas.”) AND the difference between sustaining and disruptive are extreme. Disruptive ideas, almost by definition, have to be developed and administered by people who are able to pull-on their right brains and access a degree of creativity. I refer to the artist’s process to highlight the different stages of innovation as they create for a living, every day.

Now, to specifically answer the question. There are times when we can’t know the future, or predict the next best idea. For organizations to fulfill their employees and WoW! their customers, sometimes different is required. It demands a heuristic process, and leadership that is less directive and more inspiring and for this to occur it must utilize massive amounts of right-brain thinking. Ideally, one person has the aptitude, but more times, it might simply require a naturally left-brain person to trust the right-brain perspective and take a chance & trust. I refer to Gordon MacKenzie’s boss as the ideal example.

Finally, and maybe, most importantly, we need the right-brain person in the boardroom to address the wicked problems of any organization. Design thinking (To throw out another over-used, under appreciated, mostly mis-understood term), is the only way solutions can be identified to address the problems that appear too complex and unsolvable.