One of the easiest ways to spot a dangerous perspective is to know whether or not the perspective includes observations that lead to curiosity or conclusion. If someone shares their conclusion without asking any further questions or leaving room for additional information, it is logical that the person isn’t curious about additional details. There are two things
Fresh eyes are valuable when the status quo gets defended often by experienced team members even though a change in method and concept is needed. When what got us here is not going to take us where we are going, we need new ideas that are not attached to the “glory days” that have obviously past because
My dad taught me that experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want. If that’s true, a perspective from an experienced learner is valuable. Experienced learners have learned lessons that made them better. Should I take marriage advice from someone who has been divorced multiple times? He may have a lot of experience,
Experienced people have a danger of over confidence because they have a feeling that they have seen it all and done it all. That can’t possibly be true. At best, a situation is very similar but never identical to past experience. New variables always change the game and make life interesting enough to be open to new
How a team values experience will shape the perspectives they will seek to include. There are generally two schools of thought when it comes to experience. Some people assume the more experienced a person is the better. That all depends on the type of experience. Another way to look at experience would be to see a person
When including a teammate’s perspective, a team must consider how informed the perspective is. In today’s digital world everything seems instant and easily accessible. Perspectives can include opinions that are derived from snap judgements, careful investigation, or somewhere in between. If everyone on the team shares a similar perspective based on a snap judgement and one team
So how do we know when a perspective is too different to be included if a team benefits from different perspectives? We should always consider the source of information we gain. There are some filters to apply to all perspectives…even our own: 1) Are we making an informed decision based on a pattern or a recent observation?
Different perspectives can be part of the same truth but this does not mean that everything is true despite differences. Some pictures don’t belong in the same panorama because they are actually diametrically opposed to each other. Black is not a part of white. Light and darkness cannot coexist. Full cannot be empty. Some perspectives cannot be
What happens when two perspectives differ so much that they are incompatible? They don’t fit together in a panoramic view. When teammates make the effort to see where they can agree it should be a quest for truth and not a game to see who has the winning argument.
Cut off the ends of a panoramic picture and set them next to each other. When viewed this way it may be difficult to believe they are parts of the same picture. Perspectives on the extreme ends of an issue can seem as if they cannot possibly coexist. Teammate perspectives will differ to certain degrees and can