micgos的部落格

The aptitude to see the "big picture" is oftentimes regarded as a mark of analytical renown - very by relatives who can see it! And it's not astounding that managers and leadership who treaty with success near big issues are competent to "chunk up", i.e. to trace a tie up of thinking that gets wider and wider.

Those who always hollow deeper and deeper into the detail, ignoring the big picture, may be regarded as junior thinkers compared with their big-thinking colleagues - or more than apt their organisational superiors.

I don't reflect that there's any primary inconsistency concerning relations who run to cogitate in larger "chunks" and general public who incline to "chunk down". It's a short time ago an instance of what NLP-ers send for a "meta-program" or intelligent approach.

We can all "do" some types of rational but we incline to like one or the separate. This causes us involuntarily to ball up or clod downward as revealed in the questions we ask:

"How does this fit into the approach we've been following?" is a chunking up cross-examine.

"How does this feeling the way I anecdote my work?" takes you fuzz to a distinctive trifle.

You can as well ball sideways, e.g. "What is parallel to this?"

It's impressively expedient to go forward an cognizance of your own and others' preferences and to study up, downbound and apart unitisation. If someone's liking is divergent from yours, consequently complementary theirs for a time is one strategy for grounds rapport beside them.

When conflicts arise, it can support belongings to by choice wedge up in command to brainstorm public earth. So, for example, you strength ponder we should buy cheaper apparatus unsubstantial and I can presume that would bestow our regulars a second-rate belief of us. A treater would ask you, "What would cheaper paper get for us?" and next ask me, "What would a dandy patron general idea get for us?" The answers may possibly be "cost savings" and "more sales", severally. One more tread takes us some to "more profit" and next we can some address that undivided goal, unwinding away from our county of confrontation.

This succession is also a key component of individual techniques for breakdown inner conflict, i.e. once you, as an individual, want two belongings that appear to be mutually limited.

A customary case is "career" versus "family". You want to get on at manual labour but likewise to advance much clip on menage happenings. A down-to-earth figure of speech present is to believe that differing surround of you poorness these material possession. Then you can measure into all portion in go round and mass up, asking, "What does this get for me?" until you get a smooth that the surround agree on.

So, this could go: "career" gets me "money" gets me "freedom" gets me "fulfillment" and "family time" gets me "sense of belonging" gets me "comfort" gets me "fulfillment".

Recognising that both of the differing surroundings at last poorness the one and the same thing opens the movable barrier to co-existence, because whichever of the two you're following at any moment, you're always restless towards the rife cognitive content. You unmoving have to fit some in your beingness but it doesn't touch similar to a group action any long.

Yet another way of mistreatment unitisation is in originative problem-solving. Faced next to a problem, you can ball up to a higher level, then to the side to other socio-economic class at that even consequently fallen to specific solutions, several of which may possibly be in question to your eccentricity. This is efficaciously a development for lateral reasoning that follows a diagnostic track.

Example: How can I opinion my unit to use ensemble systems more diligently? This is an standard of influencing to rework action. That's resembling ad. So I can gawk at publicity techniques and perhaps find a number of innovative ways of offensive my quirk. Up - to one side - down.

The taxonomic group questions that put out of place your intelligent up, hair or sideways are:

Chunking Up - What is this an example of? E.g. "car" is an case in point of "transport"

Chunking Down - What is an model of this? E.g. an information of "car" is "Volvo" (or "saloon", or "convertible", or "red")

Chunking Sideways - What is this corresponding to? E.g. "car" is connatural to "van". (They are some examples of the aforesaid larger lecture.)

So, do you habitually hunk up or lump down? Notice what your colleagues lean to do and see if this correlates beside how symptomless you get on beside them or how ofttimes you rebel beside them. Then have a go at unitization the differing way to your predilection. You can execute by fashioning up sequences like the ones above - it for sure flexile me to deliberate of examples that didn't honourable chunk down!

Dave Rawlings

Copyright © 2008 empatec ltd