By Dr. John Robert Dew
Originally published in Quality Progress Magazine, April 1996, pp. 91-93.
One of the best ways to liven up a room of quality professionals is to press
someone for a definition of “quality.” The room will quickly ignite into an inferno of
disputes about it.
“It’s conformance to established requirements,” one will argue.
“No, it’s understanding variation in systems,” another will counter.
“You’re all wrong,” someone will shout. “It’s meeting the customer’s
expectations!”
The concept of quality is envisioned in different ways by different people because
people process information and conceptualize situations in a variety of ways. Much of
this variation in mental conceptualization and information processing results from the
relative dominance of one of the two hemispheres in the brain.
The brain-dominance theory
Roger Sperry, a Nobel Prize winner, initiated the study of the relationship
between the brain’s right and left hemispheres. Sperry found that the left half of the brain
tends to function by processing information in an analytical, rational, logical, sequential
way. The right half of the brain tends to function by recognizing relationships,
integrating and synthesizing information, and arriving at intuitive insights.
In other words, the left side of your brain deals with a problem or situation by
collecting data, making analyses, and using a rational thinking process to reach a logical
conclusion. The right side of your brain approaches the same problem or situation by
making intuitive leaps to answers based on insights and perceptions. The left brain tends
to break information apart for analysis, while the right brain tends to put information
together to synthesize a whole picture.
Research into the brain’s function and individuals’ brain dominance was further
enhanced by Ned Hermann, the former manager of management education at General
Electric’s Management Development Institute. Herman developed a brain-dominance
profile instrument to help people assess the manner in which they use their brains.
Hermann’s research suggests that people in various professions tend to be either leftbrain or right-brain oriented. Managers, for instance, tend to be left-brain dominant,
focusing on organizing, structuring, and controlling situations. Social workers tend to be
right-brain dominant, drawing on their ability to relate to emotions to achieve insights
about situations.
Quality and brain dominance
The quality field, by its very nature, covers a broad range of concepts, tools, and
techniques. Some of these concepts, tools, and techniques are clearly in the left brain
arena, such as using statistical tools and organizing plans to ensure the quality of projects
and processes. Others are in the right-brain arena, such as using relationship diagrams to
solve problems, forming teams to analyze systems, and applying intuitive concepts, such
as zero defects.
With such a broad range of concepts and approaches, it should come as no
surprise when quality professionals become engaged in rather spirited disputes over how
to achieve quality and even over the very meaning of the term. Left-brain quality
professionals might be exasperated with their right-brain colleagues because they seem to
lack an appreciation for the careful use of data. Right-brain professionals might be
irritated with their left-brain colleagues for being too rigid in their thinking or too slow to
grasp the causes of problems. Of course, both of these positions are relative to how the
individual processes information and defines quality and neither position is right or
wrong.
The dichotomy between left-brain and right-brain approaches to quality permeates
the entire range of quality issues, as shown in Figure 1. The basic definition of quality,
the methods for achieving it, and the approach to solving quality-related problems all
hinge on patterns of thinking and information processing that are dependant on brain
dominance.
For example, there are two methods commonly used to perform root-cause
analysis. One approach employs a pre-established set of questions that forces the
investigator into using one of the pre-established root –cause categories. This approach
typifies a left-brain thinking process that values order and systematic steps in developing
a solution to a problem.
On the other hand, right-brain thinkers will approach root-cause analysis by first
trying the five-whys method to find a solution. The solution might not fit any preestablished set of root-cause categories, but it works. If the five-whys method does not
work, right-brain thinkers will use barrier analysis (or another tool that provides a visual
image of the situation) to “see” where a barrier existed.
Another example can be seen in approaches taken by quality auditors. For leftbrain thinkers, the audit is often a systematic and detailed hunt for any deviation from
procedures or requirements, no matter how minute. In many cases, this is exactly what
an organization needs from a quality audit. For right -brain thinkers, the quality audit is
often regarded as a tool for identifying opportunities for continuous improvement. Minor
deviations from procedures are not giving much attention. The hunt is on for big gamethat is, where the organization can make breakthroughs in customer satisfaction or cost
reduction. In many cases, this style of auditing is exactly what an organization needs.
Each style is different, and both can add value in certain circumstances. Each style has
its roots in how the auditor thinks.
On a larger scale, the difference between left-brain and right-brain thinking can be
seen in how a quality program is designed. Left-brain thinkers tend to value a cradle-tograve quality program. They systematically design a program that comes complete with
design control, verification of construction and manufacturing, statistical controls, and an
audit program. Right-brain thinkers often value the input of the employees working in
the process. They design a quality program by bringing these employees together to
identify existing problems, brainstorm solutions, and implement corrective actions. Leftbrain program designers bring great skill in developing carefully controlled processes,
while right-brain program designers get employees excited about quality and motivated
Figure 1: Comparison of Quality Approaches
Quality professionals who are Quality professionals who are
left-brain dominant prefer to: right-brain dominant prefer to:
Solve problems through the use of data. Solve problems through the understanding
of relationships.
Perform statistical analysis of data. Use cause-and effect diagrams.
Develop solutions using logical analyses Develop solutions using creativity and
of facts. brainstorming.
Have work done by individuals who are Have work done by teams that will raise
assigned to study a system using an many questions and work multiple issues.
orderly approach.
Define quality as conformance to definable Define quality based on a holistic concept,
requirements that can be measured. such as total quality.
Establish controls in the early stages of a View quality as a process for continuous
system that will ensure quality is controlled improvement in which controls are only
throughout the system’s life cycle. temporary.
Improve quality by studying specific Improve quality by starting with a holistic
variation within a system. strategic quality plan.
Identify root causes of problems by Identify root causes of problems by using
elaborately categorizing possible causes the five-whys method, barrier analysis
and using strict rules for questioning. and process diagrams.
to make improvements. Once again, although the approaches are different, both are
important.
Whole-brain thinking
It is vital to recognize your thinking patterns and be cognizant of these patterns’
strengths and weaknesses in dealing with information. If you are a right-brain dominant,
you must recognize the usefulness of left-brain thinking and appreciate the need to pause
and pay attention to planning and organizing data and systems. If you are a left-brain
dominant, you must allow right-brain input into your methodical approach to providing
quality.
Quality professionals who choose to deny the validity of other thinking styles will
close themselves off from their colleagues and limit their own professional growth by
avoiding different tools and concepts to address differing situations. When people cling
to their comfortable thinking processes, they restrict themselves in the manner by which
they will be able to define a problem or situation. As it is often said among quality
professionals, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.”
At the most fundamental level, you must be aware of how you think and process
information and appreciate other people’s different approaches. Truly creative
professionals will find ways to incorporate the talents of both brain hemispheres to
maximize their personal effectiveness.
Although it’s not difficult to determine which hemisphere dominates your
thinking, identifying ways to harness the power of the other side can be, so here are some
tips:
ÿ If you are a right-brain thinker, you can benefit from training in logical
decision making. By studying statistical processes, for example, you can
envision how statistical tools fit into a broad pattern and work to incorporate
these tools in appropriate ways.
ÿ If you are a left-brain thinker, you can study team processes and broad quality
philosophies to ensure that your approach to addressing quality issues has not
become too focused on specific problems or completely reliant on data. You
can plan to involve teams and structure brainstorming into the problemsolving process.
By effectively harnessing both sides of the brain thinking processes, you can shift
from one thinking process to another as the situation warrants. For example, right-brain
thinking can be used to develop a broad strategic quality plan. Left-brain thinking can be
used to analyze a problem. When the problem has been analyzed, right-brain processes
can be called on to develop possible solutions. Left-brain concepts can help plan how to
implement a solution into the work system, while right-brain thinking can sell the
solution to the organization
Quality professionals can become comfortable with using certain tools and having
certain viewpoints that fit their mental processing. To become more effective in their
daily practices, however, they must learn to move out of their comfort zones.
Unfortunately, professional growth has often meant digging a current rut even deeper by
adding to an area of strength. This can be seen in the right-brain quality manager whose
professional development for this year is to attend another seminar on team building.
Rather, this manager needs to attend a left-brain seminar, such as on how to establish an
audit plan. Similarly, the experienced left-brain auditor needs to take a seminar on how
to lead focus groups, instead of on auditing, to develop a broader range of skills.
The old admonishment to know thyself certainly applies to knowing how you
think. Often, we are unaware or uncritical of the thinking processes we routinely use to
process information and make decisions. We have developed comfortable patterns of
thinking that are reinforced in the neural networks of our brains. To achieve our full
potential, however, we must:
1. Examine our own minds. We must become aware of your thinking processes
and how they establish the frame of reference that determines how we view
the world and the pursuit of quality.
2. Learn how other quality professionals think and process information. Think
of another quality professional whose approach to quality substantially differs
from our own. Talk with that person to learn how he or she defines quality
and what tools he or she prefers to use. Chances are good that this person’s
brain dominance is different from your own; you can both learn a lot from
each other if you are willing to accept each other’s thinking as valid.
Unfortunately, instead of learning from someone who is different, people tend to
avoid them or deny the validity of their knowledge. This process, known as
marginalization, allows people to push those who are “different” to the edges of their
awareness, where the different thinking and different actions will not disturb their
comfort zones.
Whether you believe it or not
Those of you who are left-brain thinkers will likely want more evidence of the
brain-dominance theory. You might even be wondering whether surveys have been
conducted in which Hermann’s brain-dominance instrument has been tested on quality
professionals. Those of you who are right-brain thinkers will likely intuitively grasp or
reject the theory offered here. PET Scan data does supports the theory.
Regardless of whether you believe the brain-dominance theory, you must realize
that professional growth is not just a process of learning new tools and techniques. You
can become worn out if your growth is defined only by acquiring knowledge of more
tools and techniques. Growth should also come through self-awareness of your thinking
processes and through understanding how your comfortable thinking patterns influence
your views and your ability to learn and perform.
ْ
________*التــَّـوْقـْـيـعُ*_________
لا أحد يظن أن العظماء تعساء إلا العظماء أنفسهم. إدوارد ينج: شاعر إنجليزي
أمس في 5:05 pm من طرف apprenant
