Strategic Thinking 4: Analysis

It’s hard to separate Application, the putting to use of knowledge and understanding acquired, from Analysis, the slightly higher level skill in which we manipulate the knowlegde we’ve gained by evaluating it, classifying and declassifying it, comparing and contrasting it, dissecting and reassembling it–constructing, changing, and repreparing it. Application and Analysis in a knowledge enterprise occur arm in arm.

In the imagined scenario, that I’ve been sketching out across the articles: Using Bloom’s Taxonomy to Teach Deep Thinking, Strategic 1, Strategic 2, and Strategic 3, the team has applied their shared base of knowledge and comprehension–of a product that has been developed, and discussed via team blogging–to the task of presenting what’s been made to the larger group of the enterprise, in a way that has provided deeper understanding for all members of both groups.

In order for the presentation to be made, the development group not only had to apply their shared knowledge and comprehension, but also had to analyze, consider, manage, construct, prepare, implement, rehearse, react, critique, teach, and role-play to varying degrees–all of which are analysis skills.

During the presentation, which is application, the development group will undoubtedly offer a question and answer session. That will provide the larger group an opportunity to gain deeper comprehension. It will give the development group a chance to analyze further how well they did and whether the larger group responds as the development group might have predicted they would.

With the development group, the difference here is not in what they are doing–making a presentation to launch a product or a plan. That occurs in every enterprise. The difference is that knowledge becomes the focus, and the larger group is allowed the chance to learn from people who actually can answer their questions with confidence and depth.

The questions will become higher level and call for longer and more detailed answers. Beyond that difference, no new task is asked of them–no noticeable difference shows from the traditional product introduction methods. It’s the same old way–only a slightly different flavor.

It’s a different flavor because the world view has changed.

The focus is on gaining a deeper, more thoughtful data set from those traditional events. The change is one of attitude. No longer do key shareholders care only that the larger group “get” the “three main selling points,” but rather the key shareholders have a vested interest in seeing that the enterprise fully understands how and why the product works as it does.

In small ways, the shareholders will be modeling how to share the the product wth customers.

The larger group–the audience–is allowed to become engaged and interactive in a new way as participants. With this new kind of presentation, they can quickly see how the product meets their needs and those of their customers, whether their customers be corporate CEOs, state legislators, school principals, office supply buyers, or people who buy books for folks in correctional institutions.

The new presentation form brings many benefits to the enterprise.

• The fact that the people in the larger group are now treated as if they might be able to understand and offered the full information by confident, well-informed presenters raises the level of participation and engagement. It also raises their ability to retain what they hear, because they know that it applies to them.
• The higher-level knowledge the larger group receives prompts higher-level questions from them. Discussions become more meaningful and learning across the organization moves more quickly and goes deeper than ever before, as questions prompt high-level answers and so on.
• The learning organization now begins as the dialogue goes two ways and continues long after the presentation ends.The core values of the product or plan have been established and discussed in such a way that there is plenty to dialogue about.
• All participants enjoy the job satisfaction of working for an organization that is using their skills and abilities to the best effect and in which they take on data and make meaning according to Bloom’s Taxonomy–a foundation for learning that is built on concrete, not on sand.
• The work becomes the most fulfilling thing to do.

How could the individuals, the organization, and the customers not benefit from a structure that is based in learning like that?

–Liz Strauss