Type of Interdependence

Information to intentions

• Dissatisfaction with the situation [information] implies a particular target [intentions] as a standard of comparison
• Any suggested target [intentions] implies by comparison what is unsatisfactory about the current situation [information]

Intentions to Ideas

• A target [intentions] defines the results desired from any proposal [ideas]
• Any proposal [ideas] embodies assumptions about the nature of the desired target [intentions]

Ideas to Information

• A proposal [ideas] embodies assumptions about the causes of the unsatisfactory situation [information] and implies resources and requirements for change
• The situation [information] places limits on the effectiveness and feasibility of acceptable proposals [ideas]

Here are some questions that can be asked regarding interdependency among the three domains:

When information is generated about the situation [domain of information], target information [domain of intentions] can be elicited by such questions as:

• “If you could change the present situation, what would you want to accomplish?”
• “What’s missing in the present situation that you want?”
• “What would be your goal in improving the situation?”

Proposal information [domain of ideas] can be generated from that same situational statement [domain of information] by such questions as:

• “What might be done to improve that?”
• “What kind of action does that seem to require?”
• “What plan would use that resource?”

When a target is identified [domain of intentions], situational information [domain of information] can be elicited by such questions as:

• “In what ways does the present situation fall short of that goal?”
• “Why does the present situation fall short of that goal?”
• “What forces for improvement are there for reaching that goal?”
• “What obstacles stand in the way of reaching that goal?”

Proposals [domain of ideas] can be elicited from the same target statement [domain of intentions] by asking:

• “What might be a possible way to accomplish that?”
• “What steps might lead toward that goal?”

In a similar manner, when a proposal [domain of ideas] presents itself, situational information [domain of information] can be elicited by asking:

• “What might that improve in the present situation?”
• “What part of the problem do you see that dealing with?”
• “What resources are there for doing that?”

And, finally, target information [domain of intentions] can be elicited from that proposal [domain of ideas] by asking:

• “To accomplish what?”
• “In order to do what?”
• “What objective does that proposal aim at?”

These questions provide important guidance in bringing about thoughtful slow thinking—the kind that Kahneman (2011) would strongly encourage. Awareness of the interdependency between information, intentions and ideas enables a group to reduce the potential of both BIAS and NOISE.

Conclusions

Problem solving often seems to wander aimlessly from topic to topic without ever actually coming to grips with the problem at hand. During this wondering, it is easy to pick up lies and misinformation. Ideational trains can distract us and distort reality. We can turn in appropriately to “experts” who promise to steer us in the right direction. Instead, we can engage in a thoughtful process that enables us to enter into “slow thinking.”

By categorizing statements in visible columns according to information, intentions and ideas and by using statements in one domain to bring forth inquiries in other domains, we can become more effective and efficient in our problem-solving efforts.

___________________