Our perception of the world makes us live the way we do.
In my 3rd year of college, I asked my professor of spiritual studies the following question. As per spirituality (not religion) there is only one definition of God. Then why do different religions have different definitions of God?
He happened to be the professor of physics too.
So to answer my question, first, he told me to forget what I knew about the shape of a basketball ring. Instead, he asked me to transport myself to a basketball court in my imagination. Then he asked me the following questions:
- What would be the shape of the basketball ring if I stood underneath it? I said round. Correct.
- What would be the shape of the ring if I took two steps away from the ring? I said ellipse. Correct.
- What would be the shape of the ring if I rose to the same level as the ring? I said a line. Correct.
Then he explained this.
There are different levels of spirituality (I am not going to discuss that here). Great sages and messiahs have attained different levels of spirituality. They defined God based on the perspective of their level.
Hence, a varied concept of God exists.
Bam!
I understood that we see the world from where we stand.
The way we perceive is the way we live!
We form our world through our perceptions. They form through the type of information we get exposed to. So, the creator and sender of information architectures our Perception-formation about the world. Hence, our understanding of an object, person, or situation may not be what it is. It is as per what information we get exposed to and how the world makes us understand them. Our understanding would differ if the sources of information were different.
Consider the process of Brand Building. There exists Kapferer, Byron Sharp, and many more schools of thought on branding. All teach brand building but in their ways.
So, one core subject, but different perspectives.
Similar case with Business Strategy development. Various professors and organizations all have their approaches to business strategy development. Again, it is one core subject, but, different perspectives.
That brings me to the following questions:
- Why there are different approaches to the same thing?
- Is it important to have different approaches to the same thing?
- Is one approach better than the other?
We gather information about the same thing from different sources.
Different experiences, education systems, and social circles influence our perceptions. Which constructs our view of an object, person, or situation.
We have different capabilities and ways of understanding the same thing. Hence, different approaches to the same thing are necessary. It makes understanding inclusive.
By that train of thought, there is nothing better or worse. Only what works for someone in a given situation.
The concept of asking ‘WHY?’ in management makes for a great case.
Simon Sinek and Taiichi Ohno of Toyota are well known for promoting the use of ‘WHY’ in management. Simon Sinek used ‘WHY’ to identify the reason behind an organization’s existence. Taiichi Ohno used ‘WHY’ to identify reasons behind the existence of management problems.
Even though they are used in different contexts, from my perspective, their purpose is the same.
Hence, It is possible to use either of them to identify the root cause of the existence of the same thing. Be it an organization, a particular problem, or for that matter anything.
Here is how.
Different path. Same purpose.
Author and leadership expert Simon Sinek designed this framework. It makes organizations and founders answer why they are doing what they are doing. The answer to ‘Why?’ emerges from the purpose behind building a business.
Identifying the purpose leads to key strategic decisions required for building a venture.
I used the Golden Circle to identify the core reason behind the existence of the startup I was building.
First, we were building the organization to make quality assistive devices affordable to all. That was the WHY then.
Later, based on qualitative research, we redefined it to this. We were building an organization to restore human dignity. Not to restore lost or dysfunctional limbs.
Our research made us think hard about our purpose behind building the organization.
That WHY influenced every aspect of the venture building.
The design of the operational processes, business model, and customer relationship programs.
Taiichi Ohno, the father of the Toyota Production System introduced this concept. It is a 5 step iterative process to identify the root cause of a defect or a problem. In a nutshell, the core of the problem.
Why?: the performance of the employees is down.
Why?: they are unhappy with the way the organization is functioning currently
Why?: They work for 12 hours.
Why?: There is a lack of communication between the managers and their team members. Also, since the employees end up working longer, they expect better pay.
Why?: Most managers skip internal training on people management.
It is possible to add a sixth, seven, or more levels of WHYs, but usually, by the 5th we can arrive at the root cause. The reason why the problem exists.
I used the Five Why’s to understand the problem of disability. But, I ended up finding the core reason behind building the organization.
Why?
- According to my research, many disabled individuals didn’t seek disability services.
Why?
- They found the existing treatment system expensive and unsatisfactory
Why?
- limb disability leads to physical as well as mental health issues. People lose their dignity along with the loss of limbs. But not every service provider is offering mental health rehabilitation program
Why?
- Lack of care
Why?
- That’s the current nature of the system
So, we identified that our organization should exist to restore human dignity. Not dysfunctional or lost limbs.
This proves the point I made earlier about using either of the frameworks for the same purpose.
That’s because the purpose of asking WHY is to find the core reason for existence. Be it to identify the reason a problem or an organization exists.
In a nutshell, WHY deals with existence.
Identifying the core principles gives us freedom of perception.
Identifying the core concept of God eradicated my confusion. Now I have a different perspective on God. Moreover, it has made me more empathetic toward all religious practices. I know that they are all in search of that One but through different paths. It shields me from the influence of various propaganda.
Now, when I build a venture or solve a problem, I know that I need to find the reason behind their existence. Since I know that, I am free to use the framework that suits me. Because I understand the core of its usage.
Understanding the core of a subject can make learning and application more efficient. It simplifies our understanding of why some processes are more relevant than others. And how we reason.
We cannot keep too much information in our brains. So knowing the core principles can help us cut through the cobweb of information.
“When you first start to study a field, it seems like you have to memorize a zillion things. You don’t. What you need is to identify the core principles — generally three to twelve of them — that govern the field. A million things you thought you had to memorize are simply various combinations of the core principles.”
— John T. Reed in Succeeding
When we can see the combinations of core principles, we become free to perceive the world our way.
Not the way the world wants us to perceive it.
