Binary vs Spectrum Thinking

Are you a binary thinker? Does your mind try to categorize situations as good or bad? Or perhaps you frame decisions as right or wrong? There is a sense of safety and clarity when you feel certain about being right. American culture has even made a virtue out of binary thinking with the phrase "a man of conviction," meaning someone who creates right/wrong dichotomies and always chooses right. Robert Sapolsky, in his excellent book Behave, documents how humans have evolved tribalism, where we naturally categorize people into Us/Them groups, suggesting that binary thinking may in fact be part of who we are.

I'd like to suggest that binary thinking is not the most effective way to see the world. Instead let me propose spectrum thinking as an alternative and discuss the leadership implications. But first a quick and relevant detour…

Have you ever climbed to the top of a mountain? No, parking on Mount Washington and walking to the Pittsburgh overlook doesn't count. I mean have you climbed a real mountain with a peak that reaches past the treeline?

In my late teens I remember hiking Mount Princeton near Buena Vista, CO one summer. Three of my close friends came with me and we camped near the base of the Collegiate Peaks mountain range. It was exactly what you would expect a camp to look like: tent, campfire, no electronics, surrounded by trees, even a stream nearby. In the morning we packed the gear we would need for the day-long hike like food, water, emergency kit and started our endeavor. Even being in good shape and being acclimated to the Colorado elevation, it was a challenging climb.

When we got near the summit of Mount Princeton everything turned to loose rocks and there wasn't a path (I don’t recall if that was because there wasn't a path or if we were just dumb kids who wanted to climb straight up the side of the mountain). The climb was steep and the rocks kept sliding out from under us, often forcing us to scale on all fours. A trail ran across the ridge of the mountain and when we reached it we were exhausted, but we could see the top so we pressed on. Except it wasn't the top. Hikers coming back the other way warned us not to get excited because it was a false peak (it only looked like the top, until you got there and could see the real summit farther away).

Finally, after hours of hiking, climbing, breaks for water and food, and talking ourselves into pressing on, we reached the summit. I don't really understand why getting to the top of a mountain should be a rewarding experience, but it is. What an incredible feeling to see the world around you open up on all sides. The plains fall away at the edge of the horizon, peaks rise up around you, and valleys snake between everything. To be at the top is worth all the effort it took to get there (and the pain of getting back down).

It is with the Rocky Mountains in mind that I consider binary vs spectrum thinking. There is a metaphor here that we can extend several layers deep. Let's start with the mountain. With binary thinking we might analogize that right and wrong match up well with the peak and valley, but those are just two points along a very distant and twisted path. We will spend nearly all of our time between those two points as we take our journey toward the top. Spectrum thinking shifts away from those binary thoughts of right and wrong and focus instead on "Where am I now in my journey?" and "Where would I like to go?" 

It is important not to take a metaphor too far, but I think we can safely extend it one more level. Once you get to the summit of your chosen peak, you will look around you and see many other mountains across a wide range. These other peaks may be higher or lower than the one you are on now and could represent other styles or practices or cultures. The spectrum of experiences you could have are limited by your worldview (i.e. - the mountain you are on) and opening your mind to greater diversity (i.e. - the whole mountain range) gives you the best chance at finding the highest peaks.

As I think about the landscape of ideas, I want to take a step away from the theoretical and start applying it to the real world. My own binary thinking was first challenged when I read a book called The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris. He started with a practical definition of morality: decreasing suffering and increasing happiness. He then used that definition to compare various ideas and cultures to see where they fall on the moral landscape. For example, slavery drastically increases suffering so it is closer to a valley than the idea of freedom. Of course, freedom comes with its own challenges and contexts. How much freedom should individuals have? Do they have the freedom to take from others? What if they are really hungry? Do companies have the freedom to charge whatever they want for a product? Does a company have the freedom to harm the environment if it isn't breaking any laws? How much freedom should a country have to imprison its citizens? A list like this could fill a book. Many individuals, countries, and cultures address the question of freedom differently and it can be helpful to engage in spectrum thinking. Eliminate right/wrong value judgments and consider the vast mountain range of ideas on freedom and how all the various nuances and complexities get us closer or farther away from decreasing suffering and increasing happiness.

Let's connect the dots to leadership. Leadership is influence. It follows that the peak of leadership is the collection of ideas that successfully influence and benefit the people around us. The valley of leadership is the collection of ideas that fail to influence others, only have short-term effectiveness, or even cause harm. We can all imagine a boss who raises their voice, belittles their employees, and criticizes every action and it is easy to point out how far in the valley that behavior is. But there is a whole mountain of potential behaviors we could engage in and getting to the top is a matter of identify how effective those behaviors are at influencing others.

Leadership can be just as nuanced and complex as the idea of freedom. Style plays a big role as a leader. Are you charismatic? Matter-of-fact? Friendly? Strict? Strategic? Tactical? Delegator? You likely take on varying amounts of all of these traits and many more. To add more complexity you may change the mixture of leadership traits you exhibit based on the individual or situation. You may even switch between taking an individual perspective to taking a system-wide perspective and then back again. More variation: are you trying to influence a direct report or your boss or a peer? How could binary thinking ever be successful with so many variables that contribute to your ability to influence others?

It may be tempting to adopt binary thinking (it is so much easier), but the truth is it is very rare that any idea is at the very bottom of a valley or the very top of a peak. Almost always an idea will be at some point on the mountainside. Our goal as leaders is to identify which direction leads toward our peak and keep climbing, doing the hard work that gets us closer to that pinnacle. And when you survey the landscape around you from the peak, you will find that there are numerous other peaks and there are many paths to reach similar (or greater) heights. The goal is not to get everyone onto the same peak, but to seek out the highest peak we can find no matter where we start.

Jason Westman

Reference Material

The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris

Behave by Robert Sapolsky