As we continue our deep dive into the AQai Model of Adaptability Intelligence, it’s important to reiterate that there’s no “right” or “wrong” in any of the 15 subdimensions —just different. We all approach change and challenges differently and your AQai Score isn’t deterministic; it’s a benchmark—a way of characterizing one’s typical response to change in an empirical and nonjudgmental way, with the understanding that it’s malleable.
Having said that, Thinking Style, one of the subdimensions of Character in the AQai Model, is one of the traits that’s more likely to be stereotyped or claimed as a superpower. We tend to recognize people as being “big picture” thinkers or “detail oriented,” and most people probably consider themselves to be one or the other. Some may even take pride in their style, owning it as a sort of identity.
But we must be careful not to put ourselves in a box.
While it’s true that Thinking Style reflects how we typically process information, make sense of our environment, and approach challenges, it’s not immutable. It can shift based on context, circumstance and even experience.
In fact, real Adaptability Intelligence is what happens when teams (and individuals) learn to do both and flex between the two.
Think about the rookie employee who’s overly concerned about minor details contrasted with the seasoned veteran who knows what really matters. On the other hand, the rookie might bring a fresh perspective to stale processes. These insights and trade-offs happen over time and with experience as we see some big visions fail because of overlooked details, while other initiatives stall from lack of vision.
“As we progress in our careers and in life, we often develop ambidextrous thinking—the ability to zoom out and think strategically, while still drilling into details when needed,” said Competitive Edge CEO Krista Sheets. “For both individuals and organizations, learning to recognize and balance these styles isn’t just a preference—it’s a strategic advantage.”
Can You See The Forest For The Trees?
You’ve probably heard of or known someone who is considered (or maybe considers themselves to be) a “big picture thinker.” These individuals tend to be more visionary, prioritize strategic planning, and excel at innovation and creative problem solving. They’re the future-seers, able to identify long-term opportunities and trends.
Steve Jobs, Microsoft’s Satya Nadella and Jeff Bezos would fall into this category, all three famous for their strategic, long-term vision and knack for giving us vital technologies before we even know we need or want them.
Others thrive on specifics, execution, and nuance. These detail-focused individuals lean into precision and accuracy, and have a tendency toward analysis and risk mitigation, often spotting the errors or “holes” in the plans that others miss.
These aren’t opposing traits—they’re complementary assets. In fact, it’s often the detail-oriented individuals who are working behind the scenes of the visionaries, making those grand ideas come to life. Tim Cook is the perfect example, but also people like Warren Buffet, whose success has been built on strict attention to fundamentals, and Serena Williams whose well-known attention to training details (even borderline obsession) have been key to her athletic success.
Why Both Thinking Styles Matter for Adaptability
When organizations lean too heavily on one type of thinking, it creates blind spots:
- A team of visionaries might generate bold ideas but fail to execute them effectively or not see the ancillary or downstream implications of their plans.
- A team focused on execution may become rigid or risk-averse, unable to pivot when circumstances change.
Organizations that understand and integrate both styles are more resilient and better equipped to navigate complex, fast-changing environments.
Adaptable teams—and leaders—need to understand when to think big and when to drill down. This cognitive flexibility—the ability to shift perspectives and adapt one’s thinking to new situations—is a key predictor of leadership success (Source: Center for Creative Leadership) in dynamic environments. And data from Deloitte shows that cognitively diverse teams solve problems faster and make better decisions more often than non-diverse teams (Source: Deloitte Insights).
Building Balanced Teams: Bringing Both Perspectives Together
So how can organizations leverage these ways of thinking that are seemingly at odds for greater adaptability? One of the most effective ways is to design teams that balance different Thinking Styles. Here’s how:
- Map cognitive diversity. The AQai Adaptability Assessment can identify whether team members lean more toward strategic or operational thinking. Having this baseline and common language to work from is essential in building Adaptability Intelligence without alienation.
- Foster cross-style collaboration. Pair big-picture thinkers with detail-oriented colleagues on projects—especially during planning and decision-making phases. The broad-spectrum approach and collaboration will help both styles keep an open mind.
- Create space for both styles. Structure meetings to include time for broad exploration and detailed review. For example, use frameworks like the Zoom Out/Zoom In approach to explore long-term goals and short-term actions in tandem (Source: Deloitte Insights).
- Encourage appreciation for all styles. Leaders should model and reward behaviors that demonstrate an appreciation for the “other” style—e.g., visionaries praising attention to detail, or operators acknowledging the importance of strategic thinking. Showing that both have value can encourage individuals to speak up, rather than keeping their heads down because they assume their point of view will be shot down.
Developing Ambidextrous Thinking
We all have a tendency to lean more towards one Thinking Style over the other. Fortunately, the Adaptability Assessment shows you where your natural, baseline, comfort zone lies. Armed with this insight, you can learn to recognize when those comfortable reflexive habits may not be serving you well in a given situation. Developing Adaptability Intelligence means learning to flex outside of that comfort zone. Over time, individuals can cultivate a more balanced approach that enhances their leadership capacity and decision-making.
To build this ambidextrous thinking:
- Flip the lens. Big-picture thinkers should ask “What’s missing in the execution?” Detail-oriented thinkers should ask “What’s the broader impact?”
- Take on unfamiliar roles. Volunteer for projects that challenge your default mode of thinking—e.g., project management for visionaries, innovation initiatives for detail-focused individuals. Working outside your comfort zone allows you to flex your Adaptability muscle so that it’s conditioned for when you need it unexpectedly.
- Use both thinking modes intentionally. In team meetings or personal planning, consciously switch between high-level and granular viewpoints. Be intentional about bringing the “zoom out” and “zoom in” discussion into brainstorming and planning sessions. Put it on the agenda and make it part of the process.
Adaptability Is a Team Sport—and a Thinking Skill
Thinking Style isn’t just a personality quirk—it’s a core component of how people show up at work and how teams make decisions. Organizations that acknowledge and integrate both detail-oriented and big-picture thinking not only make better plans, they respond more nimbly to uncertainty.
“As you grow in your career, developing ambidextrous thinking allows you to better anticipate change, see connections that others miss, and lead more effectively across a wide range of challenges,” Sheets said. “The Adaptability Assessment helps you identify where you are now and identify some strategies that can help you learn to shift your thinking as the situation demands.” To get a baseline on your team’s Thinking Style so you can build a more adaptable and ambidextrous organization, contact us for an AQai Adaptability Assessment today.