CHETANA’S BACHELOR

OF
MANAGEMENT STUDIES

SUBJECT:
FOUNDATION OF HUMAN
SKILLS

TOPIC:
THINKING STYLE

Submitted to:
PROF. SONAL NEHETE.
 Group No.: 8

Name of the student Roll No.

Payal Balsara 104
Pankaj Mishra 127
Rahul Nilve 130
Divyangini Rahate 139
Balamurgan Pillai 158
Sharon Cardoz 161
INTRODUCTION OF THINKING STYLES
Style is a learned preference of doing a thing in a particular way or of thinking in a
particular manner. By thinking style, we mean a particular manner of thinking. Thinking
style refers to a manner as to how a given individual processes information or how one
relates to a given information.

An individual’s thinking style is his/her characteristic way of processing information.

It’s the way in which an individual acquires knowledge about a given
object/event/situation, etc., organizes one’s thoughts, forms one’s views and opinions,
applying one’s values, solving problems, making decisions, plans, and expresses one-self
to others.

A style is a way of thinking. It is not an ability, but rather a preferred way of using
the abilities one has. A thinking style is a preferred way of thinking. Much of what we
know about thinking styles is due to the work done by American Psychologist Robert
Sternberg.

Sternberg believed that people acquire their thinking styles through socialization.
However, it is also possible to teach styles.
THINKING STYLES
Different people have different thinking styles. There are five thinking styles. These
styles categorize different ways of thinking and problem solving. Following are the five
thinking styles.

 SYNTHESISTS
Synthesist thinkers are creative thinkers who view the world in terms of opposites.
When we say black, they think white; when we say fat, they think thin. Their ideas are
based on guess work. They make new and original things out of their own views. Their
basic approach to solve problems is combining different things to find the best solution.
They are always ready to take risks and are open to ideas. They do not like stability i.e.
they like changes. The details of synthesists are :

a) Appearance -
i. Synthesists appear challenging and skeptical (not easily convinced)
ii. They appear unconnected to the present subject.
iii. They appear aggressive.

b) Like –
i. They like to control the process.
ii. They like to do things in a big way.
iii. They like intellectual arguments.
iv. They like to point out mistakes.

c) Dislike –
i. They do not like the present situation.
ii. They do not like discussion which is based on facts.
iii. They do not like lack of change.
iv. They do not like people pretending to agree.
v. They do not like routine tasks.

d) Strategy to solve problems –

i. They directly face the problems.
ii. They question assumptions.
iii. They observe other people.
iv. They ignore opposing ideas.
v. They handle problems on the basis of guesswork and imagination.

e) Strengths –
i. They can be of great help in preventing bad ideas.
ii. They can open-up new ideas.

f) Weaknesses –
 i. They may act out when they are not being listened to.
ii. They do not follow details.

 REALISTS

Realists thinkers are fast-moving doers. They are corrective, result-oriented and
problem-fixing persons. They work on the basis of facts. They believe that facts should
not be influenced by personal factors. If they are unable to solve a problem, they rely on
an expert. They are optimistic in nature i.e. they always think about things in hopeful
manner. They easily form and express their views.
Realist thinkers always trust their senses, personal experience and facts while taking
important decisions. The details of realists are :

a) Appearance-
i. They appear direct and forceful.
ii. They appear frank and positive.
iii. They quickly form and express their opinions.

b) Like-
i. They like forming strategies and tactics for getting things done.
ii. They like playing with ideas on down to earth level.
iii. They like to have a number of projects at once.

c) Dislike-
i. They do not like talk that they feel is dry, dull or humourless.
ii. They do not like talk that is speculative and abstract.
iii. They do not like facts being influenced by personal opinions.

d) Strategy to solve problems-

i. Their work is based on observation and experiences rather than theory.
ii. They solve problems by setting objectives, fixing and correcting them.

e) Strengths-
i. They can achieve concrete results.
ii. They are good at identifying the resources for solving problems.
iii. They can easily categorize information after observing required data.

g) Weaknesses-
i. They simplify the problem so much that an inaccurate impression of it is formed.
ii. They have low tolerance for ambiguity.
iii. They do not like persons who do not stand up to their expectations.
iv. It is very hard to change their minds.
 PRAGMATISTS

Pragmatic thinkers are flexible thinkers who look for short-cuts and quick pay-offs.
They are interested in practical short-term results and a plan of action that will get the
things started in the right direction without much pains. They believe that whatever works
in a situation, should be done.
Pragmatists have a habit of seeing things as what others really want and not as what
they should want. So they fit in where others fail. The details of pragmatists are :

a) Appearance-
i. They appear energetic and intelligent.
ii. They appear restless, unpredictable and impulsive.
iii. They appear open, humorous and friendly.

b) Like-
i. They like to form plans, tactics and ideas for getting things done.
ii. They playing with ideas on a practical and realistic level.

c) Dislike-
i. They do not like talk that is dull or humourless, abstract or speculative.
ii. They do not like facts and values having equal values.

d) Strategy to solve problems-

i. They use tactics to solve a problem.
ii. They may experiment, to find new solutions to a problem.
iii. They look for quick pay-offs.

e) Strengths-
i. They are good diplomats.
ii. They can tolerate ambiguity.

f) Weaknesses-
i. They agree quickly with other people’s ideas.
ii. They have difficulty in dealing with idealists.
 ANALYST THINKERS

Analyst thinkers think methodically. They like to collect information, measure it,
categorize it, and rationally and methodically get the right answer to any problem. They
believe that if we go scientifically, things will work out. They plan carefully with enough
information to find the ‘best way’. They believe things will go wrong if a detail is
ignored. They like stability. The details of analyst thinkers are :

a) Appearance-
i. They appear cool and studious.
ii. They appear hard to read, perfectionists, thorough disciplined and careful.

b) Like-
i. They like stability.
ii. They like logical evaluations of issues and thoroughness.

c) Dislike-
i. They do not like talk that does not contain logic.
ii. They do not like talk that is too speculative and experimenting.

d) Strategy to solve problems-

i. While solving problems, they systematically analyze all the alternatives.
ii. They search for more data.
iii. They do one thing at a time.

e) Strengths-
i. They can help us to look at the problem from various point of views
ii. They can be useful when the situation requires logical and analytical calculation.

f) Weaknesses-
i. They may lack feedback.
ii. They may be too time consuming.
 IDEALISTS
Idealist thinkers take a broad view of the various available alternatives. They are
future oriented and goal oriented persons. They are willing to consider new ideas.
While taking decisions they always first think what is good for people and society. They
have a tendency to trust others. They are helpful and open in nature and they always want
to do the right thing. They are emotional persons. They hate selfish and dishonest people.
If they find anybody being dishonest to them they stop taking interest in him. Idealist
thinkers always try hard for agreement, and they feel disappointed when people do not
agree with them. If a person is not willing to compromise with other’s point of view then
they do not like him. They are humanitarian persons i.e. they are always concerned with
welfare of people. The details of idealists are :

a) Appearance-
i. They appear as people who respond alternatively and receptively.
ii. They always show a supportive and open smile.
iii. When others speak, they have a habit of listening properly, they show their
interest in other persons talk by nodding their head and doing other gestures.

b) Like-
i. They like feeling-level discussions about people and their problems.
ii. They like discussions about values, judgements and emotions.

c) Dislike-
i. They do not like conflicting arguments.
ii. They do not like open argument.
iii. They do not like talk that is dehumanizing.

d) Strategy to solve problems-

i. They look at the whole situation.
ii. They practice receptive listening.
iii. They focus on large range issues.

e) Strengths-
i. They can induce us on real impact of our decision.
ii. They are empathetic, tolerant and open.
iii. They can be excellent at gathering information.
iv. They are good at increasing group participation.

f) Weaknesses-
i. They avoid setting goals and standards.
ii. Sometimes, they may be overwhelmed by emotions.
TYPES OF THINKING STYLES
Sternberg (1997), conceptualized a theory of mental self-government, which runs
parallel to the governments we have in the world.
Roughly speaking, governments serve three functions – executive, legislative and
judicial. The executive branch carries out the initiatives, policies and laws enacted by the
legislative branch, and the judicial branch evaluates whether the laws are being correctly
applied. Similarly, people also need these functions in their own thinking and working.
Some important thinking styles are as follows:

 EXECUTIVE STYLE

1. They like to follow rules and prefer problems that are pre-structured or prefabricated.
2. They like to fill in the gaps within existing structures rather than to create structures
themselves.
3. Their preferred activities are solving given mathematical problems, applying rules to
problems, enforcing rules.
4. The occupation that can be a good fit to executives thinkers include, legal profession,
police, administrative work, etc.

 LEGISLATIVE STYLE
1. People with legislative thinking styles come up with their own ways of doing things
and prefer to decide for themselves what they will do and how they will do it.
2. Legislative people like to create their own rules and prefer problems that are not
pre-structured and pre-fabricated.
3. Some of the preferred kinds of activities of these thinking styles include writing creative
papers, designing innovative projects, creating new business or educational system, etc.
4. Some kinds of occupation they prefer are creative writer, scientist, artist, sculptor,
investment banker, policy maker and architect.

 JUDICIAL STYLE

1. Judicial people like to evaluate rules and procedures.

2. They prefer problems in which one analyzes and evaluates existing things and ideas.
3. They like activities such as writing critiques, giving opinions, judging people and their
work and evaluating programs.
4. Their preferred kinds of occupations are judge, critic, program evaluator, consultant,
admission officer, etc.
FORMS OF THINKING STYLES
The theory of mental self-government specifies four forms: Monarchic, Hierarchic,
Oligarchic and Anarchic. Each form results in a different way of approaching the world and
its problems.

 MONARCHIC PERSON

1. Are single – minded and driven.

2. Tend not to let anything get in the way of solving problem.
3. They can be counted on to get things done, given that they have set their mind to it.
4. Monarchic people perform best when there is a single clear goal.
5. They deal best with one need at a time, devoting to it almost all energy and resources.

 HIERARCHIC PERSON

1. Has a hierarchy of goals and recognizes the need to set priorities.

2. Tend to be more accepting of complexity than the monarchic person.
3. Recognizes the need to view problems from a number of angles as to set priorities
correctly.
4. Hierarchic people can focus on multiple goals at once.
5. They recognize that all goals cannot be fulfilled equally.
6. So, they set priorities for the various goals, and decide when and how much time and
energy to devote to each one.

 OLIGARCHIC PERSON

1. Tend to get motivated by several often competing goals of equal perceived importance.
2. Tend to feel pressured in the face of competing demands on their time and other
resources.
3. When given minimal guidance as to the priorities of the organization in, which they are
involved, they can become effective.
4. These people do well with goals that are of equal weight, but they have difficulty in
assigning priority to goals of different weights.

 ANARCHIC PERSON

1. Tend to have a random approach to problems.

2. They however have a greater potential for creative contribution.
3. They are wide ranging in the scope of things they will consider and so may see solutions
to the problems that others overlook.
4. These people depart from precedent.
5. Often they don’t like or understand the need for rules and regulations.
6. They operate without rules or structure, and create their own problem-solving techniques

LEVELS OF THINKING

Thinking styles differ in level, scope and learning. Levels indicate the way a person
processes information. Sternberg has given 2 types of levels of thinkings – Global and Local.
Just as the Government function at multiple levels. For e.g., Federal, State, City and so on, so
do people. Although the global and local styles are often viewed as two ends of the same
continuum, they are not necessarily expressed in that way. Most people trend to be either
more global or more local. They focus either more on the big picture or more on the small
details. But some people are both. They are equally attentive to the big picture and to the
details.

 GLOBAL

1. People with global thinking styles prefer dealing with broad concepts as well as with
relatively large and often abstract issues.
2. Their constant challenge remains to stay grounded.
3. In simple words, they tend to focus on the forest, sometimes at the expense of the tress.

 LOCAL

1. People who show local thinking styles prefer dealing with details, sometimes minute
ones, which often surround concrete issues.
2. In other words, they tend to focus on the trees, sometimes at the expense of the forest.
3. Their constant challenge is to see the whole forest and not just its individual elements.

Although most people have a preference to work at either a more global or a more
local level, a key to successful problem solving in many situations is being able to
traverse between levels. If one is interested in working at a given level, it is often helpful
to pair up with someone more interested in the other level.
THINKING STYLES OF MENTAL SELF-GOVERNMENT

Style Characteristics Example

FUNCTIONS
Likes to create, invent, Likes doing science
Legislative design, do things his or herprojects, writing poetry,
own way. stories, or music.
Likes to follow directions, Likes to solve problems,
Executive do what he or she is told. write papers on assigned
topics, do artwork, build
from designs.
Likes to judge and evaluate Likes to write critical
Judicial people and things. essays, give feedback and
advice.

FORMS
Likes to do one thing at a Likes to immerse self in a
Monarchic time, devoting to it almost single project, whether art,
all energy and resources. science, history, business.
Likes to do many things at Likes to budget time for
once, setting priorities for doing homework so that
Hierarchic which to do when and how more time and energy is
much time and energy to devoted to important
devote to each. assignments.
Likes to do many things at Likes to devote sufficient
Oligarchic once, but has trouble settingtime to reading
priorities. comprehension items, so
may not finish standardized
verbal-ability test.
Likes to take a random In conversations, jumps
Anarchic approach to problems; from one point to another;
dislike guidelines, and starts things but doesn’t
almost all constraints. finish them.

LEVELS
Global Likes to deal with big Writes an essay on the
picture, generalities, global message and
abstractions. meaning of a work of art.
Local Likes to deal with details, Writes an essay describing
concrete examples. the details of work of art.

CONCLUSION
Once we know our thinking styles and the thinking styles of persons with whom we
Have to interact, we can easily understand their values, rules, tendencies, their decision
making styles and their management styles knowing different thinking styles, helps us
to develop good rapport with others and it helps us to know what we should not do
while dealing with different persons of different thinking styles.
BIBLIOGRAPHY :

Foundation of human skills

1. K.T. Basantani.
2. Champa L.
3. Vinay V. Prabhu.
4. Vipan Kumar.