Over time we can get very comfortable in our ways.  We do things as they've always been done.  In this state, sometimes we can find ourselves constraining new ideas or stifling new possibilities as they come to us.



## Why Not Go For the Banana

Once there was a study done on monkeys where a group of the primates were gathered together and one of the monkeys was let loose to go fetch a banana.  If the monkey touched the banana, the monkey who touched it plus all the monkeys in the group were sprayed with cold water.  In repeat experiments, when the monkey was let loose to fetch the banana, the other monkeys in the group began to hold the monkey back so he couldn't go.  Soon the monkey stopped going for the banana entirely.

Then a new monkey was rotated in for the loose monkey.  The rest of the group had experienced the cold spray, but this new monkey had not.  The group held him back consistently, and soon the new monkey, surely confused at the resistance of the group to a nice banana, stopped going for the banana entirely.

Rotations continued one by one until eventually the whole group had been swapped out.  They continued to hold each other back.  No monkey went for the banana, yet not a single monkey in the group had ever received a spray of cold water.

I read of this study in a book recently.  The author wrote that he went to find the original study for more learning and found that the story of the study wasn't even real.  People were repeating it when it had apparently never happened.  Ironic?  And yet there is something striking about this story that does bear repeating.

## Why We Constrain Ideas

So why do we constrain ideas?  As illustrated, this desire for the status quo can come quite naturally and even illogically.  Things have always been done that way, we say, and things have turned out all right for us.

Perhaps we don't understand this new thing.  Who knows what the unintended consequences are?  Perhaps we'll fail at it.  Perhaps it'll be worse than what we have.

Perhaps we or someone else already tried something like that before.  Perhaps it didn't work out well for those involved in the place that it was attempted.

Perhaps we feel like we're betraying old ideas and customs.  Perhaps we feel like we're admitting we are wrong or were misguided in the past.  

We might just like our current ideas.  We were in the group that thought them.  We've built great things with them.  We feel ownership of these ideas and the results.

If something new begins to take over, perhaps we'll lose relevancy.  We may feel threatened.

## Letting Ideas Live

What can we do to let new ideas live?  Perhaps we don't need to [strike them down quickly as "bad"](/post/hearing-bad-ideas).  We can let them linger, hear and learn more.  With a growth-oriented mindset, this can become more natural.  Things are always changing.

We can realize that perfection is rarely achieved.  That means that things could be better.  We can really live in a mode of continuous improvement instead of just giving it lip service.

We can separate ourselves from our ideas or our way of doing things.  We don't want to say or think of ourselves as "the guy that thought of that".  We can let ideas stand for themselves, using language such as "the idea of how we..." versus "the idea that Jake had was...".

We can cultivate an inclusive way of doing things.  We can invite participation from all.  We can encourage diversity of thought through listening and acceptance.  We can take ideas from wherever they come from and not be predisposed to dislike certain sources.

We can forgive ideas we didn't agree with in the past and allow people to voice new ideas of potential virtue.

We can be willing to try, really try, out the new idea, and let results speak for themselves.

Are there ways that you can identify where you have seen yourself or your organization stifle new ideas?  What could you do to help these new ideas live and potentially see value from them?  Are there new ideas that you've heard recently that you could help support and investigate?

Often we get comfortable in our ways and end up constraining new ideas and possibility.

Constraint of New Ideas

Language is powerful.  It's super interesting to discern viewpoints based on language used.  We make value statements all the time.  Depending on how we view something, we'll describe it differently.  This is just as true in software and software dev as anything.



## Everyone Has Opinions

We all have opinions.  This is natural.  We categorize things all the time.  We have to sort through a lot of data every day, and we form opinions on everything.  We should share our opinions.  Our opinions should be honest.  We're should steer things in directions that we think are good.  But even in those times we're not meaning to share our opinions, often we are.

## A Few Examples

Listen for some of these during your next day at work.  Depending on what someone thinks of something, you might hear (or yourself say) one or the other of these phrases or any combination of value statements in between -- all while talking about the same subject!

Regarding ___, you might hear:

- A shared library: "gold-plated" or "bloated" vs. "robust"
- Non-framework code: "organic" vs. "spaghetti code"
- MVP: "simple" or "pared down" vs. "missing basic functionality" or "barebones"
- A process: "organized" vs. "conformity"
- Decision points: "ad hoc" vs. "unorganized" or "clueless"
- Decision making: "flexible" vs. "free-for-all"
- One's position or opinion: "nuanced" vs. "unclear"
- New tech: "new" or "interesting" vs. "shiney"
- Changing opinion or practice: "evolve" vs. "flip flop" or "betray"

## Trying to Speak Objectively

Sometimes it's best to keep our opinion to ourselves if our goal is not to share our opinion.  That might happen if we're trying to be objective.  Perhaps we're moderating.  This is hard.  We are pretty transparent.  It's funny to observe supposedly objective journalism.  Stories are written.  The current events are described.  It's hard to not hear the opinions of the journalist in the story.

Another time to try to keep our opinion to ourselves is when we're seeking to understand.  We're gathering information.  We want it unfettered and raw.  We should be careful in any commentary we offer or how we phrase followup questions.  We might end up leading our witness, because it's easy to let our opinions flavor all of our conversation.  Later we'll have a chance to advocate for our opinions.

We verbalize our values all the time.  Sometimes it's not on purpose.  What are some other examples you can think of -- subjects where two people, seeing things differently, will use very different value statement phrases?

Listen closely, and you'll hear peoples' opinions in their choice of words.

Verbal Value Statements

When we are exposed to a new thing, we might not at first see its full grandeur.  After a bit of context and perspective, our appreciation for that thing may increase substantially.



## Subjects are Deep and Broad 

There are so many fields of study in this world.  Many of them have been around for a long time (eg, any study of our natural world)!  When we are first exposed to a new field of study or a new idea, we see the surface.  We don't know what the expert of many dedicated years knows.  Similarly, subjects are broad.  We may not even know what another human being has discovered in this field of study during his cursory investigations of the same.  He may have found something new and foreign to us that we have not experienced ourselves.

## Code You Didn't Write

One of the most fascinating and fantastic things about software is the extreme malleability of the medium.  You can make something out of nothing.  The somethings that we make can take any shape.  Thus the method of problem solving varies much from craftsman to craftsman.

Given the size and lifespan of many software projects today, you'll see and get to work with code that you didn't originally write.  You may open a file, run through the code, and remark, "what was he thinking when he wrote this?!" -- as if he wasn't thinking what you're thinking.  And he wasn't.  But he was thinking.  In his implementation he had a perspective -- a context consisting of many things.  The combined forces of his knowledge, experience, the team, the timeline, the leadership, the company culture, company growth stage, tool availability, operational environment, customer expectations, clarity of requirements, evolutionary stage of the product, and on.  We don't see things now as that original craftsman did.  We have a new context through which we're interpreting things and making decisions.  Were we to see more clearly the context under which this software was created, our appreciation for the person and the product would likely grow.

## Crossing Disciplines 

In software teams, and any large endeavor, we employ the specialties of many people to make something larger and more interesting.  A cross functional team may consist of a software developer, ui/ux designer, product manager, operations engineer, data scientist, and more.   

The thing that we create together, we can generally all appreciate.  But do we see as clearly the expertise brought to the team from each of these disciplines?  Sometimes we may feel that one of these disciplines is lacking and letting the project down.  A bit more context into the depth and breadth of the subject may increase our appreciation of that discipline and the people attempting to perform it.  It's hard, it's deep, it has taken time, effort, and focus to get to the current level of performance -- just like your own discipline.  If performance is really lacking, help that person. But before judging too harshly, try to gain some context, and it might assist your own appreciation.

What is something that you once didn't have much appreciation for but after some investigation and added context grew in your appreciation?

When you have the background of context, you're able to better see the value of things.

Context Assists Appreciation

Ideas happen all the time.  Statistically, we'll hear some bad ones.  At least we think they're bad.  How can we best hear and react to these bad ideas?



## Ideas Have Value

First, a basic foundation for ideas:  Ideas come from people's thoughts.  People's ideas are the catalyst for innovation -- things to try, explore, and from which real progress can spring.  Progress is important.  People are even more important.  There is value in each.

## Hearing and Learning

Some ideas elicit a strong response from us.  Let's talk about the negative type of response.  Perhaps there's something in our background or perspective that may make us revile at just hearing certain ideas.  If we revile, the conversation will be over.  That one idea will die.  That may be what we want in the end.  But focusing on just the short term consequence of disposing of a bad idea may blind us to other side effects we may cause in immediately, strongly, or without tact opposing a bad idea.  

Let's explore some alternatives:  Listen.  Just take it in.  Keep your composure.  Don't even hint at your dislike of this idea.  Ask clarifying questions.  Ask about how this person got this idea.  Ask about how this idea and any implementations so far have helped them.  Here we're trying to get basic understanding, background information, and gathering any evidence of good that might exist.

Ask about any pitfalls they've experienced.  You don't have any specific lines of thinking at this point but are just inquiring generally.  Now ask about pitfalls that you see.  Don't state that these are fact.  Just ask if the person thinks these one or two pitfalls might apply.  Ask if there are any adjustments they'd make to the idea or implementation to account for these.  Here we're trying to expose in a non-threatening way the real drawbacks that may exist in the idea.

Now if you're feeling composed and generous enough, go a step further in your learning.  Congratulate them on the good things happening to them relative to this idea.  Then ask this person to describe how he thinks this idea might potentially be helpful to you.  Is it a generally useful idea?  Or in what contexts?  You may be surprised with some thoughts this person shares with you that you have not yet thought of.  You may be surprised at their generosity and desire to help you.

## Graceful Disagreement

Even after hearing and learning, you may be unmoved in your opinion.  Or maybe you want to give yourself time to consider what you've heard and learned.  But in the end, you don't have to accept what you think is a bad idea.  It's essential to realize that your hearing and learning do not imply your acceptance.  You are not forced to agree.  By listening you are not stating or even intimating that you agree.

You can give your own opinion or perspective on the idea.  You should be honest to the opinion you hold in your expression.  You also don't have to shove it in this person's face that you think the idea is terrible.  You may not mean to make your disagreement personal.  Do one better than that, and try not to let it be *perceived* as personal.

Remember that what you share as a counter-idea or fresh alternative is another idea in itself.  If you're down-voting an idea, it's good to have an alternative anyway.  You can state plainly that you'd rather not use this idea for you, your context, or your team.  State the specific pitfalls that you don't want to happen to you.  Remember that your relationship with people is more important than a problem to be solved or a task to be finished.  Keep the channels of collaboration and communication open.

The next time you hear an idea you think is bad: hear, learn, be graceful, be honest.

Is this hard for you sometimes?  What helps you avoid the initial bad reaction and inquire more honestly about what you're hearing?

The next time you hear an idea you think is bad: hear, learn, be graceful, be honest.