HAS "MINDSET-SHIFT" BEEN OVERSOLD?
- Admin
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
Updated: 1 hour ago
Welcome back Humantific Journal readers.
It's wonderful to see interest continuing to rise in the subjects of innovation, sensemaking, changemaking, complexity, cognition, culture building, etc. The reality is; as practitioners it’s not possible for us to digest and comment on the avalanche of posts related to these exciting subjects appearing on LinkedIn each week. To navigate the firehose we tend to pick and choose posts and recurring subjects related to our work that either delight us or call out for some clarity.
One of those repeating subjects that we see being creatively depicted and redepicted on-line from numerous different directions, often ambitiously, but not so accurately is “Mindset”.
SHARING SOME PRACTICE-BASED OBSERVATIONS
In the real-world, when we go to meet organizational leaders for the first round of innovation capacity building conversations the subject of “Mindset” often bubbles up. Some of the ambitious on-line depictions of “Mindset” end up cascading into real-world conversations.
Over the years we have been asked to help-out with several struggling innovation capacity building initiatives inside large organizations and in doing so found that “Mindsets” had been sold as the silver bullet prelude to CultureShift.
In the marketplace, the selling of “Mindsets-Shift” is often sold with the giant palatable presumption that everyone on-board already has the skills needed for tackling complex challenges in cross-disciplinary contexts.
Encountering that mix for more than a decade in various contexts we came to realize that in order to set realistic expectations regarding CultureShift there was a need to articulate not only what "Mindset-Shift" is and is not but what the bigger picture is related to Innovation capacity building.
"MINDSET-SHIFT" POPULARITY
Many of our Humantific Journal readers will know that the terms “Mindset” and "Mindset-Shift" have been around in the consulting community for numerous decades (see ORIGINS below). It’s a term that has cycled in and out many times. Whether we all like it or not, in 2023-2025 "Mindset-Shift" is back in full force. Part of its reappearance seems to be that many diverse disciplines are seeking to become operational, specifically in the complexity arenas of Organizational ChangeMaking and Societal ChangeMaking.
As various groups are arriving with a diversity of suitcases from social sciences/psychology, engineering, design, operational research, action research, systems, etc. numerous perspectives on “Mindset” appear. In some suitcases an emphasis on shifting “Mindsets” is held in high regard, in other suitcases not so much.
Whether we all like it or not, often in organizational contexts “Mindset-Shift” experiences take the form of inviting guest speakers, watching innovation related YouTube videos, conducting reflective circle conversations, discussing theories, philosophies, distributing powerpoints, reading innovation books on openness, growth, complexity theory, presenting talks on self-awareness, embodiment, agency, imagination, play, etc.
It’s no secret that as a product, as a rather lite-weight intervention "Mindset-Shift" is an easy sell, good fit in this shrinking attention-span era, in those contexts where easy solutions are hoped for and sought to highly complex organizational and societal challenges, however unrealistic that might be..:-)
If “Mindset-Shift” represents expression of who we want to become, what we want to be open to and embody, still required are sharable mechanisms to make that desire real and to activate that in inclusive strategically effective changemaking ways. Chatting up “Mindsets” is not such a mechanism.
In our Humantific practice, the topic of "Mindshift" or “Mindset-Shift” is considered an introduction to the introduction of innovation capacity building. It’s an important prelude. In our work with organizations "Mindset-Shift" is a never fully baked appetizer on the menu, not the entree.
TURNING POINT CONVERSATIONS
For us, an important turning point conversation with leaders responsible for innovation capacity building is around the realization that onboarding an arsenal of easy-lift "MindSet-Shift" experiences, however appealing, useful, fun and even therapeutic that might be, is not going to result in adaptive capacity or CultureShift.
In terms of setting realistic expectations, what we use in conversations with leadership teams is the simple, three-part Capacity Building Model (shown above) that points out the often missing part of the equation is SkillShift. It sounds simple but in the avalanche of often superficial posts on social media this key aspect of enabling is missing.
Without the heavier lift of SkillShift represented, robust innovation/changemaking capacity will remain elusive and nothing much is going to change. Like a multi-layer cake, Mindshift, Skillshift and CultureShift are intertwined.
Of course lets not miss the irony of rising interest in and acknowledgement of complexity with the simaltaneous rise in the selling of "Mindset-Shift". See any disconnect there?
IS "MINDSET-SHIFT" EMERGENT?
Having operated our Complexity Navigation skillbuilding program, working with organizational leaders, for more than a decade, we do understand that making "Mindset-Shift" 100% prescriptive is counterproductive as participants will shift, co-create, deepen, reinvent and expand their “Mindsets” during SkillShift. Some of the teams early, general notions of "Mindset-Shift" might be refined or altered as deeper understanding of innovation dynamics, sensemaking, cognition, process, emergence, scanning, complex challenge framing are on-boarded. Savy organizational leaders tend to understand that 100% emergence, each team reinventing the wheel each day, tends to be super time consuming/expensive.
How emergence gets combined and interconnected to sharing accelerated understanding of sensemaking and changemaking is a key complexity in this work.
Has "Mindset-Shift" been over sold in the marketplace? Increasingly yes. Is it useful to distinguish between "Mindset-Shift" and SkillShift? Big Yes!
What we do is connect SkillShift with several key dimensions of applied changemaking, actionizing open systemic challenge framing, sensemaking, ambidexterity, cognitive inclusion, maximizing brainpower, Strategic Psychological Safety and how they can be all connected and operationalized. A broader connection conversation for another day.
Are YOU among the organizational leaders figuring out that "Mindset-Shift" is not going to result in SkillShift or CultureShift? Lets talk...
Hope this is helpful Humantific readers.
END.
HUMANTIFIC COMPLEXITY NAVIGATION ACADEMY
For more information on Complexity Navigation SkillBuilding send us an email: kickitup (at) humantific (dot) com
Coming Soon / Stay Tuned: HAS EMERGENCE BEEN OVERSOLD?
“MINDSET” ORIGINS
Prompt: What is the origin of the term mindset?
CHATGPT SAID:
“The term "mindset" originates from the combination of two English words: "mind" and "set." It began appearing in written English in the early 20th century, though its popular use evolved significantly later.
Etymology:
Mind: Refers to one's mental faculties, consciousness, or thoughts.
Set: In this context, "set" means a fixed or established condition.
So, “mindset” literally means a fixed state or disposition of the mind.
First Known Use:
The Oxford English Dictionary and other etymological sources trace the first known use of mindset to around 1909–1920, primarily in psychological or sociological writing referring to a habitual or characteristic mental attitude.
Popularization:
The term became especially influential in contemporary discourse thanks to Carol Dweck, a Stanford psychologist, whose book "Mindset: The New Psychology of Success" (2006) introduced the distinction between fixed mindset and growth mindset. While she didn’t coin the term, her research brought it into mainstream psychology, education, and business.”
Summary:
Origin: Early 20th century English.
Meaning: A fixed mental attitude or disposition.
Popularized by: Carol Dweck in the 2000s (though used earlier in academic and psychological literature).