Alfred Korzybski‘s famous quote ‘the map is not the territory’ reminds us that an abstraction or a reaction is not the thing itself.

The header chart above alludes to the situationally determined nature of thought patterns. We sometimes describe thoughts as occurring in strings, streams, clusters, or constellations – like mind maps. Thoughts are connected to other thoughts in many ways, some of which have been codified as patterns.

Korzybski’s observation also applies to our use of mental models and the way we visualise the connections between thoughts. Such models and visualisations do not capture every aspect or nuance of the reality we experience, however, they can help us to manage complexity within certain bounds. Developing the capacity to skillfully apply the most relevant and beneficial thought mode or pattern to the current situation or problem is nonetheless a worthy undertaking for any nonprofit leader.

As for the elements of design (point, line, shape, form) the classification of thinking patterns works from the small and simple to the large and complex. The point or dot model of the isolated thought may be the simplest, but it is not likely to catch on. Selected examples of thought patterns are highlighted below, and you may wish to consider whether any of them might warrant adding to your thinking skillset.

An underlying theme is that any given visualisation of a thought pattern is not a complete description or analysis of the thing itself – hence ‘the (mind) map is not the territory‘.

Linear Thinking

Linear thinking simplifies a thought process into a series of steps or stages. ‘First think this, then that’, or ‘First this happens, and then that happens’.

Here we take a series of points or dots, and join them up with connectors – most often arranged in a continuous straight line, akin to ‘the arrow of time‘. The roadmap variation on this model makes concessions to variations in the strategic landscape so that there are curves along the way. It is, nonetheless, only a slight variation on the most basic linear thinking model.

Chains offer another version of the straight-line approach, as each link defines the progression from one stage to another in a sequence.

Applied to thinking processes, arrows, roads, and chains all suggest a fixed sequence of thoughts, with the flow of thought being in one direction. A sequence of stops or milestones marks progress along the way to a single defined destination or thought outcome.

Loop Thinking

Loops are yet another variation on the theme of thoughts moving in one direction – albeit curved. The Plan Do Check Act (PDCA) loop or cycle is widely used for continuous improvement and quality management. When applied correctly, the visualisation would include a slope, with the wheel rolling (repeatedly) up ‘the hill of quality’. Alternatively, it could be represented as a spiral, with the second and subsequent iterations being above the previous one. Downward spirals (as in ‘spiraling out of control’) should generally be avoided of course.

Branching Thought

We know that straight-line thinking only applies to a limited set of processes and activities. Creativity and innovation, for example, require the combination of previously separate things to form something unique or new. Divergent and convergent lines of thought engage in an iterative dance in the design thinking (Double Diamond) approach.

Branching is an evolution from simple linear thinking that allows for offshoots to an original main line, something like a railway network with alternative routes being offered to different destinations. Other branching formats include hierarchical structures like org charts, radial structures like ‘hub and spoke’, and network diagrams.

Another branching pattern that is frequently used in deliberations is the argument map. One version of this is the CASE approach – describing the relationship between a Contention, Arguments (for and against), Sources, and Evidence.

Matrix thinking

When we use thought processes that involve combinations of two categories, values, variables, factors etc., we can use the spreadsheet or matrix approach to thought relationships. Depending on the selection of cells within the row and column array, we will identify different thought products or outcomes.

Plexus thinking

We use the name solar plexus to describe the bundle of nerves, organs, and ‘tubes’ within our midsection, but we call our neurological plexus the brain.

‘Plex‘ was originally part of words like complex, duplex, and in recent history, multiplex. The Latin ‘plicare‘ means ‘to fold’ or ‘to bend’. When used in ‘complex’ it refers to an intricate or complicated association or assemblage of related things, parts, units, etc.

The abbreviated word ‘plex‘ has been applied to many complex connected forms – including the subtle forces at work when we seek to understand systems. A system may be thought of as one thing e.g. a governance system, but those of us who work in or use systems understand that they are really about a complicated set of relationships between functions, people, processes, facilities, technologies, environments, locations, and time. Various factors, elements, and forces peculiar to local system design and environment are involved.

In systems thinking, thought patterns are part of how individuals and organisations perceive and interact with complex systems. This discipline emphasises understanding interconnections and patterns within whole systems. Two of the key thinking patterns used in systems thinking are:
Mental Models: These are deeply ingrained assumptions and generalisations that influence how we understand the world and take action. Changing thought patterns involves altering these mental models.
Feedback Loops: Thought patterns can create reinforcing or balancing feedback loops within systems, affecting system behavior and outcomes.

A static 2D chart does not convey the spatial depth of a plex, and even animated 3D models may fail to reflect the subtlety of the relationships between the elements in this more complex thought pattern. The mesh and constellation examples shown below are a pale imitation of the dynamics and relationships involved in many situations for which a plex could be developed. At least with the astronomical metaphor of a constellation, there is a hint of the vastness of deep space.

The Holarchy of Thought

Thoughts may also be described as holons within a holarchy of thought – a thinking ecosystem. When we consider the relationships between parts and the whole in such an ecosystem, we may recognise a single thought as a small component of a nested set of successively larger, more complex systems.

The holarchy chart below offers one description of the nested levels of this thinking ecosystem, from the single thought up to worldview. One could extend this further of course, to universal consciousness and other ethereal heights, however, this version will suffice for secular purposes.

• Single Thought: The basic unit of the holarchy. It is an isolated idea or piece of information. For example, “The sky is blue.”
• Complex Thought: A collection of single thoughts that form a more intricate idea. For instance, “The sky is blue because of the way the Earth’s atmosphere scatters sunlight.”
• Concept: A broader understanding that integrates multiple complex thoughts. An example would be the concept of atmospheric science, which encompasses various explanations about weather, climate, and the behavior of the atmosphere.
• Theory: A coherent group of concepts that explain a wide range of phenomena. For example, the theory of climate change includes concepts from atmospheric science, ecology, and human impact on the environment.
• Paradigm: An overarching framework that shapes how a particular field of knowledge is understood. It includes multiple theories and guides the research and thinking within that field. For instance, the scientific paradigm of environmental science influences how we study and address ecological issues.
• Worldview: The most comprehensive level, encompassing paradigms from various fields to form a holistic perspective on the world. It integrates diverse areas of knowledge, including science, philosophy, culture, and personal experience, to shape an individual’s overall understanding and interpretation of reality.

Thought modes and patterns

A thought pattern that I have long used for notetaking and planning purposes is the mind map. The software I have found most useful for this is unsurprisingly called The Brain.

A simplified version of the thought relationships they employ is offered in the following chart.

Psychologists offering Cognitive Behaviour Therapy engage their clients in reflection on the way automatic thoughts arise, and how they might gain control over this process.

Gianni Sarcone’s Interdisciplinary Thinking Patterns offer a menu of four thinking modes for problem-solving: Correlative thinking; Logical thinking; Lateral thinking; and Non-conceptual thinking. Similar to de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats, these modes of thought offer a menu of approaches to problem-solving and decision-making. While we may each have a preference for one or two of these thought modes, we can learn how to expand our repertoire of thinking methods so that we have more flexibility in applying the most relevant and useful mode for the situation we are facing.

Just as ‘situational leadership’ demands that we adopt different management styles according to the experience, skills, and maturity of the people we are working with, so too is decision-making context-driven. We draw from our repertoire of thinking modes to apply ‘situational decision-making‘.

As illustrated in the chart below, different disciplines reference various thought patterns, each using the concept in unique ways to understand and influence behavior, decision-making, and creativity. Each discipline leverages the concept of thought patterns to explore and enhance understanding within its specific context, highlighting the versatility and importance of this concept across various fields:

• Psychology: Focuses on identifying and changing negative thought patterns to improve mental health.
• Neurology: Examines neural activity and pathways that underlie thought patterns
• Cognitive Science: Studying cognitive biases and problem-solving strategies
• Sociology: Analysing socialisation and collective consciousness
• Philosophy: Examining reasoning and epistemology
• Education: Enhancing learning through metacognition and constructivist approaches.
• Literature: Developing narrative techniques and theme
• Business and Management: Improving strategic and innovative thinking
• Systems Thinking: Analyses how thought patterns influence perceptions and actions within complex systems
• Notetaking: Utilises structured methods to capture and organise information, enhancing understanding through recognising patterns
• AI and Machine Learning: Recognising data patterns and simulating human cognition
• Marketing and Advertising: Understanding consumer behavior and persuasion

Leader Development and Versatility

While this survey of selected thought modes and patterns is by no means comprehensive, it nonetheless encourages nonprofit leaders to reflect on their repertoire of thinking skills, and engage in professional development to permit more versatile ‘situational decision-making‘.

See also:
Thinking about Thinking Hats
Problems ‘for’ and ‘of’ Governance
Strategic Archery
Multifocal Views of Organisational Culture
Magnetic and Attention Field Insights
Actors, Factors, and Vectors of Change