Six Thinking Hats

“The main difficulty of thinking is confusion.”

This straightforward statement is at the heart of the Six Thinking Hats method. Since people can think in multiple ways, including with emotions, information, logic, hope, and creativity, they may try to do too much when they are making decisions. In addition, people may tend to fall into one dominant way of thinking, missing opportunities to make better decisions by using different methods. This is why de Bono emphasizes The Importance of Parallel Thinking instead.

“The Six Hats method […] allows the brain to maximize its sensitivity in different directions at different times.”

The brain is presensitized to react to certain situations in a certain way. The Six Hats method allows the brain to think about the situation differently by thinking about it in different ways over time. The method offers Flexibility Within a Structured Thinking Session in terms of how and when the hats are used as thinking modes.

“Instead of judging our way forward, we need to design our way forward.”

De Bono says that judging a reaction to a situation based on past events, as the mind traditionally tends to do, only works in a stable world. In a changing world, standard situations may no longer apply. The Six Hats method is, he argues, more constructive because it focuses on what can be rather than what is.

“The Six Hats method provides neutral and objective exploration of a subject—argument does not.”

The Six Hats method is based on Confucian principles of treating others correctly regardless of their status or relationship to oneself. De Bono contrasts these principles to other ways of conducting a discussion, particularly the argument, which sets up participants for confrontation and adversarial thinking. There is a place for individual ego, but it lies not in showing off but in seeing how many ideas can be generated under each of the “hats.”

“The neutrality of the colors allows the hats to be used without embarrassment. Thinking becomes a game with defined rules.”

De Bono stresses the importance of referring to the hats by their colors rather than the modes of thinking for which they stand because of The Benefits of Game-Playing in the Six Hats method. The colors allow a request for a change to be neutral, not charged with emotion. He gives the example of asking someone to take off their black hat, claiming it is easier than asking the person to be less cautious. When the hats are used sequentially, following an initial blue hat with a red hat mode can allow people with strong feelings to get them out into the open right away.

“Only if it becomes essential to choose between them should the choice be made.”

The Importance of Parallel Thinking can be seen in the white hat mode. If there are two pieces of information offered, they should be put down “in parallel,” with both given merit. Ideally the choice between them would be made at a later stage in the sequence unless, as de Bono says, it is truly essential to make the choice at this stage.

“Japanese culture was not influenced by those Greek thinking idioms which were refined and developed by medieval monks as a means of proving heretics to be wrong.”

Here again de Bono stresses The Importance of Parallel Thinking as he attributes this thinking mode to Eastern cultural influences. Just as he has aligned parallel thinking with Confucian thought, he now aligns it with Japanese culture. De Bono claims that the type of argument put forth by ancient Greek philosophers was developed by medieval monks in order to justify the persecution of heretics—a claim that is historically incorrect and reductive, but which suits his rhetorical strategies.

“If emotions and feelings are not permitted as inputs in the thinking process, they will lurk in the background and affect all the thinking in a hidden way.”

Although emotions and feelings are nonrational, they have an important part in the six hats method because they are real to the individual. Gut feelings, senses of right and wrong, and hunches all have a place in a discussion. The red hat permits their expression.

“Any good decision must be emotional in the end.”

De Bono places emphasis on “in the end” in making this statement. Red hat thinking puts on the table the points at which emotion can affect thinking: The expression of background emotions such as fear or jealousy; the prevalence of an initial perception; and the point of decision-making. It is appropriate to bring emotions into this final stage, because they can provide real value to the decision-making process.

“It is exactly this artificiality that is the real value of the red hat.”

Red hat feelings can be expressed at any time in the course of a meeting or discussion, as long as they are stated under the cover of the red hat, invoking The Benefits of Game-Playing. Examples include saying “I want to make a red hat statement” or “my red hat view is … “ (60). The red hat idiom makes views seem less personal and reduces the temptation to constantly express emotions.

“Far too often proof is no more than lack of imagination.”

De Bono makes this statement in the context of black hat thinking. Facts are more valuable than deductions that proceed from logic that has not looked at a situation from every possible angle. He argues that parallel thinking, which lays possibilities down alongside each other, is a more valuable way to reach outcomes than logical deduction, thereby stressing The Importance of Parallel Thinking.

“It is a waste of time setting out to be creative if you are not going to recognize a good idea.”

De Bono points out that people are not naturally sensitized to finding the benefits in an idea the way they are sensitized to finding danger. The habit must be developed. Yellow hat thinking forces people to spend time looking for value.

“If it is not put on the map, we have no choice at all.”

Ideas generated during yellow hat thinking can range from the overoptimistic to the logical and practical. It is important to follow parallel thinking, putting all ideas on the “map,” in this mode, because otherwise a benefit that may well come true could be overlooked. De Bono suggests noting all ideas, regardless of their probability, while aligning them with a simple classification of their likelihood.

“Without the framework of possibilities we cannot even see the information in new ways.”

De Bono makes this point in the overview to Chapter 5 to introduce the importance of green hat thinking. He maintains that progress cannot arise purely from analyzing information or making logical deductions. Creativity is needed for progress to occur.

“Lateral thinking is directly based on information behavior in active self-organizing information systems.”

Lateral thinking is the process of solving problems by generating as many alternative answers as possible (See: Index of Terms). It shares the concept of patterning systems with vertical thinking, which looks at organized brain patterns to generate responses to situations. However, lateral thinking looks for asymmetric patterns—sudden jumps in insight.

“The ability to use provocations is an essential part of lateral thinking.”

Provocations, which are provided by nature, are accidents that arise because of asymmetrical patterns and are recognized as good. An example is the discovery of penicillin through mold that grew in a culture dish. People can wait for provocations to occur or try to produce them deliberately by way of lateral thinking.

“The provocation brings about an effect, and it is the value of this effect which justifies the provocation.”

De Bono suggests finding provocations through random word associations, such as picking the word “frog” to consider a new way to market a product. There need not be a reason for the association; the person making it looks for value in the statement after it has been said. The word simply provides a different starting point.

“There is no reason at all to suggest that the first answer has to be the best one.”

Green hat thinking is very much in accord with the principles of parallel thinking. The first answer that comes to mind for a particular question should be noted as the decision-maker or group continues to look for alternatives. When there are various alternatives, the best one can be chosen with regard to how it aligns to the needs and resources associated with the question.

“It should be part of the creative process to shape and tailor an idea so that it gets closer to filling two sets of needs.”

The two needs that an idea must fill are the situation and its constraints, such as cost. They shape the idea rather than rejecting it. The second is the needs of the people who must act on the idea. For instance, if a group is only looking for money-saving ideas, the idea must be seen as saving money.

“The blue hat is the programming hat for human thinking.”

De Bono compares the thought process to the operation of a computer. Just as computers follow programs that tell them what to do, the blue hat orders the sequence of thinking by stating the sequence in which the hats will be used to reach a certain outcome.

“In this book I am concerned with the mapmaking type of thinking in which the terrain is first explored and noted. Then the possible routes are observed and finally a choice of route is made.”

Blue hat thinking is at the heart of de Bono’s metaphor of map-making for the parallel thinking process. Too often, thinking sessions begin with conclusions based on past experience and then look for support for the conclusions. The same thing happens in politics and in the courtroom: Each side begins with an established position. The blue hat provides structure.

“The important thing about a focus is that it should be spelled out in a definite manner.”

A focus can be broad or it can be narrow as long as it is well-defined. The broad focus may contain several tighter foci. For instance, a broad focus might be on finding new market segments for a chain of restaurants, while a tight one might be increasing the use of the facilities at off-peak times.

“The blue hat thinker holds up the target and says, ‘This is it. Shoot in this direction.’”

A facilitator focuses thinking by asking questions, whether they are “fishing” for information or checking out a point with a yes/no answer. The problem itself can be seen as a question—how the group will achieve a certain outcome. It is the facilitator’s role to set specific thinking tasks, such as listing areas of agreement between two parties. If a task can’t be carried out, the facilitator must also note the failure.