Why slow problem-solving staff should be cherished

A corporate environment often commends swiftness, lauding those who, like sprinters, dash to the finish line with quick results.

But the marathon runners, those taking time to produce more considered outcomes, may possess an intellectual edge.

Recent research offers an illuminating perspective, proposing that a slower, more deliberate approach to complex problem-solving could be indicative of higher intelligence.

The implications of these findings might just transform perceptions of productivity in the professional sphere across East Africa.

Prepare to delve into an intriguing exploration of speed, intellect, and their confluence in the workplace and change your possible incorrectly held workplace biases.

Challenging conventional wisdom, a groundbreaking study by Michael Schirner, Gustavo Deco, and Petra Ritter, reports that quick thinking does not necessarily correlate with high intelligence.

Through a learning algorithm developed to build personalised brain network models, the researchers reveal a complex interplay between intelligence, processing speed, functional connectivity, and brain synchrony.

Their study of 650 Human Connectome Project participants uncovers surprising findings in that participants with higher intelligence scores take more time to solve difficult problems.

Moreover, the slower solvers have higher average functional connectivity. Simulations illustrate a mechanistic link between these elements and demonstrate that reduced synchrony can lead decision-making circuits in the brain to hastily jump to conclusions.

Meanwhile, higher synchrony facilitates better integration of evidence and more robust human working memory.

Various scientists have been correlating reaction times with intellectual performance for over a century, cementing the idea that intelligent people think faster.

Fascinatingly, this research provides an important exception to the rule. Participants with higher intelligence proved quicker only when tests were straightforward or simpler.

Complex tests requiring extensive problem-solving showed the same research sample participants to actually be slower, spending more time to arrive at correct solutions.

The study defines intelligence as the performance in psychometric tests in various cognitive domains like verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, or working memory.

It uncovers a consistent pattern where individuals who perform well in one domain tend to do well in others, leading to the derivation of a general factor of intelligence, called the g-factor.

Therefore, the research revolutionises our understanding of the brain's workings, trading decision-making speed with accuracy.

It resembles influential theories from economics and psychology on fast and slow thinking, suggesting a balance of the two stands as integral to a more profound understanding and expression of intelligence.

The transformative research offers invaluable insights for employees, managers, and organisations. Firstly, employees navigating the tumultuous corporate waters can reap benefits from the research findings.

Those often frowned upon for a slower pace, when solving complex conundrums, may take solace in the suggestion of their higher intelligence.

Knowledge of this correlation empowers employees, validating their more measured approach to problem-solving. They can harness their understanding of their cognitive style to optimise their work output.

The secret lies in realising that their pace need not signify a lack of ability but rather indicates a deeper, more thoughtful engagement with their tasks.

Secondly, managers stand to gain tremendously from integrating these research insights into their leadership styles.

No longer should they view slower employees as laggards but as potential intellectual powerhouses contributing depth to their team's capabilities.

Encouraging diverse cognitive styles within their teams could result in a wider range of solutions to the issues at hand.

Managers could, therefore, devise strategies that nurture various cognitive styles, fostering an environment that respects the tortoises and hares in equal measure.

Finally, organisations at large could harness the findings to transform their work culture and policies.

A shift in focus from the traditional valuation of speed with shallow results changed to a broader appreciation of cognitive diversity could foster a more inclusive and effective work environment.

Have a management or leadership issue, question or challenge? Reach out to Dr Scott through @ScottProfessor on Twitter or on email at [email protected]