In his book The Opposable Mind, Roger Martin, Dean of the School of Business at the University of Toronto, puts his finger on what he sees as a defining characteristic of outstanding leaders: "integrative thinking."?

Martin defines integrative thinking as, "The predisposition and capacity to hold two opposing ideas in their head and then produce a synthesis that is superior to either opposing idea."?

This is not a new idea. Here are just a few deep thinkers who've said much the same thing as Martin does:

• Heraclitus: "The way up and the way down are one and the same."
• Coleridge: "Poetry reveals itself in the balance or reconciliation of opposites or discordant qualities."
• Keats: "What quality [forms] a Man of Achievement & Negative Capability, that is when [a person] is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts without any irritable reaching after fact & reason."
• Faulkner: "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function."

What Martin calls integrative thinking is central in Hegel's philosophy and no doubt many other authors and ways of thinking that aren't on my radar screen. The fact that this idea keeps popping up suggests that maybe we should give it some attention. Martin's book helped me see that "integrative thinking" might just be an antidote to the quick fix thinking that is far too common in our organizational and (at least in my case) personal lives.?

It helps me to think of integrative thinking in a simpler way. When we are confronted with an "either/or option choice," maybe the best answer is "both." Here are a few examples:

Not safety or accountability, but both. Amy C. Edmondson, in a great article in the July 2008 Harvard Business Review, writes, "psychological safety does not operate at the expense of employee accountability; the most effective organizations achieve high levels of both."

Not fidelity or reflection, but both. Lucy West has written in Coaching: Approaches and Perspectives, which I edited, that we want teachers to have "mindful engagement" rather than "mindless fidelity." For me, this involves professional learning that is precise that also embraces teacher reflection.

Not ambitious or humble, but both. Leadership guru Jim Collins writes that the best leaders have a "compelling combination of personal humility and professional will."

There are many more examples, including non-negotiables and choice, (see Michael Fullan's Motion Leadership),or checklists and professionalism (Atul Guwande's The Checklist Manifesto). This little blog isn't the place to go in depth into all of those rich and nuanced ideas. However, for me, integrative thinking is an important concept to keep in mind. The next time we come up against what looks like an either/or option, rather than quickly trying to decide which option is the best, maybe go for both.

Jim Knight is a researcher at the University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning. You can read his blog on instructional coaching, and download free teaching manuals developed by the Kansas Coaching Project, at www.instructionalcoach.org. His e-mail address is jimknight@mac.com.