Reader,

I’ve been wondering about some thinking disciplines and whether or not they need to be emphasized and improved in leadership education.

I received my MBA late in the 1970s and I know I improved my knowledge and skills in accounting, finance, marketing, operations, management theory, and more. An unstated intention of the program was to improve my thinking skills, but such skills were not addressed directly.

Functional knowledge is certainly important. However, after many years in the “real world” I’m pretty sure we need to have and use a blend of five general thinking disciplines.

• Systems thinking
• Critical thinking
• Foresight
• Skepticism
• Design thinking.

Following are two examples of companies that dealt with a very important substance – blood. Both failed and I was wondering if “better thinking” by the C-suite or the Board might have been helpful.

Theranos

Theranos claimed it could run many medical tests from a tiny blood sample, but the technology did not perform as promised. The company became a landmark fraud case involving investors, patients, partners, regulators, and media credibility.

What if they had employed ….

• Critical thinking: Demand validated evidence, reproducibility, error rates, independent lab comparisons, and regulatory compliance before scaling their marketing claims.
• Skepticism: Challenge the seductive story: “One drop of blood will revolutionize diagnostics.”
• Systems thinking: Treat the company not as a start-up story but as part of the healthcare diagnostic system, where false results affect physicians, patients, insurers, pharmacies, regulators, and public trust.
• Design thinking: Start with patient safety and clinician trust, not investor excitement or founder mythology (black turtlenecks are not proof of genius).
• Foresight: Ask what happens when unproven technology enters clinical decision-making at scale.

23andMe

23andMe filed for bankruptcy in March 2025 after weak demand for ancestry-testing kits and reputational damage from a 2023 data breach. Reuters reported that its market value had once peaked near $6 billion, and state officials later raised concerns about what would happen to customers’ genetic data during bankruptcy.

What if they had employed ….

• Systems thinking: Understand that genetic data, customer trust, cybersecurity, bankruptcy law, research partnerships, privacy expectations, and business-model durability are one connected system.
• Critical thinking: Question whether a mostly one-time-use DNA kit could support a durable consumer business.
• Design thinking: Design around lifetime stewardship of customer genetic information, not just the initial test experience.
• Foresight: Anticipate the future ownership problem: what happens to sensitive DNA data if the company fails or is sold?
• Skepticism: Challenge the growth narrative before it outruns client needs and privacy safeguards.

The five thinking disciplines do not guarantee better decisions. However, they improve the odds of catching big mistakes before they destroy the company.

“The book”

Navigating the Wicked World has been edited and we’re in the process of getting it into Lulu, a self-publishing platform. I expect it will be ready for prime time in a few weeks.

The next project is to update and expand my original work and incorporate the five thinking disciplines mentioned above. Stay tuned.

Cheers,

Bill