Recommendations for Third Reality and Polarity Thinking

This article introduces the concept and approach of Polarity Thinking, which is useful for addressing various challenges surrounding us in the modern world.

Introduction: "Third Reality"

Starting with a personal story, when I launched the Rakuten Institute of Technology, which handles advanced technology development at the Rakuten Group, I proposed a vision called "Third Reality."

In the 2000s, the dawn of the internet business era following the 90s, physical space and the internet (virtual space) were often perceived as mutually incompatible and opposing, as "Real vs. Net" or "Reality vs. Virtual." However, for consumers, the debate of "reality or virtual" itself is essentially meaningless. What is important is "what the consumer wants to do," and the realization of a future where consumers achieve what they want by combining both physical space and the internet. The article introduced above also states that corporate business models and organizations need to be updated.
I incorporated three meanings into the term "Third Reality." I explain them in the following English article I wrote previously.

The developmental stage of society called "Third Reality":Physical space and the internet are increasingly becoming integrated into the daily lives of consumers and into various social services. There is no longer a clear boundary where one world ends and the other begins. Each world loses its boundaries, mixing together while evolving, and through this, a new reality and a new society are formed. I call this "Third Reality."

Overcoming opposition through the third option of "Third":When a new concept emerges, it is easy to fall into a dualism or binary opposition of "this or that." It is common for innovative things to be seen as bringing about conflict with existing or traditional things. However, just as physical space and the internet have transcended conflict to create an integrated world, there is a path for conventional concepts and new concepts to not only conflict but also cooperate. We can strive to propose ideas that transcend that conflict. The third option gives us the power to move further forward.

The user-first perspective of "Reality":What is reality? What makes reality real? It is none other than the user, the consumer. Reality is linked to experience, and it is the perspective of the user or consumer that creates it. Due to changes in the technological environment, the means by which businesses and services have contact with users and consumers have increased, and the experiences created through interaction are becoming increasingly important. This includes personalized experiences based on user consent. It is important for the new reality to stand on a user-first perspective and to create in cooperation with users. Through a user-first approach, a third path can be found, and society can evolve.

Third Reality was not proposed merely as an academic or business concept. It was a compass for moving sustainably in a fast-changing world facing an uncertain future, transcending binary opposition.

About Polarity Thinking

Our surroundings are full of binary oppositions. The aforementioned "innovation" and "tradition." Innovation is often seen as something that destroys tradition. On a more personal level, there is "private life" and "work." Deciding which to prioritize is not only a daily struggle but also a topic for daily conversation. "Individual" and "organization" are also treated as opposing terms in a similar position. There are also talent theories such as "genius (as innate)" and "scholar (as acquired)," and ways of looking at things such as "optimism" and "pessimism." It is as if, around us, if there is a concept, there is an opposing concept, and we are constantly exposed to decision-making about which one to choose.
However, as proposed in "Third Reality," what is important for grasping and solving real-world problems is the recognition of a state where two concepts coexist, mix, collaborate, and are integrated. An approach that serves as an entry point for thinking about two concepts (poles) that are thought to be in conflict together is called Polarity Thinking. Polarity Thinking is one of the approaches that helps in understanding situations where seemingly contradictory values or perspectives exist and in thinking about which path to take. In many binary oppositions, it involves choosing to "think about both" rather than "having to throw one away." From the standpoint that a choice is choosing what to discard and that is what decision-making is, this kind of confused position that seems completely different, almost indecisive and like a reservation of judgment, by actively accepting being on the front lines, leads to finding more developmental and sustainable effective solutions to complex real-world problems where conflicting items exist, such as flexibility and stability, or innovation and tradition.

This approach is also widely known as Hegel's dialectic. The basis of the dialectic is the idea of "Aufheben" (sublation), which states that there is no superiority or inferiority in opposing propositions. First, there is a proposition (thesis) about a certain matter. Against this, an opposing proposition (antithesis) is presented, and they collide and conflict, but as a third plan, an integrated proposition (synthesis) is derived. One proposition does not cancel out the other, but evolves as an integrated form. This is "Aufheben," and Polarity Thinking can be said to be one of them.

Overview of Polarity Thinking

There was a YouTube video that explained Polarity Thinking in an easy-to-understand way.

As explained in the video, the characteristics of Polarity Thinking include the following:

Shift from "either/or" to "both/and":This encourages us not to see things as either good or bad and discard one, but to recognize the value and potential drawbacks of each, and to think about where to utilize each or how they should be combined. This enables more nuanced understanding and decision-making.

Discovery of positive conflict/tension:Polarity Thinking takes the view that the conflict or tension between two items is a source of creativity and progress. By accepting this tension and finding ways to manage it, you can achieve more than by simply eliminating one.

Recognizing interdependence and addressing both:It is rare for two things that seem to be in conflict to exist independently; they often influence, complement, and depend on each other. In many real-world challenges, that interdependence can hold the key to a solution. Polarity Thinking helps to recognize the interdependence of the two things and, by addressing both through that, helps to find ways to create synergy and solve problems better. This can also be said to be one of the concrete methods of Aufheben that seeks the integration of two propositions.

In the video, they give an example of Franklin fearing a meeting with Sandra. Franklin is excited about his project plan, which draws out the team's creativity and has the flexibility to be customized to the team's needs. However, he fears hearing Sandra's opinion because he thinks she might crush the project's unconventional ideas by demanding strict adherence to deadlines and rigorous documentation.
Here, there is tension between the two poles of Flexibility and Structure. Each has its own advantages, and since both can create negative effects if used excessively, a balance of both is needed. Flexibility brings opportunities to leverage creativity and new ideas. However, if applied excessively, it risks leading to wasted time, confusion, and lost opportunities. On the other hand, structure brings predictability and efficiency. However, excessive application can lead to organizational rigidity.
Therefore, leaders and organizations can take a step back and use the Polarity Thinking approach to move toward a third way that combines the best of both poles, and by looking at things from different perspectives, they have the opportunity to lead to better results.

Use Cases for Polarity Thinking

The following are some cases where Polarity Thinking is applied.

Organizational Design and Management

In corporations, there is always a debate about how to balance two poles, such as "centralization and decentralization," "top-down and bottom-up," "planning/management and agile/adaptation," "permanent organization and time-limited projects," or "improving existing businesses and creating new ones." Centralized governance in global companies brings consistent policies and a unified brand to the entire enterprise, while decentralization delegates authority to regional management, allowing for more rapid responses to local market conditions. Sophisticated organizations find a balance that suits them based on their history, culture, and purpose, centralizing aspects like compliance and organizational infrastructure while decentralizing customer service operations and certain decision-making processes, enabling autonomous and effective responses to changes in society and the market.
I have previously discussed the themes facing marketing organizations due to the progress of digitalization, and in the following article, I describe how to build marketing organizations for the future.

In this, I explored the ideal state by presenting several polar points, such as "whether to build as a centralized organization or implement as distributed activities," "whether talent should be in-sourced by securing and training internally or out-sourced by collaborating with external experts," and "whether to hire specialists or generalists." In actual organizational design, these are not matters of choosing only one, but rather thinking about how to combine them, which is the realistic approach, and applying the Polarity Thinking approach is key.

Environmental Policy

Efforts to address environmental issues, such as climate change and water/food problems, also take an approach that balances environmental protection and economic growth. This includes recognizing that both elements are important for solving the problems. Environmental protection is a priority to ensure the sustainable use of resources, public health, and the survival of society, but economic growth maintains living standards and provides the resources to tackle the problems. In reality, policies will seek paths to promote growth in a way that integrates both priorities while also improving environmental sustainability. Here, the use of AI is an important point, but recent AI also carries the challenge of increased power consumption, which requires exploration through Polarity Thinking.

Private Life and Work

The balance between personal life and work is a typical example where Polarity Thinking is essential. Completely sacrificing one and relying only on the other can lead to negative results that destroy the sustainability of the pole being relied upon. (Devoting 100% to work can harm health, making it impossible to continue working. Focusing 100% on private life can make it impossible to earn the income needed to maintain life.) As an individual, finding ways to work efficiently without sacrificing one's own health and happiness will, in the long run, bring the best results not only for oneself but also for the workplace.
How to achieve this balance has been a major theme for individuals, companies, organizations, and society for a long time. For companies, it is important to devise various measures, such as introducing flexible working hours and clearly separating work and home time. This can be aided by the introduction of remote work, the sophistication of systems to improve work efficiency, and the improvement of time management skills through personnel training, which can result in simultaneously increasing organizational productivity and individual satisfaction. Through the repeated application of a Polarity Thinking approach, it is extremely important to constantly review how that balance is maintained to continue improving overall effectiveness and happiness.
I once had a conversation with Ryo Shimizu, the founder of Ghelia, on the theme of "Work Styles and AI" ({conversation video}). In this, I mentioned the concept of Human Experience (HX). I described a shift from the traditional confrontational thinking that prioritizes the pursuit of customer satisfaction over employee well-being, to a way of thinking where improving the Employee Experience (EX) and Partner/Supplier Experience (PX) can also essentially enhance the Customer Experience (CX). This can be said to be a similar perspective.

Education

How to balance and combine the two poles of educational programs through the provision of structured, standardized, and systematic curricula, and creative learning experiences personalized for each student, is a concern for many parents and children.
Effective education systems are evolving to incorporate long-valued curricula to ensure basic competency levels while also promoting creativity and individual exploration, engaging students, and accommodating diverse learning styles. In particular, the recent progress of digitalization and the development of AI technology have introduced new poles in terms of how digital and AI technology should be utilized in the educational setting itself, not to mention the content to be learned, requiring continuous updates to the combination.

Healthcare

The increase in medical costs and the growing burden on medical sites are also serious issues in modern society. Managing the polarity between improving the quality of medical care while suppressing costs and the burden on the front lines to a sustainable level will become increasingly critical in the future. Rather than simply falling into a trade-off relationship, to achieve a high level of balance in the direction of advancing medical care, measures can be considered such as promoting the development of new treatments that use resources efficiently, while expanding preventive care and health promotion by creating a system where local communities cooperate to suppress the overall increase in costs, and investing in technologies that may have high initial costs but lead to future cost reductions and improved patient outcomes.

AI and Humans

The remarkable development of AI technology in recent years has also been perceived and discussed as a dichotomy of "AI vs. Humans." There is an opinion that many human jobs could be replaced by AI, and that view has felt strengthened by the dramatic evolution of AI technology, represented by generative AI. For example, in March 2023, a joint study by OpenAI and the University of Pennsylvania reported that approximately 19% of jobs held by workers in the United States could be replaced by generative AI.

However, that view that "AI will take jobs," which has been dominant for a long time, is changing. I have previously introduced that there are initiatives that overcome this conflict through a model called E&E ("Exploration and Exploitation").

The International Labour Organization (ILO) compiled a report in August 2023 on the impact of generative AI on employment. According to this, the impact of automation on most jobs and industries is partial, suggesting that AI is more likely to complement humans rather than replace them.

AI is not a technology to be discussed through a dichotomy of "AI or humans," but rather one that should be addressed as a technology that expands human capabilities. It should be used to identify the respective strengths and mutual influences of humans and AI, and to connect to the evolution and expansion of human creativity. In September 2023, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released Global Guidance on Generative AI. In this, while stating that generative AI should be used for education and research, it emphasizes that a human-centered approach is essential to enhance human capabilities through technology, including AI, and to build an inclusive digital future. This, of course, does not exclude AI, but is also a Polarity Thinking approach that integrates and moves toward development.

Further Possibilities of Polarity Thinking

Polarity Thinking also has the following advantages and possibilities.

Avoiding unnecessary binary opposition:Polarity Thinking is a method that aims to integrate two items. Therefore, it also has the advantage of being able to avoid unnecessary conflict between two poles. There are things that appear to be in conflict at first glance, but are actually in a cooperative relationship. The "reality" and "internet" in the Third Reality mentioned at the beginning were exactly in that relationship. When tackling problems related to social change, overcoming the temptation to simplify the phenomenon of binary opposition is important for finding open solutions.

Fostering a culture of co-creation over competition:Polarity Thinking focuses on the respective characteristics and mutual interdependence of two things. Instead of viewing them as competing elements, it proposes that both can coexist, support each other, and complement one another. This leads to the fostering of a culture of helping, cooperating, and co-creating in society and organizations.

Inclusion of diversity:By recognizing and respecting two different things or poles, both organizations and individuals can utilize the strengths of each side. This goes beyond the horizon of integrating two things, making it possible to adopt strategies that incorporate diverse perspectives and strengths, leading to the acquisition of flexibility and resilience. The application of Polarity Thinking promotes diversity and inclusion, and at the same time, it is important to actively incorporate the inclusion of diversity for the effectiveness of Polarity Thinking.

Shifting to sustainable solutions:Based on the various application cases mentioned above, it is suggested that to succeed with Polarity Thinking, it is important to properly recognize that the issues to be solved are not ones that can be resolved once and for all. Polarity Thinking is not a means to find permanent solutions, but rather relates to continuous adjustment and dynamic balancing. Dr. Barry Johnson, the proponent of Polarity Thinking, also advocates a methodology called Polarity Management which is a circular model. The world's situation and environment change, and what is effective at one point in time may not be effective at another. By encouraging the balance, combination, and evolution between two things or poles, and by continuously re-evaluating and re-adjusting the model of cooperation, an approach to solving problems sustainably is opened up.

Conclusion

In this article, we provided an overview of Polarity Thinking using the explanation of the Third Reality as an introduction. Naturally, Polarity Thinking also has its limits. In the first place, it may not be suitable for situations where a clear, agreeable correct answer exists. In complex situations, it is necessary to identify what exists as a polarity and accurately grasp the interdependence and tension between the poles. It is essential to repeat critical abstraction and concrete discussion to build a model that many people can share. Humanity has solved various problems through the development and spread of science and technology. However, at the same time, we face many inherent problems that cannot be solved. Environment, population, food, health, inequality and division, social connection and individual loneliness, AI and humans. These have extremely intricate complexity, and an approach like Polarity Thinking is significant for their resolution. I hope that the Polarity Thinking introduced in this article will serve as one of the ideas that provides a starting point for readers, not only when tackling such human-scale challenges but also when addressing the various issues that surround us today.

Related Articles

The masterpiece of the early days of science fiction film, "Metropolis," released in Germany in 1927, was the first film to feature a robot, but its theme is precisely Polarity Thinking, advocating the importance of standing at both poles. If you are interested, please check out this article as well.

Also, I have written other articles regarding frameworks for thinking about problem-solving, approaches, and decision-making methods, just like this one.