Method Not Madness
May Be Key In
Suicide Prevention
he rate of suicide in America
is 11 victims per 100,000
people, almost exactly the
same as it was in 1965. In spite of
the rise of antidepressant drugs,
crisis hotline centers, and better
treatment of mental illness, we
still haven’t gotten much closer
to understanding or preventing
suicide. The reason may be that
prevention focuses more on the
study of illness than it does on the
actual ways people attempt to kill
themselves, according to Scott
Anderson in his article, “The Urge
to End It All.”
Anderson says that suicide is
an overwhelmingly impulsive
act. He cites a study of survivors
that said only 13 percent reported
thinking about committing suicide
for eight hours or longer; 70 percent said they thought about it for
less than an hour; and a whopping 24 percent said the idea had
occurred to them less than five
minutes before their attempt.
If that’s true, then suicide is
highly opportunistic and Anderson
suggests that reducing the opportunities would reduce the
incidence, pointing to supporting
research and anecdotal evidence.
For example, he notes that states
in which gun ownership is highest
have the highest rates of suicide
by guns. In England, death by
asphyxiation from breathing oven
fumes accounted for roughly half
of all suicides until the 1970s when
Britain began converting ovens
from coal gas that contains lots of
carbon monoxide to natural gas,
which has almost none. During
that time, suicides plummeted
30 percent, and those numbers
have not changed.
© ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
Better Questions Lead to
Better Solutions
Faced with too much information and not enough time, today’s managers are
pressed to make quick decisions. The downside to honing this skill, says Chuck
Palus of the Center for Creative Leadership, is that people typically spend
about 90 percent of their time solving a problem and only about 10 percent examining the problem and its context. “Often this means that they end up solving the
wrong problem.”
People take “mental shortcuts” acting on what they expect to see, says Palus,
co-author of The Leading Edge: Six Creative Competencies for Navigating Complex
Challenges (Jossey-Bass, 2002). To help you see what you and your team may have
overlooked, start asking some of the following different questions:
• R-mode questions, associated with the right side of the brain, promote patterns,
synthesis, visual metaphors, emotions, or intuitions. For instance, what are the
patterns, what is your intuition telling you, or what is interesting or unique about
this problem?
• What-if questions help you break out of the rut of traditional analysis by
encouraging imaginative thinking.
• Wild-card questions focus on scenarios that are highly unlikely or stretch our
sense of reality.
• Appreciate questions offer a way to focus on what is going right, rather than
looking for problems.
Leading Effectively e-newsletter, Center for Creative Leadership, July 2008
The New York Times Magazine,
July 6, 2008