Part Three: Interaction

Interaction

Interaction refers to working within a team or with work partners, whether they agree or disagree with our opinions.

The objective is to understand how interaction can be achieved through discussion, reasoning, and evidence at different levels of strength and validity.

This is similar to the discipline of Usul al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) and the different levels of evidence developed by Muslim scholars. In teamwork, it is essential to understand the strengths and weaknesses of different arguments and use them to evaluate competing ideas and their supporting evidence.

Ancient philosophers were pioneers in developing formal logic. Muslim scholars, however, made significant contributions to developing the principles underlying different fields of knowledge, such as Usul al-Fiqh, Usul al-Sunnah, Usul al-Hadith, and Hadith terminology. This development is discussed by Dr. Mustafa Abd al-Raziq in his book Introduction to the Study of Islamic Philosophy.

This section supports cooperative learning and active learning.

Tool 1: Examine Both Sides

EBS: Examine Both Sides

Explanation

This tool differs from PMI. In PMI, the advantages and disadvantages of an idea may be relatively clear to everyone.

Here, however, we are dealing with two different viewpoints, with each side believing that it is correct. Therefore, fairness and objectivity are essential.

We also consider the IDEALITY of each viewpoint, which attempts to evaluate the outcome of an idea using:

Ideality = Benefits of the Idea / (Cost of the Idea + Its Negative Consequences)

The result may be a new, combined viewpoint that incorporates elements of both sides.

This is one of the techniques used in Active Learning to simulate different real-world roles and compare how people in those roles think and act.

It also supports cooperative learning between different parties and strengthens social communication.

Each side examines the other's argument and looks for objections or counterarguments concerning the different ideas, with the objective of constructive analysis rather than destruction. Each party should understand the other team's argument well enough to explain it accurately if asked.

Muslim scholars applied a similar approach when investigating disputed issues and produced extensive works addressing differences of opinion.

An important benefit is learning to avoid defending one's ego or blindly glorifying individuals. In matters of religion, absolute protection from error belongs only to those whom God protects.

Example:

A disagreement between a father and his son regarding staying outside the home after midnight.

• The father focuses on family responsibility and safety.

• The son focuses on personal freedom and independence.

Exercise 1: Examine both sides regarding increasing working hours and their impact—or lack of impact—on productivity, including the positive and negative aspects.

Exercise 2: Examine both sides regarding playing in the street versus not playing in the street, considering enjoyment and productivity.

Exercise 3: Examine both sides regarding product development: should we begin by adding features or by fixing defects?

Tool 2: Evidence Types

Evidence Types

Explanation

Here, we distinguish between different types of evidence, which vary according to the field of knowledge.

In general, there is a distinction between:

1. Facts perceived through the five senses.

2. Reasoning or inference.

3. Intuition.

4. Experimentation.

5. Induction.

Each discipline also has its own sources of evidence. In Islamic jurisprudence, for example, these may include:

• Qur'an

• Sunnah

• Consensus (Ijma')

• Analogy (Qiyas)

• Presumption of continuity (Istishab)

• Public interest (Maslahah Mursalah)

• Opinions of the Companions

This develops the ability to conduct serious research and discourages unsupported speculation or “Habdology”—making claims without adequate evidence.

Example:

The rotation of the Earth around its axis is a scientific fact, whereas whether the Earth or the Sun is aesthetically beautiful is a matter of personal opinion.

Exercise 1: State one fact and one opinion about the Moon.

Exercise 2: State one fact and one opinion about the Arabic language.

Exercise 3: State one fact and one opinion about self-learning using computer programs.

Tool 3: Evidence Value

Evidence Values

Explanation

There is a difference between the type of evidence and its strength or value.

An evidence type may appear strong, but its actual value may be weak.

For example, a large bullet filled with gunpowder may appear powerful, but if it is extremely old, its effectiveness may be lower than that of a smaller but newer bullet.

Students should therefore remain neutral and objective when evaluating their own evidence and the evidence presented by others.

This tool is especially useful for overcoming the natural tendency to favor one's own arguments. The objective is to evaluate the strength of the evidence, rather than filling an argument with unnecessary or irrelevant evidence.

Strong evidence can be assessed through several principles:

First: If removing the evidence significantly weakens the argument, then the evidence is important. If removing it has little or no effect, it is weak or unnecessary.

Second: The less genuine opposition an item of evidence faces, the stronger it becomes.

Third: The greater its ideality—its benefits relative to its costs and negative consequences—the stronger and more acceptable it becomes.

Thus, students, employees, and managers learn to search for strong evidence that has minimal meaningful opposition.

Example:

Discussing strong and weak evidence for distance learning.

Strong evidence:

• Diversity of learning resources.

• Availability of content regardless of time and location.

• Ability to maintain the quality of educational content.

Weak evidence:

• The use of technology in education. Technology is not the objective of distance learning; it is one of its tools.

Exercise 1: Discuss strong and weak evidence for the advancement of developed countries.

Exercise 2: Discuss strong and weak evidence for convincing your organization's management of the positive impacts of digital transformation.

Exercise 3: Discuss strong and weak evidence supporting the need to analyze systems before beginning the design process.

Tool 4: Evidence Structure

Evidence Structure

Explanation

This tool examines how the evidence is constructed.

Is the evidence independent in itself, or does it depend on another element for its validity?

Independent evidence is capable of supporting a conclusion by itself.

Dependent evidence requires another piece of evidence or condition to establish its significance.

Example:

For software quality:

• Independent evidence: Accuracy of outputs and low defect rates.

• Dependent evidence: The skills and capabilities of the team that produced the software.

Exercise 1: Identify independent and dependent evidence supporting the need for digital transformation at the national level.

Exercise 2: Identify independent and dependent evidence supporting the need for effective communication among senior management.

Exercise 3: Identify independent and dependent evidence supporting the importance of mental training.

Tool 5: Agree, Disagree, Irrelevant

ADI: Agree / Disagree / Irrelevant

Explanation

This tool identifies:

• Points of agreement.

• Points of disagreement.

• Points that are irrelevant to the actual disagreement but have been introduced into the discussion.

This helps distinguish real problems from false or artificial ones, understand the true size of a disagreement, reduce the gap between opposing parties, and search for common ground.

Example:

Identify agreement, disagreement, and irrelevant points between supporters of Agile and Waterfall in software project management.

Agreement:

• Both approaches involve planning.

Disagreement:

• Whether Agile is suitable for managing government projects.

Irrelevant point:

• “Nobody works perfectly according to these methodologies anyway; what matters is simply delivering the product.”

Exercise 1: Identify the agreement, disagreement, and irrelevant points between:

Cloud Computing / Dedicated Servers

Exercise 2: Identify the agreement, disagreement, and irrelevant points between supporters of e-commerce and traditional commerce.

Exercise 3: Identify the agreement, disagreement, and irrelevant points between supporters of open-source and closed-source programming languages.

Tool 6: Being Right 1

Being Right 1

Explanation

Here, the student, employee, or manager develops the first level of proof for the correctness of a proposition by explaining:

First: How it will happen.

Second: Supporting it with facts, figures, and the opinions of scholars and researchers.

Example:

Transforming the workplace toward Management by Objectives (MBO).

This involves explaining how the workplace will be transformed, how objectives will be formulated, the SMART methodology, and relevant research, expert opinions, and surveys concerning organizational performance and the consequences of failing to define and monitor objectives.

Exercise 1: Prove the importance of establishing quality systems in organizations.

Exercise 2: Prove the importance of automation of organizational processes.

Exercise 3: Prove the importance of continuous employee training.

Tool 7: Being Right 2

Being Right 2

Explanation

Here, the student, employee, or manager develops the second level of establishing correctness by:

First: Clearly naming the idea, event, or meaning of the evidence being adopted.

Second: Issuing a judgment that summarizes the conclusion, such as:

• Correct

• Incorrect

• Appropriate

• Fair

and other similar classifications.

Example:

What is the importance of dividing plans and objectives?

Moving toward an Agile and MBO culture:

MBO = Management by Objectives

This represents a contemporary and appropriate approach to effective management.

Exercise 1: What is the importance of studying mobile users' needs when developing a new application?

Exercise 2: What is the importance of adopting Artificial Intelligence and Data Science in large organizations?

Exercise 3: What is the importance of using computer applications in commerce?

Tool 8: Being Wrong 1

Being Wrong 1

Explanation

Here, we attempt to identify errors through two approaches:

First: Exaggeration or incorrect generalization

This can be identified through exaggerated statements, especially when someone discusses a single example as though it represents all cases, without considering diversity or variation.

Second: Omission

This occurs when an important factor that should have been considered is ignored, especially when that factor could weaken or contradict the proposed argument.

Example:

“Most companies do not perform software analysis before beginning the programming phase.”

This contains an exaggerated claim about the number of companies that do not apply software engineering practices, without providing quantitative evidence.

It also omits the importance of software engineering because that point contradicts the intended argument that software engineering should be minimized before production begins.

Exercise 1: Identify possible errors a manager might make when conducting annual employee evaluations.

Exercise 2: Identify possible errors the Ministry of Education might make when implementing e-learning.

Exercise 3: Demonstrate the weaknesses of managing without SMART objectives.

Tool 9: Being Wrong 2

Being Wrong 2

Explanation

Here, the focus is on identifying:

• Misunderstanding.

• Bias caused by fixed ideas that are difficult to change.

Example:

Some organizations believe that adopting Agile conflicts with maintaining product documentation.

They may assume that analysis and organization are equivalent to documentation, which is a misunderstanding of the methodology and is not inherently stated by Agile principles.

This misunderstanding may lead management to develop a bias against Agile, particularly if the organization follows a traditional approach that assigns an exaggerated or overly rigid role to systems analysts compared with the practices encouraged by Agile.

Exercise 1: How could you be wrong when selecting an appropriate programming language?

Exercise 2: How could you be wrong when selecting the appropriate cloud computing provider?

Exercise 3: How could you be wrong about the role of software architecture?

Tool 10: Outcomes

Outcomes

Explanation

After completing all the previous tools, we will have examined the ideas thoroughly and identified their strengths and weaknesses, as well as what is correct and incorrect.

We should then have a clear understanding of:

• Correctness and error

• Strength and weakness

• Priorities for action

Example:

Understanding the final outcome of adopting Agile within management, including how it can support achieving objectives through predefined time periods derived from the project's overall objective.

Exercise 1: What is the final outcome of using Slack for internal employee communication?

Exercise 2: What is the final outcome of digital transformation in Ministry of Interior services?

Exercise 3: What is the final outcome of using LinkedIn as a professional network?

Summary

We have now completed Part Three of the CORT thinking program: Interaction, covering the following ten tools:

1. Examine Both Sides — EBS

2. Evidence Types

3. Evidence Values

4. Evidence Structure

5. Agree / Disagree / Irrelevant — ADI

6. Being Right 1

7. Being Right 2

8. Being Wrong 1

9. Being Wrong 2

10. Outcomes

Practice the Ten Interaction Tools

We should give ourselves sufficient time for each of the following:

• Understanding the explanations.

• Studying the examples.

• Thinking through the exercises.

• Working individually and together with our sons and daughters.

This is the true objective of the course: learning the principles of thinking, practicing them, and then practicing them again and again.

Exercise 1: What additional tools could be added?

Exercise 2: Which tools provide little or no value?

Exercise 3: Which tools could be combined?

Exercise 4: Which tools should remain separate?