John Sturrock: Leaders need to focus on the big picture and avoid bickering

This is familiar territory in negotiations and business or political strategies. For those with different views, the challenge is how to deal with a situation where someone takes a stance and seems unwilling or unable to move.

Often, this leads to antagonistic argument, which can become personalised, with accusation and counter-accusation. We see this regularly in politics and industrial relations.

Much of this strife may stem from an unsophisticated, one-dimensional view of problem-solving. People often lack the skills, competence, capability and confidence to tackle difficult situations in a different way.

Arguably, constructive problem-solving should be a core subject in schools. Certainly, many business people, civic leaders and politicians could learn to expand their portfolio of skills and perceptions of how to deal with tough choices.

They would understand that, rather than seeking to score cheap points or promoting themselves, there are other ways to achieve an outcome. These can be more effective, help resolve problems earlier, and bring more to the bottom line.

At a time of increasing constraints on resources, financial and natural, do we want more stories about costly mistakes or unresolved disputes - or do we need a mature approach, with an eye on the interests of the public and nation as a whole?

Suppose the decision to build a new Forth crossing turned out to be unaffordable? How easy would it be for those who have committed themselves to change their minds, at least in public?

Once people commit to a particular course of action, they look for reasons to support it and tend to ignore information which might suggest a different approach.

Our minds act like filters to sift out that which is inconsistent with our world view. We see only those facts which confirm our conclusions.

Highly rational people are blind to information that contradicts a course of action they have decided to pursue. It would be interesting to apply this thinking to current problems: BA, trams, nuclear energy, even airport drop-off charges.

Many decisions are shaped by emotions. Neuroscience tells us that specific parts of the brain are involved in the process of selective response, known as motivated reasoning. When someone has an emotional stake in an outcome, they have an emotional need to have their existing approach confirmed. Take the Forth bridge example: what strategy could be adopted to help decision-makers to review their choice maturely and logically, with an openness to change?

It takes an understanding of the personal investment and vulnerability of those involved, a willingness not to criticise individuals, a broader common good approach and recognition of the value of separating the people from the problem. It also takes a willingness to forgive mistakes and abstention from point-scoring.

More than that, we need a new kind of leadership which recognises the bigger picture and is prepared to subordinate personal aggrandisement to national and global benefit. And one which is willing to accept that it could be us, as well as others, who might be wrong.

John Sturrock is a mediator and chief executive of Core Solutions Group