Lateral Thinking: The Complete Guide to Thinking Sideways
Lateral thinking is a method of approaching problems from unexpected angles — moving across mental patterns rather than deepening the current one. Edward de Bono coined the term in his 1967 book The Use of Lateral Thinking as a deliberate contrast to "vertical thinking," the conventional logical process of building systematically on an established premise.
The distinction matters practically. Vertical thinking is excellent at optimizing within a frame. Lateral thinking is what allows you to escape the frame entirely.
What Lateral Thinking Means
De Bono defined lateral thinking as the deliberate restructuring of patterns in a self-organizing information system — which is what the mind is.
The metaphor he used most often: digging holes. Vertical thinking digs the same hole deeper. If you need a hole in a different location, vertical thinking cannot help — it cannot prompt you to abandon the current excavation and start fresh. Lateral thinking is what allows you to stop digging and look elsewhere.
The underlying observation is that many thinking patterns are self-reinforcing. Once a concept, framing, or category activates, cognition tends to elaborate it rather than abandon it. This is efficient — pattern recognition and elaboration are much faster than starting from scratch — but it makes novel solutions hard to reach when the current pattern is the wrong one.
Lateral thinking is the deliberate practice of interrupting that elaboration and generating alternative entry points into a problem.
Lateral vs. Vertical Thinking
Vertical thinking is sequential, selective, and analytical. You follow the most promising logical path, excluding alternatives that seem less likely. This is the right mode for well-defined problems with known solution methods.
Lateral thinking is non-sequential, generative, and deliberately non-selective. You pursue paths precisely because they seem unlikely. You use provocations to reach positions that would be impossible to arrive at by logical steps from the current position.
Neither mode is superior — they serve different purposes. A problem with a correct answer and an established solution method needs vertical thinking. A problem where the framing itself may be wrong, or where no standard solution exists, benefits from lateral thinking first.
The connection to convergent and divergent thinking is direct. Divergent thinking generates multiple options; convergent thinking selects among them. Lateral thinking has a specific flavor within that framework: it's not just generating options but deliberately generating options from outside the obvious pattern. The goal is to reach a position you couldn't arrive at by deepening the current line of thought.
De Bono's Core Lateral Thinking Techniques
De Bono developed several formal techniques for generating lateral movement in thinking. These are specific procedures, not metaphors.
Provocation (Po)
De Bono introduced "Po" as a symbol for a provocative statement — one that is not necessarily true but serves as a stepping stone toward a useful idea. The rules for using Po:
- Generate a provocation: a statement that is deliberately wrong, absurd, or physically impossible. ("Po: cars have square wheels.")
- Use it as an entry point: what ideas does it suggest? ("Square wheels would provide strong grip on rough terrain — what if tires had variable-rigidity zones that harden on demand?")
- Evaluate movement: did the provocation generate a useful new position? If not, try another.
The goal is not to assert the provocation as true. It's to use its very wrongness to reach positions that direct logical reasoning cannot access. Some of the most effective provocations are violations of the assumptions so embedded in a problem that they're invisible until you deliberately break them.
Random Entry
This technique introduces a randomly selected concept — a word from a dictionary, an object in the room — as a forced connection point with the problem under consideration. The random element bypasses the current habitual frame because it's something the frame hasn't already processed.
If you're redesigning a customer service workflow, you might introduce "lighthouse." A lighthouse operates autonomously, gives an unambiguous signal visible from a distance, requires no two-way communication, and conveys location information through clear visual principles. None of those properties were in the current problem frame — some of them might be.
Random entry works because it exploits the mind's tendency to find connections. Given any two stimuli, the brain will attempt to connect them. By forcing one stimulus to come from outside the problem domain, you generate connections that couldn't arise from working within the domain alone.
Challenge
The Challenge technique questions assumptions that normally go unexamined. It doesn't assume these assumptions are wrong — it simply asks why they exist and whether alternatives are conceivable.
Procedure:
- Identify an element of the current situation (e.g., "meetings happen in real time")
- Ask: why does this need to be true? What would happen if it weren't?
- Generate alternatives based on what the constraint reveals
Challenge is applied assumption archaeology. Most accepted practices exist for historical reasons that may no longer apply. Surfacing those reasons allows you to either validate the assumption or discover that the constraint it represents is contingent rather than necessary.
Concept Extraction
This technique moves upward in abstraction to find a more general form of a solution, then generates new specific solutions from that general form.
If the current solution is "a filing cabinet," the concept might be "a system for storing items in retrievable categories." From that concept you can generate: digital tagging systems, color-coded physical folders, spatial memory techniques, topographic physical arrangement. You've escaped the filing cabinet without abandoning what was valuable about it.
Concept extraction is useful when you know a solution is inadequate but don't know what to replace it with. Abstracting to the underlying concept lets you explore the full space of things that satisfy the same underlying function.
What the Research Says
De Bono developed lateral thinking as a practical framework before cognitive science had the tools to study it rigorously. The research that has since accumulated suggests his intuitions were largely sound.
Cognitive flexibility — the ability to switch between mental sets — is the underlying capacity that lateral thinking develops. Research consistently links cognitive flexibility to creative output across domains, from scientific discovery to artistic production. Where vertical thinking requires you to stay in a mental set, lateral thinking requires you to exit one.
Incubation effects support the lateral thinking model. Dijksterhuis and Meurs (2006) showed that unconscious processing integrates information from disparate sources more effectively than focused conscious thought. This is the scientific basis for what de Bono observed anecdotally: sometimes the most effective move with a stuck problem is to stop working on it directly. Lateral thinking provides an explicit mechanism for this — deliberately shifting to a different entry point rather than continuing to deepen a blocked path.
Analogical reasoning is closely related to lateral movement at the conceptual level. Making structural analogies between domains — finding that two superficially different situations share the same underlying structure — is lateral thinking applied at higher abstraction. The analogical encoding exercise trains this directly.
The broader research on creative problem solving consistently shows that explicitly generating alternatives before evaluating them produces better outcomes than converging on the first plausible solution. Lateral thinking provides structure for that generation phase.
Lateral Thinking in Practice
In business: Toyota's "Five Whys" is a form of Challenge — repeatedly asking why a problem exists to surface the root assumption rather than treating the symptom. IDEO's design thinking process incorporates random entry through its "analogies" phase, where designers examine how other domains handle structurally similar problems. Both use lateral movement as a deliberate phase before solution development.
In science: Many significant discoveries came from importing a concept from one domain into another. The germ theory of disease drew an analogy from fermentation. Information theory borrowed entropy from thermodynamics. Claude Shannon, working at Bell Labs, saw that Boltzmann's statistical mechanics framework applied directly to the problem of signal transmission — a lateral move across fields that created information theory as a discipline.
In everyday problem solving: Most fixation errors — situations where you're stuck because you can't see past your current framing — are cases where a lateral move is the remedy. If every solution you're generating falls within the same category, that's a signal the category itself needs to be questioned.
Developing Lateral Thinking
Systematic practice builds genuine lateral thinking capacity, not just familiarity with de Bono's vocabulary.
Work through lateral thinking puzzles. The lateral thinking puzzles post covers 25 puzzles with analysis of which assumption each requires you to abandon. The value isn't in puzzle-solving as a skill — it's in repeatedly experiencing the moment when a wrong assumption drops and a new interpretation becomes available. That cognitive shift is what you're training.
Practice divergent thinking. The divergent thinking exercise measures how many distinct categories your responses span — precisely the metric that predicts real creative performance. Broad category range is the exercised form of the flat associative hierarchy that lateral moves draw on.
Run deliberate provocations. Take a current problem you're working on. Generate five deliberately wrong or impossible statements about it. For each one, ask what useful idea it suggests. Don't evaluate during generation — that kills lateral movement. Evaluation is a vertical operation. Keep them separated.
Read across domains. The more domains you have represented in memory, the more raw material you have for lateral moves. Random entry doesn't work if the randomly selected concept has no connections to anything. Dense, cross-domain knowledge is what makes the connections available.
The connection to abstract thinking is worth noting. Lateral movement is easier when you can operate at higher levels of abstraction, where structural similarities between unlike domains become visible. A person who can see that "a supply chain" and "a food web" share the same structural properties can move between them laterally. That requires abstracting away from the surface details of each.
Ready to train your creativity? Try science-backed exercises that measure and improve your creative thinking. Start a Free Exercise