Six Thinking Hats Method
Six colored hats for six directions of thinking
The Six Thinking Hats method is a parallel thinking framework that replaces adversarial argument with cooperative exploration. Instead of each person defending their position, everyone in the group thinks in the same direction at the same time, then switches direction together. Each hat represents a distinct mode of thinking: White for facts and information, Red for emotions and intuition, Black for caution and risk assessment, Yellow for optimism and benefits, Green for creativity and new ideas, and Blue for process control and meta-cognition.
The method works because the brain cannot be optimally sensitized in multiple directions simultaneously, just as a golf club cannot be the best for both driving and putting. By separating thinking into distinct modes, each mode gets the full attention it deserves. The result is dramatically faster and more productive discussions. ABB reduced multinational project team discussions from thirty days to two days. IBM reported meetings taking one quarter of their previous time. A jury using the method reached a decision in fifteen minutes instead of three hours.
The key insight is that the hats are directions to think in, not descriptions of what has been said or categories of people. Everyone wears every hat. The system follows Confucius's approach of focusing on behavior rather than personality. By treating thinking as a game with defined rules, even aggressive or ego-driven individuals channel their energy constructively. You show off not by winning arguments, but by performing well as a thinker under each hat.
- Parallel thinking: Everyone thinks in the same direction at the same time, rather than arguing from opposing positions
- Hats are directions, not descriptions: They indicate which way to think, not labels for what has been said or who someone is
- One thing at a time: Like color printing where each color is applied separately to create the full picture, separate thinking modes produce clearer results
- Ego removal: The game structure detaches ego from being right and attaches it to performing well as a thinker
- Behavior over personality: Following Confucius rather than Freud, the method changes behavior directly through rules rather than trying to change personalities first
- Open with the Blue HatDefine why the group is meeting, what the thinking subject is, alternative definitions of the situation, what you want to achieve, where you want to end up, and the sequence of hats to be used. The Blue Hat always opens and closes the session like bookends.Pro tipUse a pre-set sequence rather than an evolving one unless you are experienced. Evolving sequences can lead to arguments about which hat comes next and can appear manipulative.
- Gather information with the White HatFocus exclusively on facts, figures, and information. Ask what information is available, what is missing, what questions need to be asked, and how to get needed information. Maintain a two-tier system: checked facts and believed facts. Use focusing questions to avoid information overload.Pro tipFrame information at its proper level of certainty. Believed facts are permissible but must be clearly identified as second-class facts, not presented as proven.WarningNever use facts to push a particular argument. The moment a statement seems designed to further a point of view, the white hat role is being abused.
- Explore emotions with the Red HatGive everyone a formal opportunity to express feelings, emotions, and intuition without needing to explain or justify them. This includes hunches, gut reactions, likes, dislikes, and aesthetic feelings. Keep it brief, often just one minute for the entire group.Pro tipConsider using the Red Hat early in sessions where strong pre-existing feelings are known to exist, so emotions can be surfaced and acknowledged before analytical thinking begins.WarningDo not use the Red Hat if the boss will express feelings first and thereby influence everyone else's responses.
- Find value with the Yellow HatDeliberately search for benefits, value, and positive aspects of the idea or proposal. This requires effort because it is generally harder to find benefits than dangers. Look for logical support, constructive proposals, and positive speculation about opportunities.Pro tipIn assessment situations, put Yellow Hat before Black Hat. If you cannot find value under Yellow, there is no point proceeding. If you find value first and then discover obstacles, you will be motivated to overcome them.
- Assess risks with the Black HatApply cautious and careful thinking. Point out difficulties, dangers, potential problems, risks, and why something may not work. Assess whether proposals fit past experience, identify what could go wrong, and evaluate whether you have the resources to proceed. The Black Hat is the most valuable and most used hat.Pro tipUse the Black Hat for both assessment (should we proceed?) and design (what weaknesses can we fix now rather than discovering them later?).WarningGuard against overuse. It is much easier to be critical than constructive. If 95 percent of an idea is excellent, do not focus exclusively on the 5 percent that needs work during assessment.
- Generate alternatives with the Green HatFocus on creative thinking, new ideas, alternatives, and possibilities. Use lateral thinking techniques including provocation and movement rather than judgment. This is the hat for generating fresh options, overcoming difficulties identified under the Black Hat, and exploring what could be rather than what is.Pro tipAllow individual silent thinking time before group discussion under the Green Hat. People generate more ideas when they are not busy listening to others.
- Close with the Blue HatSummarize what has been achieved, state the outcome, conclusions, design, solution, and define next steps. Optionally add a final Red Hat to reflect on the thinking performance: Are we happy with the outcome? Did we do a good job?Pro tipA final Red Hat after the closing Blue Hat lets the group reflect on their thinking process itself, building metacognitive awareness for future sessions.
ABB, a major multinational corporation, used to spend thirty days on their multinational project team discussions. The discussions involved people from different countries with different perspectives, and the traditional argument format meant each group defended their position while trying to defeat others. When they introduced the parallel thinking of the Six Hats method, everyone explored each perspective together in sequence.
Statoil in Norway had a problem with an oil rig that was costing approximately one hundred thousand dollars per day. Traditional problem-solving approaches had not resolved the issue. A certified Six Hats trainer named Jens Arup introduced the method to the team working on the problem, structuring their thinking through the six hat sequence.
Two similar law cases went to jury deliberation. In the first case, the jury used traditional argument and discussion to reach their verdict. In the second case, one juror who knew the Six Hats method introduced it to the group, structuring their deliberation through parallel thinking rather than adversarial debate.
Edward de Bono, the inventor of lateral thinking, developed the Six Thinking Hats method as an alternative to the Western argumentative tradition dating back to the Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. De Bono observed that argument-based thinking, while useful, was incomplete because it focused on 'what is' rather than 'what can be.' He chose hats because they are easy to put on and take off, visible to everyone, and culturally associated with thinking caps. The colors were chosen for their natural associations: white for neutrality, red for anger and emotion, black for seriousness and caution, yellow for sunshine and optimism, green for growth and fertility, and blue for the sky above everything. The method has been adopted by organizations ranging from NASA, IBM, and Siemens to Khmer villagers in Cambodia, and has been taught to children as young as four years old.