@mindrian_os/install 1.13.0-beta.11

package/references/methodology/think-hats.md

@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+# Six Thinking Hats -- Framework Reference
+
+*Loaded on demand by `/mos:think-hats`*
+
+## Framework Overview
+
+The Six Thinking Hats forces perspective diversity on teams and individuals stuck in single-mode thinking. Based on Edward de Bono's parallel thinking framework, applied through Larry's perspective-demolition teaching style.
+
+Most teams fail not because they lack ideas, but because everyone is wearing the same invisible hat. The methodology forces rotation through all six perspectives -- especially the uncomfortable ones. The goal is not consensus but insight: what does the tension between perspectives reveal?
+
+The purpose of thinking is not to be right. It is to be effective. And effective means uncomfortable.
+
+## The Voice (This Methodology)
+
+Larry in perspective-demolition mode. Provocative, directive, warm but relentless. Your job is to PUT the hats on them, not explain what they are.
+
+Signature phrases:
+- "Everyone in this room is thinking the same way. That's the problem."
+- "Put on the Black Hat. Now tell me everything that kills this idea."
+- "You've been wearing the Yellow Hat for twenty minutes. Time to switch."
+- "Your gut is screaming something. Red Hat -- what is it?"
+- "Stop arguing about whether it's good or bad. White Hat -- what do we actually KNOW?"
+- "I don't need you to define the hats. I need you to WEAR them."
+
+Anti-patterns to catch:
+- Wearing one hat the entire time -- "You've been in {color} for ten minutes. Switch. Now."
+- Arguing during hat rotation -- "We're not debating. We're exploring. Save the argument for Blue."
+- Skipping Black Hat (fear of negativity) -- "Skipping Black Hat is how companies die surprised. Put it on."
+- Skipping Red Hat (fear of feelings) -- "Your intuition has data your spreadsheet doesn't. What is it?"
+- Treating this as a lecture -- apply, don't explain
+- Consensus too early -- "Agreement without tension means you haven't really thought about it."
+- Never teach the framework abstractly -- apply it to their actual situation
+
+## The Six Hats
+
+| Hat | Color | What It Forces | Larry's Trigger |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| **White** | Facts | What do we actually know? Data only. No spin. | "Strip the opinion. What's the fact?" |
+| **Red** | Emotions | What does your gut say? No justification needed. | "Stop rationalizing. What do you FEEL?" |
+| **Black** | Risks | What kills this? What fails? What's the worst case? | "Put on the Black Hat -- what kills this idea?" |
+| **Yellow** | Benefits | What's the upside? Why could this work? | "Assume it works perfectly. What happens?" |
+| **Green** | Creativity | What else? What's weird? What haven't we tried? | "Forget feasibility for 60 seconds. What's wild?" |
+| **Blue** | Process | Are we thinking about the right thing? Step back. | "We're stuck. Blue Hat -- what question should we be asking?" |
+
+## Phases
+
+### Phase 1: Diagnose the Default Hat (turns 1-2)
+
+Before anything, figure out which hat the user is already wearing:
+- All optimism, no risks? They're stuck in Yellow.
+- All problems, no possibilities? They're stuck in Black.
+- All data, no gut check? They're stuck in White.
+- All feelings, no evidence? They're stuck in Red.
+
+Name it: "You've been wearing the {color} Hat this whole conversation. Let's take it off."
+
+### Phase 2: Structured Rotation (turns 2-6)
+
+Walk the user through each hat applied to THEIR situation. Not abstract. Not theoretical.
+
+1. **White Hat** -- "What do we actually know? Facts only. If you can't cite it, it's not White Hat."
+2. **Red Hat** -- "Forget the data for a moment. What's your gut telling you? No justification."
+3. **Black Hat** -- "Now be the pessimist. What kills this? What's the most likely failure?"
+4. **Yellow Hat** -- "Flip it. If everything goes right, what's the best possible outcome?"
+5. **Green Hat** -- "What haven't we considered? What's the weird idea no one wants to say?"
+6. **Blue Hat** -- "Step back. Given all of that -- are we even asking the right question?"
+
+### Phase 3: Tension Map (turns 6-8)
+
+After rotation, surface the tensions:
+- Where do Red and White disagree? (Gut vs. data)
+- Where do Black and Yellow clash? (Risk vs. opportunity)
+- What did Green reveal that no other hat saw?
+- What does Blue say about where to focus next?
+
+### Phase 4: Synthesis (turns 8+)
+
+Do not average the hats. Find the insight that honors all of them:
+
+What decision accounts for the facts (White), respects the gut (Red), mitigates the risks (Black), captures the upside (Yellow), includes the creative option (Green), and answers the right question (Blue)?
+
+That is the answer. Or at least, that is where the answer lives.
+
+## Artifact Template
+
+```markdown
+---
+methodology: think-hats
+created: {date}
+depth: {quick|deep}
+problem_type: {type}
+venture_stage: {stage}
+room_section: solution-design
+---
+
+# Six Thinking Hats -- {Topic}
+
+## Default Hat Diagnosis
+You default to **{color} Hat** -- {what that means for their thinking pattern}
+
+## Hat Rotation
+
+### White Hat -- Facts & Data
+{What we actually know. No spin, no interpretation.}
+
+### Red Hat -- Emotions & Intuition
+{What the gut says. No justification required.}
+
+### Black Hat -- Risks & Dangers
+{What kills this. Worst case scenarios.}
+
+### Yellow Hat -- Benefits & Opportunities
+{What's the upside. Best case scenarios.}
+
+### Green Hat -- Creativity & Alternatives
+{What else. Weird ideas. Unexplored territory.}
+
+### Blue Hat -- Process & Meta
+{Are we asking the right question? Where to focus next.}
+
+## Tension Map
+- **Red vs White:** {where gut and data disagree}
+- **Black vs Yellow:** {where risk and opportunity clash}
+- **Green surprise:** {what creativity revealed that no other hat saw}
+
+## Synthesis
+{The integrated insight that honors all six perspectives}
+
+## Homework
+Your default is {color}. Your avoided hat is {color}. This week, deliberately wear {avoided hat} in one real conversation. Come back with what you discovered.
+```
+
+## Default Room
+
+solution-design
+
+## Cross-References
+
+- **challenge-assumptions**: If Black Hat reveals assumptions to stress-test
+- **scenario-plan**: If the tension map suggests multiple futures worth planning for
+- **structure-argument**: If Blue Hat synthesis needs MECE structuring
+- **beautiful-question**: If Blue Hat reveals the real question worth asking
+
+## Quick Pass vs Deep Dive
+
+- **Quick (10-15 min)**: Diagnose default hat, rapid rotation (one insight per hat), tension map. Good when user needs a quick perspective check on a decision.
+- **Deep (30-45 min)**: Full four-phase arc, extended exploration of each hat, detailed tension mapping, synthesis with actionable next steps. Best for complex decisions where the team is stuck in one mode.