Leonardo da Vinci, having missed early instruction in Latin as a child, was unable in later life to learn it properly. Since it was the language of the learned and scholarly, da Vinci was to a great extent cut off from the great authorities of the past and the present, as literature was not really available in Italian.
Da Vinci, therefore, turned to direct experience of reality, which he referred to as nature. This gave him a new and personal view of the worlds of geography, astronomy, engineering, botany, anatomy, etc. His notebooks and drawings are full of fresh (to the age) insights on every subject, many of which surpass the knowledge and understanding of those living centuries later.
There are many other less notable cases throughout history of individuals who have discovered or invented out of the main intellectual stream. One such is Srinivasa Ramanujan, a poorly schooled Indian clerk who failed English but jumped ahead of even the most erudite Western mathematicians of the early 20th century. It seems some of his ideas are ahead of even 21st-century thinking.
As models, such people are probably dangerous, as the attainment of genius status is a rare condition. And looking at and working with raw data, as da Vinci and Ramanujan did, does not take a genius to accomplish, but it does take some gumption and effort.
Not too many years ago, the idea of reengineering and looking at the actual process became an activity of rank and file people within the enterprise. Reengineering meant a fresh look at how work was planned, done and recorded. It meant not making assumptions from afar, but instead getting in the face of the problem and of those who actively engaged the problem. To put it succinctly: taking on reality directly. And this deeply underscored the virtue of seeing and experiencing outside the box. Needless to say, it was dreadfully misunderstood as a set of principles and, in some cases, badly applied.
Rethinking a process such as the making of airplane wings, for example, could be limited to new ways of riveting metal sheet onto an airframe wing structure. This was how it was done until the advent of wings built from composites without rivets. The result was not just a substitute for the old ways, but a better, lighter and stronger way. The rethinking of process ended in this case in a multi-faceted flying advantage.
This brings to mind an old tale that was elaborated upon by the writer Charles Lamb. It described the invention of roast pork and goes like this: A Chinese man kept a pig in his house. The house burnt down with the pig inside, and the pig was roasted. The simple conclusion is: If you want to roast pork, burn the house down.
This is similar to when the inventors of early computers wanted to change programs. They thought they had to act in the same radical manner as the Chinese man and rewire the computer. Then along came fresh-thinking mathematician John von Neumann and internal computer programming, and not a moment too soon.
If we rethink the end function of a process rather than dwell on the process itself, we may be able to have the kind of insights that lead to significant process enhancement. This action requires the disregard of our own habitual and too often stultifying methods. It may mean, for instance, seeing the ability to fly not so much as flapping wings as understanding the nature of airfoils. Happy landing!