Abstract: This article examines the organizational implications of prevalent "ways of thinking"—cognitive frameworks that shape how individuals and teams perceive problems, generate solutions, and execute strategies. Drawing on Crilly's (2025) comprehensive bibliometric analysis of 78 ways of thinking across research literatures, this article translates academic prevalence patterns into actionable insights for practitioners. Critical thinking, design thinking, creative thinking, systems thinking, and computational thinking emerge as the five most prevalent frameworks in contemporary scholarship. However, their uneven distribution across disciplines and applications, varying rates of adoption, and differential combinations suggest significant opportunities and risks for organizations. The analysis reveals that while critical thinking maintains broad, sustained relevance across sectors, computational thinking shows rapid concentration in specific domains, and design thinking demonstrates explosive recent growth. Organizations that strategically cultivate complementary thinking capabilities—rather than adopting isolated frameworks—demonstrate enhanced problem-solving capacity, innovation outcomes, and adaptive resilience. This article provides evidence-based guidance for selecting, developing, and integrating multiple ways of thinking to address complex organizational challenges, supported by cases spanning engineering, healthcare, education, and public services. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.