To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’ (Part III)

To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’ (Part III)

Jul 7, 2024 | Leadership

If we think in silos, we bring ourselves deeper inside single systems, which “cannot account for interrelations and how the system we have chosen to study interacts with, affects, and is affected by, its environment” (Montuori, 2012, para. 6). This way of thinking mirrors how many organizations organize knowledge and ‘their people’ into functional departments that often do not ‘talk’ with one another.

Social science and management science, however, have historically viewed individuals and organizations as fundamentally closed systems (Montuori, 2013, p. 206). By extension, organizations often separate employees from one another, especially as they relate to departments and functional units. Collaboration, then, is a step in the right direction.

Something leaders can do is create spaces so others can make decisions. Here, I reference Ashby’s Law that only variety can absorb variety, an idea paraphrased by Ison and Straw (2020, p. 127). This is a profound idea and one (I think) connects to Heinz von Foerster’s Ethical Imperative, which is to “act always so as to increase the number of choices” (as cited in Steier & Jorgenson, 2003).

For so many reasons, I find this idea brilliant, because it captures the essence of systems thinking (or does it?). Indeed, systems thinking appears (is) very circular.
So how does this relate to leadership? How can it not if everything is perpetually connected within a continuous feedback loop?

In the general case of circular closure, A implies B; B implies C; and (Oh, horror!) C implies A! Or in the reflexive case, A implies B, and (Oh, shock!) B implies A! And now the devil’s cloven-hoof in its purest form, the form of self-reference; A implies A (Outrage!)

– (Von, Foerster, 2003, p. 289)

Indeed, the outrage—and so, is a leader only possible in the minds of those who follow? Who or what makes someone a leader? Precisely…
…If one of a leader’s goals is to ostensibly lead by example and work to effect anything systemic on a massive scale in their organization, the first thing they must do is also the last. They must look within. If a leader is to channel Von Foerster’s Ethical Imperative, then they are faced with a nearly limitless number of choices, which does not come without consequences:

For some, this freedom of choice is a gift from heaven. For others
such responsibility is an unbearable burden. How can one escape it? How
can one avoid it? How can one pass it on to somebody else? (Von Foerster, 2003, p. 293).

In the truest spirit of cybernetic thinking, I must ask who passed this mantle of leadership to me? Am I chasing myself? Are ‘leaders’ and those who follow them the same cogs in the same wheel(s)? In picturing these proverbial wheels, I am reminded of the following stanza in one of my favorite songs, “The Windmills of Your Mind”:

Like a tunnel that you follow to a tunnel of its own
Down a hollow to a cavern where the sun has never shone
Like a door that keeps revolving in a half forgotten dream
Or the ripples from a pebble someone tosses in a stream
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find in the windmills of your mind! (Bergman & Bergman, 1968)

To a very real extent, I believe the above stanza aptly describes Western society as it develops the problems to the solutions that cause the problems. To return to the original question as to how systems thinking enhances leadership capacity, my answer is that it does not simply change how leaders think about themselves in relationship with others. Rather, it changes how leaders respond to their response(s) to others and others’ respective responses to their responses.

Systems thinking can help all of us discover more windmills in our respectives minds where there is no end/beginning and is no ‘thou’. There is only I, and I ‘shall’ (not)…

References
Bergman, A & Bergman, M (1968). The Windmills of your Mind. [Recorded by Noel Harrison]. The Windmills of your Mind [Vinyl]. Reprise Records.

Ison, R. L., & Straw, E. (2020). The hidden power of systems thinking : governance in a climate emergency (Ser. Systems thinking). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351026901

Montuori, A. (2012). Five Dimensions of Applied Transdisciplinarity. http://integralleadershipreview.com/7518-transdisciplinary-reflections-2/

Montuori, A. (2013). Complexity and transdisciplinarity: reflections on theory and practice. WorldFutures, 69(4-6),200–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02604027.2013.803349

Steier, F., & Jorgenson, J. (2003). Ethics and aesthetics of observing frames. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 10(3/4), 124–136.

Von Foerster, H. (2003). Ethics and second-order cybernetics. In Understanding understanding (pp. 287-304). Springer, New York, NY.

To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’ (Part II)

To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’ (Part II)

Jul 7, 2024 | Leadership

What does social purpose mean in the context of my life? How do I apply my belief in a social purpose? How I answer these questions may provide insight into the extent to which I have retained my systemic sensibility:

Living in a relational world is an evolutionary context into which we are born. Becoming conscious that this is our birthright is another thing, it seems. This is a challenge, as coming to be aware of relational dynamics is the essence of a systemic sensibility needed for our living. (Ison & Straw, 2020, p. 110)

According to Ison and Straw, our respective systemic sensibilities can be framed within the concept of resisters, revivalists, and remainers (p. 110). In what ‘camp’ do you/I fall? How might an identification with a particular group inform ‘our’ personal leadership theory? Is it likely that we fall into one camp or another?

Such ‘either-or’ framings of questions are challenging because they lead to absolute thinking and (metaphorical and real) dead-ends. In trying to advance objectives within an organization, leaders must consider the present external landscape, which is fraught with deep uncertainty, anxiety, and fear. We are living in an ecological crisis (Canty, 2014), and this recognition can help all leaders develop a deeper appreciation for the impact this crisis may have on the people they lead.

Bernstein (2005) says there is “a craving for moral certainty and absolutes” (p. 26), and there can be “a desperate search for metaphysical and religious comfort” (p. 26), which he contends is based on illusions. As a leader—we must be mindful that the skills we develop is not mistaken for knowledge or at least the kind that confers a sense of ‘rightness’.

At the other end of this one-way road is ‘wrongness’, and so where do we to go in any conversation if we toggle (back and forth) between such large, amorphous concepts? Discussions of right versus wrong represent penultimate examples of reductionist thinking, which are inadequate in a complex world.

What is a leader to do, then, in a complex world? In part 3 of To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’, I answer this rhetorical question.

References
Bernstein, R. J. (2005). The abuse of evil: The corruption of politics and religion since 9/11. Cambridge: Polity.

Canty, J. M. (2014). Walking between worlds: Holding multiple worldviews as a key for
ecological transformation. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 33(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.24972/ijts.2014.33.1.15

Ison, R. L., & Straw, E. (2020). The hidden power of systems thinking : governance in a climate emergency (Ser. Systems thinking). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351026901

To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’ (Part I)

To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’ (Part I)

Jul 4, 2024 | Leadership

Is the past really past, and is the future somewhere ahead of us? The realization that past trauma, for instance, has a direct bearing on our mental health lends credence to the notion that yesterday is alive, a consideration that leads to a cybernetic complementarity that the future is equally real today.

Can we hold two seemingly disparate ideas?

The potentially contradictory nature of the above question serves as my segue to a discussion on how systems thinking enhances leadership. From a systems perspective, I do not believe a leader necessarily leads at all, but rather works to create a space within which as many inputs can be included as possible. This is a space in which people are allowed to make mistakes, an idea Ison & Straw (2020) indicate is a critical aspect of systems thinking in practice, as they rhetorically note, “Otherwise how will they learn” (p. 101)?

I find this question profound, because isn’t it the responsibility of a leader to create opportunities for people to learn? The answer seems obvious (at first), but this is not how businesses, including my own, Exponential Squared, on many occasions, are often run. If I am to step out on a proverbial limb and comment on the experience of other leaders or business owners, I believe it is fair to say it is a struggle (for many of us) to understand outcomes in context. I set due dates on various projects, and many of my decisions as a leader are directed to deliver them on time.

Am I creating enough space for my staff to not only learn, but to also make mistakes? Mistakes cost me money, and that is not a small consideration.

Systems thinking in practice can help me reframe my objectives as a leader, which could lead me to redefine the outcomes. Is completing a project on time the outcome I seek for every project, or is there something larger at work (play)? What is the social purpose of my company?

Systems thinking

As a leader or business owner, it is incumbent on me to help create environments within which my staff and clients are inspired, right? I am not just a business owner, however. I am a dad, a teacher, and a researcher among many other roles.

Do all my respective roles demand that I lead (and act) differently? Is the idea of a social purpose one that can bind all aspects of myself (and my many roles)?

Ison & Straw indicate that social purpose has different meanings in different contexts. One question I need to answer, then, is what does social purpose mean in the context of my life? A related question is how do I apply my belief in a social purpose?

A sense of purpose, claim Ison & Straw (2020), is “a common thread across the Blue Zone communities” (p. 86). Blue Zones, according to Talbott (2007), is the description given to areas of the world where communities have very long-life (age 100+) expectancies. Ison & Straw say that some of the health benefits that result from social purpose include a reduction of mortality risk, increase in resilience, and improvement in sleep among many others.

As a leader or business owner, it is incumbent on me to help create environments within which my staff and clients are inspired, right? I am not just a business owner, however. I am a dad, a teacher, and a researcher among many other roles.

Do all our respective roles demand that we lead (and act) differently? Is the idea of a social purpose one that can bind all aspects of our selves (and my many roles)?

Ison & Straw indicate that social purpose has different meanings in different contexts. In part two of To ‘Lead’ Or Not To ‘Lead’, I explore not only what social purpose could mean in the context of our lives, but how to apply it.

References
Ison, R. L., & Straw, E. (2020). The hidden power of systems thinking : governance in a climate emergency (Ser. Systems thinking). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351026901

Talbott, S. (2007). Devices of the soul: battling for our selves in an age of machines. ” O’Reilly Media, Inc.”.

Wading at the Edges

Wading at the Edges

Jun 23, 2024 | Transformation

All my life, I have essentially waded at the edges of the proverbial pools of life–a condition that does not lend itself to transformation, an idea I recently gleaned from Braiding Sweetgrass (2013) by Robin Wall Kimmerer. A book that weaves Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge, and the teachings of plants, Braiding Sweetgrass is stunning in its simple wisdom that is really not that simple at all.

Is parenting simple? Is love simple? Are the truths peddled by various experts in any number of fields (business, marketing, real estate, etc., etc.) actually simple? Must every question have a definitive answer? Must every question beget a (pick your number) step solution? Is anything linear?

Perhaps the answers to these questions lie in the waters around (and within us). Am I speaking metaphorically? Kimmerer certainly is not when she says the following:

Among our Potawatomi people, women are the Keepers of Water. We carry the sacred water to ceremonies and act on its behalf. “Women have a natural bond with water, because we are both life bearers,” my sister said. “We carry our babies in internal ponds and they come forth into the world on a wave of water. It is our responsibility to safeguard the water for all our relations.” Being a good mother includes the caretaking of water. (2013, p. 94)

Kimmerer says, “Transformation is not accomplished by tentatively wading at the edge” (p. 89), and I cannot help but interpret this statement as descriptive of my approach to life. It has been easy to hide in my role as marketer, pitching ideas in service of systems and processes developed by others–and yet, what is my responsibility to others, to Earth, to myself now that I have completed my doctorate in Transformative Studies. Am I not transformed? Am I not now charged with a (sacred) responsibility to be of service to others?

“In one short life where does responsibility lie” (Kimmerer, 2013, p. 95)? Indeed, how do I answer this question? Perhaps, I can look to the apple tree for this answer:

The apple tree leans out over the water and makes for a shadowy arbor. In spring a drift of pink and white blossoms send plumes of fragrance wafting down the hill and a rain of petals on the water. For years now I’ve watched her seasons, from frothy pink blossoms, to gently swelling ovaries as the petals fall away, to sour green marbles of adolescent fruit, to the right golden apples of September. That tree has been a good mother. Most years she nurtures a full crop of apples, gathering the energy of the world into herself and passing it on. She sends her young out into the world well provisioned for their journey, packaged in sweetness to share with the world. (2013, p. 95)

I’m not sure I will ever look at a tree (or mother) the same way again. I also cannot imagine I will remain content to continue to wade at the edge(s). What can I offer? What can any of us offer? Questions like these speak to a scarcity paradigm, a concept explored at great length by Canty (2022) in Returning the Self to Nature.

References
Canty, J. M. (2022). Returning the self to nature: Undoing our collective narcissism and healing our planet. Shambhala Publications.

Kimmerer, R. (2013). Braiding sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge and the teachings of plants. Milkweed editions.

Successful Fundraising Strategies

Successful Fundraising Strategies

Dec 20, 2023 | Fundraising

Successful fundraising at the organizational level rests on constructing solicitation strategies and techniques that reflect the capabilities and wants of current and prospective donor groups.

These strategies and techniques hinge on the development of an understanding of current and prospective donors, including individuals, businesses, corporations, foundations, and government agencies.

To develop such an understanding, collecting and analyzing data is necessary to determine the best fit for particular projects and fundraising campaigns. Some attributes of potential donors into which research should be conducted include demographics, past giving behaviors, existent relationships, and philanthropic interests.

Based on this research, which includes a variety of methods, project and campaign prospects can (and should) be ranked according to linkage to the organization, financial means (if known), and philanthropic interests (if known). These rankings can be codified into a list that serves as the basis for an action plan that lays out the activities that will make up the fundraising and development component of the project and/or campaign.

Activities could include events, one-to-one interactions, grant writing, corporate solicitation, digital (e-blasts and social media), and traditional PR. The proposed mix of fundraising and development activities will rest to a large degree on assumptions made from the research and the nature of the project or campaign for which funds must be raised.