Forgive the length of this message, but the best tool/exercise I have
worked with for bringing "resistance" into the open and validating it is
called polarity mapping. It is developed by Barry Johnson in his book
Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable Problems,
copyright 1992 by HRD Press (1-800-822-2801) ISBN# 0-87425-176-1.
Johnson defines "polarities" as any pair of interdependent opposites.
Examples of polarities I frequently encounter are:
-- centralization/decentralization (some call this flex/core)
-- individual/team
-- stability/change
We often frame such pairs as choices, when in fact a better approach is to
recognize the good/bad of each and strive for the best of both. Reasons for
calling them polarities (vs. paradoxes or dilemmas as others have) include:
-- such pairs of interdependent opposites often "polarize" teams
-- you place them at opposite "poles" of a polarity map when assessing
Johnson's simple but powerful construct (the polarity map) helps clients
get away from seeing their current initiative (eg, teams, decentralization,
change, etc.) as a "solution to a problem", and to begin to recognize it as
one half of a polarity which must be managed over time. While teams or
decentralization might be a necessary emphasis for a given organization at
this point in time, where we often get into trouble is in thinking of these
things as final solutions, or something we must choose between. A good
example of this is cost/quality. For decades, conventional wisdom was you
can have either one, but you must choose which. The Japanese proved that
when viewed in a cyclic fashion, you can eventually have both. The real
gains come from shifting our emphasis from one pole to another at different
times, while striving to get the best of both.
As Senge says in The Fifth Discipline:
"You can have your cake and eat it too--but not at once. Sometimes, the
knottiest dilemmas, when seen from the systems point of view, aren't
dilemmas at all. They are artifacts of 'snapshot' rather than 'process'
thinking, and appear in a whole new light once you think consciously of
change over time."
The polarity map is the tool I use to help get at this. As an example, one
pair of polarities, or interdependent opposites, is individual-team. I have
clients create a 2x2 map of this polarity that includes identifying the
"upsides" and "downsides" (represented by the upper and lower quadrants) of
each pole, then talk about where the org. is now, where it is headed, and
the benefits/dangers associated. Following is an example of a polarity map
for individual/team, with just one item in each quadrant, where there are
typically many.
-------------------------------
l Individual l Common l
l initiative l direction l
l l l
Individual l---------------l---------------l Team
l Isolated l Conformity l
l l l
l l l
---------------l---------------
In the case of the increasing emphasis on teams (shift in emphasis from
bottom left quadrant to upper right on this map), polarity management helps
us see that it may be a necessary evolution at this point in time, given
the historical focus of most western organizations on building systems to
manage, reward, and develop individual performance. It also allows us to
understand that TEAMS ARE NOT the be-all, end-all, solution-to-all our
problems, as many have framed them. What's more, if we pursue teams as a
"solution" to the "individual problem" we will hasten its failure. Instead
we must:
- pursue the "upsides" associated with increased use of teams
- while simultaneously attempting to maintain the "upsides" that
have resulted from our historic focus on individuals
- and avoiding the "downsides" of each pole
This simple exercise is often a tremendous relief to those with VALID
CONCERNS about whatever change is being proposed (e.g., adoption of teams,
decentralization, etc.) because it allows them to publicly express their
concerns about how individuals or functional expertise could potentially be
devalued in such an environment. Previously, saying such things aloud was
often interpreted to mean the speaker was "not a team player" or "a
resister."
For those advocating a change, it forces them to recognize that an
initiative like teams can only be successful if the upside, or positive
aspects of a focus on individuals is carried forward into the new
environment.
In this regard, one of Johnson's contributions to the notion of
change/resistance is to offer new terminology. He replaces the term change
agents or advocates (aka good guys) and the term resisters (aka bad guys)
with:
-- Crusaders = Those who want to shift emphasis to a different pole.
-- Tradition bearers = Those who recognize the upside of the current
pole and the downside of the pole Crusaders are advocating we
move towards. Their concerns are always valid and when seen as such
help to ensure the success of the shift, rather than inhibit it.
While no simple answers exist for how to manage such momentous efforts as
shifting the central focus of power in organizations to teams while
simultaneously valuing individuals and their contributions, I have found
that simply reframing the debate proves helpful. I satisfy myself with the
belief that helping clients recognize there are no easy answers and to
begin a dialogue around managing such issues is a good start.
Other books on topics of a similar nature include:
Managing on the Edge, Richard Tanner Pascale (contention)
Charting the Corporate Mind, Charles Hampden-Turner (dilemmas)
Organizational Dilemmas, Robert I. McLaren (dilemmas)
Beyond Rational Management, Robert E. Quinn (paradox)
Necessary Wisdom, Charles M. Johnston, M.D. (paradox)
The Age of Paradox, Charles Handy (paradox)
By the way, Johnson was/is a Gestalt psychologist, so if you have
background or interests in that area you will probably "take" to Polarity
Mapping. I am not affiliated with him in anyway. Just find the approach
valuable and do a 1/2 day workshop on it I call "Unsolvable Problems:
Recognizing and Managing Dilemmas."
Joe Kilbride -- jk@mcs.com
------------------------------------------------------------>
Training & consulting in Quality/Process/Systems Improvement
PO Box 64 in Downers Grove, IL 60515
Ph:708-515-9882 FAX:708-515-9883
<-----------------------------------------------------------
The uncompromising pursuit of whatever name is given to the supposedly
highest ideal--be it security, patriotism, peace, freedom, happiness or
whatever--is an ultra-solution, a force which, to paraphrase Goethe, always
seeks the good and always creates evil. -- Paul Watzlawick, Ultra-Solutions
There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. -- Shakespeare
One way to change people is to see them differently. -- Barry Stevens
Under Heaven all can see beauty only as beauty because there is ugliness.
All can know good as good only because there is evil. -- Lao-Tzu
People rise to a leadership position because they have a sense of the
dilemmas facing the organization and offer its members a mode of resolution
or reconciliation. -- Charles Hampden-Turner, Charting the Corporate Mind
A dilemma seeks to obtain both goals simultaneously, not eschew either.
-- Robert McLaren, Organizational Dilemmas
Paradox does not have to be resolved, only managed.
-- Charles Handy, The Age of Paradox