 ‘Above all, try something.’ (Franklin D. Roosevelt) Trilemma is a new word for me. It means to face a situation where we must decide between three desirable (or undesirable) and mutually-exclusive options. Some call it an ‘impossible trinity’ where, at most, we can (or must) choose only two of the three options and, thereby, must (at least from that perspective) give up on the third. I sometimes see this when working with Christian leaders who feel caught in an ambiguous ethical choice between, say, exercising personal agency vs showing respect to others vs trusting God to act. ‘Should I seize the initiative (agency)…or wait first to see what actions others may take (respect)…or pray instead to see what God will do (trust)?’ Ignatius of Loyola offered some partial advice to help resolve this: ‘Pray as if everything depends on God – and act as if everything depends on you.’ Oliver Cromwell offered similar guidance to his troops when crossing a river to face an enemy: ‘Trust God – and keep you (gun)powder dry.’ I wonder if a tetralemma may be a useful tool here too. Future Learn published an interesting, practical case example of a trilemma when discussing the potential trade-offs of policy goals to address drugs, peace and development. It demonstrates an interdependence of sorts between intersecting issues, so that addressing one or two may have unintended consequences for the third. When have you faced a trilemma? What did you do to resolve it?
13 Comments
 ‘A virtuous cycle is a self-reinforcing loop in which a series of positive actions and outcomes continually strengthen each other.’ (Marc Wilson & Donnée MacDougall) I hardly slept on Saturday night then, yesterday evening, I spent time with friends in Germany. As it got late they offered me a lift in their car back to the apartment where I’m staying and, to their surprise, I declined. ‘Why not?’ they asked. ‘You’re very tired, it’s a 30 minutes’ walk and it’s freezing cold outside.’ ‘It’s OK. I'll walk.’ ‘But why?’, they persisted. ‘Because I don’t feel like walking.’ They looked at me completely puzzled now. Had something got lost in translation? ‘The last thing I feel like doing at the moment, when I’m tired and it’s so cold, is to walk back. Therefore, I’m choosing to walk back.’ It opened a curious discussion about self-discipline as a way to strengthen character, personal agency and resilience. It’s as if each time we make such a decision and act on it, it reinforces or changes something within us. Some philosophers argue that who we are and become is a cumulative consequence of such decisions and actions. Now don’t get me wrong. Even the best principles can get a bit crazy when pushed to extremes. Yet picture this. A person is feeling lethargic, demotivated, anxious or depressed and says they don’t feel like getting up in the morning; eating or drinking healthily; going outside for exercise, fresh air and open sky; meeting up with other people; doing something (e.g. as a volunteer) that creates a sense of achievement or makes a positive difference for others – so they don’t do it. The decision and action of not doing it, because in that moment it’s the last thing they feel like doing, actually reinforces their experience of lethargy, demotivation, anxiety or depression. It’s a vicious spiral. The solution, known in psychology as a virtuous cycle, is to do the exact opposite thing – whether we feel like it or not. In the moment, it will feel counterintuitive and we may need support from others to help break an old, fixed pattern and create a sustainable new one. Do you want to re-create your future? Get in touch!  ‘They were all ordinary until they took the extraordinary steps with courage to leave extraordinary footprints.’ (Ernest Agyemang Yeboah) ‘Extraordinary people are ordinary people making extraordinary decisions.’ (Sharon Pearson) Every now and again we meet someone who’s truly making history. This week, I had the privilege of meeting Usha Vishwakarma, leader of Red Brigade Lucknow in India. It was hard to not feel awestruck. After all, for me it felt a bit like meeting Mahatma Gandhi or Mother Teresa. However, Usha’s humble persona and presence immediately put me at ease. I was grateful to activist professor Smita Singh for making the introduction and for interpreting during our brief conversation. Some years ago, I had a similar feeling when I had the privilege of meeting Bob Geldof. It was only for a few seconds after hearing him share his life story, but as I stood in front of him and shook his hand, I struggled to find words that carried a fitting sense of gravity. I have this feeling, too, every time I work with the amazing Jasmin in the Philippines. Usha, Smita, Bob, Jasmin – all ordinary people who are using their own agency, their own lives, to do something extraordinary. Keen to develop your own personal agency, your own life story? Get in touch!  ‘Success depends on the real possibility of failure.’ (Clara Nobre) I heard someone complain recently that achieving their goal would take too much hard work. I replied that, if the goal were more easily achievable, it could risk decreasing any corresponding sense of success. I heard someone else say that the bar for achieving qualifications should be lowered so that more people are able to pass and less people will fail. Their argument was based on compassionate desire for inclusion. I do think it’s legitimate to ask if the bar is at the right level. However, to lower it for this reason alone would risk devaluing the qualification. A different approach might be to consider whether everyone has equitable access to, say, the life circumstances, resources and support that would enable them to succeed. If someone is disadvantaged by having no access to such things and no realistic prospect of accessing them, should we lower the bar for those people? Or should we, perhaps, do whatever is needed to ensure they are able to gain access and, thereby, to achieve the same standard as others? It’s something about where we locate responsibility for success; the individual or the system. So, it’s a complex issue. Success depends on the real possibility of failure. If I were to succeed in something without ever having had any real prospect of not-succeeding, where would the sense of merit or achievement be? Take, for instance, a scenario in which I pass a car driving test, irrespective of how well I am able to perform behind the wheel. What would any cause for celebration (say, for successfully overcoming the challenge) be based on afterwards? What would the consequences be for the quality of my driving and the safety of other road users?  ‘Capabilities are freedoms conceived as real opportunities.’ (Amartya Sen) I keep coming back to this question: what is it that makes the difference? I’ve been drawn recently to reflections on this theme by Indian economist and philosopher, Amartya Sen. He distinguishes between capabilities, which are our resources (including our abilities and our potential), and conversion factors, which are influences on the real opportunities we have to use and fulfil them. Sen focuses his work on wellbeing and on the kinds of lives people and groups are effectively able to lead. He moves on to questions of what people, groups and societies need. Sen offers some interesting illustrations. Two people have the same resources. One is able-bodied and the other has physical disabilities that confine them to a wheelchair. All else being equal, the able-bodied person has more net resources because the person with disabilities has more related expenses. The former may also have greater net opportunities in society because the latter may be limited to places that are wheelchair-accessible. This could lead us to the conclusion that the person with disabilities should be given more resources to ensure equity. Sen then asks, what if the able-bodied person is hard to please and needs more resources to achieve a sense of wellbeing? What if the person with disabilities is content with their life and needs fewer resources to achieve wellbeing? If the goal is wellbeing, should we therefore provide more resources for the able-bodied person? Sen poses two challenges before we leap to this conclusion: sometimes disadvantaged people lower their expectations as a coping mechanism; and society has a moral imperative to support the disadvantaged and vulnerable. Sen provides another example of a person who owns a bicycle. The bike is a means to an end, to ensure mobility rather than an end in itself. Yet to convert the potential of bike ownership to greater mobility, certain conditions need to be in place. These could include, for instance, the physical ability to ride a bike; a social-cultural context that allows the person to ride a bike; and environmental conditions such as safe roads or suitable bike paths that make using a bike feasible. It’s a combination of capabilities and conversion factors that make this difference. So, what does this look like real situations? As far back as 2003, I wrote a research paper as part of an organisation development (OD) masters’ degree that aimed to identify and address common factors that influence engagement and effectiveness in organisations. I proposed that culture, complexity, capability and climate were critical variables. It’s about releasing and harnessing individual potential on the one hand, whilst creating the conditions in which people thrive on the other. This is, in my view, where coaching, action learning and OD intersect. What do you think?  ‘Moral discipline is the consistent exercise of agency to choose the right because it is right, even when it is hard.’ (D. Todd Christofferson) Secret agent? No. Estate agent? No. Travel agent? No. Change agent? Yes – that’s what I mean here. Personal leadership is all about outlook, attitude and behaviour. It isn’t about role or position. It is about seeing myself, whatever my role, as an agent of change. It’s about being proactive, seizing the initiative and embracing fresh challenges. It’s also about seeking ways to improve things and being resourceful to address them. Here are some examples of personal leadership, representing a shift from passive to active stance:
Personal leadership isn’t about being individualistic or selfish. It is about choosing to take responsibility for my own decisions and actions and, where it affects others, helping to manage the implications. For instance, say I discover I can’t make it to a pre-arranged meeting. A passive response could be to say, for example, ‘Apologies, can’t make it after all.’ And that’s it. It could leave the other party feeling unsupported, undervalued or disrespected. By contrast, a personal leadership approach could look something like this: ‘Apologies, some unexpected, high priority and urgent work has come up which means I can’t now make it to our meeting. I recognise the meeting is important and I’ve explored various ways to make it possible, e.g. by rearranging other work, asking colleagues if they can cover for me; seeing if other deadlines can be renegotiated etc, without success. Is the date or time of the meeting negotiable...or could I perhaps arrange for somebody else attend in my place? I would ensure they are fully briefed beforehand and check in with them afterwards.’ See and feel the difference? Bottom line: personal leadership is about exercising my agency to contribute my best, and to enhance the contribution of others. Would you like help with developing personal leadership in your organisation? Get in touch! [See also: Shared leadership; Personal leadership; Developing personal leadership]  ‘For every fixed idea there is an absent idea: by interpreting experience in a particular way we inadvertently exclude alternative renditions.’ (Peter Senge) It’s tricky being human. We are so easily trapped by our assumptions. Imagine this scenario (mirroring Chris Argyris and Peter Senge’s Ladder of Inference): You arrange a meeting with a colleague from whom you need input and you race back from another appointment to ensure you arrive on time. To your frustration and dismay, the other person doesn’t turn up. You call them but there’s no answer. What sort of thing goes through your mind? It could be:
That reminds me of Stephen Covey’s observation that, often, ‘We judge others by their actions but ourselves by our intentions.’ If this happens, you’re likely to feel devalued and disrespected – and that will have a negative impact on your relationship. Yet how to challenge yourself to create a shift in perspective and, thereby, to open up fresh possibilities for moving things forward? Jean Latting and V. Jean Ramsey offer a useful ‘3 Hypotheses Technique’: The first step is to notice and take note of what you assume the person’s action or behaviour means – that is, if you like, your starting hypothesis. The second step is to assume the person has a positive intention – which would be, in this case, the reverse of your initial hypothesis. The third step is to assume the person is, for instance, being driven by external circumstances that are beyond their control – that is, to imagine or create an alternative explanation. Playing with hypotheses like this can help us loosen the grip that hidden, subconscious assumptions can hold over our thinking, how we feel and how we respond. It helps us recognise when we may be jumping to conclusions without realising it – especially when we’re feeling anxious, pressured or stressed – and it can evoke a constructive and healthy state of curiosity, allowing us to navigate situations and relationships with greater freedom, flexibility and truth.  'We don't get to choose how we come into this world - but God gives the freedom to choose how we live in it.' (Frances Cabrini) The end of a year and start of a new one marks a transition point in the calendar and, at times, in our own lives too. It’s an opportunity to look back, re-evaluate, learn and make choices before casting our eyes forward to take next steps in a future direction. I find the best way I can do this is by taking time away from day-to-day distractions in silence, to sit before God and before myself, as if looking into a mirror long and hard to face whatever may surface into awareness. This kind of reflective examination sometimes helps me to avoid falling into repeating patterns of thought and action, often based more on habitual routines than on conscious decisions. Part of the challenge we may encounter is self-deception; made more difficult by subconscious projection (that is, framing others in ways that distort reality) and introjection (that is, framing ourselves in ways that distort reality). The subconscious part means we do it without being aware that we’re doing it. It’s a kind of fooling ourselves about fooling ourselves – a double bind, if you like. There’s a risk, on the one hand, that we believe what we want to believe – which is a way of defending ourselves from anxiety, confusion or stress – or, on the other, we believe what we fear most – which is a sign, driver and consequence of anxiety. And both without knowing it. So how can we get past this? I try a number of strategies. On the foundational hope, purpose and ethics front, I reflect prayerfully on the Bible and on other spiritual resources. On the professional development front, including to address my own hidden assumptions and risks of avoidance, I employ a talented coach who’s high in stimulus and in challenge. On the fresh thinking front, I network, read articles and write blogs to share and invite insights and ideas with and from others. On the international front, I work cross-culturally and, on occasion, visit other places and cultures. Taken as a whole, these approaches help me to stay, as well as I can, at the edge of my calling.  ‘To learn through listening, practice it naively and actively. Naively means that you listen openly, ready to learn something, as opposed to listening defensively, ready to rebut. Listening actively means you acknowledge what you heard and act accordingly.’ (Betsy Sanders) I ran a Leading and Influencing Change workshop today for health and social care professionals, focused on introducing and embedding trauma-informed practice in the mental health arena. Ironically, the event took place in an old, abandoned fortress, with the training room in which we met surrounded by symbols of attack and defence: tanks, artillery, torpedoes, tunnels and protective walls. There was also a disused military hut with 007 on the door, a symbol of secretive actors and actions behind the scenes made famous by fictitious spy James Bond. Serving as metaphors, we considered how to shift team and organisational culture away from, at times, a default and subconscious fight-flight, attack-and-defence response in incredibly busy, pressured and complex work environments. We did this by thinking through approaches and behaviours that may look and feel counter-cultural – in practice, if not in principle – in those contexts. It entails role-modelling five key qualities in attitude and action in communications, conversations and relationships: i.e. safety, trust, choice, collaboration and empowerment. What could this look like practice? One participant illustrated it beautifully. When I asked for volunteers, she commented that she felt nervous to take part in an activity in front of the group. Two simple questions can make all the difference here: ‘If you were to do X, what would that mean for you?’ (e.g. ‘I would feel anxious and exposed in front of my peers’) and, ‘Given that, what would you need?’ (e.g. ‘If I could have more information about what the activity will entail, I could make a considered decision’; or ‘If I could sit behind a table, I would feel less exposed.’) This is, at heart, about adopting and modelling a human, invitational and coactive leadership style and approach that takes the voices, hopes and concerns of others seriously. I don’t believe the oft-quoted maxim that people are necessarily and fundamentally resistant to change. In my experience, people may resist a change, even if they agree with it, if they don’t feel heard and understood. Conversely, people may support a change, even if they don’t agree with it, if they do feel heard and understood. Attack-and-defence is a sign that something has gone awry. [See also: Trauma-informed coaching; A safe-enough space]  ‘Votes are cast based on rational decisions, right?’ (Zaria Gorvett) As I watched the former leader of a very influential nation speak on TV last night with what came across (to me, at least) as a mishmash of delusions and mistruths, I felt, to put it mildly, both bemused and dismayed. This felt even more so because current polls in that country point to a distinct possibility, if not yet a probability, that that person could actually be re-elected to that position of power. I found myself asking myself, ‘What kind of craziness would compel people to vote for this person? How can’t they see through the nonsensical and narcissistic rhetoric?’ Shaking my head with a deep sigh, I got up to make a cup of tea. Suddenly (I don’t know if it was the caffeine), a revelation hit me. I flashed back to some years ago in Germany, watching a 1-hour interview with Angela Merkel on TV. She was at the height of her leadership that year and, to be honest, I could hardly understand a word she said. My German language skills simply weren't up to it. Yet, somehow…I found her absolutely mesmerising. Something about her style, presence and tone subtly seduced me. I would have voted for her. I would have married her! Maybe. This took me back, next, to the Brexit-EU psychodrama in the UK. At that time, arguments flew back and forth vociferously in favour of Leave or Remain. Little I heard on either side bore much resemblance to evidential reality. Noticeably, most people I spoke with voted on instinct, on gut-feel intuition, and were swayed little by spurious claims or counterclaims. Boris Johnson, who won that game (by a narrow margin), played subconsciously on cultural memories of Winston Churchill, the lone hero who stood alone against overwhelming internal and external odds. So, an ex-President, an ex-Bundeskanzlerin and an ex-Prime Minister. It's far more than the words they say. It’s what they symbolise and represent. It’s how they make people feel. |
Nick WrightI'm a psychological coach, trainer and OD consultant. Curious to discover how can I help you? Get in touch! 
Like what you read? Simply enter your email address below to receive regular blog updates!
|
RSS Feed