Craziness

17/11/2017

I posted a blog a while ago where I proposed that four ‘Cs’ persistently undermine global efforts at development in the poorest countries: corruption, culture, conflict and climate. I spoke afterwards with Steve, an international development expert who has spent his life working with NGOs around the world, leading change strategies and interventions, running refugee camps etc. He said in all seriousness that I was missing a critical fifth C that is, in his experience, central to this equation: ‘Craziness’.

I started to laugh but stopped myself when I realised he wasn’t joking. Steve went on to explain with this example: Whilst working in Africa, he witnessed refugees burn down a primary school because of a personal disagreement between the head teacher, himself a refugee, and another person in the camp. He went on to say that we could attempt to explain such actions rationally but, unless we take into account the capacity for sheer human craziness, our efforts at development will be both naïve and limited.

This really got me thinking. I’ve never yet seen a craziness factor feature in a strategy map, theory of change, HR framework, coaching proposal or organisation development plan. So, I wonder…do we subconsciously and culturally filter out craziness because it doesn’t fit with our worldview, our theory of humanity? Conversely, could a resort to craziness-as-explanation simply be an admission of the limits of our ability to understand that which mystifies us, takes us by surprise, appears to defy all logic?

I don’t know – but I do think Steve may have a point. In our desire to structure, organise, manage and control, do we edit out, seek to remove or simply ignore the unpredictable, unmanageable, spontaneous, playful, mood-swinging aspects of our humanity that don’t fit our tidy, preconceived ideas and plans? If so, in doing so, do we miss out on the best of amazing, emergent, creative, human potential as well as find ourselves caught off-guard by its flip-side dark, destructive, shadows and risks?

61 Comments

Ian Henderson link

17/11/2017 04:20:00 pm

Great blog Nick - really interesting points. I never cease to be amazed about how people perceive their situations and problems. Recently I asked a production manager why there was so much waste on the floor of his unit; and there was a lot!! His answer was interesting. "Because we haven't got enough waste bins".

Nick Wright

17/11/2017 07:08:07 pm

Thanks Ian. I think that's a great example of how 'craziness' can become embedded in human systems. Our ability to persist in irrational and self-defeating behaviours - whilst, at the same time, convincing ourselves we aren't - is really quite remarkable!

Katy Murray

18/11/2017 12:39:07 pm

Love this Nick and agree that 'craziness' allows a space for emergent, messy, mystical, seemingly non rational, non logical aspects of our lives and leadership ... worth looking at chaordic leadership (Dee Hock) on this ✨

18/11/2017 12:44:57 pm

Thanks Katy! A couple of quotations from Hock resonate well here:

'Ego, Envy, Avarice, and Ambition: Four beasts that inevitably devour their keeper. Harbor them at your peril, for although you expect to ride on their back, you will end up in their belly.'

'Creativity: The problem is never how to get new, innovative thoughts into your mind, but how to get old ones out. Every mind is a building filled with archaic furniture. Clean out a corner of your mind and creativity will instantly fill it.'

You may find this related short piece - and some of the comments under it - interesting (...inspired by Richard Marshall)?

http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/everybodys-weird

Richard Simpson

19/11/2017 09:55:17 am

Assumptions are useful, except when they're not. I did a Clowning course last year and that was a good antidote to assumptionitis. Exercises included finding uses for an everyday object that avoided the obvious - e.g. what can you use a chair for when you can't sit on it? In my coaching, so often a breakthrough occurs when an assumption is successfully challenged. Maybe our human reality is built on assumptions about the world because they give us a degree of certainty and stability which in turn enables purposeful action. It's perhaps why some of like habits and routine so much. The shadow side is that we are fooled into thinking our reality is the only one - because it works for us more often than not. Dissonance shakes those foundations.

19/11/2017 11:12:46 am

Hi Richard. Well said! I love the idea of a Clowning course. :) It incorporates craziness, dissonance and 'assumptionitis', all at the same time!

Steve

20/11/2017 08:35:39 am

Hi Nick, I like the blog. Humanity is just so colourful. As we create with one hand we seem to be able to destroy with the other. We want to be rationale but can’t help sometimes being irrational. Wanting order and simplicity but forever creating complexity and chaos.

21/11/2017 10:57:11 am

Thanks Steve. That certainly resonates with my own experience!

Brigitte Jowanka

23/11/2017 07:43:22 pm

Interesting process....to think through.
I am sure the man was at the heartbeat of life.

23/11/2017 07:43:59 pm

Thanks Brigitte. I'm intrigued...can you say more?

Dawn Reed, MSOD, ACC

26/11/2017 07:53:23 pm

You present a very interesting question! It is definitely food for thought!

26/11/2017 07:54:25 pm

Thanks Dawn. I would be very interested to hear any further thoughts you have on it..!

Steve Tarpey

26/11/2017 07:55:05 pm

In a bizarre coincidence - I too am (another) Steve and have done similar work in similar environments to your first Steve. I see his point and I appreciate your response, but where I'd challenge who defines 'crazy' and against what norms. I can think of plenty of people and cultures I've encountered who would think that how we organise and run our lives in the West is 'crazy' - "you spend how much time travelling?"; "you work how many hours?"; I'm sure you can add your own examples ...
To be clear, I absolutely agree that we all too readily ignore the wonderful and terrifying potential for human beings to be spontaneous and/or act in ways we don't understand. But alongside that is the danger of uncritically normalising our worldview, behaviours, culture and practices. Anyone who has stood in Waterloo Station and watched the stress and frenzy of people hurrying to meetings that don't matter, reading long documents that won't have any impact may wonder what 'crazy' looks like.

26/11/2017 08:03:03 pm

Hi (another) Steve! Thanks for your reflections. I think your question of 'who defines crazy and against what norms' is a very important one. We could argue that, for instance, craziness is in the eye of the beholder or that craziness is socially/culturally constructed or construed. In doing so, we could similarly challenge all notions of normality and rationality/irrationality. At the same time, I can see so may examples of individual or group actions that, although explainable at some level, also appear to me as deeply deranged (e.g. Hitler/Nazis; Idi Amin; Serbia in Bosnia; Daesh). You may be interested in the short piece I posted originally: http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/sisyphus I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

William Chadwick

26/11/2017 08:18:30 pm

Really like this new dimension - humanity and chaos do produce results within the framework AND, paradoxically, the informality you set out Nick - thank you for sharing.

26/11/2017 08:18:59 pm

Thanks William. You're welcome.

Barry Jackson

26/11/2017 08:20:09 pm

What a thought provoking question. To begin with, it's not just a developing world problem. How many times have we heard it said, after the EU referendum, after the election of Donald Trump, Italy's exit from the World Cup in a qualifying round, "The world's gone mad." The very term "political correctness" is acknowledgement that we are seldom guided by logic or even common sense. Collective insanity is an everyday occurrence. What one makes of this I really don't know. I look forward the comments of others. Will we eventually get ourselves into such a mess that we'll be forced to come to our senses or will we, one day, do so something so stupid that we cease to exist?

26/11/2017 08:21:44 pm

Hi Barry. Great questions. You reminded me of a profound quotation by Gareth Morgan: 'What passes for rationality is often irrationality in disguise.'

Srihari Balasubramaniam

26/11/2017 08:22:40 pm

Good post Nick..in my view and I concur with your premise that craziness in today's world has a negative connotation( unless of course its downright malicious)."are you crazy" ? Is a question that implies somebody not fitting that prescribed mould..when it could be that the person is walking a totally different path..which does not conform to present day equations and thinking.

26/11/2017 08:26:29 pm

Thanks Srihari. You remind me of how many people we now consider genius in the fields of art, science etc. are or were considered by their peers or contemporaries as 'weird', 'insane' or something similar. You may find this short related piece interesting? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/censored

Caroline Esterson

27/11/2017 02:38:50 pm

So true Nick. Sadly human behaviour, not just in developing countries is chaotic. Chaos theory suggests that a dynamic system is highly sensitive to initial conditions but even in 'craziness' there are patterns to be found. Human behaviour isnt neat and tidy.. it doesnt fit in a box and that, i think, encourages us to look at it case by case... as the exception to the rule as it is too complex to form part of our norms. As such we do avoid it in all its craziness and glory.

27/11/2017 02:40:20 pm

Hi Caroline. I think that's a very interesting reflection vis a vis a possible relationship between 'craziness' and 'chaos'.

Jeanne Coogan

27/11/2017 02:41:11 pm

But as more and more industries attempt to utilize algorithms and big data, how does one factor in the craziness/chaos to these equations?

27/11/2017 02:42:08 pm

Hi Jeanne. That's an interesting question. The short answer - I don't know!

Vimala Suppiah

27/11/2017 02:51:48 pm

I agree with Barry that craziness is not exclusively assigned to developing countries but is a global feature of the 21st century. It is the “upside world” that’s emerging that needs a upside world view and suspend all what we are familiar and comfortable with. Are we ready to let go of what we are familiar with, step into the madness and dare embrace what Richard A. Rowland, head of Metro Pictures said in 1919, “the lunatics have taken over the asylum”?

27/11/2017 02:56:39 pm

Thanks Vimala. I agree re. developing countries and would argue it's not only a feature of 21 Century. My sense it it's an intrinsic aspect of the human condition and of all groups. I've got that song by Fun Boy Three stuck in my head now: 'The Lunatics have Taken Over the Asylum'! :)

Alan Wingrove

27/11/2017 02:57:20 pm

Nick, as ever, a thought provoking piece. I agree with Barry and Vimala, this is a global issue - and some of the 'developed' countries may be the most crazy.
A great book on this, by Dan Ariely, is 'Predictably Irrational' where Dan gives everyday examples of the craziness of human behaviour. Personally, I believe the term VUCA is a modern excuse for irrationality.
It could be argued that the most crazy, irrational and damaging animal species on Earth is the human being. The only species that hunts other species to extinction for 'sport' or financial benefit; the only species that destroys their own environment (and the environment of other species) and overuses all their natural resources - and the only species with the arrogance to think we're doing it well.
Another good book to read is Theo Compernolle's 'Brain Chains'. In this he outlines research into the dangers of using a palm-top whilst driving. Totally crazy - and yet we see it daily.
Just a thought....

27/11/2017 03:01:40 pm

Thanks Alan. I love how you articulated that..! Great examples and great books. Another good book along similar lines is McRaney's, 'You Are Not So Smart'.

Business Study Online link

28/11/2017 04:51:08 am

Great Job

28/11/2017 10:23:57 am

Thank you.

Tom Rausch

28/11/2017 10:25:55 am

We live in a VUCA world: Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous. No need to add crazy to that. Is 30+ % of America to be labeled crazy just because many of us do not take the time to understand the nuances of thinking that bring about behaviors that may appear "crazy?" Great topic and question: how do we make sense of things that do not fit our worldview? Thanks for bringing it up Nick.

28/11/2017 10:39:01 am

Hi Tom and thank you for posing such a thought-provoking response. VUCA is normally applied to contextual environments. I wonder if what we perceive and experience as craziness is sometimes VUCA expressed as a psychodynamic phenomenon in people and groups?

The sense-making issue is a tricky one. I sometimes assume that everything could be explained rationally if only we could understand all of the factors and variables at play. It's a philosophical stance that mirrors and reflects something like a traditional cause-and-effect scientific paradigm.

I think the assumption itself is questionable. What if, like in quantum physics, some things 'just are' or 'just happen' or, as in social constructionism, the sense-we-make is simply a product of, say, personal, language and cultural paradigms? I love the mystery in that. Maybe that's where true 'craziness' lies.

Louise Frayne MSc, LL.B (Hons), Chartered FCIPD

28/11/2017 10:40:40 am

Perhaps it's the perception that crazy equals chaos.....replace it with Curiosity then I believe there would be better engagement. As children we are naturally curious but as we get older many of us Conform and our Curiosity takes a back seat. Let's embrace Curiosity to encourage discussion, learning and reflection.

28/11/2017 10:42:20 am

Hi Louise. I agree. Curiosity can be a great response to what we perceive and experience as craziness...as can be, in some expressions of craziness...wonder or even horror..?

Bruce Hammer

28/11/2017 11:36:36 pm

My associations to Nick's four C's is that people in the system no matter what the defining operating principles of that system may be impede development efforts because they have an alternate agenda such as acquiring resources outside the agreed upon rules of that system (corruption), or because they are in opposition to the actions or beliefs that development is aligned with (culture) or they are in the midst of conflict between groups populating that system, or because of external factors that make development extremely difficult. I am using climate in the broadest sense. I believe that Nick's Steve is referring to the impact of individuals whose motivations are mostly to destroy systems and people. Anarchistic and narcissistic rage ,and primal contempt and hate for people does exist, and can play a significant role in impeding development efforts if they aren't identified as such.

28/11/2017 11:38:46 pm

Thanks Bruce. Interesting comments!

Inbavanan G.

29/11/2017 10:11:10 am

Two thoughts for contemplation from my side. Firstly, 'Craziness' is based on what lenses we wear to see others with. A lot of things happening in India currently for example, might look 'crazy' to people from the West. However, the reasons of such things is quite evident to a large majority of people living in India.

That brings me to the 2nd thought - To be a successful 'change agent', one first needs to leave behind their lenses and engage with the group that is attempting to bring about change and imbibe their 'thinking' & 'ways'. Only then will they be able to facilitate successful change. As there is a saying, 'walk in the other man's shoes to know exactly where it bites'.

29/11/2017 10:28:55 am

Hi Inbavanan and thank you for such a thoughtful response.

Your first comment about India begs some really interesting and important questions, for instance: (a) whether anything or anyone can ever be regarded objectively as 'crazy' and (b) whether anything or anyone can be regarded as not crazy simply because the reasons are evident to the majority.

One example in the media in recent years has been some very extreme incidences of rape in India. Even if the underlying social, cultural and personal causes can be explained, e.g. by social scientists or psychologists, does that make them any less pathologically deranged?

I'm reminded of a fascinating conversation I once had with a profound Indian man on a flight home from Cambodia. When I told him I was working for a charity, he responded, 'How shameful!'. I was surprised because, in the West, people normally respond with something like 'How honourable!' I was curious so asked him to explain.

He replied that he assumed that, by working for a charity, I was earning less money than I could have done by doing alternative work. In his view, the honourable thing is to earn as much wealth as possible for one's extended family. I found that absolutely fascinating! I love those kinds of cross-cultural encounter. :)

I agree wholeheartedly with your second point, with the caveat that I don't think it's possible to leave behind our own lenses. The idea that, for instance, 'one needs first to leave behind their lenses' is itself to view an approach, a relationship, through a particular lens. I believe it's more about being aware (as far as we can be) of our own lenses so that they don't interfere with the relationship and process.

'Walk in the other's shoes' is very good advice...as far as it is possible!

Iain Martin

29/11/2017 10:31:25 am

And this is why Artificial Intelligence will never completely replace experienced coaching in face-face discussions with senior leaders. AI may threaten or even replace many elements of mid-management coaching but creative dialogue at high level springs from the intuition, learning and experiences of mature coaches interacting with engaged clients and not from computer synthesis of 'normal responses'. Coaching is more of an art and less of a science and AI cannot replicate spontaneous creativity.

29/11/2017 10:46:06 am

Thanks Iain. What an interesting angle to consider!

Interestingly, I heard mention in the UK this week of some research that proposed some clients with mental health issues benefited more from engaging with 'e-therapy' than with an actual human therapist.

I think it was to do with accessibility and preference for ethnic minority clients but it raises some important ethical and practical questions that may apply to the coaching arena too. If interested, here are a couple of reference articles:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ethnic-minority-children-non-white-mental-health-services-a8078961.html

https://schools.au.reachout.com/articles/online-counselling-pros-and-cons

Mary Huntington, PHR

29/11/2017 04:17:11 pm

In a time where neuro-diversity is on the rise and the word "crazy" elicits strong emotions from some, perhaps a look into changing that final "C" into "Choas." I encourage you and others to take a look at the work of Snowden...very interesting and especially useful in working globally!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7oz366X0-8

29/11/2017 04:27:49 pm

Thanks Mary. I think the neuro-diversity phenomenon has some interesting parallels in social constructionism. What we notice and consider to be differences - and what value and meaning we attribute to differences - are, in a sense, culturally constructed.

'Crazy' is indeed a sensitive word. I'm not sure, however, that 'chaos' captures the full extent of what Steve in the blog meant or whether, perhaps, chaos is a possible cause or consequence of craziness.

My sense is that craziness is inherent to the human condition and that, personally and culturally, we sometimes try to repress or contain it because of its potentially embarrassing or damaging consequences. In doing so, I wonder how much amazing positive mystery, wonder, talent, contribution and potential we miss too.

I'll be very interested to watch the video. Thanks for posting the link!

29/11/2017 04:39:38 pm

Not sure if you've done any reading on the Cynefin Framework developed by David Snowden (Cognitive Edge), but he speaks of chaos and the disorder that can ensue when approaching a chaotic situation from a simple frame. He frames leadership decision making through four frames (Simple, Complicated, Complex, and Chaotic) whereby approaches to decisions and leadership is different in each area. Maintaining that in today's world, contemporary organizations are changing so rapidly and are more than just the sum of its parts - "unknown unknowns" as he refers to them. However, the fourth frame is the chaotic frame where no manageable pattern exists and it's only turbulence. As I read it in your words, "craziness."

29/11/2017 04:42:19 pm

Hi Mary. The Cynefin Framework sounds fascinating. I'll have a look!

Samira El Boudamoussi, PhD

29/11/2017 04:35:10 pm

I think that we are all (implicitly) aware of this human creaziness or chaos and that is why we try our best to control (explicitly) the other ingredients in order to leave enough room for us to deal with the unpredictable.

29/11/2017 04:36:53 pm

Hi Samira. I think that's an interesting idea - as if we seek to create sufficient stability in some aspects of our experience to allow unpredictability to arise in others without feeling threatened or destabilised by it?

Luke Novelli, Jr

30/11/2017 04:45:39 pm

Craziness from who's perspective? I would love to know what the refugee who burned down the school was thinking, and how this act "made sense" to that person.

30/11/2017 04:47:00 pm

Hi Luke. I guess that's the million dollar question! A related question could be, could such an act be regarded as 'crazy' even if it did make sense to the person,,?

C Jason Martin

30/11/2017 04:49:10 pm

You probably know more of the background than you've shared, but without that I would be slow to judge the burning of the schoolhouse as crazy. Depending on the issues and the power distribution, burning the schoolhouse may have had lasting and profound positive impacts on the community. Maybe the schoolmaster was immune to reason and after the flames cooled they had a laugh and built a new and better school. I wasn't there. I don't know.

That example aside, I have seen countless crazy and even cruel things perpetrated 'for the good of the business' with nary an eyebrow raised. The insane part is how good we are at accepting what we are habituated to, as normal.

To the point of lenses, I find it easier to start from the premise that I'll never know what it's like inside your head and that everyone has apparently irrational urges and needs. But that doesn't mean they can't be convinced to play along at least some of the time.

30/11/2017 04:53:30 pm

Hi C Jason. Thanks for such inspiring and thought-provoking insights.

Yes, I had a similar conversation with an international development expert this week who is trying to measure and evaluate the impact of an INGO's work and on how many beneficiaries.

My sense is that we can't possibly know and understand all the ripple effects and down-through-time implications of any action-intervention that we or others make.

On that note, you may find this related short piece interesting? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/maybe

Debbie Tucker

30/11/2017 04:54:52 pm

This reminds me of Brene' Brown's Rising Strong theory of reckoning (recognizing and engaging the issue), rumbling (...getting honest about the issue/struggle....and reality checking topics hopefully beginning of the change..) and the revolution (fundamental changing of our thoughts and beliefs)....all leading to transformation. Allowing the unpredictable...seems a great opportunity to communicate, listen, and relate to each other to sort out the best resolutions. I don't want to miss the "best" options.....I'll listen, learn and communicate and deal with the unpredictable!

30/11/2017 04:56:59 pm

Thanks Debbie. I like that. It sounds like how to be open and look for the treasure that may emerge in the midst of the apparent 'craziness'?

Chris Jackson

30/11/2017 06:25:19 pm

Nick, With your permission (based on, for example, your desire to 'edit in' the “unpredictable, unmanageable, spontaneous, playful, mood-swinging aspects of our humanity"), let’s define “craziness” as “uncertainty” and “structure, organise, manage and control” as “certainty”.

With these definitions, there’s an interesting paper by Frank Matthias Staemmler published in the British Gestalt Journal that extols the practice of uncertainty (aka ‘craziness’) and which I believe relates to this post (- http://www.britishgestaltjournal.com/shop/volume-6-1-1997-1). As we Gestalters believe, there really only is the ‘here and now’ in which to engage and, moreover, in the encounter in that existential moment, it’s important that we have no attachment to any certainty – no small challenge in a world that is wedded to dualistic thinking with its attendant pressures of fitting into pre-defined certainties.

However, if, in that moment, the coach can tolerate not knowing what will happen next, can ‘cultivate craziness’ and can hold the space (the 'ground') so that the client’s 'crazy’ figures surface, a new beautiful thing is possible. Indeed, we might say, without such craziness, there isn’t really life happening.

So, yes, let’s add that Fifth 'C' :)

30/11/2017 06:38:52 pm

Hi Chris. I loved reading your reflections and ideas and your way of expressing them! :) Although I have the sense that 'craziness' extends beyond 'uncertainty', I think the certainty-uncertainty idea captures well something of that which we may experience when we encounter it. I experience it within myself as well as in encounter with others...and in cultures and systems.

I wonder if 'craziness' can represent psychodynamically, for us, uncontrollability as well as uncertainty which can, in turn, evoke feelings of anxiety and threat. This drives an instinct to control, suppress, mitigate or remove craziness in order to feel more in control, more certain, and therefore, less anxious.

Craziness holds, for me, ideas of 'new beautiful things', often beyond our ordinary, un-crazy abilities to imagine, alongside the worst kinds of destructive potential. Perhaps that's why, culturally, we view craziness as so dangerous and try to control, rationalise or define it out of existence?

In doing so, I find myself wondering what I/we lose as well as what I/we gain.

1/12/2017 09:24:05 am

Agree that's the something important about control here, Nick, as well as certainty ... and, of course, dualistic thinking tries to control in order to create certainty, which is the antithesis of what I believe (true) Gestalt is offering :)

1/12/2017 09:26:59 am

Thanks Chris. I'm very curious. I regard myself as a Gestalt-ist too. What do you believe '(true) Gestalt is offering'..? Do you have any examples from experience you could share to illustrate it?

Lara Currie

1/12/2017 06:13:45 pm

Interesting. The unpredictable is hard to factor in because it is just that, unpredictable. I agree it should be a consideration.

1/12/2017 06:14:14 pm

Thanks Lara. I agree!

Scott Hawkins

2/12/2017 04:53:05 am

In the world of Recovery Coaching, craziness is the norm! To go from a "you can't make this stuff up" to coaching an individual to start on a new pathway of life, you got to work in the craziness before dealing with the other 4 C's!

2/12/2017 04:53:57 am

Hi Scott. Brilliantly put..!! :)

liana link

23/8/2022 09:04:36 am

thanks for info

Craziness

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Craziness

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives