thinks paradoxical
In good times, we focus on opportunities and less on threats. As with natural ecosystems, focus makes us vulnerable. These vulnerabilities become visible during a crisis.
The Corona crisis gives us the reason to restore the balance between extremes and make the organization resilient (again).
We need a culture that enables paradoxical thinking and acting. Only then can the organization move organically with arising opportunities and threats.
There are some signals that indicate whether your culture does or does not encourage resilient behavior. We present four cultural values which create a fertile safe ground for employees to enable paradoxical thinking.
In good times the focus is
on opportunities
During years of prosperity, organizations typically focus on agility and the ability to adapt to fast changing environments. Employees are encouraged to think about how to capitalize on market opportunities and the best way to implement this. Such activity has brought various improvements to traditional outdated hierarchical structures.
Result: Organizations now respond more quickly to outside opportunities, products are delivered that meet demand more accurately and there is more room for innovation.
Because the focus is more directed towards opportunities, there is less attention on threats. During these times of plenty, employees who have a more reserved or risk-averse nature, are seen as 'deal breakers' or ‘delayers’.
When, like now, a crisis takes place, it becomes clear that the one-sided focus on opportunities also creates vulnerabilities.
Just like in ecosystems,
focus leads to vulnerability
When there is any kind of one-sided focus, people become "lazy" and pay insufficient attention to existential threats, especially when the focus results in success. This process is comparable with the adaptive cycle of an ecosystem. Ecological scientists have established that the adaptive process of an ecosystem always goes through the same cycle.
.jpg)
In the growth phase (r) the emphasis is on development and exploration. The focus is on what goes well and organisations become strong in that. In the conservation phase (K). this focus, results in the ecosystem losing its diversity and weaknesses arise in the system. This is similar to Netflix's algorithm. Because it knows so well what you like, you will no longer be surprised. and you no longer see what another part of the world sees. You get a one-sided view. This vulnerability allows an unexpected threat to turn into a crisis (𝝮). After which, one will recover and reorganize (𝛂). People now become strong where the weak spots used to be … and the cycle starts all over again.
This cycle is visible not only in natural ecosystems but also in economic systems, social systems and in organizations. This article zooms in on what this means for the social interaction of employees in organizations.
A crisis like Covid-19 gives reason to restore the balance
Due to Covid-19, most organizations are in the crisis phase (𝝮). During the coming months, the organization will move from crisis (𝝮) to the reorganization phase (𝛂). In this phase, the organization is rebuilt and demonstrates its resilience. The focus may of course be to return to the old state, but it can be even more desirable to explore how the organization can prosper from this crisis. The ‘lessons learned’, combined with some creative thinking about the new situation can create new opportunities for the future.
In the transition during the reorganization phase (𝛂), it is time to face vulnerabilities. But how is the paradoxical balance of extremes restored in an organization that has such one-sided focus?
A balance between paradoxes brings resilience
An organization wants to be able to take advantage of opportunities quickly, but also at the same time be able to deal adequately with threats. This calls for an seemingly paradoxical attitude: taking risks on the one hand whilst simultaneously limiting risks on the other. This continuous balance between these extremes is the hallmark of a resilient organization.
According to a study by Professor David Denyer at Cranfield University in collaboration with consultancy organization BSI, the resilience of an organization is determined by the degree to which it anticipates, prepares, reacts and adapts to incremental change and sudden disruptions in order to survive and to flourish.
They have explored the different stages that a resilient organization goes through and displays them in a quadrant so that the coherence between all stages becomes visible.
During periods of prosperity, the focus is more on flexibility and progression. In the event of a disruption or crisis, there is more inclination to shoot into the defensive reflex. Then, the shift to 'preventative control'. However, to be truly resilient it is important to take action in all four quadrants.
This is complex because it requires paradoxical thinking. For example, rather than make a choice between flexibility OR consistency, progression OR protection, Innovation OR control, a balance needs to be found between the two extremes. This requires a certain mindset of the workforce.
A balanced dialogue makes paradoxical thinking possible
As the BSI research describes, a resilient workforce identifies both opportunities and threats which it then understands, addresses and, above all, acts on them (in a timely manner). This means there must be a continuous insight into the different quadrants and there must be a continuous dialogue between extremes in order to make the right decisions, every time; if that opportunity is picked, how are risks kept in check?
From an employee perspective, the type of person comfortable working on risk mitigation is different from one comfortable working on risk taking.
Both types experience a certain degree of stress when they (due to the situation) have to move to the other side where the other type is dominant and overshadowing the other. In a resilient organization there is room for a balanced dialogue between the two types.
Organisations need to become aware of their one-sided focus
Every organization is of course different and develops differently. Looking at ecosystems in nature, the one-sided focus arises when positive feedback is received on the development it is going through. This positive feedback ensures even more focus which keeps on developing in this area. This positive feedback loop creates an exponential one-sided development.
An example is the current Agile development that many organizations have gone through or are going through. Flexibility, progression and innovation were often the focus during this phase and, as mentioned earlier, this was a good development for this phase of social and economic progress. Organisations came with old hierarchical structures, which worked in silos on tasks. That has changed successfully. It was the perfect era for flexible, networked, innovative employees. They flourished in new innovative projects, participated in pilots or lead teams in the new way of working.
There was less room for the critical eye of the more conservative employee. And, because the flexible innovative networkers received positive feedback, it increasingly legitimised their way of working as the right one. New employees with the same profile were hired and employees who did not fit in with the new direction were let gol. An homogeneous organization is created with employees whose interests are all aligned in the same direction, but, with the downside that the organization loses its diversity, and this creates new symptoms:
There is little room for critical feedback
When a system actually loses its diversity, it loses its ability to operate paradoxically. When the focus is on flexibility, progression and innovation, people with a focus on consistency, protection and control will be less inclined to express themselves. Nobody likes to be the "whiner" or the "retardant". The much needed critical feedback is therefore lost.
The need to experiment has limited pragmatism
Due to the focus on opportunities, leaders have increasingly motivated staff for positivity and growth. Experimentation and boldness was encouraged, even if it meant (temporarily) switching across boundaries.
This set the tone for new norms and values. There is less discipline on keeping to agreements and achieving set goals. Especially as the emphasis was on autonomy and the reduction of unnecessary hierarchical control.
For some, fear has arisen from uncertainties
The emphasis on flexibility and innovation in the past has caused some fear and anxiety to some employees. Fear of the unknown, fear of speaking up and fear of losing grip due to blurred boundaries.
This fear and anxiety can create stress which creates friction. This friction makes it increasingly difficult to conduct a constructive dialogue. People are more likely to be resistant or even worse, become indifferent and disconnect from the dialogue completely. The latter can have even greater consequences. When people feel that they no longer provide added value, this can lead to absenteeism or burnout.
What’s needed is a culture that enables paradoxical thinking
If there is desire to restore balance and shape a resilient organization, leaders must create a culture in which 'paradoxical' thinking amongst employees is stimulated, developed and expanded, without causing "stress".
When communication is transparent and information is available, employees are able to continuously improve, ensure safety and quickly identify, understand and address opportunities and threats. An open and curious attitude ensures that existing patterns are challenged and that new ideas are tried out in a responsible manner.
To stimulate this behavior, a culture is needed in which
That is not always easy. We have created our own beliefs and values when someone else's beliefs refutes these, it takes an open mind to seriously take this new belief in consideration.
A good example is the need for more femininity in leadership positions. Organisations are generally interested in the added value of a woman, but cling on to masculine beliefs that are historically present. Consequently, there is often only room for women who adhere to these masculine beliefs. The organization then does not take sufficient advantage of the feminine characteristics and therefore remains masculine oriented instead of more diverse oriented.
Organisations and individuals need to realize that (1) that it is better for the collective end result when we consider diverse perspectives, (2) it is a natural behavior to ‘stereotype,’ and (3) people often have ingrained behavioral patterns, then it becomes increasingly easier to be open to dissenting beliefs, comments or ideas.
Employees typically have been brought up with a learning concept which separated learning from practice and individuals learned individually. Obviously this has its advantages, but in order to create a continuously learning environment, it is important to create a collective 'growth mindset' in which employees also see the workplace as a learning place. But, this is not easy in an organization where employees are constantly working under pressure and priority is given to achieving concrete and visible results.
Taking an example from academic hospitals; employees contribute to the improvement of health care by increasing knowledge obtained in practice. While doctors (in training) are treating patients, they ask questions like: What works, and how? Is one intervention more effective than the other? How do we achieve the maximum efficiency?
When employees (1) adopt a curious mindset and (2) feel jointly responsible for a learning organization, we automatically start asking more questions and we are also more willing to share our knowledge and experience.
Put culture on the agenda!
Creating such a culture is not always easy. It requires time, attention and prioritization. And too often we see that developing such a culture is not (yet) on the agenda.
What you can do yourself:
- HR - work with employees representation to investigate how you score on these cultural values
- Employee representation (union/ council) - organize a dialogue session with management about these cultural values
- Management - reflect the cultural values in every communication and lead by example
- Department - convert the cultural values into activities in the annual and quarterly plans
- Team - Be aware of the signals as mentioned and investigate with your own team where you think there is room for improvement
- Yourself - Determine your resilience by examining how you respond to deviant beliefs and behaviors ?; when does resistance arise in you and is this justified or arisen from fear ?; how well do you cope with stress and uncertainty? You can test this by looking back on the emotional phases you went through during the Corona crisis.
How we can help
If you want to get started with this, we can support the organization in the following areas:
- Inspiration - We give inspiring presentations and dialogue sessions to make sensitive topics easy to discuss. We often use our storytellers. In the dialogue we determine the new norms and values together.
- Assesment - We assess the organization and provide insight into the current state of the culture and what is needed for the transition.
- Work session - We organize work sessions where employees work on a practical plan for creating new behavior.
- Transformation - We support both the design and implementation of the transition.
- Coaching - During the transition we coach management, employee representation (council) and employees
This article is written by:
Ilja van den Berg, with the input of Robert van Oirschot, Martijn Cruyff en Nicole Gregoire