系统纵览

教育家、剧作家巴里·奥什瑞这本充满诗意的商业寓言书不同于其他任何商业书籍。根据他数十年来观察和帮助功能障碍组织的经验，奥什瑞在这本由其1995年的作品更新而成的著作中提出了极有价值的见解和智慧。他令人耳目一新的启发性见解能够帮助领导者及其追随者摆脱相互对立的境地。当您理解了这本著作后，您就会发现组织内部的许多行为都是自动的或者“系统性”的，很少是个人性的。这种认识能够让您改进任何一个群体的自然动态。益得书摘相信，本书能够让您对关系的作用方式，以及如何才能将您的系统和您自己变得更好有一个更加全面的了解。

通过本浓缩书，您将习得

• 为什么组织和社会中会产生冲突
• 如何认清人们在工作和社会中扮演各种不同角色的多样性视角
• 如何改变群体的自然动态，创造出更好的“系统性”成果

要点速记

• 工作、组织系统和社会中的人可以分为四种角色——“上层、下层、中层以及客户”。
• 上层包括总裁、首席执行官、部长、家长以及其他的领导者。
• 上层感觉责任沉重，但却不愿意分享权力。
• 下层包括工人、儿童、普通市民和教友等。
• 下层抱怨自己没有权力，但却不愿意承担责任。
• 中层包括经理、主管以及其他处在上层和下层之间的人。中层往往在上下两个“终端”之间左右为难，因此很少能够团结起来。
• 所有的人都可能在某个时间点扮演客户的角色。
• 人们会在工作中和个人生活中不断转变角色，却很少有人能够超越自己在某个特定时刻所扮演的角色。
• 社会各群体之间的误解会带来压迫、战争和种族屠杀。在工作中，“系统性”分裂则会导致组织出现功能障碍。
• 上层、下层、中层和客户在感到不满时会相互指责。若要消除误解，就需要认清每一个人的角色及其扮演该角色的原因。

浓缩书

“系统性盲目”

在一个复杂的社会里生活或是在一个大型组织中工作，往往意味着您对整个系统的观察视角会受到局限，视野范围不够完整。无论处在组织的上层、中层还是下层，或是作为组织的客户，人们往往发现自己在“系统中”的位置会干扰自己对事物的判断和评价。这种扰乱被称为“位置性盲目”。

“将主导性的世界观由个人角度转向系统角度。简单地说，很多个人性的感受其实并不是个人性的。”

无论您是员工、经理、家庭成员还是社区成员，您每天都在体验着四种角色：上层、下层、中层和客户。您可能身处社会权力的下层，但作为家长又处在家庭的上层，作为经理处在工作的中层，同时您还是保龄球馆的客户。您可能了解自己扮演的角色，但可能难以理解其他一切外在的事物，比如什么驱使系统中的其他人去做他们所做的事。您可能无法完全了解所有造成周围局面的事件和决定。这种“临时性盲目”与位置性盲目一道，带来让大多数人厌恶和回避的误解与不确定性。

“我们是系统的生物。”

对于复杂的问题，人们往往讨厌不确定性，可能更愿意采纳坚定明确的意见——虽然坚定不移的意识形态经常会导致冲突。但同时，处于组织和社会中的人们又会创造出一些虚构的故事来解释未知和不确定的事物。随着时间的推移，您的组织会不断强化这种虚假的故事，以至于把这种故事当成事实。当您针对其他人、其他群体和其他社会虚构这种通常是错误和反面的故事时，他们其实也在做着同样的事情。这样的虚假故事会带来误解，并造成工作中、家庭中、社会上和国家间的冲突。

“当我们处在上层/下层关系中时，就有可能进行互惠互利的合作。”

“上层、下层、中层和客户”

当被要求描述自己的状况和不满时，许多组织和行业的员工和客户都会针对自己的角色给出如下四种类型的描述。不论部门、行业、地域还是年代，上层、下层、中层和客户这四个群体所面对的问题和挑战都惊人地相似：

“关于领导者，有两个平行的迷思：进步来自开明的领导者；人类的种种恐怖——战争、压迫、屠杀，都来自恶魔般的领导者。”

• “负担沉重的上层”——组织的领导者往往认为自己负担过重，得不到足够的支持，孤立无援。他们需要花太多的时间到处救火，以至于没有时间来完成他们真正的工作，比如规划和战略。
• “备受压迫的下层”——在工作中人微言轻的下层员工认为自己是领导者眼中的小齿轮。他们觉得自己像是没有名字、能够被轻易替换掉的雄蜂；他们觉得没有人关心他们，于是反过来，他们对无能为力的上司或中层管理人员也漠不关心；他们很少能够看到上层的领导者。
• “感觉被撕裂的中层”——中层往往会感到被孤立，感到自己被困在上层和下层之间，并且被两个方向的力量所撕扯。无论要完成何种工作，中层都需要来自上层或下层的配合。他们要么紧跟上层的脚步，与下层划清界限；要么对下层充满同情，却可能妨碍自己的职业发展前途。那些试图同时迎合上层和下层的人，则往往会因为无法同时满足两方的要求而心力交瘁。
• “不被重视的客户”——客户总是感觉自己被忽略和不受重视。他们痛恨被视为问题；他们认为自己的选择非常有限；他们认为即便更换供应商，自己受到的对待也大同小异。

“一些上层一边抱怨自己的负担太重，一边又不肯放手；一些下层一边抱怨自己受到压迫，一边又不愿抽身。”

扮演好自己的角色

上层、下层、中层和客户在感到不满的时候会相互指责。无论是在家庭中还是在组织中，处于上层者都需要承担责任。您可以承担专门职位和领域的责任，找机会了解其他处在上层的人，与他们交流工作。跟他们分享信息，就共同的目标表达并达成一致意见；多与他们呆在一起，向他们提出和征询建议。

“下层群体往往在‘团结就是力量’的旗帜下发挥作用，但更为强大的座右铭应该是：‘多样就是力量’。”

中层很少能够形成一个独特的群体，他们往往相互猜忌和竞争。中层不可避免地要谈论他们所带领的团队，也就是下层员工。若要进行整合，中层必须要摆脱彼此间的不和，通过定期召开会议走到一起。这样就能够通过改善沟通、一致性和客户服务来让他们及其组织都发生转变。处于中层者必须要明确组织内整个中层群体的目标，了解彼此，关注彼此的成功，把中层群体会议放在竞争性的优先事项之前，哪怕是来自上层的优先事项。

“我们的大脑对不确定性的忍耐是有限的。相对抗的立场和派别将会出现，而其追随者会由确定性和正当性武装起来。”

下层员工的情况则恰恰相反。他们很自然地团结在一起，却往往为了集体而牺牲自己的个性。他们会逐渐变得不能容忍异议或反对意见。在工作中，那些特立独行的下层员工会受到排斥或打击，他们会因此而变得假意迎合，隐藏分歧，不会表达自己对群体的不同意见。群体思维和随大流于是催生了下层的集体声音。事实上，下层群体应该“系统性地”思考问题，应该尊重每一个人的观点，彼此分享看法，而不是排斥异见。大多数人的意见可能会带来最终的决定，但尊重那些不同的观点却是对其他角色的理解和尊重，也让群体的最终立场能够反映每一个人的视角，更为坚定有力。要想得出最强有力的决策，实现集体的目标，下层群体必须要抵抗自发走向一致的意愿，为多样性留出空间。

“当我们阐述彼此的分歧时，还需要发展和维护我们的共性。”

无论处在上层、中层还是下层，您都应该尽力抵制以团队或群体做出每一个决策。太多的商议和考虑往往意味着错失良机。太过依赖集体决策会让组织停滞不前，从而失去创造力和创新能力。无论是极端的个体化还是极端的差异化，都不值得提倡，因为它可能会带来民族主义、宗教极端主义、战争、压迫甚至种族屠杀。我们要努力在极端之间找到平衡点。

“当我们处在供应商/客户关系中时，就有可能在交付高品质的产品和服务方面进行互惠互利的合作。”

“习惯性盲目之舞”

组织上层和下层的表现都是可以预测的。上层肩负着责任和决策权。他们抱怨压力，却不愿放弃控制权。下层没有权力，抱怨压迫，同时又不愿承担责任。中层则往往会抱怨自己夹在上层和下层之间两头受气。组织中的每一个群体处于习惯性盲目的舞蹈中，都在被其他群体所抱怨。上层可能会说，他们也想放弃更多的责任，下层可能会说，他们愿意接过这些责任。但是，直到有人能够真正改变舞蹈的方式，真正接受或放弃责任和义务之前，一切都是空话。

“客户需要更直接地参与到交付过程之中——了解交付系统如何运作；提出明确的要求和标准；尽早作为合作伙伴加入其中，而不是在最后担当评判者。”

必须要有一方先迈出第一步。迈出第一步的一方虽然会独舞一段时间，但却能够创造机会让其他群体加入到舞蹈中来，从而带来改变的空间。谁来迈出这第一步？这需要视情况而定。社会的变革通常来自下层，比如奴隶制的废除和民权运动。如果下层不能改变盲目舞蹈的状况，他们往往会指责上层。罪恶的行径则只可能来自上层的命令，同时也离不开下层的自满或同谋。若要改变盲目之舞的局面，每个人都有义务参与和承担责任，要避免把所有的权力和责任都推到上层。上层不会主动迈出第一步放弃自己的权力，因此下层必须要主动采取行动来实现社会变革或者进行反抗。

“当‘一些事情’发生时，您可以把它当作个人性的事件对待，也可以把它当作系统性的事件对待；前者只能是旁敲侧击，隔靴搔痒，后者则能够直击核心，解决问题。“

无论是试图同时迎合两方，还是选择与某一方站在一起，中层往往都在上层和下层之间被撕扯。上层和下层都会给中层施压，希望将更多的责任转移他们。这一切都发生在无形之中，除非有人能够率先停下盲目之舞——比如中层意识到自己走进了一个无解的境地，或者“终端”，也就是上层和下层认识到了自己加诸中层的严苛要求。不幸的是，尽管抱怨不休，一些中层却仍然希望被上层和下层两方所依靠，而一些“终端”也非常愿意让中层来完成工作和承担责任。必须要有一个群体来打开变革之门。这个任务就落在了中层的身上。他们必须为上层和下层之间直接解决问题提供便利，同时帮助这两方完成其分内的事情。

“在组织中，很多时候我们都认为自己在个人对个人地处理问题，而实际上却是情境对情境。”

客户往往会陷入对供应商产生依赖的境地，期待通过最低程度的参与获得高品质的交付产品。对于购买者所给予的越来越多的责任，供应商可能会感到愤怒，感觉受到了不公平的对待。客户应该打破这种盲目之舞的局面，与供应商充分合作，分担交付产品或服务的责任。供应商应该欢迎客户参与自己的业务。客户应该在交易过程中明确提出自己喜欢什么，不喜欢什么，并且与供应商团结一致，做出相应的改变，而不应该在事后不断抱怨。

“我们与世界的问题就在于：愚蠢的人总是盲目自信，而聪明的人却往往[是]充满怀疑。”

人们也许会一边抱怨组织的功能障碍，一边又对新的道路感到恐惧——那可能意味着放弃权力和责任，或者承担改变组织文化的责任。新的道路就是：上层、下层、中层和客户都来拥抱新的选择和可能性，这样自然就会带来更好的产品、系统、家庭和组织。上层必须要分流出一部分责任，下层应该要接受它。中层则必须要团结起来，为上、下层之间的链条增加价值和一致性。组织中的每一个人都必须要坚守组织文化的精髓，同时利用新的主意来创造一个更为强大的组织、社会或国家。

改变盲目之舞

当您认定组织中的责任是根据层级从上向下流动时，您也就陷入了盲目之舞的境地。组织中的参与者必须要打破这种局面，催生变革。但是机会并不一定能够带来成功。上层可能会开除下层，客户也可能会选择其他的供应商。新的舞伴可能会加入舞蹈，带来持久的、积极的变化，但是巨大的障碍却仍然存在。随着盲目之舞的不断继续，组织会进一步陷入功能障碍，上层也会发生分裂。上层领导者开始不信任中层和下层，转而注重保护自己的地盘，而不是为组织寻求出路。中层也会陷入类似的境地，开始在组织中自我孤立。下层却会出现相反的情况。个人会组成群体，并试图保持一致——或是假装一致。下层会逐渐走向组织的对立面，而随着盲目之舞的深入，这种对立还会进一步深化。

要想进行变革，就必须先承认上层、下层、中层和客户之间的关系，进而建立一种伙伴关系。要认清各个群体所代表的盲目之舞，然后跳出舞蹈圈，做出改变并且坚持下去，即便其他人不断给予您压力，想把您带回“原来的舞蹈”中。

换个角度

您可以通过了解其他人的工作环境和状况来避免盲目性。领导者需要组织“工作时间外例会”（TOOT），帮助每一个人从彼此的角度来看待问题。把上层、下层、中层和客户聚集在一起，让每个群体的成员讲述自己的故事，诉说自己的经历、压力和问题，谈论工作中的顺境与逆境。TOOT的目的不是解决问题，而是分享，让大家了解其他人的视角，从而营造理解、共鸣和团队精神。

上层、下层、中层和客户之间的问题是系统性和自发性的，并非源自个人。如果您能够准确地洞悉上层、下层、中层和客户可能会在TOOT上反馈的困难和问题，您就可以给所有的参与者留下深刻的印象。对他们的状况的了解能够让您向他们证明：尽管他们的问题对他们而言似乎是独一无二的，但其实并不是；尽管他们的一些感受似乎是个人的，其实也不是。组织的问题必须要通盘考虑、系统解决。

您可以考虑向人类学家寻求帮助。他们会默默地进行记录，不作任何判断地记录下他们的观察结果。他们能看到千头万绪的线索，并且站在不属于组织内任何群体的立场来将组织的拼图拼凑完整。人类学家能够发现组织中的障碍，帮助各个层级的参与者了解彼此的行动和理由。这种了解能够带来更好的团队运作和更流畅的整体系统。

您应该努力创造一个尊重人们彼此间的差异、尊重和肯定其想法和意见的平衡有力的系统，利用人们的各种不同观点和意见，实现一致的更高目标。您的系统应该在不失去控制的前提下，尊重思想和个性的自由。这种有力的系统需要付出很多努力，并且通常只有在工作、家庭、宗教甚至国家中的某个群体已经依次尝试了无政府、极权和民主方式，却都没有成功时才能实现。要想成就一个具有适应性和弹性的系统，您需要在保留历史和文化核心的同时，尽量将每一个人都纳入其中。

关于作者

巴里·奥什瑞（Barry Oshry）：作家、顾问、教育家和剧作家，与自己的妻子（同时也是商业伙伴）共同运营Power + Systems公司——一家非营利的教育机构。

Seeing Systems

Unlocking the Mysteries of Organizational Life

Barry Oshry

Educator, playwright and consultant Barry Oshry’s poetic, allegorical manifesto is unlike any other business book. Drawing from decades of observing and helping dysfunctional organizations, Oshry offers valuable insights and wisdom in this update of his 1995 book. His refreshing, illuminating insights will help leaders and followers shed any mutual antagonism. As you gain understanding from his text, you will see that many behaviors within organizations are automatic or “systemic” and rarely personal. This knowledge equips you to improve the natural dynamics of any group. getAbstract believes you will gain a more complete picture of why relationships work as they do and of how to change systems and yourself for the better.

In this summary, you will learn

• Why organizations and societies generate conflict
• How to recognize the diverse perspectives of people in various roles at work and in society
• How to change the natural dynamics of groups to create better “systemic” outcomes

Take-Aways

• People at work, in organizational systems and in society fall into four roles – “Tops, Bottoms, Middles and Customers.”
• Tops include presidents, CEOs, ministers, parents and others who lead.
• Tops feel burdened by great responsibility but only reluctantly share power.
• Bottoms include workers, children, ordinary citizens and parishioners.
• Bottoms complain about powerlessness but only reluctantly take responsibility.
• Middles include managers, supervisors and others who are between the bottoms and the tops. Torn between the “Ends,” middles rarely band together.
• All people play the role of being a customer at some point in time.
• People move across roles at work and in their personal lives but seldom see past the role they occupy at any given moment.
• Misunderstandings among society’s groups lead to oppression, war and genocide. At work, “systemic” divisions lead to organizational dysfunction.
• Tops, bottoms, middles and customers blame each other when aggrieved. To break through misunderstandings, recognize people’s roles and the reasons they play them.

Summary

“System Blindness”

Living in a complex society or working within a large organization often means that you have a limited perspective and an incomplete view of the entire system. People at the top, middle or bottom of an organization – or among its customers – will find that their “systemic” position interferes with their judgment and evaluation. This confusion is called “spatial blindness.”

Whether you’re an employee, manager, voter, family member, worshipper or community member, you experience four roles or positions daily: top, bottom, middle and client. You may be at the bottom in societal power, at the top as a parent in your family, in the middle as a manager at work or a customer at your bowling alley. You may know your part, but you may not comprehend everything else that’s going on – including what drives other people in the system to behave as they do. You might not understand all the events and decisions that led to the conditions surrounding you. This “temporal blindness” combines with spatial blindness to create a void of misunderstanding and uncertainty, a condition most people dislike and avoid.

“Shift the dominant worldview from the personal to the systemic. Simply stated, much that feels personal is not personal.”

People react poorly to uncertainty and may feel more comfortable adopting strong, definitive opinions on complex issues, although fixed ideologies often lead to conflict. Instead, people in organizations and societies invent myths to explain the unknown and the uncertain. Your organization mythologizes the stories it invents and adopts, and – over time – treats the stories as facts. As you create stories – mainly wrong and unflattering – about other people, groups and societies, they do the same about you. These myths cause misinterpretations and contribute to conflict at work, in families, in society and amongnations.

“We are systems creatures.”

“Tops, Bottoms, Middles and Customers”

When asked to describe their situations and grievances, employees and customers across many organizations and industries give the following descriptions of their roles, which they group into four types. The issues and challenges each group faces as tops, bottoms, middles or customers reveal remarkable similarity, no matter the sector, industry, geography or decade:

• “Burdened tops” – Executives who lead organizations see themselves as overtaxed, under-supported and isolated. They spend so much time putting out fires that they can’t get to their real jobs, which include planning and strategy.
• “Oppressed bottoms” – With little say or visibility in running their operation, bottoms see themselves as cogs in the eyes of their leaders. Bottoms feel like nameless, easily replaced drones. They believe no one cares about them and, in turn, they don’t care about their powerless supervisors or middle managers and they rarely see the top leaders.
• “Torn middles” – Middles feel isolated, trapped between tops and bottoms and pulled in both directions. Middles need the cooperation of tops or bottoms to get anything done. Middles either align with the tops and distance themselves from the bottoms, or they sympathize with the bottoms and jeopardize their own career growth. Middles who cater equally to both sides usually burn out from trying to satisfy impossible demands.
• “Righteously done-to customers” – Customers typically feel neglected and under-appreciated. They resent being treated as problems. They believe they have limited options; they think that if they switch providers, they’d still receive the same treatment.

“When we are in top/bottom relationships, it is possible and mutually beneficial to be in partnership.”

Surviving Your Role

Tops, bottoms, middles and customers blame each other when they are aggrieved. To survive at the top, whether in a family or an organization, delegate responsibility. Take on specialized duties and areas of responsibility. Look for opportunities to learn about and exchange work with other tops. Share information, express and agree to mutual goals, advise and seek advice from other tops, and spend time with them.

“There are two parallel myths about leaders…progress comes from…enlightened leaders; the horrors of humanity – warfare, oppression, genocide – are attributable to demonic leadership.”

Middles rarely form a distinct group. They tend to mistrust each other and compete. Middles invariably talk about the teams that report to them – the bottoms. To integrate, middles must get past their discomfort with each other and come together by meeting regularly. This can transform them and their organizations by improving communication, consistency and customer service. Middles must identify group goals, get to know each other, care about each other’s success and treat group meetings as first among competing priorities, including those imposed from the top.

Bottoms face the opposite dynamic. They bond naturally but sacrifice their individuality for the collective. Bottoms gradually grow intolerant of dissent or disagreement. At work, nonconformers at the bottom face ostracism or sabotage. They become more likely to conform falsely, hiding their disagreement rather than displaying their opposition to the group. Groupthink and conformity drive the bottom’s collective voice.

“Some tops complain about their burden while clinging to it…some bottoms complain about their oppression while clinging to it.”

Bottom groups should think “systemically.” Rather than dismissing nonconformers, the group should canvas everyone’s viewpoints and share perspectives. The majority view may carry the decision, but all those involved can gain understanding and respect for the other roles and positions. The group’s final stance will reflect everyone’s perspective and be stronger as a result. To reach the most robust decisions and achieve collective goals, bottoms must resist the reflexive pull toward unanimity and make room for a variety of options.

“Bottom groups are prone to function under the banner, ‘In Unity There Is Strength.’ A more powerful motto is: ‘In Diversity There Is Strength’.”

Whether at the top, middle or bottom, resist the temptation to decide every issue as a team or group. Too much deliberation means missed opportunities. Taken too far, the collective stagnates and loses its ability to create and innovate. Discourage both extreme individualization or extreme differentiation, which can lead to nationalism, religious extremism, war, sexual oppression and genocide. Try to find a balance by avoiding theextremes.

“The Dance of Blind Reflex”

Tops and bottoms fall into predictable patterns. Tops coalesce responsibility and decision-making. They complain about pressure but resist giving up control. Bottoms cede power and complain about oppression while avoiding responsibility. Middles complain about working between tops and bottoms. Each group enables the others’ complaints in the dance of blind reflex. Tops may say they want to give up more responsibility and bottoms may say they want to take it, but until someone changes the dance and accepts or relinquishes responsibility and accountability, nothing happens.

“Our…brains have limited tolerance for uncertainty…Conflicting positions and factions arise whose adherents are fortified with certainty and righteousness.”

One side or the other must make the first move. Making the first move means dancing alone for a while, but it creates opportunity for the other side to join the dance and it makes room for change. The person who takes the first step toward change depends on context. Societal change normally comes from the bottom – for example, the end of slavery and the civil rights movement. Bottoms who fail to change the dance may point fingers at the top. Evil acts can occur only by command of the top and with the bottom’s complacency or complicity. Everyone has an obligation to participate, take responsibility, and resist investing authority and responsibility solely at the top. The top won’t make the first move to disperse its power, so the bottom must take action to bring about societal change orresistance.

“As we elaborate our differences, we also need to develop and maintain our commonality.”

Middles get pulled between tops and bottoms while trying to serve each or pick sides. Tops and bottoms pull on the middles and shift more responsibility to them. This happens invisibly unless someone stops the dance – so middles can realize that they created an impossible situation and so “Ends” – the tops and the bottoms – can acknowledge the demands they place on middles. Unfortunately, some middles, although they complain, crave a situation in which both sides rely on them. Some ends enjoy having middles to do the work and take the blame. One group must open the opportunity for change. This burden falls to the middles, who must facilitate direct problem solving between the ends and help them do things themselves.

Customers fall into the trap of relying on providers and expecting high-quality delivery with minimal involvement. As buyers put increasing responsibility on suppliers, the suppliers can react angrily and feel treated unfairly. Customers should break free of that dance by partnering with their suppliers and accepting shared responsibility for product or service delivery. Suppliers must welcome customers into their businesses. Customers must say what they do and don’t like during the transactional process, and unite with suppliers to change it, rather than complaining afterward.

“When we are in provider/customer relationships, it is possible and mutually beneficial for us to be in partnership regarding the delivery of high-quality products and services.”

People may complain about dysfunction even while they remain terrified of the alternatives – whether that means giving up power and responsibility or taking responsibility for making changes to the culture. The alternative is that tops, bottoms, middles and customers could embrace opportunities for new options and possibilities, and then better products, systems, families and organizations would emerge. Tops must offer shared responsibility; bottoms must accept it. Middles must unite to add value and consistency up and down the chain. Everyone must preserve the best of the culture while leveraging new ideas to create a stronger organization, community or nation.

The “customer needs to become more directly involved in the delivery process – knowing how the delivery system works; setting clear demands and standards; getting into the delivery process early as a partner, not late as a judge.”

Changing the Dance

You fall into the blind dance when you accept that responsibility flows hierarchically – from top to bottom. Participants must break the dance to generate change. Opportunity alone doesn’t guarantee success. For example, a top might fire a bottom or a customer might choose another supplier. A new party might join the dance to make lasting, positive change, but formidable obstacles stand in the way of that outcome. As the blind dance continues and the organization slides further into dysfunction, splintering occurs at the top. Leaders grow distrustful and focus on protecting their turf rather than looking out for the organization. Middles follow a similar pattern and isolate themselves. At the bottom, the opposite effect takes hold. Individuals form groups and conform – or pretend they do. Bottoms’ antagonism toward the organization grows, and positions harden as the dance intensifies.

To generate change, build partnerships by acknowledging the relationships among top, bottom, middle and customers. Recognize the dances they typify. Step outside the dance, make changes and hold fast even if others attempt to pressure you back into the “old dance.”

“‘Stuff’ happens; you can take it personally or treat it systemically; one takes you to the side show, the other to the center ring.”

Seeing Other Perspectives

Overcome blindness by understanding other people’s operational context. Leaders must help everyone see each other’s perspectives by taking a thoughtful “time out of time” (TOOT). Bring tops, middles, bottoms and customers together, so members of each group can tell their stories – and talk about their experiences, stresses, issues, what’s going well and what isn’t. TOOTs are not for solving problems; they’re for sharing. Letting everyone hear other perspectives engenders understanding, empathy and teamwork.

“In organizations, much of the time we think we are dealing person-to-person when in fact we’re dealing context-to-context.”

Problems among tops, middles, bottoms and customers are systemic and reflexive, not personal. Because you can accurately predict the problems and issues that tops, bottoms, middles and customers will reflect upon at the TOOT, you can make a profound impression on the participants. Knowing what they will say lets you demonstrate that, though their issues might seem unique to them, they aren’t – and though what’s done to them might feel personal, it isn’t. The organization must address problems deliberately and systemically.

Consider bringing in consulting anthropologists, who will silently take notes, make no judgments and document what they observe. They will see the threads and piece together the puzzle in a nonpartisan way. Anthropologists can shed light on obstacles and help participants at all levels understand each other’s actions and reasons. This knowledge can lead to better functioning teams and a smoother overall system.

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent [are] full of doubt.”

Seek to create balanced, robust systems that respect people’s differences and welcome their thoughts and ideas. Use people’s myriad perspectives and opinions to achieve a unifying higher purpose. Your system must allow freedom of thought and individuality without spinning out of control. This robust system takes effort to achieve and usually arrives only after a group at work, a family, a house of worship or even a nation has sequentially tried and failed at anarchy, totalitarianism, and democracy. To enable an adaptable and resilient system, include everyone while preserving the history and core of your culture.