How to build a better world one (risk) decision at a time?

With the pressures created by the current economy it is not unusual to find people are becoming more concerned about safety and seeking ways to return to stability. When this applies to individuals, this behaviour closely matches 'survival' behaviour. Where it applies to collectives -be that communities, organisations, nations etc - we start observing behaviours such as group-think, territorialism, nimby-ism, terrorism and more worryingly, the search for stronger leaders who are believed for their promise to return the collective to 'safety' and 'stability'.
 
Safety and stability are myths, which even strong leadership cannot help bring to life. Why? Because the 'laws of nature' dictate that risk is the norm and continuous change (AKA evolution) is positive. These are the simple, but for a lot of people, counter-intuitive principles which will help rebalance decisions for better (more peaceful) outcomes.
 
All this is based on a false belief that risk is the polar opposite to safety, and that only safety can avoid blame (see 'False' Risk Continuum below). Nothing could be further from the truth! Evidence shows that (command-and-) control behaviours actually attract more extreme 'survival' behaviour in others - be that flight or flight - leaving the collective more open to extreme behaviours and scenarios as described above. 

 

 

In order to win, we need to complete the continuum with the polar opposite to control. So here is what the full risk continuum looks like: 

 

The polar opposite of control is neglect. Without adding the consideration of neglect to our decision-making processes, risk will continue to be seen as needing to be avoided instead of embraced as that what helps us survive, grow and evolve. 

 

The trick is not to control but to find balance, build resilience to change, letting go of control and learning with the flow as set by the 'laws of nature'!

 

 

 



Tip of the day ... on supporting organisational change

Are a lot of the actions you take at work based on the common belief that 'Turkeys don't vote for Christmas'? It may be time to update yourself on Employee Engagement and letting go of 'old-school' change management practices.

A great book to read:
Axelrod  R.H. (2010) Terms of Engagement: New Ways of Leading and Changing Organizations

Safeguarding adults - finding the right risk balance

When we awaken to meet each day, we face a variety of health and safety risks
in our lives. Life is inherently full of risks, but this does not keep us from
‘taking on the day’ or even unnecessarily limiting our activities.

When working with people with dementia or other people whose life
circumstances make them more vulnerable to abuse, we assess risks and
sometimes forget that risks have benefits, such as encouraging independence,
building self-esteem, etc.

 

Observing vulnerability brings out in us a want to care and protect. Rightly so!
However when being a witness to abuse - whether in a professional role or as
an unpaid carer - our brain kicks into 'survival mode' (fight-flight-freeze) as strong
emotions often accompany our interactions with those people more vulnerable
than ourselves. These feelings may include:

• Anger (fight)
• Withdrawal (flight)
• Resignation (freeze)
• Denial (freeze)

It is not possible to switch off our 'survival mode'. As human beings our brains are
wired toprotect us from threats in our immediate environments. We have a
'natural' distrust that has kept us safe throughout history. What is important
however is to become more familiar with and acknowledge our own 'survival
mode' reactions when working inemotionally challenging circumstances. This will
not only help protect the people in our care, but also you, as the person in a
supportive role.

 

Why is it important?

 

'We (that is, every single one of us) assess risk using emotion and not logic. We
use our emotion first and then logic second to argue against, or reaffirm the
conclusion we’ve already come to from an emotional perspective.' (Source -
'Why risk assessment misses the point')

Strong emotions and the  'survival mode' reactions have a negative impact on

managing risk.

 

The ambition of protective behaviours and risk assessments is to return to
'conditions of safety'. The difficulty arises from the fact that in the world there
is no such thing as 'total safety'. 'Total safety' can only exist in an environment of
'total control' (metaphors - 'the padded room', 'the straight jacket' or 'wrapped in
cotton wool'). Life is full of risks, and even more complicated is that taking risks
provides benefits.

 

Examples:

- When leaving the house you could get run over by a bus, but the activity
means visiting friends and family.

- When doing a parachute jump your chute may not open, but the activity can gives
you an amazing buzz and confidence.

- When cooking a meal you may burn yourself on the hob, but the activity means 
cooking a heart-warming meal for your spouse. 

‘With respect to ourselves and our own life, we often see risks as choices.' (Source -
Carson & Bain 2008)

So how than can we find the right balance?

In order to create a more balanced risk assessment, we have to take time to
acknowledge and reflect on our 'survival mode' and its potential impact on how
risk is managed.

 

We have to find the middle ground between being overprotective and being
underprotective. I have for some years been working on a simple Risk
Continuum (see image below) which can help people reflect on their 'survival
mode', become more self-aware (AKA emotionally intelligent) and finding the
right risk balance.
 

Over the following weeks I will be building onto this simple continuum, which starts
fromhow our brains are wired, and how it links to organisational behaviour,
culture and leadership styles.

 

SOURCES:

* 'Why risk assessment misses the point' - http://www.jomc.co.uk/blog/why-risk-

assessment-misses-the-point/)

Carson & Bain (2008) Professional Risk and Working with People

RELEVANT BLOGS:

'Building a Learning Culture' - http://mythoughtcanvas.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2011-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2012-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=1

'7 Ways to ReWire Your Brain and Become a Better Leader -
http://seapointcenter.com/rewire-your-brain-for-leadership/

'What fear calls risk is actually opportunity' -
http://www.soulseeds.com/grapevine/2012/07/what-fear-calls-risk-is-actually-opportunity/

 

The 5 Monkeys Metaphor & Lessons in Personal Leadership

This morning I woke up thinking about the 5 Monkeys metaphor, the leadership style of Gandhi and Hitler and how the combination of both might just hold some very powerful leadership lessons. For those unfamiliar with the 5 Monkeys metaphor, follow this link: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=five%20monkeys

So where does Hitler's leadership style fit with the metaphor of the Five Monkeys? I am here introducing the 6th Monkey ...

At the bottom of the ladder there are 5 monkeys who have learned to depend on others for the provision of bananas and have learned to fear the consequences of the actions of others. The monkeys start from the expectation that the cage is inescapable and that the bananas need to be provided by a more powerful other who is to be feared and who sets the rules of engagement and what behaviours earn bananas. Each monkey who is brave enough to reach for the bananas is perceived as a threat to the 'status quo' by the other monkeys and pulled back into line through discouraging words and restraining actions, but also potentially - given the right circumstances - being attacked with weapons.

In steps a 6th monkey who supports the majority's believe that the cage is inescapable and that the unknown more powerful someone/something needs to be distrusted/feared. The 6th monkey offers themselves up as the 'rescuer' of the situation (please refer to the definition of rescuer as described by Stephen Karpman*). At first the 'rescuing' leader is welcomed. It gives the rescuer the status/popularity they crave and the followers are happy that someone other than themselves is willing to take accountability for all that is bad in the their experience of the world.

However when the rescuer struggles to rescue and starts losing control (as is inevitable as one person cannot solve all problems), the majority start to distrust the 6th monkey, however due to the power and status awarded to them by the majority when things were going well, the 6th monkey can now become the powerful someone to be feared and in turn is the one who sets the rules of engagement, with due punishment for those who are resistant, step out-of-line or those who are different. And so the cycle continues ...

So how would the 6th monkey act differently Gandhi-style (not to be confused with Gangnam-style)?

Gandhi trusted in the belief that even in the most appalling of situations someone can create their own freedom by accepting their situation and living a simple life (high resilience). His only focus in life was humility, being non-judgemental and continuously seeking self-improvement (personal leadership). 

In this case the 6th monkey looked at opportunities beyond the cage (innovation) and did not start from the believe that you need to rely on others to provide. The 6th monkey made self-determining choice, thought positive and committed to living self-sustainably.

By showing his simple successes, the 6th monkey led by example. When the other monkeys started to follow the example, the ladder, bananas provided and the powers previously feared became less of a focus, which in turn created a more trusting and peaceful environment to live in, where collaboration and sharing wins over power and status.

So in summary, embrace personal leadership by being more self-aware, trusting of yourself & others, and unleashing your creativity by thinking differently! ... and we might just be making our way to world peace (Gandhi-style)!

REFERENCES AND FURTHER RELATED SUBJECTS

Test your resilience (FREE Resilience Self-Assessment Questionnaire) - https://www.testyourrq.com/

Transactional Analysis - http://www.businessballs.com/transact.htm

* Karpman's Drama Triangle - http://coachingsupervisionacademy.com/thought-leadership/the-karpman-drama-triangle/

Transactional Analysis: Getting off the Drama Triangle - http://www.melmenzies.co.uk/blog/transactional_analysis_getting_off_the_drama_triangle_part_1

Learned Helplessness, Rats, and People Power - http://codecraft.co/2012/11/26/learned-helplessness-rats-and-people-power/

The truth about dishonesty - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBmJay_qdNc

The Power of Outrospection - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG46IwVfSu8

Understanding conflict in the workplace

When dealing with conflict, it is important to understand the reasons why relationships get stuck into ‘playing games’ from a Neurlogical and Psychological perspective. It is all to do with our Fight, Flight and Freeze (survival) responses, as in essence we are primitive beings living in a sophisticated society. In our pre-historic environments, treats came in the form of lions and wolves etc. which triggered our survival responses. Today it is often these neurologically-driven responses have that makes us, as human beings, distrust others’ actions and take them to heart.

As we all are driven by our neurological survival responses, it has a major impact on how we communicate and form relationships. Stephen Karpman suggested that, due to the way our brain functions, every person plays a number of roles. Linking my perspective with that of Stephen Karpman, it appears that the fight response in us brings out a ‘persecutor’. In the Culture Continuum model this is presented on the left-hand side as the ‘under-protective parent’/judgemental role. The flight response appears to bring out, what Karpman refers to as the ‘rescuer’. On the Culture Continuum this is represented as the ‘over-protective parent’/putting others first role. The freeze response brings out a ‘victim’, represented as the ‘dependent’/learned helplessness role in the Culture Continuum.

In relationships with others, these roles ‘feed’ each other into a vicious circle of distrust and paranoia, always leading to LOSE-LOSE situations. Example – a teenager lacks confidence to do something (victim), a parent may step in and do it for them (rescuer). The parent may feel overwhelmed and resentful (LOSE) and the teenager never learns and gains confidence (LOSE).

Some more details on Karpman’s Drama Triangle and examples of interactions:
http://coachingsupervisionacademy.com/thought-leadership/the-karpman-drama-triangle/

How to move to WIN-WIN communication and relationships by being more aware of our brain neurological responses:

• The key – make time to REFLECT on your own neurological survival responses. In any given situation, are you in Fight (judgement), Flight (overprotective) or Freeze (dependent) mode?

• Treat others as adults and trust them to make their own decisions and cope with the challenges they face, including mistakes

• When you feel your FIGHT responses kicking in (e.g. being defensive, judging the actions/behaviours of others, feeling frustrated, anger etc), step back, reflect and when ready acknowledge how the other person is feeling and responding (according to their survival response), separate the behaviour from the person and constructively challenge without judgement. Be a constructive, but critical friend and offer some 'tough love' where needed.

• When you feel your FLIGHT responses kicking in (e.g. feeling sorry/pity for others, indulging others in their poor judgements, wanting to step in to take over from others etc), step back, reflect and when ready acknowledge how the other person is feeling and responding (according to their survival response), ask coaching-style questions that help you understand them better and empower the other person to find their own solutions.

• When you feel your FREEZE responses kicking in (e.g. not knowing where to turn, requesting others to step in, pushing others away and help/problem-solve etc), step back, reflect and when ready take control and create a plan of action. PLEASE NOTE - This does not mean you have to be eternally independent. Instead focuss on inter-dependency. It is ok to ask others for their views as long as there is no expectation for being ‘rescued’ and you recognise you are equal in presenting your views. This sets the basis for mutual respect and collaboration with others.

It is important to acknowledge that we are driven by our neurological pathways and that in stressful situations it takes extra effort to challenge yourself into making time to reflect on how you communicate with and respond to others. The reassuring bit is that we are all wired in the same way and all fall into these ‘survival’ patterns.

I personally find it helpful to use Karpman’s Drama Triangle and reflect on the role I play in any interaction to ensure my actions and communications don’t ‘feed the game’.