Structural Amnesia: noticing, seizing and changing the obvious

The Nuer people live in South Sudan, mostly around the Greater Upper Nile. They are largely semi-nomadic cattle headers. It was the Nuer people that the British anthropologist Edward Evans-Pritchard (b1902-d1973) chose to study with a trilogy of seminal books published in 1940s. Anthropology is useful, it enables us to see ourselves through the lens of others in a way that we can’t quite glimpse directly. Gillian Tett (Gillian, 2021) quotes the anthropologist Horace Milner as saying that it is ‘alone amongst the sciences it strives to make the strange familiar and the familiar strange (p5).’ Back to the Nuer. The contemporary anthropologist Arlie Russell Hochschild quotes Pritchard as being fascinated that the Nuer could remember ancestors going back eleven generations – but only the men. When it came to women it was almost as if they did not exist. Pritchard called this Structural Amnesia as it reflected the power structures of the kin system which was an indirect expression of power that privileged men but not women. But the Nuer were blind to this. Hochschild uses Pritchard’s insights of Structural Amnesia to explain why some people in the deep red US Republican state of Louisiana (Hochschild, 2016) feel justifiably hurt by the destruction of their much loved environment from industrial pollution yet are blind industry’s culpability. She then meticulously plots the narrative and the power structures at play that create this social amnesia. These are two examples of Structural Amnesia, but they are all around us, yet we hardly notice them.

Here is something that you can try. Get a group together with different experiences and roles, hopefully including someone who is new to the organization, and be your anthropological team and investigate:

At a surface level: What knowledge is taken seriously, for example numbers over words, words over numbers, spoken word, written knowledge, tacit knowing, one topic over another, the weight one department has over another, the influence of different stakeholders, and so on.

At a deeper level: What does this say about who or what has the power.

• Within the organization what groupings and departments hold sway, and how is this reflected in the layout, structures, and even furnishings that you see. How is this power exercised – at meetings, e-mails, side conversations, who is included and who is excluded. 
• Beyond the organizations who are the stakeholders that hold the power and who does not (in healthcare those with learning difficulties are the ones that have less voice and power and have the poorest outcomes – this matters). This can include individuals, groups, and even regulators and government bodies.

Choices for change: Power structures grow and creep over time. These can result in unfair allocation of resources and outcomes for people and poor decision-making or organizations. The question is: by raising these questions and inviting conversations what might change? In other words, how we can work together to imagine and take practical steps to make improvements for people and organizations?

Gillian, T. (2021). AntroVision – How Anthropology Can Explain Business and Life. Randon Hose.

Hochschild, A. (2016). Strangers in Their Own Land. The New Press.

The role of organisation development in our AI future

Have you noticed the debate on Artificial Intelligence (AI) tends to fall into three categories: panic, people running around with their hair on fire; the doomsters, sandwich boards with ‘the end is neigh’; or the deniers, with heads firmly buried in the sand. The question is how can we structure the debate so we can make the most of the intellectual and practice-based gems that are out there. To narrow this down I am going to focus on the world of organisation development and change management.

To my mind there are three key areas around which to structure the conversations on AI, these are: Imagining, Transitioning and Nurturing. So …

Imagining, when cars were invented they looked like carriages but without horses. It took time for people to imagine how they could be designed and used in non-horse-drawn ways. Even then the dots were not connected between cars and the impact they would have on the way we work, on towns, cities and how society would function. The same is true for AI, we need a debate on imagining to include the fullest range of possibilities and those ‘knock-on’ possibilities that rapidly come after, in short, from the technical to the social.

Transitioning, the skills we need for the future are likely to be different from now. The debate here needs to centre on learning and development and wider organisational capabilities that will become more important. Although the exact trajectory is uncertain, it will be flexibility, sensing and rapid personal and organisational development that will be key in transitioning. And this will require resources and attention.

Nurturing, during times of rapid change it can be easy to neglect what is important. The debate here is on what we need to keep and further develop. This might include the values and the heritage of the organisation and how they can be nurtured to stay relevant. What is valued is sometimes not clear, particularly for those with their head down focusing on the ‘day job’. For this debate, the conversation needs to include diverse voices within and beyond the organisation.

These are just three ideas to help shape the conversation, there will be others, either way, some shaping of the debate is important so as not to miss wider implications.

[100% natural, made without artificial sweeteners, flavourings, colours or intelligence.]

Artful ways – practice-based learning.

In our latest project James Traeger and I have returned to the traditions of smudgy ink and thin paper of the pamphlet. At its heart is a reminder that we are people and change happens through relationships, in all their forms. Here we make the case that development comes from getting close the grain. By this we mean that we can find rich learning in the fine detail of our day to day work and the relationships that sustain or diminish our efforts.

Tight knit arguments and focused data sit under the influence of the scientific method. This has led to all manor of good things (and a few problems), but it is not the whole story. In fact it suppresses other ways of knowing, particularly when it comes to being creative and artful and it is this that we explore.

To read our smudgy pamphlet here it is: Artful Ways Pamphlet

Obvious, it’s obvious really

A few days ago Douglas Board, a friend and writing partner or mine, and I ran a Zoom workshop for organisation development professionals. The topic being:

Working with changes in the obvious: why do meritocracies produce glass ceilings

The aim of our session was to ask the question, why is the obvious not obvious to us and what might the consequences be – in this case unintentional effects of creating better and fairer places that sadly can result in the opposite. At least they can do without careful attention to the unintended, and how difficult this can be. For an exploration of some of the ideas we explored at the workshop click here.

However, in this blog posting I want to make some broader observations notably that the obvious is anything but! In a reflective conversation with Douglas after the session we focus on this and the experience of running a workshop for thirty people on Zoom, click here.

At the University of Chichester, I run an MBA for experienced managers as well as an MA in Leadership and Management. I know lots of things about the subject. There was a striking moment in my early thirties when I was presenting a strategy to a group of directors.  In an hour my paradigm that management was all about rational clear-headed argument and evidence was turned on its head. I had realised the importance of power, anxiety, conflict, influence and politics during the course of a very mundane side conversation about catering arrangements for the meeting – what were they doing and why? I can look back to see that this helped spark my long-held interest in management and leadership.

When I work with participants on our programmes a part of my work is knowledge sharing, but this is second order, it is not where I believe that I add the most amount of value. After all, when it comes to knowledge in management there are no ‘proofs’ like you will find in mathematics but ideas, fads and rules of thumbs that tend to work backed up with empirical studies, philosophy, sociology or psychology.

Instead I shake people up so they perceive their ‘obvious’ in new ways: they see it, feel it, hear it etc in a way that they can make sense of and act. And from that action further noticing of the obvious occurs and the ripples continue. I could be running a workshop on decision making and strategy, facilitating an action learning set or having a one-to one coaching conversation – they all shake up the obvious, albeit in different ways.

Perhaps those conversations with Douglas, writing this blog, reflecting on my own work has made obvious to me that little bit more is obvious. And so our work goes on.

Picture credit: Multi Color Abstract 2, 2018 (photo) / © Susan Vizvary / Bridgeman Images

Purpose and ethics of organisation development: moral practice of the moment

Picture credit: Blest are those of integrity, 2000 (acrylic on board), Waddams, Ron (1920-2010) / Private Collection / Bridgeman Images

James Traeger and I have been working with ODN Europe to ask some fundamental questions about the future of organisational development. Here is our letter on where we see the future and ethics brought into sharp relief by the ongoing pandemic. 

It is April 2020 and Covid-19 is ripping its way through the populations of the world. Both of us work in organisation and people development and are struck by the moral gravity of recent conversations. We have listened to people talking of their role in making mass redundancies of garment machinists in developing countries; laying off highly skilled people in the European pharmaceutical industry according to the rules dictated by American owners and the dilemmas of senior leaders weighing up the optics of releasing prisoners early into society. These are conversations unthinkable only weeks ago. Yet this is not the whole story. In nine days London has a new 4,000 bed hospital – one of the largest in the world.  People have organised with their neighbours to support the old and vulnerable and there are companies that have turned their operations around to make ventilators, masks, sanitizers in just days. There have been extraordinary acts of kindness, flexibility and solidarity and yet there are we see examples that make the heart sink.

For those of us in the field of people and organisation development we are reminded of the impetus of a founding father, Kurt Lewin (1890-1947). Lewin was driven to make the world a better place having been horrified by the inhumanity witnessed in the Second World War. But we should not wait for hindsight to prompt us to consider how to make sure people act ethically.  Petruska Clarkson (1947-2006), another luminary of humanistic psychology suggested we might use ‘midsight’ as reflexive awareness of our actions and mindset in the here and now is a better place to start. The world will be changed by this and we can help be better, by what we and the leaders we work with are doing right now. In all of this there is a question: what are the values of social justice that guide what we do? At some point history will judge us; each person, organisation, government and community. With the immediate transparency that is piped into our mobile devices, we will judge and be judged. Judgement starts right here, right now: the world is looking.

Over the past twelve months we have been working with ODN Europe, a professional body aimed at developing the theory and practice of organisation development (OD), to rethink OD. James has been working with others to ask the question: what is the future of OD? Rob and colleagues have focussed on the question: what are the ethics of OD? This pandemic brings the two together. At times of upheaval our true values come to the fore for both good and ill. It is now that those carefully crafted words in the corporate social responsibility policy are put to the test.

Even before the pandemic, organisations were changing unrecognisably. They have become loser, less connected and less bounded. This is characterised by long supply chains, networks of people coming together to work on projects and then moving on, casual employment and zero hours contracts and automation. But people have the same hopes, anxieties, worries, dreams and instincts that they always have. So, what is the role of organisation development? We believe that there are two important themes if we are to create better organisations and a wider society that Lewin might recognise. Firstly, the development of profound relational skills between people. In short, how people influence and how they are influenced in creating a better world. Secondly, to enable people to made sense of their experience, to challenge assumptions that would otherwise wash over them. All of this is serves the need for better decision making as well as social justice. We do not come to this from a privileged position of knowing the answers, instead we are part of a process of living inquiry of discovery and improvement.

The question is: how will we hold each other to account and bring about positive change? At its most radical, it is about everyday normal interactions that we all have as we understand the world, involve others and make decisions. It is not about abstract theory, policy or ‘key performance indicators’.

We propose three question areas that nest together, sitting at the heart of ethical practice. These are as follows:

Firstly, how we are planning for the future? Here the focus is on how our actions might impact people in the longer term. Questions include:

• How do I ensure that I ask the right questions before I decide on a course of action?
• How do I know when I have involved the right people and information in planning a course of action?
• How do I know if I have hurt or harmed?
• How will I know if I have done any good?
• How will I account for myself to others – what will I say in planning my course of action?

Secondly, how do we make the next step as we interact with others? Here are focus is in the here and now. Questions include:

• How will I develop awareness of the wider influences and contexts of what I am experiencing?
• How will I act in the network relationships in which some people are more powerful and others less powerful?
• How can I ask questions that will enable me to get more insightful views of conversation?
• How will I know that I have been ‘conditioned’ to act or think in a certain way?

Finally, In working with others how are we influence and how are we being influenced? Here we consider our impact on others. Questions include:

• How can we stop ourselves sleepwalking into poor and unethical decision making?
• How do we keep alive enough difference so that we can see our world with ‘new eyes’?
• How do we keep aware of the changing contexts and how this affects our stakeholders?
• How can we keep asking difficult questions of ourselves?

These are questions written in the first person; they are about ‘you’ and ‘me’, not the distant ‘them’. At this current time people are having to make extraordinary decisions where the normal structures and reassurance of knowledge and hierarchies are under enormous pressure as they change. This is becoming the new normal. If this is the case these questions of ourselves and those around us become ever more important. Today it might be about the pandemic but tomorrow we still face climate change, the impact of digital technology and the changing expectations and hopes of the world’s populations.

In summary, even before the pandemic organisations were changing rapidly responding to the realities of climate change, digital transformation and greater expectations from people and this will continue. Yet people have the same hopes, desires, anxieties that they always have. Through this we have choices to make and accountabilities to face. If OD is to remain relevant, to enable people to understand and navigate these challenges, we too have to change and to adapt in a similar manner.

This will bring into sharper focus the core of OD namely social justice and moral practice. This is achieved through developing profound relational skills and our ability to make sense and respond to what is happening.  This long tradition of OD practice is as relevant, if not more relevant, than it has ever been to make a positive change in the world.

Here is the paper: Ethics R Warwick and J Traeger

The changing world – conversations with MBA students

Over the last week or so I’ve been working with MBA groups – online of course.  In the midst of Covod-19 I posed the question ‘how our the world different now?’ And to explore the question I posed the following lines of inquiry:

• How does your world look right now?
• What sense of making of the future?
• What are you leaving behind?
• How do we capture the very raw (and fleeting) experience we are going through right now?
• How is our decision-making changing?

Each one of these questions is fascinating, but here I am going to focus on the last one – how is our decision-making changing?

Key themes that came up in one conversation included:

• Dispersal of decision making, particularly to the frontline.
• How rapid decisions are having to be made.
• How many of the assumptions that are there to help decision making are having to be redrawn.
• Through all of this navigation is possible and is taking place.

However, there were two overarching themes that emerged which are important to draw attention to, these are trust and the changing role of senior leadership.

When it comes to trust we can spit this into two. Firstly, on an optimistic note, the here and now, our ability to decide in a rapidly changing context. Secondly, being pessimistic, the implications for the longer term, what problems are we storing up.

In this rapidly changing world it seems that we are more trusting in each other. Perhaps we have no choice. To trust someone is also to take a risk and to be vulnerable. But in trusting people, being prepared to take a risk and for this to work out well adds to a reinforcing cycle that enhances working relationships and enables us to see the potential in others.  Setting up hospitals from scratch that can treat thousands, how we are supporting hundreds of thousands of the most vulnerable people, local authorities turning upside down how they provide services are all evidence of what can be achieved. I suspect all of this is dwarfed when we add up the small everyday efforts that millions of us are making.

But are we storing up problems for later, what might be the shadow that we might miss? In being adaptable and fast moving what are the rules and governance arrangements that we are leaving behind? Where does this leave democracy and the ability for citizens and elected representatives to shape decisions and to hold the powerful to account. These are questions that are not only important on the national political stage but are very real in all avenues of life: healthcare, police, where and how we work, who we mix with etc. Being generous, it will take time for the pulleys and levers of scrutiny to catch up, but it is a question that we need to keep on top of.

In all of this where does this leave the role of the Chief Executive and the top team? Leading from the front, or supporting and enabling the front line? Local knowledge, context and expertise are key. More than in any other time senior leadership is about enabling others to make good decisions, to make sure people communicate with each other and to provide the resources they need. In short, this is a form of more humble leadership that shapes, reassures and enables.

Click here for a video on how our world is changing and implications for MBA students.

 

Artfulness in the organisational playground

Artfulness and the playground, two words you do not normally associate with the serious world of organisational life. I am going to offer two invitations, but before I do let me explain.

Firstly, artfulness. Here art is both an artefact, for example the painting, piece of music or even the benefits of a well-managed project, and the processes we use, for example how we paint a picture, run a challenging workshop or even show up at a meeting. ‘Being artful’ congers thoughts of skill, craft and even cunning, just think of the Artful Dodger in Dickens’ Oliver Twist. And then there is the social dimension: for art to have value, that value has to be recognised by others and conditions need to be in place to nurture and support artful practice. So art has a number of fascinating qualities to it.

Secondly, playground. The playground is the place of creativity, games and laughter. It is where we can make our own worlds with actors, plots and stories. It is the opposite of sitting in rows with forced concentration listening to the teacher. But then there is the shadow side, the place of bullies, power and coercion. The playground is not a neutral place, there are hierarchies and places where the ‘cool’ people are, but others are excluded. And none of this is written down, it needs to be learnt by sensing what is around us, making mistakes and involving others.

If we dwell on these two words we have the opportunity to imagine organisational life differently. We can come up with different answers to questions such as:

• How do we support others to grow and develop?
• What is of value and why?
• Why do people act like they do?
• What would happen if we did something different?

Now for the invitations. James Traeger and I are associate editors of the Action Research journal and we are editing a special edition on artfulness in the organisational playground, here is the call for papers that gives all the details of what we are looking for and why. If you are tempted to write an article it would be great to hear from you. You can also find details here about submitting your paper to the journal.  We have another invitation as well. Every month for an hour we hold an online gathering to explore our artful practice in organisational life, if you would like to be part of this #ArtfulKnowing group please write an e-mail to Pip Rowson at pip.rowson@mayvin.co.uk. 

Picture Credit: On and On, 1951 (serigraph), Gershgoren, Milton (1909-89) / Dallas Museum of Art, Texas, USA / Tom Gooch Memorial Prize (Dallas Print Society, Dallas Art Association and Leon A. Harris, Jr.), 1st Annual Dallas National Print Exhibition, 1953 / Bridgeman Images.

Six books (that have helped me) to understand people and organisations

I have done a quick scan of my bookshelves to find six books that have helped me understand organisational life and to give reassurance that it is not just me. This is particularly true when I find it hard to fathom what is going on.  Here goes:

The Portable Hannah Arendt, Penguin Classics. Evil people are rarely born evil. They are nurtured and created by a lack of reflection and thought. We need to save others and ourselves from that fate by asking those searching questions that unsettle, even if it hurts.

Seeing Like a State, James C Scott, Yale University Press. Powerful people tend to be sensible folk. They make decisions based upon how they see their world and their own experience. The problem is that their experience is often not ours. The question is how do we keep sharing those experiences?

Down and Out in Paris and London, George Orwell, Penguin Books. Above all else, life is most vivid if we pay attention to the detail. It is there to see, smell, feel, taste and hear. It is fun, quirky, sad, confusing and simple all at the same time.

Victims of Groupthink, Irving Janis, Houghton Mifflin Co. Powerful delusional people surround themselves with powerful delusional people. Not only that but when things get worse, they only listen to each other. Note to self: stand by the lifeboat.

Rationality and Power, Bent Flyvbjerg, Chicago University Press. They may be wrong but powerful people get to write the truth. That said we do not have to believe it and we have a voice.

Grimms Fairy Tales, The Brothers Grimm, Routledge. At least I am not in a forest with a wolf.

Artful knowing in everyday life – developing insights from action research

https://mayvin.co.uk/

If we are to find solutions to difficult problems we need to pay attention to different and artful ways of knowing. These are forms of knowledge that draw attention to the fact that we are all creative people able to see and live in the world in imaginative ways. This is despite what school and formal education might have done to us in forcing us to think in linear and scientific ways. However, it is more than this; it is social too. For example, what conversations can we have to enable others to see their world differently and how can they do likewise for us? Both of us became intrigued by the artistry of everyday life in our book, Organisation Development – A Bold Explorer’s Guide, in the chapter Artful Practice to Inspire Human Systems we said of art:

.. in this sense is not just the creation of beautiful objects by the talented few; it extends to the way do our daily work, at home and beyond, and what we see in others on the broadest canvases. To meet the challenges of the future new and imaginative ways of working will be essential (p77).

Recently we became Associate Editors of the Action Research journal, focusing on organisation development. In order to get to know the journal in a fresh way we set ourselves a challenge. In going back through the fifteen years of the journal, which six articles have the most relevance to artful knowing? This is not just about coming up with a list; it is more. What new insights can we generate from one article shining a light on another, perhaps years apart? Most intriguingly, how might different subject areas come together to say something new. A couple of questions one on what we should be looking for the second the questions we should be asking, so:

• What sort of difference to people’s lives, communities, work and workplaces should we hope to find in this writing?
• Taking artful knowing in organisation development as an example, what kind of questions should we be asking?

If you have any thoughts and ideas it would be great to hear from you.

Rob Warwick and James Traeger.

Ref: Traeger, J. & Warwick, R (2018) Organisation Development: A Bold Explorer’s Guide, Libri Books

Organisation development: a bold explorer’s guide

This month sees the publication of the book that James Traeger and I have been working on over the last year or so. It has been a project where we have been keen to put the art of everyday interaction at the centre of organisation development (OD). We wanted to write a book that gave confidence to people who might ask themselves the question: ‘is it just me, but …’; particularly for those puzzled by the messiness, politics and sheer difficulty in getting anything done when set against the simplicity and step-by-step instructions implied in many other OD books and articles.

Think for a moment when we meet a senior director informally, moments later an idea can take shape with new avenues to be explored. On the other hand, another idea is quashed. What are our responsibilities to the organisation and its people in these moment-by-moment interactions? And how do we know? In this way OD is not a series of set piece of events, it is a continual process of everyday interaction. Some of these are high profile and carefully planned, others not. So, how do we pay attention and talk about OD in a different way? We have chosen to put the curious OD practitioner at the heart of their own development. We use narratives and fiction a reflexive prompts between our worlds and yours. Finally, we draw on some theory of process and interaction to draw some wider themes together.

If you are interested in buying a copy, use the Discount Code JW18 to obtain a 20% discount when bought online from our publishers – here is the link.