Leading change requires a paradoxical mindset rather than either-or thinking

Globe and Mail

6 hours ago

Interested in more careers-related content? Check out our new weekly Work Life newsletter. Sent every Monday afternoon.
In his 1841 essay Compensation, Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote that 'an inevitable dualism bisects nature, so that each thing is a half.' Blogger Billy Oppenheimer recently surfaced that quote and elaborated: 'Dark can't exist without light. Left can't exist without right. Hot and cold. Pleasure and pain. Up and down. Man and woman. Odd and even. In and out. In motion, at rest. Sickness, health. Peacetime, wartime. Strength, weakness. Order, chaos. More, less. Yes, no.'
They must be understood as connected and tackled together. 'What is lost in one realm is always compensated for in another,' says Mr. Oppenheimer. 'To gain something is to have given up something.'
Transformation and change are supposed to provide clarity for organizations – a mission, a path forward. But they too can be riddled by contradictions which if unaddressed might add to the reasons so many change efforts go awry. Going overboard on one element and ignoring the other element in a quest for dramatic clarity can sink your efforts.
In The Art of Change, Jeff DeGraff, a professor of management at the University of Michigan, and his wife, Staney DeGraff, a consultant, say the complexities of change demand a nuanced approach. Adaptability is key and that requires a paradoxical mindset rather than either-or thinking. You must be flexible and agile. You must understand and grapple with competing elements.
They identify seven paradoxes that crop up repeatedly and pose dangers if ignored:
Instead of rushing to solve urgent issues, they urge you to spot paradoxes you are facing and reflect on them. Look for experiments, small changes that you can learn from. 'By considering creative and hybrid solutions and implementing them with intentionality, you can effectively navigate paradoxes and drive meaningful change,' they advise.
One of the paradoxes they highlight is about transcending limits while still being within them. They note that to transcend our limits, we always have to start by acknowledging them – the limits of our knowledge, resources and time. Once we acknowledge those limits, we can facilitate lots of experiences and experiments to learn from them.
Perhaps there is another contradiction to consider there: In change, we usually think carefully beforehand, develop ideas that are really theories but become prescriptions, while in fact the learning and understanding (and best prescriptions) come after experimenting with change possibilities.
Jason Fried, chief executive officer of Basecamp, raises another duality when he observes that one of the reasons companies have a hard time moving forward is because they've tangled themselves in the near past. They trap themselves looking for certainty where there isn't any, actional advice where there are only guesses. 'Eyes aimed backwards rather than ahead, staring at the dark, feet in their own concrete,' he writes on his blog.
He stresses that isn't always wrong. If the process is highly mechanized or isolated, you can look back and find the exact moment when something went wrong. But he argues that most failed projects subject to retrospectives are searches for reasons where there are only humans to be found. We are plaintively searching for reasons where – here's another duality – there are only mysteries.
'A better path is to reflect forward, not backwards. Develop a loose theory while working on what's next. Appreciate there's no certainty to be found and put all your energy into doing better on an upcoming project,' he says.
'But how will you do better next time if you don't know what went wrong last time? Nothing is guaranteed other than experience. You'll simply have more time under the curve and more moments under tension to perform better moving forward.'
Tina Dacin, a professor of organizational behaviour at Queen's University, raised another paradox when she looked at Lady Gaga's recent Coachella performance where the singer paid homage to past greats such as Michael Jackson and Prince as well as her different past selves. Prof. Dacin's research with colleagues has found leaders involved in stewarding change and transition in organizations are 'custodians' – people with a vested interest in protecting traditions, while also reimagining and renewing them over time. 'Such custodians in workplaces or social organizations facing disruption take valued remnants from the past and curate them to be accessible and relevant for the future,' she writes in The Conversation.
But not just custodians of the past. In making change, she says, you must be custodians of hope. You must craft futures worth preserving. There's a bundle of dualities in there to consider as you reflect on the paradoxes of change.
Cannonballs
Harvey Schachter is a Kingston-based writer specializing in management issues. He, along with Sheelagh Whittaker, former CEO of both EDS Canada and Cancom, are the authors of When Harvey Didn't Meet Sheelagh: Emails on Leadership.