Dive Into Yourself

The deepest dive you can do is into yourself.

If you want to find the resistance to changes that need to be made in your organization, it starts with you.

If you want to discover why other people aren’t resonating with your story, it starts with you.

If you want to know how to empathize with others and their plights, it starts with you.

If you want to understand how to manage conflicts and how to be satisfied when conflicts can’t (or won’t) be resolved, it starts with you.

If you want to advance in your career, social, financial, or even in your community life, it begins with you.

[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4BQ83oIyVM[/embedyt]

The trouble, of course, is that understanding begins with you. And you think that you already know who you are and that you don’t need to go any further. Or even worse, you think that other people need to conform to you because you’re the one that knows the answers to their toughest questions, not them.

Self-awareness is the most underrated leadership trait, and that’s because on top it looks easy, but when you go deep into yourself, it becomes more and more uncomfortable.

Gaining self-awareness means going into your family, your friends, and even the systems and organizations you work in, make money in, and/or recreate in, and asking them the critical questions that matter:

  • What am I blind to here in this system?
  • What do I accept that has been told to me as reality?
  • What can I reject?
  • What are the “rules” or “standards” or “expectations” that “everyone” conforms to in this environment and do those work for me, or am I just accepting them because it’s less comfortable than not questioning?
  • What do I owe others?
  • What do others owe me?
  • What are my responsibilities here?
  • What are my obligations in this environment?
  • How does being here (wherever “here” is) match up with the story I’ve told myself about how my life and experiences should work?

Self-awareness should not be confused with behaving selfishly. Selfishness comes about when we seek to deny someone else’s humanity and pretend that the interaction is a zero-sum transaction. Self-awareness is the quiet, mindful, anticipatory work we do by ourselves, internally that positions us for success in relationships where the opportunities and possibilities can be expanded rather than retracted.

The deepest dive you can do is into yourself.

Dive in.

Dissatisfaction Times Vision Times First Steps Must Be Greater Than the Resistance

The equation that drives change is simple:

Dissatisfaction times Vision times First Steps must be greater than the Resistance to the impact of all three combined or else change efforts falter.

There are plenty of dissatisfied people in your workplace, your work group, or even just your organization.

There are people who insist that providing negative feedback is the only way to encourage organizational growth and they provide it liberally.

There are people who have been dissatisfied for years in your organization; who have made brief, or even faltering, attempts at change, but have been stymied and have now surrendered.

There are people inside your organization who claim they are dissatisfied, but who are mimicking the sounds of dissatisfaction as a political power move to angle for a better position at the organizational table.

There are people with vision in your workplace, your work group, and your organization. But this vision is hazy, or they are easily distracted by the next “hot” leadership initiatives, or their vision can be compromised with just a little more money or promotion.

There are people who take first steps and attend training, workshops, and seminars.

They read books and articles, combing the internet for advice and guidance about how to overcome the organizational ennui that holds back change.

There are people who take the same first steps, but their enthusiasm doesn’t go anywhere.

They stop at memorizing the “how-to” listicle and when trying to apply the emotional jujitsu against the resistance in their organizations, they experience limited success.

But these elements, dissatisfaction, vision, and first steps, must be greater than the sum of the organizational resistance to them. Or else, the changes that you are seeking inside of your organization, your work group, or even the team that is inside your sphere of influence, won’t happen.

The resistance to change is pernicious, persistent, and it never gives up. The resistance to change is sneaky and sly and sometimes comes in the form of well-meaning people and situations that appear as though they are helping your cause of change when in reality they are hurting it.

No great change happens without conflict. And no great conflict can happen without the resistance being overcome.

And if you think that it can, then you are bound to wind up stuck in the same place of dissatisfaction where you initially began your change journey.

There Are Easy Solutions to Complicated Problems

The two most difficult roadblocks to success in resolving hard problems are the presence of real trade-offs and considerations of power.

Most complicated problems and difficult conflicts have simple solutions. We often confuse what we believe is a hard solution with a complicated one. What makes solutions to hard problems not easy are the presence of trade-offs (scare resources in scare environments) and power.

In a world of scarce resources (the two scarcest being time and attention these days…even more than money) the trade-offs that must be made to create the space for solutions to your most pressing conflicts can seem insurmountable.

Here are a few (of many) trade-offs. Each one can either represent a zero-sum trade-off or an even exchange trade-off:

Conflict or Apathy

Attention or Ignorance

Awareness or Ennui

Momentum or Slowness

Going Along or Resisting

Reassurances or Courage

Change or Status Quo

Focused or Distracted

Power is the consideration behind most forms of fear. Either a lack of power or power focused in an area that doesn’t benefit getting to a solution. That power is often cloaked in reassurances and comes with a healthy dose of resistance.

We often confuse easy with simple in our own minds. Easy solutions to conflicts usually involve the kinds of solutions that favor whatever trade-off benefits us and validates our perspective.

Easy solutions also preserve our power (maintaining the status quo), or grow our power in each conflict situation. Hard solutions take away or diminish our power, as well as go against whatever trade-off we’d like to have honored.

What makes solutions hard to simple problems is that we are often blind to what is hard, and are aware of what is easy.

Be sure that you are making trade-offs you can live with, in a search for complicated solutions to hard problems.

Change Comes Upon Us Gradually

Change comes upon us gradually.

Change comes in our organizations when we hire one person, and then two, and then more, who think differently about the mission, vision, values, and goals of the organization.

Change comes when the people (or persons) at the top of a hierarchy choose to give up their power over and engage in power with; and, not as a marketing ploy or with lip service.

Change comes when a person in an organization, decides to take a risk, stand up, challenge the status quo respectfully, firmly, and consistently.

Change comes when technology creeps into systems that we once believed were sacrosanct, but are now revealed to be hollow.

Change comes when we are lamenting the things that have passed and are looking with fear at the future that has yet to come.

And then, change is upon us all at once.

And we collectively can’t remember a time when the change wasn’t the norm.

First 200 Bad Drawings

There are 200 bad drawings inside every comic book artist.

Just as there are an estimated 1,000 bad words/turns of phrase inside of every writer.

And there are a certain number of below quality (or poor quality) teaching or training experiences inside of every teacher and trainer.

There are 1,500 bad jump shots inside every free throw shooter. As there are multiple bad layups inside of every basketball player.

In professional fields from comedy to athletics, the audience accepts that there is a curved path that the performer has to walk, from being inexperienced to being experienced.

What the audience doesn’t know is where the performer is at on the path from being inexperienced to being experienced, which complicates the audience’s judgment of the performance.

And can warp its feedback.

But the thing is, once the performer gets all the inexperience out of their system, and successfully works their way through the curve from inexperienced to experienced, the performer won’t care what the performance “looks like” to the audience.

The performer won’t care about the feedback about their performance from the audience either.

The Opposite of Artificial Intelligence

When was the last time you…

…asked fierce questions?

…emphasized uniqueness?

…engaged with others?

…told stories that related past victories to potential solutions to present–and future–problems?

…ruthlessly eliminated hurry?

…were direct, but not demeaning?

…established a foundation of empathy with another person?

…didn’t read from the manual, but spoke from the heart?

…focused on the connection as the product rather than trying to persuade, cajole, or move another person into buying whatever it is that you are selling?

It’s hard to connect with others because performing the actions listed above is hard.

Not “hard” like plowing a field for planting wheat is hard. Or “hard” like picking lettuce in a field for $4.00 a day is hard. Or “hard” like working on a construction site to break up concrete.

Those kinds of “hard” are increasingly being performed either by human beings (who will soon be replaced by machines and artificial programs that can perform those actions better) or by machines and artificial programs that are performing those actions better right now.

It’s always been hard to make an emotional connection with other people and to break down the carefully constructed resistance to change we have constructed in our heads—that then manifests in our tools, our systems, our organizations, and our civilizations.

For humanity to remain a relevant, vibrant, force well into the future, we had better figure out how to make space for all human beings no matter their status to do the hard work of connecting.

Otherwise, what really separates us from the machines who will replace us?

Boundaries of “No”

In a conflict, boundaries are overrun with impunity.

Emotional boundaries.

Ethical boundaries.

Psychological boundaries.

When boundaries are overrun, feelings of betrayal and hurt automatically follow because when we have our boundaries overrun, we recognize that the other party has misused and damaged our trust.

The number one word to maintain boundaries is the word “no.”

The problem, of course, is not the obvious overrunning of boundaries. We can say “no” directly and without guilt in these situations.

We are comfortable with that process.

The problem arises when there is seepage through a series of moral and ethical decisions that initially appear to be right, but ultimately turn out to be wrong.

Saying “no” in these situations doesn’t often happen because preservation of personal pride, selfish ego, and other concerns becomes more paramount than the re-establishing of sinking boundaries.

No matter.

“No” is “no.”

But learn when—and where—to use it.

Self-Select Out of the Pool

Here’s an idea:

When you hear an idea that doesn’t appeal to you, doesn’t interest you, or that doesn’t resonate with you, merely say (either internally to yourself or externally to the presenting party) “That’s not for me.”

Then add this other part on.

“And that’s ok.”

Then, either move on physically from the room or emotionally from the interaction.

This works better as a coping mechanism for handling ideas, concepts, and thoughts that we find to be personally repulsive, than engaging in feedback processes where you seek to destroy the other person’s sense of self-worth and seek to shame them into silence.

If it’s not for you, then stop wasting your time (and the other party’s) and self-select out of the pool of interaction.

Do this so that other people, for who the idea is appealing, can self-select into the pool.

This approach works better than staying in the pool of interaction, exercising the vain hope that the messaging underneath the interaction will resonate for you—or be relevant for you—at some point in time in the future, and at the end of the interaction, engaging in the politics of personal destruction via the use of weaponized negative feedback.