The Power of And
Occasionally,
a new word or phrase breaks out of the confines of the business world and into
the cultural conversation. Paradigm shift and synergy had
their day. Then sustainabilityand resilience. More
recently, agile and lean seem to be
everywhere. Often, the word comes out of genuinely original thinking and can
stimulate new practices. Without care, however, it can quickly spiral into
overuse and achieve buzzword status.
There’s
a word that is unlikely to join this list, though it accurately captures and
communicates the essence of today’s leadership challenges. It is the common
conjunction and.
The
complex issues with which executives wrestle today — global supply chains,
multigenerational workforces, and political polarization and instability, to
name a few — are not solved through simple bifurcated choices. They require
more nuanced thinking. And can provide the needed stimulus.
The
first person to bring the power of and to my attention was my
colleague, Leonard Marcus, founding codirector of the National Preparedness Leadership
Initiative at Harvard. Whenever I sent an article
or book chapter related to our shared work on crisis leadership to Marcus to review,
it would come back with each but crossed out and replaced
with and. He explained that over his many years of researching and
teaching negotiation and conflict resolution, he had discovered a certain magic
in and because it subtly reframes whatever topic is on the
table.
For
example, imagine that a direct report asks for permission to work from home two
days a week. If you respond, “I understand your desire, but I need to ensure
coverage in the office,” there is an implied denial of the request. An alternate
reply of “…and I need to ensure coverage” is an invitation to
mutually solve a problem. The shift of one word acknowledges each person’s
interests as legitimate and recognizes that there are issues to be resolved. It
creates an environment for positive dialogue.
Another
instance in which and asserted itself was in an ongoing
conversation about the evolving meaning of leadership with cognitive
anthropologist Bob Deutsch. In his recent book The
Five Essentials: Using Your Inborn Resources to Create a Fulfilling Life (Avery, 2013), Deutsch argues that in our
tumultuous times, leaders must embrace paradox. The imperial executive was better
suited to simpler times; now, “everything seems to contain inherent
contradictions and ambiguities,” he told me. Deutsch asserts that we are in the
“age of and.”
For
example, leaders are expected to be both mythic — having answers that elude
average people — and simultaneously approachable. In the past,
this was often an either/or decision. Additionally, contemporary leaders are
expected to craft a singular, compelling vision while also being inclusive and
welcoming contributions to defining the way forward. They must embrace these
two “crosscutting paradoxes” to succeed, Deutsch explains.
The
increasing prevalence of companies seeking to create both social and financial
value also presents an and lesson. Milton Friedman’s theory
on the social purpose of corporations was
clearly predicated on an either/or choice between profit and social good: It
was a zero-sum game with profit the only logical choice. That was then — in the
1970s, engagement would be found more often in a newspaper’s
social pages than in its business section. Many companies operated within
regional or national geographic constraints. The telephone and postal service
were the primary connections between companies, suppliers, and customers.
Today,
there is a different zeitgeist. Whether it’s called shared value, higher
ambition, or conscious capitalism, these emerging approaches
are centered on a belief in and as an economic imperative, a
source of competitive advantage, and a key for engaging a wide range of
stakeholders. What once seemed like an impossible paradox can now be reconciled
with and.
Joshua
Cooper Ramo’s book The
Seventh Sense: Power, Fortune, and Survival in the Age of Networks (Hachette, 2016) provides another example. Ramo
posits that the essence of power in our highly interconnected, networked world
is concentration and distribution. A dominant search engine,
for example, concentrates the largest collection of data on its servers and must
attract a large number of users who help it refine its algorithms (and
generate advertising revenue). Each side of the equation is dependent upon the
other, “encased in a powerful and dynamic tension.”
The and lesson
for leaders here is to again embrace the paradox and move beyond simply
amassing authority. Build a leadership platform that facilitates independent
yet aligned participation and connection by the nodes in your network. When you
seek to involve employees and communities as well as customers, and will
open more doors than but. Confronted with complex challenges,
dynamic markets, and fast-changing technologies, and is not
only more powerful than or — it may be the only option for
dealing with the multiplicity of factors involved.
As you
lead, try substituting and for but as often
as possible. Note what opportunities for collaboration and novel solutions
emerge. When contemplating your next strategic move, think about and instead
of or. See what new perspectives this generates. And is
one small word that can make a big difference in the way you think and lead.
Eric
J. McNulty
https://www.strategy-business.com/blog/The-Power-of-And
No comments:
Post a Comment