LEADERSHIP, IDENTITY & THIRD ORDER CHANGE
Creating Collaboration and Building Community
John
November 1992
Content
Leadership and ChaosChange
Type I
Type II
Type III
Leadership and Identity
I was once an observer at an electronics manufacturing company having annual sales of over 270 million dollars. This company had a new chairman replacing the patriarchal founder and his son who succeeded him. The new chairman, young, dynamic and charismatic brought (he would say developed) an inspiring vision with which to prompt the company out of its lethargy. The executive "team" agreed to build a one billion dollar enterprise within a decade. An acquisition in Europe was underway which added approximately 150 million dollars in sales and 900 employees. Concurrently, layoffs had begun at the headquarters site as non-performing products were eliminated.
To achieve his ambition the chairman, while bringing new products on line, introduced the concepts of team, quality and ethics. The employees, told that they were a team, were being taught how to act like one. Many were enthusiastic because they had chaffed under the old authoritarian structure; others were skeptical and a few were indifferent or cynical. They wondered for whom all this was being done.
As are we all, the chairman was the product of a culture that desires to make heroes of those at the top of an organizational pyramid. In a market driven world growth, profits, and wealth are the measures used to identify heroes. The cult of leadership to which he, and all aspiring executives, belong has a vast library describing what needs to be done to climb to the top of their pyramid. The many business schools serving this cult are like the military academies and war college of the armed services. Warrior students are everywhere, seeking the advantage in order to gain victory. But what price victory? The answer is rising up from a world in chaos. It is time to take a hard look at leadership as it is presently understood--and what it has brought upon us after thousands of years of unmodified practice.
LEADERSHIP AND CHAOS
Many observers of current affairs believe that the nations of the world are at a crossroad; one unlike any before. Decisions made and actions taken now are seen to have a life and death quality for all life on the planet. The significance of this crossroad is increased by the fact that human beings have never been particularly capable of predicting the consequences of their actions. Even when they can, they frequently don't because they prefer immediate satisfaction regardless of the long-term results. Life, therefore, retains a mysterious and often frightening quality. It is filled with the unexpected and undesired. To provide order, stability and security we establish values and beliefs, look for patterns and laws and give power to those who are inclined to think up answers that help maintain control. For millennia, the answers (i.e. rules, customs and beliefs) that have been created to provide order have always led to chaos. By chaos I mean destructive disorder, recognizing, of course, that such destruction can precede a new and higher order. The mysterious and frightening feature of chaos is that it also can, and sometimes does lead to annihilation.
Consider some of our attempts at order. Communism and capitalism alike generate economic injustice, poverty and misery; the very things they promised to correct or prevent. Almost all religions have produced bigotry and justified wars. The scientific method and technology have created pollution, drugs and efficient genocide. Legal systems designed to provide justice are used to defend violence and wealth and allow the abuse of the disenfranchised.
Because various forms of media have shrunk the world, the presence of chaos is more difficult to deny and the occurrence of disillusionment more prevalent. It is no wonder many believe that chaos and its companion, fear, are of a greater magnitude than ever before. The proliferation of apocalyptic scenarios and people with answers is therefore understandable. Most of them truly wish to help. The difficulty is that the myriad separate voices addressing the matter of chaos are drowning each other out. The result is that the billions of people wanting and needing something to be done are becoming even more disillusioned and despairing. They are, of course, ignored or repudiated by those who wish to deny the seriousness of present circumstances.
How does this all sum up in terms of our capability to address our personal and collective dilemmas? It would seem, on the surface at least, that the numerous discordant voices prevent agreement on either the magnitude and nature of the problems we call chaos or the appropriateness of offered solutions. Understandably then, effective action is not forthcoming. On the political and economic scene this lack of agreement produces immobilization, wheel spinning, lies, promises and failed strategies, which in turn produce more disillusionment and disengagement. It should be clear therefore, that these circumstances create a demand and opportunity for new leadership to emerge.
Often in history a single individual holding a vision has stepped forth to fill the leadership vacuum accompanying crises and potential chaos. Examples from recent history are Napoleon, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Gandhi, Martin Luther, (also Martin Luther King), Hitler, Stalin, Churchill and FDR. This has happened so frequently that there has evolved what is called "the great man theory of history." The assumption in this theory is that great men are the primary driving force or causative factor for the major changes in the path of human history. Given the present level of anxiety in the world and the inclination humans have to give their power away, many await the arrival of a "great man" (and for some, the Messiah) or they attempt to create one from among those who are available and willing to play the part.
For those who agree that the present crises are sufficient to warrant major change (which we might call transformation) and that no “great man” appears to be present to lead the process, there exists the important question: “What to do?” Before attempting an answer, it is useful to become clearer about the nature of change.
CHANGE
For the purposes of this discussion, there are three types or degrees of change. Type I (First Order Change) can be called “game without end"” or doing the same things harder. It involves only the appearance of change in an attempt to avoid change by relieving symptoms. It is thus that some people are heard to say, “The more things change the more they stay the same.” Geographic relocations by alcoholics, job changes, dieting schemes, corporate reorganizations, presidential elections, even revolutions within nations can be examples of change where no real change occurs. The suffering borne of conflicts and crises will eventually produce change but not so long as the strategies of First Order Change are being applied.
Type II (Second Order Change) also pertains to problem solving but is characterized by the “a ha!” phenomenon, a signal of success. This usually occurs where there is a highly specific question. "A ha!" happens when through frustration, pain or suffering the tried and true "rules" being applied to find a solution are dropped and in a sudden burst of inspiration a reframing occurs which allows for an unexpected and often paradoxical solution. People often speak about thinking outside the box. This approach to problem solving is now being packaged in the business world and presented in seminars as creative/intuitive thinking. It is also an approach for learning how to learn.
While many history-making inventions and discoveries result from the Second Order Change process, there are serious difficulties that arise when individuals and societies limit themselves to this approach to change. Because the focus is frequently on expediency, immediate satisfaction and personal comfort/power, the discovered solutions more often than not create new, more serious problems. The internal combustion engine is an example. It brought us the automobile and further industrialization, which in turn brought us rapid growth of cities, breakdown of the family and massive pollution. The discovery of America led to the near annihilation of a race and the expansion of slavery. Plastic is another example: its many efficiencies are accompanied by serious problems in disposal. The vast array of Second Order Changes we call modern medicine have extended our life expectancy but concurrently have increased our fear of death, contributed to a decrease in spontaneous natural healing, reinforced our belief that we are victims, diminished our connection to what is spiritual, and brought us to the point where, in financial crisis, social indifference or both, we are unable to provide health care for millions of our citizens. It is possible that modern medicine is actually limiting our potential for healthful living. The desire to understand nature often becomes, in Second Order Change, the intention to defeat it.
Type III (Third Order Change) encompasses the methods of Second Order Change and adds three very important features: 1) There is an ongoing commitment to change 2) No boundary is defended and 3) There is an agreement to create no avoidable and foreseeable negative impact.
These characteristics of Third Order Change are not easily understood. A commitment to change would seem to be an invitation to chaos when many seek only to stabilize their lives by obtaining permanent comfort and security, called by some "The American Dream". But it is more and more obvious that nothing is permanent no matter how desperately we wish it so. Change, then, is the only constant; the only thing of which we can be truly certain. The suggestion in Third Order Change is to commit to what is, or expect the unexpected. This means that we will actually value change and agree to live a life in which discovery is the primary experience. The belief here is that the richness in a life of discovery can be accompanied by enthusiasm, confidence and wonder.
This will not occur however, where there is defensiveness. The second feature of Third Order Change is an agreement/commitment to defend no boundary. In psychology we now speak of ego boundaries. A boundary defines something; it establishes it as separate. The individual ego is one of the most boundaried enterprises in human existence. Because we so value individualism, the United States has become the most ego-driven nation in history. Ours is a country guided by the notions, I, me and mine. Paradoxically, it was founded upon the concept “we the people” and has exhibited the greatest generosity the world has ever known. Nevertheless, as a nation, we are now fragmented into a host of discordant, frightened and angry groups demanding attention. Defending no boundary means an openness to any idea or anything that doesn't injure or destroy. To do this, fear must be reduced. Fear creates the perception of danger and sees enemies everywhere. In the absence of fear, self-limiting and self-serving boundaries can be dissolved and reformed over and over again in keeping with the commitment to change. It is apparent, then, that defending an established boundary often prevents or delays necessary change and helps to maintain a fearful environment.
A final aspect of Third Order Change is the agreement to create no foreseeable negative impact. Obviously this also is not easy. I stated earlier that humans have a limited capability to predict the consequences of their actions. But if we were a society that was governed by the principles of Third Order Change, and therefore required to consider the consequences, would we have, with such pride, developed the hydrogen bomb, nuclear power plants, pesticides, napalm, fast foods, multinational corporations, steroids and cigarettes? Perhaps, but perhaps not. The Quaker religion, the printing press, organic farming, much of art, naturopathic medicine, alcoholics anonymous, electric and solar powered automobiles, and thousands of service organizations which are guided by loving principles and teach self-reliance are examples of Third Order Change.
If the three agreements/commitments of Third Order Change are used to guide the development of new technologies, customs, beliefs and institutions any human creation that has outlived its usefulness will be let go; it will cease to be supported. In reaction to the destruction of past ages many have become advocates of a "sustainable future". By this, they mean a future based on beliefs, practices and technologies that do not injure or destroy; in other words the products of Third Order Change.
For thousands of years the inventions of Second Order Change have been critical ingredients in the rise and fall of civilizations. Without the concept of Third Order Change (which requires a major shift in values and beliefs about nature), the products of Second Order Change will continue to contribute to chaos. And they will do this while appearing benign, natural or necessary to an evolutionary process. It is argued, of course, that the inventions are neutral and become negative or destructive only through human misuse. This is the argument used by arms manufacturers, claiming that they never intended that automatic weapons would be used by roving gangs of angry youth. Originally presented as a blessing but possibly as harmful in the long run are the products associated with Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Cement has been an important contributor to our present civilization but now the pollutants generated by its manufacture threaten life by contributing to global warming. From these and countless other examples it should be clear that we must consider the probability of misuse and undesirable consequences when introducing new ideas and products.
If human beings continue to invent/create only from the premises and processes of Second Order Change, we will continue to destroy our habitat and ourselves. The adoption and commitment to Third Order Change will automatically move those involved to a new context for work or play. This context will feature the qualities of respect, courtesy, honesty, compassion, curiosity, discipline, wonder, creativity, openness, and imagination--all of which are simply facets of the diamond we call love.
LEADERSHIP AND IDENTITY
Essential to global transformation, characterized by Third Order Change (establishing a world in which humans do not destroy each other or the planet), will be the emergence of a new concept of leadership. The most well-known and simplest definition is that a leader is one who can direct or control the behavior of others, called followers, members, employees, citizens, students, believers or soldiers. This definition has its origin in a military or socio-political context. Beginning with the tribal chief and shaman, societies have always had individuals who by their deeds excelled beyond others and thereby became powerful, meaning that they could get others to obey their wishes. As cultures became more complex, power was passed on, by law, as a function of birth and wealth rather than deeds. Leaders thereby improved their ability to create monuments to themselves. Experience continues to teach us that ego monuments are problematic and especially dangerous when the leader is inclined toward violence, tyranny, or destruction of the environment.Our understanding of leadership now includes individuals who have excelled in areas other than those which permit direct control of people. Accordingly, a teacher, healer, statesman, writer, merchant, priest, artist, scientist or prophet can be seen as a leader. This broadened definition means that those, who by their performance and influence are able to set standards or modify beliefs, may be seen as symbols of what humans should be or can become. Again, this can be destructive if the leader has a personality that tends to be exploitive. Recently we have begun to hear about transformational leaders. These are people who through the power of identification and inspiration can get others to change their beliefs and behavior (for the better presumably) in a manner that changes the culture. But regardless of the source of their power or their intentions in using it, those we call leaders are individuals who have gained recognition. They stand out from the crowd, the single most important feature establishing them as leaders.
At this critical moment in history it is time to develop a new definition and understanding of leadership. To do so we must first consider the subject of identity. Acquiring identity, a process that begins at birth and is critical to life, also involves the activity of distinguishing/separating. As it separates itself from its environment by being recognized (especially in the first three years), the child establishes the foundation for all patterns of behavior for its lifetime. This foundation is the sense of self forged from experience and is called the ego identity, a composite of conscious and unconscious beliefs and perceptions about who one is. The task the newborn infant undertakes is to become an "I" that is distinct and separate from anyone or anything, i.e., to establish an identity. Nurturing supports this work and abuse inhibits it. Becoming a leader, then, can be seen as a sign of success or evidence that an individual has achieved an identity. Power and recognition are the key indicators. Our culture's investment in supporting and admiring celebrities attests to this phenomenon.
It is now becoming understood in some branches of psychology that there is an identity beyond the ego identity. This identity (linked to the soul) observes the ego identity and has little or no concern about separation, power over others, or recognition. The soul's identity is built on an awareness of connection and the absence of separation. It attends to matters of value often called spiritual. It is thus that those who are cited as transformational leaders are often individuals who have undergone a spiritual transformation as part of their journey in life. The consequence is that the objectives of the ego identity (recognition and power) no longer attract them. The ego identity has through suffering, boredom or curiosity and experience of the miraculous been brought into service of the soul's identity.
Except for spiritual masters, saints and mystics, history has known only leaders who function primarily from ego identity. Among these there have been two basic types. There are those who, having established a secure ego identity, have distinguished themselves by their integrity, courage, compassion and wisdom. And there are those whose frightened egos have caused them to fight for survival by seeking recognition and power through manipulation and exploitation. Their ego identity is like a “black hole” perpetually in search of power and recognition. It is unceasingly driven by the unconscious fear that it is powerless. Leaders of the first type are, at important moments, influenced (through intuition) by their soul identity. Those of the second type fear the larger identity; typically they deny that it exists and continuously refuse to allow awareness of it to enter their ego consciousness. Of course, most leaders are combinations of both types.
Neither type is sufficient for the circumstances humans now face. Leaders of the first type, with their high values, appear to be what we need in a time of crises. The difficulty however, is that an individual from whom others seek guidance, unintentionally maintains the distinction between those who are powerful and those who are powerless and dependent. That distinction, when embedded in a society's belief system, creates an environment which also produces individuals who seek to rule, dominate and exploit. In a circular fashion, the existence of type two leaders creates a demand for type one leaders and in keeping with First Order Change, the cycles we call history are repeated over and over again. The planet can no longer endure the rise and fall of civilizations governed by First and Second Order Change and type two leaders. We now have no choice but to embrace Third Order Change or destroy our habitat and perhaps ourselves.
What is needed therefore are individuals who do not think of themselves as, or desire to be, leaders of either type. These are people whose sense of I has become more fluid, changeable and open. They have given up fear driven self-definitions that impede adaptation to new circumstances. They have committed themselves to a life of Third Order Change, agreeing to ongoing change, defending no ego boundaries, and creating nothing that results in negative impact. The code they live by includes courage, integrity and compassion.
Such individuals will seek out others of like mind and habits in order to form a creative unit capable of collective, concerted, effective action. The emphasis in such a unit will be on we, not I. It will be a circle of friends, a self-directed team in which no one stands above or apart from the others. The only noticeable difference will be in talents, style, and tasks. Across the country there are experiments of varying success underway to build such teams. They will only succeed where ego identity comes into service of the soul's identity and Third Order Change.
Global transformation demands this “we-ness”. This new kind of leader, rather than becoming either a tyrant or a savior, joins others to create a greater whole from a greater vision—a world guided by the principles of Third Order Change. The beauty of this answer to the question “what to do?” is that everyone can become this kind of leader.
There is a woman who was the librarian for a small city in a western state. She is what I would call a Third Order Change leader. The library, prior to her administration was almost a non-entity. Through her leadership it grew so that it now holds an important place in the community. She became recognized for her many fine qualities but most of all she was known by her staff and city officials alike as a caring, honest and open person who honored and welcomed other's success. She was greatly valued and highly trusted.
In becoming librarian she did not attempt to establish grand goals, she merely acted prudently, seized opportunities when they arose and allowed her heart to guide her. Although she knew where every "paper clip" was in her budget she did not judge her own performance by measurable indicators. For her, the intangible sense of well-being of those she worked with and for was the critical ingredient in her success.
She held the position for many years without aspiring to grander things. Her work remained rewarding and she chose to move on only when there was a clear signal from within that it was time to do so. Change, however is not new to her. In summary, it can be said that she is a youthful yet mature woman who has grown wise, strong and loving through the fire of her own suffering and joy, the consequence of many changes. I have little doubt that she could have effectively managed the 270 million dollar corporation mentioned earlier. But if this were to happen she would care not at all if it grew to be a one billion dollar enterprise. How it served human betterment would be her primary concern.