opinion

A recent article in the Financial Times by Enuma Okoro focused on why it can be hard to ask for help.

Shame and judgment

That article got me thinking – and remembering: remembering moments when clients had articulated a sense of shame in not being able to sort all their challenges out themselves, and indeed moments when I myself had hesitated to trouble another person in my search or request for help.

Okoro comments on embarrassment or shame when we fail to ask for the help we need, as though admitting our distress or pain would reveal a defect in us, and as though that admission would diminish our value. This very point has prompted reflections for me when I’ve worked with a client who believes they ought to be able to sort everything out themselves – all the challenges, all the vulnerabilities, all the needs, all the perceived weaknesses. It applies equally to the clients who are shouldering a multiplicity of burdens and challenges (often both professional and personal at the same time, such as building a start-up or facing the challenge of a restructuring or a takeover, whilst at the same time having caring responsibilities). In all these situations their language and attitudes are characterised by an implicit sense of shame, and by a sense that they are deficient in some way.

The myths

Far from recognising that these kinds of challenges – and many others – are a normal part of everyone’s lives, we seem to have somehow learnt or understood or assume that not only are they unusual, but that other people deal with them with ease or perfection, and that we need to hide them if we aren’t to be judged as lacking worth or substance. This is apparent with leaders who nurture a culture in which vulnerabilities are hidden or secret, or there are attempts to hide them or keep them secret.

I’ve lost count of the number of coaching clients – both men and women – who either relegate their real needs, including love for their families, to a lower priority than the priority they give their work, or they struggle with their self-image when they put their families first. These leaders believe that they’ll be perceived as weak if the truth was known – and their fears, sadly, are well-grounded in some organisational cultures.

Interdependence, community and collective intelligence

Somehow we’ve learnt to equate ‘alone’ or ‘separate’ or even ‘isolated’ with ‘strong’ and ‘resilient’. In reality, precisely the opposite is true. ‘Alone’ and ‘coping alone’ are brittle ways to be. As human beings we are interdependent. We live, function and operate – knowingly or unknowingly – within systems composed of interdependent elements. As one element moves or changes, so do all the others. When one element is vulnerable, that vulnerability will impact all the others, no matter how seemingly distant.

Equally, when one element is helped, resourced and strengthened by another, that too will be felt in some way by other elements. Collaboration is a more strengthening process than separateness. Collective intelligence is always superior to the intelligence of one individual, and calling on the collective intelligence of the group or the system will release more wisdom, expertise and richness of perspectives than is to be found in any single element.

At its simplest, the community can be thought of as a group that shares a narrative which builds their identity – a team, for example. At its most effective, its members are committed to supporting, helping and collaborating with each other, without blaming or judging each other for needing that help. It is immensely more robust than a group of people whose behaviours are fundamentally fragmented and who see themselves and others as ‘separate’.

This applies too to a system (such as an organisation or even a country) composed of communities: seeing other communities as not deserving of our help, our cooperation and our collaboration weakens the whole system.

We need to recognise and value vulnerability and a need for help in our communities, and to both accept help and offer help if we are to nurture cohesiveness and health.

^{Photo by Getty Images for Unsplash}

Help - giving and receiving

I'm remembering moments when clients have articulated a sense of shame in not being able to sort all their challenges out themselves. However, these challenges – and many others – are a normal part of everyone’s lives. Somehow we’ve learnt to equate ‘alone’ or ‘separate’ or even ‘isolated’ with ‘strong’ and ‘resilient’. In reality, precisely the opposite is true. ‘Alone’ and ‘coping alone’ are brittle ways to be. As human beings we are interdependent. When one element is vulnerable, that vulnerability will impact all the others, no matter how seemingly distant. Equally, when one element is helped, resourced and strengthened by another, that too will be felt in some way by other elements. Collective intelligence is always superior to the intelligence of one individual. We need to recognise and value vulnerability and a need for help.

World Kindness Day

Every November 13th, the world celebrates World Kindness Day - a global reminder of how small acts of kindness can create a ripple effect that strengthens our connections to one another. Kindness begets kindness - and it also gets more of value achieved. It’s close to compassion, and to the exercise of compassionate leadership. It certainly beats the effect of not noticing or caring how things are for The Other, of inconsiderate or unwarranted criticism, of self-absorption to the exclusion of others, or of neglecting others and their interests. Kindness creates precious connections and scope for collaboration, which is critical for innovation, change and versatility: the employee who feels seen and heard, taken account of and considered, will feel led with strength.

Working dynamics

Three of my coaching clients have decided to leave their jobs and their employers. In all three cases their reasons related to the way they were treated at work. One felt diminished, shut down and rendered voiceless by their line manager. The other two felt unvalued and unrecognised by their line managers. It has looked to each of them that those leading and managing them have been predominantly concerned with being seen as ‘right’, with protecting their own internal empires and with self-protection. My clients have felt crushed, sidelined, unseen and voiceless. If one looks at the seniors with compassion, the contexts in which they are working and the variety of pressures on them, and expectations of them, together with their possible exposure in front of a wider audience, come into view. How might it have been possible for my clients to seek ways in which to establish better connection, to be more curious and to stimulate more curiosity, and to bring more compassion and more self-compassion?

Clinging - and pausing

Home: what does it mean for the leader?

What does ‘home’ actually mean? What will we tolerate or sacrifice in order to find home? What isolation, loneliness or lack of rootedness is acceptable? What might we cling on to from any previous sense of home that we have had? Home can be a knowing of oneself, a clarity about who one really is, and a feeling of not only familiarity, but also ease with that, as well as home in terms of a knowing of the systems one exists as part of. This is, it seems to me, critical for the leader if they are to lead with assurance, with empathy and compassion, with insight and versatility, and with the capacity to recognise and manage complexity. When the leader is not at home in the figurative sense, they lack the rootedness and stability that come with feeling ‘at home’ with themselves. A well-developed sense of self-awareness, and an awareness of the systems they form part of, almost implicitly bring a sense of acceptance of both self and system which can be very steadying to be with, including through turbulent, difficult, challenging or uncertain times. And my sense is that that acceptance is a significant component of the leader feeling at home and being at home. The impact for the leader’s teams may mirror any or all of the impact for the individual leader – and likewise for the effectiveness of both.

Out of control

Two topics relevant to leadership have arisen for me: on the one hand, some leaders’ effort (and expectation) to control, and, on the other, the reality that all organisations and teams operate in a context of complex systems. In fact, success in the quest for control is impossible because all organisations consist of constantly moving parts in interrelationship with each other. The constant moving creates changes in the interrelationships and therefore in the interdependencies. This approach to leadership doesn’t usually lead to engagement or discretionary effort. It may lead to compliance, but it doesn’t lead to flourishing, health or vibrancy in an organisation. One way of seeing how systems work is through systemic constellations: when one element moves its position, so do all the others. Their relationships to each other change, which will have implications for what needs attention at any given moment, and what kind of attention. Control, or an attempt to control, simply doesn’t work: the system has a life of its own.

What holds me back?

For some time I’ve been in conversation with Julian Burton, change consultant, creative artist, facilitator and leadership coach. Julian has created a number of pictures that have reflected scenarios we’ve each been witness to in our work and conversations that we have co-facilitated with public sector leaders – and the one at the head of this piece is amongst his latest. Some of what I find striking about it is what I see, some is what I experience, and some is thought and curiosity. I’m curious about what you may see, experience and think when you look at the picture. If you’re a public sector leader, a safe and spacious space for conversation and for nurturing hope with like-minded leaders can make a significant difference. This is the kind of conversation that Julian and I enable and facilitate. If you’d like to join us, please drop me an e-mail at lw@lindsaywittenberg.co.uk

Either-or, us or them: the perils of polarisation

A polarised position is characterised by a certainty. Boundaries are created which become increasingly strong, rigid and immovable with the passage of time and the reinforcement of the conviction of being right. In these contexts I notice a lack of critical, objective thinking and of curious enquiry. One ‘side’ is split off from the other by a stubborn blindness. Difference from ‘the other’ is reinforced too: the sense of ‘I’m right and you’re wrong’ morphs into ‘I’m good and you’re bad’, which in turn morphs into ‘I’m acceptable and you’re unacceptable’. This can also move into the idealisation of one’s own leader and the demonisation of the other’s leader. Those who take a polarised stance usually don’t recognise it. Neither are they open to rationalisation, compromise, or any nuancing of belief, so no amount or persuasiveness of data makes any impact. On a team or at an organisational level it can seriously inhibit effectiveness and flourishing. It can be very difficult for a person taking a polarised position to engage in dialogue because they come from a conviction of already being right rather than seeking collaborative thinking which can offer them learning if they are willing to open their minds to unfamiliar and unwanted perspectives.

Creating psychological safety for yourself

Feeling psychologically unsafe evokes a range of emotions and behaviours: anxiety, lack of trust, loss of motivation, indecisiveness, reticence, withdrawal and loss of engagement, to name but a few. It’s bad news for a team or an organisation. Professor Amy Edmondson’s globally-recognised and ground-breaking work in The Fearless Organization brings insight to the experience and realisation of psychological safety, and allows it to be measured. That measurement in a team can be debriefed, and the behavioural and attitudinal sources of the scores explored through facilitation that supports teams to capitalise on it and/or improve it. A different challenge arises when a team member experiences a lack of psychological safety, and when that very lack makes it impossible to share honestly with anyone, least of all with the leader, who may themselves be the source of the lack of safety. There are a number of possible approaches that can help.

Being before doing

It’s so easy to get sucked down the rabbit hole of ‘doing’ in order just to get through every day, forgetting engagement with the bigger picture - what it’s about, where we’re really going, what our guiding principles are, and – so importantly – the interconnecting, systemic and interdependent factors and features that underpin any given situation and that circumscribe inevitable complexity. Coaching clients have ended their programmes realising that they have been able to become more of who they really were, and, as part of the journey, to discover how important ‘being’ was to them. Executive coaching has at its heart the relationship between the client and myself: a relational process. A central part of this relational process is the expansion of awareness beyond thinking alone: moving into a space where both client and I let go of knowing, and experience the emergence of different types of awareness that can bring deep insights on which they can then act. They relate to their situations, their possibilities and their options from new, expanded perspectives. That’s real change – real transformation.

opinion

Recent Posts