Originally published 6/20/2014
I don’t think that I am making an assumption to say that we have been operating primarily in hierarchical systems for many years. Our social norms and the assumptions we make about how we should interact with each other and act are based on the thinking, patterns and beliefs of that past system. If your personal or organizational goal is to not operate hierarchically then you will have to address these things to actually make the shift happen or stick.
Becoming conscious of how our current thinking, patterns and beliefs are “hierarchical” is the first step to begin the process of co-creating a new context that will help us work together in new ways. At the end of the piece I offer an exercise that will help you reflect on how these might be true for you, or not.
Our past; thinking, patterns, beliefs are holding us back from our future. They are what ‘gets in the way’ of operating in new ways.
Hierarchical thinking:
Expert Model: In the hierarchical model we thought that only a few people earned the right to be at the top. They were at the top because we thought they were the experts. They had the education, the personality, the experience, the gender, the color, to make us believe they were more worthy than us to be the leaders. Many of us abdicated our personal responsibility to them and then blamed them when things didn’t work.
Competition: To get to ’the top’ required being competitive and required that we be ‘over’ others. We anticipated that others would be competitive with us and thought that to succeed we needed to be competitive with them. This tension kept us hyper-aware and we would switch between defensive to offensive thinking and actions.
Mechanistic: In a hierarchy things are very linear. We thought that we could fix problems with mechanistic thinking. We saw the world as a machine and simply used a simplified cause-and-effect model to determine where the ‘problem’ was. With this model the expert at the top could, by themselves, find a way to fix the problem.
Hierarchical patterns:
Top Down: In a hierarchy all communication flows down from the top. A pattern of limited communication worked because communication was not vital to the organizations success. The expert at the top needed information but the rest of us followers did not.
Discussion not Dialogue: Most of our conversations were discussion not dialogue. Discussion is about making a decision and seeks closure and completion. Dialogue is about exploring the nature of choice and evoking insight.[i] In a discussion we worked to score points and saw a conversation as a competition to ‘get our voice heard’, ‘prove the other wrong’ and find the ‘right answer’. We thought the purpose of a conversation was to convince others of our thinking and demonstrate our ability to be the expert.
Questions are Threats: In a hierarchical system asking a question is a threat. The pattern is to not ask questions. Asking a question of the leader or about a decision would clearly be challenging their authority. Asking a question of someone at an equal level would often be used as a way to combat an opinion, or fact.
Hierarchical beliefs:
Perfectionism: Because we had to appear to be the expert we could not allow failure or imperfection. Any imperfection would move us down the hierarchical ladder. Vulnerability and authenticity would be seen as weakness.
Individualism: In the hierarchical world being independent was a goal as we worked to become the expert. Our need to be perfect and competitive has led us to being isolated. A highly independent person was revered and more likely to be seen as a leader.
Power Over: We believed that having control over others was valuable and that belief led us to define power as being in control of others. The only individual who is thought to have power is one who is able to control the behaviors of others.
Reflective Exercise:
These reflective questions are a way to realize in what ways we have used the context of hierarchical thinking, patterns and beliefs. They will help you uncover old or existing context in yourself or in your organization.
Use these with a group or just yourself. Use all of the questions or only some, write others that fit your situation or group. Be your own expert, be flexible and use your wisdom.
The biggest question is if you decide that you don’t want to use hierarchical thinking, patterns and belief what context would you like to use? I hope you are willing to write some statements about the context that you want to work from! I know that it will help you to make the changes that you desire. You can get my free complete Context Implementation Exercise here.
Thinking reflective:
Expert:
- In organizations the expert might hold a job title or be assigned the role by the group. Think of an organization that you were involved with and one or two of people who were the experts. Have you ever had the experience of realizing that you were as qualified, intelligent, or capable as they were? Or when you wanted to contribute your knowledge or wisdom and were discounted or ignored because you were not seen as the expert.
- Can you think of an example when you abdicated responsibility to the group expert? Have you ever waited for someone at the top to solve a problem?
- Is there an example of when you discounted your own knowledge, insight, or intuition because someone else held the title of leader or boss?
Competition:
- Think of an example of when you remained silent because you knew that someone would jump to tell you that you were wrong?
- Does society tell us that we have to be competitive to survive? How do we think that leaders have to use competition to get to the top? In what ways does this thinking make sense to you? What does it look like to question these assumptions?
Mechanistic:
- Our mechanistic history makes us believe that there are simple answers. Think of an example when something was ‘fixed’ but over time it became clear that there were unintended consequences and the problem was either worse, or different.
- Can you think of an example when a boss or leader fixed a problem but if they had asked your advice you could have given a better solution?
- It is mechanistic thinking to believe a certain person is ‘the problem’ and yet when that person is replaced the same issues seem to continue. Have you seen this happen?
Patterns reflective:
Top Down:
- Think of an organization that you have been involved with. How was information held only by those at the top? When decisions were being made who was involved in the conversation? How did it feel to be included or excluded in those conversations?
- Do you have an experience where conversations were held and all or most people were included? How did that feel and was the outcomes different?
Discussion not Dialogue:
- Sometimes it is appropriate to have a discussion when a decision must be made but many times we need a dialogue first so that we have access to everyone’s creative wisdom. Think of an example of a group conversation you participated in. In what ways was it a discussion, and in what ways a dialogue? What would have made it a dialogue to you? What might have been different?
Questions as Threats:
- Do you have an example of when you asked what you thought was an ‘innocent’ question and someone got mad?
- Can you think of an argument you witnessed and realized that they were not arguing about the same thing? Where they were misunderstanding each other?
- In your family growing up was it ok to ask questions? Were you taught that outside of your home you should not ask questions? Do you have stories of how questions were handled at school?
Beliefs reflective:
Perfectionism:
- Think about a time when your choices or actions were based on perfectionist beliefs. How did that feel? Did you feel that you had to hide anything? Did it require keeping secrets?
- Think of an example of when you allowed yourself to be vulnerable or authentic and how that created a different experience.
Individualism:
- In what ways does society tell us we have to ‘do it ourselves’.
- How have we been affirmed as good when we were ‘ruggedly independent’?
- Are there ways that we diminish or put down others when they seem inter-dependent?
Power Over:
- All of us have examples of when we have controlled others. Can you reflect on that experience and then feel again how it felt. It would be normal to have felt victorious but were there also any other feelings that might have gone unnoticed at the time, or feelings that come up now as you think about that experience?
- Can you find an example of when you shared power or used power with others? Remember the experience and feel again how it felt.
- How were these two experiences different? When you remember the experience how does it make you feel now.
The great news about context is that we socially construct it. We can be intentional and through conversational processes any group or organization can change the context! Be willing to believe that big changes are possible and do the work to get there.
“The context that restores community is one of possibility, generosity, and gifts, rather than one of problem solving, fear, and retribution. A new context acknowledges that we have all the capacity, expertise, and resources that an alternative future requires. Communities are human systems given form by conversations that build relatedness.” [ii] (Block, p. 29)
To use my complete Context Implementation Exercise go here.
[i] Isaacs, W. (1999). Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. Random House, New York, NY.
[ii] Block, P., (2008). Community, The Structure of Belonging. Berrett-Koehler. San Francisco CA.