by Philip Ramsey

When faced with a problem, how often do teams within your organization become polarized around proposed solutions that are opposites? For example, one group of people may be convinced that the only way to increase productivity is through greater teamwork, while another group may advocate better management of individuals as the best method for bringing about the desired result. Or perhaps the impasse exists over whether decision-making within the organization should be more centralized or more decentralized.

We regularly find ourselves stuck in futile conflicts over choices we face. How can intelligent, committed people in the same organization be so divided? Could it be that both sides are right? If so, how does the conflict come about? And how can you and your team leverage the differences that exist among you? Help lies in understanding the structure of paradox.

In their study of organizational effectiveness, James Collins and Jerry Porras noted that a distinguishing characteristic of highly visionary companies is the capacity to manage paradox. These authors define such capacity as "the ability to embrace both extremes of a number of dimensions at the same time" (Built to Last, p. 44). This rare capability seems to allow successful companies to avoid falling into a pattern of values-based conflict, with parties becoming increasingly polarized around "either/or" choices.

Systems Thinking in Action Conference
October 31-November 2, 2011
Westin Seattle Hotel
Seattle, Washington

By Russ Gaskin

In her now-classic list of 12 places to intervene in a system, Donella Meadows elegantly prioritized the most effective "pressure points" for getting more of what we really want in our families, organizations, communities, nations, and global community.

Of these 12 "pressure points," it's the highest intervention point that is the most challenging for most of us to actually put into practice. That's the element that Meadows named simply "the power to transcend paradigms." It's the point that we access, she observes, only when we learn to detach ourselves from specific paradigms and realize that no one paradigm is true, even the ones that most define us.

The power of this intervention point can't be overstated. According to Meadows, this is the place where "people throw off addictions, live in constant joy, or bring down empires." If you really want to move the world, this point holds the one lever that's long enough.

It's also a dangerous place to operate because, simply put, other people don't like it when you transcend their paradigms. And the unintended consequence of pressing on people's paradigms is often to only further entrench them.

Unfortunately, given our intensely increasing interdependencies, we can no longer afford individual transcendence. We must discover ways to transcend paradigms together.