"We first thought of presence as being fully conscious and aware in the present moment. Then we began to appreciate presence as deep listening, of being open beyond one's preconceptions and historical ways of making sense. We came to see the importance of letting go of old identities and the need to control . . . leading to a state of 'letting come,' of consciously participating in a larger field for change."
Thursday, December 8, 2022
Practices in Presence: The Land of AND
Sunday, November 13, 2022
Hitchhiking to the Grand Ole Opry
"I used to hitchhike in the Sixties," he recalled, "and I learned a lot from conversations with people who gave me a ride."
When he began to imagine himself in meetings as “hitching a ride,” conversing with people who work for him as if they’re traveling companions, it made a world of difference.
Sunday, September 4, 2022
Coaching for Managers: Helping Employees Loosen their Personality Traps
I've almost finished revising a small handbook for managers that I created for a client company more than a decade ago--a slant on change that's common among psychologists but I haven't seen addressed in other Enneagram books except my own: a detailed version, with business examples, of why it doesn't work to hit someone while saying "Don't hit!"
The premise here is for managers to approach each employee from the perspective of the employee's key Enneagram fixation with the goal of helping to loosen their fixed point of view and broaden their perspective. For example, if you're coaching someone who's stuck in black and white thinking, it's ineffective in the long run to say, "You're taking the wrong approach here."
That employee already thinks in terms of right/wrong, and while they may comply with a specific instruction, you won't be helping them loosen the shackles of Enneagram point One, and different versions of their being too judgmental a voice on the team will continue to show up.
More in Out of the Box Coaching with the Enneagram.
Thursday, March 3, 2022
No More of the Same
One of the coaches I mentored asked for the sources of my distinction between first-order change and second-order change. My earliest influences were Bateson's Steps to an Ecology of Mind and Watzlawick et al's Change; later, Senge's The Fifth Discipline and Hargrove's Masterful Coaching.The belief that one's own view of reality is the only reality is the most dangerous of all delusions. Paul Watzlawick.
While the terminology of these authors and I may differ, we share some common principles:
First-order change is a temporary "fix" to a problem without examining the underlying patterns that caused the problem; the typical result is "more of the same." Senge, for example, identifies archetypes arising from attempts at organizational change that feed the original dynamic.
Second-order change is a radical shift in worldview and consequent actions; it requires systems thinking, the ability to step back and intervene in the dynamics that have reinforced "more of the same."
Political satire, "more of the same" |
For example, Bill Danvers was VP of Sales, in line to be president of his company. The CEO had annointed him because of spectacular sales results, not realizing Bill had taken all the credit in spite of behind-the-scenes support from VPs of other functions. After agreeing with his peers on negotiation parameters, he would override those agreements to make deals with customers that other functions didn't have the resources to support in the expected time frame. So if customers became dissatisfied, Bill still looked like the golden boy and his peers took all the blame.
His underlying drive was to succeed at any cost. Consequently, the other VPs didn't trust him and wouldn't support his bid to be their boss. Because he wanted their approval, Bill agreed to tell customers his offers were tentative and to confirm with his peers before closing the deal. This first-order change might have temporarily satisfied others in the organization, but if his fundamental drive continued to serve his own achievements at the cost of theirs, nothing fundamental would have changed and he would again have lost their trust.
With a systemic view of his behavioral patterns, Bill Danvers began to acknowledge evidence of his competitiveness and his high need to be recognized for his successes. He became aware of childhood messages that his worth depended on his individual accomplishment. With the goal of second-order change, I helped raise Bill's awareness when feelings of competitiveness and approval-seeking behavior began to grip him. He was gradually able to intervene with new responses and authentically collaborate with his peers.
...