No More of the Same

The belief that one's own view of reality is the only reality is the most dangerous of all delusions. Paul Watzlawick.

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.

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"

 

First-order change in coaching similarly refers to learning new skills or capabilities that involve doing something better without examining or challenging underlying beliefs and assumptions. Second-order change occurs when clients step outside their current perspective, examine their frame of reference, and do something different. As a coach, you help them (a) observe the assumptions and behavioral patterns that have kept the same problems cropping up over and over, and (b) fundamentally reframe their worldview. As a consequence, they become less habit-driven, more open, and increasingly self-aware.

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.

*     *     *

For a personality-based explanation, see the discussion beginning at the bottom of page 4 in my book with Clarence Thomson, Out of the Box Coaching with the Enneagram. For more about first- and second-order change, see Tompkins and Lawley's  When the Remedy is the Problem.

...

In AWE of the Process

There are many "how-to" books on leadership, management, and coaching, lists of all kinds for the 10 principles of this or that. I've done the same and published a variety of steps for specific aspects of behavioral change. 

But what about the bigger picture, the nature of change itself? I've written elsewhere about first- and second-order change, how coaches who address only conscious goals and overt behavior can unwittingly reinforce the worldview a client brings to the table and subvert the intended change.

Einstein once said, "Problems cannot be solved by thinking within the framework in which the problems were created." Our task is to help clients see how their worldviews operate and how to break free of the patterns those worldviews create. The question of "how" is elemental. Asking "why" can lead down many paths and take months or years to answer, possibly never satisfactorily. Discovering with your clients how they enact their patterns will illuminate where to intervene and promote significant change.

I've provided a frame of reference for my clients with the acronym "A.W.E."

1. Awareness of their unique patterns of motivation and behavior. This can be discovered in ordinary conversation; with models such as the Enneagram, Tilt365, DISC, MBTI; or feedback from others who know or work with you.  
2. Watching how those patterns operate. Your clients learn to hold full awareness in the present, notice their flow of thoughts, and accept their experiences without judgment or attempts to control.
3. Experimenting with pattern breaking so their choices are free, energizing, and fulfilling. Even a small, symbolic change can shake up someone's worldview so much the old way of thinking no longer computes. Keep these points in mind when you co-create fieldwork to break old patterns with new responses:

• Understand the client's worldview deeply.
• Make sure there's a mutually agreed-upon definition of the desired change.
• Collaboratively design tasks that will reframe the client's view of the problem.
• Once any part of a pattern is shaken up, look for spontaneous changes from your clients.