The next principle in Advanced Change Theory (ACT) is to model counterintuitive, paradoxical behavior. If all we ever do is what we have already done, all we can hope for is status quo and relative stability. That is very comfortable and might appear to be safe, but stability is deceptively perilous. As we attempt to attract our followers to purposefully pursue the vision for the common good, we have to be open to doing things we have never done before. We have to give ourselves permission to do things our peers would never consider doing.
The result of enacting behavior at the edge of chaos is increased sense making and greater cognitive complexity… At the edge of chaos, the system is more sensitive to small stimuli than it is in a more stable condition, and transformation is more likely. (p. 155)
I’ve written about paradoxical change before in my article “The Sigmoid Curve and the Pardox of Change.“ The logic of the s-curve tells us that we need to change at a point in time when all the cues from our environment are giving us the exact opposite message – that we do NOT need to change.
Modeling counterintuitive, paradoxical behaviors means we jump off the wave of success long before it crashes into the shoreline. When our peers are patting themselves on the back and basking in the glow of success, we begin the painful and uncertain struggle of searching for a new and radically different path. The seasoned practitioner of change prepares herself to jump off the new path she is searching for before she even finds it.
Excellence is not a destination. Continually free yourself from the prison between your ears and model the way for others to do the same.
Related Posts:
The Sigmoid Curve and the Paradox of Change
Excellence is a form of deviance
The primary barriers to success are self-imposed
You should follow me on twitter here.
Dr Bret, you continue to challenge the status quo. Stability is perceived as something desirable, yet without the risk of pushing into the uncharted, the results sought for may never be achieved.
Thank You!
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
December 27th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Concur, David. It puzzles me why we crave stability when we should know that change and renewal is the path to growth and abundance. Thanks for the comment! Bret
[Reply]
I like this series. The challenge I find with the leaders I work with is the fear. Fear of failing, fear of looking bad and the fear of emotional discomfort. I like what you are saying but you need to get leaders not to play it safe. A good example was the head coach of the Indianapolis Colts who were on track to have a perfect season. He lost the vision that his team had of perfection and was afraid that if Payton got hurt it was over with. It is over with now if you saw the dejection on the players face when the head coach didn’t model the vision. The lost the game and the momentum.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
December 28th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Good point, Jim. it will be interesting to see how that loss affects their play from here on out. I think they should have played to win. Thanks! Bret
[Reply]
Hi Bret:
Yes, the content of your message may seem a bit abstract to some, but I know that destinies are shaped by counter-intuitive and seemingly paradoxical thinking. My takeaway is that organizations need to give room for employees to be themselves– to give expression to their own unique point-of-view and individual expression. What you’ll see, then, are counter-intuitive ideas in the best sense of the word. But employees must be granted the freedom to come up with a near-miss at times–and that’s the rub. Many risk-averse legacy organizations will not allow your thinking about change to cross this threshold– and, in trying to perpetuate the same models and modes of growth, they will ultimately fail. Keep it coming, Brett. You’re surely on to something important. I couldn’t agree with you more.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
December 28th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Welcome, Dom. You make a great point about creating an organization that is not so tightly coupled that there is no room for freedom of expression and experimentation. Keep a tight lid on your folks and you will surely put out all fires, but as you point out that is a bad thing, not a good thing. Thanks! Bret
[Reply]
It’s so easy to become complacent. I’m amazed at the number of ‘thought leaders’ who spend the majority of their time defending the status quo. Fighting the battle for new ideas and creativity gets real old real fast.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
December 28th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Welcome! Agree that fighting for new ideas and creativity can be a battle, but it’s one worth fighting. Keeps things interesting. Thanks for visiting and sharing. Bret
[Reply]
Very well said!
Just finished reading Roger Martin’s book, the Design of Business and how, like salmon, (my words), we all are driven to a normative, predictable outcome which values reliability over validity. Let’s get integrative!
Would also recommend Ori Branfman’s, Sway, the Irrestible Pull of Irrational Behaviour, in other words why people try so hard not to lose vs. winning where they must take a risk.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
December 29th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Welcome, Seamus! Love your observation about valuing reliability over validity. Thanks for the book recommendations! Bret
[Reply]
[...] ACT Change: Model Paradoxical Behavior [...]