Adaptive Leadership and the Electric Slide
In 1994 Ronald Heifetz set the leadership field afire with his theory of “Adaptive Leadership” in his book Leadership Without Easy Answers. Since then, adaptive change vs technical change has been the focus of many a leadership conference. Wrapping one’s brain around the applicable differences between adaptive and technical can be an exhausting task. In essence, technical change occurs around a technical problem that can be managed by someone with the skill or knowledge of a solid solution. An adaptive change occurs around an adaptive challenge that “require new learning and can only be tackled by changing people’s assumptions, beliefs, habits, and allegiances.”[1]The beauty of The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World by Ronald Heifetz, Alexander Grashow & Marty Linksy is that they move past the theory of adaptive leadership to offer tangible and practical ways to apply adaptive leadership while discerning the adaptive capacity of the system; the reader finds a plethora of diagrams and charts, tools and tactics, as well as interesting reflections and exercises to utilize for diagnosis and discernment.
Interestingly, for me, one of the most thought provoking notions in The Practice of Adaptive Leadership was the provocative notion that leaders often fail in effecting adaptive change due to the false notion that something is broken. The authors call this the “illusion of the broken system”.[2] Heifetz says, “The reality is that any social system (including an organization or a country or a family) is the way it is because the people in that system (at least those individuals and factions with the most leverage) want it that way.”[3] The authors argue that this is not necessarily a dysfunctional system.
I find an interesting tension in this concept, especially in light of the authors premise that adaptive change being closely related to the biological evolutionary process. If a human system is fighting the adaptive change because of its desire to function the way they know and the comfort therein, isn’t that a dysfunction? Because ultimately in the evolutionary process refusal to face the adaptions leads to death.
Heifetz, et al. go one to offer another stimulating notion,
The importance of this idea lies in the impact it has on the techniques for trying to address the problem. Embarrassing or not, the organization prefers the current situation to trying something new where the consequences are unpredictable and likely to involve losses for key parties. Taking that into account will lead to different strategic options for closing the gap. When you realize that what you see as dysfunctional works for others in the system, you begin focusing on how to mobilize and sustain people through the period of risk that often comes with adaptive change, rather trying to convince them of the rightness of your cause.[4]
Heifetz and Friedman have confluence around the challenges pioneers have when attempting to bring the people together around new visions, dreams, or future. It seems Friedman would argue that a self-differentiated leader must not have a failure of nerve to take action, while Heifetz entreats the leader to be intentional and calculated in curating the space for the system to adapt. Either way Friedman and Heifetz agree that adaptive leadership is dangerous.[5]
Kahneman’s system 2, slow thinking works well in Heifetz et al practices for considering a system’s adaptive capacity. A leader endeavoring to understand the biases at play that Kahneman unpacks in Thinking Fast and Slow could prove beneficial in practicing adaptive leadership. Being cognizant of these biases can help the leader do what Heifetz et al challenge the leader to do, “build on the past”.[6]
In the end I feel it is important to ask, is the church broken or is the dysfunction only an illusion? I am convinced it is both/and. Anxiety has created quick fixes that are driven by false thinking we are dealing with technical changes. The quick fixes have, if not entirely, partially broken the healthy functioning of worshipping communities in North America. As I face the challenge of pioneering a path with a church that must recognize it needs to transform or accept death, I find that the integration of the wisdom from Friedman, Kahneman and Heifetz is a necessity. Each author provides dance steps for the leadership dance routine as I not only look from the balcony but dance the Electric Slide on the dance floor with the church.
[1] https://aduroconsulting.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Book-Summary_The-Practice-of-Adaptive-Leadership-by-Heifetz-Grashow-Linsky.pdf
[2] Ronald A. Heifetz, Marty Linsky, and Alexander Grashow, The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World, 1st edition (Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press, 2009). Location 429. Kindle
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid. Location 438. Kindle
[5] Friedman says that a self-differentiated leader is a lonely place to be and will face sabotage and resistance. Heifetz et al. remind the reader that being adaptive leader is dangerous because the leader challenges the systems status quo and that naturally causes pushback. Ronald A. Heifetz, Marty Linsky, and Alexander Grashow, The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World, 1st edition (Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press, 2009). 576-586. Kindle
[6] Ibid. Location 1265. Kindle
About the Author
Nicole Richardson
PC(USA) pastor serving a church in Kansas City. In my spare time I teach yoga and scuba diving10 responses to “Adaptive Leadership and the Electric Slide”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Nicole,
After reading Heifetz, how would you diagnose your dancing? What new rhythms will you instill as a result of “Adaptive Leadership.”
Andy my diagnosis
https://media.giphy.com/media/26uf68LgjAMAj2a9a/giphy.gif
Adaptive rhythm
https://media.giphy.com/media/zVNZs7EOMBMha/giphy.gif
Hasn’t the church always been broken, at least to a degree? Is it really any worse off than it has been historically? I ask this sincerely as it seems to me that there has always been a level of dysfunction within the church as it is comprised of broken people. What is your take?
Eric, yes I think worshipping communities have had varying degrees of brokenness throughout history. I also think we miss the thriving aspects of the journey because we like safety too much.
Nicole,
Love it…dance steps of balance and change. As you continue to diagnose the various factors at play in your congregation what minimal risk experiments would you like to explore?
Nicole, I really like your concise summary of a book loaded with content. I also appreciate how you apply the content to the context of the local church, something not specific to the book. You wrote, “In the end I feel it is important to ask, is the church broken or is the dysfunction only an illusion?” I agree with your “both/and” take on that important question. In your new role, do you have a handle on the issues requiring technical or adaptive change? Also, what would indicate to you that a church is “broken?”
Roy I am still working it out regarding the technical vs adaptive challenges that are in place here.
I think the brokenness becomes evident through the anxiety behaviors that Friedman points to in A Failure of Nerve.
Nicole: The church is broken and yet blessed and redeemed, huh? Just like all us individuals who make up the church. There are cracks in each of us and in every church–but the cracks let the light in. Nice analysis of the book and I love the electric slide metaphor.
Nicole: We better be doing that dance at graduation 🙂 Not that you’ll be adding to your NPO at this point, but if we were still in the writing process, is there anything from the practical tools that the authors included that you think could add value to your project if incorporated?
Kayli we will need a practice session…maybe in one of our Monday zoom classes? 🙂
I believe that as the process of launching the project becomes a reality it will be important to come back to the tools to see what will help shape the dynamics. So…no…I don’t know of the tools right now 🙂 🙂