Airbnb’s “Party Houses” and the Need to Move to Kingdom-Order Thinking
Shane Parrish has created a thoughtful community at Farnum Street delivering content about content, thinking about thinking, 
learning about learning, and wisdom about wisdom. He hails the mission statement “Upgrade Your Thinking.” From a simple blog to now active online community with over 250,000 participants, Parrish curates and engages his community about epistemology and decision making. Furthermore, Farnum Street is probably the only place I know of that sells a literal thinking cap. In his latest endeavor, The Great Mental Models: General Thinking Concepts, Parrish delivers a survey of nine maps or models of thinking to equip the reader with more tools and strategies to make informed decisions.
One of these models outlines the concept of second-order thinking. First-order thinking only considers the immediate results, while second-order thinking considers consequences farther ahead and more holistically (loc 1076). This mental model extends a call to think downstream about intended and unintended consequences. I’m reminded of the cane toad infestation in Australia. These toads, indigenous to the Americas, were introduced to control the native grey-backed cane beetle in Australia. Years later, these toads have multiplied to an uncontrollable millions upon millions and little evidence exists that proves these toads have positively impacted the number of cane beetles. The effects of these toads on the environment have far surpassed the original nuisance of the beetles. Oops!
This morning while running on the treadmill I caught some of the morning banter about Airbnb banning “party houses” after a tragic killing over the weekend on CNBC’s “The Squawk Box” (CNBC). The talk show participants were asking second-order type questions around innovation like “Why was Airbnb allowing ‘party houses’ in the first place?” and delivering the accusation, “Why didn’t they think of this before?” They were considering processes of innovation (“Do you ask for permission or forgiveness?”) and the diffusion of innovation (like the adoption process of using seat belts). The moved the conversation to the false political advertisements on Facebook. One reporter rhetorically asked, “Will the marketplace of ideas take care of the problem? Obviously not.” While asking second-order thinking questions, they unfortunately responded with a first-order thinking solution to the advertisements: move the narrow targeting of advertising on Facebook. This, they argued, would allow others who disagree to voice those disagreements and crowd-source the accountability in verifying the truthfulness of the ads. This doesn’t take into consideration that Facebook’s entire marketing schema revolves around the potency of advertising to highly narrow audiences. One interviewer delivered what might become the thrust of my research. She said, “This [problem] is due to a lack of imagination on the part of the innovators.”
Parrish identifies the two most efficacious areas for second-order thinking: “1) Prioritizing long-term interests over immediate gains. 2) Constructing effective arguments” (loc 1136). He also offers two postures to embody: being “as observant and honest as we can about the web of connections we are operating in” (loc 1113). While I would absolutely affirm the need for second order thinking, this model is limited to fields of existing issues or new ideas with easily predicted consequences. Consequences are nearly impossible to predict in new and innovative landscapes. Mark Zuckerburg, in his amorous years in college creating a “Hot or Not” page, had no idea he would be standing in front of a court some fifteen years later discussing policies of foreign meddling with political elections and advertisements.
Second and even third-ordered thinking (thinking about thinking about thinking) are certainly prized and welcomed, but I coin a new term here – Kingdom-ordered Thinking. I would define this as a thought process that considers implications, consequences, and postures of a decision in light of the coming kingdom. In other words, as a leader considers the new heavens and the new earth, the coming reign and rule of Christ, and the process of God making all things new, she will find the entire decision process stamped with kingdom principles. When considering a possible innovation, the entire process will be marked and shaped by this King and life in the Kingdom (and Kin-dom!). Like the reporter’s declaration, I would argue that many unintended consequences are due to a lack of kingdom imagination on the part of the innovators.
First, I’ll offer a negative example for contrast from my own context. Over the last several years, Cru out of a well-intentioned heart, has adopted an Adventure-based recruiting narrative. There was little Second Ordered Thinking and this was just a grassroots approach, not stemming from an intentional direction, but from a desire to mobilize more students. “Imagine the places you could go!” the almost Seussian invitation went out. The downstream, second-order issues are a group of laborers who don’t have the sacrificial and cross-bearing attitude at the epicenter of their call. The appropriate second-order question asks, “What happens when their time overseas is no longer an adventure?”
How do we flex the kingdom imagination muscle and grease the cogs in a kingdom-ordered thinking mind? I suggest some guiding questions to begin practical Kingdom-ordered thinking for innovation:
- Does the problem addressed with a potential innovation seem in line with a kingdom schema?
- As you were steeped in the story arc of Scripture, what types of solutions do you imagine?
- How does the process (not just the outcome) reflect the equity and dignity of everyone involved?
- How does this innovation point to the upside-down Kingdom? How are the voiceless given a voice? The outsider made an insider? The contesting groups given peace?
- Will the access to this innovation be consistent with a kingdom ethic? Will the “have-nots” be able to benefit either first or second-hand?
- To what degree can you discern if this is an innovation promoting and furthering an ego or about making His name great?
- What types of voices have spoken into the potential consequences of this decision?
What questions would you add to this list to help stoke Kingdom-order thinking?
__
CNBC. “Airbnb is banning ‘party houses’ after a deadly shooting in California.” The Squawk Box. November 4, 2019. Accessed November 4, 2019. https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/11/04/airbnb-is-banning-party-houses-after-a-deadly-shooting-in-california.html?&qsearchterm=airbnb%20squawk%20box
Shane Parrish. The Great Mental Models: General Thinking Concepts. (Ottowa, Canada: Farnam Street, 2019). Kindle.
About the Author
Shawn Cramer
16 responses to “Airbnb’s “Party Houses” and the Need to Move to Kingdom-Order Thinking ”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Shawn,
As I consider the questions you posed for third-order thinking, or Kingdom order thinking, I think it would be very important to establish what you mean by Kingdom. Different Christians view God’s Kingdom in different ways. Some are offended by it (because of its connotations to Empire), others love it and the hierarchal structure it provides. Many pick and choose the pieces they prefer, so even when looking at the “arc of scripture,” the question you pose is quite complicated. Your upside-down perspective of Kingdom is helpful, but not every one really likes that particular understanding. While I agree that seems to be Jesus’ understanding, historically, not all christian initiatives fall within that understanding. So I would add:
What does Kingdom really mean?
What are the main characteristics of its schema and ethics?
And how do we move toward such realities with integrity, when so many before us have failed to do so?
Great addition! It’s challenging when a word that comes from Jesus’ own mouth becomes short-hand for an entire theology. “Kingdom” is such a positive word in my vocabulary and theology, and is is immensely helpful to know that it doesn’t resonate with everyone.
Shawn,
I had the same question as Darcy as I read. What do you mean by “Kingdom”? And what if you discover that that term is actually oppressive to folks without power? How do you think that term, even as generous as your definition might be/become, could interrupt someone’s ability to fully give herself to the innovation process?
So…what do you mean by Kingdom?
I’ll have to give this some consideration. If the term is a tripping point, then I would hope I would embody the audience-centered approach of removing that barrier, while the concept could still be pursued. Hermeneutically, I would point to the Sermon on the Mount as a more lengthy description of what I mean by Kingdom. The preceding verses talk about him going to all areas and preaching “the good news of the kingdom,” then he gathers people and describes it. I would also lean on one of NT Wright’s definitions: “It was simply a
Jewish way of talking about Israel’s God becoming king. And, when this God became king, the whole world, the world of space and time, would at last be put to rights.” I’m genuinely curious about the hesitancy of that term. In what arenas or circles have you experienced an aversion for the word “kingdom,” and do you have any resources to point me towards? I’m coming out of a short season diving into James KA Smith and NT Wright, where “kingdom” is in just about every other sentence. Thanks in advance.
Shawn, I resonate with your negative example. When I first began to serve with my previous organization, I found that the way it was presented was very different than how it is currently presented. When I first volunteered, there was a strong emphasis on the need to build long-lasting relationships with students, and through that to share the Gospel. Now, when I look at their social media, a lot of what I see is a push toward the adventurous. “Go to such and such place; your friends will be jealous.”
How have you seen Cru change their approach in this regard and include more second-order thinking?
The change is slow, but even bringing awareness to this has been effective. I’m not a lone voice in this observation, too, so that helps as well. At this point, we are trying to make staff aware of this tendency as well as keeping an eye on any nationally branded efforts for recruiting. I’d welcome your input, too, brother!
Shawn,
I love how you reach out to others to help in the innovative thinking process. It shows a willingness to hear.
What types of conversations need to happen amongst the innovators to help guide them into second-order thinking in order to create more kin-dom and Kingdom building? What tools need to be pulled out of the toolbox in order to help spark imagination?
Is there a need or place for a life/business coach to help guide these discussions?
I don’t know why I thought of this as I read your post, but maybe it will spark something for you. Many years ago I worked in a flower shop and the owner was so adept at watching someone for a period of time and putting them into a role that fit them so perfectly. He was magical at matching skill set to need and employees stayed for years.
Nancy, thanks for engaging with this so thoughtfully. I thought you were going to make the artistic simile – just as he placed each flower in its proper spot in the bouquet to shine individually yet bringing completeness to the whole, so he placed each employee in their respective spots throughout the store. What you describe is laid out in “Collective Genius”: it’s the leaders job to orient everyone involved so that together, collectively we achieve the genius potential.
The idea of a consultation package or coaching package is certainly in my idea mill for a project for the program, but I’m trying not to jump the gun. Do you see merit in that approach? How would you nuance it?
Shawn,
LOL. I like the artistic metaphor you gravitated to, but no. It’s too cute for me.
I do think coaching has validity in a situation as yours. The key to it is having the right coach. I was trained to be a life coach that asks questions which help the individual/group come to their own conclusions without my judgment or thoughts. In fact, many pastors who I was in training with felt that the coaching model was also a wonderful tool for discipleship.
It has been amazing to me to be able to help guide a person into their own a-ha moment. It’s hard to not give advice. As humans I find we can be too opinionated. It’s nice to sit back, listen and ask open-ended questions and watch for the light bulb to turn on.
Also, coaching helps to keep individuals/groups accountable to a time schedule so that goals are achieved. It’s not to add pressure or rigidity but more so because we are lazy. So lazy. We need deadlines. Even if a coachee doesn’t meet the deadline, the idea has been planted in their brain.
I have learned that the nuance doesn’t have to be that the coach be Christian (although that can be extremely helpful) but that the coach is the right coach. It’s like finding a therapist. You keep looking until you find the right fit. And prayer. God knows what you need. Ask and it shall be given (if it’s in God’s Will).
In the church, we’re always walking that tightrope of offering transforming hands-on mission experiences without turning them into “serve-cations.” I appreciated your example about the adventure-based serving opportunities and whether or not these were helping people become more sacrificial and servant-minded. Some of our response to that is loads of training before and during these trips so that we can monitor the motivations and help engage people at a deeper level, but it’s an on-going challenge. So what is the right mix between marketing and promotion that gets someone excited and interested to explore an unfamiliar way of serving that also engages their brains to see the opportunity in a “kindom” kind of way?
John, I wish I had the secret sauce for that mix. We are making a couple of shifts: First, we are highlighting the fact that God is already at work where our students might go (contra messiah complex), and second, it is more about coming and dying (to self, comfort, etc.) than it is about going on an adventure. A third shift is moving from calling the trips mission trips (i.e. you’ll a make long-term missional impact) to vision trips (you’ll gain a vision for what God is doing and how you might be involved.)
I love reminding my congregation that we never “take Jesus” to anyone, but we are simply showing up in places where Jesus is already at work. Sometimes just by showing up, we help others become more aware of the divine presence in their midst. What we hope we avoid is doing any harm or giving people a negative picture of what God is like because of our witness. Most of the time, we’ve got a greater need to experience the presence of Christ than those we supposedly serve. I love seeing people’s hearts opened to the reality that someone living in a tough part of the world has something of great value to offer and that God has something to teach rich white people in the so-called “shithole” places of our world.
Very thoughtful blog. So, much to learn by watching my colleagues
You wrote, “How do we flex the kingdom imagination muscle and grease the cogs in a kingdom-ordered thinking mind?”
Having come from the business world as an entrepreur and intrapreneur for most of my working life, SO FAR, then a pastor for 8 years I think this is one of the dangers as a pastor- to flex muscle. I’ve learned that when change happens is when change needs to happen. The trick is to encourage others to use their gifts without muscle. This in my experience is the roadblock to sustainable healthy experiences.
Strategically priming the pump over a long period of time, spending time to let people know how much they are loved by working with, and not a tool to a leaders success, with some momentous highlights are part of the keys to more sustainable road to success
Great point, Steve. One of the marks of godly innovation will be honoring the God-given dignity in each person as a human, and not as a cog of innovation.
Please allow that quote to undergird your research. Wow…that’s a doozy.
And, it’s what I’m curious about in our conversation over on my post. I truly wonder about the effectiveness of innovation if it’s being driven by the same first-order (lack of imagination) assumptions that generated the problem. Diversifying the innovation process in pursuit of a co-created outcome seems to be a key to awakening our imaginations.
Jer,
Thanks for the confirmation on that quote. I’ve moved it to a more central place in my notes as a result. Co-creation is the bullseye, no doubt. It’s what God granted us in the Cultural Mandate and what we can, in turn, invite others into.