¿Eres un árbol o un animal?
¿Eres un árbol o un animal? Are you a tree or an animal? (Spanish)
Edwin H. Friedman uses the tension of opposites, intentional polarization of thought to challenge the readers concepts on leadership. Going out on a limb, I reached back to the definition of dialectic dialogue. (philosophy a: discussion and reasoning by dialogue as a method of intellectual investigation specifically: the Socratic techniques of exposing false beliefs and eliciting truth). He uses it quite effectively in a comically subtle dialogue between cells with no nucleus (Prokaryotes) and cells with nuclei (Eukaryote) to describe the need for leaders to see themselves as elements of change, p.170, (dialogue abbreviated).
At the onset, one should plan on “agreeing to disagree” when this book is being read. As one creates an outline of thoughts for Friedman, there are clearly things that cry out for argument, and yet at the same time Friedman, Poole, Thomas Wedell-Wedellsborg, and Chivers, carry similar leadership threads.
Friedman and Poole
At first glance, Edwin Friedman’s take on leadership flies in the face of Poole’s approach to Leadersmithing. While Poole provides 52 exercises for good Leadersmithing. Friedman boils it down to one phrase, “Failure of Nerve.” He also takes on the problems of emotion and empathy. This is in contrast to Poole’s deck of “hearts” calling for: Manners, Trust, Listening, Relationships, etc…. (Poole, p.152). Friedman, however, writes, “Empathy has become a power tool in the hands of the weak to sabotage the strong, p. 26. “
Some provocative statements from his Introduction: The problem with leadership.
1) Whenever a “family is driven by anxiety, what will also always be present is failure of nerve among its leaders, p.(p.5).
2) A well-differentiated leader is less likely to become lost in the anxious emotional processes swirling about, (p. 15).
Despite these seeming contradictions, both authors (in their book introductions) give a nod to the presence of military leadership (which has lessons for a civilian leadership mindset). Poole, in her introduction What do Leaders need to be able to do? Leadership 101, leads with the portrait of the Duke of Wellington, mentions leadership classics like Sun Tzu’s Art of War, Machiavelli’s The Prince and Carl von Clausewitz’s On War. Friedman is a bit more contemporary when he describes his presentation to 32 generals from the U.S. Army Europe (USAREUR) and the follow-on comments that the “Army is going soft.”
The comparison and contrast between Friedman and Poole provide two different perspectives on how leadership can be viewed today. Upon investigation, however, both authors want leaders to have, Courage, A brain and a Heart, (Poole, p. 8).
Friedman and Wedell-Wedellborg
Friedman writes in Imaginative Gridlock and the Spirit of Adventure, (p.33).
1) Conceptually stuck systems cannot be unstuck simply by trying harder, (p. 37).
2) The treadmill of trying harder is driven by the assumption that failure is due the fact that one did not try hard enough, (p.39).
3) Seeking answers can be its own treadmill. Changing the question enables to step off, (p.43).
This really speaks to Thomas Wedell-Wedellsborg’s book, What’s your problem? – To solve your toughest problems, Change the problems you solve. Matthew Soren’s the church mobilizer for World Relief asked me to do research why churches were not responding to the biblical mandate to love the “stranger amongst us.” After reading What’s your Problem, I reformatted that question to, “What would cause churches to respond to the need of international newcomers.” This reformatting has sent my NPO spiraling off into a completely new direction. In doing so, it follows Friedman’s guidance to change the question and step off the treadmill.
Friedman and Chivers
Friedman gives stark warning about data in Data Junkyards and Data Junkies: The Fallacy of Expertise, (p. 103).
1) Data may eventually outweigh the planet, p. 104.
2) As long as leaders base their confidence on how much data they have acquired, they are doomed to feeling inadequate, p. 104.
3) The pursuit of data, in almost any field, has come to resemble a form of substance abuse, p.106).
For some reason, I think Tom and David Chivers, in their book , How to read Numbers would be chuckling out loud at the concept of data as substance abuse. They might even add another chapter to their excellent book. However, while Friedman leaves data in the dustbin, Chivers puts data and numbers in perspective for leaders. They write,
“In this book, we’re going to talk a lot about numbers: about how they’re used in the media, and about how they can go wrong – and give misleading impressions. But along the way we will need to remind ourselves that those numbers stand for something. Often they will represent people, or if not people, then things that matter to people, (p.2).”
Epilogues and Conclusions
Poole ends with the phrase, “Leadership takes a lifetime – so be a tortoise, not a hare (p.182).
Friedman ends with a surprising story about creation (surprising since he used the evolutionary theory so much in his book.)
“On the third day of Creation, just before all forms of life were about to multiply, the Holy One said to his creatures….(see full story p.266)…It ends with this statement, “Those that chose stability we call trees, and those that chose opportunity became animals.”
Which are you?
About the Author
Russell Chun
interlinkt.org is now ready for your Refugee Resettlement needs. 15 tasks, languages ESL plans coming8 responses to “¿Eres un árbol o un animal?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Great post, Russell! I especially like how you have tied in to our previous readings. These three points you have pulled out I want to print and tack on a wall somewhere:
1) Conceptually stuck systems cannot be unstuck simply by trying harder, (p. 37).
2) The treadmill of trying harder is driven by the assumption that failure is due the fact that one did not try hard enough, (p.39).
3) Seeking answers can be its own treadmill. Changing the question enables to step off (p.43).
All three seem to be paradigm shifts that make me want to experimentally apply them and see what happens!
Oh, AND, I actually could interpret your title this time!
Hi Jennifer, I have finally circled back to Spanish which will probably be language group that gets the most use out of my NPO.
I frequently get on treadmills (actually ellipticals) and try to burn fat. Going no where fast!
I appreciated both Friedman’s and Wedell-Wedellsborg’s books about getting out of a rut and rethinking outside of the box.
Each time I speak to a new stakeholder, my mind is expanded in new ways that makes my NPO more useful for the consumer. God is Good. Thanks for your comments…Shalom…Russ
Russ, your comparison between Friedman and Chivers & Chivers is great. As I read Friedman, I think How to Read Numbers probably came up in my mind as much as any other book. Your reference: “As long as leaders base their confidence on how much data…” is precisely what I kept pondering. Really, I kept thinking how tempting it is to obsessively rely on numbers, technique, and know-how when leading organizations OR even operate as a consultant. I even thought of Adler’s book — how often we read to simply acquire more information and talk about what we “know.” Great post.
Hi Travis,
If anything Friedman is a discussion starter! I was speaking with my wife on Friedman and his take on empathy. (I was driving her to work to dig out her car from last nights snow). She said….BALANCE. Which sort of rocked my world. Of course, in order to be good leaders we must have all those Poole traits to be in balance.
Friedman is selling a book and that needs to draw the leadership connoisseurs attention. Failure of Nerve does exactly that.
Thanks for your comments…Shalom…Russ
Hi Russell,
I enjoyed your comparison’s of our past reading with Friedman, especially this statement, ” The comparison and contrast between Friedman and Poole provide two different perspectives on how leadership can be viewed today. Upon investigation, however, both authors want leaders to have, Courage, A brain and a Heart, (Poole, p. 8).” Courage, brains and heart are all necessary for good leadership. Between the two perspectives and practical insights from both we have more tools in our leadership belt. I was trying to find a helpful tool from Poole’s book that fit with Friedman’s non-anxious presence, With 52 options it took me a bit, but there it was 7 of Diamonds, Composure! To answer your question I think I am a tree. Which are you?
Hi Jenny,
Definitely an animal. (Mythical – a dragon – the skinny oriental kind or in the real world a tiger).
But I do enjoy Friedman’s tree image. (I like Banyan trees – kids can explore and play along the hanging vines).
I wish I could find the page again where he talks about the root depth of various trees. How some go deeper than others. How the image impacts organizations and how they survive in the real world.
I truly need a deeper read of his book, both provocative and calming at the same time.
Sidenote: Our forests are filled with both trees and animals.
Shalom…Russ
This was really well written Russell. I like your question at the end from Friedmans book, are you a tree who choose stability or are you an animal who seeks opportunity. I think I am going to cheat and say I am both! Or at the very least an animal who lives in a tree! Opportunity comes from strong foundation of stability, and yet stability depends on opportunity to thrive.
What one are you?
Hi Jana,
I definitely am an animal. But both are present in the forest!