The Quick Fix- Leadership in Crisis
As I began to read his book, my curiosity grew as to who was Edwin H. Friedman. I asked myself “why was his input on the subject matter of leadership and family seen as important?” In searching the web for information, I stumbled upon his obituary in the Washington Post dated November 7th, 1996 entitled “Edwin H. Friedman Dies”.[1] Although very brief, this article highlighted the significance of who Dr. Edwin H. Friedman was during his 64 years of life. Friedman was New York native who became a Jewish Rabbi and a family therapist for thirty years. As I continued my search, much of the information I found centered on two main aspects of Friedman’s work his belief in self-differentiation and self-control. If a person wanted visual cliffnotes on Friedman’s theory I also found this YouTube clip : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgdcljNV-Ew . In his book A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of Quick Fix, Friedman asserts that leadership today is in a crisis. It is looking for a quick fix through methods and practice while lacking the maturity to bring true impact through differentiated leadership. He begins his work by outlining his thesis statement:
“America’s leadership rut has both a conceptual and an emotional dimension that reinforce one another. The conceptual dimension is the inadequacy of what I shall refer to as the social science construction of reality. This construction fails to explain these emotional processes; even more, it fails to offer leaders a way of gaining some separation from their regressive influence. The emotional dimension is the chronic anxiety that currently ricochets from sea to shining sea. However, the word emotional as used throughout this work is not to be equated with feelings, which are a later evolutionary development. While it includes feelings, the word refers primarily to the instinctual side of our species that we share in common with all other forms of life.”[2]
In short, Friedman says that a good leader is a differentiated leader who is mature enough to not be influenced or affected by the anxiety of others. The differentiated presence of this type of leader affords them to have a higher threshold or tolerance of others anxiety allowing for others to be able to take accountability for their own actions. Chronically anxious families or organizations possess an absence of such leadership and have a low tolerance for the pain of others. This form of empathy is detrimental to absolving the anxiety that persists. No leader is born with this ability to differentiate and maintain such levels of self control; however, it is something that a leader matures into. Within his book he addresses our societies addiction/dependency on techniques, methods and data to hack our way through problem solving. The result typically ends in failure and only produces chronic anxiety.
Looking at Friedman from a practical business perspective
“if only we knew enough we could do (or fix) anything,” and its obverse, “we failed because we did not use the right technique.”[3] I cannot count how many time I have heard these words. In an age driven by data, technology and information it is difficult to not give credence to the value each of them play on a daily basis within the business world today. There can be a perceived confidence and power that leaders assert when using data to transform the direction of an organization. I believe that data for data sake produces nothing. Data is only beneficial when it can add value to the story you are trying to convey within your organization. Data driven answers may only provide an internal perspective of measurable significance. On a daily basis, thousands of business professionals spend hours searching and gathering information that drive their decisions.The more data they have, the confident they become about the decisions they have made. However, it is often that business leaders do realize that data, techniques and methodology alone are not enough. They,in turn, recognize that the premise behind driving decisions only with data can be short-sighted and still only provide a short term solution to a long term problem. Would Friedman’s differentiation theory in practice lead to a better understanding of how to move their organizations forward. What path would their organization be on if all of their leaders followed his theory? With that said, I would challenge the notion asserted by Friedman (or my interpretation of the notion) that data driven decisions are made as a means to hack the system. I would assert that in many cases it is a means to understand the problem and provide guidance on the process to effective solution making. It is not absent of leadership capacity but done in conjunction with it.
[1] “EDWIN H. FRIEDMAN DIES,” The Washington Post, November 07, 1996, , accessed October 18, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1996/11/07/edwin-h-friedman-dies/f2ee2c73-4179-4b90-b90a-d3b2631b73d2/?utm_term=.0f000eb63cbb.
[2] Edwin H. Friedman, Margaret M. Treadwell, and Edward W. Beal, A failure of nerve: leadership in the age of the quick fix (New York: Church Publishing, 2017), Location 208.
[3] Ibid, Location 609.
About the Author
Christal Jenkins Tanks
6 responses to “The Quick Fix- Leadership in Crisis”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“I would assert that in many cases it is a means to understand the problem and provide guidance on the process to effective solution making. It is not absent of leadership capacity but done in conjunction with it.” I agree Christal that we can use data effectively.
One other thought that I had as I was reading Friedman – do some exec’s show their failure of nerve when they rely solely on the data? Is it a way to find something else to blame if things go wrong? I guess it’s another one of those both/and things. (Not either/or which he also points out as a problem.)
I was struck by the statement that “chronically anxious families or organizations possess an absence of such leadership and have a low tolerance for the pain of others.”
This may have been my biggest mistake in my earliest years of ministry.
Because of a desire for every teenager, parent, and staff member to LIKE ME, I would often run myself ragged trying to give everyone attention, answers, and accommodations.
I have learned that this often become a pattern. When someone learned that I would accommodate their wishes if they complained, they would end up complaining more, not less.
Maturity has taught me to identify this people… to be compassionate without giving up control.
Great post and reflecting on how Friedman’s views fit into the business world “On a daily basis, thousands of business professionals spend hours searching and gathering information that drive their decisions.” As ministers, we do similar techniques as well as parenting. Gathering facts to make a sound and effective decision.
Christal, thank you. You did an excellent job of distilling Freidman’s thesis into a few words. “In short, Friedman says that a good leader is a differentiated leader who is mature enough to not be influenced or affected by the anxiety of others.” That’s it! The maturity level of the leader impacts the whole organization—regardlenss if the leader is physically present or not. I always appreciate your business perspective too, i.e. driving decisions with data alone. It brings an important dynamic to our discussions. Thanks Christal!
Christal,
Great post and a lot of good stuff to think about…. I want to piggy back on your challenge about ‘data driven’ decisions.
It would be interesting to get Friedman’s thoughts about the advent of ‘Big Data’ and deep learning, where computers are able to pull out patterns and give insight that simply wasn’t possible before…. Maybe it is a ‘hack’ in a way, but certainly a useful one
I concur Christal: “No leader is born with this ability to differentiate and maintain such levels of self control; however, it is something that a leader matures into.” And yet, I think some people are born with more natural leadership abilities and inherit the inner strength to self-regulate and develop a strong sense of self. I see people who endure similar abuse or mistreatment and one person becomes severely emotionally tramatized while the other person is a better person from the experience. Resilence seems to be a contributing factor to self-differentiating. Do you see resilency playing a part in self-differentiating?