I really do not want to take on the task of critiquing Edwin Friedman\u2019s masterpiece, A Failure of Nerve. And honestly, I\u2019ll spend most of this article relating to the brilliance of his work rather than combatting it. I agree with William H. Dorherty\u2019s endorsement, \u201cReading this book is like discovering an unpublished Beethoven sonata or a missing play of Shakespeare.\u201d Let me tell you about the genius of Friedman\u2019s proposals on leadership and natural systems at large, while I summon the nerve to take a stand on what he is missing in the end<\/p>\n
Friedman’s main argument in the book is that \u201cleadership is essentially an emotional process rather than a cognitive phenomenon.\u201d[1]<\/a> The contrast Friedman sets up here appears simple enough on the surface but what he really means is the difference between Renaissance era \u201cnerve\u201d (emotional leadership) and post-enlightenment information (cognitive leadership). He claims modern leadership is predicated upon and celebrated as a mastery of data, techniques, methods, and social sciences.[2]<\/a> (He does leave one exception to this rule \u2013 Family Systems Therapy. ) Not only does modern leadership depend on these cognitive systems erroneously, but American society has made cognitive knowledge a pathological addiction where leaders can escape to avoid dealing with the pain and fear of facing themselves.[3]<\/a> This was a mirror for me and revealed my own addiction to knowledge and fear of emotion.<\/p>\n I flee from internal discomfort. Anytime I am confronted, overwhelmed, excited, or unsure about\u2026.anything, I research. I am not fluent in the language of my emotions. Emotions, of any kind, cause a physiological response in my body. This is their medium of communication. Because I have not learned the nuances of that language in my body and valued my body and heart as legitimate sources of wisdom the way I have my cognitive mind, all I feel when an emotion arises within me is extreme discomfort. I commonly refer to this as \u201citchy sweater syndrome\u201d because it feels like I am wearing an itchy sweater on the inside and can\u2019t take it off. All this to say, I am a knowledge addict, It is my safe house from the undiscovered continents of my internal terrain. This suppression of my physiological responses causes me to operate in chronic anxiety.<\/p>\n Friedman\u2019s thesis is that our contemporary society at large is chronically anxious and has gone into emotional regression.[4]<\/a> I am displaying the natural energy of the emotional context I am a part of. \u00a0What\u2019s painful about this is that I am filled with vision for how things could be. I am a creator, a systems thinker, an outlier, a risk-taker, an adventurer, and a visionary. But my vision is constantly funneled through and truncated by research and information, rather than self-directed, internal knowing. Listen to this sobering line:<\/p>\n \u201cVison is basically an emotional rather than a cerebral phenomenon, depending more on a leader\u2019s capacity to deal with anxiety than his or her professional training or degree.\u201d[5]<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Gut check! I wonder how much of my motivation for pursuing a doctorate falls into the category of me not trusting my-Self yet. How do I step into and lead from Self?<\/p>\n According to Friedman, it is the work of \u201cSelf-differentiation\u201d. A self-differentiated leader, (or to use Friedman\u2019s key term, a \u201cwell-differentiated leader\u201d) is someone with a high level of self-regulation.[6]<\/a><\/p>\n This is the work of Family Systems Therapy and Friedman\u2019s leadership development model for dealing with systems – becoming a non-anxious presence to the others around us, and leading with strength and resolve. I can\u2019t help but wonder what Friedman would think about the evolution of Family Systems Therapy into what is today Internal Family Systems Therapy.<\/p>\n Internal Family Systems Therapy, created by Dr. Richard Schwartz recognizes that a living system of personalities actually exists within individual people. It takes these truths from external family systems and brings them into the internal system of one person. After putting this book down, I took a long walk and began to dialogue with the parts of me that were feeling anxious. Within minutes, one of those parts began to weep and asked me to lead them and allow them to take on a different role in the system. It had been operating as a protector of a much younger part ever since I was 13 years old. It was only through openness, curiosity, and empathy that I was able to unburden the part and welcome home the younger part it was protecting. Then I promised to lead them all well. The major difference in this approach and Friedman\u2019s approach is in fact empathy.<\/p>\n Friedman warns about the \u201cirrelevance of empathy in the face of un-self-regulating organisms that are by nature always invasive and cannot learn from their experience\u201d.[7]<\/a> I would say that accurately describes the recurring triggers and anxious cycles I fall into. I have tried self-soothing, separating from the emotions, and regulating my nervous system. And you know what, it works. But it doesn\u2019t heal anything. And while I can appear to be regulated to my family or coworkers, this does not stop the need for regulation from occurring. In short – I am not healed. While I am in awe of his craft and comprehension, I experientially and foundationally disagree with him on this point. Columbus, who Friedman exalts (and for good reason), maybe the hero of nerve, but Christ is the Archetype of Love. From my current worldview, it is love that transforms people, organizations, creation, and my own internal family system. Today I feel better.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Friedman and Steinke, A Failure of Nerve, Revised Edition<\/em>, 14.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Things like Sociology, Education, Politics, Management, and Psychology.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Friedman and Steinke, 23.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Friedman and Steinke, 59.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Friedman and Steinke, 20.<\/p>\nMy Addiction to Knowledge & Fear of Emotion<\/h1>\n
Self-Differentiation<\/h1>\n
Internal Family Systems \u2013 The Next Frontier<\/h1>\n
Love Wins<\/h1>\n