Leadership and Vulnerability to Terrorist Attacks

I hate the ideas of “grief” anniversaries. I find them shallow and often misguided and I vowed to not write anything on this 10th “Anniversary” of 9-11. I personally don’t see anything magic or special about the 365th day after an event over the 364th or the 366th. It seems to me grief has its own schedule independent from our Gregorian calendar. It has seasons of its own which visit in unpredictable and inconvenient ways throughout our lives.

But with all the sentimentality, the pablum and the psychobabble that is filling our airwaves through our 24 hours news cycle this weekend, I feel compelled as a leader to say something.

Much is being analyzed in terms of our “vulnerability” to terrorist attacks. Such discussions focus on physical borders, security and intelligence. But there is one factor that is being ignored. I think it is the most important factor in determining any vulnerability to a terrorist “attack,” whether you are looking at a nation, a business or a family. This factor is the quality of the leader of the system.

Ed Friedman, early on in his book, The Failure of Nerve (p.9), states 3 conditions within leadership that are needed for terrorists to succeed. Their chances of success often determines their willingness to act. Paraphrasing these conditions, they are as follows:

1. There must be a perceived weakness in the leader. There must be a pervasive sense that “no one is in charge.”

Bring “in charge” as a leader has nothing to do with reactive, macho crap that isn’t afraid to “blink.” This has nothing to do with a leader getting up and uttering idiotic statements like “Bring it on!” Being in charge is about someone who is in control of themselves and their own reactivity. Being in charge is about someone who will not pass blame and will shoulder responsibility independent of public opinions. When a “buck passing, poll-taking, knee jerk, macho talking, reactive leaders is present, the threat level of a terrorist attack is elevated. It’s no accident that 9-11 was chosen for the date of the terrorist attack. It is no less of an accident that 2001 was chosen as well.

2. There must be a vulnerability in the leader that can easily be exploited.

Terrorist look for leaders that they can “bait” into reacting in predictable ways and then seek to use their reactions to further their goals. Do you think it was by accident the son of a father who had a “score” to settle for Dad was selected as the target? Do you think the terrorists of 9-11 (the ones behind the scenes of the attacks) were surprised at theUSresponse? I think not. An obvious vulnerabilty existed in our leadership and they knew it and knew how to use it.

3. Thirdly, Friedman observes that there must be among the leader and the followers, a pervasive and unreasonable faith in “being reasonable.”

No one would accuse the terrorists of being reasonable. And no one in our leadership publicly tried to reason with them. But that’s not what reasonableness is about here. I take faith in reasonableness to mean a confidence that one can act in a certain linear way and be assured of achieving a predictable result. Enter “The War on Terror.”

The thinking that we can use revenge, force and assassination to “win” against terrorism is, in my opinion, among the most misguided efforts to respond to 9-11. Acting as if the world is a billiard game and all we have to do as a nation is line up our shots, knock enough balls into their respective pockets and clean the table is blind faith in the “reasonableness” of using force in order to change someone’s thinking and opinions.

Lest you think I am being partisan here, I assure you, I believe these same vulnerabilities exist in most if not all political leaders these days.

I happened to be on a flight out of Dulles the morning of 9-11. The first strike happened. I was on Northwest Flight 1271 which departed the runway this morning at 8:45 am, one minute before the first strike. I remember noticing the sickened and unusually alert expressions on the faces of the flight crew after they had been called to the cabin some 15-20 minutes after our departure. I remember saying to my seatmate that morning, that I thought something was wrong. Another 20 minutes later the pilot informed us we were making an emergency landing inPittsburgh.

We all have vivid memories of that day and I suppose there is value in taking time out on an anniversary to be intentional about our grieving as an alternative to not doing it at all. But the details I want to keep in my own thoughts are not just those of 9-11. I also want to remember the details of 9-10-01 and the conditions of leadership that made us vulnerable to the rationale of a terrorist attack. It is these details with regard to leadership that need to be highlighted in our efforts to address our vulnerability, whether on a national, organizational or familial scale.

Peace and Courage,

Steve Geske

5 American Myths that Help Keep Us Stuck as a Nation

Friedman, in the second chapter of Failure of Nerve focuses on the dynamics of chronic anxiety driving families, organizations and nations into a regressive process devolving into greater chaos, immaturity and a frenetic focus on symptoms. He observes that the lack of awareness or outright denial of the emotional processes that are driving our symptomatic behavior is the trigger that begins the “slide back into the swamp.”

We are inundated daily with our 24 hour news cycle by opinions and theories about what is “wrong” with America. Politicians clamor for the high ground of offering a solution while promising a quick fix. Meanwhile the real, painful and extensive work of examining the emotional processes that produce “what’s wrong” with America eludes us.

The question isn’t “What do we see that is wrong?” The question is “What continually blinds us?” What is it that obfuscates us so? What blinds us from our blindness?

I think there are a number of “American myths” that repeatedly resonate in our culture that trip us up every time with the illusion that we are able to accurately see. This list of myths does not originate with me. But as far as I know, I’m the only one that sees them as destructive.

Myth #1 – The Wisdom of the Rustic

This myth resonates with “common sense” and resists complexity. The right answer, the right course of action appears not from intelligence or rigorous education. It can be found in a rocking chair on the porch.

Though intelligence can be misguided, there is in reality little virtue in ignorance. Yet our culture worships it and trusts it. If you doubt this, just listen to Sarah Palin for 2 minutes. Sound bytes and quick fixes make perfect sense. This myth not only keeps us stuck as a national “family” it drives us backwards.  This for me is illustrated perfectly by the fact that 60% of all college graduates do not recognize the well-supported phenomenon of evolution.

Myth #2 – The Possibility of Success

This is the Horiatio Alger story. This myth believes that a person can start out with nothing and can realistically expect to be a rich man some day. This is useful in keeping workers on the treadmill while dangling the American Dream in front of them for 30 years until their energy and youth are spent.

This myth convinces us to keep up the insanity of continuing to keep doing what isn’t working. It has to work one of these times, right? If you don’t believe this myth is prominent in our culture just look at the popularity of the lottery – the tax for people who don’t understand (or believe) statistics.

Myth #3 – The Value of Scars

Someone who has been through the fire and survived has increased credibility in our culture.  The truth is often the fact that the wounded can be broken and less qualified as a result of their wounds.

If this myth has value it is the way it offers encouragement to enter into the hard tasks of life despite the struggle. However, this myth is seldom invoked prior to the struggle. There is no value in future scars, only those which are past.

Myth #4 – The Coming of the Messiah

This is the myth that the right man (or woman) will appear at the right time to deliver us from our pain and lead us into utopia. Its focus is external in terms of solutions. It leads to the lack of self-reflection and abdication of personal responsibility for the creation of our problems and the ultimate way through them. It focuses on the other.

Myth #5 – Presence of a Conspiracy

Of all the myths, this is the one that I, personally, find most seductive. Anything becomes more believable when it is framed as a conspiracy. It is indeed, part of our nature to look for patterns and explanations for what we observe. Yet much of life is random and more things happen by chance than we care to ponder.

The Myth of the Presence of a Conspiracy lingers not only in the manipulations of extremists, con men and politicians, but also in the market place. Articles and books about with titles like “What Your Doctor (or Government, etc.) doesn’t want You to Know.” Enough said.

Conclusion:

So how best can we do the work, Friedman advocates to begin our journey out of the regressive swamps in which we find ourselves? Whether we are addressing our national, corporate or familial inertia, we would do well to be examine our treasured myths and how we are seduced by them, using them as shortcuts around and diversions from the hard work of owning the role our emotional processes play in way we frame our reality and in the choices we make. Only then can we begin to live rationally, objectively and consciously.

Peace and Courage,

Steve Geske

Either/Or Thinking

I’m particularly interested in the “Stand Off in Wisconsin” because I was raised in that state.  My first vocation was in broadcast news and I began to learn how to observe and report on political developments in Wisconsin.  (Some day I’ll tell the story about getting teared gassed while reporting on the Posse Comitatus http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/adl/paranoia-as-patriotism/posse-comitatus.html.)  I’ve interviewed politicians in the capital rotunda where state union employees are now protesting.

Naturally, my internal question machine is asking, “How is what we know about chronic and episodic anxiety playing out in this event?”  The standoff is a perfect illustration of a gridlocked system.

Friedman lists three characteristics of gridlock systems

• An unending treadmill of trying harder.
• Looking for answers rather than reframing questions
• Either/or thinking that creates false dichotomies

It’s a good bet the third characteristic is fully present in the Wisconsin conflict.    The false dichotomy is broken down into a pure right or wrong perspective;  either union bargaining rights should be restricted or they should not.  Friedman writes. “…intense polarizations…are always symptomatic of underlying emotional processes rather than of the subject matter of the polarizing issue”.  If true, the heart of the conflict in Wisconsin is more emotional than rational in scope and nature.  Observe the bunker-fixed “we’re not moving” emotional reactivity between opposing sides. 

This is not the opposite of compromise.  In fact, the healthiest solution to this conflict will not come from compromise.   If it comes at all, it will come from leaders of both movements-in-opposition finding effective leadership through emotional maturity.

Howard

Shark!

More proof that media work hard to create anxiety and fear where none is necessary;

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2011/02/08/2011-02-08_global_shark_attacks_on_the_rise_in_2010_us_again_leads_rest_of_world.html?r=news/national

When you run the numbers, the headline should read:  AMERICANS HAVE A ONE IN 8.3 MILLION CHANCE OF BEING ATTACKED BY A SHARK!

I have long suggested to groups I facilitate, audiences to whom I speak and in private conversations, that we’re being fed a constant diet of fear. Media now say to us; “You don’t have enough to fear. We’ll give you more”.  It is feeding an addiction.  And it’s making us afraid of each other and ourselves.

Making us afraid of stuff that isn’t important contributes to chronic anxiety.  Friedman writes; “Whether we are cosidering a toothache…a relational bind…” (I will add “shark attack statistics”) …”most individuals and most systems….will ‘naturally’ choose to revert to chronic conditions of bearable pain rather than face the temporarily more intense anguish of acute conditions that are the gateway to becoming free”.

In other words, fear feeding which is now our cultural norm, restricts and constrains our ability and capacity to deal with our own emotional immaturity in ways – painful to be sure – which make us more alive.

Howard

I have a dream!

“Don’t look at my finger. Look at the moon!”

A recent experiment in animal intelligence revealed that dogs are in some ways, smarter than chimpanzees. You can point to something (like the moon) and the dog is intelligent to look at what you are pointing to. A chimpanzee will merely look at your finger.

On this day when, as a nation, we remember the life, the work and the dream of Martin Luther King Jr., it is tempting to look at the greatness of this man. To stop there, however, I believe would be missing the point of his life. This man is important not only for who he was to our nation but also for what he pointed to. I believe the essence of what he pointed to was the truth that we are all the same and worthy of love, dignity and respect. Every individual matters. Every individual can make a difference in our world.

The leader in me also goes beyond what he was pointing to; and considers the act of pointing itself. Here is the full richness of the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  The courage of a leader to courageously stand up and say what he sees. Not only could this man see the barbed wire of racism in this nation, he could see beyond the barbed wire to a better world, a better nation, and a better person in each of us.

Friedman, in his Introduction talks about the need for leaders to get up in front of those they lead and give an “I have a dream” speech.  Giving voice to a vision – that’s the challenge before us as leaders. That’s looking beyond ourselves to the vision of what could be ahead. What’s your dream as a leader? And to whom do you need to tell it?

Steve

Bringing the Baggage

A few days ago I participated in a presentation preparation meeting.  Some of us had been assigned to represent organizations who, collectively, work to support and advance environmental issues in the area where we all live, work and play.  Together, we worked up an agenda for a meeting next month, where we will attempt to influence legislators (I know, I know…dream on) with our concerns.  Each of us will make a presentation to our captive audience.  Our presentation preparation meeting was designed to get on similar pages and iron out our messages.

The inevitable moment arrived in the meeting.  Who among us should deliver the all important “summary”?  Someone with deep collective knowledge (not me!), long connection to issues (not me!) and a grasp of the necessary technical language (still not me!) had to assume the wrap up role.  Many of us looked at the single most qualified among us.  You know the feeling.  Everyone looks someone’s way when it’s time for a volunteer.  The target of the stares gets that look that says, “uh oh”. 

“I can’t do that part of the presentation, I have too much baggage”, responded the target. 

This person is deeply invested in the issues.  She qualifies as “resident expert”. She passionately expresses bright and thoughtful insights into problems and their potential solutions.  But she often looks harried, frazzled and sort of burned out.  She carries a fair amount of anger about the seeming impossibilities of making serious progress against the threats she sees.  Friedman would say she is on an unending treadmill of trying harder.

The baggage she says she has is, actually, her own anxiety.  It is a suitcase full of fear. It is well nurtured and has taken up permanent residence in her soul.  The loss this anxiety creates is obvious in the meeting’s moment.

Remember your own moments of owning the baggage.  Our energy management model offers a way to disown baggage, leave it behind and travel lighter.

Might be a good Christmas focus and a great New Year resolution.

All best wishes for the holiday season.

Howard

Emotional Regression

I’ve been test driving the idea of observable emotional regression in organizations.  I am doing this by asking leaders whether they see any signs of it around them.  My intent is to invite clarity into the possibility that leaders might see regression not only around them, but in themselves as well.

Friedman’s thinking on emotional regression suggests it is the opposite of what explorers in earlier centuries possessed when they undertook to discover what was to them the unknown world. 

The explorers demonstrated these characteristics:

• Persistence: They refused to give up.
• A capacity to get outside the emotional climate of the day: The ignored skepticism, doubt and hostility.    
• A willingness to be exposed and vulnerable:  At least they were willing to be wrong.  At most they were willing to die.
• Stamina:  Imagine the sacrifice of safety, sleep, health and other comforts. 
• Headstrong:  Columbus was willing and ready to leave a ship behind mid voyage when its crew couldn’t get its act together.  Once the emotionally regressed crew understood this, they got it together. 

The explorers for all their documented faults were, at least, emotionally mature.

The absence of these characteristics among leaders and their followers invites the presence of emotionally regressive characteristics.

• Reactivity: Highly charged emotional reactions to normal moments of stress and challenge.
• Herding: The gathering of groups around the least mature.
• Blame displacement: Child like refusal to accept responsibility.
• Quick fix mentality: Paralysis which blocks mature mental processes, and the investment it requires, in carefully and calmly seeking solutions.

My queries of leaders about the presence or absence of these characteristics are sometimes met with looks of startled insight.  They see signs and examples of emotionally regressive tendencies in their teams.  The more enlightened of these leaders see these tendencies in themselves.

25 years ago I started working for a company whose culture fostered the idea that we employees were pioneers in the tradition of prairie settlers who, a century earlier, lived through brutal winters in sod houses. At great sacrifice,  they built a remarkably successful agriculture model.  We were called to follow their example and be explorers in a nascent world of software which would change people’s lives.  Our failures and setbacks along the way were born of the emotionally regressive characteristics above.  Our successes came when we were emotionally mature, when we were explorers and adventures.

Howard

At a Distance

Friedman writes, “When creative, imaginative, and self-starting members of any organization are being sabotaged rather than supported, the poorly differentiated person ‘at the top’ does not have to be in direct contact with the person being undercut. In fact, neither even has to know that the other exists”.

As Northwestern University’s David Gal and Derek Rucker recently documented in a paper titled “When in Doubt, Shout!,” many Americans respond to convention-challenging facts not by reevaluating their worldview. Shaken by an assault on their assumptions, many become more adamant in defense of wrongheaded ideas.  The assaults Gal and Rucker refer to don’t have to be delivered by someone we know; someone we work with; someone who works at a headquarters building (and makes a decision which influences our work-life); or someone who lives next door; or someone we live with.

“The government makes decisions” – real or imagined – understood or misconstrued – and many react as if their personal lives will be deeply and forever altered.  Once that meme is accepted, it is a small step to the belief that life itself is threatened.  It’s a short step more to the response that resistance is required.  These are short brief steps, fueled by reinforcing fear.   Fear fuel is not compatible with the rational mind-engine.

It is good that we identify not only the step up transformers who are nearby, but those we don’t see directly – who are at a distance – and invite us into anxiousness and fear. 

 Howard

Peace Monger

I was about to meet a potential new client for the first time the other day.  Our meeting was to be a needs analysis to include  the business owner and two of his leaders.  I had an inkling of what the (now) client would be looking for.  The need for succession planning would be on his list. 

 As I talked with partner Steve about the upcoming visit, he said, “Don’t work with any peace mongers!” 

His advice was brilliant.  Consultants, leaders and anyone else, would do well to carefully choose which individuals and groups are worth their time and which are not.  Among those who are not, are leaders who have carefully crafted, polished and nurture their roles as conflict managers.

Good to work with conflict provocateurs.  Better to become one yourself.

Think about your family.  Remember the one person who attempted to neutralize conflict which arose between family members?   His or her mission was “peace at any price”.  Accordingly, this peace monger would engineer all manner of mediated conflict reduction so that things could return to what was considered “normal”. 

But, normal was and is suppressed and submerged conflict which is surfaced only as crisis. It is the worst time to learn to become more mature about how one manages the emotional hijacking which derails and blocks maturity.

Emotional triangles  http://healingleaders.com/Documents/Emotional%20Triangles%20and%20Leverage%20for%20Change.pdf show how moving into others’ conflicts – and taking responsibility for solving others’ issues – is peace mongering.  Maintaining the outside position – forcing others in conflict to take responsibility for their own emotional maturity – is a provocative undertaking.   It makes the system healthier.

The Word

It’s a word we’re not hearing enough of.  We ought to be speaking it more.  Maturity.  I am in occassional conversations with leaders who always seem to have a current story about someone in their organization who is demonstrating one of Freidman’s characteristic of family and organizational anxiety.  Remember, chronic anxiety is symptomatic of the individual’s inability to mature his or her own emotional processes.  One story I heard involved an executive who rushed to the rescue of a subordinate who faced some challenging feedback from colleagues about results from her efforts. The feedback was delivered in a professional, thoughtful and focused way.  It was positioned as constructive and delivered as important to support the organization’s mission and values.  But, the receiver prematurely left the meeting distressed.  The executive returned to the feedback group and criticized it for delivering the feedback.  There was no evidence the executive used her status with her subordinate to suggest she learn to manage feedback with less reactivity.  (The two characteristics at play here are blame displacement and reactivity.)  Result; maturation not achieved.

Leaders will do better when and as they pay attention to levels of maturity in the systems they occupy and influence.  They must begin with themselves, first.  In the story above, a leader reacted to reactivity.  Systems aren’t static.  They either mature or devolve.      

Howard