Do we deliver the present or find the future? Do we drive for performance or develop people? Do we play to our strengths or shore up weaknesses? Whether running our own businesses, selling our services, or teaching our clients, paradoxes abound in everyday life. Carl Jung once observed that “only paradox comes anywhere near to comprehending the fullness of life.” And the ability to see and think in paradox is an important stage in adult development that lets us look beyond our initial assumptions, our side of an argument, or even the natural preferences of our personality.
Figure 1
To think in paradox is not the first instinct of our nervous system, which tends to lock onto its first answer, and lock out other possibilities. For example, what do you see in Figure 1? If you say “frog,” that would be correct, and not complete. If you didn’t know this was one of those trick pictures with more than one image, your mind would be quite convinced that it has seen all there is to see. But if you keep searching, you may tip your head to the side and see it instantly: horse! This agility of mind that can see and think in paradox is essential to excellence in leading, teaching, coaching, or consulting, because the “picture” of life has even more fullness than frog and horse. So how can we get better at managing paradox? And how can we apply it to excellence in training and development?
Figure 2
First, we have to understand the dynamism of paradox. It doesn’t “solve” with a static compromise or single trade-off. Rather it’s more like breathing. If I were to ask you which is right—inhale or exhale— you’d scoff at the question, knowing both are right. Indeed, the tension and oscillation between these opposing forces are exactly what bring about a higher level goal—that is, breathing. This same dynamic is true of all paradox: A greater good or higher standard of excellence is possible through a healthy tension of opposites. Lock onto one side, however, and fail to acknowledge or leverage the rightness of the other side, and trouble escalates.
Drawing on the work of Barry Johnson, we can depict this process in Figure 2. Trying to maximize only one side, we also maximally fall into the concerns of overdoing it. Now we don’t normally drive breathing to such extremes, because we know both sides are right. We know each is problematic if you lock onto it and stay there too long, and we have signals for when to shift.
These same principles apply to managing all paradoxes well, including one that’s central to excellence in training and development, and that is: Is it right to play to strengths or shore up weaknesses? If you’ve been in this field long enough, you know we’ve gone back and forth favoring one side or the other. A greater good is possible when we optimize the value of both sides and avoid the greatest downsides of either. We can work through this example using three steps that come from The Zen Leader to flip from “or” to “and” thinking. For a bit more guidance, and to practice on a real paradox you’re facing, you can download a free paradox mapping guide.
Figure 3
1. See 2: Identify the two forces.
We’ll look at playing to one’s strengths versus addressing weaknesses, labeling the two forces on either end of a horizontal line as in Figure 3.
2. Map 4: Identify what’s right about each force and what concerns will develop by overdoing either side.
First we stand on the side of “playing to strengths” and consider two to three things that are good about this: for example, authenticity, easier to excel, feels natural. We’ll then ask what happens if you stay here too long and write down a few concerns, as in the lower left-hand quadrant of Figure 3. To avoid these issues, we naturally would move to the other side and address weaknesses. Moving to the upper right quadrant, we answer what’s good about addressing weaknesses. And finally, we fill in the lower right box by answering, what happens if we over-do fault-fixing. Now we have a fuller picture of the value and concerns of both sides.
3. Manage the Figure-8: Consider what greater good could be achieved through the optimal mix of both forces, and then look for progress toward that goal by shifting from one side to the other, identifying signals for when to shift.
An example of an overarching goal we use in our work with the FEBI energy patterns (which, if you’ve been following this blog, you’ve been reading about in the five-part series by Anthony Attan) is to know and win on your strengths and develop your weakest pattern enough to stay out of trouble. Just as the physiological signals around breathing tell us when to shift from inhale to exhale and back again, we can identify shift signals based on the concerns we want to minimize. For the whole dynamic cycle to work well, it’s vital to have signals on both sides. For example, we could use as a shift signal that we’re overdoing strengths when we hear the same feedback twice around a problematic behavior. On the other side, we could use low energy or depleted confidence as a sign that we need to shift back and remember our strengths.
This is but one of many paradoxes that raise the bar in training and development. Is it right to learn on the job or in programs? In designing learning, is it better to emphasize action or reflection? Do we select leaders based on their wins or how they handle losses? Once we get an eye for paradox, we find it everywhere in our professional and personal lives.
The good news is that the agility we build in managing “and” raises our suspicion of one-sided views and opens the door to broader possibility. Add Zen training (or equivalent extraordinary conditions that let us see around the edges of ego) and the condition of oneness becomes our own genuine experience, even as we live a human life. Who we are is revealed in its paradoxical entirety: the power of the universe manifest through our own hands and feet. The Zen leader in us is revealed in the all-embracing “and.”
