Managing Dilemmas By Geoff Ball and Jerry Talley, Edgewise Consulting Managing Dilemmas focuses on on-going approaches that maximize the benefits of both sides of a dilemma while minimizing the drawbacks of pursuing either side alone. “A visionary company doesn’t seek to balance between short-term and long-term. It seeks to do very well in the short term and very well in the long term… it doesn’t simply balance between a tightly held core ideology and stimulating vigorous change and movement; it does both to an extreme….Rare? Yes. Difficult? Absolutely. But as F. Scott Fitzgerald pointed out, ‘The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.,’ This is exactly what the visionary companies are able to do.” --Built to Last, James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras. A dilemma is a pair of apparently contradictory goals both of which are valuable to the organization. These goals are in tension – moving one goal ‘up’ tends to move the other goal ‘down.’ Dilemmas and Conflicts Poorly managed dilemmas lead to conflicts. These conflicts are familiar to most executives and managers. Audiences respond to their familiarity and acknowledge the conflict that it causes in their organizations. When poorly managed dilemmas sound like this: CEO: How do I take on more staff costs when our biggest sale is about to collapse on us? SALES: (To Eng) You know, if you stopped adding features that our customers don't want, maybe you could get the configuration right in time? Did you ever think of that? ENG: Those "extraneous features" are our future. You just sell single installations. We have to design a next generation product. And that's how we're going to get tomorrow's customers. Not to mention tomorrow's engineers. SALES: (To Eng) I just wish you'd pay a little more attention to today's customers. They're the ones paying our salaries. CEO: Well, neither one of you are going to be drawing a salary if we don't sort this out. I'm tired of having these conversations with you two guys. I'm going to call Bob back and see if I can buy you two clowns some time. And I want this resolved by the 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 1 end of the week. We believe that some 25-50% of all organizational conflict is caused by unacknowledged and unmanaged dilemmas. In this role play we hear blaming, whining, finger pointing, and threats – but no positive acknowledgement of the ways these goals are connected together – even when the connections are pointed out by the participants themselves. Unmanaged dilemmas tend to fuel interpersonal conflicts and heighten interdepartmental friction. People caught up in dilemmas are likely to pull at each other, even yell at each other, without being aware that they are caught on the horns of a dilemma. They feel that some other group in the organization routinely undermines their best efforts. Yet, their own good efforts often lead to someone else's setback and pain. People often experience dilemmas as a forced choice – they must choose one goal or the other, as if they are polar opposites. Yet, we believe that maximum organizational performance is created when dilemmas are considered a single focus, rather than separate goals. Since both sides of a dilemma are valuable and necessary, we don’t want to sacrifice one for the other. (What company can continuously avoid longer-term investments to secure short-term profits? Or visa-versa?). This thought is shown in the graphic to the right. When the situation is characterized along a line, we think in polarities and opposites. When we bend the line, we see the possibility of pursuing both goals by managing the dilemma. Managing Dilemmas for Competitive Advantage Organizational dilemmas are easy to find; yet, successful management of these dilemmas is rare. Exceptional management of dilemmas leads to significant competitive advantage and to reduction of unproductive organizational conflict. The cost of poorly managed dilemmas can be high. For example: Time spent arguing with other departments to no useful end. Reduced productivity from lowered morale Workers feeling unappreciated 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 2 Departments take unilateral action that leads to confusion and rework and resentment Appear disorganized to the customers Lost sales and lost referrals And there is a prize if we do manage dilemmas well: Synergy of efforts between departments Leapfrog the competition with breakthrough ideas and products High customer satisfaction for high quality work done on time Here are major examples of successful dilemmas thinking. Consider the dilemma: [Lowered cost /\ Higher quality]* in the context of health care: Managing the costs of health care has been problematic, political and frustrating to all who have attempted it. Yet, in what appears to be a breakthrough – and what seems to us an example of dilemmas thinking - Merrill Lynch has increased the quality of health care and lowered costs over the last five years. The Wall Street Journal article “Doctor Yes: How is Merrill Lynch limiting health costs by expanding benefits,” May 23, 2000, reported that, “Adjusted for inflation, its health costs have declined even while benefits have expanded…. Merrill says it saved money by focusing on the quality of care and early detection.” The full article is fascinating. Merrill Lynch has done the following: 1. Made a commitment to quality care 2. Allowed doctors to determine treatment 3. Focused on early detection, and 4. Applied risk management strategies and sophisticated tracking software to health care It appears to be working. ____________ *Footnote: The symbol ‘/\’ is our way of indicating that both sides (goals) of a dilemma are equally valuable and essential for our organizations to succeed. It is also the logical symbol for the conjunction of sets, which reflects our belief that the only satisfying solution is to find a way to do both, despite the apparent conflict.. – End Footnote _____________ Consider the dilemma: [Low cost /\ high employee satisfaction] in the context of transportation. At a time when all airlines were offering pretty much the same type of service Southwest Airlines created a different business plan. They focused on customers 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 3 willing to accept less in areas not that important to those customers – no meal service, no pre-assigned seating,. They limited other complexities by using only 737’s airplanes; by going to second tier airports; and by exercising great care in selecting, training and indoctrinating their employees in the way Southwest works. They have been the most consistent positive financial performer in the airline business, with extremely good on-time records and employees that exhibit initiative and the extra effort needed to keep costs low and customer satisfaction high. While we doubt that they explicitly used dilemmas thinking, we do believe that implicitly they followed its precepts. Dilemmas thinking allows us to focus on this struggle. People learn that the conflict is inherent in the goals of the organization, not between the people. We seek to shift conflict into mutually beneficial dialog and innovative high performance. Fletcher and Olwyler, Paradoxical Thinking, point out that with a paradoxical (dilemmas) framework* the conversations between coworkers become much more open, more productive, and that hidden issues are talked about productively with minimal blame and maximum insight into ways to manage the dilemmas that confront every business. We face the dilemma together rather than confronting each other as persons. This process of thinking together enriches everyone’s understandings of the linkages between actions across the dilemma.1 Charles Handy, in The Age of Pardox, argues, “We have no chance of managing the paradoxes (dilemmas) if we are not prepared to give up something, if we are not willing to bet on the future, and if we cannot find it in ourselves to take a risk on people. … Most of the dilemmas that we face in this time of confusion are not the straightforward ones of choosing between right and wrong, where compromise would , indeed, be weakness, but the much more complicated dilemmas of right and right. …We want to be good corporate citizens and return a decent profit; we want to trust our subordinates but we need to know what they are doing.” Outcomes and their supports Managing dilemmas seeks to achieve two outcomes: 1. Limiting the damage: This negotiated set of limits, indicators and parameters constrain the immediate damage caused by excess zeal in pursuing one goal at the cost of the other goal and by narrow thinking. 2. Managing towards maximal resolutions for the dilemma: We seek specific actions and behaviors that enable high performance on BOTH sides of the Three words are often used relatively interchangeably – paradox, dilemmas and polarities. We have somewhat arbitrarily chosen the word dilemma. 1 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 4 dilemma. Since that requires continuing oversight, we focus on 'managing' the dilemma rather than 'solving' it. Work on dilemmas must be supported by: 3. Building strong working relationships: These enable people tasked with different sides of the dilemma to explore jointly both sides of the dilemma for their mutual benefit. And effective dilemmas management strengthens working relationships. 4. Creating Shared Mental Maps and Representations: These enable us to see dilemmas clearly, think about dilemmas powerfullly and manage them through time. The fact that they are shared greatly facilitates communication. Knowing generic classes of dilemmas enables us to catalogue strategies for consideration in a specific situation. Dilemmas thinking requires the following mindsets: Avoiding excesses; we agree not undermine each other. Knowing that how we think is as important as the specifics we consider. Seeking to truly understand the experience of those "on the other side.” Believing that dilemmas thinking can lead to superior performance Organizational Helps and Hinders We are helped or hindered in managing dilemmas by interpersonal, structural and cultural characteristics of our organizations. The following characteristics hinder managing dilemmas: HINDERS How we deal with Interpersonal attitudes Structural Cultural CONFLICT Push it upstairs Subordinates are NOT empowered to address cross boundary issues Conflict is handled, if at all, at higher levels BOUNDARIES “Keep off my turf” Strict organizational boundaries. A unit can take action within its boundaries without consulting or even informing others. Controlled information GOALS I pay attention to MY goals Management by objectives Narrow focus on what I / my unit is responsible for 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 5 REWARDS Do what I need to to get my rewards Incentives focus on individual performance ROLES & DUTIES My way of the highway Rules and duties define the totality of the work There is one right way. Keeping order and maintaining discipline is paramount These characteristics severely limit the ability of the organization to manage dilemmas that transcend organizational boundaries. Yet, they tend to be what we do ‘naturally’ since they have been successfully used in traditional organizations and are often taught as the cornerstones of good management. Conscious effort will be needed to revisit and rethink these precepts. The following characteristics help in managing dilemmas: HELPS How we deal with Interpersonal attitudes Structural Cultural CONFLICT We can work it out between us at this level Cross boundary disputes are addressed by those involved, Everyone is expected to work through interdepartmental conflicts. BOUNDARIES Welcome. We appreciate your interest Permeable organizational boundaries. Shared information where that is helpful. Conversations across boundaries; GOALS Tu goals es mi goals. I keep in mind the impacts of my actions on other’s goals. Individual, team and process goals Goals include mine up to the organizational goals REWARDS I know that working with others will be rewarded Formal incentives support working together. We truly are a team and individual performers both ROLES & DUTIES Open to seeing others perspectives I have a balance of work defined by roles and duties and space where I use my judgment. 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 6 While recent books have suggested the importance of developing these helpful conditions, the more common conditions are those in the hinders table. Business executives often recognize that they have dilemmas, though they may not name them. However, too often the recognition leads to “Oh well, that’s just business.” Or “You just have to choose what you are going to make your priority.” While some companies do manage dilemmas well, many do not. What we are proposing is more conscious thought on managing dilemmas. One excellent resource is Barry Johnson’s work on ‘polarities’. See his website, http://www.polaritymanagement.com/ One tool he developed about 1975 uses a Polarity Table to surface the ‘racetrack’ dynamics of dilemmas, and then to press for approaches that move toward both of the goals contained within the dilemma. He published a highly rated book Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable Problems, 1997. One reader stated, “Johnson provides us with a framework to understand the nature of dilemmas. Easy to read, the simplicity of Polarity Management belies its explanatory power in handling paradox and in so doing transforms our view of dealing with difficulties. This book is an important and satisfying read that does provide the reader with a genuinely new paradigm in thinking rare in these days of over-hyped publications.” And another, “Johnson shares great truths needed today. I cannot imagine how this book has remained the best-kept secret in management and systems thinking.” In what follows we provide responses to that question first in terms of five phases and secondly in terms of six approaches & eight tools. Five Phases for Managing Dilemmas Phase Outcome 1. Assess the situation from a dilemmas perspective Determination that there is a dilemma to be managed 2. Agree to share responsibility for this dilemma Agreement by key parties to partner in managing the dilemma 3. Understand the dilemma Deep understanding of the dynamics and the connections of the dilemma 4. Find approaches to manage the dilemma Specific actions to take and commitment to take them 5. Create and monitor dilemma boundary indicators Indicators and monitoring system that will show when minimums are approached or crossed 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 7 Approaches to managing dilemmas 1. Search Generic Dilemmas Database for possible solutions About 15 generic types of dilemmas are sufficient to categorize most of the specific dilemmas we have found. We are currently searching out strategies for managing specific dilemmas within each of these classes. By reviewing this database team members may find suggestions for specific approaches that will work for them. 2. Create incentives and structures that motivate and enable management of the dilemma by participants Instead of creating a planning team to develop strategies, create an action team with incentives aligned with managing the dilemma. For example, both sales and engineering are both responsible for both goals. Remove as many of the ‘hinders’ as possible and create the ‘helps.’ Encourage the team to invent strategies as they work. 3. Challenge the mind through oxymorons and progressive improvement Make use of the oxymoron approach in Paradoxical Thinking by Fletcher and Olwyler. Make use of the tools mentioned below in support of the dilemmas management team. 4. Map the connections between the sides of the dilemma; relax these constraints; transcend boundaries and make boundaries permeable Use a variety of the tools below to find and display the connections between the goals. For example: 1. List activities to maximize each goal WITHOUT regard for the other goal. Work together to see what could be done to really ‘go for the gold.’ Do this for each of the goals independent of constraints. This exercise makes it easier to see connections and constraints. 2. Ask participants specifically where they feel the pain in the other goal when the first goal is maximized. 3. Map the role play dialog as it reveals connections. 4. Seek ways to get around or modify the connections to enable maximization of both goals. 5. Identify actions that can be independently taken in the service of one side without negatively impacting the other side of the dilemma. 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 8 6. Creativity exercises focused on maximizing both goals’ maximums Identify maximal resolutions for both goals. Search directly for these resolutions. Brainstorm strategies for each and then brainstorm modifications so that the resolution works for both goals. (Use the rich variety of creativity-enhancing tools that are known.) 7. Duality meditations Eastern traditions consistently focus on the duality of things – the most common symbol of this being that of yin and yang. Approaches and mindsets from those traditions can be used to enable the searcher to hold both sides of the dilemma in their mind simultaneously and then let the mind find resolutions intuitively. Tools that support Managing Dilemmas Group process tools: Brainstorming, countering, NLP “Parts Party”, “Go for the Gold”, work through the TWWB’s - the “That Won’t Work Becauses ..; Graphics: graphic wall charts, images, pictures, video Maps & Representations: Linkage charts, Fletcher’s pendulum, flow charts, linkage plots, loop diagrams, Johnson’s Polarity Table mentioned above, process maps with organizational boundaries drawn in, Activities: Model construction, role plays with role reversals, Word plays:, Oxymorons, metaphors & analogies, ‘ing’ words, splitting multidefinitional abstract words, jokes & humor, Histories & Lessons Learned: Generic Dilemma Database, Pilot Projects, Broad strategies: Getting to Yes & Interest based Bargaining; Risk management; Fuzzy Logic; Triad-based Systems, Process Improvement & Re-engineering. Principles We believe in the following key principles for managing a dilemma: 1. Make dilemmas visible and felt; name them. 2. Maintain a dilemmas mindset that leads to sharing and visibility across permeable boundaries 3. Build powerfully collaborative working relationships 4. Construct reward systems and organizational structures that support managing the dilemmas 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 9 5. Avoid unconscious habits that make things worse – escalation of conflict, power plays rather than working dilemmas through, oscillation of emphasis between the two goals 6. Learn from past cases and situations; by generic naming of types of dilemmas it becomes possible to aggregate experience more easily. 7. Avoid turning everything into a dilemma – useful as it is, dilemmas thinking can be used to avoid making necessary hard choices. 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 10 Example In the following example we continue the travails of Bob Reynolds, CEO, his VP of Sales (Joe) and VP of Engineering (Mike) introduced in the element, Dilemmas in our Goals. Let’s assume for this example that Joe and Mike – instead of following their usual pattern of complaining to their staffs and anyone else who would listen about each other – wound up right after Bob’s meeting having lunch with Susan, their director of HR. Susan, sensing the tension between them, began to explore what had happened. This time Joe and Mike began to complain about Bob and the untenable situation they were in. Fortunately, Susan had just been to a seminar on Dilemmas Thinking. After listening in some detail to each of them in turn, she described the Dilemmas Thinking approach to managing this kind of situation. As a consequence of this conversation Joe and Mike embarked on an effort to apply Dilemmas Thinking to their situation. In order to keep this element to a reasonable length we will highlight a few examples of the work that they did. 1. Assess the situation from a dilemmas perspective They identified specific situations in which their own goals were in tension; where efforts by one led to pain for the other. They selected one specific situation that seemed rich enough in detail to provide a lot of insight into their dilemma. They described the two primary ‘competing’ goals as: 1. We sell the product that brings in revenue that keeps the company going (Sales) 2. We have a quality product that can be delivered on time and in working condition that continues to sell. (Engineering) 2. Agree to share responsibility for this dilemma They answered the two key questions affirmatively to ensure they were dealing with a dilemma: 1. Both goals are essential to company success. 2. The two goals interact in ways that moving toward one goal without considering the other makes moving toward that other goal more difficult. And they agreed, for the first time, that they actually could help each other if they worked together effectively. They would strive for mutual respect, open communication and trust building across boundaries. Joe and Mike agreed that this would be achievable over time. There was currently too much bad blood based on past history to simply announce that the two departments were partners and have it believed by anyone. So they strategized a series of small confidence building steps – kind of like they were two warring nations trying to build a peaceful relationship. 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 11 One such step was their agreement to publicly agree with Bob that they both needed to find a way to both meet the market needs and to have products that worked as sold and on time. They also agreed with each other on the two essential outcomes of Dilemma Thinking: 1. Maximal resolutions for both groups 2. Limited damage to the goals of one unit from the actions of another unit; neither group below its minimums 3. Understand the dilemma By using the Fletcher oxymoron process, they agreed on a powerful label for the dilemma that would drive home the interconnections. In Paradoxical Thinking, Jerry Fletcher lays out in considerable detail the sequence of questions and conceptual foundation for the use of oxymorons – word combinations that drive the mind to struggle with the inherent tension. In this case Joe and Mike chose as their high performance oxymoron, ‘Responsive products.’ Their nightmare oxymoron was, ‘Unsaleable engineering marvels.’ Joe and Mike worked with their staffs to understand the connections between the goals. One department would suggest and action and the other department would articulate where the pain was felt. In this way they were able to make the connections between the goals explicit. For example, “giving in to clients on time of delivery” linked to “training is inadequate because the system isn’t operating when it is supposed to be.” They then sought ways to relax the constraints, and ease the tension that the connections created. 4. Find approaches to manage the dilemma Out of this they came up with a number of action items that could be implemented to manage the dilemma more effectively. These included: Shifting the incentive system so that they both shared in the success of both departments and both suffered when the other suffered. Engineering worked closely with sales in the meeting with clients. Using modern teleconferencing equipment that could be brought into the client’s office they were able to get the engineering expertise into the conversation, and it helped the engineer understand what the sales engineer went through -- and all with little additional engineering time required. Product launches where staged with the most critical unique functionality coming early in the installation and less critical unique functionality spread out in time, often over six months. 5. Create and monitor dilemma boundary indicators 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 12 As Joe and Mike experienced success in their collaboration they grew more and more comfortable with the notion of establishing indicators that signaled when either department’s goals (now really joint goals) were in the yellow or approaching the red zone. The indicators for Sales were: Red: Percent of sales closed as a percent of serious clients falls below x percent Strong negative perception of the company among potential clients. Yellow: Percent of clients complaining The indicators for Engineering were: Red Percent of contracts not fulfilled on time. Percent of engineering time focussed on new product development falls below y percent Yellow Percent of engineering time spent trouble shooting the installation in order to get it up and running. FINAL WORDS While Joe and Mike are fictional, the situation portrayed is very common. Dilemmas thinking and management can be a real service to an organization and to the people working in them. 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 13 Exercise 1. Assess your situation from a dilemmas perspective Do the exercises in Dilemmas in our Goals. Create a high performance oxymoron and a nightmare oxymoron. This results in naming our dilemmas. 2. Agree to share responsibility for this dilemma Identify who would need to be involved in managing the dilemmas What would need to happen for that person or persons to agree to engage in managing this dilemma? What working relationships would need to be improved? 3. Understand the dilemma Imagine the exercise in which one sided action that leads to pain for the other side and identify two or three connections that could be relaxed to enable both goals to be addressed more effectively. 4. Find approaches to manage the dilemma Based on the connections or your increased understanding of both dilemmas invent actions that you could take to manage the dilemma. 5. Create and monitor dilemma boundary indicators Establish boundary indicators for both sides of the goal at both the yellow and the red level. What would need to happen for everyone to agree to monitor and honor these indicators.? Now sit back and review your train of thought. What new insights or new perspectives came out of dilemmas thinking. Where did you realize that you had been attempting to do something like this but couldn’t articulate it well enough to get a group of partners to do the work? 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 14 Resource Books (This list is from the list on Polarity Management Associates http://www.polaritymanagement.com/) • Collins, James and Jerry Porras. Built to Last. New York: HarperCollins, 1993 • De Wit, Bob and Ron Meyer. Strategy Synthesis. London: Thompson Learning, 1999 • Fletcher, Jerry and Kelle Olwyler. Paradoxical Thinking, How to Profit from Your Contradictions. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1997 • Hampden-Turner, Charles and Alfons Trompenaars. The Seven Cultures of Capitalism. New York: Doubleday, 1993 • Hampden-Turner, Charles and Alfons Trompenaars. Building CrossCultural Competence. Chichester: Wiley, 2000 • Hickman, Craig R. Mind of a Manager, Soul of a Leader. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1990 • Johnson, Barry. Polarity Management. Amherst: HRD Press, 1992, 1996 • Koestler, Arthur. Janus, A Summing Up. New York: Random House, 1979 • Kotter, John P. A Force for Change. New York: Macmillan, 1990 • Pascale, Richard T. Managing on the Edge. New York: Touchstone, 1990 • Quinn, Robert E. Beyond Rational Management. San Francisco: JosseyBass, 1988 533569133 2/17/16 5:38 AM Page 15