For Better

Staying optimistic, looking on the bright side, holding on to hope: these are all wonderful mindsets, and I expect you have experienced, as have I, how elusive they are to hold on to in trying times. Some days, it seems as if there is more bad news than good, and it comes at us relentlessly, and from countless sources.  My friends and colleagues tell me that they have simply stopped looking at the news. While I don’t do that, I can understand it. Avoidance---and the genuine phenomenon of contagion---make it not an unreasonable response. Upon further reflection, I have realized that I’ve been influenced by the idea of a stop -staring-at-the-problem strategy, and am even willing to consider denial which, as a bonus, results in almost immediate gratification!  

Today, however, I stumbled on the words of Kieu Vuong, PhD, who said: “There is no problem that can’t get worse.”  My immediate reaction was Oh no! Heaping a negative prediction on a negative present! But the longer I pondered, the more I realized I had the sock inside out.

Vuong (a former UX leader at Google and Airbnb) has pointed out a significant hole in the don’t-watch-the-news logic. Maybe a focus on the problematic present’s potential to get even worse, can be the prompt for action that might change the course of history. In fact, recognizing problems---identifying, naming and keeping them in the forefront of one’s thinking---is not focusing on the negative. It is a way of providing an impetus for the idea of working on the present. This concept really spun my head around! My denial thinking went like this: Problems require work to solve them->Work is something we all seem to have too much of already->It is demoralizing to focus on how much of a mountain of work is out there to be done->Might I try to stay positive by NOT contemplating how much problem solving there is to do? 

In other words: Does buffering oneself against a sense of being buried by the enormity of the problems in the world today really help you?

My answer to that query is a resounding “No.” When I take my own pulse, I realize that I simply cannot put sufficient insulation around me to negate my sense that there is significant damage being done to others in the world. It isn’t a case of empathy versus sympathy. To me, it is a problem of reality versus fantasy. How can I live in reality and then choose to ignore it?

What would help? Surely the sense that I am making a positive contribution toward a value in which I believe. Staying informed and avoiding the passivity of being swept along by something I see as wrong, is not the answer. But, as I am painfully aware, my old solution of seeing my end goal and tackling it head on—the way I would have defined taking action until recently—does not appear to be a viable option. 

If you see today’s world as chaotic (an apt descriptor I feel), you must recognize that the old “pull the cord and the bell will go off” framework of cause and effect cannot be our only yardstick for success. We live in a large, complex system undergoing constant, fast-paced change. Sure, AI is coming at all of us and our organizations. Certainly for many of us it is already here. But why aren’t we all getting trained to use it? Is that a failure---or can it be seen as a coping strategy for our reality? As one executive said to me, “Of course I want my workers to be ‘AI ready.’ My board is demanding it. My stockholders are monitoring our progress against our competitors. My employees are anxious to get training to keep their skills competitive, but are simultaneously terrified that AI is going to eliminate their jobs. So, I’m being asked about it constantly. But what’s a simple response?”

The reality is that there is not one.  In cases where organizations have jumped in with two feet to stay ahead of the game, they have been frustrated to find that the game itself changes monthly—if not daily. How AI works, what it can do, how employees can leverage its capabilities and many other highly salient issues evolve at a rapid pace. The AI training planned  for 6 months hence is outdated before it is even delivered.

Where’s the answer to this dilemma? It’s a complex challenge, to be sure, and there are no simple answers. What is certain is that there are few good strategies when the benchmarks for success are as cut and dried as we are used to framing them. 

A few months ago, I heard social scientist Brian Klaas, author of Fluke: Chance, Chaos and Why EVERYTHING WE Do Matters address members of the Human Resources Leadership Foundation in metro Boston. Klaas lays out a different perspective on how to think about how our world works. He points repeatedly to actual history to support his contention that small, even chance, events can change everything. In this framework, Klaas questions what he calls “most people’s neat and tidy storybook version of reality.”  He makes a good argument for his claim that, as unsettling as it sounds, we all willfully ignore a truth that is really self-evident: but for a few small changes, our lives (and our societies) could be radically different. He brings it down to the most personal level. If, in 1988, your enlisted mother from Idaho had not gone to a dance at the USO canteen in West Berlin and fox trotted with your father who hailed from Vermont, would they ever have met? If not, you’d never have been born. Or, using a more public example of this phenomenon,  if President Kennedy had not been assassinated, what might the U.S. sequence of presidents look like today?

This mode of thinking leaves room for both an awareness of a present-day problem and the reality that an unexpected historical turn of events (the assassination of  President Kennedy) set in motion the ascension of  Lyndon Johnson to the Presidency which launched an ambitious series of  successful efforts toward advancing the civil rights agenda in our nation. Would LBJ have been elected President if he had not assumed the title by being VP to a murdered President? Given the national turmoil at that time over the ongoing war in Vietnam, it is impossible to say. What we can say, however, is that, when he did assume the presidential title he carried out the Civil Rights agenda set by JFK,  created his own complementary plan for a “Great Society” and signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect voting rights, guaranteed access to public accommodations and allowed the federal government to withhold federal funds for programs that had discriminatory practices. The following year, Johnson ensured the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which authorized the federal government to step in to safeguard the rights of African Americans to register to vote and cast their ballots. 

 Klaas’s view on living and working is that we always are at the mercy of chance, and that, in times of chaos there is even greater uncertainty.  Enormous uncertainty means that all we can know is that the future will happen, regardless of whether we engage today or not. But we also know that small choices can truly influence what happens, albeit not necessarily directly or promptly. 

Which leads me back to the question I started with: in the topsy-turvy world we currently inhabit, how do we deal with the everyday challenges and choices that are the never-ending drumbeat of our lives?

My new mantra is Change Nothing… Influence Everything. The future will happen, regardless of whether one engages today or not. Don’t frame change as an immediate all or nothing proposition. Make your best contribution today and then do the same tomorrow. All kinds of things will happen in the future: the optimal means of helping define its direction is through daily influence and ongoing activism. This is, without a doubt, for the better.

[Photo credit: Jane Moulding, who snapped a picture of Della Francesca’s Duke and Duchess of Urbino at the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, Italy.]

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                          

 

 

 

 


ADDITIONAL BLOGS THAT COULD BE OF INTEREST