Book Notes

Solving Tough Problems: An open way of talking, listening and creating new realities
- Adam Kahane

- 3 types of complexity:

1. Dynamic – Low: If cause and effect are close together in space and time. High: If cause and effect are far apart in space and time i.e. ‘messes.’ The latter can only be understood systematically, taking account of the interrelationships amond the pieces and the functioning of the system as a whole. For the former, piecemeal (even authoritarian) approaches are fine.

2. Generative – Low: Familiar and predictable future. High: Unfamiliar and unpredictable future. For the latter, solutions cannot be calculated in advance. They have to be worked out as it unfolds. For the former, solutions and rules from the past will work fine.

3. Social – Low: People involved have common assumptions, values, rationales and objectives. High: People involved look at things very differently. Highly socially complex problems cannot be solved by authorities ‘from on high – the people must be involved in creating and implementing the solution.

- Kahane outlines a series of facilitation stories from most closed/least generative to most open/most generative dialogue and outlines their characteristics and lessons along the way.

1. “Being Stuck” – Sides less (or not) willing to talk to each other, and then possibly only through intermediaries or in private. Nobody listens to each other because the have already made up their minds. “[Talking] might be useful [in this situation], but ‘I don’t think it would be possible. I’m not sure that they would be willing to talk with us, and we’re not really ready to talk with them.’” Whether or not the actors are on speaking terms, they are not on listening terms. People only pretend to listen, but are meanwhile only rehearsing their rebuttals. There are two ways to unstick this problem: 1) one side to act unilaterally – to try imposing a solution by force or violence, 2) the actors start to talk and listen in order to find a way forward.

2. “Dictating” – In a dictatorship, the dictator does not listen and the people are afraid to talk. This results in pessimism, hesitation to speak up and stand up, lack of self-confidence and self-management, and painfully slow innovation. This is seen in many authoritarian organizations. The root of not listening is knowing: If you already know the truth, why would you need to listen to anyone else? Out of either politeness or guile, people pretend to listen. And then when they do not hear each other, they repeat themselves more forcefully. The authoritarian pattern of talking is that bosses and experts talk down – dictating and telling – and everyone else talks cautiously. This is the close way. To solve complex problems, we have to find a more open way.

3. “Talking Politely” – Being concerned about hurting another’s feelings (or about being embarrassed yourself), and therefore not speaking openly, is another kind of hesitancy. Some (simple issues) can be dealt with adequately through cautious, dispassionate, amiable talking and listening, but this kind of talking can also be completely inadequate, leaving a dangerous reality unaddressed and un altered. As long as the status quo is working, we can afford to remain polite. But when we see that the status quo is no loner working, we must speak up.

4. “Speaking Up” – The first step to an open dialogue is for the actors in the system to speak up. People hesitate for a variety of reasons: from the extraordinary fear of being jailed or killed to the mundane of being considered impolite or stupid. Creating a safe space for people to speak what is on their minds can be critical. Also, being aware of what you are thinking, feeling, sensing or wanting at that very moment is necessary i.e. not off in your story about what is going on ‘here and now.’ Victims are often the most able to speak up and make courageous statements because they have nothing more to loose.

5. “Only Talking” – Just talking about a problem is not enough. People can talk and talk and talk, and nothing can happen. Even if all main points of view are represented, if people do not listen to each other then (i.e. let themselves be changed), then nothing happens. Enormous potential can go unrealized.

6. “Openness” – If talking openly means being willing to expose to others what is inside of us, then listening openly means being willing to expose ourselves to something new from others. Opening up to other people and to what is goin on in the system of which we are part is not always a comfortable or comforting experience, but it can be very enlightening. To solve complex problems, we have to immerse ourselves in and open ups to its full complexity. Dynamic complexity requires us to talk not just with experts close to us, but also with people on the periphery. Generative complexity requires that we talk no only about options that worked in the past, but also about ones that are emerging now. We must stretch beyond our comfort zone. ‘If we listen in a normal closed way, for what is right and what is wrong, then we wont be able to hear what is possible: what might be but is not yet. We won’t be able to create anything new.’

7. “Reflectiveness” – Listening is more than reloading old tapes. It is being receptive to new ideas – being open to be influenced and changed. It requires being separate from your ideas; not attached. (Your ideas are not ‘you.’) You have to be able to notice and question your own thinking. When teams listen reflexively, they are not only open to new ideas about the problem “out there,’ but also to new ideas about themselves. It is not only necessary to hear the chorus of voices, but we must also hear the contribution of our own voice. We must recognize ourselves as actors who influence the outcome. To change the systems that we are a part of, we must also see and change ourselves.

8. “Empathy” – The traditional Zulu greeting of ‘Sawu bona’ translates to ‘I see you’: we cannot interact properly with other unless we see them as fellow humans. The ability to listen with total presence is key, so that the boundary between two people disappears. When a person feels fully heard, they often become clearer about their own thought and feelings, and more centered and purposeful. We cannot develop creative solutions to complex human problems unless we can see, hear, open up to and include the humanity of all the stake holders and of ourselves. We have to listen to people in a way that encourages them to realize their own potential and the potential in their situation.

Note on Otto Sharmers’ four kinds of listening:

1. Downloading – Listening from within our own story.
2. Debating – Listening to ourselves and others from the outside, objectively, like a judge.
3. Reflective Dialogue – Listening to ourselves reflectively and others empathetically, i.e. from the inside.
4. Generative Dialogue – Listening not only to ourselves and others, but also to the whole system.

Kahane then goes into some deeper levels of this type of work:

1. ‘Solving tough problems’ doesn’t really apply to this work because it implies a problem ‘out there’ that we cans react to and fix. There is a ‘problem situation’ of which each of us is part. This way of thinking has serious consequences because if we admit that we are co-creating the way things are, that also makes us co-responsible. How could we ever make scenarios about the possible futures with out talking into account out impact on how the future will unfold? Also, we can’t reason nor rationalize through everything – it is too complex. We have to sense it. This requires us to access a deeper, non-rational, more ancient way of knowing.

2. Open listening and open taking go hand in hand like the tai chi bow: a soft right fist cupped in an open left palm. The right had represents creativity and open talking. The fist is not clenched tightly; you should be able to pull a pencil through it. It represents talking with, not talking at. The left hand represents receptivity and open listening.

3. From a Mayan sacred text: “ We did not put our ideas together. We put our purposes together. And we agreed, and then we decided.”

4. This work has parallels to the natural healing capabilities of the body: a wound wants to heal and be whole again. The two sides of a wound will reach for each other until they have met and are mended. Dialogues are like that: the participants and the human systems that they are part of want to be whole. A faciltator’s job is simply to create a clean, safe space. The healing will occur on it’s own.

Kahane concludes with 10 suggestions to help people get started in unlocking even the most stuck problems:

1. Pay attention to your state of being and to how you are talking and listening. Notice you own assumptions, reactions, contradictions, anxieties, prejudices and projections.

2. Speak up. Notice and say what you are thinking, feeling and wanting.

3. Remember that you do not know the truth about anything. When you think that you are absolutely certain about the way things are, add “in my opinion” to your sentence. Don’t take yourself too seriously.

4. Engage with and listen to others who have a stake in the system. Seek out people who have different, even opposing, perspectives from yours. Stretch beyond your comfort zone.

5. Reflect on your own role in they system. Examine how what you are doing or not doing is contributing to thins being the way they are.

6. Listen with empathy. Look at the system through the eyes of the other. Imagine yourself in the shoes of the other.

7. Listem to what is being said not just by yourself and others but through all of you. Listen to what is emerging in the system as a whole. Listen with your heart. Speak from you hear.

8. Stop talking. Camp out beside the questions and let answers come to you.

9. Relax and be fully present. Open up your mind and heart and will. Open yourself up to being touched and transformed.

10. Try out these suggestions and notice what happens. Sense what shifts in your relationships with others, with yourself, and with the world. Keep on practicing.