Are We Aiming to Fix or Improve?
When you are planning a meeting, does what you say you want to do translate into what you do? Consider these questions:
When you want to listen to people do you put yourself at the front of the room?
When you want a group of people to figure something out do you give them directions?
When you want to figure something out for yourself do you defer to experts around you?
Does the work you do feed your soul or your desire to distract yourself from your self?
Patterns in our beliefs
At the heart of these questions is our relationship with ourselves–and whether we believe we have the smarts and ability to do what we are called to do. The question beneath the questions: do we believe in ourselves?
“The question beneath the questions: do we believe in ourselves?”
The beliefs we hold about ourselves shape our relationship with the world around us at every scale (self, family, neighbourhood, organization, city, nation, species). If I believe I have all the answers–and no-one else out there has anything to add–then I set myself up as the expert. If I believe I am incapable of figuring things out for myself then I rely on the directions of others. I am a knower, a teller and a fixer, or someone who does not know, needs to be told, needs to be fixed.
The expert speaker / panel reinforces the “telling” pattern in a gathering
The expert(s) at the board table reinforce the “telling” pattern in a gathering
In contrast, if I believe that I don’t have all the answers, that together we will find the right questions and answers, then I contribute to the creation of habitats where we explore questions and discern right action. If I believe that I am capable, with all that I know and don’t know right now, I rely on the sense of direction with myself, and ourselves. I contribute to our ability to see together rather than defer to others and take action together. I am a learner and I help others be learners too.
The circle, and circles of circles, reinforce the “listening/discerning” pattern in a gathering
When we don’t believe that others have value to contribute to decision-making, we don’t involve them. In the same vein, if I don’t believe that I have something to contribute, I don’t get involved. The “telling” pattern reinforces this belief pattern by setting us up to listen to one or few people, to expect instructions, and land in the expert trap.
When we DO belief that others, and ourselves, have meaningful contributions to make, we organize to listen at scale, expect discernment and action, and cultivate community expertise.
Scarcity and abundance
When I look at myself and the world around me with a lens of scarcity, my attention gravitates toward what is wrong. I see that there isn’t enough, there never will be enough, and that there are things to be fixed everywhere. This leads me to a stance where I prefer control, even though I have no control, as well as a stance where I take whatever I can because it might run out. I hoard information. I hoard goods. I hoard relationships. I accumulate all that I can because somehow it will protect me from what I am most afraid of: not having. Worse yet, I believe myself to be not good enough, in need of being fixed, usually expecting others to do the fixing. This manifests within me, and in the community meetings I organize.
When I look at myself and the world around me with a lens of abundance, I see all the possibility inherently within each of us. Scarcity distracts us from being who we are because it tells us what is wrong with us. It does not answer, let alone pose the question, “who am I?”
“Where scarcity constricts, abundance invites our expansion as citizens and as a species.”
Abundance is a stance where I believe in myself and others. Further, it requires me to trust that who I am, and what I have, is more than enough. I don’t need to be “fixed”, but rather to continue my never-ending journey of learning who I am and who we are. Where scarcity constricts, abundance invites our expansion as citizens and as a species.
Pay attention to energetic patterns
It is not the case that a board meeting is only about telling and scarcity, or a circle is about listening and abundance. It is necessary to notice the energetic pattern of the gathering, to see if the physical shape and the feel of the meeting are aligned with what you want to accomplish.
A well-run board meeting can fully acknowledge diverse voices around the table. I used to sit on a board for a non-profit where each meeting started and ended with hearing everyone’s voice with a check-in and check-out question that was related to our agenda. It allowed us to weave our perspectives together and make more wise decisions. We even begun, later in the meeting, to ask each other for perspectives we knew would cast new insight on the topic. We relied on the group’s wisdom before making choices.
A group sitting in the shape of a circle can fall into the trap of recognizing the value of only one or a few voices. A community organization I used to work with found this trap when they realized that half of the group was deferring to a member who had authority over them outside the group; they weren’t participating freely, only suggesting ideas that aligned with perceived approval of the authority figure.
The energetic pattern of a gathering, both in how we design them ahead of time, or the dynamics during the gathering, need our constant attention. One of the ways I keep an eye on things is to ask: are we aiming to fix or improve? This is a question I ask myself as a host or participant, but I’ll also put this question to the hosting team I am working with, and the group assembled as well.
“One of the ways I keep an eye on things is to ask: are we aiming to fix or improve?”
Noticing if we have “fix energy” is an indicator that we are drifting into a stance where the telling, instructions, expert pattern is alive. If we are needing to fix something, then the stance is appropriate, but if our intention is to improve something, then we have the opportunity to consciously choose to shift our energy. I helped a group last year who were working on a project to enable city government and infill developers “fix” how water infrastructure was paid for to accommodate new buildings with more people needing water. They shifted their discussion from fixing the problem (have city hall pay for everything) to improving the quality of their relationships so that they could (and did!) come up with a logical cost-sharing model to prototype a new funding mechanism. They found “improve energy” in their shared belief that various technical perspectives were needed to find a solution that would both work well for all parties and serve as a model to solve other conflicts that needed attention.
The distinction between fix and improve is significant. A fix is simple, mechanical and linear, and keeps us in the present and often in the past, when we spend energy fixing things that are no longer a problem. An improvement, in contrast, is more complicated and complex and reaches for a better future.
“Where a fix can be finished like a task on a checklist, improvements are continuous.”
Where a fix can be finished like a task on a checklist, improvements are continuous. Where a fix may be a specific destination, an improvement is about moving in a direction that will become more clear over time. Where a fix assumes brokenness, and usually blame, improvement accepts that something is not good enough and compels us to make it better. It is a shift from “everything is wrong” to “let’s find a way to make this better.”
The distinction between fix and improve energy is an important distinction to make while we work in our communities and cities. When we trust that when something needs improvement, it enables us to accept that we have opportunities before us to reorganize ourselves to better meet the needs of our city. And in doing that, our cities are better able to serve citizens.
REFLECTION
When does the “fix” pattern make the most sense?
When does the “improve” pattern make the most sense?
First posted on September 12, 2016 at www.populus.ca