Note (1) from Leading Adaptive Change Workshop

Brief notes from Leading Adaptive Change Workshop, only with the points that I need to keep reminding myself of.......)

p. 21. Leading an Adaptive Intervention - 7 Steps
Step 1: Get on the Balcony
   - Stay diagnostic even as you take action. Develop more than one interpretation. Watch for patterns. ... Debrief with partners. ...
Step 2: Determine the Ripeness of the Issue in the System
Step 3: Ask, Who Am I In This Picture
How are you experienced by the various groups and subgropus? What role do you play in them? ... Because they are comfortable with the way you usually act, they are probably quite proficient at managing you in that role to ensure that you do not disturb their equilibrium. You will have to be less predictable than usual to get their constructive attentions and make progress on an adaptive issue.
Step 4: Think Hard About Your Framing
Communicate your intervention in a way that enables group members to understand what you have in mind, why the intervention is important and how they can help carry it out. A well-framed intervention strikes a chord in people, speaking to their hopes and fears. It starts where they are, not where you are. And it inspires them to move forward. ... Connect your language to the group's espoused values and purpose.
Step 5: Hold Steady
When you have made an intervention, think of it as having a life of its own.
People need to time to digest it, think about it, discuss it, and modify it. If you think of the ideas as "yours" you are likely to get overly invested in your own image of it. Once you have made the interventions, your ideas is theirs. You cannot control what they do with hit. Resist the impulse to keep jumping in with follow-ups. Stay present. Keep listening.
Step 6: Analyze the Factions that begin to Emerge
As people in your inner circle begin to discuss your intervention, pay attention to who seems engaged, who starts using your language or pieces of your idea as if it were their own. Listen for who resists the idea. Map the factions.
Step 7: Keep the Work at the Center of People's Attention
Avoiding adaptive work is a common human response in the face of potential loss. Expect that your team will find ways to avoid focusing on the adaptive challenge... resistance to your idea has less to do with you or the merits of your idea, and more to do with the fears of loss your idea generates.
.... 3. Help them think through the resistance, in terms of threat and loss, to their own people
.... 4. Get allies. Share the burden of keeping the work at the center of people's attention. 

p. 23. Evaluating The Ripeness of the System
Your adaptive intervention:
1. Supporters.
Who might be your supports? 1)        2)       3)
Why might they be allies? 1)       2)      3)
What's their main objective? 1)     2)    3)

2. Resistors
Who are the likely resistors of this initiative? 1)     2)    3)
What ideas are they bringing forth that might be valuable for you to hear?    1)     2)    3)
How might you enable their ideas to have a hearing    1    2)    3)
How can you protect them from being marginalized or silenced?   1)     2)     3)

3. Authority figures
4. Those with Hurts and Losses  (p. 24)  ****
Who will be hurt or suffer loss from this intervention
What will they lose
What new skills would help them adapt?
How might you help them learn these new skills
Which ones will probably need to leave the congregation
How could you help make that transition easier for them?

p. 25. Reframing Problems, Hopes & Fears
2. Demonstrate to people how their way of thinking about things will get them into trouble.
3. Provide people with new frames of reference that allow them to see things differently and act differently.

What the Leader says or does: 
"Let's make a distinction here!"
Distinguish between pursuing possibility and passion vs. the status quo.
"That's one possible interpretation; what's another?"
 - people make an assumption and then act as if that assumption were fact. Ask them to consider another interpretation that would be more insightful, empowering and accurate.
What assumptions are you making?
Bridge conversations:
 - The leader's role in reframing is to engage people in conversations which bridge between an old interpretation and a new one.
from focusing what is predictable to focusing on what's possible
from do it yourself to doing it within a group
from being a victim to being empowered;
from complaining about something to making a request.

Storyline! p. 26. 

Holding Steady - observe, interpret, & Intervene - p. 27. 

Once you have made an intervention your idea belongs to the system.
- Resist the impulse to over-control. You cannot control what people do with your intervention
- Watch for the ways in which the idea unfolds and how resistance or buy-in manifests.
- Stay present, keep listening, use silence. 
- Pay attention to work avoidance and keep giving the work back to the people who need to do it. 
- Watch the behaviour of leaders and how pressure is being applied to them to restore equilibrium.

Act Politically- p. 30
Through the strategic use of power
Sources of Power
Granted Power, Assigned Power, Attributed Power -> Capacity for Influence
Granted Power - God's power, shared through creation, the Gospel and faith tradition
Assigned Power - Position Power & Organizational power (by virtue of position within the congregation, individuals or groups may acquire power because they have access to, or the ability to influence: Decision Making, Information, Resources (Human and capital)
Attributed power - Expert power & Referent Power (Charisma)
     Expert power - the follower complies because she believes that the agent has special knowledge about the best way to do something
     Referent Power - the follower complies because he admires or identifies with the agent and wants to gain the leader's approval, such as
    1. Energy, endurance, and physical stamina. Endurance triumphs over cleverness.
    2. The ability to focus one's energy and to avoid wasted effort & to attend to critical detail.
    3. Sensitivity, which makes it possible to read and understand others
    4. Flexibility, particularly with respect to selecting various means in order to achieve one's goals. Flexibility ensures the capacity to change course and to adopt new approaches, rather than clinging to action that are not working. It also helps one to acquire allies, as it is easier to shift approaches to accommodate different interests.
    5. The willingness to engage in conflict and confrontations, when necessary; or in other words, a certain degree of personal toughness.
    6. The ability to submerge one's ego, at least temporarily, and play the good subordinate or team player to enlist the help and support of others.

As we think about the characteristics that provide people with power, we need to keep in mind that congregations almost invariably are characterized by interdependence and frequently are arenas for conflict and competition, among individuals and groups. For that reason, it is logical that attributes that are related to the capacity to garner support, and attributes that are related to the survival of competition and conflict, are also significant sources of individual power.

The Case Study - p. 35 
power Bases/Key Stakeholders   Granted Power   Assigned power   Attributed Power  Ethical Orientation (Dirty Fighter ,Fair Fighter, Balanced Fighter)  Aligns with your Agenda

Ethical Orientation - self-serving behaivour as apposed to pursuing common good

Influence Reservoir:
Capacity for Influence -> Choosing Appropriate Forms of Influence & Resisting the Inappropriate Influence Attempts of others -> Influence Reservoir: Resistance, Compliance, Commitment

Choosing an Appropriate Influence Tactic
Form of Influence:
Legitimate Request (Establishing the leader's right to make the request)
Rational Persuasion
Rational faith (appeal to the target on the basis of previous effective decision making.)
Inspirational Appeal (an emotional or value-based appeal) for example, sermon    
                               Leader requirements - insight into values and beliefs, persuasive ability
Consultation: the target is invited to participate in the decision making
Exchange tactics: the explicit or implicit offer to reward a person from doing what you request
Personal Appeals: Asking someone to do something based on friendship or loyalty (likeability, attractiveness, charisma, or friendship base)
Ingratiation Tactics: Giving compliments, doing unsolicited favours, being deferential and respectful (Likeability, attractiveness, charisma) - positive regard for the agent - otherwise they will see it as manipulative
Pressure Tactics: Threats, warnings and assertive behaviour
Coalition Tactics: Getting other people involved to influence the target person

Youtube: The Science of Persusation
Six Principles that Guide Human Influence Behaviour
1. Reciprocity: People feel a desire/obligation to give back when they receive.
   a. People are more likely to say yes to those that they owe. b. This principle works most effectively in your favour when you are the first to give, when the giving is personalized and unexpected.
2. Scarcity: People want more of those things they can have less of.
   a. highlight the benefits + what is unique + what they stand to loose if they miss this opportunity
3. Authority: People will follow the lead of credible, knowledgeable, experts
4. Commitment & Consistency: start with small voluntary commitments first. ...
5. Liking: 
   a. We like people who are similar to us (establish common bonds)
   b. we like people who pay us compliments (use ingratiation tactics)
   c. We like people who cooperates with us towards mutual goals (initiate contact and cooperation)
6. Consensus (Social Proof) for example, 75 percent of people who use this room reuse towels.

What are three influence tactics that would work most appropriately with your key stakeholders
M: Rational Faith, (Inspirational Appeal), 
HP: Legitimate Request, (Rational Persuasion), Inspirational Appeal, Consultation, Ingratiation Tactics, 
HS: Consultation, Personal Appeals, Coalition Tactics
L: Inspirational Appeal, Ingratiation Tactics, 
G: Rational Persuasion, Inspirational Appeal, Personal Appeals, Coalition Tactics
D: Legitimate Request, Inspirational Appeal, 

Six Questions to Evaluate the Appropriateness of an Influence Tactic
Is it moral, ethical, scriptural?
Does it serve and preserve the integrity of your mission/outcome?
Would you be comfortable if the details of your decision or action were made public in the church newsletter or through e-mail?
What would you tell your child, sibling, or young relative to do in a similar case?
Do you have the capacity to use this form of influence? (power..)
Will the follower value the currency that this influence tactic offers them?

Inappropriate Influence Attempts of Others include the following types of behaviour
- Agreeing to a request to someone's face, but opposing or sabotaging behind the scenes (H)
- Avoidance or withdrawal as a means of stopping forward momentum (HS)
- Triangulation: avoiding direct conversation with someone while conversing and complaining about them and their leadership to others
- Intentionally circumventing/manipulating the formal decision making process of the congregation
- Parking lot or hallway decision making; decisions fully formed and made before a meeting starts, withtout involving all parties that should be involved (HS)
- Advocating for personal gain at the expense of the common good or central
- Outright deceit

Resisting the Inappropriate Influence Attempts of Others
A process for resisting inappropriate influence:
1) Assess your own mindset - honour the principles of assertiveness, accountability, respectfulness and inclusiveness.
2. Evaluate the ethical orientation and emotional health of the one who is acting inappropriately. 
 (Are they capable of, and willing to, use more appropriate influence tactics? If yes, move on to step 3. If no, move onto step 4.)
3. Confront the behaviour using the following I statement format:
Observations: A description of what I have seen or heard.
 Example: "When you leaned back in your chair, gave a loud sigh and rolled your eyes, while I was speaking.."
Assumption check: Share what you thought or assumed about the described behaviour
Example: "... I thought you were disrespecting me and didn't approve of what I was saying..."
Share the feeling: Share the feelings you experienced as a result of the observation and assumption
Example: "....and I felt shamed, angry, and resentful."
Share an alternative: Describe a specific behaviour that would have been more appropriate in the moment.
Example: "next time I would prefer to hear a verbal articulation of your thoughts, so that I can address your disagreements or reservations."

If you have tried the confrontational statement in step 3 and the behaviour continues, or if you have determined in step 2 that the person is incapable of healthy behavioral choices, then proceed to step 4. 

4. If the negative influence tactic of the other does not risk the health of the community or the achievement of the congregation's goal, ignore it. If the negative tactic risks the health of covenantal community, or risks the advancement of the congregation's goals, consider engaging in negative currency. Such as

Withholding recognition
Withholding support
Threatening to remove yourself from the situation
Raising your voice to indicate your firm intent to stand your ground
Refusing to cooperate when asked
Escalating the issue upward to a higher authority
Going public with the issue, making lack of cooperation visible

5. Use the power of the community to counteract the behaviour of the inappropriate party. Engage the disengaged healthy bystanders.

Bystander power is exercised when we covenant with healthy congregants to engage in healthy behaviours, disempowering the troublemaker.
(Example: healthy members of the community covenant with one another that they will not engage in triangulated conversation. This removes a significant number of people from the process of triangulation and leaves the unhealthy player without an arena in which to operate.)

The Outcome: Assessing Your Influence Reservoir
1. Resistance: The person you are trying to influence resists your focus efforts:
- refuses outright to accede to your attempts to engage the work you have placed before them
- ignores your efforts at influence
- asserts their opinion that change is not necessary
- Makes excuse why they cannot do what you want
- Asks higher authority to overrule your request
- persuades you to withdraw your influence attempt
- delays action on your influence effort
- makes a pretense of complying while actively attempting to sabotage your efforts

2. Compliance:
3. Commitment

An accumulated reservoir of influence over time determines your overall capacity of leadership within the congregation. A track record of consistent effectiveness in influencing others and resisting the inappropriate influence attempts of others positions you to act with clear authority as a congregational leader. A diminished reservoir of influence weakens your claim on leadership authority.

Starkly but evenhandedly, articulate the competing claims and positions you are hearing. As people begin to appreciate how deeply held the competing values are and how committed each faction is to avoiding taking any losses, the tension sill rise. Look for signs that people are seeking to avoid the conflict, such as trying to minimize the differences or change the subject. As orchestrator, keep reminding people of the purpose, why it is that they are going through this hard patch.

-----------------------------------------------------
Pastoral leaders - politically savvy - where does the power of leadership come from (ethically appropriate and politically savvy adaptive leadership and intervention)
the artistry of AL: failing in people's expectation
ambiguity -less of predictability -> church's environment - every day presents them to us, help people to think in this circumstances
Adaptation: the process that organisms follow as they seek to survive and thrive (evolution biology)
Remove (or modify) that is no longer necessary or useful
what is helpful or harmful (long and accepted standard...)
create and innovate new arrangements that enable the organization to thrive
"we are going to fail repeatedly." 
다르게 할 수 없기 때문에 실패
new arrangements that serves us better
dysfunction: often signals important tension in values. 
around the edges of the normative behaviour - bubble up - let's take that thing
page 8. Chart *****
locus of work: ownership of the work = though we expect "them" (minister, stakeholders) to fix it...
technical problem solving
Adaptive challenge - so fuzzy around the boundaries, defining a challenge needs conversations

ex.) evangelism
"everyone" should learn the way to be in a different way
technical solving - make a welcome table (extroverted people..!)
technical solving/adaptive change - church sunday, music night , (invite a friend to church sunday) - people in leadership suggests a worship, stakeholder's participation
adaptive change - creating  a culture in which people feel comfortably telling and sharing their faith stories
Most of our leadership challenges are bundles of technical problems and adaptive change
usually people feel better when they do technical problems solving
Adaptive challenges build adaptive culture
Adaptive challenge invites failure and embraces conflict 
Highly committed democratic consensus decision making (when we understand the democracy as - every voice is heard and honoured....)- actual moving is ...very slow... Maybe we have been confused about consensus 
Any unhappy person can stop the adaptation and.....we get stuck. 
What would we do with this unhappiness, resistance. 
what if we thought of leadership as a verb not a noun (a body of people assigned to do...)
Dancing just beyond the edge of formal authority
and makes people nervious (social justice value....being violated...?)

USE OF POWER - 
Authority zone (meeting expectations)
Leadership Zone (work on competing values)