July 4, 2018
I recently attended a half-day D&I workshop.
During the second half of the workshop, the facilitator asked participants to come up with a list of actions and solutions to a problem shown on a cue card in three minutes.
Every table (of 6-8 people) had a different cue card, that had, something along the lines of, ‘How can we make this D&I initiative more effective’? I stared at my blank butcher paper in a state of confusion for the first two minutes, and thought to myself, I’m going to fail abysmally at this task by three.
Many of the workshop participants went straight into fix it mode, and by the end of three minutes, I peered over long lists of actions on my table about things we can do better; for example, more targeted training, more promotional campaigns, t-shirts, fridge magnets, getting executives to do more stuff, etc, etc.
But when asked by the facilitator to identify the main challenge in achieving all the actions listed, the most frequent response was, ‘How are we going to get this all this stuff done without resources, money and time?’
But a bigger issue was still looming in my mind. At the end of this exercise, did we collectively, including me, arrived at superficial outcome – a ‘skimming the surface’ type outcome? Did we go deeply into the issue? I’m not sure we did.
During this short exercise, I felt pulled into one direction and fought against it. Do I attempt to be strategic or operational when solving a complex issue? Do I feel rushed or slow things down? Do I need to think faster on my feet? So instead of writing a list of solutions, I wrote a list of ‘problems’ and kept adding more ‘problems’ on top.
Something like:
1. What’s at the core of this issue? Why is this relevant and to whom? What is the context? Does this issue have wider implications? Is there any evidence available? What is the data saying? Why have previous attempts at this initiative failed? (was it just resources, time and money?)
2. Do I know enough about the problem? Do I need to seek different perspectives? Am I not seeing something? What’s my bias in this? Where is my place in this? What makes this work relevant to those who think it’s not?
3. Do I have a clear rationale for doing the work? Do I need to establish an authorising environment to make this initiative work? Do I have the autonomy to make this work? If not, who can I influence? What levers can I manoeuvre? Can I be creative in my pitch and delivery?
I guess what I learned from the analysis of the outcomes of this exercise, is that we can often jump into fix it mode when we have a set of imposed rules, given time constraints or feel pressured in group situations to conform.
Quick fixes have short comings if you don’t think through the problem carefully.
Can I deliberately slow down to think about the best way to solve a complex issue under pressure? Just focus on one thing and do it right!!! Or do we think fast through complexity, like a formula one driver, who handles multiple tasks all at the same time, while having their mind on the end game. I guess we can all be quick strategic thinkers!
Are we also open to different ways of learning and problem solving? I wonder whether a dominant or homogenous style of problem solving exists in different cultural settings too? Does it stifle creativity? Does it encourage resistance? Can I break the rules? Do I feel comfortable to say, sorry I’m just going to sit out this exercise and watch?
How do I apply all this in real time and in the real world?
I think I need to take a Bex and have a lay down, or another workshop to figure this out!!!