The Circle Project

Circle Project's Robinson gets rave reviews for NYC directorial debut

Circle Project co-founder, David Robinson, directed a play entitled "Dirt" in New York City this past August to rave reviews. "Dirt" explores what it is to be "the Other" and the impact of internalized racism, messages strongly connected to the diversity work of The Circle Project itself. 

This review appeared on Aug 18, 2007:

"See this show.

Because it reminds us how rarely, and how inaccurately, we too often see each other and ourselves. On the subway after seeing Dirt, I thought hard about how I was looking at the strangers around me: the generalizations I was making about them; the lack of eye contact. See this show.

'My name is Sad. I'm 30 years old.' We hear this phrase repeatedly throughout this one-man play, in different incarnations. Sometimes he says he's 25 instead, sometimes he follows it with phrases such as 'I'm a piece of shit. I won't contest that.' Sad is a self-degrading illegal immigrant from Iraq, a peddler of roses, a self-confessed liar, a lover of America. He is the product of racism; he knows he is inferior, he knows he doesn't deserve to look an American in the eye, or sit on a park bench, or use a public toilet. Sad's monologue, directed straight at us, jumps back and forth. Through repetition, in spite of the lies, we see greater layers of truth, of who he is, where he came from, and where he now lives. But predominantly we are left with how terribly he views himself in comparison to the beautiful fair-skinned Americans.

See this show. The script, written by Robert Schneider and translated from German by Paul Dvorak, is rich, poetic, and unique. Christopher John Domig is captivating, highly skilled, and utterly heartbreaking as Sad. David Robinson's direction is smart and beautiful, relying heavily on contrasts. The elements come together with skill and precision, creating a true piece of art."

Digh featured in Chronicle of Higher Education

What Can Be Done to Diversify Executive Suites?
From The Chronicle of Higher Education, September 28, 2007              

Although the American population is growing more diverse, and colleges are seeking to enroll students and hire faculty members from many different backgrounds, the top leadership at most higher-education institutions remains quite homogeneous. For example, a 2005 Chronicle survey of about 1,300 presidents at four-year institutions, of whom 764 responded, found that nearly 89 percent were white and almost 81 percent were male.

At The Chronicle's second annual Presidents Forum, held in Washington in June, Mickey L. Burnim, president of Bowie State University; Patricia Digh, co-founder of the Global Diversity Roundtable and the Circle Project; and Laura Skandera Trombley, president of Pitzer College, discussed the issue and what can be done to diversify colleges' executive suites. Following is an excerpt of their answers to questions from the session's moderator, Sara Hebel, a senior reporter at The Chronicle, and from members of the audience.

Hebel: How much attention should institutions be paying to the issue of diversity among their top administrators? What can colleges do to hire and promote a wider range of top officials?

Trombley: Diversity has to be a goal of the board of trustees and viewed as a core value of the institution; otherwise, it will always remain on the margins. No one group should serve as an institution's symbol of diversity. It cannot be students; it cannot be staff; it cannot be faculty. Efforts to increase diversity have to involve everyone.             

Trustees must support diversity initiatives, do outreach, and emphasize when they are conducting presidential searches that not only are they interested in a diverse pool of candidates, but also that the institution is ready for that diverse pool of candidates. I have been a candidate where it was clear that I was the "diversity candidate," and everyone was thrilled that their institution was so forward-thinking. But, in my view, if I was such a big surprise, that indicated that more foundational work needed to take place at that institution. Colleges can accomplish that by asking diversity experts to come in and help educate various groups on their campuses.

It is also important to have good institutional data. At Pitzer College, we know, for example, that 45 percent of the faculty members are women and 36 percent are people of color, and that 32 percent of the students are students of color. We have an institutional-research Web site that provides all that information, and that forms the basis for our discussions.              

Hebel: What steps do leaders need to take to make sure that diversity is something that their campuses focus on?

Burnim: I agree that trustee leadership is critically important on campuses, that board members set a tone. To create the right climate or culture, a president must first articulate the value and the importance of having a diverse campus — of having diversity not just within the student body and the faculty ranks, but within the administration as well. Second, the president must walk the walk and make sure that the cabinet and senior leadership are diverse. What one does speaks a lot louder than what one says.              

For example, at Bowie State University, we have spent a lot of time refining the strategic plan. Before we finalize that process, I want to make sure that we explicitly address the notion of diversity and what that means for our campus, and that we have some measurable objectives against which to gauge our progress. We need to put the right accountability measures and standards in place. We must also provide adequate resources, and recognize and reward behaviors that help us reach the outcomes that we want.

Hebel: Ms. Digh, you have described the lack of diversity in university leadership as a "wicked problem" for which simplistic or short-term solutions will not work.             

Digh: The phrase "wicked problems and tame solutions" has come out of looking at diversity issues for about two decades and recognizing lately that I have made the mistake of proposing easy solutions to very complex problems. Racism in this country is a wicked problem. It is attached to a lot of other societal problems, so it is very difficult to say, "If I do A and B, then racism will disappear."

Americans like short-term, quick, linear solutions to issues like diversity or racism, which are long-term, complex issues that don't necessarily have solutions. Every wicked problem is unique. The lessons learned dealing with a wicked problem at one institution are not necessarily ones that can be easily transferred to others. What's more, wicked problems are often solved as well as they can be through group efforts. So you must constantly ask yourselves when you are in a strategic-planning process, for example, who else should be at this table? Are all the people in the room thinking just like me? Do we need different voices?              

The easy way of trying to tame a wicked problem is to simply construct a definition of the problem that obscures its wicked nature and then apply linear methods to solve it. For example, a human-resources person called me to say, "We had some white employees put nooses on black employees' lockers. Could you come help us with this issue? We are wondering if you could conduct a two-hour workshop."

But such tame solutions, when they are imposed on wicked problems, exacerbate the situation by hiding the fact that it was wicked to begin with. If you have an issue on your campus and do a two-hour workshop on it, you might keep the trustees happy but actually make the situation worse.              

Instead, we should make ourselves step back from our innate impulse to tidiness and ask, "Have I engaged fully in what the problem is? Do I understand the complexity of it?" And, like a Rubik's Cube, "if I change one thing or solve one part of it, will the other parts change?"

Hebel: How can colleges effectively set benchmarks and move forward in a concrete way?             

Trombley: When we went through our strategic-planning process, we talked about what we wanted to see happen at the institution in five years and the areas where we had the greatest concern. Because Pitzer is a small college, we were able to come together and have an enormous amount of discussion — among large and small groups, in residence halls and elsewhere — and come up with common goals that we adopted as part of a strategic plan. I cannot overemphasize the importance of having a dialogue on a continuing basis; it cannot occur only during times of crisis. A lot of the best work happens when you are building relationships and channels of communication so that, if an issue does arise, you can work through it constructively.

Hebel: How do you foster discussions when people hold different views about diversifying the top ranks of the institution?              

Burnim: It is not hard to engage in a discussion on campuses. We are intellectual communities, so whether it is a forum, a convocation at the beginning of an academic term, or commencement, I take the opportunity to teach a lesson or raise a question or issue. That continuing dialogue can take place throughout the campus and the academic year.

Trombley: I do not wait for students to come to me or for faculty members to drop by. I'm always walking around and talking with students and professors. And I tell students about how I had never even seen a woman president or taken a course from a female full professor when I was their age. The only woman I ever met in a leadership position was my mother, who was an elementary-school principal. I talk about how that is now simply part of their experience and how extraordinary it is that we can have such a conversation in my lifetime.             

Hebel: If you are trying to diversify the top ranks, what are some specific ways that you can help build a pipeline of potential candidates and ultimately get a qualified pool of diverse applicants to chose from?

Burnim: It isn't enough for us as presidents to advertise for openings, to try to make sure that we have a diverse pool, and then to choose an appropriate person from that pool. We do not have a lot of people of color, for example, who are coming through the pipeline so they will be in positions to join the faculty and then move through the administrative ranks and ultimately become presidents. So in addition to trying to run open searches and creating a culture that fosters and encourages diversity, we have some obligations to help increase the supply of people who are in position to fill the top spots.              

What can I do as a president to make sure that there are people who are in place to fill those roles? I can encourage people to position themselves for leadership. I can say: "I recognize some qualities in you that I think would make you a great dean or vice president down the road. Have you thought about attending leadership-development programs like the American Council on Education Fellows Program or the Millennium Leadership Initiative of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities?"

Also, when I hire people, I say: "Look, I'm hiring you because you have outstanding credentials and the appropriate experience to perform this job, but I'm interested in your personal development as well. What do you want to do five years or 10 years down the road? I will work with you to see that you have the experiences and the development that will position you to do that." I figure that the person is going to serve my institution most effectively if he or she feels that they are doing something that will benefit themselves as well as me and the institution.              

Hebel: What are some best practices and strategies to diversify the top ranks?

Digh: A friend always says that people do diversity work because of pain, vision, or a combination of the two. The demographics of the country have changed, and if you and your institution are not in pain right now, you will be. You must ask yourself, "What action must I take to make this institution inclusive?"     

For example, I could buy one of many types of running shoes since they are all about the same price and quality, but I buy a certain brand because I know the company's CEO has a foundation that supports abused women. I would venture to say that most students who are now coming to your campuses are also making purchasing decisions based on, "What does this institution stand for?"

If I were a college president today, I would step back and ask: "What is the story that my institution is telling right now about diversity? When you look at my board, is it a white, male-dominated group?" Because that is the story that you are telling and what people are hearing. Change does not happen until an organization and its leader change their story.              

One way to get at that is to teach people how to have a dialogue. We don't know how to do that in this country; we scream at each other a lot but do not necessarily know how to deal with conflict. How do you begin to bring people up in the ranks of your institution who have the skill to hold opposing points of views at the same time — to recognize that any diversity conversation is not an either-or, but a both-and conversation?

Also American institutions are largely built around culturally white traditions, and we need to prepare minority candidates to come into what are largely white, male-dominated organizations. We must say to our trustees, "You know, part of the process of diversity work is for you to acknowledge that there are different ways of doing this job." But often, we just graft people from minority backgrounds onto the institution, and then they fail in some significant way because we do not value their cultural norms in terms of how they operate. And then the board says, "I told you it just does not work." But the real problem is that we haven't provided the kind of support that people need.              

Hebel: Let's take some questions.

Question: I just spent the last year coordinating a successful presidential search that resulted in our first black president in 60 years. What do you do with folks who have never had to work for a black president? What might we do to make sure that we have the kind of welcoming, nurturing environment for a minority CEO that will help him and the institution to succeed?             

Burnim: As part of the transition, you might hire a consultant and ask that question: How can we best prepare the institution for this new leader? That would be beneficial because, no matter what the characteristics of the new leader coming in, a new president represents change for the institution, and that always requires some adjustment.

Trombley: I would suggest taking the administrative cabinet and the president on a retreat, perhaps with a consultant, where people spend the night off the campus so they do not have to try and juggle two or three things at the same time. I would also try to make it a safe space where people can ask honest questions. And at the conclusion of the retreat, I would try to come up with some common goals that unite everyone.              

Digh: An acknowledgment that, "Yes, a black president is coming into our institution" is important. We dance around these issues. We bring in people from a wide diversity of backgrounds, but then we say, "We are not going to notice the fact that they actually are different from us." We need to have a conversation about why we so often mistakenly equate simply acknowledging difference with making a value judgment about a person — that they are better or worse than we are.

Question: I have studied the pipeline on the national level using data from the American Council on Education and found that different minority groups appear at different stages of the pipeline. For example, there may be people at the level of department chairman who are of Chinese and Indian descent, but how many chief executives are of Chinese and Indian descent? I am the chairman of the Asian-American committee at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. The number of public-university presidents from China, India — indeed all of Asia — could sit comfortably in a very small room. How do we look at different groups, whether it is women or different ethnic minorities, that may appear at different levels of the pipeline?              

Trombley: If you look at the pipeline, the typical path to the presidency is to become a department chair and then to become a dean and then move to the provost's office, and so on. But if you look at the percentage of deans who are people of color or women, then you see some startlingly small numbers.

What needs to happen at the departmental level is for administrations to actively promote people or think of alternate ways in which people can reach the presidency. I was never a department chair. My first administrative position was as an affirmative-action officer, and I had people across the college warning me not do it because they thought it would end my career. But I ignored them and went ahead and became an assistant provost and then went on to become dean of the faculty at a different institution.              

But you have to be mindful of the pipeline. You need to determine how to exist within the system, and if it does not look as though that advancement is possible, then you should figure out alternatives.

Digh: Also, there is a difference between first-order and second-order change. First-order change is what I hear in most conferences and most conversations about diversity on campuses. We will just tweak things, make some adjustments. With first-order change, the system itself remains unchanged. Over time, it will self-correct and go back to where it was before.              

Second-order change transforms the system. So if you are a college leader looking at diversity at your institution, you should ask yourself, "Is this a first-order change that I'm putting into place, or is it something that is going to go deeper?"

For example, Dean Ornish, author and founder of the Preventive Medicine Research Institute, does a lot of work with heart patients and how they change their lives to become healthier. We all think that change has to happen incrementally: "I could lose 20 pounds, if I just drink one more glass of water per day." But Ornish says that huge, massive change is the way to do it, because if you just start eating better in small incremental ways, you are not going to get the immediate health benefits that will keep you on the right path. So, whether as human beings or as institutions, we should make sweeping changes. We should make them big and systemic.              

Burnim: Systems do need big change, but personal action is also required. Presidents individually should do a lot of self-assessment and ask themselves: "Am I doing what I can do to make a difference? Yes, faculty members, department chairs, and deans who are from China or India work at my institution. But have I encouraged them and offered to provide for their development and support?" That kind of introspection is something that we should not overlook.

http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i05/05b04801.htm
Section: Diversity in Academe
Volume 54, Issue 5, Page B48

Circle Project to be featured at Applied Improv Network

We are thrilled to be featured at the upcoming Applied Improv Network conference in Banff, Canada, from November 10-13, 2007.

A unique and innovative group will gather for workshops and open space dialogue--and we're pleased to be a part of it, offering our afternoon workshop on Culture, Conflict and Creativity using experiential, interactive learning techniques. Come, join us!

Feedback from our clients...

We are always thrilled to hear how The Circle Project is received--here are a few recent notes we've gotten from clients and participants:

Patti and David were able to take us to a level of insight beyond anything I could have imagined... and do this over and over again. In retrospect, I can see that they accomplished this through a combination of ingenious facilitation and workshop design, but at the time it felt more like a magic - a sleight of hand.  We would begin by playing what seemed a simple game...and then, after laughing and enjoying gradual variations in the activity, we would suddenly find ourselves where we least expected to be: immersed in the deep end of human relationships, seeing ourselves and each other in new ways. Our group walked in as acquaintances and emerged feeling close, bonded by the experience and with a whole new language for relating to each other. It is absolutely the most engaging and enlightening workshop I have ever taken. I can't recommend it highly enough for teams with communications or cultural issues...or who just want to learn to work more effectively together. -Cate Goethals, Professor, University of Washington

We began diversity work in our organization several years ago, but through Patti and David's work with us, we have been better able to identify where our opportunities lie, where to focus our energy, and how our Diversity Council can be effective in a changing organizational climate. Patti and David partnered with us to conduct employee focus groups which helped uncover roadblocks that we may be putting in our own way, both as an organization and as a council in moving our diversity efforts forward. I believe the teaching methods that Patti and David have used with our employees have been instrumental in breaking down barriers, and have helped us to begin to understand what it means to truly build an inclusive culture. -Julie Blaikie, Assistant Vice President Human Resources, Equity Residential

Patti and David are a dynamite team with so much wisdom and power between them. Their training is like taking a personal and collective journey into a place where innate knowledge is illuminated into new ways of seeing ourselves and others. The Circle Project is both a robust and compassionate experience led by two very agile and authentic trainers. -Teresa Ferrer, Oregon Education Association, Portland, Oregon

Patti and David’s sensitivity to the needs of their clients is exceptional and beautiful to watch. It is dazzling to observe how quickly and creatively the two of them create new content and forms of coaching and training through use of anything available from participants and others as well as their own knowledge. It is not just creativity. All of their creative actions are taken from the perspective of the client. Patti and David almost never look for their own satisfaction of sharing their own ideas and knowledge even though they know a lot. Yes, they are amazing. -Kichiro Hayashi, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Aoyama Gakuin University, Tokyo

It's rare to have the safety and encouragement to explore your edges, question your assumptions, change your perspective, and have a lot of fun doing it. Patti and David's facilitation style is fluid, smart, creative, balanced, and aware. They expertly extracted the wisdom in the group and guided us through a playful, and sometimes uncomfortable, journey of discovery. None of us will ever forget it. -Marlo Goldstein, Adelante Services, Portland, Oregon

My experience with The Circle Project's writing retreat was absolutely magical!  Patti Digh's wry humor, intelligence and expertise, combined with David Robinson's brilliant ability to facilitate learning through stories and theatrical games, created an environment in which I felt completely at ease.  I was inspired and motivated to explore deeply within my own heart and mind.  Patti and David's techniques are designed to gently break down barriers between participants and allow us to experience our human commonalities and connection.  I was amazed and touched by the insights we were able to share with each other.  I definitely came away from the workshop changed in a very positive way and have continued to benefit from the insights I gained.  I recommend The Circle Project to anyone who wants to experience more joy, satisfaction and positive growth in their lives and within their organizations. -Janna Zonder, Writer, Musician, Actor, Asheville, NC

Lasting learning is co-created; in each case, we learn so much from our participants, too. If you'd like information on having us present to your group, drop us a line.

The Two-Rule Syndrome

The dialogue goes something like this…

The Director of HR: “We don’t give “outstanding” on performance reviews.”

The Manager: “But it’s on the scale. It’s a five point scale, the top is outstanding.”

The Director of HR: “Yes, but as a rule, we don’t give them out.”

The Manager: “But this employee’s work is outstanding. She deserves to be acknowledged for her superior efforts.”

The Director of HR: “I understand. But we just don’t give outstanding. It’s a policy. Unwritten policy but it is understood. A rule is a rule.”

The Manager: “Then why is it a part of the scale? If it is impossible for me to officially tell my people they are doing outstanding work when they are doing outstanding work, why not remove it from the scale?”

And so it goes.

The Manager wonders, “Is this a game? Is there some deep, hidden ideal in play that I’m not privy to? And, if so, why not? I manage a large staff and carefully monitor their performance! I’m not arbitrary in my reviews.”

The Manager spent hours carefully considering the performance of her employee in writing this performance review. She knows that some managers have been in the business long enough not to care which box is checked on their review; they’ll get significant salary rewards that reflect their value, regardless. Not so with the younger staff positions. Excellent work is rarely rewarded financially. It is imperative that her employee knows her value and be rewarded for her work. Why the blanket moratorium?

This Manager has run head-on into the first rule of a two-rule syndrome: a contagious debilitating condition found in many organizations. It is known as the two-rule syndrome because diagnosis is only possible through the examination of two seemingly disconnected rules that serve a common purpose: silencing authentic conversation.

At this same company, the President and CEO has made it clear that he will only allow positive comments; he doesn’t like to hear the negative stuff. So, consequently, none of the real issues reach his ear (until they become crises). The kingdom looks pretty good from his vantage point. And, that’s the point of the rules.

If you stop and do a simple accounting, 1) we don’t talk about the negative stuff, and 2) as a rule, outstanding achievement is not possible and if it happens it won’t be acknowledged. These two rules guarantee a culture of appearances. They are a recipe for superficial counterfeit conversations. It’s a policy.

The CEO is under the illusion that he is setting the bar high by outlawing an outstanding performance review. In addition, he wants people who come to him prepared with solutions, not complaints. These are positive intentions but the means to the end are misguided.

From the vantage of the senior management, they will always have to edit the real stuff to provide a better, prettier picture for the CEO. No messiness is allowed. This is lovingly known as the illusion collusion. This team will inevitably break down. They will bristle when consultants come in to help them be more effective because the two-rules require them to negate their truth. They are dishonest collaborators. Their work is impeded as a rule.

The impact on collaboration, creativity and innovation

Teamwork, collaboration, and particularly creativity and innovation are results of fire. The forge has to become hot for new shapes to emerge. Collaboration does not mean playing nice-nice with everyone having equal voice. Collaboration is a multi-talented group of people dedicated to a common goal that has been articulated by a leader. Collaboration is controlled creative tension vaulting a team into a new and previously unimaginable solution. Collaboration rarely knows full agreement but always recognizes superior solutions.

At the center of collaboration is a deep abiding respect for your team’s ideas, whether you agree with them or not – and whether they are positive or negative. In collaboration, respect creates safety and a willingness to share, make bold offers, do battle to attain a greater vision. Mutual respect allows for constructive heat. In the two-rule syndrome there is no heat allowed. What’s not being said becomes like cold steel: hard, non-compliant. Impediments, contradictions, honesty, personality conflicts go underground. When the two-rule syndrome is in play, “outstanding” actually becomes an impossibility.

The cure for the two-rule syndrome is simple to state, yet counterintuitive in a litigating two-rule culture: reinforce intrinsic responsibility.

Empowered people moving toward a common goal will achieve unimaginable results. Create a safe “play pen,” a working environment with clear boundaries, and innovation and hot conversations can occur. Let the manager reward her employees as she deems appropriate. Foster full-body conversations. Get out of the way.

-David Robinson, The Circle Project (www.thecircleproject.com)

Patti Digh featured as "Meetings Industry Guru"

Circle Project co-founder Patti Digh was featured this week as a Meetings Industry Guru on the Meetings Industry Megasite. In that role, Patti contributed three short articles on diversity issues for meeting planners:

Let’s hold our next National Conference over Christmas!

Make inclusive meetings your brand

How accessible is your meeting?

What drives diversity change? Not what you think.

-David Robinson, The Circle Project (www.thecircleproject.com)

Think of the Grand Canyon. Or of a river gorge closer to home. We know from those examples that water follows the structure of the land. Behavior is also like water; it too follows the structure of the land.

And yet, as we provide diversity expertise and training in organizations whose core values include a commitment to inclusion, often they're not in it for the long haul - they don't really want to investigate the structure of the land, but want to quickly look at the water and move on to things that are more "mission critical."
 
We can either belittle their shortcomings or we can move them to deeper and more intentional action about diversity issues. But how?
 
There are two things required of a good model for change: 1) the issue has to be personal, and 2) it has to be relevant for the long view - it has to apply to something bigger than me, go beyond me. Perhaps there are actually three things - the third has to do with believability: I have to believe that my actions matter (the actions are immediate but the impact is long term).
 
Relevance is actually the first thing (if we don't do this now we'll lose in the long run), then making it personal (this is mine to do, in everything that I do), then believability (I may not see the change but I know if I act now the change will happen).
 
After watching An Inconvenient Truth, I am re-astounded by the capacity of human beings for denial, or truth construction based on what we want to believe. Given all that Al Gore has presented, all the science and data, the actions our leaders are taking (and in fact, we ourselves) are less than minimal. The same can be said of diversity efforts.
 
Regardless of what we want to believe, people do not act out of reason. Smokers who continue smoking in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are killing themselves provide one good example of this. Approaching diversity solely from the standpoint of data and statistics is ultimately futile.

Executives demand data and the omnipresent "business case for diversity," but they will not really respond to it in significant actionable ways because it is irrelevant to their experience (they can't see it) and the only kind of "personalization" they can see is "I will lose or my people will lose." They have no visceral reason or understanding to act on the data and data, in fact, is largely a negative impetus, not a positive one.

I've spent much of my career training young actors to free their impulses so they can get to the root of what drives their actions, what defines their intentions on the stage. People like to think that reason rules the day but it doesn't. We act out of emotion (usually fear or desire). If reason ruled the day, modern marketing wouldn't work, diversity would be a non-issue, and I'd be selling my car (which, come to think about it, isn't such a bad idea).
 
Significant diversity change is not possible as an intellectual exercise or “data dump,” nor can it be legislated. Significant diversity change will only come when it is personal and relevant to the leadership of our organizations. Until then we are incapable of looking beyond our behaviors to the structure of the land.

[amazing, beautiful river images from David Jensen]

Dead Metaphors and Counterfeit Conversations

-by David Robinson

HR professionals continue to rely on metaphors of diversity that obfuscate and complicate the very challenges they are meant to address. “Stir fry,” “mosaic,” “tossed salad,” and “bottom line” is all metaphors that HR professionals use—and abuse—in talking about and addressing diversity issues. They have become pablum of sorts, quaint “shorthand” for diversity; we are losing their meanings and power

The reality of diversity in the workplace is complex. It requires metaphors capable of grasping complexity, expanding perspectives, and facilitating a meaningful dialogue across difference. By unwittingly “literalizing” their metaphors, HR professionals hinder their capacity to grasp and address the multifarious nature of diversity. Without the capacity to engage with multiple perspectives that comes with metaphor, their only recourse is to default to well-worn cycles of legislating behavior, thereby perpetuating the notion that diversity is a problem to be “solved.”

Business identifies itself through what it believes to be quantifiable, objective data. The “bottom line” is a favorite and oft used expression (and a metaphor). It is not surprising then, that HR professionals, working within a context that greatly values the reduction of information, are stymied when confronted with a complexity like diversity. Business demands that issues be reduced to prose, which condemns HR professionals to perpetually seek ways to address the “bottom line” of diversity. When “seeking the bottom line of diversity” refers only to “what is the pay-off?” or “what will it cost?” the metaphor (bottom line) is being used literally and no longer functions as a metaphor. It is in effect, dead.

The parade of literal business cases made to address the literal “bottom line of diversity” indicates that the metaphor has lost its referential power. A living metaphor connotes; it is the poetry that reaches for understanding beyond the ability of language to grasp. A dead metaphor denotes; at best it describes. It is prose. When taken literally, a metaphor (bottom line) has no power to illuminate; the subject (diversity) is reduced, the interpretive possibilities neutered and the complexities denied. In fact, the inert metaphor holds the subject (diversity) captive reducing its access to quantitative statements, dollars and cents. “Stir Fry,” “Mosaic,” “Jelly Bean Jar,” and “Tossed Salad,” are among the plethora of “different-things–in-a-single-container” comparisons used to describe but incapable of illuminating diversity.

A living metaphor facilitates a more significant and revealing engagement with diversity. It does more than describe. It affords HR professionals the capacity to deal with the complexity of diversity in a useful way. For instance, Robert Fritz teaches that behavior, like water, will always follow the path of least resistance, a path determined by the structure of the land. How might diversity interventions transform if the focus shifted from regulating behavior to engaging with the underlying structure of the land? How might diversity become meaningful if it was no longer seen as a container-of-different-things (a “silo”) but instead was understood as an action, “how we do what we do?” These perceptual changes are possible within a living metaphor in which the “essence” or the “ends” or the “heart” or the “fundamental nature” of diversity become relevant.

Dead metaphors are supported by two concepts: split intentions and counterfeit conversations.

A split intention happens when actions taken do not support the stated intentions. For instance, when an organization sincerely includes diversity in its statement of core values but does little to address its recruiting and hiring practices, systems of promotions, compensation, etc., it has effectively split its intention. A split intention is often invested in the appearance of an action and not the action itself. When diversity is encased in a dead metaphor, HR professionals have no choice but to split their intentions in order to make their initiatives appear impactful.

Counterfeit conversations result from the continued, persistent use of a dead metaphor as if it were still alive. The metaphors we use frame the choices we see; when a metaphor no longer refers to an illumination, it becomes concrete and obfuscates absurdities. In this instance, when we take seriously the metaphor of the “bottom line of diversity,” it appears that the unsolvable might be solved. The organization, invested in the concrete nature of its metaphor, is within its rights to demand that expenditures en route to solving the unsolvable be justified. HR professionals with the task of “solving” diversity while staying under budget have no other recourse but to talk around the issue and pretend that a mountain of data, lists of statistics, 10 best tools or a host of interventions and conferences will actually result in the “solving” of the problem. It is a vicious circle.

It is a trick of language that deludes us into grasping for diversity like it is an object, a thing, jellybeans in a jar. The word “diversity” is, after all, a noun. It is only through another trick of language, a living metaphor, that we will able to reach beyond the limits of our language and encounter the many complex forces, the poetry that we reduce to the prose “diversity.”

-David Robinson is co-founder of The Circle Project, providing unique, experiential training about diversity and inclusion issues and culture change. www.thecircleproject.com; 828-280-5766 (East Coast office) or 206-853-8289.

 

We need to stop creating tame solutions for wicked problems - like racism

-Patricia Digh

I got a call recently from a human resources director. “We’ve got a problem,” he said. “Some of our employees have hung nooses from their African-American coworkers' lockers. We need help.”

The solution he requested? A one hour workshop.

"You've got to be kidding me," I replied. “A lifetime of mental constructs led these people to put nooses on their black colleague's lockers, and you're going to give it one hour?"

“If I could solve this in an hour, don’t you think I would?”

Like that HR director, we continue to focus on the race issues facing our communities in ways that ensure failure. By applying “tame solutions” to what is a “wicked problem,” not only do we not solve the problem, but we obfuscate the reality that racism is a wicked problem to begin with—and in so doing, actually exacerbate the problem.

Before defining “wicked problems”, it is important to understand what a “tame problem” is. By definition, a tame problem has a well-defined and stable problem statement; a definite stopping point; a solution that can be objectively evaluated as being right or wrong; solutions that can be tried and abandoned; and belongs to a class of similar problems that can be solved in a similar manner.

By contrast, wicked problems like affordable housing, disparities in health care, and institutional racism are ill-defined, ambiguous and associated with strong moral, political and professional issues. Since they are strongly stakeholder dependent, there is often little consensus about what the problem is, let alone how to resolve it.

Furthermore, wicked problems won't keep still: they are sets of complex, interacting issues evolving in a dynamic social context. For example, the significant differences in achievement and graduation rates between white and black students in the U.S. aren’t just school-based problems, but intertwined inextricably with a host of connected societal and economic issues.

Often, new forms of wicked problems emerge as a result of trying to understand and solve one of them. While attempting to solve a wicked problem, the solution of one of its aspects may reveal or create another, even more complex problem; like a Rubik’s cube, solving one facet changes the face of other sides.

Problems—like racism—whose solutions require large groups of individuals to change their mindsets and behaviors are likely to be wicked problems. And yet, we persist in looking for what are essentially “tame” solutions; we pile program upon program and hold forums in which it is difficult to get beyond the surface of the issues—why is that?

Here’s what defines a “wicked problem”:

§ Every wicked problem is unique—lessons learned are hard to transfer to other problems

§ Every wicked problem is a symptom of another problem

§ The problem is not fully understood until after the formulation of a solution

§ Stakeholders have radically different world views and different frames for understanding the problem

§ The problem is never solved

§ Wicked problems do not have an exhaustive set of potential solutions

§ Wicked problems are often "solved" (as well as they can be) through group efforts

§ Wicked problems require inventive/creative solutions

§ Every implemented solution to a wicked problem has consequences, and may cause additional problems

§ Discrepancies in wicked problems can be explained in numerous ways—and the choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem's resolution.

Racism is a wicked problem. Yet the interventions we undertake to address it are often, in fact, “tame solutions” which, by definition, exacerbate rather than solve the problem.

As analyst Jeff Conklin has written, “Business and government persist in applying inadequate thinking and methods to solving problems. One reason they do that is because it is possible, in fact easy, to tame a wicked problem. To do so, you simply construct a problem definition that obscures the wicked nature of the problem, and then apply linear methods to solving it (this sets off a chain reaction that perpetuates the problem).”

What if racism can’t be “solved” by linear methods? What if there isn’t a programmatic solution to it? What if it resists strategic planning and forums? What then?

We have been trying to dismantle racism using what Paul Watzlawick calls “first order change”—an incremental, linear progression to do more or less, better, faster, or with greater accuracy. Instead, we need “second order change.” First order changes occur within a system that itself remains unchanged. Second order changes change the system.

Conferences on racism and other diversity issues are important—overflowing crowds tell us that, but real change will be messier and more transformational than a panel discussion. We must create second order change by changing the system itself. We must resist tame solutions. And we must address this problem as if our future depended on it. Because it does.
 

Circle Project featured in Presidents Forum

In June 2007, Circle Project founder Patti Digh will be a featured speaker at the Chronicle of Higher Education's annual Presidents Forum, "Managing the Academic Enterprise."

The Chronicle Presidents Forum will bring together the most influential leaders in American higher education—presidents and chancellors, chief financial officers, other senior administrators, and trustees at four-year institutions and community colleges. The Forum will examine the strategies college executives can use to improve the management of their institutions' fund raising, financial performance, and employee recruiting. Patti will address the issue of diversity in the executive suite.

The forum sponsor, The Chronicle of Higher Education, is the leading professional news source for the chief executives, senior administrators, technology officers, and faculty members who run America's colleges and universities.

The impact of story and storytelling

Circle Project co-founder Patti Digh was recently invited to participate in a unique panel discussion featured on The Story and the Listener Online and focused on Story, Narrative, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity. Here's one excerpt from that interview and a report of the full panel discussion can be found here:   

Patti Digh: When we choose stories to tell our children that involve nontraditional families and gay and lesbian characters, we are -- in essence -- giving voice to a broader reality for them. We are allowing them to realize that definitions of "normalcy" are broader than the general population might allow for. We are opening the door to a dialogue that might be difficult when faced head-on, but can be broached when the door is opened through story. 

2007 Retreat Series Open for Registration

Registration is now open for our 2007 Retreat Series. Our course catalog and registration materials are now online; feel free to contact us with questions you might have about any of the retreats planned for this year:

April 13-15
Exploring the Power of Metaphor: Accessing deeper personal and organizational wisdom

May 14-17
Training at the Edge: Experiential Tools for Transformational Learning
[A Train-the-Trainer Intensive]

September 28-30
Mind the Gap: The Power of Personal Stories [A 37days Retreat]

October 26-28
Wicked Problems & Tame Solutions: Navigating Complexity in Organizations and Communities

Each of our 2007 retreats can accommodate between 14-16 participants only; they will be held at the beautiful Bend of Ivy Lodge near Asheville, North Carolina.

You'll find course descriptions and logistical information in the brochure (PDF). We would welcome your participation and engagement and insights. Please join us if you can.

The Circle Project featured by SHRM

The work of The Circle Project was featured prominently in a recent article by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). Members of SHRM can access the full text of the article here. We’ve excerpted a few sections of the article below for those who aren’t able to access it online:

Experts: Intentions Should Dictate Experiential Outcomes
By Rebecca R. Hastings, January 2007 [From the SHRM Online Diversity Focus Area]

Employers seeking nontraditional or experiential forms of diversity training have a wide range of options available to them. To achieve lasting benefits, however, experts say that an employer’s intentions and their employees’ expectations must be aligned before training begins.

“There’s a great opportunity to use nontraditional modes,” says Patricia Digh, co-founder of The Circle Project, a consulting group focused on diversity issues through experiential learning. But some programs don’t quite reach Digh’s definition of “experiential.” “For me, experiential [programs] involve asking people to experience something and make meaning out of it,” she says. “The meaning is co-created with the other people in the room.”

What Makes Experiential Learning Stick

“There’s a difference between learning and training,” says Digh, but what people really need is learning. “I might absorb information from a lecture but I don’t necessarily internalize it.” Experiential programs can help increase learning, she says.

A Measured Approach

Before recommending an experientially based program, Digh suggests, HR professionals should ask themselves a series of questions:

• Am I doing this just because I need to mark it off my “to-do” list?

• Am I prepared for people to have open, honest communication?

• Are senior managers willing to be vulnerable with the rest of the staff?

• Are we willing to follow up on what comes out of the training?

• How are we going to measure the success of this work?

• What is the transformation that we want this to effect?

• If I believe that managers would not participate, what does this mean about my own stereotypes about this group?

Organizations that cannot answer questions like these should not offer a program that could raise people’s expectations that things are going to change, Digh says.

One Employer’s Experience

“Experiential learning is far more effective than the traditional type of learning programs,” says Karen Allen, vice president of human resources for the National Parks Conservation Association in Washington, D.C., a client of Digh’s, whose experience in counseling, education and HR led her to pursue an experiential option for her organization. 

“I wanted something different,” Allen says, though she wasn’t sure how well it would be received. “What they offer is ‘way’ different, but so much more meaningful and effective,” she says.

“My primary concern was that the organization was not ready for this experience,” Allen said in an e-mail interview. But the outcome was in her words “amazing” in terms of her expectations of the program and her colleagues’ responses to it.

Other Considerations

Measurement of the results of an experiential program should take place over the long term, Digh says. Though participants can be asked broad questions, such as “what were your biggest surprises?” following an event, Digh encourages participants to identify long-term commitments to change behaviors. “The organization needs to take a long-term focus and build into the post-learning process a way to revisit it,” Digh says.

“Organizations have to have a broader belief that this work can make a difference,” Digh says.

NW Speakers Series - Materials

For those participants in the January 23rd NW Speakers Series session on "leaning into your discomfort," you can find PowerPoints slides from the session here. Please email if you'd like additional information.

Exploring the Power of Metaphor: A Circle Project Retreat

We sometimes overlook the tools we have at hand, those that are the most potent.

One of those is metaphor. As we've explored learning and organizational culture and story, we've come to appreciate the power of metaphor. Emerson has said, "The world is emblematic. Parts of speech are metaphors, because the whole of nature is a metaphor of the human mind."

 We've become enamored of metaphors such as "desire lines" and "dorodango" and want to explore further how the metaphors we use both illuminate and obscure, how they help and how they hinder, both personally and organizationally.

This weekend retreat, "Desire Lines: Exploring the Power of Metaphor," will start that exploration. We'll make use of a beautiful space and place to explore metaphors of those same concepts, applying our learning to the organizational universes and systems in which we find ourselves. Come, join us!

Details follow...