“The mind, stretched by a new idea, never returns to it’s original dimension,”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Each morning when we awaken from sleep, we almost always do the same thing: push down with our legs, reach up with our arms, and often, emitting a loud and noisy yawn, stretch. This unusual and situation-specific action has a name: “pandiculation. We don’t choose to do it. It never occurs to us that it’s time to stretch. Rather, it’s what the body wants and even demands, and in those moments between sleep and wakefulness, the body is in charge. Trying not to stretch has probably never occurred to anyone. In fact, driven by the physical demands of the body, trying to resist stretching would upset the natural rhythms of our physical lives and probably make us feel confused and uncomfortable.
If we could see ourselves in full-stretch, we might be surprised. Our muscles contract and tighten, we thrust our legs downward with a surprising amount of force and our arms upward in an attempt to reach the ceiling. All the while, the torso, caught in the middle between these opposing forces, twists and turns in an attempt keep things aligned. Once into full stretch, our eyes and ears close, our faces scrunch up into a grimace that often morphs into a scowl, our mouths open and what usually comes out is a huge yawn, accompanied by a window-shaking, cry: “Ahaughhh.
Stretching Is Everywhere
Humans are not the only animals which stretch upon awakening. Dogs do it, cats do it, even mice and rats do it. And so do cows, horses, deer, sheep, lions, foxes, and hamsters. Even some insects are stretchers. Get close to a fly that’s settled on a plate after eating its fill, and you may see it stretch one wing and then the other.
When we move outside the boundaries of living organisms, we can discover that “stretch” or “stretching” is a term used to describe a wide range of actions, situations and activities. Baseball pitchers go into a stretch as part of their windup; the fans in the stands rise as one during the “the seventh-inning stretch” and sing “Take Me OutTo the Ball Game;” a large and unbroken expanse is described as “stretch of highway;” at a race track, as horses near the finish line, they are “coming down the home stretch;” during the times of the Inquisition, people were tortured by “stretching” them on the rack; we make things longer by “stretching them;” and after a picnic lunch, we may find a comfortable place to stretch out on the lawn for a nap. When we believe that others have exceeded normal limits, we tell them that they are “stretching my patience to the breaking point.”
In “In the Home Stretch,” a narrative poem published in 1916, Robert Frost, describes the struggles of an older couple as they move from an old home to a new one and settle in. They take a few moments to review the events of their lives together during past years, and reflect on the fact that they don’t have many more years ahead. We can read the poem as a story of two people being stretched by moving, and also coming to understand that they too are “in the home stretch” of their lives.
In recent years, the practice of stretching has moved beyond the physical, metaphorical, and the poetical, and has morphed into a way for people, especially the young, to become more “with it,” either by adopting the latest iteration of social media, or keeping up with the latest fashions in dress and speech. The adoption of new approaches, new vocabularies, and new attitudes requires constant stretching of rules, procedures, categories and behaviors.
A dominant theme for those of us who live in First World societies is the goal of becoming successful, a task which involves for most a continuous improvement of one’s self, and for some, a betterment of society. In 1982, Philosopher Karl Popper placed this theme at the center of his answer to the oft-asked question, “What’s it all about?” The first sentence of In Search of a Better World” is, “All living things are in search of a better world…they are trying to improve their situation.“[1] ) Both goals – improving one’s self, and making society a better place – begin with searching, a practice that can stretch our perspective beyond the boundaries of our present knowledge and experience. For individuals, this often means engaging in programs for identifying their weaknesses and faults, working to be rid of them, and replacing them with new and more productive approaches to one’s problems and opportunities. Improving society is a process of making organizations, institutions, communities and governments more effective, first, by transforming the processes, policies and procedures that make the system what it is, and second, developing the people who work in these transformed systems by encouraging them to hone the talents and abilities they possess, and helping them to acquire new ones. For all of this, stretching is at the center.
Come to the Edge
As part of this process of “developing people” so they can work successfully in transformed organizations and institutions, the concept of “stretch goals” has become part of the armamentarium of leadership. From this perspective, employee goals should go beyond easy or even difficult objectives, and become “stretch goals,” those which require them to move beyond what they are familiar and comfortable with.
In 1997, playwright Tom Stoppard, while addressing a class of drama students in Santa Barbara, California, asked his audience a question, and then answered it himself: “What is the real dialogue that goes on between the artist and his audience?” By way of reply, Stoppard held the microphone close to his mouth and spoke these eight lines by English poet Christopher Logue:
“Come to the edge.
We might fall.
Come to the edge.
It’s too high.
COME TO THE EDGE!
And they came,
and he pushed,
and they flew.” [2]
“There was a surge of applause,” wrote Kenneth Tynan, in a The New Yorker article: “In imagination, these young people are all flying.” [3]
At her inauguration in November, 1997, Mary McAleese, newly elected president of the Irish Republic, not only recited the poem, “Come To The Edge” but also had it embroidered into the silk lining of her evening gown. Come to the edge, she told them, and be prepared to stretch! [4]
We Have Bodies and Minds
In 1855, Punch Magazine published “Shortcut to Metaphysics:”
What is matter? – never mind
What is mind? – no matter.” [5]
Over 150 years later, in an impressive affirmation of the truth of the old saying “What goes around, comes around,” Bart Simpson answers his son’s bedtime question, “What is mind?” with the same words that Punch Magazine printed years earlier: “Relax, What is matter? Never mind. What is mind? No matter.”
But answering the question “What is mind?” does matter, first to generations of psychologists, philosophers and neuroscientists who have continued to argue the question over the past decades, and second, to the rest of us as well, since it is clear to us that the mind – whatever it is – is hugely important to us. There is work to do. The scientists and philosophers who are in the middle of these arguments do not have an answer to the question,“What is mind?” nor are they ready to answer a related question, “How does it work?” On the first page of the 660 pages of How the Mind Works, Stephen Pinker writes “We don’t understand how the mind works…” and then goes on for the next 660 pages explaining what he means by “don’t understand.” [6]
We will bypass debates over “What is the mind?” and “How does it work?” and turn to a question that is much more relevant for our purposes: “What does the mind do?” And here there is much more clarity: “The mind is designed to solve many…problems,” writes Pinker. [7] It is with our minds that we identify and make sense of the problems that beset us, then use them to figure out a way to solve or manage them. The way we do this is by thinking our way though them, deciding what we should about them, and then addressing the problem by making plans to remove any obstacles that stand in our way.
American philosopher John Dewey took this idea that minds are about solving problems, and turned it on its head. First the problem, he believed, and then the thinking: “We only think when we are confronted with a problem.” [8]
Stretching The Mind
This chapter is not about stretching the body, but stretching the mind, a challenge which, as we will see, is a much more complicated process. It is not an automatic experience as is the stretching of the body, but must be initiated by us, the “conscious we,” which is the way we think and talk about the mind. And when the mind does stretch, there are hardly ever any “Ahaughhh’s. It is generally an internal experience, quieter and more private then the stretching of the body. Here is an example of “mind-stretching” as reported by the philosopher Thomas Kuhn. While puzzling over Aristotle’s theory of physics, Kuhn looked out the window, and
“Suddenly the fragments in my head sorted themselves out in a new
way, and fell into place together. My jaw dropped, for all at once
Aristotle seemed a very good physicist indeed, but of a sort that I’d
never dreamed possible. Now I understood why he had said what
he’d said.” [9]
Kuhn did not believe Aristotle’s approach to physics was either accurate or correct, but what he came to understand was how Aristotle understood it. The stretching of his mind occurred when he was able to set aside his twentieth-century ways of thinking about physics and temporarily adopt Aristotle’s world-view, something entirely new for him.
Our Minds Are Ready for Some Problems, Not for Others.
There is no shortage of problems. Psychologist John Gardner wrote that “The problems of life and society as a numberless as raindrops. They are part of the texture of life.” [10] Some of these numberless problems become obstacles that block our way forward toward achieving our goals; finding ways to overcome these obstacles is the sine qua non of experiencing satisfying relationships with others, enjoying the rewards of success at work, and living what we define as a good life.
We excel at solving some of these problems. During the past decades we have sent people to the moon and returned them safely to earth. We have written down in a book the exact dates and times for the next 10,000 years, accurate to a millisecond, when the planet Venus will pass in front of the sun, and how long it will take. In 2021, we sent Perseverance, an unmanned mission to Mars, and after it landed, sent a message to Ingenuity, a small helicopter packed into the module, to fly. And fly it did, rising up and flying across the surface of Mars and taking photographs that were sent back to earth. We have eliminated smallpox, one of the most deadly and feared diseases, from the face of the earth, and we, along with most of the people in First World countries, enjoy pure water and safe food.
Others problems have been more resistant. “We have made advances in agriculture, manufacturing, and aviation,” writes philosopher Martha Nussbaum. “It is less clear that we have done so with respect to partnering, parenting, and choosing political leaders.” [11] We have also been less successful in insuring that all of our citizens have adequate heath care, that all of students are able to take advantage of a quality eduction, or in ending the shame of child sex trafficking or sexual and physical abuse of women.
What must we do in order to solve the problems that resist our efforts? “One of the requirements for solving problems is that we confront them,” continues Gardner, “identity them early, appraise them honestly, and avoid compliance or evasion. We are not good at it.” [12] One reason we are not good at this is that we ignore Gardner’s instructions: we do not confront them, or identify them early, choosing to ignore, evade, or even deny that they exist. And even when we follow Gardner’s advice, some problems remain unsolved. The reason seems to be that our minds are not up to the challenge. Our thinking is flawed. Our capabilities to think about them, and then to take constructive action, fall short of what is required.
Near the end of How the Mind Works, Steven Pinker includes a list of important problems that are too difficult for psychologists to understand, much less solve. “Consciousness” is one, another is Self, followed by Free Will, Meaning, Knowledge, and finally, Morality. “How did ought emerge,” he asks, “from a universe of particles and planets, genes and bodies.” [13] His conclusion is straightforward: Our minds did not evolve so that they could comprehend problems such as these. When we try to think about solving them, “The head spins in theoretical disarray,” writes philosopher Colin McGinn, “no explanatory model suggests itself, bizarre ontologies loom. There is a feeling of intense confusion, but no clear idea about where the confusion lies.” [14] There is a mismatch between these kinds of problem and the capacities of our minds to think them through.
The mind has other work to do than think about unthinkable problems: “The mind is designed by natural selection to solve the kind of problems…that were matters of life and death to our ancestors,” the ones they faced “in their foraging way of life, [and] in particular, understand and outmaneuver objects, plants, animals and other people…”[15] Examples of the problems our ancestors faced are “What plants can we eat, and which plants should we avoid?” “How can we avoid being surprised by our enemies,” and “How can we store food to last us through the winter months?” Either Homo sapiens became good at solving these kinds of problems, or they perished. Undoubtedly, codes of morality emerged which allowed people to live together and resolve their conflicts. But it is doubtful that pre-history peoples gathered around the fire at night and debated the issues of right and wrong.
Intelligence Is The ability to attain goals in the face of obstacles.
Psychologists define intelligence as the “ability to attain goals in the face of obstacles.”[16] Since thinking is problem solving, then intelligence is a matter of being able to think successfully about problems to reach goals. There are at least three important reasons why we fail at this: The first is the mismatch problem discussed above: Given the nature of the problem, the cognitive equipment of the mind is not up to the task. We don’t have a way to think about them that allows us to move forward.
The second reason that some problems are beyond us is that our habits of thinking are out of sync with the problems we are thinking about. We are effective with some kinds of problems, but not for others. When we face problems that have answers, most of us know how to look for them, When the problems have no answers, we are thrown off-stride.
A third reason for our inability to address some problems is sloppy thinking. We lack a foundation in critical thinking skills and spend too much time mucking around with concepts, models and approaches that lack the disciplined thinking that is required to make sense of the world around us. Here are three examples: rushing for a solution before making an effort to understand the problem; insisting that you know what to do without involving others; and choosing “solutions” to the present problem that seemed to work in previous years.
The Minds We Have vs The Minds We Need.
“What got you here, won’t get you there.” [17]
Marshal Goldsmith
We are born with brains which make possible our survival. They are programmed to solve our immediate problems: we can breath, suck, cry, swallow, gag, sneeze, eliminate waste, among other reflexive behaviors. And yet, even with all of these amazing abilities, surviving depends upon other human beings. They are responsible for keeping us safe and making sure that our basic needs are met.
What we are not born with is a mind. Although in most cases, we are born with the capabilities to develop one, the mind begins to emerge as we struggle with obstacles in our environment. Cognitive psychologists believe that we are endowed with an experimental approach to problem solving: try this and if it doesn’t work, try something else. Babies are problems solvers by necessity. But the specific ways they go about behaving in the presence of problems are taught to them by those who first take care of them. Do they push ahead to overcome obstacles, do they throw tantrums, or strike out at another child?
The ways we learn to meet our needs are also taught to us. Our first experiences with food are arranged by those who decide what we should eat. Significant changes in what we eat begin only when we leave the care of our parents, move out into the world, and begin to make our own choices.
When it comes to using our minds to face up to our problems, nothing is more important than being able to talk about them, both to ourselves and to others.Thinking can occur only when we have language with which to think, and here, once again, we depend upon our parents to teach us how to use language to get what we want. It is only when we can name things and then talk about them with others can it be said that we have minds to navigate through the difficult problems we face. Philosopher Rene Descartes is primarily remembered by, “I think, therefore I am.” What he left out was what comes before:“I have language, therefore I can think.” And since I can think, “therefore I am.”
The Minds We Have
From the moment we are born, we become problem solvers, actively engaged in learning how to manage the numerous problems that life sends our way. Most of us learn to solve many of our early problems, a success story which, paradoxically, often makes us unfit to address many of our later ones. How unfit? Many of us believe that if we just work hard enough, all problems can be solved, and, if we do run into a problem that we cannot solve, we assume that there must be an expert somewhere who can; many of us believe that those in authority know the answers to our problems and so we are happy to pass over to them the responsibility for solving them; we often believe that once we solve our problems, we are finished with them and can move on to tackle the next ones; some are are confident that the solution to a problem we faced last is one we can use again this year. If any of these describe ways that your mind works with problems, you may excel with tame problems, but for wicked problems, they are too narrow, constricted, flawed or basically inadequate. Rather than contribute to your effectiveness with problems, skills that work with tame problems get in the way when the problems are wicked.
By the time we leave adolescence and enter into early adulthood, we have solved thousands of problems, an activity that will continue throughout the rest of our lives. Some of us excel at this, others struggle, and still others often fail, but all of us are familiar with the experience of confronting problems. When we come upon a problem, our first challenge is to decide what the problem is, then move on to decide what we should do with it. Hovering above these first steps, however, often unperceived and so unnoticed, is a different kind of problem: a mismatch between the problem itself and our capabilities to address it. Here is American poet, Anne Sexton, describing her mismatch problem: “I’m tall and thin…but my life is square and small.” 18] A paraphrase of Sexton’s insight will give us an understanding of why some problems cause us so much grief: “Many problems are tall, big, and messy, while the way we think about them is small, square and neat.” The problems with which we struggle the most – the big, tall, messy ones – are wicked problems, while the ones our minds are most ready to solve – the small, square and neat ones – are tame. If the problem in front of us is big and messy, and we are prepared only for those that are “small, square, and neat,” we go into the struggle with a serious handicap.
Examples of Match/Mismatch
Here are two examples of how problems are matched and mismatched with people’s abilities:
Fred Singles arrives home from a business trip to discover that he has a problem that he didn’t count on: he is locked out of his house. After considering several possibilities – breaking a basement window and crawling through, going around to the back of the house and kicking in the door – he decides that his best choice is to remove the hinges that hold the front door in place. But to do that he will need a screwdriver, and his tools are locked up in the house. So next, he decides that he will find a hardware store and buy a new screwdriver. But upon second thought, he realizes that at 2:00 am on a Sunday morning, the chances of a hardware store being open in town are slim to none. And besides, the hardware store is five miles away in town – too far to walk with the temperature at 30 degrees – and the taxi that brought him from the airport has long since departed. What about the service station on the highway next to the turnoff into his neighborhood he wonders. Would it still be open? It takes him fifteen minutes to walk to the station only to discover that it closed at midnight. Shivering with the cold, he thinks about his next step. A car going by on the highway gives him an idea. When the next car approaches, he is standing the middle of the highway waving his arms. The car swerves to the right, and speeds away in the darkness. The next car slows down and stops, and a policeman opens the door and steps out. Fred explains his problem. “I’ve seen worse,” the officers chuckles good heartedly. “Get in and let’s get this solved.” Twenty minutes later, after Fred and the officer have replaced the hinges on the door and the police cruiser is turning the corner at the end of the block. Fred, with a small smile of triumph, opens the door and enters his house.
Rene and Alice are at their wit’s end. They have been talking – arguing really – with their son Ken for over an hour, and they were clearly getting nowhere. Ken had called earlier and asked to see them. The news he brought was not good: the bank was going to foreclose on his house unless he brought his mortgage payments up to date. There is a sense of deja vu in the room. They had had this same conversation a year ago, and the year before that. Last year they reached an agreement that they would bail out Ken one last time and Ken would not ask again. And now, here he was, back again, making the same request, Here are some questions Rene and Alice are struggling with: Should they do what they have done before and give him money? Should they insist that before they give any money, he needs to get his act together? Or should they cut him off and let him deal with the consequences” They have no idea what would be the best thing do do. Finally, Rene says. “You can just forget it. I’ve had it. No more money.” “Fine,” said Ken, “that’s just fine. And then Janet and kids will be out on the street. Do you want your grandchildren to be homeless?” “Of course not,” said Alice, almost in tears, “its just…” Rene interrupted: “It’s just you have never been able to manage money. Your make a good salary. What happened to the budget we helped you set up last year?” “O great, here we go again about the budget,“ said Ken, his voice rising and the sarcasm oozing out of his voice. “What I want to know is why you are so tight. You have loads of money.” “It’s not about the money, it’s about you learning how to be responsible and live within your means,” said Rene, his voice rising and his face getting red. Rene and Ken stare at each other for a moment. Finally, Ken says, “So, are you going to help us or not?” Rene answers quickly: “ No more money. You’ll have to figure it out yourself.” “Fine, that ’s just fine.” And with that he gets up and stalks out of the room. After a moment, Alice burst into tears. “It always ends this way,” she said, sobbing. “It always ends this way.”
Earlier we quoted John Dewey: “We only think when we are confronted with a problem.” When Fred Singles discovered that he was locked out his house, he immediately began to think of ways to solve his problem. He came up with one possibility after another, tried one, and when it failed, tried another until he came upon one what worked. His problem-solving approach fit the problem he was struggling with.
On the other hand, Rene and Alice seemed unable to get beyond the accusations, anger and frustrations of their problems with Ken. They didn’t seem able to think about it in ways that would allow them find answers that they could agree on and then work together, helping and supporting each other, to make the situation better.
The Minds We Need
Stressed out? Tense? Anxious? At your wits end? Many of us are. James Champy believes he knows why. The social and cultural revolutions that we are living though bring with them new demands that put pressure on us to see and act differently. Here is his summary:
Nothing is simple anymore. Nothing is stable.
Now, whatever we do is not enough.
Everything is in question.
Everyone must change. [19]
With such pervasive upheavals in the world around us, it is no wonder that we feel stressed and overwhelmed. Mental health experts suggest that one remedy that may help us is to practice meditation. Successful efforts to “quiet” the mind have proven to be helpful. Those who give it a try discover something surprises them. The mind has a mind of its own! It doesn’t like you messing around with what it is thinking, and your efforts to force it to think of “nothing,”and will be actively resisted. What the mind seems to want is to think of something, anything, and it doesn’t seem to matter what that is.
It seems unfair that when we choose a remedy to help us manage our stress and anxiety, we encounter a new problem that only adds stress and anxiety. By trying to reduce our emotional struggles over what is happening “out there,” we find ourselves with a new problem “in here.”
The Minds We Need for Wicked Problems
It is a truism that the present is different from the past. But given the rapidity and the pervasiveness of the changes that are occurring in our lives, this present may be more different from the past than for any other generation in history. W e find ourselves in a predicament: We prefer certainty, closure, security, and predictability, and yet find ourselves in situations where there are no final answers, no closure, little security and few predictabilities. To survive in this kind of world, let alone flourish, we need to learn new ways of thinking about what’s happening and what can be done. Here are some characteristics of the minds we need for what is coming:
- Minds that are ready to revolt against their own conclusions.
- Minds that are not necessarily prepared for disbelief, but for constant, graceful skepticism.
- Minds that are open to any possibility, including impossibility.
- Minds of democratic hospitality to other views.
- Minds that are profoundly questioning, but also buoyantly hopeful.
- Minds that are willing to to bring established processes, procedures and, yes people to judgement. [20]
Three Stretches for Collaboration
On January 25th, 1996, hours after the final dress rehearsal for the musical Rent, composer and creator Johnathan Larsen died of an aortic aneurysm. He was 35. Everyone involved with Rent was devastated. They had worked together for months preparing for the opening and suddenly, with Larsen’s unexpected death, everything was turned upside down. The creative team met to decide what to do, and their decision was to go ahead with the production. It was a decision that paid off: the musical received rave reviews from the critics, won a Pulitzer prize, four Tony awards, and ran for over 12 years on Broadway.
As remarkable as was the success of Rent, equally remarkable was what happened with the cast members after Larsen’s death. Before he died, they had felt connected and involved with the project. Afterwards, a new, stronger spirit of collaboration became part of their experience. Here are three comments from cast members:
- “Everyone felt a degree of ownership and responsibility to do their absolute best on his behalf. It ceased being a job and became a calling.” James C. Nicola.
- “Our idea was, ‘Let’s do what Jonathan wanted us to do,’ even if we couldn’t know exactly what that was.” Tim Weil.
- “From that last dress rehearsal until mid-July no one missed a performance. It seemed impossible. No one could. I don’t say that to brag. I just think it showed our level of commitment. We had do it for Jonathan.” Anthony Rapp. [21]
The experience of the cast members of Rent is an example of what can be achieved if people will forget their own personal issues and direct their energies toward working together.
Collaborating with family members and close friends is often easy and, as we saw with Rent, it can lead to significant accomplishments. Collaborating with strangers, however, is another matter entirely. Since we cannot predict with any degree of accuracy their behaviors or motives, it can seem risky, even dangerous, and so we hold back.
Most difficult of all – and often impossible – is collaborating with our enemies. And yet, according to author Adam Kahane, if we are interested in any kind of progress with our most intractable problems, that is what is required. “We face the same challenges everywhere,” writes Kahane, in Collaborating with The Enemy, “…at home and work, in business and politics, on community and national issues. We are trying to get something done that we think is crucial. To do this, we need to work with…people we do not like or trust.” [22] Here we find ourselves between two alternatives, aware that collaboration is important and yet resistant to the idea. What should we do?
Stretch Collaboration
Kahane’s answer is that we must learn and practice the basic principles of what he call Stretch Collaboration, a process that requires us to move away from our unrealistic beliefs for easy agreement, harmony, and individual choices, and move toward the messy reality of disagreements, conflict, and consensus. It consists of three distinct stretches:
Stretch #1: The first stretch is “to embrace conflict and connection.” Dialogue, while important, is only part of what is needed. Understanding and then accepting the other’s view, and at the same time asserting one’s own position is also important since they make clear where the differences are between them and makes reaching agreement possible.
Stretch #2: The second stretch is to “experiment a way forward.” No one know what will work before trying it. The idea is to learn together by experimenting with different options and alternatives. When everyone can see what works and what doesn’t work, they will more willing to agree on what should come next.
Stretch #3: The third stretch is to “step into the game.” It asks us to give up the roles of observing, commenting, teaching, pontificating and preaching and become a player. Kahane summarizes this as having “less distance and autonomy, and more connection and conflict… it requires us to take the risk of engaging fully in the situation…and requires us to be willing to sacrifice some of what feels known, familiar and comfortable…” [23]
Kahane’s discussions of these three stretches is rich and rewarding and this brief review has not done justice to them. What is important for us, however, is not to master the details of the his three stretches (though that is worth doing) but become aware that the art of collaborating with our enemies is beyond the capabilities of most of us and requires that we stretch our way into it.
Common Mistakes by Square and Small Minds.
What is required for collaborating with our enemies is also true for many other kinds of problems – our minds are not up to the challenge.
Here are some examples for which, if we are to move beyond an unsatisfactory status quo, mind stretching is required:
- Many believe that the answers to their perplexing questions – and the solutions to their persistent problems – are like buried treasures, hidden “out there” somewhere to be discovered. It is a profoundly misleading notion. Rather than finding a treasure at the end of our journey, answers come to us only as part of the process of searching and not at the end of it, and even then we must relinquish any claim that these answers are correct or true.
- We should be able to solve our problems. If we cannot, then there must an expert who can solve them for us.
- When we decide that a problem is finally solved, we can stop thinking about it.
- We can depend upon our elders and our leaders to solve our problems.
- Technology is the answer.
- By attending seminars, reading books, or listening to guru lectures, we will learn how solve our problems.
- My problem, since it is mine, must be the problem.
- Problems stand alone, unconnected to other problems. When we solve one, we can move on to the next one.
These ways of thinking can be effective with tame problems, but not with wicked ones. For improving our capabilities for addressing wicked ones, we need our minds to be stretched, expanded, and enlarged, able to handle more ambiguity, uncertainty and complexity.
Fifteen Stretches for Wicked Problems
Reviewing a definition of wicked problems can help us understand why minds need to be stretched. Here is how Jay Rosen, professor of journalism at New York University, defines wicked problems:
It is hard to say what the problem is, to define it clearly, or tell where it stops and starts. Their is no “right” way to view the problem, no definitive formulation. The way it is framed will change what the solution appearsto be. Someone can always say that the problem is just a symptom of another problem and that someone will not be wrong. There are many stakeholders with their own frames, which they see as exclusively correct. Ask what the problem is and you will get a different answer from each. The problem is connected to a lot of other problems; pulling them apart is almost impossible.
It gets worse. Every wicked problemis unique, so in a sense there is no prior art, and solving one won’t helpyou with the other…The problem keeps changing on us. It never gets definitely resolved. We just run out of patience, time, or money…” [24]
Most of us, most of the time, when confronted with problems like these, feel lost and uncomfortable. Our first impulse is to pull back and move away. When we make this choice, however, things almost always get worse. What is required is for us to move toward them, then actively work to stretch our minds in ways that make us more capable of attacking them.
Here are fifteen stretches that if put into practice, can make success with wicked problems more likely:
Stretch #1: From tame problems that can be solved to wicked problems that cannot.
Is this difference important? “We would be vastly better off,” says Rosen, “if we learned to distinguish between them and regular (or ‘tame”) problems.” [25]
Stretch #2: From “solving problems” to wrestling with predicaments.
It is almost impossible to say or think “problem” without moving quickly to “solve” and “solution.” They are attached at the hip and separating them is difficult. But when the problems are wicked, separating them is what we must learn to do. Puzzles can be solved, computers can be fixed, chemistry experiments have an end, but dysfunctional families cannot be fixed nor the problems that create the dysfunction solved. The same is true for ineffective work teams, or corrupt governments. Rather than “solve,” what we are asked to do is “wrestle.”
Stretch #3: From believing that solving means solved, fixed and finished, to understanding that “solutions” for wicked problems are never permanent but are always temporary arrangements.
Stretch #4 From solvable problems to actionable problems.
While tame problems can be solved, working successfully with wicked problems requires that we transform them into actionable ones, defining them in ways that allow us to work together to improve things.
Stretch #5 From beginnings and endings to “only middles.”
In Robert Frost’s poem, “In the Home Stretch,” an older couple struggles with moving into a new home. The husband says that this will the end of the turmoil in their lives, and they can now can settle in. The wife responds,
You’re searching, Joe,
For things that don’t exist.
I mean beginnings
Ends and beginnings – there are no such things.
There are only middles.” [26]
Stretch #6: From avoiding conflict, controversies or confrontation, to welcoming and encouraging them as essential parts of the conversation.
Stretch #7: From uncovering/discovering the problem to creating it.
With wicked problems, at the beginning there is no problem “out there” for us to discover. There is only a situation that concerns us, one that we think needs to be changed. This concern becomes a problem comes as we share perceptions, observations and experiences with others about what we think isn’t working and needs to be changed. Our to these collaborate efforts, a problem slowly emerges, one that we have created by giving our concerns shape, structure and substance.
Stretch #8: From “we’re finished” to understanding that there are no stopping rules.
Without stopping rules, there is no ending. The best that can be said is, “We’ve made progress, but there is still a long way to go.”
Stretch #9: From “We’ve seen this problem before,” to accepting that each problem is unique.
An excerpt from Mark Strand’s poem “Blood Maps,” captures the essence of this idea:
“Nothing will tell you
where you are.
Each moment is a place
you’ve never been before.” [27]
Stretch# 10 From a belief that we all see the problem the same way to the realization that each person in the room sees it in their own way.
For centuries, people relied on one story to explain the world, one told by kings, rulers and religions leaders. But in recent years, our minds have been stretched: “Never again will a single story be told as though it’s the only one.” [28]
Stretch #11 From “getting it right,” to “there is no ‘right’ to get.”
“You have your way, I have my way,” said Friedrich Nietzsche. “As to the right way, the correct way, the only way, it does not exist.” [28]
It is only when we move from “my way” and “your way” to “our way,” can we hope to work together productively .
Stretch #12: From closing the gaps to narrowing them.
When the problems are wicked, goals, while important, can never be fully reached. The gaps between the unsatisfactory present and a desirable future can be narrowed, but never completely closed.
Stretch #13 From answers and solutions that are true or false to ones that are better or best.
With wicked problems there are no true answers or correct solutions, but only some that are better than others. In his novel, The Overstory, Ricard Powers makes clear the nature of answers for important questions. “Answers need to be reinvented, over and over, from scratch.” [30]
Stretch #14 From one person – boss, parent, leader – who defines the problem and names the solution, to everyone deciding together.
It is impossible for a single person to define or describe the problem, or insist on providing a solution. One person’s perspective is limited, narrow and biased. Different perspectives are required to arrive at the definition of the problem.
Stretch #15: From Solving One Problem to Creating New Problems
In the 1990’s, scientists in Tasmania discovered that, due to facial tumor disease, Tasmanian devils were in danger of becoming extinct. In the early 2000’s they attempted to save them by sending 28 of the animals to Maria Island, which was also the home of 3000 penguins. By 2012, the number of Tasmanian devils had increased to 100 animals. The penguins had disappeared. “Every time humans have deliberately or accidentally introduced mammals to oceanic islands, there’s always the same outcome…a catastrophic impact on one or more bird species,” said Eric Woehler of Birdlife Tasmania. [31]
When you attempt to solve a problem in nature as did these scientists, or in a human system – a family, a relationship, an organization, or a community – your efforts will always create new problems. The Law of Unintended Consequences has not been repealed or abridged. Our at
Stretch #16: From a reliance upon Convergent Thinking – arriving at the correct answers by eliminating the incorrect ones – to Divergent Thinking, a process of imagining more and more possible answers and solutions.
The actual process of grappling with wicked problems is more complicated than Convergent/Divergent thinking. Divergent thinking is used to identify many options or alternatives as possible, and then, in order to choose the “best” one, switching over to convergent thinking is required. Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, described this switch as, first, “Let Chaos Reign,” followed by, ”Rein in Chaos.” [31]
Preparing to address wicked problems requires that we move from away the first word in each of the stretches and toward the second. Those who find themselves unwilling or unable to make this effort will be unprepared to think about, understand, or talk with others about the most important problems we face, and be equally unprepared to imagine what should be done to make things better.
Enemies of Stretching
Many obstacles stand in the way and block our way toward the stretching of our minds that is required for wrestling with wicked problems. Here are several of the most important:
Expert Knowledge: Becoming an expert in anything is a long slog, and those who are truly expert in a specific aspect of knowledge usually have earned the praise they receive. At the same time, when considering new ways of thinking, their advanced knowledge can be a disadvantage. “Highly credentialed experts can become so narrow-minded the they actually get worse with experience, even while becoming more confident – a dangerous combination,” writes David Epstein. [32] As Buddhist teacher Shunrye Suzuki reminds us, “In the beginners mind there are many possibilities, in the expert’s mind there are few.”
Early Successes: Mark Twain was reported to have said, “The worst thing that could happen to a young man [or a woman] is to bet on a horse at an early age and win.” Once people attribute their successes to the way they approach things, they are inclined to repeat them. “Habits of mind engrained by past successes can prevent change,” writes organization theorist Rosabeth Kanter, “and, in fact, can make people want to repeat the pleasurable past rather than question themselves and do new things in new ways.” [33] “Why change a winning game?” is a common argument. Why indeed. The reality is everything is always changing: ourselves, the times, as well as the challenges we face. Confronting new realities by relying upon old approaches and practices is a recipe for losing.
Previous Preparation: In Leadership for Sustainability: Strategies for Tackling Wicked Problems, R. Bruce Hull and his colleagues argue that, “Practicing wicked leadership can be challenging if you are a technically training professional or scientific expert.” [34] And paradoxically, those who have been the most rigorously trained in one way of thinking – lawyers, engineers, and military officers are examples – struggle when asked to approach things from a different perspective. In 1914, sociologist Thorstein Veblen gave this problem a name: “Trained incapacity.” [35]
Hubris and Overconfidence: Be wary of those who insist that they are TSPR (The Smartest Person in the Room). If the topic under discussion is narrow enough, it may be true. But if the group is wrestling with a wicked problem, there are no TSPR’s: All perceptions, points-of-view, and opinions are valuable and need to be considered.
“Hardening of the Categories:” We spend the early years of our lives creating mental categories into which we place our experiences: “This is good, this is bad;” “This is useful, this is useless;” These are interesting, these are boring,” and so on. Unfortunately, many of us reach a point when we feel we have the answers, and we spend the rest of our lives living with the categories we created when we were young. And not only living in them, but, when we feel challenged, defending them as well.
Human Weaknesses: As our categories harden, we often begin to feel more settled and secure in what we know. Add this to the predicable challenges of getting older, and we often lose our interest in exploring new possibilities and discovering new ways of doing things. In short, we become satisfied with the status quo and feel that getting out of what could be seen as a rut takes too much energy. Though we may not be aware of it, we may be in trouble. “People wish to be settled,” wrote Ralph Waldo Emerson. “Only as they are unsettled is there any hope for them.”
Experiences of Mind Stretching
The body decides when it needs to stretch, and once ready, goes right ahead and stretches. It does not consult us – by “us” I mean the minds that are observing the stretch – or ask our permission, We go along, we have no inclination to resist. Stretching the mind is an entirely different proposition. Our minds show little inclination to stretch themselves – or better said, we have little inclination to stretch our minds – and in fact many of us resist all opportunities to stretch, and hold tightly to what we think and how we think it. There are exceptions to this. Often, when people take on a new challenge or responsibility – a promotion to supervisor, director or CEO, the arrival of a baby, marriage, traveling in new country – they often experience an avalanche of new experiences and ideas. Almost before they realize it, they become aware that their minds have been stretched. Some people acquire a desire for stretching that can turn into a life-long pursuit of new ideas or perspectives. And others find that after a traumatic experience – a colossal failure or betrayal by a friend. for example – they can never go back to seeing things as they did before. Others wander into an experience, or stumble into it by accident, and afterwards become aware that they see thing differently. “The first two weeks of class,” wrote Gregg, a student in Advanced Leadership in 2009, a class given over to exploring wicked problems, “I was frustrated. I didn’t see where we were headed. I was also struggling with the idea that some problems can’t be solved, only acted upon. As the course went on, I started to see the greater value in the concepts and how they fit together. I now look at that course as perhaps the most valuable of the entire program, because of the handful of takeaways that that I still use at work and in my personal relationships…”
Another example of stretching the mind is described in a letter from a reader to the editor of a journal that published an article titled “Leadership is a Wicked Problem: “I found the article about Leadership is a Wicked Problem very thought provoking and insightful. I had fallen into the trap of believing that all problems can be solve.d This article caused me to have a ‘aha’ moment.” [35]
In the final pages of, Confessions of a Philosopher, Bryan Magee summarizes his life’s experience with the philosophers who have influenced him: “All these philosophers are so good that if one reads their work with understanding, one’s outlook is never the same again, because what they have to say feeds into one’s own way of looking at things and becomes part of it, enlarges it, complicates it.” [36]
“Becoming Masters of the Situation…”
As we leave childhood and move into adolescence and then to adulthood, we share an unwritten curricula consisting of three subjects: How does the world work? How should it work? and How can I get it to work the way I want it to? Looking back at the end of our lives we may discover that each of these three questions is really the same: “How can we manage successfully the problems we face? “Life is a series of efforts to solve problems,” wrote sociologist F. G. Bailey. [38] Looking back, we will see that while the substance of these problems during our lives changed, the ones that gave us the most trouble were wicked. If we paid attention, we learned that no matter how much effort we expended on them, they never were solved nor did they disappear. All we could do was wrestle them down to the mat, and when they got up – as they always did – throw them down once again.
The implications of this struggle, continues Bailey, are profound: “We are continuously faced with alternative possibilities both between goals and strategies for achieving goals and only by making correct choices do we become masters of the situation…” If we get started with this struggle on the wrong foot, believing that they are tame when, in fact, they are wicked, then we end up mastering nothing. Our efforts will not only be fruitless but also counterproductive.
Wrestling wicked problems to the ground and then keeping them there for as long as we can requires us to be able to think clearly and speak accurately about them. We need minds that are large and flexible enough to take in their complexity, their uncertainty, their wickedness, and make them into something useful. Otherwise, our lives will be excessively limited by what our minds cannot do. “The limits of my language,” wrote philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein over 100 years ago, “are the limits of my life.” [38]