CHAPTER 5

Influencing

What’s the Big Idea?

The exercise of power, in its different forms, is an integral aspect of the work of co-design. Different individuals and groups each come to co-design with their own desires, needs, interests, values, and resources. They especially arrive with forms of knowledge that they consider are likely to give some form of advantage in the co-designing process. And so, inevitably and unsurprisingly, power dynamics are always in play. Arguably co-design is a process that is all about power. This is not meant to be negative, given that the word power can evoke images of interpersonal domination, but rather it recognizes that power is at play in any human system for both good and bad. Facing this is both somewhat daunting but also potentially liberating. As we see more clearly what is happening between us and can name it so together, it becomes possible to shape and co-design how power manifests itself going forward.

In a complex system, there are added levels of complexity. Traditional forms of power with which we have become familiar in organizational settings, and which are often formally vested in individuals, have less leverage. Sometimes those who relied on position power may find that they have lost it in a complex system. Individuals who perhaps maintained a command-and-control approach to enacting power can do so relatively safely within the structures of organizational hierarchies and cultures. In a complex system, such hierarchies do not exist in the same way. This means that the same interpersonal strategies once seemingly effective in one context become ineffective in another. A person used to giving instructions finds, in a complex system, that such instructions either get ignored completely or are subject to negotiation.

The system develops its own power dynamics beyond artificial organizational boundaries. Such dynamics are shaped by many different players, some of whom may not be known to the others. It is, of course, unwise to oversimplify. Organizations that invest significant time and resource in a co-design process may act as though they believe themselves to be wielding significant power within the system. This may be true to an extent, but in a complex system time and resource are just two elements and do not necessarily translate into power. Other factors are at play and are amenable to influence.

For the purposes of our discussion in this chapter, we are making several assumptions about the nature of power in complex systems:

• Power is fluid and amenable to change across a system.
• Knowledge and power are intimately related. As people work together, for example, in a co-design process, new knowledge is created that in turns alters the flow of power. To be more accurate, new forms of knowledge are created and not just verifiable scientific “facts.” This new knowledge influences decision-making.
• Power, as we experience it, is created by many networked individuals and hubs. It is not located just in a few individuals.
• Sharing of power within the system and beyond becomes the norm.
• Power can reside in formal structures but is often of limited value in a complex system where collaboration and co-creation of knowledge is shaping the emerging future.

(adapted from Heimans and Timms 2014)

What stands out from these assumptions is the relational nature of power. No longer can we look to an individual as the sole power-holder but rather understand power as located in the relational networks between people and that it is collaboratively created and re-created by them. If we accept these assumptions, then influencing moves center stage as a practice, given that it is about being able to affect how individuals and groups think and act. The more our influencing skills develop, the more we will become effective in shaping relationships in a system.

So, What Are Influencing Skills?

The management literature highlights empathy, emotional intelligence, self-awareness, communication abilities, demonstrating self-esteem, and listening. All these of course do have value in influencing others. However, when it comes to influencing in complex systems we think there are some other skills that have value including the following:

• Connecting others to create new linkages for the exchange and creation of knowledge. This is sometimes called networking, but, in this context, it does not place your contacts center stage. Rather you and your colleagues are working to create a living set of relationships between others rather than just solely with yourselves.
• Being attuned to how the system is shifting and what is emerging and what is dying. Noticing and listening are important with the focus on both the system you are concerned with and the wider environment within which it is nested.
• Remaining open to sharing knowledge and know-how across the system. Letting go of a mindset that wants to grasp knowledge in order to obtain power.
• Enabling others to find their own sense of agency in the system. Influencing is thus less about promoting a particular set of ideas or messages but rather supporting others to develop their own.
• Understanding the worldviews that are shaping how the system works and help with bringing these to the surface. All systems contain multiple realities. Influencing depends on enabling these realities to become consciously apparent to individuals and groups.

Influencing, as we define it, therefore becomes not just a personal practice with the goal of achieving personal ends but rather a welcome characteristic of a co-design process located in a complex system. The concern for the influencer is less about how people change in response to being influenced personally but rather about how have the actions of the influencer strengthen the capability of people to influence each other.

Why Is Influencing Important?

Co-design in complex human systems is essentially about change—change in what we do, how we do it, and what processes we put in place to continue to change and develop. Therefore, the capacity and capability for individuals and groups of individuals to work with change is essential. Management literature about change still tends to focus on the organization as the principal unit or structure leading and subjecting itself to change. This is typified by the continuing interest shown by academics and practitioners alike in subjects like “organization development” and “organizational change leadership.” A quick browse through books on these topics is unlikely to reveal any interest in influencing as a practice. This is because the prevailing mindset is that change can and indeed should be led by those at the top of the hierarchy. This can be done through command-and-control approaches albeit sometimes dressed up in words like “empowerment” and “bottom-up,” which give the impression that individual leadership is welcome, when usually, in practice, it is not. Influencing in these organizational contexts is more likely to be viewed as a form of rebellion and troublemaking since such activities are not likely to coincide with the dominant view of what is required. Hence, influencing is not a valued practice.

In a complex system, multiple organizations, groups, and individuals are engaging themselves in change (or co-design). The practices that will enable change to happen are therefore different. Command-and-control approaches have little or no effect in sustaining change. Indeed, they may be counterproductive as groups view this type of behavior with concern and as damaging the spirit of collaboration. Influencing on the other hand moves center stage as a vital practice that enables co-design to happen across a range of diverse contexts. In fact, it may not be possible to practice co-design without influence.

If we further develop the case for the primacy of influencing in complex systems, we argue that it is invaluable because it

• focusses our thinking and practicing on the quality of interactions between people in a system. Taking an organizational perspective on change can often lead to a focus on procedures for change. Influencing asks us to consider first and foremost where people are in their thinking and feeling about co-designed change.
• enables us to see the paradoxes and tensions that exist in a complex system. As we converse and listen we can notice the diverse perspectives that could at any moment make co-design impossible. By recognizing such diversity, we are then able to actively engage with the multiplicity of perspectives flowing across the system.
• Practicing influencing grounds us in the realities of our own personal power and the lack of it! Instead, we see more clearly how others can act with great effect in shaping the dynamics of the system. This motivates us to influence people to use their influence in working with power dynamics.
• Opens up possibilities for co-design that we might not otherwise have noticed. Organizations have boundaries that also act as boundaries to thought and creativity. It is the existing resources and capabilities that become constant limiters on people’s imaginations. Instead, influencing leads to new connections that have the potential to add to the overall pool of resources. It is essentially a developmental practice rather than a constraining one.
• Builds collaboration by extending networks and conversations across the system. Influencing, by its very nature, intentionally looks to see how others might collaborate. It is an intentional practice in this context. There are of course times when influence happens inadvertently. We find ourselves saying or doing things that influence in a way that may be counterproductive or hinder collaboration. Indeed, we may sometime do that deliberately! We never see the whole picture, and we can be unaware of our influence, which is why its effects can be unpredictable.
• Prompts us to grow in self-awareness about our impact on others. Co-design is a challenging interpersonal process. It asks of each person a level of self-awareness so that we can recognize our impact both positively and negatively. As we reflect on how well we influence, so we become much more self-aware.
• Shifts our attention away from traditional organizational power to the fluidity of power in complex systems. Such a shift opens up the way for new power to manifest itself by, for example, stimulating new social movements around key topics for wider society. This builds confidence to work actively with power rather than constantly feeling the “victim” of others’ power.
• Offers greater opportunities to make choices. Not only can we choose who we wish to influence but also how we wish to do so and for what end. This is very liberating. Our sense of responsibility for what emerges grows. Together a greater sense of personal and collective ownership is felt across the system, and this is likely to enhance the quality of co-design.
• Helps grow leadership. When influencing is perceived to be an appropriate way in which to work in the system then other people begin to influence and express leadership of the work. This then builds the leadership capacity of the system. No longer is the role of leader vested in a few individuals, but it becomes a way of acting that is accepted by many.
• Happens through a very wide range of channels, both physically and electronically. Influencing happens in face-to-face conversation and through interactions on social media. Both the written word and the spoken word and visuals have a role to play in the process of influencing. This enables the widest possible reach for the influencer. In this way, influence can extend beyond the immediate system into other connected networks leading to change on a very large scale, sometimes very rapidly.
• Can shift perceptions and acting at great speed relative to organizationally based approaches to change management.

The case for focusing on the practice of influencing in complex systems is very strong.

What Are the Implications for Practice?

The idea that we can develop skills in influencing one another has been very influential in its own right! Beginning with the popular landmark book by Dale Carnegie How to Win Friends and Influence People (1936), leaders in all sectors of a modern capitalist economy have understood influencing as a core practice and capable of development. Each of us have had to consider how best to influence other people in our contexts. As a result, there is great diversity of opinion and experience. This short section highlights some of the key material about influencing and focusses on both individual practice and some ideas about how build influencing capabilities across complex systems.

Personal Practices That Enhance Interpersonal Influencing

1. Listening

   At the heart of empathizing and engaging in conversation is the practice of listening. By listening we mean paying careful attention to words, feelings, and body language. Listening is the way we receive the clues we need to respond accurately to another person. Accurate responses open the way for empathy to be felt, stories to be given attention, and the other person giving time and energy to listening what you may have to say. It really is the platform upon which influencing happens and cannot be underestimated.

2. Questioning

   Having listened well it becomes possible to frame questions that intrigue and excite a response. Asking, for example, “What if . . .” questions opens up the possibility of a new future. At the heart of influencing lies the belief that a new future is possible.

3. Affirming

   By appreciating what is praise-worthy in the work, achievements, and attitudes of another person an influencing relationship becomes much more likely. Criticism at the outset creates defensive responses in others. Obvious but often forgotten in the busy-ness of working life.

4. Purpose

   Engaging people by sharing your purpose and passions. Using language and stories that resonate with others and respond to their own concerns. Elsewhere in this book we cover these topics from a systems perspective, but they are just as usefully applied when engaging with individuals or small groups.

5. Authenticity

   This characteristic is difficult to define, but we all recognize when a person is being inauthentic! Communicating your personal values and demonstrating them in practice are a challenge. Such authenticity is noted by people and creates interest in what you have to say.

6. Being influenced

   Allowing yourself to be influenced in relationships with others reduces the possibility that you may be viewed as a manipulator. Opening yourself up to the views and perspectives of others and allow these to shape your work and thinking model the collaborative approach to human relationships that forms the bedrock of co-design.

   A quick search on the Internet will demonstrate interest in developing influencing skills to deceive or pressure someone into harmful actions. This means that in the practice of co-design we individually and collectively give time and energy to working through the moral intentions behind the use of influencing skills. This implies a degree of transparency in personal practice about the motives we have and how they guide our actions. Developing skills in having open and honest conversations about values and beliefs is therefore also vital.

Practices to Enhance System-Influencing Capabilities

While we generally consider influencing as a personal practice in co-designing services in complex systems, we also have a concern strategically about how well-equipped people across the system feel in relation to being influencers. An important feature of co-design is that everyone concerned has a voice and that traditional expression of power based on organization hierarchy is, when possible, reduced. A complex system has the advantage of connecting many diverse voices, but how might these be enabled to influence?

The answer to this question lies in how we support the systems to convene conversations, virtually, but primarily physically. Conversation around significant questions offers all gathered voices the opportunity to influence each other. The larger the number, the wider and deeper the potential influence.

Chapter 3 introduces useful conversational processes like World Café (2010) and Open Space (2008). These, and others like them, help form co-design spaces where influence can express itself through conversation. In Chapter 8, we reference Appreciative Inquiry (2016) as a development process. Alongside using conversation as its core process, it also encourages the development of generative images. These are pictures of what the future might look like if the best of our collective past experiences happened consistently. Such pictorial representations can help those who are less conversation orientated to be influenced and, through their contributions, shape the perspectives of others. The invitation is to be creative in blending approaches to inquiry and conversation. By doing so, the system as a whole is strengthened in its relationships with individuals and groups. Power to effect change becomes potentially more widely distributed as a result.

The implication is that influencers in a system can benefit in the longer term by considering what steps they can take to develop others, not only to influence but also to use a wide variety of processes that connect the system across its many networks.

Reflect and Act

Reflect

• What approaches do you currently use to influence others?
• How well do they work for you?
• What practices mentioned in this chapter can you adopt to strengthen your influencing?
• How do you think those you are working with currently will react to a greater use of conversational processes? Why?

Act

• Ask for feedback from close colleagues on your influencing skills
• Observe other people influencing and note down what seems to work? Review your own approach in light of your observations.
• Find an opportunity to use either World Café or Open Space in a system you are working with. Reflect on the experience.

References

Brown, J. 2010. The World Café: Shaping our Futures through Conversations that Matter. ReadHowYouWant.com.

Carnegie, D. 1936. How To Win Friends And Influence People. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Heimans, J., and H. Timms. 2014. “Understanding ‘new power.’” Harvard Business Review 92, no. 12, pp. 48–56.

Lewis, S., J. Passmore, and S. Cantore. 2016. Appreciative Inquiry for Change Management: Using AI to Facilitate Organizational Development. London, UK: Kogan Page Publishers.

Owen, H. 2008. Open Space Technology: A User’s Guide. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.