Chapter 12. Polarity Management: One Tool for Managing Complexity and Ambiguity

Barry Johnson

Effective Leaders Manage Complexity and Ambiguity

Through a combination of experience, intuition, and hard-earned wisdom, effective leaders have developed the ability to look within complex issues, identify opposites in tension, and capitalize on that tension. These interdependent opposites are sometimes called dilemmas or paradoxes. I call them polarities.

We all have a degree of ability in managing polarities. We have an implicit understanding that there are many opposites in our lives. Yet, most leaders do not have an explicit model and set of principles to both enhance their skills with these issues and to collaborate with others to intentionally manage them better.

A Multipurpose Swiss Army Knife for the Leader's Toolbox

The Polarity Management map and set of principles provide a user-friendly resource for effectively addressing organizational complexity and the dilemmas within that complexity. Like a Swiss army knife, they have multiple applications in a variety of situations. For example, they have been used as a core competency in leadership development; in change efforts as a way to convert resistance to change into a resource for change; to build cross-cultural competence, both domestic and international; in mergers and acquisitions as a way to capitalize on the best of two or more cultures; as a key to integrated healthcare; in identifying corporate values, which are best seen as pairs in tension; in strategic planning; and in South Africa to assist in the ending of Apartheid. These situations have a number of things in common:

• They involve complex issues at many levels of the system.
• There are key, underlying polarities (dilemmas, paradoxes) within the difficulties.
• The "problem-solving" mindset alone is not up to the challenge these issues present.
• Identifying and intentionally managing one or more key polarities has made a big difference.

How Is this Tool Used? Two Application Stories

Story One: The Expansive Leader

While interviewing executive team members to identify current organizational issues, I was told by one executive, "Barry, if you really want to make a contribution here, I suggest you just leave as soon as possible and don't look back." I inquired as to whether there was an option B. He smiled and said, "It's nothing personal, Barry. It's what you represent. You are the most recent in a long line of people who have been invited in here by Don [the CEO] because he wanted to try out the latest fad. We keep starting one thing after another and never finish any of them. We are overwhelmed and frustrated with unfinished projects all over the place. So, you are a part of the problem.

"If you are serious about helping us out, I can think of one thing that would really help. Get Don to be more focused and provide some clear direction. We need to choose a few projects and make sure they are completed. Then people wouldn't be so overwhelmed and would have a sense of completion and accomplishment. Can you help us get Don to do that?"

Don had asked me to help apply Polarity Management to a few key issues within the company. I used this complaint to explain Polarity Management to the three executive team members who had raised it. On a flip chart, I summarized the issue of Don by drawing a simple model. (See Figure 12.1.) The executives wanted my help moving Don from A, which was seen as the problem, to B, which was their solution. Don would then become a more effective leader.

Figure 12.1. The expansive leader (problem-solution map).

Looking at Figure 12.1, it is obvious that an organization with the problems illustrated in A would benefit from moving to the solutions found in B. This is an understandable change strategy, which is based on a problem-solving mindset using gap analysis. First, you describe the present state in negative terms and declare it the problem = A. Then, you describe an improved future state in positive terms and call it the solution = B. Finally, you decide on a strategy to bridge the gap between A and B, which is symbolized by the arrow.

Looking at the model on the flip chart, the executives agreed that the model summarized their statement of the issue. I explained that this situation was a good example of a polarity to manage rather than a problem to solve. If the polarity were to be treated like a problem, with B as the solution, Don would resist efforts to move him to area B. Even if they could get Don to agree to go to area B, he wouldn't go there.

They looked surprised. "Who have you been talking to?" they asked. I told them just the three of them. One of the executives said, "You just described exactly what happened two years ago. We had a meeting with Don to tell him our frustrations with the lack of direction, too many uncompleted projects, and our need for direction and completion. He agreed to move to B, but we haven't moved an inch in that direction."

I told them that from a polarity perspective, it was quite predictable. The problem with the model they were using was not that it lacked accuracy. It was accurate. If you have a lack of direction, you need direction. If projects aren't completed, you need to complete them. The limit of the model was that it was incomplete. It was based on the assumption that this was a problem to solve when it is actually a polarity (dilemma, paradox) to manage.

Figure 12.2 is a polarity map. It is the mental model I drew as I heard the executives' previous attempt with Don.

Figure 12.2. Polarity Management map.

The underlying tension between the poles is described in Figure 12.2 as Being Expansive (E) and Being Focused (F). Don liked being expansive, but his executives wanted him to be focused. Don would not go to the upside of Being Focused (B) because he strongly valued the upside of Being Expansive (C). He liked being flexible and innovative, and he enjoyed exploring new ideas and opportunities. The stronger his value for the upside of Being Expansive (C), the stronger was his fear of the downside of Being Focused (D). He avoided falling into a rut in which a lack of innovation and creativity lead to boredom for himself and his staff.

Notice that Effective Leadership (G) moved from area B, as in Figure 12.1, to the top of Figure 12.2. The arrow pointing to it separates the two halves of the polarity map. The goal is not to get Don to area B as the solution. The goal is to be at the upside of Being Expansive and at the upside of Being Focused, which move in combination toward Effective Leadership. Also, Ineffective Leadership (H) moved from area A, as in Figure 12.1, to the bottom of the polarity map. This indicates that there are two ways, in this example, to become an ineffective leader—overconcentrate either on Being Expansive or on Being Focused.

Once the executives saw the larger picture and began to understand the dynamics of how polarities work, it changed the whole conversation and approach to addressing their concerns with Don. Paradoxically, if you want more focus, you have to embrace the benefits of being expansive and be clear that you are not rejecting expansiveness. The shared challenge is to get the upside of both over time. That is what it means to manage a polarity well.

Story Two: The Multinational With a Silo Problem

The part/whole polarity is common. I have worked with it often, as have all leaders, though they may not have called it a polarity. For example, a multinational company was very plant-centered and proud of it. In this context, each plant represents a part in the part/whole polarity. Corporate, with its efforts to integrate and coordinate all the parts, represents the whole. Because of the strong organizational value for the uniqueness of each plant and the country and culture in which it was located, they promoted plant-based freedom, initiative, and creativity.

Predictably, the organization's plants were in the downside of "focus" all over the world. The red-flag indicators pointing to the downside of the part pole were too much inventory ($12 million) and the 18-month timeframe to purge outdated products.

Everyone at the company had a basic understanding of polarity management. They brought one person from each of their plants to a one-day meeting. At that meeting, each person filled out a polarity map and wrote out action steps. Then, they took the maps back to their plants.

They did not waste time or increase resistance to needed changes by implying that this was a problem to solve and the solution was to stop acting like silos and start acting like an integrated team. Instead, they regarded it as an out-of-balance polarity to manage. They understood that they needed to figure out (1) how to get the polarity back in balance, and (2) how to sustain the balance over time in order to minimize either downside.

As a result of this effort, inventory went from $12 million to less than $1 million and holding 6 years later. Also, the purge rate went from 18 months to a few weeks and holding 6 years later. This is an example of how a few people and a little time can produce sustainable results when everyone has a basic understanding of polarity management.

If an issue is seen as a problem to solve, it will become a power struggle between the advocates of each pole, and the organization will lose twice in the process: (1) It loses by expending tremendous energy to "win" in the political power struggle between the two groups, and (2) it loses again when one side wins, because the organization is set up to experience, over time, the downside results of the winner's preferred pole. If you have a polarity to manage, it is either win/win or lose, because neither pole is sustainable without the other.

The map in Figure 12.3 shows some of the generic upsides and downsides of the part/whole polarity used by the multinational. It also includes the action steps outline that helps manage a polarity effectively over time.

Figure 12.3. Part/whole polarity.

Polarity Management—A Summary Introduction

As with all other polarities, the generic part and whole polarity is very scalable. The parts could be individuals on a team, and the whole would be the team. The parts could be diverse ethnic and racial groups within the larger community as a whole. Regardless of the size of system or the complexity of the issues, it is helpful to distinguish, within the complexity, which are the key polarities to manage and how we can be intentional about managing them better.

If they are polarities going in, there are a number of things we know:

• They are not going away.
• They will not be solved in any final sense. The best we can do, which is a terrific opportunity, is to capitalize on the inherent tensions between the poles in a way that elevates and sustains the whole system.
• If they are treated as a problem to solve, with the solution being the upside of one pole, either solution will generate its own resistance.
• Both sides will see themselves as attempting to save the company from the other—and they will be half right.
• No matter which side wins in the power struggle between equally valid opposing views, the organization will lose twice.
• If both sides can see it as a polarity to manage and intentionally create a map and action steps to manage it well, this organization, over time, will outperform those organizations that treat this as a problem to solve—every time. It's not even a fair contest.

Competitive Advantage

Research shows that there is significant competitive advantage for organizations that can both solve problems and manage polarities. Organizations that tap the power of polarities outperform those that don't. Three examples are shared below.

1. In Managing on the Edge, Richard Tanner Pascale studied the 43 companies identified in In Search of Excellence 5 years after the original research. He discovered that 14 companies retained their "Excellent" rating and 29 did not. The key factor that distinguished the 14 from the 29 was that they managed seven polarities better. He calls it "managing contention."
2. In Built to Last, Collins and Porras call it, "The Genius of the 'AND'." This was a central distinction between the 18 "Silver" companies that outperformed the stock market for the period from 1926 to 1990 by a factor of 2 and the 18 "Gold" companies that outperformed the stock market during that same period by a factor of 15! The Gold companies tapped the power of polarities = The Genius of the AND.
3. In Charting the Corporate Mind, Charles Hampden-Turner calls it, "re-solution of dilemmas." His research shows that organizations that effectively manage key organizational dilemmas have better bottom-line performance than those not managing the same dilemmas well.

This Phenomena Is Everywhere

The phenomenon of interdependent opposites (dilemma, paradox, polarity) has been written about in philosophy and religion for over 4,000 years. It is a central reality in all of life and all human systems. However, only within the last 20 years has it been explicitly identified by business and industry as an important dimension that can give a competitive advantage.

It does much more than that. Life itself, both figuratively and literally, emerges out of the synergy between opposites. We are created male and female, and our uniqueness as men and women must be combined through sperm and egg to create new life. Even in cloning there is a cell differentiation between muscle cells, bone cells, and so on. We are made up of unique parts that serve the whole and sustain life.

Atoms and our solar system are sustained by managing the tension between tight and loose. Electrons and planets circle the center with enough speed to keep from being pulled into the center and collapsing the system into itself (too tight). However, they can't go too fast or they will escape the attraction of the core and end the system's existence in its historical state.

In our brains, we have two hemispheres with interdependent functioning.

In our organizations, we are constantly managing the inherent tension between centralization and decentralization, collaboration and competition, local culture and global culture, increasing quality and reducing cost, change and stability, personal life and work priorities, employee interests and company interests, and mission and margin.

As leaders we need to use our heads and our hearts. We need to show all people respect as human beings, regardless of performance, and we need to respect good performance. We need to listen and talk. We need to manage and to lead. This list could go on, but you get the idea.

It is not a question of whether or not there are polarities in your personal and organizational life. Polarities are everywhere: They have existed since the beginning of time. Knowing this, the questions we should ask are, How we can learn to see polarities more clearly? And, how can we tap the wonderful potential within key polarities to enhance our lives rather than allow the inherent tension between the poles to become destructive?

More than One Model

There is a host of bright, compassionate people who have been doing some creative thinking about this phenomenon of interdependent opposites. Our experiences have led to different models. However, our common desire is to create more effective organizations. And it goes beyond effective organizations to our quality of life and our relationships as nations and unique groups within nations.

Below are a few of those helping us understand this phenomenon:

• Charles Hampden-Turner has many books on this subject. His most recent, with Fons Trompenaars, looks at cross-cultural issues: Building Cross-Cultural Competence, How to Create Wealth From Conflicting Values.
• Prasad Kaipa has created a pyramid, a tetrahedron composed of four equilateral triangles, which combines several polarities. I call it a multarity model. Find out more about this rich model through his Web site: http://www.selfcorp.com.
• Peter Koestenbaum has created the Leadership Diamond, which is a multarity of four. All combinations of the points of the diamond are polarities. His book is titled Leadership, The Inner Side of Greatness.
• Ken Wilber, in A Brief History of Everything, has synthesized the scientific and the spiritual, which includes the combining of two polarities: (1) interior and exterior, and (2) individual and collective.

Summary

Polarities are everywhere. You have been dealing and will continue to deal with them. The question is, How well will you deal with them? Polarity Management is one user-friendly model and set of principles to help you

1. Distinguish between problems you can solve with traditional problem-solving skills and polarities (dilemmas, paradoxes) that require an alternative approach.
2. Be intentional about managing these polarities effectively over time, by understanding and applying a model and set of principles that applies to all polarities.

Much time is wasted and tension invoked in power struggles and ineffective problem-solving when appropriate mapping of polarities more clearly presents the issues to be managed. Polarity Management is more than one more passing fad of management gurus; it is a path to perception, understanding, communication, and a more efficient organization.