Heart of the Art

By John Atkinson

Different perspectives on the pandemic

People view the outbreak of Covid-19 in many ways depending on their circumstances and experience of events. This is entirely normal. Any complex problem has multiple facets and is experienced therefore in multiple ways. Each one of these usually makes sense to the proponent from the perspective from which they look at the issue based on the information they are considering. The relationship between perspective and information is itself complex, each influences the other and is often self-reinforcing; the more people become convinced of their perspective, the more information they absorb that supports that point of view. The more people see information from particular sources, the more evidence emerges for a particular perspective.

The perspective someone uses when viewing the pandemic has a major influence on what they are prepared to act on, and how they will act. This is illustrated through three perspectives that we have encountered recently.

1. It is a great global conspiracy. Whether the outbreak was deliberately started from a laboratory in China or is part of a global master plan for a ‘great reset’, there is no shortage of conspiracies as to the nature of the current pandemic. Of course, any or all of them might have some elements of truth in them, but anyone who has worked at any level of local, national or global governance will probably confirm that our ability to plan and deliver even the most basic aspirations is limited. We still have children growing up in poverty, education systems struggle to ensure children reach adulthood suitably prepared for the world they live in, food and water shortages are far too common, non-communicable diseases are a major issue.

There are leadership lessons from the great global conspiracy theory, and they are not new. Not paying attention to people outside the Political bubble, complacent superiority and poor communication are all components of a growth in conspiracies. As each new Political generation takes control these lessons seem to need constant re-learning. The confidence that comes from Political victory can all too easily lead to arrogance and disconnection. Covid-19 hurt people badly, their health, their wealth, their confidence and their belief in a state that protected them. It added energy to all number of grievances and anxieties that were capitalised on, and exploited by some, in a vacuum of leadership.

1. It is a freak event, and we will revert. For many, Covid-19 is seen as an aberration, a freak event, once in a hundred years, and once we have weathered the storm we can return to life as it was. There is much truth in this. Covid-19 will not mean that everything is different. The production systems, supply chains, and delivery operations that keep food in the supermarkets, hospitals functioning, schools and universities open, cars on the road, the internet working, all these will continue much as before, at least for a while. Local, national and global systems have wobbled but not entirely collapsed.

The leadership lessons here may be self-congratulatory. Under pressure, under stress, people did incredible things to keep the basics of life functioning. They reinforce a sense of control, that, although tested, came out on top. The cost in lives and livelihoods has been high and the disruption will continue for some time. Contingency planning will take higher priority in the future, but if Covid-19 is seen as an aberration, then there is little that pushes leaders to rethink their basic approaches and mindset.

1. It is part of a wider shift. Other see Covid-19 as an almost inevitable occurrence connected to changes in climate, population levels and a reductionist mindset of control. As populations move into more remote areas, and pressures on food availability increase, people inevitably mix more with reservoirs of disease that are so far new to experience. Some of these, increasingly more, will cross the zoonotic boundary. Many of these will have no large-scale impact whatsoever, they are either so fatal that they kill the first host they encounter or cannot survive in a human population. But not all. And the more these contacts occur, the greater the likelihood of future pandemics.

The third perspective is important because of the profound challenges it creates for 21st century leadership. It highlights the interconnected nature of all life on the planet. It suggests relationships between climate, health, economy, biodiversity that are complex and by their very nature less predictable. The leaders’ mindset is evolving. Repeated and different shocks to existing systems may not continue to be managed through control, with its cost to economies or freedoms, in a way that people see as acceptable. The challenge for leadership is to foster adaptation to new and emergent circumstances. The challenge is also to do this even if the predominant mindset is self-congratulatory for managing the pandemic as an aberration. The new mindset for 21st Century leadership means treating the planet and all of us on it for what it is, a giant ecosystem that is constantly evolving. The leadership approach for effective function in this space is called Living Systems Leadership.

Living Systems Leadership

In Living Systems Leadership, the emphasis is on balance rather than control. Controlling one facet of human activity inevitably generates consequences in other areas. Sometimes these are direct and obvious, at other times the consequences may occur in remote locations or much later in time. Establishing links of causality is often impossible. Modern management methods that depend on such causality often produce the exact opposite outcome to intentions. For example, testing programmes for Covid-19 often reached the more vulnerable last, resulting in deep pockets of the disease that were long lasting and tough to eradicate. Much is known about how ecosystems exist, how they thrive and are healthy as well as how they can become harmed and decline. Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess suggested three dimensions that might form the focus for living systems leadership.

Three dimensions for living systems leadership

Healthy ecosystems have a balance, achieved over many cycles in three dimensions. Although they will be considered sequentially there is no priority order, and all interact with each other. Following a living systems leadership approach means working with all three dimensions and constantly attending to the balance within and between them. It is this balancing that is the act of leadership, recognising when things are becoming unstable and being conscious of how to create environments that allow for re-balancing.

1. Complexity. Life is by its very nature complex. The best understanding of how basic life emerges suggests a non-deterministic, generative process. In such environments, certainty is a casualty. It may be likely that action A leads to event B but not only is it not guaranteed, but the wider impacts of such actions cannot also be wholly predicted. This fundamentally challenges the premise of modern management theory. It asks living systems leaders to move from attempting to control activity to being in balance with it.
2. Diversity. Healthy ecosystems have a wide range of diversity. When one group or species becomes over-prominent, their short-term advantage is undermined in the long-term as the whole environment is degraded. Constant and increasing external effort is then needed to maintain the situation or a rebalancing is needed. This can be seen in forestry and farming where biodiversity is diminished if a monoculture is created and results in the need for extra fertilisation, pollination, drainage and other external inputs in order to maintain the output.
   Human monocultures are also unhealthy. Numerous studies on board performance show that gender-mixed boards outperform single sex boards, sometimes dramatically. Involving all racial groups in addressing community issues has lasting impact far beyond working with a single group. Innovation has diversity of thought as a pre-requisite. For living systems leadership, diversity is far more than an issue of social justice, it is an ecological imperative.
3. Symbiosis. No living thing exists in isolation. Everything depends on the environment within which it exists. It influences and shapes that environment and is itself, influenced and shaped by it. If we damage the environment we live in, whatever the immediate gain, it eventually harms us. Our relationship is thus in a state of unstable equilibrium, if we move out of this, then rapidly amplifying patterns of feedback can be catastrophic. Living systems leaders pay attention to these feedback loops and the cycles of events they can perpetuate. They can provide an element of foresight when considering future activity.

Finding a balance– the art and skill of living systems leadership

Balancing is a learned skill that with practice becomes an art. Just as the painter learns their brush technique before being able to deftly apply it appropriately in their style, the living systems leader needs to learn how to notice what is happening in their system and environment and become adept at the art and skill of balancing. There are some features of living systems that influence the ways in which leaders should practice balancing:

1. Living Systems are constantly adapting. An ecosystem, in symbiosis with its environment, is constantly detecting shifts and responding to them. The response may be random as much as planned. Diversity is a huge asset. As multiple different responses occur, some are successful and are rapidly adopted and proliferate. The unsuccessful ones peter out. Living systems leaders can encourage rapid adaptation as a response to environmental shifts. This means sponsoring and encouraging a wide range of experiments that test hypotheses as to what might be going on and how best to respond. Using a diverse set of participants, some from within the organisation and some from without, a deeper understanding of the situation is reached, a possible pattern established and actions that might rebalance can be trialled. This is a constant and iterative process in a natural ecosystem and can be encouraged in our human organisations. It is a process of ‘adaptegy’ rather than strategy.
2. New forms tend to emerge within Living Systems When changes in the environment or the ecosystem result in a reshaping of the balance, a new form can emerge from apparently random activity that shapes what now takes place. Living systems leaders cannot create emergence but they can perhaps recognise when it might be occurring and cultivate the conditions under which it is more likely to happen. These are the balancing of sufficient energy, dissonance and positive feedback that something new may arise. Leadership activity can encourage or diminish all of these but not ultimately control them or the new form that emerges.
3. Living systems have integrity. In this case integrity means wholeness of systems, actions and messages. It is about living systems leaders ensuring there is integration not separation with their environment. How leaders behave and act is their message, not the words they script and share. For example, leaders in Covid who did not address rule-breaking behaviour in their teams sent a message at odds with their public voice causing confusion and undermining the integrity of the response. At the bigger scale, integrity in the sense of wholeness makes clear that living systems leaders are considering approaches for the benefit of all in their system and its environment, not seeking local or short-term advantage.
4. Power is inherent within living systems. In living systems, there are multiple sources of power and desire that already exist. The power has value: if it can be tapped it can enable leaders to get things done. People are uneasy when talking about power as it is often associated with coercion. However, unless they are able to tap into the power of the systems, living systems leaders will not have impact. Power lies in all sorts of surprising and unusual places. Developing a sensitivity to these sources of power is vital requirement for living systems leadership. When accessing this power, the living systems leader seeks to balance the competing interests of different power sources in ways that satisfy the needs for integrity to be maintained. Owing to the nature of the unstable equilibria within which systems leadership operates, this is a delicately fragile act, that requires constant sensitivity and attention and is fraught with potential for collapse.
5. Living systems are liberating. While the dominant feature in most mechanical systems is the emphasis on control, living systems are about liberation. The living systems leader opens up possibilities for others to bring their brilliance in response to a challenge. It is about relishing the diversity, complexity and symbiosis in every situation. Implicit in the liberation of others is being prepared to liberate one’s self. A living systems leader who is anxious, unsure or fearful has only limited capacity to act joyfully and inspiringly. Becoming comfortable in oneself, and with one’s anxiety and uncertainty, even in adversity, requires time, support and consideration. It comes from within. The leader who is at ease with self is well placed to unleash the liberating potential of living systems in multiple diverse settings. It is a priceless and much prized attribute.

Conclusion
The basic proposition is that humanity needs new patterns of thought and action to contribute to healthy ecosystems on our planet for millennia to come. The observations in this note show ways to articulate the kinds of enquiry needed to establish what form the new patterns might take. That enquiry needs to start within us, and then within our immediate environment. By exploring our own integrity of action and the liberty we access, we understand more and more about how to source power so as to better influence the world around us. We exercise this influence through adaptation and responding to emergence. This is the mindset for the 21st Century, Living Systems Leadership.