If you’ve ever discovered the need to show up at work everyday by first forcing yourself out of bed, and then dragging yourself into the office because you’re dreading the day there: perhaps you’re working in an “addictive organization” (a concept I briefly outlined in my recent Analysis Paralysis post).
How does anyone really cope with life in an addictive organization? How is it possible to survive, much less thrive? What is your fate if you find yourself in one? Can you promote health and recovery…and actually, eventually, find a place of well-being there?
During the time I was engaged in my doctoral research, and anticipating using the addictive organization model as a theoretical framework for my dissertation, I corresponded briefly with Anne Wilson Schaef, the model’s developer. I had been tremendously impressed with her “organization as addict” metaphor and asked about any thoughts she might have regarding “coping with” or “recovery in” such an organization. She said that her plans were to write a follow-up book to The Addictive Organization (1988) and outline her ideas there. As far as I’ve been able to determine, though, she never produced that book…I can only hope it’s not because she thinks that recovery is impossible!
Now, given that it took an entire 232 pages to outline the many dimensions of an addictive organization, I suppose it would be reasonable to assume that any discussion of recovery in one would take at least as much space. However, coping with an addictive organization has been much on my mind lately, and I thought I might get started (here) on developing some salient points regarding this topic.
Although there are several dimensions of an addictive organization, certainly near the top of the list of characteristics (and among the most applicable to individual addicts) are the descriptors of denial, dishonesty and control. So, in this brief essay, let’s begin with just these three.
Denial means that the organizational problems are not openly acknowledged, or at least not accepted as “real” by those most able to address the dysfunction: the leadership. For issues to be worked on, they need to be identified, they need to be named. Statements such as “this is just the way things are” or “this is as good as it gets” or “we may have a few small problems here, but certainly not big ones” – when everyone really knows differently – is a sure sign of organizational denial.
Dishonesty is another key characteristic of an addictive organization. Like individuals who are addicted to substances or processes, those caught up in such an unhealthy organization exhibit their dishonesty on three levels: by lying to themselves, to those around them, and to the world at large. Believing that one can effectively impression-manage (e.g., the media) and “put up a good front” to those outside the organization, for example, are a couple of obvious manifestations of organizational dishonesty.
[I was once told, in private, by a college president, “I tell lies to everyone every day. There’s no other way to do this job.” While a striking example of personal honesty, the underlying message is one that reflects normal life in an addictive system.]
Finally, there is the element of control. This more accurately might be labeled the illusion of control, though, as it is, of course, ultimately impossible to control anything. However, the addictive organization harbors the notion that it is possible to control. When likened to a dysfunctional family that revolves around an individual addicted member, Schaef (p. 66) describes this symptom as “[t]he family tries to control the addict; the addict’s behavior is controlling the family; the co-dependent spouse is trying to avoid being controlled; and everyone is going crazy.” Further, Schaef notes (p. 66), that “whenever a system is operating on the illusion of control, it is an addictive system by definition.”
I believe that it’s possible to begin the grasp the severity of life in an addictive organization by simply (and quite briefly, as I’ve done above) understanding just these three characteristics. The questions that naturally arise include: What is there to do? How do I cope? How do I survive? How can I continue to show up every day, when this is what I always find?
I suppose that any discussion of “recovery” in a system defined as “addictive” would naturally include, at some point, a 12-step model; let me leave that discussion for another day, though. I would like to begin with countering the three points above by suggesting strategies that lie on the opposite ends of our behavioral continuum.
If the characteristics of denial and dishonesty are taken together (considering that denial is essentially a lie to one’s self), then a position contrary to that is honesty. Similarly, when the element of control is considered, an alternative could be termed surrender. So, I pose the question, what if I approached life in an addictive system with a personal stance of honestyand surrender?
When I consider this question, I am reminded of the Four-Fold Way orientation developed by anthropologist Angeles Arrien. Quoting directly and liberally from the description of this model on her website, I believe it is evident how such a philosophical and behavioral stance might successfully contend with the illness of an addictive system. The four elements are:
Be Present. The way of the Leader is to show up. Being present allows us to access the human resources of power, presence, and communication. We express this through appropriate action, good timing, and clear communication.
Pay Attention. The way of the Healer is to pay attention to what has heart and meaning. Paying attention opens us to the human resources of love, gratitude, acknowledgment, and validation. We express this through our attitudes and actions that maintain personal health and support the welfare of our environment.
Tell The Truth. (Honesty) The way of the Creative Problem Solver is to tell the truth without blame or judgment. Truthfulness, authenticity, and integrity are keys to developing our vision and intuition. We express this through personal creativity, goals, plans, and our ability to bring our life dreams and visions into the world.
Be Open To Outcome. (Surrender) The way of the Teacher (or Counselor) is to be unattached to outcome. Openness and non-attachment help us recover the human resources of wisdom and objectivity. We express this through our constructive communication and informational skills.
It is my thought, and suggestion here, that to adopt the healthy elements of Arrien’s Four-Fold Way, could be critical to both personal survival and organizational change in an addictive system.
I have been thinking lately that I am suffering from an affliction I suspect many others at my workplace are also attempting to cope with: for want of a better term, “analysis paralysis.”
Ever since I began my present work assignment, I have been confronted with one ambitious “to-do list” after another. We have produced many, many lists and attempted to prioritize the items at many, many meetings I have attended. Among the giant list of tasks is the recently-revised and distributed, overwhelming, intimidating, multi-page strategic-plan document.
I have to admit: in the face of so much to do, and so little guidance about what the priorities are, I tend to remain somewhat frozen. Because, everything is a priority, I’m told. And, what I know is that when everything is a priority, nothing is. And that when everybody is responsible, nobody can be.
The organization is attempting to change several dimensions of its collective being all at the same time. Stress is high. Communication is low. Ad hoc decisions abound. Everyone is off balance; or, at least I know I am.
Come to think of it, all of this is sounding amazingly familiar. Because…
My 1995 dissertation about alcohol use and socialization in a college fraternity, used the “addictive organization” paradigm of Anne Wilson Schaef (1988) as the guiding theoretical framework. This way of looking at workgroups (and, in my study, a social group) came about as a rather logical extension of the “dysfunctional family” literature, which sees family groups behaving as addicts. Schaef proposed that it is possible to “recognize that organizations themselves are addicts, and that they function corporately the same way any individual addict functions” (p. 137).
Some of the elements of an addictive organization, according to Schaef (see chapter 4, pp. 137-176), include:
Communication that is indirect, vague, confused, and ineffective
Lots of gossip and many secrets
The expression of feelings is forbidden and outside of acceptable behavioral bounds
Loss of corporate memory; forgetfulness; inability to learn from mistakes
Dualistic thinking (limiting available options to yes/no, black/white, no room for gray area); setting up sides
Denial and dishonesty (problems “don’t exist” and lies protect the status quo)
Isolation (allows for one reality as the only reality) & self-centeredness (organization feels that it is the center of the universe)
Judgmentalism (adds the element of “bad” to people’s choices, especially when views are expressed that are counter-cultural)
Perfectionism (mistakes are not allowed)
Confusion and crisis orientation (everyone is always trying to figure out what is going on)
Manipulating consumers (covering up faulty products or faulty functioning)
Control (including personnel practices that are built on punishment not reward, as well as the belief that the organization can control how it is seen by others), and
Lots of time and attention working on structure (looking for cosmetic ways of addressing problems rather than attempting to discover root causes)
Whew! Now that’s a long list of symptoms! (Yet another list, sorry!) Yet, for the purposes of summarizing the model here, I’ve tried to be quite concise.
My question: I just wonder if there is anybody else who might be seeing and experiencing any of my current reality?
During Thursday and Friday this week, I attended a retreat of UCC faculty as part of our beginning-of-the-school-year inservice activities. The event was held at the Big K Guest Ranch in Elkton, Oregon (about 30 miles from here). The place is truly in the middle of nowhere. After driving about 18 miles north of (I-5 Exit 136) Sutherlin on Highway 138W, you take a right-hand turn onto a gravel road and proceed onward for another four miles…an experience bound to rattle your bones and car frame, even at 15 mph. However, the setting is quite idyllic, and a great spot for a group our size to get away and do some retreat-type work. The organizers constructed a very worthwhile agenda, and I was amazed at the effort and energy expended to make this a wonderfully-successful experience for everybody.
A lot of the time together was spent in small groups, examining topics relevant to both new and returning instructors. Even though I am not an instructor anymore [I was one of two administrators present (the other being the college president)], I found I was able to participate fully. And, the greatest benefit to me was getting to know faculty from my new, large division (as well as the entire campus).
On the final day, yesterday, we held discussions (during both the morning and afternoon sessions) on a variety of hypothetical ethical-dilemma situations. The final scenario involved a student who wore a t-shirt to class that had a (unidentified) racially-offensive message on it. The questions: what to do? How to handle this?
A variety of perspectives were offered. One person offered thoughts about a dress-code. Others provided suggestions aimed at trying to control student behavior and, hence, suppression of the t-shirt’s message.
I could not hold my tongue. At the end of the discussion (and our time together), I raised my hand. I offered the thought that a t-shirt was not offensive in and of itself, and that this was neither a dress code nor a student-conduct issue, but rather a free-speech one. Freedom of expression is one of our most cherished and important constitutional rights, I said, and that, especially in a college environment (where we are presumably devoted to a free exchange of ideas), we cannot stomp on such a fundamental American freedom. I observed that quite a number of campuses over the last couple of decades have attempted to restrict student behavior with speech codes, virtually all of which had been struck down by the courts on constitutional grounds. I tried to convey the message, and personal (legal?) opinion, that we cannot attempt to silence a student merely because his or her message might be offensive to some.
Of course, I likely sounded like an over-the-top civil libertarian. And, I know, I delivered this message with some degree of passion, but hopefully not so extreme as to offend my new colleagues. The ACLU has an excellent summary of this issue on their website, as well as descriptions of many specific cases involving freedom of expression (including t-shirts).
At my last workplace, I was only a couple of months or so into my new job when I participated in a “leadership workshop” with a group of fellow administrators. Things went extremely well, I thought, for just about the entire time. As the group-work unfolded, folks were increasingly talkative and open and, for the most part, genuinely engaged in examining our personal communication and leadership/management styles.
That experience ended very poorly for me and everyone involved, however. As the two-day session was wrapping up, our “big leader” stopped by to check in. He had arranged for the workshop to happen, but had not attended. When it came time for the group to offer up a report on our training experience, there was apparent reluctance to do so. As the new guy, it didn’t really seem my place to be the spokesperson, but one of my colleagues mouthed to me from across the room: “talk Jim.” Of course, that was all I needed to raise my hand and proceed to gush forth with my version of reality.
As it turned out, that action turned out to be one of the biggest faux pas of my professional life. I was interrupted mid-report and soundly lambasted for my opinions and “negativity.” I actually didn’t think I was being negative (rather, merely attempting to be an accurate communicator regarding the sense of the group), but it was certainly perceived that way, and the big guy’s defensiveness turned instantly into attack mode. I was the target. And, boy, did it hurt.
Things were never the same for me after that; I spent two years in place where I knew I was not a fit. In retrospect, it would have been a really good idea for me to leave the organization at the end of that workshop, but you know how it is: I needed a job. I can’t help thinking, though: even if it meant unemployment, I might be a physically healthier person today had I immediately resigned.
So, here I am now in a new organization. And I spent all day today at a retreat with my fellow academic administrators here. I participated fully. I said what was on my mind. I spoke my truth. I felt listened to.
Very good!
Soundtrack Suggestion
What if there was no light Nothing wrong, nothing right. What if there was no time? And no reason or rhyme?...
Every step that you take Could be your biggest mistake It could bend or it could break But that’s the risk that you take…
Oooooh, that’s right Let’s take a breath, jump over the side. Oooooh, that’s right How can you know it when you don’t even try? Oooooh, that’s right
Here is the text of the email I sent out to my colleagues this afternoon.
So…
Thus it ends; after two intense, event-filled years, my time as an interim dean here at MHCC is over. As I come closer and closer to seeing this campus in my rear-view mirror one last time, I know that it’s you, the faculty and staff of the Science & Technology Division, I will be missing.
It’s probably too early at this point to have a great deal of meaningful perspective about this entire experience. Questions such as “Jim, what did you learn?” are likely a bit premature. Honestly: I’m still grappling to understand this period of my life.
I began this position on July 14, 2004. For those who were on campus teaching that summer, I got to know you a little sooner than the rest. Although I acquainted myself with everybody’s name during those first few weeks, I literally did not lay eyes on some of you until the morning of September 15th, the first day of In-Service.
As you recall, during that first Division meeting, I gave up a brief autobiography; I described the rather non-linear life’s path that had led to me standing in the front of the room that day. Just weeks earlier, I had lost my position with the Oregon University System and found myself moving to Portland to try this interim-dean gig on for size.
Of course, I wanted to be liked, respected, and trusted. And competent. Nothing has ever defined me so much as a professional as my competence level. So, believe me, I wanted to fail neither you nor me.
A friend of mine asked, at the time, how I was going to possibly manage a group this large? (You were forty full-time faculty members strong at this point, not to mention the part-timers.) My response was that I needed to simply (hah!) attempt to establish one relationship at a time, building what trust I could along the way. I was coming in from the outside, the “dark (university) side,” and had had no community college level administrative experience. And I could only imagine you thinking: “what’s this guy about?!”
My belief was that you had to know me in order to trust me. That was the motivating factor for my little speech that first morning. And, I’ve attempted to be as transparent an individual as I possibly could be during the time I’ve been among you. As I depart, I hope, at least, that you feel you do know me. And I hope that I have earned your trust.
Prior to my time at MHCC, I had never attempted to lead, on a daily basis, a group as large and as diverse as you. As I reflect on my time here in the coming days and months, I know I will wonder what it is I could have done differently – i.e., better – in order to serve your needs. When it came to my relationships with you, I only ever wanted to be a colleague, a coach, a mentor, and a friend. Perhaps a cheerleader. I never really sought out, or identified with, the roles of adversary or “boss.” I suspect you know that I believe in the concept of “team,” which, of course, leads to the idea of “team leader.” If you were to remember me in that role, even in some little way, I would be honored.
I have only the deepest respect for you. I have felt honored and privileged to be among some of the most talented, dedicated, and hard-working educators I have ever known. I will miss you all.
The final (and BIG) announcement I have for you is that, just this afternoon, I accepted an interim position at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg. I will be leading their Liberal Arts and Math & Science faculty for the coming year.
And, one more time: thanks for the wonderful book of Oregon photos, personalized with your written goodbyes. FYI: I love my new Waterman pen!
