Both Positive and Negative Forces Rather Than Only Positive or Negative Forces
It is in the balanced and sustained consideration of not only polar-opposite priorities and perspectives but also the positive and negative aspects of each polar position that we are best able to appreciate and eventually manage a challenging polarity – such as we find with S² (Home) and O² (Quest). While Johnson offers excellent advice (and provides many case examples) in both of his books (Johnson, 1992/1996; Johnson, 2020) regarding the steps to be taken in conducting a polarity analysis, I would suggest that the positive and negative parameter might be supplemented by a process of force field analysis that Kurt Lewin (2010) suggested many years ago. The total field of forces identified by Lewin provides what I have identified as the vibrance of Essence that exists in this field.
Engaging Goodwin Watson’s S-P-A model: For Lewin, specific factors (forces) either assist or block the successful achievement of specific goals within this system (field). I borrow from Goodwin Watson (Watson and Johson, 1972) in suggesting that these factors might be structural (S) in nature. They might also involve processes (P) and/or attitudes (A) that are operating in this system. We can conduct a force field analysis at the start of any polarity analysis by first identifying a specific outcome we hope to achieve. This outcome can help to guide our selection of a lens and the direction to which we turn this lens.
With regard to the analysis I am conducting in this essay, there are two sets of desired outcomes. One set (S²/Home) includes security and safety. The second set (O²/Quest) includes opportunity and openness. We begin with the lens of S² (Home) and identify the structures, processes and attitudes (SPA) that will facilitate the achievement of the S² goals (security and safety) within this system (organization). These factors (forces) hold a positive Valence with regard to S² (Home). This list might include such forces as a system’s long history of stability (attitude), close working relationships among members of this organization (process) and operation of the organization within a long-established institution (structure).
We then turn to the negative side of the force field ledger. Our lens is turned in this direction. These forces hold a negative Valence regarding achievement of desired S² (Home) outcomes. This negative Valence list might include a prevalent desire of members of this organization to try something new (attitude), the emergence of a new generation of members who prefer to relate to one another in a quite different manner (process) and the existence of “cracks” (such as growing financial debts) in the institution within which the organization is operating (structure). The list might also include the forementioned fears (boredom, rigidity, stagnation) and concerns about the loss of vitality. Regrets might surface concerning the failure to ever leave home or take a risk.
A similar force field analysis can be conducted with O² (Quest). Once again, we turn our lens in two directions—first identifying the positive forces and then the negative forces that are to be found in the organization’s structures, processes and attitudes. The positive forces might include expanded ownership of the organization (structural), hiring of young people with ample technological skills (process) and a prevalent spirit of entrepreneurship in the community where this organization resides (attitude). The negative forces might include lack of consistent financial support for innovation (structural), lack of support and coordination between units of the organization (process) and lingering fear regarding the broader economy in which the organization operates (attitude. The primary O² (Quest) fears (anxiety, overwhelm, lack of containment) might be included on the list along with the feared loss of integrity and potential regrets regarding elusive satisfaction, lack of caring for others and failure to discover what is really important.
Download Article 1K Club
