Sequencing
We can move beyond the specific polarizing challenges and opportunities facing Susan and Rick, to consider the various ways in which integration of polarity might be achieved. First, there is the potential sequencing and leveraging of the polarities. For instance, when seeking to integrate the two polarities of Trust, we might engage in a quest when seeking to find our “home” (identity, profession, enduring intimate relationship). As a young person we might try out several summer jobs to determine what we “really” want to do in our life. We might date a variety of people to determine what we are looking for in terms of a life partner. Developmental psychologists like Erik Erikson identify this as a psycho-social “moratorium” that allows us to explore alternative identities. (Erikson, 1980) Later in life, we might use our “mid-life” crises to take a journey through alternative identities, occupations – and even relationships (Levinson, et. al., 1978; Levinson, 1997).
We might switch the sequencing. We ensure that our home is secure before we begin the quest. We want to be sure that “home” is intact and will be there for us when we end our quest. We leave our current job and begin to apply for jobs in a quite different field—but first check to be sure we have sufficient savings and insurance. We know that our loving life partner will be there even if we “crash and burn” with our new venture. Perhaps Odysseus was able to embark on his very long (10 year) Odyssey because he knew that Penelope would always be there for him when he returned to Ithaca.
In the case of Trust, we might think of home and quest as two book ends. We first ensure that there is adequate Trust at home before debarking on the quest. We then return from the quest with new skills and knowledge to further ensure that our home is secure and safe (S²). These bookends of Trust not only provide stability. They also establish an integrated foundation for both home and quest.
Enablement
A second pathway to Integration is found in the process of Enablement that I identified in one of my previous essays. We engage in a systemic analysis (such as that engaged by Jay Forrester and other members of his MIT group) that entails discovering how various factors (forces) in a system impact one another (Meadows, 2008). Specifically, we identify those forces that are most likely to enable other forces to have a strong, positive impact on the desired outcomes. When we are successful in achieving XYZ then opportunities open up and resources become available to initiative ABC. While XYZ might not be very important in and of itself, it might be of great value because of its capacity to enable other components of the system to succeed.
It is not only a force field analysis that one can complete before embarking on a polarity analysis. One can also prepare a cross-impact matrix in which specific forces are listed on both the left side and across the top of the matrix. An assessment is then made regarding how each force listed on the left impacts on each force listed across the top of the matrix. Does the left forces help or hinder the effective engagement of the topside force. After completing the matrix, attention is directed to those forces that most often enable other forces to be effective in achieving a specific outcome. In the case of a Trust-focused matrix, some of the forces will relate to the establishment and maintenance of security and safety (S²), while other will relate to the enhancement of opportunities and openness (O²). The systemic focus on enablement will help to bring about integration of S² and O² forces.
Download Article 1K Club
