I would further suggest that the movement itself may become a matter of concern. It can buffer or block action. A “meta-level” polarity may emerge that addresses the basic tension between change and stability (non-change). There is often a push toward “trying something different” that is countered with a push toward “keeping everything the same.” This polarity often exists independent of and supersedes a focal polarity (in this case Trust). Change sometimes is a contentious issue in and of itself regardless of the polarity being engaged.
Conclusions
I have come to the end of my analysis of the complex and dynamic nature of Essentials and of Essence. I have offered several ways of distinguishing between Essential and Essence. I wish to conclude by suggesting a “down-to-earth” example of how these two terms differ. I turn to sports for this distinction. During a baseball game, the essentials are those factors that lead to achieving a victory. They include the capacity to hit the ball to a place in the field where it can’t be caught (offense), the capacity to run from base to base without being tagged out (base-running), and the capacity to catch a ball that is hit in your vicinity (defense).
By contrast, the Essence of a game of baseball is displayed at the moment when victory is achieved. There is minor celebration when one of the essential factors is displayed (perhaps a fist-pump, a shout of “hurrah” or a pat on the back or rearend when the player displaying the essential factor returns to the dugout. When the Essence of the game is evident—that is when one team had won the game—then the celebration is quite different. Players race onto the field, give each other a hug (regardless of the role played by the person being hugged), and often turn to those in attendance (if a home game) to share the celebration.
What does this “down-to-earth” example suggest/ First, the essentials of a ballgame concern short-term tactics. These tactics are engaged by individual ball players as they make immediate decisions about whether or not to hit the ball, race to the next bag, or position themselves to catch the ball. Second, the Essence of the ballgame is ultimately founded on longer-term, strategic decisions regarding who will play a specific position and what is the batting order among those who are playing the game. Winning of a game is attributed, ultimately, to participation by all members of the team—along with the manager and other members of the team management staff. They are all celebrating—not just the hero of this specific game (who might be the one interviewed by the press at the end of the game).
Even longer-term, decisions are made by the general manager (usually in association with the manager) regarding which players to recruit, retain, bring up from the minor leagues, send down to the minor league, and so forth. The Essence is all about winning games and hopefully ending up playing in (and winning) the World Series. Actually, when we explore the Essence of baseball, we find that there is actually two components—that provide the tension which make the Essence “glimmer” with energy and suspense. As I noted in a previous essay in this series, a game like professional baseball is played not just for one team to win; it is also played to generate revenues for both teams (regardless of which team wins the game). If one team always wins, then people will quit coming to the game and revenues from broadcasting will drop off. The strategic Essence is to win – but not win too often!
Download Article 1K Club
