Pervasive In Some Organizations / Sectors?

“Learned helplessness” (LH) may be more prevalent in the Social-Profit Sector than we know and it could explain some behaviors which might be counterproductive.  What is LH?  A situation in “which people or animals feel they are unable to positively influence their surroundings or personal situation.”  (John Bradberry) A diet of  continual bad news.

The prompting for this reflection was a recent Retreat that my colleagues and I facilitated; it was obvious, the next morning, that the members of this group seemed to feel powerless to alter the status quo.

Learned Helplessness was a discovery that was the result of an accident: in 1967, psychologists Martin Seligman and Steven Maier, detected helpless behavior in dogs who were shocked after hearing a tone.  Dogs subjected to the conditioning made no effort to overcome the shocks by moving to the other side of the “shuttle-box.”

According to the researchers, “Due to their previous experience, they [the dogs] had developed a cognitive expectation that nothing they did would prevent or eliminate the shocks.”  (Seligman & Maier, 1967).

After some reflection, we began to wonder: is this problem more pervasive than we realize?  Since we have detected some elements of “mild paralysis” in some organizations, we thought it — this idea of Learned Helplessness — was worth exploring and…writing about.

A quick warning: LH is not a diagnosis; it’s a tool to better understand behaviors and provide solutions that are respectful of situations that are growing increasingly more complex.

Since many social-profits (SP’s) are now suffering adversities that have little to do with their own actions (few of them, I imagine, shorted AIG’s stock or packaged mortgage-backed securities), is it possible that their people are engaging in a higher level of Learned Helplessness?  Possibly, is my answer.

If this is indeed true, it is easy to see why some organizations cling to old models and “turn inward”  (See Harwood: “How Programs Crowd Out Community”) as they try to “defend” themselves.

We believe we can change this situation.  Risk-taking and courage can replace fear and reluctance if we: 1) develop a new series of conversations, and; 2) encourage a new model of leadership.

This new conversation must come with a few simple ground rules: we’re not here to blame or defend…we’re here to imagine a new way as we see many of our old, hierarchical, “go-it-alone,” win/lose models breaking down.

The model of leadership we need?  My preference is on “Servant Leadership.”  It puts the constituents first, ahead of self-interest.  Sounds easy.  It’s not.

What if…we could encourage a dialogue that is deeper, more reflective and begins with probing questions that get at meaning?  Questions like:

• what change do I hope I can make?
• how much am I willing to bet on my future?
• what are my rewards for success?

These are questions that deliver personal or “authentic” power.  Perhaps, these questions can get tried out in the next Staff, Board meeting?

We can’t predict the future nor can we control it but we can co-create it.  As one wise philosopher tells us: “The future ain’t what it used to be.”  Yogi Berra (1925–  )

The Original

The New AT&T

In December of 2006, Cingular became a wholly owned unit of AT&T. It’s OK that you don’t remember; very few people do. (Yes, you can smell an object lesson coming?) I call it “The Cingular Dilemma” (TCD).

Cingular, prior to its acquisition, was the second largest wireless carrier in the world’s largest wireless market and….we don’t even think about it anymore. It was re-branded “The New AT&T.”

(Unless I’m way off base, I think we’re unlikely to see anything in the non-profit sector the likes of “The New Gates Foundation” or “The New Alzheimers Association.” )

Just this sort of phenomenon — The Cingular Dilemma — is, I believe, what keeps non-profit, and foundation, management teams up at night, tossing and turning. Why?

In these perilous and uncertain times, the plight of non-profits, and the entire sector, is an unknown. As demand for services continues to and funds continue to drop, non-profits look to the possibility of “mergers, collaborations, partnerships” as a way through, a tactic that could insure survival.

The Model: Buy Me Up, Scotty

The models which are often used are based on the for-profit M&A (Merger & Acquisition) design. While it’s well known, it’s worth stating that: there are no golden, let alone, brass parachutes for discarded management teams; there are no severance packages even when you fail or when you can’t come to terms with the Board on an outlandish pay package for yourself. And, of course, in the event you would like to “cash out,” there is no stock exchange on which to launch an Initial Public Offering. In fact, non-profits are required upon closure, by IRS statute, to distribute their assets to other non-profits.

If for-profits and non-profits are so different, why do we treat them the same on this subject of partnering? Why haven’t we created a new set of rules that would assure, let’s say, that Cingular’s name would still be around…in some form?

Clip from Points of Light Institute Website

My answer is that I think we’re stuck and scared. I see a shortage of imagination and a language that is lacking in subtlety. Even though we have models, like the Points of Light Institute (recently ”merged” with HandsOn Network) that tell a different story, we’re stuck in an old model: “if I partner with you, I go away.”  Yes, there is a cultural theme here, too: cowboys ride alone.

Combine the cultural and creative reality with the landscape — 74% of our non-profits are under $500K in annual revenues; 61% are under $250K — and we can see that there isn’t a lot of perceived “wiggle room” to make anything earth-shattering happen.

This reality puts the subject of partnering in the non-profit sector in a relatively unsophisticated stage that makes any change complex, expensive, time-consuming and fear-producing.  (Here comes the pitch.) We in The Minerva Project are working to create tools and methodologies that would drive down the expense and increase the simplicity of evaluations and potential integrations.

Where do we go from here?  Some more talking wouldn’t hurt. But, experimentation would be better.

Rosabeth Moss Kanter, the noted Harvard Business School professor,  speaks about the steps that are needed to “turn a culture of decline into one of success.”  A bigger task than most realize, she simply says “…you have to restore employees’ confidence in the system.”

She Looks Harmless

“Learned helplessness” is the term that psychologists use to talk about school-aged childrens’ resignation.  In that context, the internal dialogue is something like…”I’m stupid…I can’t do this…”  It is the opposite of their other term: “Self efficacy.” 

In the workpalce, the learned helplessness addresses the sentiment that sounds something like: “We can’t do this….we tried this before…we’re stuck and…that’s the way it’s going to stay….”  It’s more than the feeling of an underdog because an underdog thinks s/he can move up, win a few.

“….as communication and the willingness to face problems openly deteriorate, infighting and finger pointing increase.  Employees in different unit lose respect for one another and…for themselves.  Groups start withholding information from one another.  They look to maximize their own results but not to contribute to the performance of the organization as a whole.”

So, turnarounds in any organiztion, says Kanter, are special situations.  And, of course, they require special skills.  The first “cornerstone of confidence” is accountability.  It comes from open dialogue and mutual respect.  Quite a contrast to the “finger pointing” and provides the opportunity for people to step out and re-commit to the promises they previously made.

June 1, 2010 Seems Like a Long Time Ago

Almost three months ago, James Cameron, got involved in trying to help clean up the runaway oil gusher in the Gulf.

Is truth stranger than fiction?

What could Movie Director Cameron’s involvement with an oil spill tell us about addressing some of our big problems in business, problems in the world?

Is it possible that the world of “fiction” offers us some answers to our most troubling questions, dilemmas?

Maybe, someone could write a decent script / movie for problems like Afghanistan, Israel/Palestine, Iraq, The Koreas…runaway profits at Goldman Sachs after they bankrupted AIG…

Go ahead: I’ll wait.