The phrase “Strong Opinions, Weakly Held” from a post by Bob Sutton describes an important philosophy for leaders, Bob Sutton describes the importance of this idea as:

“….the virtues of wise people – those who have the courage to act on their knowledge, but the humility to doubt what they know…to deal with an uncertain future and still move forward – they advise people to have ‘strong opinions, which are weakly held.’ …… Bob explained that weak opinions are problematic because people aren’t inspired to develop the best arguments possible for them, or to put forth the energy required to test them. Bob explained that it was just as important, however, to not be too attached to what you believe because, otherwise, it undermines your ability to ‘see’ and ‘hear’ evidence that clashes with your opinions. This is what psychologists sometimes call the problem of ‘confirmation bias.’”

When dealing with complex and uncertain futures having strong opinions, weakly held is an important philosophy in how to approach the development of strategy.

Strong Opinions…

Strong opinions encourage you to develop strong arguments that support your point of view. Consider the alternative, weak opinions, when we have weak opinions:

1. We generally don’t develop robust arguments to support a weak opinion.
2. Weak opinions don’t challenge other people to debate and test the validity of the supporting argument.

Take a strong stand, if you’re wrong, acknowledge it and be open to learning along the way. By taking a strong stand, rather than a weak one, will invite the opposition, debate and dialogue necessary to test that validity of the supporting argument.

Weakly Held….

Much of the opinions we hold today, are based on what we see today. While strong opinions encourage you to develop strong arguments supporting your point of view, if those opinions are strongly held we often fail to change in response to other people’s ideas and fail to change in response to new information. Considering the human tendency to actively seek information and evidence that supports our existing point of view. People with strongly held opinions invest way too much time and energy, supporting their existing opinions and fail to observe and respond to new information and feedback.

Having strong opinions, weakly held enables us to observe and rapidly respond to the changing world. Taking a position and developing a supporting argument, then rapidly testing your point of view, whilst being open to learning is a crucial skill required for success in complex and uncertain situations.

Try the following when you’re next faced with a complex issue to resolve:

• What strong opinions do you have about the issue you’re working on?
• Do you have a clear argument to support your opinion?
• Share your opinion with a number people on both sides of the issue.
• Consider how you can incorporate some of the ideas and feedback to strengthen your argument. Or, alternatively should you be changing your opinion?

No related posts.

@N01/471685172/" target="_blank">Photo by chelseagirl

The need for change in how we think, behave and relate as organisations and individuals has never been greater. There is a great need for leaders who are capable of leading organisational change. The results to date have been dismal, research from Harvard Business Review indicates that as much as 70% of all organisational change programmes fail. The subject of change is vast and complex and I don’t claim to have all the answers, however I do feel that the following models provide useful insights, guiding how we should approach  and think about change.

The Paradigm Shift Model

Whilst reading “Whole-Scale Change: Unleashing the Magic in Organizations” I found this powerful formula that the authors call “The Paradigm Shift Model”. The model is based upon the work of Richard Beckhard, the formula describes what is required to bring about change in an organisation or in individuals. The formula is described as follows:

Each person in the organisation as a whole need to share a common “database” of dissatisfaction (D) with things as they are now. This requires that the organisation to do what Jack Welsh suggests, to “face reality as it is, not as it was or as you wish it were.” This is a very difficult task for most leaders. People also need a common vision (V) of what organisations needs to be in the future, and the people need agreement of what the significant organisational wide first steps (F) are that will move them in the required direction. If you look at the formula if any of the three elements D, V or F is zero, the drive for change will not be sufficient to overcome the resistance (R) to the change. This formula reminded me of the work of Robert Fritz who describes the necessary structures and tensions required to propel an organisation or individual towards change discussed in his book “Path of Least Resistance: Learning to Become the Creative Force in Your Own Life”

Structure Determines Behaviour

Organisational and individual change needs to be supported by the appropriate structure, Robert Fritz in his book “Path of Least Resistance: Learning to Become the Creative Force in Your Own Life” describes the importance structure:

“Once structure exists energy moves through that structure by the path of lease resistance. In other words, energy moves where it is easiest for it to go. The structure of anything refers to its fundamental parts and how those individual elements function in relation to each other and in relation to the whole….. Every structure contains within it the inclination towards movement, that is, a tendency to change from one state into another state…. Structure determines behaviour. The way anything is structured determines the behaviour within in that structure.”

This understanding of the importance of structure leads to the following insights:

• We go through life taking the path of least resistance.
• The underlying structure of your life determines the path of least resistance.
• You can change the fundamental underlying structure of your life.
• Some structures are more useful than others in leading to desired results.

We can recognise the structures at play in our organisations and lives then change them so that we create what we really want to create.

Structural Tensions

If we want to create change it’s necessary to have a structure that creates a path of least resistance by creating the necessary structural tension that moves the organisation or individual towards resolution. When creating a structure for change it requires two key components:

1. A clear view of current reality you now have.
2. A vision of the results you want to create.

As illustrated above, the discrepancy between what you now have and the results you want to create in the future creates a structural tension that seeks resolution. In creating the tension it’s necessary to hold the vision and not lower your standards and face reality as it is, any biased view of reality makes the tension difficult to form or maintain.

I think that these models are powerful tools for guiding how we create change in organisations and our lives. What are the structures and tensions in your life? Are they producing the positive results? Do you have a clear view of your current reality? Do you have a clear vision? Perhaps these are the reasons we’re not creating the results we seek in our organisations and our lives….?

Related posts:

1. How leaders change and in turn, change the world…
2. Stimulate Insights with the Relaxation Response
3. Organisational Change and the Neuroscience of Leadership

The story of Roger Bannister is an inspirational one. For many years it was widely believed to be impossible for a human to run a mile (1609 meters) in under four minutes. In fact, for many years, it was believed that the four minute mile was a physical barrier that no man could break without causing significant damage to the runners health. The achievement of a four minute mile seemed beyond human possibility, like climbing Mount Everest or walking on the moon.

It was a windy spring day, on the 6^th of May 1954, during an athletic meeting between the British AAA and Oxford University, that Roger Bannister ran a mile in 3 minutes, 59.4 seconds. He crossed the finish line with a time of 3 minutes, 59.4 seconds, and broke through the “four munite mile” psychological barrier. John Landy a great runner of that day never run faster than within 1.5 seconds of the four minute barrier. Then 56 days after Roger Bannisters breakthrough, John Landy ran the four minute mile in 3 minutes and 57.9 seconds in Finland. Later Bannister and Landy raced in the Mile of the Century where Bannister won in 3 minutes and 58.8 seconds.

Roger Bannister breaks four-minute mile, 6 May 1954 Photographer: Norman Potter

The breaking of the four minute mile was so significant, that is was named by Forbes as one of the greatest athletic achievements. What made this event so significant is that once the four minute barrier was broken by Roger Bannister, within three years, by the end of 1957, 16 other runners also cracked the four minute mile. Describing the psychological impact of the four minute barrier in an interview with Forbes, Sir Roger Bannister, who was knighted in 1975, related that:

The world record then was four minutes, 1.4 seconds, held by Sweden’s Gunder Haegg. It had been stuck there for nine years, since 1945. It didn’t seem logical to me, as a physiologist/doctor, that if you could run a mile in four minutes, one and a bit seconds, you couldn’t break four minutes. But it had become a psychological as well as a physical barrier. In fact the Australian, John Landy, having done four minutes, two seconds, three times, is reported to have commented, “It’s like a wall.” I couldn’t see the psychological side.

So what happened to the physical barrier that prevented humans from running the four minute mile? Was there a sudden leap in human evolution? No. It was the change in thinking that made the difference, Bannister had shown that breaking four minute mile was possible. Often the barriers we perceived are only barriers in our own minds. Previous runners had been held back by their beliefs and mindsets. When the barrier was broken other runners saw that is was possible and then 16 runners went on to do they same.

Sports Illustrated commemorated Bannister’s achievement in their issue of December 27, 1999, more than 40 years after his famous run.

Our beliefs and mindsets limit or expand our world. Beliefs have power over us because we treat them as though they’re true. Beliefs influence what you attempt or choose not to attempt in life. They determine what you pay attention to, how you react to difficult situations and ultimately your attitude. Success and failure begin and end in what the mind believes is possible.

The first step a leader can take in influencing the world around them is to change how they think about it. If Roger Bannister accepted that the four minute mile was a physical limitation, he would never had tried to break it. Just like the runners of time past, many of the barriers that hold us back today exist only in our minds.

• What are the four minute miles that are holding you back in your personal and professional life?
• Are their any role models who are challenging existing limits that you can learn from?

If you’re interested in learning more about Roger Bannister’s story I recommend you read his book….

The Four-Minute Mile, Fiftieth-Anniversary Edition

No related posts.