Boost Creativity: Make Rules To Be Broken

Counterdependence: The act of overcompensating as a result of feeling very dependent and subconsciously moving in the opposing direction.

Think "teenagers".

Once teenagers figure out the rules, they begin to look for creative ways to break them as a way to assert their independence. Adults do the same thing. You can choose to funnel that dynamic into productive counterdependence.

Here are some proven (that means I did it at least once) ways:

1. Implementing Changes.

The warm-and-fuzzy school of thought says to get people involved at the outset of a change to help create it. Well, that might work if they known what to do and how to do it.

a. If they don't know either, then they require direction. When people know the over-arching purpose of the change, they'll be able to help refine it.

b. If they know what but not how, they need educational direction.

c. If they know how but don't want to do the what, they need a darned good reason. Perhaps even an offer they can't refuse. Then, listen for the responses to get an accurate readiness diagnostic that you won't have to pay for.

2. Brainstorming Past Glazed-Over Eyeballs.

People who are highly expressive and verbal often enjoy brainstorming. That's who the "storming" part was meant to accommodate.

But what about the deep thinkers who want to reflect thoughtfully  before participating?

They need something upon which to reflect, then react. They need content. Give them some. Instead of expecting your engineers and accountants to view your blank flip chart page as a Monet canvas, put some of your ideas up there first. Don't worry about how lame they are. (Your ideas, not the engineers). Just get something up there for people to "bounce off of."

Think of yourself and your content as  "trampolines for engagement." (Did I just say that?)

3. Overcoming Senior-itis.

Frequently heard from managers:

"I don't want to tell anybody what I think of Project X until after they've discussed it in the meeting. Then I'll give my opinion. Otherwise, they may be intimidated and try to please me." The thinking is this: The most senior person in the room should wait until last to speak.

That may be true if:

a. You have an abundance of shrinking violets working with you, in which case it won't make any difference.

b. These people used to offer up a stream of ideas until they figured out that you always wait until the last minute to unveil your brilliance and tell them how wrong they all are. Gotcha!

c. You somehow believe that the accurate definition of "leadership" is "I'll go last."

I actually do understand how strong managers arrive at the "I'll go last" methodology and most of those with whom I've worked believe they are doing a good thing. They aren't.

At the beginning of the meeting the manager needs to say something like:

"Here's my thinking on this right now, and why. I don't have all the answers or the nuance. Let's talk about how to look at Project X in it's totality and see what we come up with." Then sit down, listen, and stick to clarifying questions.

Why go first? Because everyone in the room will hold back to some extent until the senior person puts a stake in the ground. Pound the stake, tell them you are more than willing to move it, and get out of the way.

Note: If you aren't willing to budge, say so and have a "best way to implement" discussion. Don't do a "faux" participative activity. You can get away with it once or twice but it will ultimately wreck your credibility and the group's participation.

That's what I'm thinking about this today. How about you?

____________________________________________

( "All Things Workplace" has been selected as one of the 10 finalists for the 2009 Best of Leadership Blogs competition hosted by the Kevin Eikenberry Group. It's an honor to be selected. If you are interested in voting for your favorite, please vote at Best Leadership Blog 2009 by July 31st.)

Comments

[peter vajda]

Hi Steve,

You say, "Once teenagers figure out the rules, they begin to look for creative ways to break them as a way to assert their independence. Adults do the same thing. You can choose to funnel that dynamic into productive counterdependence."

Me - I think there's another dynamic at play here. More and more brain research shows that the neo-cortex part of the brain (i.e, the "thinking" part, the "executive part", the "rational" part) is not totally developed in teenagers – the reason so many adults/parents/others react to and judge the "stupidity" of teenagers - when it comes to criticizing their choices and decision-making as being irrational. Well, it may be. But not necessarily because teenagers are "thinking rationally" about their choices and decisions.

So, perhaps, it's not that they are "figuring out" the rules – which requires conscious attention, analyzing, and rationalizing, etc. - but that their emotional brain, their reactive brain, is doing the computing and leading to unwise/creative choices and decisions.

Asserting their independence, perhaps, is not much different than the five-year old who throws a tantrum about going to bed, or cleaning up their room, while for the teenager it's the same reactivity towards other types of expectations, rules, structure, discipline, accountability and self-responsibility.

"Adults" who do the same thing, psychologically and emotionally, are "children" who are being reactive, that is, coming from their limbic brain – amygdala brain, and emotional brain, even though their neo-cortex is developed, only, in this case, they are not engaging it – notwithstanding their protestations to the contrary, that they are being "rational."

So, for me, I think it's good to see this when presenting "change" to folks, and not assume that everything that is presented will be filtered through their "thinking, rational, analytical" self, that their "child" part may be very active and engaged, as a function of any fear, anger, resentment or other emotions that "change" triggers (as a result of their childhood experiences around "change").

While I suppose there can be a "technology" about what to do and how to do it when presenting change, that's just one part of the equation, one side of the dance. Being open and fluid and waiting for folks' responses and reactions can support the able and qualified change facilitator to "dance" with the individual and then access his her facilitation skills to meet their "partner" where they are.

The suggestions you offer may work, or not, at the outset or at the end or in the middle of the interaction, and my experience says that, "Yes, I have to start somewhere" but at the same time be very open and fluid as to how the experience will unfold, i.e, there can be a "change process structure" but one that demands and deserves a great deal of "flexibity" within it.

Me - that's what I'm thinking about this Steve, and thanks for asking.

[Bohdan Rohbock]

I agree, especially about putting out some initial material. I have had to be careful to not beat people up (in their view, I seldom try to do that on purpose) so that they stay open.

If I find myself not getting much response I will sometimes present suggestions that are obviously wrong. Most experts have plenty to say once they get started and giving them a way to be right immediately can help get them going.

[Steve Roesler]

Peter,

Yes, I've seen that research about neo-cortex development and didn't even consider it in thinking about this article. Good one.

As for "managing change", my personal belief after all of these years is that it is a misnomer but a very marketable one. Have never actually seen anything go according to the big flowchart on the wall. The idea of staying open and flexible while also staying focused is the only thing I've seen that makes sense.

What I'm hoping for people to see here is exactly what you are talking about. That is, do something to activate the more "childish" part of the brain to stimulate something other than robotic thinking. In other words, get people feeling. Since that is often difficult for many to do on cue--especially in the business arena--let's do some things to help it along.

[Steve Roesler]

Bohdan,

Isn't it fascinating that we have a tough time just offering suggestions outright--but when faced with an opposing point of view, the cup overflows?!

Sounds as if you are helping people 'get it right' by being willing to 'look wrong'.

Kudos.