Lately, I've been thinking about the importance of striking a balance--finding a way to accommodate seemingly contradictory conditions--and how frequently that can make or break an interaction or relationship. High performing individuals, leaders and teams constantly acknowledge and embrace the paradoxes that come from successful balance.
When in balance, we show our strengths and disclose our vulnerabilities. Teams in balance enjoy the sweetness of harmony, yet work through conflict to achieve creativity and innovation. Most of us appreciate the opportunity to give support to others, and, in order for support to occur, someone has to be willing to ask for help. Sometimes leaders need to define a direction for the group; other times the most effective leaders discover where the people want to go, then get in front of the parade. I like it when my life settles into a somewhat predictable routine, and like the challenge of responding to the unexpected.
It's not either/or. Order or Chaos. Stability or Change. It's both/and. Balanced. A little of this, a little of that. Apply as needed.
Comments
I recently read a book on this topic (i think): Nonaka and Takeuchi’s “Hitotsubashi on Knowledge Management”. The godfathers of the Scrum method describe how at the highest levels innovation at Japanese companies come from the ability to “synthesize paradox”. That is, in reaching the “balance” you describe, creativity and innovation flow optimally. Very interesting reading and not just for business folks.
Thanks for the comment and citation, Victor.
Another book I’ve consulted about balance and paradox is “Paradoxes of Group Life” by K. Smith and D. Berg. It was first published in 1987 and is not an easy read, but if one can handle slogging through the academic verbiage, there is some good stuff to find. The subtitle is “Understanding Conflict, Paralysis and Movement in Group Dynamics.”