I’ve noticed that my own self-organizing group members always ask the best, and most difficult, questions—questions that I am afraid to fully look at on my own, let alone answer. Here’s a great one. Thank you Neil!!
_____________________________________________
From: Neil
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 8:02 AM
To: Lori
Subject: re: article
Lori
When I started [the article The Foundational Metaphors and Theories of Relationship-Centered Administration, 2004, Suchman] a few weeks ago, I quit because it was so dense. However, I seem to be flowing through this time and find it quite interesting and even inspiring. I think its themes probably overlap a lot with self-organizing groups. I thought of you with the following quote:
If you decide to read it, let me know what you think. Also, have you seen “evil” self organizing groups?
Enjoy your day
Neil
_____________________________________________
From: Lori
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 5:46 PM
To: Neil
Subject: RE: article
Hi Neil, you rock star. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my perspective. Whether you mean to or not, both you and Doug are pushing me toward verbalizing a theory of self-organizing groups, as the flip side to documenting the experiences of self-organizing groups that is my true joy. Love you guys. Thought I was decades away from being ready to do this!
Regarding the Suchman, 2004 article, I’d say that my experience of self-organizing groups sounds more like this paragraph than anything else in it:
“And so we have arrived at the very essence of Relationship Centered Administration. It is about how we show up and what we bring to each moment: it is very personal. It is about openness and humility: understanding how much we depend upon the serendipity of self-organizing process that is perpetually outside our control. It is about paradox: to get the best outcomes, we have to forget about outcomes and focus instead on the quality of relational process. It is about expectations: transforming individuals and organizations by focusing attention on their best qualities, not their worst. The ultimate message of this chapter is just this: organizational change begins and ends with changing ourselves, how we think and act, what we pay attention to, what we expect of each other, and how we talk and relate to each other in every moment of every day. Gandhi said it best: “Be the change you want to see in the world.”
This sentence in particular—organizational change begins and ends with changing ourselves, how we think and act, what we pay attention to, what we expect of each other, and how we talk and relate to each other in every moment of every day—sounds like my own writing. Always nice to find others doing similar work under different terminology and for different people! Go us! Thanks for sharing it with me.
Regarding this snippet you highlighted:
I’m not a physicist, chemist, complex systems scientist, biologist, or any of the other amazing folks you’ll find working to define the abstract terms (such as “complexity,” “self-organization,” or “self-organizing patterns”) mentioned in this snippet. I am a self-organizing groups researcher/determined learner. I document the experiences of self-organizing groups. In large part, I do this to ensure that I myself get to live and work as part of self-organizing groups the rest of my life.
This author is in very good company if he believes that self-organizing groups can be evil (is that what’s being said here?). At this point I think Doug would agree that the adjective “virtuous” or “good” should be added before “self-organizing groups” when I write and speak about the groups I study and am part of. So, I suspect, would several more of my heroes, including local legend Bill Grace. 🙂 Someone I suspect may lean a little more toward my perspective is Peter Block. Another is Meg Wheatley. If you’re interested, I can also forward you the draft e-Book Doug and I are writing, as it’s decided that it’s documenting an emerging self-organizing groups theory whether I want it to or not.
I’m exhausted today. We adopted one 12-week-old kitten and one 8-week-old kitten this weekend. They woke me up playing every hour on the hour last night. At 3 a.m., they collectively dive-bombed my head from a several-feet height and then attempted to nurse on my face. This was after the single-kitty approach to this same idea didn’t work the previous 4 hours in a row. Today, the younger one is throwing up regularly as he adjusts to new food, so I fear I may be off to the vet tomorrow if he can’t keep food down. Poor little guy. I’ll take a shot at explaining my perspective on self-org groups, but I’m working at about 10% energy/brain power today. Mostly what I’m thinking about today is my family friend who is raising two sets of twins. I’m convinced she must be surviving on some combination of health food, B-12 shots, and cocaine! But I digress. 🙂
When I started on my journey studying self-organizing groups, my goal was to learn enough that I could spend the rest of my life working this way. My experience working in a group at work was extraordinary, personally transformative, rewarding, fun (most days), and also by far the most difficult thing I’d ever done. Our division also evolved significantly as a result, and we got to watch ideas spread and blossom as self-organizing groups formed around us and fostered collective working far beyond what we’d imagined. We gained the ability to move within the organization as one: to know each other’s minds well enough that we could take individual actions that were either in sync from the start or that we could make appear to be in sync the moment we came together. With the confidence and passion this group gave me, I quit my job to pursue study of these groups full time, confident that the division I now loved was being left in 300+ amazing hands.
I first recognized what we were when I saw this graphic (in the book Small Groups as Complex Systems by Arrow, McGrath, and Berdahl, 2000). In it, planned means built by designers and emergent means appearing to arise spontaneously. External means created from outside the group itself and internal means created from within the group itself.
I recognized us as a self-organizing group, because the group had moved me from thinking:
- Mid 2004: “I’m fed up and exhausted working the way this division works. I hate it here. I should quit.” (concocted group) to
- Early 2005: “I’m creating an amazing group that’s going to change the whole division!” (founded group) to
- Early 2006: “I can’t believe how extraordinarily lucky I am to be part of this group and this division. I am utterly surrounded by amazing people and groups. What our group has been talking about and planning wasn’t even what mattered most! What matters most is that we are a diverse group of people, working across long-held division boundaries, and demonstrating that the division is capable of actually doing remarkable cross-boundary work despite our many flaws. It’s not what we’re saying that matters most. It’s not us as individuals. It’s who we are as a group!”
So I began looking for other groups that identified themselves as “more emergent than planned” and “more internally created than externally created.” I began with groups within organizations: teachers in a high school, employees in a tech company, several doctoral student groups and professor/student groups in higher education, for example. Changed, I then found consultant groups and other cross-organization groups to study. Changed, I then found groups outside of traditional organizations altogether, such as flash mobs. Changed, I began noticing and studying other self-organizing groups I was part of, such as my husband and I, my sister and I, my husband and best friend and I together, etc. Changed, I found large friendship groups to study. Changed, next up I’ll be studying an artist group and a church that fosters self-organizing groups as a regular practice—both even farther outside my comfort zones than I’ve gone before (plus several more flash mobs, because they’re just so much fun I can’t stay away).
I study groups I am part of and groups recommended or revealed to me by the groups I study. I only study groups connected to the groups I study and am part of. It’s only as the groups I’m studying and part of evolve (and I evolve) that we become capable of recognizing the next groups to study. There is ample evidence here that we draw only “good” or “virtuous” groups to us, and if that’s your perspective on me and my work that’s fine with me! 🙂 My own belief based on my experience is that every new self-org group changes me and allows me to see even more people and groups as “good” or “virtuous” and as part of myself. I believe there will come a day when these groups so change me that I become capable of noticing the good and virtuous in all people and groups from the moment I show up through whatever happens to the moment I leave. Some days, that’s already happened. Other days, I feel eons away. For example, last week I yelled at my dad (who was trying to help), my husband (who was trying to help), and at the wife (who was trying to help) of a plumber when the plumber failed to show up as expected, and without a plan, for the second time. Clearly I still have a very LONG way to go. 😉
This past winter, as I hit group #30, I could no longer ignore the most clear theme that emerged from across all the groups. Namely, that in these groups, people are surprised and delighted by what they become and do together. Same goes for the people close enough to them to see what they’re doing and consider themselves part of it at some point. Those who aren’t typically can’t see them as a group at all. I ignored this theme for a long time, because it’s a big deal. As an individual, it’s unbelievably scary to say this out loud. My definition for these groups appears to fly in the face of what many of my planet’s experts, including many of my own personal heroes, experience and believe. But I say it anyway. I can today, because I don’t only see myself as an individual anymore. I see my “self” as all the self-organizing groups I study and am part of. This is their experience, and mine, and I’m going to honor it. The groups themselves give me the chutzpah to stand by what I see! (not to mention the ability to use the word chutzpah, because one of my own groups right now is mostly Jewish, even though I’m not). 😉
So, in January, I evolved my definition of self-organizing groups into: a self-organizing group is a collective whose members are surprised and delighted by what they become and do together. This means I can no longer hide what I experience and see in these groups. For me, the “self” in self-organizing group means the group self. It means:
- Group-level self-awareness as demonstrated by group members who can finish each other’s thoughts, share themselves without fear, naturally reflect together, tease each other, pull each other outside their comfort zones until they recognize new strengths in themselves that they could only see in the others before, and learn together faster than they could on their own.
- Members so recognizing the value the group brings to themselves and those who matter most to them that they regularly reflect on and change their individual ideas and behavior. It means people who happily get together and will do so even when it means in the rain outside, late at night, during 15-minute breaks, on weekends, or driving and busing and walking and ferrying themselves great distances, if needed, to spend time together.
- Groups that find themselves creating win-win-win-win-win-win situations and coming up with ideas unimaginable to every individual within them until they started working closely.
- Groups saying “How the heck did we do that?!” and then figuring out the answer to their own questions together.
- Groups born in diversity, because these groups can trace themselves back to two people (and several sets of two and three people) all thinking to themselves “I’d be a whole lot better off with that person, because they have _____ that I don’t.” or “He’s better at that than I am.” Or “She knows more about that than I do.” Or “They’re connecting with people I’d like to be connecting with.”
- Groups that foster other self-organizing groups in all directions around them, because they demonstrate that flawed individuals working in flawed systems really can be and do amazing things when they’re together.
- Groups that give individuals visible, tangible hope (including individuals within the group itself).
- Groups that help members recognize when it’s time to let go (when what matters most to them has changed).
I recognize my own groups each moment in which I think “This group showed up to teach me what I needed to learn next.” The self-organizing groups I encounter are only those very close to me—my own groups and close others. As an individual, I can’t judge self-organizing groups at a distance. Closeness matters. Emotionally if not physically.
My definition will evolve continually to reflect what my groups and I (including you) know now. The evolution of the word interests me more these days than its stable definition. Because the moments it changes are the most interesting moments (and the change always has to include and honor all the groups studied to date)! From January 2011 onward, all groups I study define themselves up front as “surprised and delighted by what we become and do together.” Across seven years, and 14,000+ hours consciously studying self-organizing groups, I’ve come to trust this research far more than I imagined possible, because I completely trust the groups I study and am part of. Trust in my individual self is getting easier, most days, thanks to these groups.
You asked me “Also, have you seen “evil” self-organizing groups?” From my perspective, evil is a word that belongs in the hands of someone far, far wiser than me. I’m not qualified to use it to describe living beings. No living being I personally know fits that description. Self-org groups have taught me that it’s pointless to negatively judge distant others, because I’ll never have the full story. Today, for me, evil self-organizing groups don’t exist, because for me self-organizing groups are self-aware groups of people surprised and delighted by what they become and do together. For me, these groups are an “us” that we’re only just beginning to recognize.
FYI, my perspective on the subject was originally and continues to be strongly influenced by the work of Humberto Maturana. He’s one of my emotionally, not physically, close group members.
Thanks!
Lori
P.S. If it’s ok with you, I’d like to share this as a blog post at some point.
Wow, Lori. Fantastic stuff. I’ll have to let this sink in for a moment 🙂
Your post showed me that I am more focussed on planned groups (projects). I sometimes think I am talking about emergent groups because the elements that make emergent groups so powerful can also be found in planned groups, but not always, and what makes them great is not always planned 🙂 There is a big difference there. I think this is the part that exactly nails this down: “… are surprised and delighted by what they become and do together. ” Thank you for putting that into words.
Now I’ll have to ponder about the good vs evil… 🙂
Hi Bas,
Neil loves detail, so I got to let my detail-freak flag fly in my e-mail response to him. 😉 Was pretty certain blog readers would think this far too long-winded, so thank you for saying this.
The planned vs. emergent distinction is a fine line. It’s not as if self-organizing groups don’t plan. It’s more that they’ve come to very deeply get that planning isn’t what matters most–that the closeness of the group itself matters far more. The agility and flexibility and resilience that closeness brings forth can make planning itself easier but, more importantly (apparently), it also makes them capable of appearing to distant others that they planned far more than they actually did. It’s much faster to appear to have planned everything than to actually plan everything. Except for my own groups–which I can bumble around in and watch pre-emergence–the self-organizing groups I encouter to study are self-aware. That is, core members know that the group itself is something special and are feeling very lucky to be part of it. They naturally talk about the group–its actions, ideas, characteristics, behavior, etc.–and minimize talk of these same things at the individual level. The group itself is teaching them this beyond what they were inclined to do as individuals before the group.
Today, I think the planned v. emergent and internal v. external distinction is only important from an individual perspective. Once you’re talking to a self-organizing group together–people grateful to their cores for the group–those differentiators matter less and less. For example, self-organizing groups together will trace their origins back and forward a very long way–thanking their families (sometimes long-gone ancestors), friends, people who came before them, people who came after them, people all over their organization, the people the community serves, the people the organization will serve, partner organizations, etc. So, in response to the question “What fostered the formation of this group?” although they may start out by talking about what they themselves did, they don’t let it end there. Not by a long shot. Together they can see far more into who has helped them along the way, which is where much of the gratitude comes from. So eventually, the internal v. external distinction (and other distinctions) comes to matter less and less to group members. The people and their experience together come to matter more and more.
Lori
P.S. “Wow” is an indicator that you’re within or near your own self-organizing group. 🙂
Hey Lori,
Ha! Wow, yes! I know I’m getting near my own self-organizing group. 🙂
This is interesting, distinctions are more on our minds when we enter a group / group is formed. Identity matters most when we are in transition. I experience it actually at this moment. I find myself “mapping out” your topics/writings. I recognize a lot of words I use, and find myself “synchronizing” the meaning. Do you mean the same with those words as I do? 🙂 I see myself asking polarity questions, trying to see where stuff fits on scales. And talk about myself 🙂
This will go away soon 🙂 Promised.
Now I wonder if boundaries will matter more to concocted and circumstantial (and founded?) groups (still using distinctions here :))?
Soon I will get to the original question about evil 🙂
Cheers
Bas
Hi Bas,
From my perspective, what matters most is that we will stick together and move in the same general direction. We don’t have to agree on everything or even most things. The group is actually stronger if we don’t, because that widens the group around us who we’ll be visible to and who’ll be interested in what we’re doing as a group. Being in sync, appearing to be in sync, and the ability to bring ourselves into sync in an instant when together—all—will come as we get closer. I have no doubt.
From my perspective, our individual selves are boundary keepers and our self-organizing group selves are boundary expanders/erasers/illusion lifters. These selves are important in my book. 🙂 I don’t study other types of groups so I can’t really answer questions about them.
I hope you never stop wondering about the meaning of what we say, asking questions, and talking about yourself. In my book, those are all the best parts! I’m a qualitative researcher, after all, so the more you (and we as a group) say the better. 🙂
Besides, talking to you and Ali like this helps my marriage. Daniel’s response to my blog post this week was to come home, plunk himself down onto the sofa, and say “Do you have any idea how difficult it is to be married to the planet’s most verbose person on self-organizing groups?! I started that post on my lunch hour and had to take a paid-time-off hour after that just to finish it!!” He was teasing, but he also makes a very good point (like a good self-org group member does). 😉 See how remarkably annoying I am!
Lori
Well, you have an incredible way with words and expressive power 🙂
Ok. The thoughts about evil came to mind when I was watching the riots in London last week. Social media used to coordinate.
Gangs in general might be an example to look at. Where the cost of getting out the group may be high, so people stick into the group by fear.
Makes sense?
Yep, that makes perfect sense.
And from my perspective, a group of destructive, angry, fear-generating individuals isn’t a self-organizing group.
A self-organizing group builds up over time from 2 to 3 people who see things in each other that they themselves could be better at. They are born in diversity and appreciation. Members eventually get close enough to begin to move in the world as one (trusting each other enough to speak on behalf of the group, becoming more creative and adaptable and resilient together than they were on their own, teasing and teaching each other, often feeling in sync, for example). If it grows from there, it does so slowly, to 4 to 6 people (pulling in diversity again) that can begin to move in the world as one. Everyone in the group recognizes the group as something special, something they’re lucky to be part of, a group allowing them to imagine more possibilities than they could on their own. A group like you, Ali, and I appear to be evolving into, for example. People close to group members, and many nearby others close enough to witness what they’re doing, notice something special about the group as well, and begin to pay closer attention.
From my perspective, fear is an indicator that I’ve popped out of my self-organizing group self and am back to my individual self. And if I’m causing others to feel fear, I’m ot doing so as a self-org group, I’m doing so as an individual.
But that’s just me. Oh, and the 30+ SOGs I’ve studied so far. 😉 heh heh
Lori and Bas,
I do not know what to say. I am supposed to go a medical check-up on my knee, but found myself engulfed in this exceptional dialogue.
It is out of respect, willingness to learn, trust, enjoyment that make us exchange comments without previous planning or agenda. The belief that we all are willing to share knowledge and grow together that makes that triad of self-organizing group.
Lori, I liked your explanation of the quadrants. May be the dividing lines are fuzzy and not linear. Something to ponder about
Ali, hmm, so is it a planet-wide phenomena that men will come up with any excuse to avoid going to see the doctor? 😉
Seriously, though, that we are all here voluntarily, willing to share knowledge and grow together certainly indicates to me that we’re a self-organizing group. And yep, the dividing lines are fuzzy/porous. For myself, I tend to think that as individuals we need them to shine a light toward where we should be going and as self-organizing groups, we make our own light, so they can stop being important.
I hope your knee check-up went well!
Lori
Lori, yes I hate to go to doctors and I am part of this phenomena. That is why my company’s name is Phenomena.
Dissolve the fuzzy lines and make them irrelevant. This is a great message and gives me a lot to think about.