Reality and the Culture of Simulation (3)
Learning to Observe and Understand Cultures
This post is a continuation of a series on the cultures of Simulation and Reality, (1) & (2). We look at this through the lens of culture. Culture is a popular subject in leadership circles today. It is viewed as another strategic asset for leading an organization. If a leader can create an organization’s culture, it validates the power of the position and the person.
I disagree with this assumption. I believe a senior leader can only join and lead the culture that already exists. Even an entrepreneur who starts a company will have to establish a culture through the relationships of the people who join him or her in the endeavor. Understanding how cultures form and are sustained is essential if we are to understand the four-fold nature of the culture of Simulation and by extension the culture of Reality.
Observing Organizational Cultures
My observations of people and organizations convince me that culture is not a strategic asset that can be deployed as a change process. Culture is a product of human creativity within networks of relationships. The material and the ideological develop out of human interaction through ideas and practices that are shared, accepted, then adopted by people. Culture creation is not a mechanical fix to a problem of disagreement between people or a breakdown of the functioning of the organization’s systems. Culture is the foundation of an organization.
I came to this perspective on organizational culture by observing how organizations function. The patterns of behavior that led me to the development of my Circle of Impact model of leadership ultimately pointed me to how a social structure forms. I am using the term social structure in a similar manner as I do in talking about culture.
My observation process requires engagement, conversation, and reflection of what is actually taking place. This is a process of direct experience, not of abstract brainstorming. My methodology is the following.
By observing patterns of behavior of organizational leaders.
In my research over the years, I identified three distinct patterns that can be found across the spectrum of organizations. One was a lack of clarity of thought. Second, relationships that lacked respect, trust, and mutual accountability. And third, the inability of leaders to define the impact that their organization sought to have.
These patterns point to poorly sustained cultures and broken structures. These patterns are so evident to me that one or more are always present in the organizations where I have contact. This is not a judgment on any particular person or organization. Rather, it is the recognition that everyone of us and every human institution is always flawed in some way, always breaking under stress. Many organizations cannot see this because they have never operated with an alignment between the dimensions of Ideas, Relationships, and Structure. When alignment is achieved, a culture of shared leadership develops. In our present situation, living in the midst of a global culture of Simulation, this alignment is very difficult to achieve.
By learning to think for yourself through your own self-education.
Recently, I realized that almost everything that I have done during my career I was not trained to do. Being an independent learner taught me how to observe and find meaning in patterns of behavior that reveal what is actually going on in situations. It is why it was easy for me to see the basic problem in the COVID-19 response as a systems problem, not a public health one. I described this perspective in my short book, All Crises Are Local: Understanding the COVID-19 Global Pandemic.
I studied systems theory on my own, and then applied it in my work. Culture is a systems function of human interaction. It touches every aspect of an organization. Unless you do your own research, you may think that the Simulation is reality. It isn’t. It is the simulation of reality, a false reality, and one designed to confuse, divide, and stop you from creating an impact. How do I know this? Ask this question:
What is the impact that you personally create through the Simulation?
By talking to people of all types.
Of all the things that I do to observe what is happening in the world, simply talking to people is by far the most important. Every person has a story to tell. Every story has meaning and insight that can be valued. Every encounter can be filled with affirmation and validation. Several years ago, I realized that the core strength of my work were these encounters with people. I invite myself into a conversation where I ask people to share their experiences. It is born out of respect, and before the conversation finishes trust and mutual understanding have been established.
The curiosity that drives my encounters with people, also fuels my desire to learn new ideas. When I hear a story or an anecdote about something that is unfamiliar to me, I begin to do the research to gain a significant enough understanding to intelligently ask questions that help me learn more. The deep lesson is that you cannot gain an understanding of the world by just reading books, listening to podcasts, and watching lectures on YouTube. You have to develop the facility to talk with people. I know that people do not do this because they fear looking ignorant. We are all ignorant about most things in life. It is only when we realize that our lack of understanding is the best entre’ into getting to know people and learning about the world. It is how real self-awareness happens.
Understanding What Culture Is
These practices of observation helped me to see the real origin of culture. It comes from the interaction of people where there is a shared purpose to their relationships. I call this a persistent, residual culture of values. As a culture, it persists because it resides in the relationships of shared experience. This culture is found in organizations where people tend to have a long tenure as employees.
I once did a values statement process for a large company that had gone through an executive leadership transition. On my first day with the team selected to work with me, I asked: “How far back in time do we have to do to when this was a happy company?” The union president said,“Twenty years. We were a family back then.” This is how a persistent, residual culture of values outlives twenty years of executive leadership that was not interested in the company’s residual culture.
The wisest leaders learn to identify, join, and nurture this residual culture. This is why I do not believe you can treat culture as a mechanical device to leverage improvement in organizations.
Before we can understand the culture of Simulation or the culture of Reality, we need to embrace the idea that we can not only learn about culture, but enhance it through our leadership initiatives.
In the next post, I dig into the origin and nature of the culture of Simulation with a comparison to the four-fold nature of the culture of Reality. It completes the description that I have begun here.
Reality and The Culture of Simulation
1 Understanding the Context of the Spectacle of the Real
2 The Difference in Context between the Simulation and Direct Experience
3 Learning to Observe and Understand Cultures
5 The Spectacle of the Real comes to Uvalde, Texas. What should leaders do?