This is the third post in our series about the truths found in polarities. Click to read the first one, Balancing Structure and Freedom, and the second one, Nurturing Plus Courageous Compassion.
We find ourselves at a unique time in history with pressures pushing in on us on multiple levels. For those who feel deeply and those seeking to make positive impacts, we know the pressure is both an overwhelming force and an invitation to explore yet another aspect of both/and spaces. We’ve been peeling back the truths found in polarities over the last few weeks, and continue in our series. This week we delve into the tension in individual compassion vs. organizational compassion.
At times of great stress, we can swing between opposites – relying on ourselves for strength, safety, and success, or relying instead on group norms and community for the same support. In some cultures and environments, the role of the individual is supreme, like the United States’ strong sense of individualism, while in other cultures and environments, individuals are asked to sacrifice their own desires to serve the community. In order for compassionate change to occur within us and our organizations, we need to embrace the strengths of both the individual and the community.
In between the swings of the pendulum are ways to recognize the value of each individual’s uniqueness while also acknowledging the deep interconnectedness among all of us. There is power in holding to our individual entities - as our purposes intermingle, we create a solid foundation for the changes we want to see in the world.. We are all unique beings, worthy of celebration in our uniqueness.
And, when we begin to dig a little deeper, we see the connections between our individual expression and the communities that created us. Each of the experiences that shape who we are exist in group contexts. Our cultures, traditions, biases, and perceptions are formed by the groups and communities we are a part of. Groups shape behaviors and practices of the individual through enforced group norms that reward or punish different behaviors. While we often link behavioral choices to individuals, perhaps, instead we may start to see that individual actions aren’t ours alone; they have been heavily influenced by the groups we find ourselves in.
“The group” is simply the accumulated practices of individuals, and as such, group norms are based on individual choices. We must recognize that our individual experiences are made up of and have been made of elements beyond ourselves:
Our genetic makeup that came from our ancestors
The families we grew up in
Our unique experiences – both joyous and traumatic – that we have lived through
Environments where we’ve been taught to believe certain things
Supportive relationships with those on our growth journeys
Different areas of oppression or limited access to certain spaces
And yet, it is important to recognize that these norms are the result of those voices which have been the most dominant due to their position of power or privilege. Change agent Shannon Cohen often expresses, “Shared space does not equal shared experience.” To create a more compassionate world requires the application of change strategies at both the individual and the group level. Individuals need to practice ways to strengthen their capacity for compassion at each step of the process:
One’s awareness of the suffering of others,
A generous interpretation of that suffering,
An empathic resonance with the one suffering, and
The willingness to act to relieve the suffering and remove the causes.
At the root of compassion is the call to explore our common humanity. When we stop to slow down, and invite our egos to linger just a minute longer, we can exhale into the moments that remind us, “Oh, wow, I thought I was the only one.” We all suffer, we all feel, and we all want to be safe and belong. By strengthening your own practice, you then build and strengthen your own individual capacity for compassion. With intention, these changes then can integrate into changes needed at organizational levels.
While there are a multitude of opportunities to examine group structure, norms, and community, we’ll narrow our focus to look at the invitations for organizations as communities. In organizations, we define culture as the accepted norms of a given group, knowing this varies group to group. The macro (organizational) culture is nothing more than the cumulation of all the micro (individual) actions. In addition, the individual actions are strongly shaped and affected by the macro culture.
Without integration of individual and organizational efforts, change won't occur. If it is a top down culture change initiative, the major risk is that it becomes nothing more than a slogan poster on the wall. Without changing the ability and willingness of the individuals to lead more compassionately, announcing a compassion initiative won't work.
On the other hand, the actions of an individual or a small number of individuals will be dominated by an existing culture that isn't predisposed to change. Even one person can take small steps that ripple outward to the people around them, and then beyond. The risk, however, is that the "ripple outward approach will likely hit walls – often repeatedly. Bottom-up change normally requires top-down support for change to be sustained.
Effective transformation requires the integration of change strategies at both the individual and the organizational level. Individual transformation alone will eventually run out of oxygen in a culture that cannot provide fuel. Organizational change will be met with resistance and skepticism without support for the needed change at the individual level.
We, as leaders and employees, find ourselves uniquely positioned as individuals creating and operating in greater group structures. And in this space is the invitation to embrace the social architecture approach described by Worline and Dutton in Awakening Compassion at Work, which is to create an environment that supports bringing compassion to life within the organization.
They offer a path to organizational change through four distinct, yet highly interrelated, flexible and structural organizational components:
Roles that promote a sense of responsibility for the well-being of everyone within and related to the organization.
Networks that facilitate and nurture high-quality connections among co-workers.
Routines that allow suffering to be easily recognized and responded to.
Culture that values the uniqueness of each individual and recognizes our shared common humanity.
Each of these four elements provide leverage points for enhancing the organizational capacity for compassion. Examining and utilizing each of these components with intention provide opportunities to more deeply integrate the individual and the community. The ask of leaders is to look at where you can make organizational changes using these four elements to develop greater compassion competence.
So, what will your groups be known for? As leaders, what opportunities exist as you explore how to integrate the individual with the community you are trying to create? How can you celebrate your connectedness, and work together to magnify the shared experiences you are trying to cultivate for your customers and your employees? And where, as individuals, can you invite others along on your journey? Share your thoughts in the comments below.