Open Thinkering

Menu

Tag: systems thinking

TB871: Conceptualising myself through metaphor

Posted on by Doug Belshaw

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

A river running through a lush green forest

I’m a big fan of metaphors. I find them useful in all sorts of situation; they can be extremely generative and motivational (when they’re not dead).

Activity P4.24 (The Open University, 2020) is an interesting one:

Ask yourself ‘When I am at my best, I am like what?’, and launch out into your own choice of metaphor. […]

  • What aspects of yourself are captured in the metaphor?
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of being your choice of metaphor? What can it do? What can’t it do?
  • What aspects of the ‘metaphorical you’ do other people see? What is helpful about that? What could be different?
  • Seeing your life from the point of view of your metaphor, are there any changes you might like to make?

A flowing river

I had a bit of a think about this, and decided that, when I am at my best, I feel like a flowing river. A river is constantly moving, never static, which aligns with my tendency to keep going from one thing to the next, preventing me from ruminating and overthinking various aspects of life.

Rivers are adaptable and resilient. They can be calm and meandering or fierce and turbulent, reflecting the different states of my thoughts and emotions. I tend to cite the famous saying by Heraclitus about not being able to step into the same river twice quite a lot, which I think helps demonstrate both the ever-changing nature of river — and my own experiences and perceptions.

There are advantages and disadvantages to this metaphor:

Advantages of the metaphor

The river’s ability to navigate around obstacles mirrors my capacity to adjust to new situations and overcome challenges. This kind of adaptability allows me to be resilient, finding new paths when necessary and continuously moving forward. The constant movement of a river signifies growth and progress, which aligns with my drive for personal development. As Taylor and other characters would say on the TV show Billions “forward momentum, always.”

Disadvantages of the metaphor

However, this continuous movement can also be a disadvantage. I can find turbulent times overwhelming, much like a river during a storm or flood. Continuous rumination, which we might liken to stagnant pools or the river’s erosion, can lead to mental fatigue. Additionally, a river that disperses widely might lose its strength, similar to how I sometimes feel when taking on too much at once.

Aspects of the metaphorical me seen by others

I think that others see my energy and enthusiasm, notice that I tend to come up with a lot of new ideas, appreciate that I can deal with ambiguity, and can handle diverse situations. My adaptability is evident to those around me, and people observe both my moments of clarity and times of deep rumination. I’d hope that my resilience (which I have to work on continuously!) helps to inspire others to embrace change and persist through challenges.

Being visible, in my work, on this blog, and elsewhere, while often positive, can have its downsides. My intensity and constant motion can sometimes overwhelm others or make me appear unpredictable.

Life from the point of view of the metaphor

Viewing my life through the lens of a flowing river, I see several changes I might like to make. I need to reduce my overall levels of stress, which from a metaphorical point of view would be the ‘rapids’ of my life. Perhaps some kind of meditation practice could help with this, although to be quite honest the idea of sitting with my thoughts for any length of time terrifies me.

Rivers tend to follow the path of least resistance which, while meaning that there is always forward momentum, isn’t very strategic. Defining clear goals might help channel my energy more effectively, ensuring my efforts lead to tangible outcomes.

One thing that I definitely do already do is to prioritise self-care to ensure my mental and physical wellbeing. Preventing the negative effects of constant change is something I’ve had to learn through experience. So, for example, while I’m always moving onto the next thing intellectually, my home environment is usually very ordered and unchanging (when we’re not moving house!) and I’m pretty fastidious about my three pillars of productivity (sleep, exercise, nutrition).

Conclusion

By embracing the metaphor of a flowing river, I can gain a deeper appreciation of my strengths and challenges. This metaphor provides a framework for understanding my forward-thinking nature and the importance of balance and direction in personal growth and my interactions with others. This has actually been a useful activity. I think I might use the river metaphor a bit more when thinking, planning, and discussing plans with others!

References

Image: Timon Studler

TB871: Navigating communication under pressure: Transactional Analysis, DISC, and the FONT framework

Posted on by Doug Belshaw

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

Effective communication can be challenging, especially under pressure. This post will explore how Transactional Analysis, the DISC model, and the FONT framework can be integrated to better understand and manage these situations. Using a notable example involving Donald Trump and a CNN reporter, we will illustrate these concepts and provide practical applications for improving communication in high-stress scenarios.

Transactional Analysis

Four diagrams of transactional interactions, illustrating complementary and crossed transactions, with labeled arrows between "Parent", "Adult", and "Child" circles.
Image taken from TB871 module materials (The Open University, 2020)

Developed by Eric Berne, Transactional Analyssis is a framework for understanding social interactions. It categorises communication into three states:

  • Parent (P): Behaviours and attitudes learned from authority figures.
  • Adult (A): Rational and objective responses to the present situation.
  • Child (C): Responses replayed from childhood experiences.

Complementary Transactions: Occur when the communication is aligned, with expected responses. For example, an Adult-to-Adult conversation where both parties engage rationally.

Crossed Transactions: Happen when the response is unexpected or inappropriate, leading to communication breakdowns. For example, an Adult communicates with another Adult, but the response comes from the Child state, causing confusion.

The DISC Model

The DISC model: a circular diagram divided into four quadrants labeled D (Dominance), I (Influencing), S (Stabilizing), and C (Cautious).

When I’ve been in management or leadership positions, I’ve been asked to do all kinds of tests to figure out my ‘style’. The DISC model is a behavioural assessment tool with high reliability (an individual will get the same result over time) but low validity (ability to predict job performance is low). It categorises individuals into four types based on their dominant traits:

  • Dominance (D): Direct, assertive, and results-oriented.
  • Influencing (I): Outgoing, enthusiastic, and persuasive.
  • Stabilizing (S): Calm, patient, and loyal.
  • Conscientiousness (C): Analytical, detail-oriented, and reserved.

I did this assessment when over in Australia with the Moodle senior management team in 2018. I came out as being in the yellow quadrant (I) usually, but in the red quadrant (D) under pressure.

FONT framework

I’ve written about the FONT framework and non-violent communication before. I’ve found it helpful to me and also, as both Laura and I did the same workshop, in our professional relationship whenever there’s conflict within WAO.

FONT stands for:

  • Feelings: Emotional responses that influence behaviour.
  • Observations: Objective facts observed in the interaction.
  • Needs: Underlying needs driving the behaviour.
  • Thoughts: Cognitive processes and interpretations.

Even just taking a moment to write things down in four different boxes is a useful exercise: it helps separate out feelings from thoughts, for example. Crucially, it helps you figure out what you need from the situation.

Combining approaches

Integrating Transactional Analysis with DISC and FONT provides a comprehensive approach to understanding communication. It allows for the analysis of transactional states, behavioural styles, and underlying drivers in interactions.

Using the interaction between Donald Trump and a CNN reporter as a case study, included in the module materials, we can analyse it using all three approaches, and then synthesise our findings.

  • Transactional Analysis: Trump’s defensive responses may represent a crossed transaction when the reporter’s questions come from an Adult state, but Trump responds from a Parent or Child state.
  • DISC Model: Trump’s behaviour typically aligns with Dominance (D), showing assertiveness and control. Under pressure, this may shift to more aggressive or defensive actions.
  • FONT Framework:
    • Feelings: Trump might feel threatened or cornered, while the reporter might feel frustrated by evasive answers.
    • Observations: Trump’s body language, tone, and choice of words is uncharacteristically defensive in response to the reporter’s persistence and questioning style.
    • Needs: Trump may need to maintain control and credibility, while the reporter needs truthful information.
    • Thoughts: It’s impossible to know what each party is thinking, but during the reporter’s persistent questioning, it’s clear that Trump isn’t sure how to deal with him, and is thinking on his feet.

Conclusion

Learning about Transactional Analysis has helped me realise the importance of maintaining complementary transactions for effective communication under pressure. This means responding from the appropriate transactional state to keep interactions aligned and avoid misunderstandings.

Although DISC is of questionable value, what is helpful is recognising and adjusting to different behavioural styles. We can recognise these in ourselves, and also in others; this can significantly enhance communication. For instance, when dealing with a Dominance (D) type, providing clear and concise information can help maintain a constructive dialogue.

Using the FONT framework allows us to address the underlying needs and thoughts of all parties involved, leading to a more empathetic and effective interaction. I’ve certainly found this helpful when dealing with conflict in the workplace.

References

TB871: Conflict management and systems thinking

Posted on by Doug Belshaw

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

The video below shows the ‘Thomas–Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument’ (2024). Activity P4.20 of the module materials asks us to reflect on this model, which plots possible responses to conflict on two axes – assertiveness and cooperation (The Open University, 2020).

Although some people act otherwise, conflict is inevitable in life, and particularly when doing systems thinking work. It’s how we deal with it that matters.

The image below shows the same four quadrants as shown in the video, created by plotting assertiveness (integrity, control, self-reliance) against cooperation (a positive way to move beyond conflict).

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Management Model Template diagram showing five conflict styles: Competing, Avoiding, Collaborating, Accommodating, and Compromising, each represented with varying levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness.

The module materials explain the different aspects of this diagram in the following way (The Open University, 2020):

  • Competing may give you a short-term advantage, but if the outcome is win–lose it may not do much for the emotional dynamics of future relationships.
  • Accommodating can be precarious as you may find yourself on a track that you’re not really happy with and start to feel resentful.
  • Avoiding doesn’t really tackle the situation at all, but it does conserve some energy.
  • Compromising will help you to move on, but everyone has lost a little – which can be dispiriting.
  • Collaborating can be a leap out of the conflict situation into a different space with new possibilities – but it needs imagination and some mutual trust. Also, those who choose not to collaborate may see you as selling out.

I find myself in conflict situations reasonably often, and reflect on what happened. I know what I should do, but doing it is another story. With people I really care about I try to collaborate and go for the win-win, other than with my wife I’m very rarely accommodating, I never think it’s a good idea to avoid conflict, and so I end up competing a lot.

As the overview from the module materials indicates, collaborating isn’t always an option, and I’m not a big fan of compromising (which isn’t always win-win). I guess I can be a bit of a prickly character (an “arse” as more than one person has described me) so it’s something I’m going to have to work on from a systems thinking practitioner point of view.

References

css.php