Hmm... so this article by Debra Meyerson answers some of the questions that I've been having about the other articles I've read. It takes a pretty radically different approach to change than the other articles and does I think the most genuine job so far of addressing change from the bottom up. I also thought it was interesting that Meyerson stopped to describe two general approaches to change: one that would pretty well describe the first three articles in this collection and the other which would describe this article's approach. The other articles never acknowledged that there were two ways to approach change. I wonder if the fact that this article does address that overview reflects something about the relative power and privilege that those two perspectives hold?
Whatever the case, I could relate a lot more to this article, which described the strategies of people who tried to change their organizations from the bottom in a more gentle and non-disruptive way. Meyerson notes four ways that her research found that people did this: disruptive self-expression, verbal jujitsu, variable-term opportunism, and strategic alliance building. Meyerson makes the point that it is not only important to lead this kind of change, but also for other types of leaders to recognize and partner with individuals who are able to lead this kind of change.
I think I have already explained my own struggles in this area--and perhaps alluded to the fact that part of the reason I struggle is that I always feel different. I have spent years of my life trying to figure out why I'm so different and why fitting in seems to be so much harder for me than other people. I suppose taken from the kind of change perspective Meyerson describes, this tendency could be considered a gift...
*sigh*
I don't know. It seems like it is so much easier to admire and examine this phenomenon from the outside than it is to live it. For one thing, it's hard to feel like the change you are creating is really worth anything. How important, really, is it to wear lace socks is you are a female surgeon? Optimistically, one might point to it as a positive influence, or pessimistically, as merely a personal idiosyncrasy. Again, for the observer, the difference doesn't matter that much--it's easy to take the optimistic view on things, but from the inside, when you are living that reality, it can be very easy to just feel that the struggle to hold to one's identity is futile. It can be so hard... and the changes really difficult to see. And the rhetoric, which seems to imply that this is something we all admire, often does not reflect the reality which is that being different is lonely, isolating, and doesn't always end in positive change.
Anyway, I think God has been challenging me in this area recently. For the longest time, I kind of gave up. I was never any good at fitting in, so I just kept my head down. It seemed like any time I tried to take initiative, I was flooded with negative feedback. Maybe I'm just really sensitive, but it felt like all I ever did was make mistakes in my efforts to make changes. Recently, though, I have felt moved to make mistakes, to stand up for what I really think and let the chips fall where they may. I failed one of my comps doing that, and I'm not sure if I changed anything, but I kind of decided that if I was too afraid to fail, I would never try. But standing up and being different is really scary!
I wish Meyerson had addressed that issue more. Maybe it really wasn't within the purview of her article and perhaps someone else addresses it, but when I look at the process she describes, I just see fear on all sides, and the people who make or support change in this way are the very few people who are not locked down by fear.
Fear for people who are different and try to create change comes in a few different forms. One fear is the fear of rejection. Rejection can take many forms. It could be something really concrete like losing a job or failing an exam. It can take more subtle forms like not having anyone to sit with in the cafeteria or not being on the "right track" for promotion. There are so many ways a person can be shut out for being different.
One can also just be afraid of failure. Perhaps the change I want to see isn't the change that's really needed. I often think, "My way is not the only way. They'll figure something else out and it will be just about as good." How can I really know that my idea is that good or that change is really needed? Such perceptions can be so subjective. Or maybe, in an effort to make change, one pushes too hard. Meyerson indicates what a tightrope this is to walk: how people try too hard just end up building resentment. That resentment can be so hard to measure, though. There is a point at which one pushes hard enough to change and there is some backlash but ultimately the change is positive and then there is a point at which the backlash is all that happens and no positive change comes, and the line between the two is very fuzzy. So there can be a fear of not knowing which battles are really worth fighting. To make all that sacrifice and have nothing to show for it is heartbreaking, and I know that I, for one, tend to blame myself for that failure. I often struggle with the thoughts, "Was that really worth it? Why are you making such a fuss? No one else cares! Maybe you're the problem, Ahneka, not them..."
On the side of those who help or enable change, there can be fear of the unknown. Here is this strange person who wants things to run differently, but who is to say how far they will take it? I was really impressed by Meyerson's account of the conservative Republican manager who helped the more progressive female employee make changes. Political differences, especially, make people close down because, at least in America, we are so prone to see the other as the worst case scenario. Any woman who is trying to improve the situation for women in the workforce is presumed to hate men (by many conservatives). Any hetro male who expresses doubts about the morality of homosexuality is presumed to be a hate-filled homophobic (by many liberals). In order to be someone who can help others promote change, this kind of fear has to be overcome, especially for people working across party lines, which is, in my opinion, the place where change needs to take place the most. People who help others create change also have to face the risk of rejection, but to a lesser extent.
The answer to all this fear, at least for Christians, is to believe in God's protection. Maybe I will write more about that in another blog entry.
Social Justice
One thing I really appreciated about Meyerson's article is that she did not just limit the ideas of change from the bottom to conventionally acknowledged social inequities. I can easily imagine another writer only looking at people of color who were making change, or women, or non-cisgendered, but she expands her inquiry to people making decisions about how much time they spend with their family. I think that it is important not to get too locked into categories when talking about the kind of change the world needs because there is always new kinds of difference being marginalized.
Tolerating difference is something a lot of people struggle with. Although I recognize that as true, it is a little hard for me to understand. Why do people get so uptight when others don't fit in? I enjoy living in China because I'm different no matter where I go, so living in China is actually relatively easy--and I love meeting people who are different. I'm expected to be different in China but in the U.S., people don't know how to label me. My difference is not immediately evident by looking at my identity on paper (white, female, cisgendered, Christian). One thing about being forced to face my difference everywhere is that I have a very strong value for this ability to tolerate difference.
True tolerance of that sort is a broader, more subtly complex perspective than I have yet encountered in most rhetoric on social justice. Maybe it has something to do with accepting one's own oddity. People who live between cultures understand it the best. I don't know if I can really describe the distinctives of that perspective because I know it primarily by experience. Like a secret handshake, I meet people from across cultural and linguistic boundaries and, within a few minutes of conversation, feel akin. Perhaps at some point in this blog, I will try describe it better than that.
Thanks for this entry. I was especially struck with the idea of fitting in. I have often felt in my life that I was always the one asking why? This often put my on the outside and feeling only. When I had power as the VP asking why actually required that people challenge their assumptions. As a faculty member with no power, it feels as if asking why is just annoying to people. I think as I have aged I have become less oriented toward "fitting in" but the reality is that without fitting in you always have to deal with the ting of loneliness.
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking a lot about the courage it requires to be yourself. First, you have to peel off complex layers of your own identity. And I believe that because we are all fearfully and wonderfully made that we all are called to be unique players in the world - the trick is leaning into the uniqueness as opposed to letting outside forces rob you of what I call my "God-given weirdness." I thoroughly enjoyed reading this.