Thoughts on the Geometry of We

At the recent ITRevolution Enterprise Tech Leadership Summit Admiral John Richardson gave a keynote and then an extended discussion about some of his leadership principles.

Geometry and Leadership

In the longer workshop discussion, he gave an example of standing shoulder to shoulder and the significance of simple geometry on the pronouns people use to relate to each other.

Using a member of the audience, the Admiral demonstrated how a speaker stands in relation to another individual or team changes their frame of reference and their view of group membership.

This has subtle but deep effects on the ability of individuals and teams to manage norms, handle conflict and engage in learning and problem-solving.

Some examples:

• People standing across from each other will naturally use "you" and "I" to interact and naturally put someone on the defensive in a challenging conversation making collaboration much more difficult.
• People standing shoulder to shoulder considering a problem are more likely to work together towards solutions "how are we going to solve this?".
• When addressing undesirable behaviors in a group, using "we're not like this" reinforces group identity and promotes prosocial behavior resulting in higher collaboration, learning and innovation.

The Value of Pictures

When demonstrating shoulder to shoulder, Admiral Richardson and the volunteer stood looking at a flipchart to work on a hypothetical problem. This goes together nicely with an excellent point made by Simon Wardley and it relates to slide decks.

When we use slide decks to communicate, this naturally breaks the shoulder to shoulder geometry that Admiral Richardson is talking about. Instead, the presenter is often placed across from the group at the head of the room or highlighted in zoom.

Simon brings up another related problem that decks create. Decks are essentially stories and the presenter the storyteller often with a personal investment. If you challenge the deck, you are challenging the storyteller and their identity which makes collaboration harder.

Contrast this with graphic representation of a problem, like a map. A map or diagram on its own is much easier to face together shoulder to shoulder. A map is much less a narrative or story and is much less likely to put someone on the defensive in a discussion.

Some of this doesn't translate well between the physical and virtual worlds and offers real insight into how physical proximity can enhance working relationships. At the same time, it shines a light on how little effort we've put into remote and hybrid experiences and what we should be aspiring to.

Takeaway

The next time you face a difficult discussion, use a picture of the situation that allows you to stand shoulder to shoulder, virtually or otherwise, and work on the challenge together as "we".