Awareness, Motivation and Action

The Gestalt Cycle of Experience and the Law of Pragnanz are vital to our understanding of how we become aware and move to action, sometimes in different ways and at different times from each other(1). If we want people “on the same page” as us, we need to attend to this. A confrontation in a care park highlighted this for me. And, a 1999 medical research study(2) points the way as to how leaders can create and maintain heightened awareness, motivation and action-orientation in their teams.

A short while ago, I was driving into a shopping mall in Warsaw. As I drove around the upper stories looking for one of the very few places left, I saw the car in front of me stop in the roadway. To my disbelief, he got out, locked his car and began to walk into the mall itself. With oncoming traffic coming the other way, he blocked the road in front of me. I wound down my window, and in language a little unbecoming for a coach, I said, "Hey X$C%!, move your car!!!". What he said astonished me. I was expecting either compliant action, or an alpha male riposte, but instead he simply said "spokojne, Pan. Nie problemu." (Be calm, Sir, there's no problem). He then proceeded with his nonchalant walk into the mall. The oncoming traffic had cleared and I was able to maneuver around his parked car. Still mumbling "What an X$C%!", I parked nearby. Soon however, I was thinking about something else (food probably).

To put it mildly, he and I had experienced different "Gestalts", the figures or images that form in our mind. I saw his car as an obstacle, he saw an opportunity to fix to his parking problem. But I also saw someone breaking the rules. We are meant to park our car inside the white lines. It's obvious. Society deems it so. But...in actual fact I had lost perhaps one minute at most. I was able to maneuver around "the obstacle". Other drivers would probably have been able to as well. Weren't we both right? When he said there was no problem, he probably had a point. Perhaps we can tolerate a bit of flexibility in society. After all, Britain, where I come from, is one of the most heavily policed societies in the world and this has its costs, too.

But more important to the point of this article, my attempt to achieve a resolution to this affair was wholly a failure. Why was this. Let's deconstruct this event:

> I had sensed the presence of an obstacle,

> I become aware that I was stuck and I saw a "rule breaker" ahead of me

> I became charged, and mobilized sufficient energy to deal with the crisis at hand

> and, I moved to action by winding my winding down and delivering my verbal assault.

> I had arrived at the action stage with a need-for-closure attitude

He on the other hand, had not even sensed the same things that I had. He saw that there was plenty of space to move round his car, once the traffic had cleared. And, he saw someone yelling at him. His lunch date was probably more figural to him at this stage(3).

I had moved from awareness, through motivation, to the action phase without ensuring my counter-part had any idea of what I was experiencing. Had I got out of my car, used some EQ to engage him in a conversation and said respectfully but firmly that I felt it was important that we all abide by the rules (and asserted my values), he might perhaps have been more accommodating. We might even have engaged in some joint problem solving, scanning our eyes for alternative spaces.

I wish I had my Wife next to me at this point. A third party perspective often helps.

But, isn't this just what happens all the time in leadership situations. In the moment, leaders see actions, results and behaviors which do not fall into the "white lines" they expect. Right/wrong imagery comes to their mind. Different levels of energy and motivation come to the fore. They're energized and excited by things, but it's hard to get peoples attention or energy focused on the same place. Often, leaders have to put up with grudging compliance rather than active energy behind shared goals.

The Gestalt Cycle of Experience (Figure 1) is therefore not just a personal process, but is a shared experience(4). It is our interaction with the outer world, and often with people that forms our experience. The more a leader can help people move through this cycle together, the more likely it will be that everyone will be "on the same page" and "pulling in the same direction".

Closely associated with the Cycle of Experience, is the Law of Pragnanz, the drive to complete the cycle and return to a point of equilibrium. In other words, we need closure. And, once we achieve closure we are often reluctant to re-open the cycle of experience, which is one reason we are resistant to feedback.

We can therefore look at the Gestalt Cycle as a linear pattern which is shared by different members of a team, with attention and engagement fluctuating over time and resulting in closure. Figure 2 shows the ideal situation, where the Cycle of Experience of each team member flows in a similar way. This tends to occur when a leader has allowed each team member to see, hear and experiment with an object or idea; and, through questioning and interaction, come to form a shared view about it. Big picture, coaching, affiliative or democratic styles can all do this well. They encourage people to be more open to feedback, to accept other peoples "Gestalts", and to listen to contrary views. Closure is achieved in business terms in various ways, such as problem resolution, decision, clear accountabilities, supporting processes, technical competence, and so on, all enabling the leader to psychologically "move on" and address other burning issues.

Figure 3, shows us a situation that often occurs, where the leader is exercising higher awareness and energy (usually negative) than others around them. Rather like myself in the Shopping Mall parking lot, leaders stuck in this place tend to use either the directive, "tell" , or pace setting "show" styles which results in compliance or replication, but which does not generate the same level of awareness or energy. One reason for this effect is that a "telling" style can more often lead to D3, denial, deflection and diminishing responses to feedback (See Feedback Coaching). When we are resistant to feedback, we have achieved a premature closure and withdrawal on an issue. Our mind is literally "set". New information contained in feedback is treated as inaccurate, irrelevant or malevolent. We stop listening and hold on to out-of-date images of ourselves and the situation around us.

How else can we explain failures of banks and other financial institutions, led by apparently successful and intelligent people who clung for too long to images of themselves "turning things around".

And, also in Figure 3, we see the real danger in "stuckness": A failure to reach completion or closure on an issue. The matter continues to bug you; cause arguments; distractions; procrastination takes hold; ineffective repetitive strategies are formed; failed execution results. People feel drained and fatigued. Without a shared awareness and common understanding, team members will interpret ambiguities in different ways.

A life and death situation illustrates the Gestalt Cycle of Experience in action. In 1999 a medical research study in Boston, USA, looked into the wide variation in the effectiveness with which sixteen public hospitals had introduced radically new ultrasound technologies for cardiac surgery. The key measure was time, as the duration the patience was under operation had a large effect on survival rates and post-operation recovery. Yet, the average time taken to complete the new procedures varied significantly. A wide number of variables were looked into. One of the most obvious was the knowledge and experience of the surgeon. Naturally, we'd expect that the more qualified and experienced the surgeon, the more effective and expert was the implementation of the new procedure. Well, not so. The study showed a negative correlation between "world class" surgeons and the time efficiency in adopting new procedures. "Average" surgeons performed the new procedures better.

How could this be. Well, direct quotes from the authors illuminate the reason:

"The ability of the surgeon to allow himself to become a partner, not a dictator, is critical."

The procedure was introduced more effectively when there was " a free and open environment with input from everybody"; and,

"An atmosphere of information sharing" was key to the more rapid adoption of the procedure.

World class surgeons, grown up in the older methods, had used a dictating style in the operating theatre. They saw that the success of the new procedure depended on their judgment. What was most figural to them was their own expertise. They were therefore reluctant to take on board the ideas of others. The support staff were not made to feel that they had anything to contribute, and therefore they simply saw this procedure like any other. They were professional, but detached.

"Average" surgeons, perhaps because they were not invited to give speeches at international conferences, were less prone to see themselves alone as the instrument of success. They saw the new procedure as a an "organizational issue" and not merely a technical challenge. They therefore actively sought after the opinions of assistants. And, these surgeons saw the value in building up a dedicated team so that knowledge could be built up and shared. Team members felt part of something. They invested energy. It was this team specialization that accounted for the biggest variation in operational effectiveness of the new procedure.

World class surgeons merely retained the existing nursing rotational system. They were not open to new experience. Their Gestalt Cycle was closed. They had equilibrium, confident in their image of themselves as truly world class. Although perhaps a read down of their effectiveness rankings might have prompted a sudden re-opening.

The case study points to the uncomfortable fact that it can be our very success that can stop us sensing and becoming aware of the value of those around us. If business leaders sit in a room and see others as rivals, threats, juniors, women, ethnically or nationally different, less smart, rather than as people they will miss vital sensory information that can lead to disconnection, dissonance and "stuckness" later on.

Taking more time early on to prompt dialogue, exchange and reflection is the surest way of achieving a common Gestalt Cycle and a common sense of closure and equilibrium. Carefully listening for meaning; deep questioning, resolving differences and being transparent in ones own thought and feelings might take more time initially, but will produce higher levels of awareness, greater motivation and more effective action.

1.Organizational Consulting, A Gestalt Approach. Edwin C. Nevis

2.Use of Ultrasound Technology in Cardiac Surgery in 16 public hospitals in the Boston, Mass area, 1999. A Edmondson; R Bohmer; G Pisano: HBR

3.Skills in Counselling & Psychotherapy. Phil Joyce & Charlotte Sills.

4.Organizations Get Stuck Too. Bill Critchley & David Casey (Leadership & Organizational Development Journal)