blog

The impact of Alzheimer’s disease

I regularly visit a family member who has, from my birth, always played a very significant and meaningful role for me. She’s led a vibrant life, both professionally and personally, and has been a source of support, nourishment, connection, wisdom and enabling for dozens and dozens of people. The most noticeable thing about her for me these days is the impact of the ravages of Alzheimer’s disease, which are getting more and more cruel and serious as time goes by (although thankfully she isn’t aware of them).

Identity

And I notice that her identity is changing – her identity as it comes across to me (she’s now someone who seems increasingly detached from her former vibrancy and capability, and from those who know her and love her, separated from them by losing touch with who they are and how she’s connected to them), and her identity as she experiences herself (she’s interested in less and less of what goes on around her or participating in it).

Somatic experience

Of course, so far I’ve been referring to cognitive memory and memories. Those memories come from what has been laid down over many years, and, for the two of us in this particular relationship, are rooted in the nature of our relationship, and how we feel and have felt about each other. Although I know that she has very little, if any, short-term memory (so the second I leave her, she will have no memory that I have been with her), I also know that because of the nature and closeness of our relationship, she will be left with some kind of emotional and somatic experience which I dare to hope gives her something positive in what I imagine is a life lived only in the present, since the past – in terms of conscious memories – is no longer a part of her life.

The somatic nature of memory

When I step back from the immediacy of the sadness and my awareness of exponential loss inherent in this specific situation, I find myself curious about not only the somatic nature of memory and memories, but also about the memories that exist in organisations because of, for example, individuals’ relationships with previous leaders and colleagues, and how important it is to take account of them: these memories carry significant power in terms of having shaped some of the attitudes, motivations and expectations that people bring to work. This is the stuff of systems, revealed often in a facilitated engagement with systemic constellations.

Leaders

In the same way that memory for an Alzheimer’s sufferer will reside more in the body and the emotions than in the mind, my experience of working with leaders has shown me that so too does the somatic impact of memory in their work contexts, translating into loyalties, attitudes, emotional responses and even values, and, in turn, behaviours and the performance (or what is perceived or interpreted as performance), of individuals at work.

The embodied impact

New leaders, and leaders coming into roles in organisations that are new for them, seem to do well in the medium and long term when – rather than making uniquely cognitive judgments – they approach their new contexts with a humility that allows them to reflect on the meanings behind the behaviours they’re seeing, the power balances they’re experiencing, and what may be the apparently inexplicable ways in which judgments seem to be made and decisions seem to be taken. This is the territory of somatic and emotional memory. It can be useful and revealing for a current leader to reflect on the imprint of previous leaders in their role, and to respect it rather than being tempted to dismiss it (and be the ‘new broom’), simply because that leader was in the past. The memory of past leaders may be very alive today because of their embodied impact on the team and the organisation – just as the Alzheimer’s sufferer embodies the impact of memories from the past (albeit in ways that are different from the impact of conscious memory). These memories might show up as feelings of love, safety, connection, caring or concern, for example.

The organisation’s history and memories

The new leader’s skill and effectiveness will be tested in part by the way they integrate the impact of a team or organisation’s memories and history (and that team or organisation’s consequent sense of identity) with their own individuality, beliefs, values, insight and behaviours – and particularly their relationships.

The recently-arrived leader does well not to trample on memories nor to impose organisational Alzheimer’s.

Photo by

Memory and memories

I find myself curious about not only the somatic nature of memory and memories, but also about the memories that exist in organisations because of, for example, individuals’ relationships with previous leaders and colleagues, and how important it is to take account of them: these memories carry significant power in terms of having shaped some of the attitudes, motivations and expectations that people bring to work. This is the stuff of systems, revealed often in a facilitated engagement with systemic constellations. It can be useful and revealing for a current leader to reflect on the imprint of previous leaders in their role, and to respect it rather than being tempted to dismiss it (and be the ‘new broom’), simply because that leader was in the past. The memory of past leaders may be very alive today because of their embodied impact on the team and the organisation. The recently-arrived leader does well not to trample on memories nor to impose organisational Alzheimer’s.

Help - giving and receiving

I'm remembering moments when clients have articulated a sense of shame in not being able to sort all their challenges out themselves. However, these challenges – and many others – are a normal part of everyone’s lives. Somehow we’ve learnt to equate ‘alone’ or ‘separate’ or even ‘isolated’ with ‘strong’ and ‘resilient’. In reality, precisely the opposite is true. ‘Alone’ and ‘coping alone’ are brittle ways to be. As human beings we are interdependent. When one element is vulnerable, that vulnerability will impact all the others, no matter how seemingly distant. Equally, when one element is helped, resourced and strengthened by another, that too will be felt in some way by other elements. Collective intelligence is always superior to the intelligence of one individual. We need to recognise and value vulnerability and a need for help.

World Kindness Day

Every November 13th, the world celebrates World Kindness Day - a global reminder of how small acts of kindness can create a ripple effect that strengthens our connections to one another. Kindness begets kindness - and it also gets more of value achieved. It’s close to compassion, and to the exercise of compassionate leadership. It certainly beats the effect of not noticing or caring how things are for The Other, of inconsiderate or unwarranted criticism, of self-absorption to the exclusion of others, or of neglecting others and their interests. Kindness creates precious connections and scope for collaboration, which is critical for innovation, change and versatility: the employee who feels seen and heard, taken account of and considered, will feel led with strength.

Working dynamics

Three of my coaching clients have decided to leave their jobs and their employers. In all three cases their reasons related to the way they were treated at work. One felt diminished, shut down and rendered voiceless by their line manager. The other two felt unvalued and unrecognised by their line managers. It has looked to each of them that those leading and managing them have been predominantly concerned with being seen as ‘right’, with protecting their own internal empires and with self-protection. My clients have felt crushed, sidelined, unseen and voiceless. If one looks at the seniors with compassion, the contexts in which they are working and the variety of pressures on them, and expectations of them, together with their possible exposure in front of a wider audience, come into view. How might it have been possible for my clients to seek ways in which to establish better connection, to be more curious and to stimulate more curiosity, and to bring more compassion and more self-compassion?

Clinging - and pausing

Home: what does it mean for the leader?

What does ‘home’ actually mean? What will we tolerate or sacrifice in order to find home? What isolation, loneliness or lack of rootedness is acceptable? What might we cling on to from any previous sense of home that we have had? Home can be a knowing of oneself, a clarity about who one really is, and a feeling of not only familiarity, but also ease with that, as well as home in terms of a knowing of the systems one exists as part of. This is, it seems to me, critical for the leader if they are to lead with assurance, with empathy and compassion, with insight and versatility, and with the capacity to recognise and manage complexity. When the leader is not at home in the figurative sense, they lack the rootedness and stability that come with feeling ‘at home’ with themselves. A well-developed sense of self-awareness, and an awareness of the systems they form part of, almost implicitly bring a sense of acceptance of both self and system which can be very steadying to be with, including through turbulent, difficult, challenging or uncertain times. And my sense is that that acceptance is a significant component of the leader feeling at home and being at home. The impact for the leader’s teams may mirror any or all of the impact for the individual leader – and likewise for the effectiveness of both.

Out of control

Two topics relevant to leadership have arisen for me: on the one hand, some leaders’ effort (and expectation) to control, and, on the other, the reality that all organisations and teams operate in a context of complex systems. In fact, success in the quest for control is impossible because all organisations consist of constantly moving parts in interrelationship with each other. The constant moving creates changes in the interrelationships and therefore in the interdependencies. This approach to leadership doesn’t usually lead to engagement or discretionary effort. It may lead to compliance, but it doesn’t lead to flourishing, health or vibrancy in an organisation. One way of seeing how systems work is through systemic constellations: when one element moves its position, so do all the others. Their relationships to each other change, which will have implications for what needs attention at any given moment, and what kind of attention. Control, or an attempt to control, simply doesn’t work: the system has a life of its own.

What holds me back?

For some time I’ve been in conversation with Julian Burton, change consultant, creative artist, facilitator and leadership coach. Julian has created a number of pictures that have reflected scenarios we’ve each been witness to in our work and conversations that we have co-facilitated with public sector leaders – and the one at the head of this piece is amongst his latest. Some of what I find striking about it is what I see, some is what I experience, and some is thought and curiosity. I’m curious about what you may see, experience and think when you look at the picture. If you’re a public sector leader, a safe and spacious space for conversation and for nurturing hope with like-minded leaders can make a significant difference. This is the kind of conversation that Julian and I enable and facilitate. If you’d like to join us, please drop me an e-mail at lw@lindsaywittenberg.co.uk

Either-or, us or them: the perils of polarisation

A polarised position is characterised by a certainty. Boundaries are created which become increasingly strong, rigid and immovable with the passage of time and the reinforcement of the conviction of being right. In these contexts I notice a lack of critical, objective thinking and of curious enquiry. One ‘side’ is split off from the other by a stubborn blindness. Difference from ‘the other’ is reinforced too: the sense of ‘I’m right and you’re wrong’ morphs into ‘I’m good and you’re bad’, which in turn morphs into ‘I’m acceptable and you’re unacceptable’. This can also move into the idealisation of one’s own leader and the demonisation of the other’s leader. Those who take a polarised stance usually don’t recognise it. Neither are they open to rationalisation, compromise, or any nuancing of belief, so no amount or persuasiveness of data makes any impact. On a team or at an organisational level it can seriously inhibit effectiveness and flourishing. It can be very difficult for a person taking a polarised position to engage in dialogue because they come from a conviction of already being right rather than seeking collaborative thinking which can offer them learning if they are willing to open their minds to unfamiliar and unwanted perspectives.

Creating psychological safety for yourself

Feeling psychologically unsafe evokes a range of emotions and behaviours: anxiety, lack of trust, loss of motivation, indecisiveness, reticence, withdrawal and loss of engagement, to name but a few. It’s bad news for a team or an organisation. Professor Amy Edmondson’s globally-recognised and ground-breaking work in The Fearless Organization brings insight to the experience and realisation of psychological safety, and allows it to be measured. That measurement in a team can be debriefed, and the behavioural and attitudinal sources of the scores explored through facilitation that supports teams to capitalise on it and/or improve it. A different challenge arises when a team member experiences a lack of psychological safety, and when that very lack makes it impossible to share honestly with anyone, least of all with the leader, who may themselves be the source of the lack of safety. There are a number of possible approaches that can help.

blog

Recent Posts