“Come mothers and fathers throughout the land
And don’t criticize what you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters are beyond your command
Your old road is rapidly aging
So get out of the new road if you can’t lend a hand
The times, they are a-changin’.”
Yup, the times are a-changin’.
Bob Dylan wrote this song in 1964, and change has continuously accelerated since then.
For example, the world population, when he wrote the song, was about 3 billion. Now it’s about 8 billion.
And it feels like everything is getting more extreme: speech, politics, poverty, weather, wealth – you name it. Quantitatively and qualitatively, times are a-changin’.
The question for me is: “How do we create sustainable change?”
There are so many events occurring in the world that make me question our ability to create a sustainable civilization. Putin invading Ukraine is an extreme example on the military front. Elon Musk buying Twitter is another on the business front. Trumplican lies based on extreme conspiracy theories makes me wonder about what’s in store for us politically. Smart phones make me worry about how our kids will relate to each other in the future. Fires and floods should give us pause about the sustainability of the planet.
None of these events, and others like them, will result in life as we have known it.
Times are a-changin’.
All of these events made me think about how we respond to all the rapid and accelerating changes around us. It seems to me we have a lot of options regarding how we deal with change that can be represented by this C-scale:
5.0: Co-Create
4.0: Contribute/Collaborate
3.0: Compete/Comply
2.0: Criticize
1.0: Close
The first option is to close off or close down.
We simply react to the changes we are seeing by retreating to our tribal bubbles and ignoring any news that may affect us.
We close down by becoming like a turtle – hunkering inside our protective barriers and keeping all news and new ideas away. Instead of staying open to what’s fresh and new, we hang onto the way things were. We simply pretend that all is well in the world, and we can go on living just as we always have. It’s the choice of willful denial or ignorance.
The second option to criticize.
We simply look for negatives and why new ideas won’t work.
We tear things down instead of building things up. Instead of taking constructive action, we take contentious shots. We derail positive initiatives by pointing out flaws and faults. It’s the choice to sit on the sidelines and observe life passing by – keeping score and tallying the body count. At this level, we may be skilled observers, but we are not doing much to help.
The third option is to compete or comply.
We can either get along by going along or we can create competing narratives that distract from whatever movement or initiative may be taking place.
Instead of fully participating in change initiatives, we push our own agendas. In some cases, providing competing points of view can push our thinking and result in better ideas. Healthy conflict can be good. This choice can also be helpful when we meet expectations and stay in the game, but it’s less than optimal when we aren’t adding any real value.
The fourth option is to contribute and collaborate.
This option requires us to bring in fresh ideas, open up to new possibilities, and work together with others to advance change.
It means taking an inclusive approach by inviting others to join and welcoming their initiative. This choice means sharing ideas and accelerating progress. It involves connecting the dots and finding ways to value and leverage each other’s strengths in pursuit of a higher purpose.
The fifth option is to create the future inclusively and interdependently.
This option ensures that we bring everyone into the change equation.
We look for ways for everyone to invest their energy in a positive direction and we seek ways to help others succeed. This choice means taking the initiative to make things happen with others instead of despite others.
The questions are: What drives us to choose one option over another?
What keeps us from contributing and co-creating more often?
Due Quach, the founder of Calm Clarity, suggests that our actions are a result of three brain states that influence how we think, feel and act.
In Brain 1.0, as she describes it, we tend to be more reactive – we fight, flee, or freeze in response to changing conditions.
In Brain 2.0, we find ourselves addicted to pleasure or status – we constantly strive to achieve and acquire more and more on a never-ending treadmill that supposedly leads to success as we have been conditioned to define it.
In Brain 3.0, a state of Calm Clarity, we are more inclined to creativity – we are inspired to be curious, to tap into sources of wisdom, and to strive toward a higher purpose. In Brain 3.0, we feel less driven and more sanguine; we feel less reactive and more responsive; we feel less combative and more collegial; we feel less frozen and more free; we feel less alienated and more connected.
In short, our state of mind determines where we are likely to land on the change scale: Closed, Critical, Compliant, Collaborative, or Creative.
So, how do we shift to Brain 3.0?
The first step is to notice how much time we are spending in reactive, addictive, or creative states. How much of our time do we spend lashing out or being defensive – riled up? How much of our time do we feel driven or obsessed – stressed out? How much of our time do we find ourselves in a curious and creative space – calm and clear?
The second step is to open up to change. How trapped are we by our raging emotions and negativity? How attached are we to our power and privilege? How willing are we to give them up and find a more peaceful and productive place?
The third step is to understand the personal and cultural dynamics that are keeping us from making the shift. Do we have inner demons that are calling us to react? Are our goals and ambitions driving us to push the pedal to the metal – faster, faster . . . more, more? Are we being influenced by the culture in which we live, learn, and work? Do we have underlying trauma that needs to be addressed and healed?
The fourth step is to make the shift. Are we committed to equanimity? Are we capable of finding our internal home? Are we able to create norms of our own choosing with the people we love and care about?
In my small community, we are welcoming people into a process for co-creating a vision of what may be possible for us by using simple questions. We are inviting citizens to imagine an ideal future for Elk Rapids by asking:
What would you see?
What would you hear?
What would you feel?
What would you sense?
Who would belong in this community?
What would be the value of youth and diversity to our community?
What would a thriving school district mean to you?
What would a thriving downtown mean to you?
What would safety look like to you?
As themes emerge from the answers to the questions, we will try to find common ground and common purpose among all the “tribes” in our community. For example, we will discuss the evolving vision with young families as part of a process to invest all constituents in co-creating our future.
No, we can’t change all the events that are creating us angst. We have little control over geopolitical forces, technological innovation, or climate change – even though we can all do a better job of being stewards of the earth. Yes, we can choose not only to carve out more time and space in our lives for calm, clear, creativity, but also to contribute to our communities and to co-create our futures with people who share our goals for the common good. So, “get out of the new road if you can’t lend a hand.” May it be so.
Also published on Medium.
We’ll done Ricky-May it be so indeed!