The Art of Possibility

The book my group selected to read was titled The Art of Possibility, written by Roz and Ben Zander. Overall, I found it to be very interesting book, as it presented several ideas that both challenged and supported my current ideas of leadership (if that makes any sense?). One of the authors, Ben Zander, is a conductor for internationally known orchestras, and I found it neat that ideas he discussed were easily traceable to his daily work and life experience. It gave him credibility – and plenty of stories to back up his sometimes-radical proposals.

The overarching themes of the book are centered around three main ideas: the transition from I to the WE, the revival of dreams, and “designing the stage to let life play out.” Most prevalently, The Zanders suggested that you should be the board in the game – if you set yourself up in the right context, your dreams will unfold in the way that they are supposed. At first, this was difficult for me to relate to. I am a very objective-driven person (or, as referred to in the book, the calculating self), so the thought of giving up meticulously calculated goals in order to just let things happen was overwhelming to me. I understand their viewpoint, but I think that this approach to life may work better in some situations than others. Although there is usually always room for creativity, some professions and dreams do not coincide with the idea of just “letting it happen.”

In contrast to this criticism, however, reading the book has caused me to entertain the thought of setting myself up for success and trusting that through preparation and unleashing my passion, I will eventually reach my goals – even if it is not through the means that I originally planned. I also liked the idea of being happy in the present. (That statement sounds a little obvious doesn’t it?) The example the Zanders give is when a man asks young girls how she is doing, she replies, “Perfect!” This a little bit of an unusual response. Not often to we think our life is perfect, but why not? This idea of perfectionism doesn’t mean that no challenges exist or that things haven’t gone awry, but instead, it refers to accepting the imperfections as part of the process in unleashing our dreams. The first practice introduced in the book is that “it’s all invented.” Everything we observe is a result a result of how we perceive it. They even quoted Einstein, when he stated that it was nonsense to found a theory on observable facts alone:

“In reality, the very opposite happens. It is theory which decides what we can observe.”

Hmmm… I like that idea.

One of the more lighthearted ideas that I found myself in total agreement with was “don’t take yourself so g– damn seriously,” (also referred to as Rule Number 6). Zanders told us to coax our calculating self to lighten up. This is something I definitely can relate to, but I have serious problems following this sometimes. I agree wholeheartedly that there is room as a leader (even necessary) to laugh and include humor. The Zanders state that when one personal peels away the layers of opinion, entitlement, pride, and inflated self-description, others instantly feel the connection … Wow, that sounds familiar to our class book, doesn’t it? It is completely true though. This exactly correlates to my past experiences in an organization, where one of the first things we do upon meeting new members is “break boundaries” so that these new connections can be made. 

One of most applicable ideas that I found in the book was the contrast between the downward spiral and possibility.

              Downward Spiral                   Possibility

The downward spiral tends to lead to falling down a slope of negativity and criticism. Conversely, possibility is about being “with the way things are.” This can be done by:

• Clearing “shoulds"
• Closing the exits: escape, denial, and blame
• Clearing judgments
• Distinguishing physical from conceptual reality

By following these, the Zanders suggest that the world of possibility will emerge and you will be able to see the opportunities, rather than the shortcomings of everything. As a leader, I think this is a powerful message. One of the roles of a leader is to encourage and empower the participants. This model is a great way to do that; by implementing it, perhaps we can allow ourselves to open each other’s world of possibility and begin feeling “perfect.”

#4. SOAR

During my junior year of high school, I founded a group with several of my classmates. The superintendent had approached a teacher with the idea of forming a group of students that would have the primary purpose of providing educational opportunities to members and the general student body, such as attending symphonies, musicals, senate debates, and math competitions. Some of my friends and I were selected for this group, called Student Organization of Academic Relations (SOAR), but in the beginning, we felt like a group just thrown together, not really knowing what we were going to do.

Formation

The advisor of the newly formed group did an excellent job of making people feel included and suggesting that we should also reach out to non-members for events and general meetings. Students initially selected to form the group were chosen based on a cumulative GPA and class rank, so we all kinda had the same goals going into the group. We were nerds; attending academic events excited us. However, our advisor continuously told us that we could do whatever we wanted and the group could follow our own academic interests. The school board was willing to give us money for the endeavors which we chose, but I remember it took us several meetings in the beginning to come to a consensus about how we were going to pursue and choose the events that SOAR sponsored.

Storming

During the first year of the organization, all of the new members were pretty motivated. I mean, what student wouldn’t want to be approached by the superintendent and told they can use the school’s money to pursue our own “academic” interests? (I use that term loosely because as the group began to normalize, we stretched the definition of what was considered “academic.”) The group formed with very a straight-laced and serious approach to the events attended. Overall, we were very focused, so listening to each other’s ideas did not pose much of an issue. We created a blog and online forum for students to participate in, and I think this really helped with the issue of inclusion. Our advisor was a very peaceful mathematician, so he was also always present to resolve issues and use his analytical personality to keep the students focused.

Norming

Over time, certain practices became normal for us. By my senior year, we knew that the president would always be late, so we could therefore begin rolling in 5-10 tardy as well. Occasionally, we also realized we could convince our advisor to fix us pancakes, fruit, and bacon. We also knew what our individual accepted roles were, whether they had a specific title or not. Some students were just along for the ride, while others were deeply involved in planning the dates of events, purchasing tickets, and publicizing our events. We knew what to expect out of meetings and other students, and this did not change often.

Performing

Since I was a part of the founders, my class of members grew very close to the advisor. After graduation, he had a cookout at his house for us to celebrate the time that we all spent together during high school (aww right?). We grew to be close friends and easily felt comfortable talking to our advisor about personal battles, so it was sad for us to leave. The class below mine does not have the same relationships built, so that was something we also discussed in our final meeting about building involvement with the younger students. We brainstormed ideas about how they can increase participation and build closer relationships with the advisor, each other, and the general student body through academic relations. Involvement was the biggest issue and conflict that we had as a group. The seniors to seemed to be the only ones participating, so by the end of our final year, we began to freak out about the direction of the group after graduation. Our advisor also saw this as a very pertinent problem, so we to find a resolution. Empowerment was our main goal, because we found out during our two years as members that if students felt like what they said and did mattered, then they were more likely to be more passionate about pursuing their interests and getting involved.

Adjourning

Tuckman and Jensen amended their original model to include this final stage, but my SOAR group has not yet reached it. My graduating class had our own type of adjournment, but that was not the end for the entire organization.

I still get Facebook notifications about events that SOAR is attending, so I’m assuming that they’re still in existence and that the issue of involvement has not caused them to end. However, sometimes groups do need to dissolve. I think this may be the case when the group is no longer able to ever reach a consensus, identify a common purpose, or just feels that it is more dysfunctional than constructive. One of the groups that immediately come to mind is my high school’s student council. Unfortunately, an imbalance of power arose a few years ago in which the two advisors now running the entire council. As president last year, I tried to create more relaxed conditions, but it is difficult to reckon with two individuals of power that refuse to listen to those below them. Council members seem to always leave meetings unhappy and very little gets accomplished in meetings. The two advisors and the president end up doing almost all of the work for the entire year. That is very dysfunctional leadership to me. Students see that and don’t want to get involved – we had to nearly beg students to run for office after I graduated. In that situation, serious reforms need to be made. If those reformations do not work, the council should vote to dissolve itself – for everyone’s sanity. 

#3. I'm A What??

This week, we were asked to take the Jung Typology test online. After I finished taking the test, the results profiled me as a 4-letter type with corresponding “core functions.” Okay, so what does this mean? Apparently I am an INFJ.

The “I” means that I am slightly introverted – which was no surprise to me. I do enjoy interacting with groups of people, but I can find it exhausting; I need time alone to recharge and reflect. According to the book, I prefer to think things through and reflect before forming or stating opinions, and this does not mean that I am a shy person. That is an excellent description of me. I definitely over-analyze anything I plan to say in front of people. This analysis has gone as far as causing me to break out in hives during public speaking and high-stress situations because I fear making a mistake.

I am also moderately intuiting, designated by the “N.” This means that I prefer to see the big picture, and I often approach situations with the attitude of “there has to be a better way.” With this projection into the future, this closely correlates to my issues of over-analyzing and need for reflection. My tennis instructor, whom I spent many hours taking lessons from, used to always tell me, “Don’t fix what’s not broken.” I had a strong backhand stroke, and he always encouraged me to leave it alone and focus on perfecting other techniques. I mean I listened to him, but I didn’t really understand that approach until the book explained that this view is the opposite of mine.

The next letter in my 4-letter profile is “F,” a moderately feeling-type. This type is the account for relationships and the importance of human values and beliefs. There is also an emphasis on personal relationships. This makes perfect sense to me. My relationships with others come before almost all other priorities in my life, because relating to the big picture (i.e. “N”), I feel like without friends and family, life would be pretty empty. Last week I even noticed myself becoming infuriated with a friend of mine because she did not feel the same way. For other people success can be the foremost priority, but I just don’t understand them.

Finally, my “J” represents moderately judging preferences. I prefer order and emphasize resolving issues and making decisions to create order. I like tying the loose ends of a project and seeking closure. It gives me piece of mind to have a clear-cut beginning, deadline, and end. It drives me CRAZY when I’m trying to arrange plans with someone and they are able to give me nothing on a day/time that works for them. I need to know what is going on… Unfortunately, this also means that others may perceive me as being close-minded or driven. I’ve actually even been told this before. I think this is balanced out my “feeling,” however. I am not a close-minded or judgmental person whatsoever, I just like to know where I’m headed!


I came across an article online that described the stresses that Idealists (that’s what I am – an INFJ) can encounter. Since we are Idealists, when we lose hope, it is easy to become stressed – which affects us to the point of muscle or sensory problems… This can explain why after my first midterm I was so distraught that I had difficulties finding my way home… 

Famous INFJs include Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, and two presidents. I felt that this was very appropriate, considering that I am interested in pursuing similar type of work.

Although there are fewer restrictions, I felt that the Briggs-Meyers test was more accurate than the StrengthsQuest. (I also took the StrengthsQuest while sick and exhausted, so that may have also had an impact on my responses… I took the same Briggs-Meyers assessment last year and had a very similar response. The difference? I am less introverted. This corresponds closely to the growth that I’ve noticed while being here, so I would say that it is a pretty spot on reflection!


A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.
Martin Luther King, Jr.