Theory U

Last updated

The U Process of Co-sensing and Co-creating -- Presencing Theory U.png
The U Process of Co-sensing and Co-creating — Presencing

Theory U is a change management method and the title of a book by Otto Scharmer. [1] Scharmer with colleagues at MIT conducted 150 interviews with entrepreneurs and innovators in science, business, and society and then extended the basic principles into a theory of learning and management, which he calls Theory U. [1] The principles of Theory U are suggested to help political leaders, civil servants, and managers break through past unproductive patterns of behavior that prevent them from empathizing with their clients' perspectives and often lock them into ineffective patterns of decision-making. [2] [3]

Contents

Some notes about theory U

Fields of attention

Presencing

The author of the theory U concept expresses it [4] as a process or journey, which is also described as Presencing, as indicated in the diagram (for which there are numerous variants).

At the core of the "U" theory is presencing: sensing + presence. According to The Learning Exchange, [5] Presencing is a journey with five movements:

We move down one side of the U (connecting us to the world that is outside of our institutional bubble) to the bottom of the U (connecting us to the world that emerges from within) and up the other side of the U (bringing forth the new into the world).

On that journey, at the bottom of the U, lies an inner gate that requires us to drop everything that isn't essential. This process of letting-go (of our old ego and self) and letting-come (our highest future possibility: our Self) establishes a subtle connection to a deeper source of knowing. The essence of presencing is that these two selves – our current self and our best future self – meet at the bottom of the U and begin to listen and resonate with each other. Once a group crosses this threshold, nothing remains the same. Individual members and the group as a whole begin to operate with a heightened level of energy and sense of future possibility. Often they then begin to function as an intentional vehicle for an emerging future.

The core elements are shown below.

1. Co-initiating common intent: Stop and listen to others and to what life calls you to do.5. Co-evolving through innovations: ecosystems that facilitate seeing and acting from the whole.
2. Co-sensing the field of change: Go to the places of most potential and listen with your mind and heart wide open.4. Co-creating strategic microcosms: Prototype the new to explore the future by doing.
3. Presencing inspiration and common will: Go to the threshold and allow the inner knowing to emerge.

"Moving down the left side of the U is about opening up and dealing with the resistance of thought, emotion, and will; moving up the right side is about intentionally reintegrating the intelligence of the head, the heart, and the hand in the context of practical applications". [1]

Leadership capacities

According to Scharmer, [6] a value created by journeying through the "U" is to develop seven essential leadership capacities:

  1. Holding the space: listen to what life calls you to do (listen to oneself, to others and make sure that there is space where people can talk)
  2. Observing: Attend with your mind wide open (observe without your voice of judgment, effectively suspending past cognitive schema)
  3. Sensing: Connect with your heart and facilitate the opening process (i.e. see things as interconnected wholes)
  4. Presencing: Connect to the deepest source of your self and will and act from the emerging whole
  5. Crystallizing: Access the power of intention (ensure a small group of key people commits itself to the purpose and outcomes of the project)
  6. Prototyping: Integrating head, heart, and hand (one should act and learn by doing, avoiding the paralysis of inaction, reactive action, over-analysis, etc.)
  7. Performing: Playing the "macro violin" (i.e. find the right leaders, find appropriate social technology to get a multi-stakeholder project going).

The sources of Theory U include interviews with 150 innovators and thought leaders on management and change. Particularly the work of Brian Arthur, Francisco Varela, Peter Senge, Ed Schein, Joseph Jaworski, Arawana Hayashi, Eleanor Rosch, Friedrich Glasl, Martin Buber, Rudolf Steiner and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe have been critical. Artists are represented in the project from 2001 -2010 by Andrew Campbell, whose work was given a separate index page linked to the original project site. https://web.archive.org/web/20050404033150/http://www.dialogonleadership.org/indexPaintings.html Today, Theory U constitutes a body of leadership and management praxis drawing from a variety of sources and more than 20 years of elaboration by Scharmer and colleagues. Theory U is translated into 20 languages and is used in change processes worldwide.

Meditation teacher Arawana Hayashi has explained how she considers Theory U relevant to "the feminine principle". [7]

Earlier work: U-procedure

The earlier work by Glasl involved a sociotechnical, Goethean and anthroposophical process involving a few or many co-workers, managers and/or policymakers. It proceeded from phenomenological diagnosis of the present state of the organisation to plans for the future. They described a process in a U formation consisting of three levels (technical and instrumental subsystem, social subsystem and cultural subsystem) and seven stages beginning with the observation of organisational phenomena, workflows, resources etc., and concluding with specific decisions about desired future processes and phenomena. The method draws on the Goethean techniques described by Rudolf Steiner, [8] transforming observations into intuitions and judgements about the present state of the organisation and decisions about the future. The three stages represent explicitly recursive reappraisals at progressively advanced levels of reflective, creative and intuitive insight and (epistemologies), thereby enabling more radically systemic intervention and redesign. The stages are: phenomena – picture (a qualitative metaphoric visual representation) – idea (the organising idea or formative principle) – and judgement (does this fit?). The first three then are reflexively replaced by better alternatives (new idea --> new image --> new phenomena) to form the design design. Glasl published the method in Dutch (1975), German (1975, 1994) and English (1997). [9]

Schematic depiction of U procedure by Glasl, F. U procedure.png
Schematic depiction of U procedure by Glasl, F.

The seven stages are shown below.

Factual/phenomenal level, technical and instrumental subsystemObservation of phenomena1. How do processes and workflows function? Instruments, resources.7. How can processes be developed in future? What phenomena and facts will characterise the organisation of the future?
Imaginative level, social subsystemForming a picture of how the organisation works2. Understanding the social subsystem and how functions, roles and management are distributed.6. What does that mean for new functions and roles? How should the organisation of the future be visioned?
Inspirational level, cultural subsystemIdeas3. Understanding the implicit/actual values, rules and policies that shape the organisation. How and why things happen.5. What values and guidelines do we want for the future?
4. Is this what we want?

In contrast to that earlier work on the U procedure, which assumes a set of three subsystems in the organization that need to be analyzed in a specific sequence, Theory U starts from a different epistemological view that is grounded in Varela's approach to neurophenomenology. It focuses on the process of becoming aware and applies to all levels of systems change. Theory U contributed to advancing organizational learning and systems thinking tools towards an awareness-based view of systems change that blends systems thinking with systems sensing. On the left-hand side of the U the process is going through the three main "gestures" of becoming aware that Francisco Varela spelled out in his work (suspension, redirection, letting-go). On the right-hand side of the U this process extends towards actualizing the future that is wanting to emerge (letting come, enacting, embodying).

Criticism

Sociologist Stefan Kühl criticizes Theory U as a management fashion on three main points: First of all, while Theory U posits to create change on all levels, including the level of the individual "self" and the institutional level, case studies mainly focus on clarifying the positions of individuals in groups or teams. Except of the idea of participating in online courses on Theory U, the theory remains silent on how broad organisational or societal changes may take place. Secondly, Theory U, like many management fashions, neglects structural conflicts of interest, for instance between groups, organisations and class. While it makes sense for top management to emphasize common values, visions and the community of all staff externally, Kühl believes this to be problematic if organisations internally believe too strongly in this community, as this may prevent the articulation of conflicting interests and therefore organisational learning processes. Finally, the 5 phase model of Theory U, like other cyclical (but less esoteric) management models, such as PDCA, are a gross simplification of decision-making processes in organisation that are often wilder, less structured and more complex. Kühl argues that Theory U may be useful as it allows management to make decisions despite unsure knowledge and encourages change, but expects that Theory U will lose its glamour. [10]

See also

Related Research Articles

Strategy is a general plan to achieve one or more long-term or overall goals under conditions of uncertainty. In the sense of the "art of the general", which included several subsets of skills including military tactics, siegecraft, logistics etc., the term came into use in the 6th century C.E. in Eastern Roman terminology, and was translated into Western vernacular languages only in the 18th century. From then until the 20th century, the word "strategy" came to denote "a comprehensive way to try to pursue political ends, including the threat or actual use of force, in a dialectic of wills" in a military conflict, in which both adversaries interact.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bottom–up and top–down design</span> Strategies of information processing and ordering knowledge

Bottom–up and top–down are both strategies of information processing and ordering knowledge, used in a variety of fields including software, humanistic and scientific theories, and management and organization. In practice they can be seen as a style of thinking, teaching, or leadership.

The Abilene paradox is a collective fallacy, in which a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of most or all individuals in the group, while each individual believes it to be aligned with the preferences of most of the others. It involves a breakdown of group communication in which each member mistakenly believes that their own preferences are countered to the group's, and therefore does not raise objections, or even states support for an outcome they do not want.

Organization development (OD) is the study and implementation of practices, systems, and techniques that affect organizational change. The goal of which is to modify a group's/organization's performance and/or culture. The organizational changes are typically initiated by the group's stakeholders. OD emerged from human relations studies in the 1930s, during which psychologists realized that organizational structures and processes influence worker behavior and motivation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peter Senge</span> American systems scientist (born 1947)

Peter Michael Senge is an American systems scientist who is a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management, co-faculty at the New England Complex Systems Institute, and the founder of the Society for Organizational Learning. He is known as the author of the book The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Self-organization</span> Process of creating order by local interactions

Self-organization, also called spontaneous order in the social sciences, is a process where some form of overall order arises from local interactions between parts of an initially disordered system. The process can be spontaneous when sufficient energy is available, not needing control by any external agent. It is often triggered by seemingly random fluctuations, amplified by positive feedback. The resulting organization is wholly decentralized, distributed over all the components of the system. As such, the organization is typically robust and able to survive or self-repair substantial perturbation. Chaos theory discusses self-organization in terms of islands of predictability in a sea of chaotic unpredictability.

Theories of technological change and innovation attempt to explain the factors that shape technological innovation as well as the impact of technology on society and culture. Some of the most contemporary theories of technological change reject two of the previous views: the linear model of technological innovation and other, the technological determinism. To challenge the linear model, some of today's theories of technological change and innovation point to the history of technology, where they find evidence that technological innovation often gives rise to new scientific fields, and emphasizes the important role that social networks and cultural values play in creating and shaping technological artifacts. To challenge the so-called "technological determinism", today's theories of technological change emphasize the scope of the need of technical choice, which they find to be greater than most laypeople can realize; as scientists in philosophy of science, and further science and technology often like to say about this "It could have been different." For this reason, theorists who take these positions often argue that a greater public involvement in technological decision-making is desired.

A learning cycle is a concept of how people learn from experience. A learning cycle will have a number of stages or phases, the last of which can be followed by the first.

The viable system model (VSM) is a model of the organizational structure of any autonomous system capable of producing itself. It is an implementation of viable system theory. At the biological level, this model is correspondent to autopoiesis.

Reflective practice is the ability to reflect on one's actions so as to take a critical stance or attitude towards one's own practice and that of one's peers, engaging in a process of continuous adaptation and learning. According to one definition it involves "paying critical attention to the practical values and theories which inform everyday actions, by examining practice reflectively and reflexively. This leads to developmental insight". A key rationale for reflective practice is that experience alone does not necessarily lead to learning; deliberate reflection on experience is essential.

Robert Kegan is an American developmental psychologist. He is a licensed psychologist and practicing therapist, lectures to professional and lay audiences, and consults in the area of professional development and organization development.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bernard Lievegoed</span> Dutch physician (1905–1992)

Bernardus Cornelis Johannes Lievegoed was a Dutch medical doctor, psychiatrist and author. He is most famous for establishing a theory of organizational development. He founded the N.P.I., or Netherlands Pedagogical Institute, which works with organizations and individuals to help these realize their economic, social and cultural goals. He also founded the Vrije Hogeschool in Driebergen.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sociology of human consciousness</span> Aspect of sociology

The sociology of human consciousness or the sociology of consciousness uses the theories and methodology of sociology to explore and examine consciousness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Management cybernetics</span> Application of cybernetics to management and organizations

Management cybernetics is concerned with the application of cybernetics to management and organizations. "Management cybernetics" was first introduced by Stafford Beer in the late 1950s and introduces the various mechanisms of self-regulation applied by and to organizational settings, as seen through a cybernetics perspective. Beer developed the theory through a combination of practical applications and a series of influential books. The practical applications involved steel production, publishing and operations research in a large variety of different industries. Some consider that the full flowering of management cybernetics is represented in Beer's books. However, learning continues.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">CLARION (cognitive architecture)</span>

Connectionist Learning with Adaptive Rule Induction On-line (CLARION) is a computational cognitive architecture that has been used to simulate many domains and tasks in cognitive psychology and social psychology, as well as implementing intelligent systems in artificial intelligence applications. An important feature of CLARION is the distinction between implicit and explicit processes and focusing on capturing the interaction between these two types of processes. The system was created by the research group led by Ron Sun.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Otto Scharmer</span> American academic

Otto Scharmer is a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and co-founder of the Presencing Institute and its u-school for Transformation. He focuses on awareness-based action research with leaders across various sectors, anchored in the concept of presencing, a method of "learning from the emerging future", which he introduced in his books Theory U (2007) and Presence.

A social-ecological system consists of 'a bio-geo-physical' unit and its associated social actors and institutions. Social-ecological systems are complex and adaptive and delimited by spatial or functional boundaries surrounding particular ecosystems and their context problems.

The viable systems approach (VSA) is a systems theory in which the observed entities and their environment are interpreted through a systemic viewpoint, starting with the analysis of fundamental elements and finally considering more complex related systems. The assumption is that each entity/system is related to other systems, placed at higher level of observation, called supra-systems, whose traits can be detected in their own subsystems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Raymond-Alain Thietart</span> French business school professor (born 1944)

Raymond-Alain Thietart is a French business school professor. He is the author of eight books on strategy and management and over a hundred articles in the same field. His research and teaching focus on organization theory and strategic management.

Autonomous agency theory (AAT) is a viable system theory (VST) which models autonomous social complex adaptive systems. It can be used to model the relationship between an agency and its environment(s), and these may include other interactive agencies. The nature of that interaction is determined by both the agency's external and internal attributes and constraints. Internal attributes may include immanent dynamic "self" processes that drive agency change.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Scharmer, C. Otto (2016) [2007]. Theory U: Leading from the Emerging Future. A BK business book (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. ISBN   9781626567986. OCLC   944179658.
  2. Frannie Léautier, retrieved 15:53, 27 July 2007 (MEST)
  3. Scharmer, C. Otto (2007), Addressing The Blind Spot of Our Time. An executive summary of the new book by Otto Scharmer Theory U: Leading from the Future as It Emerges. HTML, retrieved 15:53, 27 July 2007 (MEST).
  4. Scharmer, C. Otto (2006), Theory U: Learning from the Future as it Emerges, Fieldnotes: An online Newsletter of the Sahmbhala Institute for Authentic Leadership. PDF. Can be found at http://www.ottoscharmer.com/
  5. retrieved 15:53, 27 July 2007 (MEST) The quote can also be found at
  6. Scharmer, C. Otto (2007). "Addressing the blind spot of our time: an executive summary of the new book by Otto Scharmer: Theory U: leading from the future as it emerges" (PDF). presencing.com. Retrieved 22 September 2016.
  7. Hayashi, Arawana (2010). "Feminine principle and theory U" (PDF). Oxford Leadership Journal. 1 (2): 1–4. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2017.
  8. Steiner, Rudolf (1 June 1988). Goethean Science. Translated by Lindeman, William. New York: Mercury Press. ISBN   9780936132921.
  9. Glasl, Friedrich (1 January 1994). Das Unternehmen der Zukunft: moralische Intuition in der Gestaltung von Organisationen (in German). Verlag Freies Geistesleben. p. 67. ISBN   9783772512346. Published in English as Glasl, F. (1 January 1997). The Enterprise of the Future. Hawthorn Press. ISBN   9781869890797.
  10. Kühl, Stefan (2016). "Die vier blinden Flecken der "Theorie U"" (PDF). Wirtschaft + Weiterbildung. 10 2016: 24–29.