What is your action style?

Propensity to Action




Being/becoming/doing is an orientation, a range of human propensities to action or “the nature of man’s mode of self-expression in activity” report anthropologists Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck.

We all have the whole spectrum in us, but we have natural preferences as well. Our preferences are guided by our beliefs in how the world is structured and also our own image in that world. For example, because I came from a highly individualized culture, where action is prized over whom you know and what you can do, my self-image is based very much upon what I have accomplished through doing. When I am not "doing", I criticize myself for laziness and lack of initiative.

"Being" is related to the spontaneous way human beings satisfy their impulses which has nothing to do with passivity or development. It lies nearer instinctual behavior. If my lips are dry, my concentration is totally on how I can get to lip balm. If I am thirsty, a drink is upmost in my thoughts and motivates my actions. Being occurs when we accept our environment, living instinctually with a certain amount of “flow” made famous by Csikszentmihalyi.

“Becoming” is a creative activity, motivated by one's will, which is triggered by our emotional, intellectual and sensuous experiences. If one believes strongly that wife battering is the root of many of society’s problems and possibly have some more personal experiences, then your activity level might drive you to volunteer at a shelter for battered spouses. It is in becoming that we can understand the workings, patterns and systemic connections in our environment.

“Doing “ is dominant in Western society and is characterized by “…the kind of activity which results in accomplishments that are measurable by standards conceived to be external to the acting individual” (Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck,1961, p.17), like succeeding in being responsible for large profits in your working situation. It is often that monetary gains are the standards conceived to be external to the acting individual". Whether our reward is monetary, status or fame depends upon what we need most. Our actions are directed to changing something, making something, as we see it, better.

The being, becoming and doing continuum influences our foresight ability. The individual focused upon “being”, is totally involved in his or her work, enjoys the work, doesn’t make a conscious effort to develop, and is not as motivated to wander into thinking about what might be.

However, an individual focused upon "becoming" might be studying what is going on around him or her and seeing links, consequences and systems. They might begin to see what future activities or trends might result from such systems. It requires a certain amount of distance and the ability to see the whole picture rather than focus upon details. Generalists, who know a little about a lot, can often see the connections between divergent situations and activities.

When the situation under our inspection becomes personally connected to our emotions or grows out of an unfulfilled need is when we move toward action and "doing". In positive situations, the activist within steps forward and tries to make a change not only for him or herself, but for others with similar problems. Watch the TV program Dr. Phil to see examples of both. Some people are just caught up in their tragedy and can only tell how they feel. Others have the ability to realize that the situation, in which they find themselves, happens to others as well.

Which propensity to action do you find yourself using at this moment? Are you able to identify personal examples of when you are “being, becoming, or doing”. One of the biggest lifestyle complaints has been that we are so wrapped up in doing that we have no time for being (playing with the kids) or becoming (watching the interaction between the people around us, or observing world patterns and systems).

Do rules reign?

How much structure do you require to feel save and happy in your life? The theory of foresight styles postulates that one’s personal need for structure partially affects where on the foresight style continuum one sits. Naturally, there are other personal characteristics that affect it as well. Earlier I have written about the temporal factor.

You can test your personal need for structure on a Scale.

Personal Need Structure or (PNS) is one of those few academic descriptions that don’t need interpretation. Think about the structure that you have in your life. Do you always put your keys in the same place? Do you want a written job description or just verbal instructions in the beginning?

I first became aware of the concept when I worked with thirty-five women in learning/executing a study of the future of the public sector in Sweden. Every time we had a participants meeting, there were some that asked question after question and others who understood directly and wanted to leave and start working. Those in the middle needed a little clarity, but pretty much understood and were greatly irritated by those who wanted more information and those who had one foot out the door. When I thought about it, I realized that every meeting I had ever been a part of had the same dynamic which illustrated individual differences of the participants. Obviously, others had made the same observation and have done some very detailed research on it. PNS is conceptually similar to how tolerant or intolerant we are of ambiguity, or as Geert Hofstede called it, Uncertainty Avoidance. These concepts, when applied to foresight have to look at what a high need for structure might mean to someone who is asked to thinking about the future. A logical extrapolation from the current situation could make the future a better or worse version of how it is today. Someone who has a low need for structure, and can handle more ambiguity and not shy away from uncertainty, might feel freer to create visionary or dystopic images of the future. Those in the middle of that spectrum might be inclined to put together current and past ideas, creating something new and yet not totally unfamiliar. It is clear that both positive or negative or mixed futures can come from individuals on the personal need for security spectrum. This is the starting point for many scenarios. However, when looking at why people choose one or the other or both, might lie in their orientation on what anthropologist Florence Kluckhohn used, scale of good to evil. In other words, we all sit somewhere on a belief spectrum from: people are basically good to people are basically evil. You are possibly starting to get the idea that there are a lot of factors that influence foresight. Research continues to flush them out. Keep reading here, we have and will discuss others.

Theoretical entree, practical dessert

Recent interest in the theoretical background of Foresight Styles Assessment has lead to a paper soon to be published by the Journal of Futures Studies titled Foresight Styles Assessment: A theory based study in foresight competency and change.

For Certified Consultants who use FSA in their consulting or coaching, insight into our "entree" (some light theory) might be useful in working with clients. For "dessert" practical suggestions are offered.

The intentions of FSA are the same as for most assessments, allow for wide divergence in clients' views, attitudes, values, and behaviors, recognize the diversity with which they and their colleagues face change and aid clients in choosing approaches to change that consider both short and long term aspects.

Background

FS has its background in Innovation Diffusion research or how new ideas become integrated into a wider population. It is a scale from non-acceptance to quick adaption of the new. It is not just how we accept what's new, but has to do with the origin of the new idea and how each different adaption style affects long and short range results. When economic, climate, ecologic and energy questions fight for our attention and energy, the long-range and the short range come into perspective in a new light.

A number of assumptions that influenced the foresight theory are:

individuals have a greater affinity for and can be placed upon a temporal spectrum of past - present - future,

individuals think from analytic or holistic paradigms,

individuals have a greater or lesser affinity for activity as described by the continuum for instinctual behavior, development directed behavior or action oriented behavior,

individuals have a greater or lesser need for structure.

Evolutionary development has endowed Homo sapiens with genetic and physiological capabilities that allow them to do what no other animals can; form their future.

Holistic thinking is summarized as a spectrum, from the ability to see the larger picture with all its messy detail: holistic causality, everything-is-connected and a an attitude of contradictions that can see some validity in both sides. The locus of holistic thinking is the whole. Analytic thinking is described as slow, deliberative and conscious, rational analysis and discussion with locus of attention on the parts. Researchers from Eastern cultures refer to their research as holistic and Western researchers tend to use Duel Process and their term of choice.

The temporal aspect of FSA has to do with ones orientation or alignment to the past, the present or the future. It does not mean that the individual lives totally in one of these time zones, but find one or the other a comfort zone.

Under propensity to action there are two concepts. Being, becoming and doing describe the activity relationship we have to our total environment. We can be accepting within our environment, living instinctually with a certain amount of “flow” as Csikszentmihalyi describes it. We can understand the workings, patterns and systemic connections in our environment, or we can take action in order to bring about change. The being, becoming and doing continuum influences how each of the styles individualize themselves.

The other individualization influence is in the varying degree of personal need for structure which enables us to make sense of the world, to form and maintain a clear perception of our personal and work lives. A high personal need for structure implies a need for information and rules about the topic at hand and appears to correlate with a fear of lack of validity, cogency or acceptance by the larger group. In addition, when confronted with a proposed change, a personal need for structure can include a need to know what to expect, the need to maintain a daily routine, the fear of unpredictable situations and people, unclear and new rules, activities and expectations.

Paractical Tips

When using FSA with client groups or individuals, one can discuss need for or lack of need of structure, propensity to action, holistic or analytic thinking and temporal orientation. First, talk to yourself about your stance on these four orientations. Consider that your orientation will draw you to clients that have similar orientations and initiate a certain amount of judgment against those who do not. Bon appitit!

The telling of your time

As those of you who have used Foresight Styles Assessment with your clients know, there is a temporal perspective attached to each of the six styles.

Foresight Styles Assessment and Temporal Orientation

Futurist - Future
Activist - Present/Future
Opportunist - Present
Flexist (Leading group) -Present/Future
Flexist (Later group) - Present/Past
Equilibrist - Present
Reactionist - Past

From resent research we are just beginning to understand just how important temporal perspectives are in the way we respond to life's various changes. Each of us put a lot of time into thinking about the past, the present or the future. You can check your own time orientation by drawing three circles representing past, present and future on a piece of paper in relation to one another as you see them in your life. They can be different sizes, near, far or overlapping where you find it appropriate. Label the circles past, present and future in the way that you feel is the best representation of your life. Do not read further until you have completed the task. Look to the bottom of this blog. Thanks to Peg Thoms' Driven by Time for the exercize.

If your clients are managers or CEO's they will want to know "is better for the boss to be future oriented?" Each of the time orientations have their positive and negative sides. Naturally, a CEO who is out to change their organization has an advantage with a future orientation. If getting the organization in order after crisis, it is good to have someone who is oriented to the present. What ever your orientation, one should have compliment orientations in their near circle to add balance. After consulting with them you get valuable information that reflects how others might respond. Use that information to help you in making the kind of changes you feel are important to your business.


Analyzing your drawing:

There are two points of interpretation in this task. One has to do with impact and the other has to do with size. The larger circle is that upon which you focus the dominate amount of energy. The nearness, touching or overlapping indicate the amount of influence one time orientation has upon another.

Our thoughts tend to dwell in one temporal orientation or another. Of course, our temporal orientation isn't simply that, it is colored by negative, positive, hedonistic, fatalistic or transcendental impulses say researchers Boyd and Zimbaro.

Request to Read about FSA

I have been asked recently if there is something written on Foresight Styles Assessment. There is a lot of information on the website and monthly entries at Foresight Files and Consulting Change. A manual is available on the website which is tailored to those who wish to become certified. A theoretical paper is currently being written, and a statistical paper will follow. Here is an excerpt from the opening of the theoritical paper:


The Foresight Styles Theory defines and measures a range of thinking that distinctly influences responses to change and the future. In this particular juncture in time, change is increasing in speed and intensity. The human organism struggles to respond to this change. Within the broad range of both capacities and needs there are four, values related orientations: temporal (time orientation), structural (stronger or lesser need), doing/being (acting/observing), systemic/linear which assist us in our response to change. Each individual contributes their own unique combination of each orientation to every external change they meet during their lifespan. Foresight Styles Assessment is a tool designed for the purpose of drawing focus to just those qualities in each individual and group which are used to survive in this ever changing world.

A Place of Creativity and of Holistic Foresight

Recently, in writing about Foresight Styles Assessment, I have spent a lot of time explaining why the "Futurist" style differs quantitatively from most of the other five styles which have their own personalities, but are relatable to the massive and statistically validated body of research known as Innovation Diffusion. I am convinced that there is a place of creativity and of holistic foresight that comes together within us that is a part of a genetic gift that we all have to varying degrees. I am convinced that how we relate to the future is highly influenced by that genetic gift.

Evolutionary scientists are learning more every day about the development of our brains. The order of the brains development has been established for decades now. We are just beginning to learn about things like plasticity, the way culture and behavior shape the brain, the way past memories influence what we can imagine the future to be. We are also learning how genetics influences what our brains can be and what they can and cannot do.

Another of the styles that doesn't fit into the innovation diffusion scheme is the "Opportunist". It may feel as if the parts of us that live in the present, that look for what will enhance our lives here and now, the parts that, in our materialistic, achieving society tempt our values towards gain for fame's sake are totally negative. Yet, we see many examples of opportunistic behavior every day and we act on opportunities that we would regret if we didn't take them. Opportunism represents more than just the speed with which we accept an innovation. It goes to the motivation behind our need to live in the present, to use whatever comes along to enhance our survival now without regard to a future time. This is also a part of our brain's architecture. It speaks to survival, at the reptilian brain level, but also in other parts of our brain. If lying will get a hug, praise, acceptance or acknowledgement and those qualities are missing from our lives; naturally we will take the opportunistic road and leave thoughts of the future for others.

That opportunistic behavior can also be of value in a change process was something I came to slowly. As Maslow put it, there is a certain hierarchy of needs and survival is the bottom line. An organization, in which I am a member, recently was on the brink of extinction. It was very hard for the membership (largely academic and all working with some aspect of the future) to keep straight what were the "Opportunist" actions and "Futurist" actions. Fortunately, the group had one person who understood the difference and was willing to take charge.

It feels presumptuous to offer a model of change that is tangent to such a well developed concept as Innovation Diffusion. I still feel strongly that FSA is a more holistic view of change. It can be used to fulfill our need for understanding and learning. FSA can be used as a way to grow ourselves, our communities and our organizations. It is integral to understanding the present and creating the future.

The Answer is in the Questions

A group who recently took Foresight Styles Assessments made an oft repeated comment, "What interesting questions, they really made me think". Often Consultants and even individuals who are interested in FSA for personal or group development ask me, "What should I do with my results"? Naturally the results are interesting, and I will speak to that in the near future, but the questions can be just as useful. Take, for example, the question about being willing to give up benefits in the present to assure even better rewards in the future.

It is easy to come up with daily personal examples - give up this desert now for less weight gain in the future, pay bills now for lowering stress and feeling good about one’s self.

In business situations there are also many examples such as, address possible customer illness or injury caused by our product now instead of dealing with bad publicity, lowered product sales and legal costs in the future, - spend now on research for non-polluting materials for later rewards in the form of positive publicity, good will, saving on future fines or pollution clean-up costs.

How can giving up success now for even better rewards in the future help your team, your leadership group or your department? Are you, as Consultant, CEO, or leader willing to take such questions up in your organization? What better way to get more people involved in the decision making?

When it has to do with changes in process, work load, new assignments, new bosses or new mechanization, some employees, when questioned, perceive decision makers as a threat to them and their world. These individuals fight the changes recommended by others no matter who they are. When asked why they resist they reply with a series of responses you have heard before, "they don't know our organization", "they are too young (or old) and haven't thought things through," they don't have any experience in this specific situation", we've been through these changes before and it only makes things worse. These individual are those who can make life difficult in an organization change. Are they just difficult people who we can dismiss? Do they have any points to make? An open discussion of this question, handled respectfully, could open a few new doors.

Take Foresight Styles Assessment and think through the questions in relation to a current assignment or change situation. Use the questions and your own creativity to open difficult subjects and get people to articulate their feelings and attitudes.