Yet again, I dreaded my workday. I knew I had way too much to accomplish in the time I had. I was holding up several projects at the end of a long month, and I hunkered down at my desk, despite feeling a bit depressed. I pressed on with the tools I always think will work–coffee and a long period of solo computer work–but I didn’t manage to get through it all.
I came up against this same feeling this morning, but I was lucky to recall Albert Einstein’s words: “Problems cannot be solved with the same mindset that created them.” Instead of getting depressed, I decided to meditate instead. When I did sit down to work, it came to me… What about exploring the ToP Levels of Discernment?
Levels of Discernment
In ToP Strategic Planning, we often use a tool called the Levels of Discernment exercise with groups who keep experiencing blocks to their progress, no matter what they seem to try. It’s a great way to get past blaming, shaming, and hopelessness to help a group name their real problem. Often, intractable problems are contradictions, in which we are doing something based on false assumptions that is unknowingly making the problem worse.

As the graphic illustrates, our most intractable problems may have unconscious roots in our assumptions. The graphic shows the successive levels that must be examined to get to the root of the blockage: irritants, blame, lack of, issues, blocks/obstacles, underlying obstacles, and contradiction. Examples of each level can look like:
Irritants: "The time it takes our receivers to get out for passes is so annoying."
Blame: "Maybe it's the quarterback's fault for not getting out a clear enough call."
Lack of: "Isn't the problem that there aren't enough offensive coordinators?"
Issues: "It's not just reception. We have a bigger communication issue across our team."
Blocks/Obstacles: "By the time I correct the play and the call, the defensive line prevents me from finding my line."
Underlying Obstacles: "We have a variable system for communicating offensive strategies, both in planning and execution phases."
Contradiction: "Even though we want clear offensive strategies, we switch up our strategies for every team we play, without communicating the plan in meetings or on the field."
Working from the level of irritation (mild depression), through naming the issue (prioritization) and blocks (backlog), I finally found there was an unconscious preference to work alone that was fueling my productivity problem. It looks like I might need an assistant or some good advice on best practices as an entrepreneur. Naming all the issues, blocks, underlying obstacles, and possible contradictions sets us up for trying appropriate solutions, no matter the context. In simple systems like mine, the Levels help groups avoid oversimplifying so they can find a solution that accounts for all the data. A group in a complicated system might be more likely to hire the right experts or seek the proper data. In a complex system, a group might be better prepared to create targeted experimental initiatives and measure the results. If your curiosity is piqued for ToP Strategic Planning, we offer the course in the Seattle metro and the Twin Cities. Check the events page for dates and to register.
Comments