Paul: 0:08

Welcome to Employing Differences, a conversation about exploring the collaborative space between individuals.

Karen: 0:14

I'm Karen Gimnig.

Paul: 0:16

And I'm Paul Tevis.

Karen: 0:18

Each episode, we start with a question and see where it takes us. This week's question is, "How did we get here?"

Paul: 0:27

So one of the things about complex systems generally – but human systems absolutely – is that their history matters. You can't just look at the current conditions and decide what you should do. Because the way that system works, the way it evolves, the way those people interact with each other, is flavored and is influenced by the past, by the history of the system, by the context that the system is existing in. And what's often challenging is when new people come into a system, come into a group, who don't have that context, who don't understand, "How did we get here?" And as it turns out, as humans, we're not necessarily good at providing useful levels of context for people. It's very easy to fall into the "too much," very easily to fall into the "too little," and often very easy to fall into the "not at the right time" traps. So we want to explore a little bit today how we can provide more useful context to people when we're working groups –when we're living in that space between – to really help us work more effectively together.

Karen: 1:43

Yeah, and I want to provide some context for this by saying that one of the reasons I find this really important is that context actually helps us regulate our nervous systems. So when we land in that place of not having the context that we need, all sorts of triggers go off. What you're saying, when you're a new person and that's why you don't have it: The lack of belonging, the "Will I fit in here?" all of that triggers. But just the "I don't know enough, I don't feel safe." It doesn't seem like a little bit of information would shift all of that, but neurologically, it actually does. And so be thinking... For me, I find it useful to be thinking about,"What is the context that gets everybody fully into the room and present?" because then they get here well-enough regulated that all of their faculties are on board. They're able to think about what they're thinking and make decisions, change their mind about things, be in relational spaces; all that stuff that we do when we're neurologically regulated, and we don't do well when we're not. And context is one of the big pieces that helps us do that.

Paul: 2:56

And the other thing is that different people have different desires/needs for context. So I'm a high-context person. I could do nothing but"Tell me more about what's going on here? I don't understand this. Explain that part?" And one of the challenges for me is actually learning to regulate my nervous system when I have less than I normally would like. And actually being able to go,"Okay, I can't..." Because this

is one of the challenges: 3:27

We can't understand everything. We can't know everything about the situation, about the history, about how we got here. So how do we – particularly within a group– make sure that people have enough that they're able to stay in that place of regulation – of being able to damp the anxiety that is building from the lack of context, from the lack of understanding – enough that we can work usefully together? And I think that's actually usually one of those barometers that you can kind of use in a group. Have we provided enough context or have we provided too little? Where are people? What's that sense of "We don't understand what's going on" and noticing that that's not going to be evenly distributed – even if all of the people have the same history and have the same information, because they have different set points in terms of what they want in terms of context.

Karen: 4:32

Yeah. And like you, I tend to be a high context person. So I very generously share lots of context with the people around me...

Paul: 4:40

That's very kind of you.

Karen: 4:41

...who may not appreciate it. I'm thinking of a particular example, in the car with my partner, he's driving and, and I say, "Oh, there's this shop down over here and it would be nice to go by but they might not be open but I just like to drive by it." And he's like, "Which way do you want me to turn? Tell me the turn, I can find out what later I just need to know where I'm turning." And I think that's that example of the mismatch that we're pointing to. I didn't want to just give him an order that he would take out of context. He didn't care. He just wanted to know where I wanted to go. He's happy to drive wherever I wanted. And I think we do that in groups all the time of misunderstanding how much context is desired? And so, as you said at the very beginning, it is this balancing act of how much context do we need? And how much is too much? And also, which context, which pieces do we need? I think of a group that was working on getting a bank loan, and they needed that bank loan, they needed it now. And the bank at the last minute said, "Oh, we need everybody to sign this extra document." And so the group had to say, "Yes, we're all gonna sign this extra document." And there were people who didn't want to sign it. For good reasons. They had good reasons. And they were looking at do we or don't we want to sign the document, when in fact, what they needed to know was,"The context is we signed the documents or the project goes over budget." We sign the documents, or we lose the bank loan. It means these bad things. So yes, you have a choice to sign the document or not. And the context around it makes it actually it's not about the document. It's about what we got to offered.

Paul: 6:30

Yeah, so one of the things that that points to is that when we're thinking about information, we need to be thinking about the relevance of that information. Given what we're asking people to do or people what need to do or what's going on in the context, what relevant information do people need in order to make the decisions that they need to make, to engage in the ways that they need to make? So going back to the driving example, it's hysterical to me because I do the same thing? I have a super great need for context, but not when I'm driving. When I'm driving, I need to know, "Do I need to turn left here or not?" So it's not relevant.. I trust you that there is a reason why you would ask me to turn left. I can't sort through that. In the moment the relevant thing is turned here or not. And so part of it is when we're asking people to do a thing, what is relevant to them? What is relevant to the thing that they need? So then to your bank loan example, the relevant thing is,"If you choose not to sign it, you're signing up for we're going over budget." That's actually what what the relevant– and if you don't have that information, then that changes the decision. And so I think when we talk about "How did we get here?" when we're explaining how we got here, we need to explain the things that are relevant to here and now. And obviously, the more that we're able to sort of lay the groundwork for that in a group – this is the idea that people don't hear things until they hear them seven times, seven ways; there are important things that we just need to keep reiterating – but it's really about are we providing people with the relevant information at the right time. Because if you tell me about, something that's greatly important to what's going on in the community and the work and the project that we're doing, but it's not relevant to what I'm working on right then there's a very good chance that my brain is going to filter it out. And then later, you're gonna say, "Well, I told you about that last week." And I'm like, "I'm sure you did, but it was not relevant to what I was doing at that time." So I think when we want to share information, we want to be clear about the relevance of the information that we're sharing. And I think it could also be useful when we're receiving information to ask about the relevance. Because it may be that it connects exactly to something that you're doing right now we're going to be doing and you just don't see the connection.

Karen: 9:12

Yeah. And I think the way that we say it matters, too. And again, this isn't a there's one right way, but it's a thing to think about, because humans work really well in stories. And so if we give the context – when I've been in a thing, and in the bank loan example, the finance team who'd worked on that, like they got all of the relevance, they had it, they knew it, it was just solid for them. And they were so frustrated that people were pushing back on whether or not to sign this document. That was really hard for them. And so what they wanted to do was go flood everybody with everything about the bank loan and all the details and all of the thing about that. And what actually was effective in that case was to connect it to the long-term story. So to go in and say,"Here's the story of our project. We started with this. We did this to get the financing. We did this to get here. We did this to get here. The essential piece from where we are now is..." It wasn't the 10,000 word version of the story. It was the 100 word version of the story. But it went back far enough to connect with a story that was familiar and comfortable and a mental framework they all had. And placed that thing, both for its relevance, but also how it fit with the pieces that they did have solidly, so that they could integrate it and go, "Oh, that's where we are."

Paul: 10:42

Well, it's drawing the line between – if I have this information, I have the context. But I started from a place of not having it. So I need to clearly and coherently connect back to where I started, and how I got here, and then draw that line as cleanly, as clearly, and succinctly as I can for other people to bring them along in that story. To your point, the 100 word version of the story, not the 10,000 word version of the story. But that's what it's about doing, because it's about connecting back to the place of"When did I not know this? When did I not have this context?" Because that's what helps bring other people along, is thinking about "How did I get here?" But then, being a guide along that path. It's almost the, "Over here on the left, we see the Statue of Liberty. Over here on the right, we can see..." You're moving through it pretty quickly. You're not belaboring the point. And I think the other thing around that is letting people pull the information they need rather than pushing information on to them. Information flows effectively when – this is kind of the other side – when people recognize they don't have the context they need. Creating space around those stories for people to get curious about the pieces you might have accidentally omitted. And so it's creating space for things like, "So I've laid all of this out. Here's how we've gotten here. What questions do people have around this?" And that's where I might be asking,"So how does this relate to what do I need to do tomorrow?" And not noticing. So creating a space for people to pull the information to them based on their relevance filters, based on what they're doing, rather than just trying to push everything at them or not giving them anything.

Karen: 12:41

Yeah, yeah. And I think that push energy, for me where that shows up is if I'm trying to convince them. If I show up trying to make a case, now I'm pushing stuff at people. Context is more about creating this nice environment where they can feel at home and comfortable, and come to their own conclusions. So we're offering this cozy decision-making space, that's equipped. It's got the information that we need in an accessible way. And it's brought them along to "How did we get here?" And the other thing I want to say about storytelling for context is you want to link it to the things that matter. To the values, to the overall goal. How does this fit? We know we wanted to get from A to B. How is this thing we're doing now on that path? What's that road that connects this thing, both to where we've been into where we're going, so that we really have a sense of what choices got us here? What choices do we not have anymore because we already made them? Like all that sort of historical stuff that gets us here. So that we don't rail against that past stuff that we can't change it. It's done. And also that vision of where we're going so that the past and future context I think is helpful.

Paul: 14:09

Yeah, that word you used in there that I latched on to is"equipped." How do we equip people for the journey? And so that's actually I think – I'm going to explore the metaphor just slightly – it's almost like asking them what they would need? If they were going to get to go shopping, what are the things that they would need in order to make this journey? In order to continue to this next stage of the journey that maybe they haven't been with you on? But letting them pull. You're painting a picture of where it is you're trying to go and you're connecting it to the past, but you're also creating an opportunity for them to say,"Here's what I would need in order to be able to travel along this. Here's what I didn't need to know. I'm unclear about this. Can you tell me more about that?" That's actually one of my favorite places that we can get to is when someone says, "Tell me more about that." Because that actually is a clue that you've started to provide enough useful stuff that they want to know more. When their curiosity gets engaged that means you're on the right path. And they're going to tell you where to keep going.

Karen: 15:19

So I feel like where we're going is we started with this idea of context is essential. How did we get here? We need to know that. And we need it to be not too much and not too little. We need it to relate to what the group already knows. We need it to connect to the knowledge they already have. We need it to connect to the history of where we've been, the goal for where we're going, and the values of the group. And, we need it to be relational in nature. We need there to be that give and take, so that I'm creating a space where people have what they need, and I use their input to help with that. So that I'm being responsive to what the group is and to where the group's curiosity is. And getting a little bit out of my own head so I'm not just supplying what I would need in terms of context, but that I'm actually engaging with some curiosity and empathy so that I can supply the context that others need, which may be very different than what I would need in their chair.

Paul: 16:20

Yeah. Well, that's gonna do it for us for today. Until next time, I'm Paul Tevis.

Karen: 16:25

And I'm Karen Gimnig, and this has been Employing Differences.