Way Over Their Heads

When we say that something is "way over their heads," we mean that the people referenced lack the ability to understand the issue at hand. That conclusion is usually based on observations of their behavior. We observe that explaining it to them is futile. We observe that persuading them of the importance of grasping it is futile. And we observe that providing them information that could form the basis of understanding the issue is futile. We use these observations to conclude that the issue itself is way over their heads.

The observations might be valid. But often the conclusion is not. The people who "don't get it" are not stupid. But for some reason they don't see things as others do.

In such cases, what we're observing is each person's response to change. Understanding the issue at hand — the "something" that seems to be "way over their heads" — requires more than just new information, or training in logical thinking. It requires a change in perspective that has implications for how people make sense of the world. Changes like that are extraordinarily difficult. For us all.

From the To make progress in resolving a
crisis, everyone must make changesperspective of the people who do understand the issue at hand (by a coin flip I'll call them the Blues), dealing with those who do not (the Greens) can be extraordinarily frustrating. It can tear asunder long-standing productive relationships, whole teams, or even entire organizations. In the most severe cases, Blue and Green must collaborate for the good of the organization, and in some instances, Blue and Green must collaborate for the very survival of the organization. When the Blues can't secure the Greens' assistance or support no matter what they try, frustration can erupt into toxic conflict.

Natural questions then arise. If the issue is important and urgent, how can the stalemate persist? In some cases, the stalemate is stable not because the Greens don't understand the problem, but because the Greens and Blues have different perspectives. To make progress, both Blues and Greens must make changes.

[Reminder: the Blues are the folks who understand the problem and who are ready to address it; the Greens are the folks who don't see a need to address the problem.]

Breaking the stalemate requires two changes on the part of the Blues.

Blues must understand what's sticky about the Old Status Quo

The Old Status Quo is the current way of understanding the world — the Greens' perspective. Greens want to continue to see the world in this way. They do so because the Old Status Quo provides them with something they value.

What they value need not be money or property, though it can be. It might be something as abstract as security or familiarity or social identity or social status. Whatever it is that Greens value, the Blues must appreciate that the change they're proposing might seem to the Greens to threaten that thing that the Greens value. Until the Blues can devise a means of making the New Status Quo more attractive than the Old Status Quo, the Greens are unlikely to welcome the perspective of the Blues.

The required change might be similar to past experiences Greens lament

Just as the Blues must find a way to attract Greens from the Old Status Quo to the New Status Quo, they must also find a way to reduce any perceived threats Greens associate with the New Status Quo. The difficulty in accomplishing this is that Blues might be unaware of any threats Greens perceive. For example, the required change might be similar to some unpleasant past events, either in this organization, or in other organizations Greens might imagine, remember, or otherwise know about.

Blues can try to guess what those unpleasant events might be, but a better method involves listening. Listening is more effective because what worries Greens might not be in the public record. Asking a Green might be the only way to learn what the Greens' concerns actually are.

What makes the stalemate stable is the Blues' assumption that changing the Greens' perspective about the issue is the only way to make progress. In most cases, that isn't a good starting place for change. The place to start is changing Blues' perspective about what Greens want and don't want.  Top    Next Issue

Is your organization embroiled in Change? Are you managing a change effort that faces rampant cynicism, passive non-cooperation, or maybe even outright revolt? Read 101 Tips for Managing Change to learn how to survive, how to plan and how to execute change efforts to inspire real, passionate support. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Organizational Change:

Don't Rebuild the Chrysler Building

When we undertake change, we're usually surprised at the effort and cost required. Much of this effort and cost is necessary because of the nature of the processes we're changing. What can we do differently to make change easier in the future?

Pick-Up Sticks and the Change Game

When we change organizational culture, we often stumble over unexpected obstacles. Sometimes the tangle can be so frustrating that we want to start the company over again. Here are some tips for managing large-scale cultural change.

Conventional Foolishness

Every specialization has a set of beliefs, often called "conventional wisdom." When these beliefs are so obvious that they're unquestioned and even unnoticed, there's an opportunity to leap ahead of the pack — by questioning the conventional wisdom.

Power, Authority, and Influence: A Systems View

Power, Authority, and Influence are often understood as personal attributes. To fully grasp how they function in organizations, we must adopt a systems view.

Contrary Indicators of Psychological Safety: I

To take the risks that learning and practicing new ways require, we all need a sense that trial-and-error approaches are safe. Organizations seeking to improve processes would do well to begin by assessing their level of psychological safety.

See also Organizational Change and Organizational Change for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming January 22: Storming: Obstacle or Pathway?

The Storming stage of Tuckman's model of small group development is widely misunderstood. Fighting the storms, denying they exist, or bypassing them doesn't work. Letting them blow themselves out in a somewhat-controlled manner is the path to Norming and Performing. Available here and by RSS on January 22.

And on January 29: A Framework for Safe Storming

The Storming stage of Tuckman's development sequence for small groups is when the group explores its frustrations and degrees of disagreement about both structure and task. Only by understanding these misalignments is reaching alignment possible. Here is a framework for this exploration. Available here and by RSS on January 29.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info