A630.2.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

Review of Taylor's - 21st Century Enlightenment

This is the best time in history to be alive.  Though not yet universal, freedom is advancing.  Individuals are given the space to wrestle with their thoughts and test various value systems.  Religion is allowing more personal interpretations while politicians are loosening their grip on constituents.  People are no longer being forced to think one way; rather, creativity, innovation, and a new enlightenment are being accepted and promoted.  The historical Age of Reason, otherwise referred to as the Enlightenment, questioned traditional authority and embraced the notion that humanity could be improved through rational change” (History.com, 2013). 

Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufacture, and Commerce (RSA) summarized the next period of enlightenment.  His video RSA: The 21^st Century Enlightenment, explores some of the key ideas of the Enlightenment, suggesting we might both rethink the interpretation we have come to place on previous beliefs toward human progress and develop perspectives more relevant to today.  At the heart of the RSA’s contemporary mission and public debates about the future prospects for the human race is the question: ‘Can we go on like this?’  Will the ideas and values which transformed our world in the last two centuries be sufficient to find solutions to the challenges we now face or do we need new ways of thinking? (RSA, 2013).  

The following seven questions that challenged my thinking while watching Taylor’s video.

Why do you think the talk is titled 21st Century Enlightenment?

Taylor purports that we must champion a more self-aware, socially embedded autonomy.  In the seventh century, people did a lot of talking; today, we must have action.  It is not enough to know why someone deserves to be free; steps must be taken to free men and women.  Taylor’s tagline is referred to as the 21^st Century Enlightenment because he is challenging today’s human race to rethink past foundations of values and principles and weigh them against the challenges we face today and will face in the future.

What does Matthew Taylor mean when he says "to live differently, you have to think differently"?

Rather than always looking outward, we must look inward.  Daniel Goleman (1995) refers to this state as self-awareness.  He defined it as, “continually paying attention to one’s internal states” (p. 46).  If the first enlightenment promoted our individual strengths and abilities, the new enlightenment must build on that by recognizing our frailties and limitations.  In short, we need a new way of thinking. 

The 21^st Century Enlightenment “requires us to see past simplistic ideas and inadequate perceptions of freedom, justice, and progress.”  Moreover, Taylor said, “we must get away from abstractions and reconnect a concrete understanding of who we are, who we need to be, and more importantly, who we aspire to be.”

  

At one point in the video (4:10), Taylor argues that we need "to resist our tendencies to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is only strange". What is he talking about?                

Before we submit our loyalties to an easy or familiar path, we should investigate its premise and how it aligns with what we believe and value.  Relying on what we’ve been told or witnessed should not be the basis for making decisions.  In the video, Taylor quoted Robert Kegan as “successfully functioning in society with its diverse values, traditions, and lifestyles requires us to have a relationship to our own reactions rather than be captive by them.” 

Governing our responses by first filtering input through our value systems creates a level of self-awareness and self-control that strengthens an individual and in turn, strengthens the society.  Robert Kegan (2009) said, “The challenge to change and improve is often misunderstood as a need to better “deal with” or “cope with” the greater complexity of the world.  Coping and dealing involve adding new skills or widening our repertoire of responses” (p. 11)

Can you think of an example within your company or your life that supports this point?

As a minister of the Gospel, my faith leads me to depend on God for divine guidance, encouragement, and direction.  While I do not espouse to follow the theory of humanism in its entirety, I do respect the motivations behind personal responsibility and accountability.  Two key verses speak of the importance, in Luke 6:45 Jesus said, “Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks” and in Proverbs 18:21 that says, “There is life and death in the power of the tongue.”  If I am to control my responses rather than be captive by them, I must be able to control what I say and then allow God to help me change with how I think. 

I often talk about the truth of our responses and our actions.  We can speak of love all day long; but without showing love for each other—especially those who are different—than what we are demonstrating isn’t really love at all.  Jesus also said, “They will know you are my children by the love you show for one another” (John 13:35, NIV).  If the new enlightenment is about empathy, then we must work together to demonstrate care, concern, and love for one another.  In the Age of Reason, men sat around for hours discussing the power of the mind and a myriad of philosophical ideas and motivations.  Again, the new enlightenment must be manifested through action.

Taylor argues that our society should eschew elements of pop culture that degrade people and that we should spend more time looking into what develops empathetic citizens. Would this be possible?

Possible? Yes. Probable? No.  Media influence and pop culture is a money machine getting rich of the ills of its consumers.  Pathetic and selfish husbands are portrayed on numerous sitcoms, violence is celebrated on every channel, and the push to accept open sexuality on television and in music has reached an all time high.  The minute one think it can’t get any worse, another song comes out degrading women ort a primetime television show exposes more flesh.

Even with the onslaught of degradation, empathy and respect is possible.  As citizens, we must remember that pop culture does not represent the majority; only the most vocal.  Behind the degrading music video and violent video game are millions of people loving each other and communicating with respect and empathy.  Our challenge is to continue to report it and share it.  Even more, to show it.

At the end of the video, Taylor talks about atomizing people from collaborative environments and the destructive effect on their growth. What is the implication of these comments for organizational change efforts?

One of my favorite books read during this Leadership curriculum is Stewart Levine’s (2009) Getting to Resolution: Turning Conflict into Collaboration.  In it he said, “How did we get here, and how can we get out of here? I believe that as a civilization we are tottering on a dangerous precipice. To resolve many of our great challenges we must be able to engage in thoughtful and authentic dialogue. We have conquered outer space; our biggest challenge is conquering “inner space.”

Taylor implores us to rethink freedom, justice, and progress. 

My cousin watched political television every chance he gets.  As a result, every time I speak to him his response is always the same, “Society is sleeping! People must wake up! Our country and our freedom are being taken form us and no one is doing anything about it!” 

I often assure him I am not sleeping but am also not defaulting to a Chicken Little persona.

Even so, it would behoove us all to understand the direction of our society rather than ignore the flow and one day wake up unaware of your surroundings.

Levine (2009) finished the above comment with, “Given our current military capacity for destruction, if we cannot make the mental shift to fully engage in authentic conversation we risk the end of life as we know it” (p. xxii).

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

Taylor’s video so eloquently presented the importance and responsibility of every citizen to “own” empathy.  To pursue a genuine concern for others.  To look at life through the lenses of unity, equality, and compassion.  It isn’t enough to understand the need for empathy; rather, we must extend it and activate it.  Everyday. Everywhere.

In 10 hours I’ll be sitting at my desk on a Monday morning.  I’ve watched Taylor’s video no less than five times (listened to it twice while driving).  I am impressed with his grasp on the human condition and the present state of society.  At the end of the day though, I am not motivated by his talk as much as I am “enlightened.”  My motivation comes from another kind of Light.  It inspires me to love radically, to serve selflessly, and to give unabashedly.  My empathy flows from a divine source.  It is not a cause; it’s a cross.

Steve

References:

Goleman, D. (1994). Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Dell

Kegan, R., & Laskow, L.L. (2009). Immunity to change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School

Publishing Company.

Levine, S. (2009). Getting to Resolution. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Taylor, M. (2010). RSA Animate: The 21^st Century Enlightenment. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo&feature=youtu.be

A521.8.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

                                                           Contact and Connection

My wife and I will celebrate 29 years of marriage this year.  We started dating at 15 and married at 19.  The differences between dating in 1980 and dating in 2013 are infinitely vast.  Watching my best friend (41 years old) navigate the tumultuous waters of Internet dating is both amusing and confusing.  Scrolling through scores of women, profile after profile, reminds me of how long it has been since I needed a “date.”  Times are different and more and more people are finding love online.  What I find interesting though is my friend discounts woman after woman because they have little in common.  As one who studies marriage, rarely do I find a couple that are perfectly compatible.  Rather, as spouses share their story, I hear about the differences between them and how they’ve “grown” similar.

My wife and I are the same way.  She is relationally conservative.  Introverted by nature, she avoids large gatherings and is more comfortable with one or two select friends.  Meeting new people challenges her to step outside of her comfort zone.  I, on the other hand, am extremely outgoing.  Long before I understood the concept of leadership or embraced my ministry calling, I was leading my friends.  As a teenager, I made the weekend plans for our group.  It was my parent’s rotary phone that rang off the hook every Friday night as friends called to ask where we were going and what time we would meet.  I was the one asked to keep an eye “on things” when teachers left the class.  Yet, I led with humor and camaraderie, not manipulation and intimidation.  Joining the Air Force fresh out of high school opened the door for me to step into greater positions of leadership.  Because of my personality, supervisors often left me in charge or selected me to speak at seminars and banquets.

Nearing half a century old, I’ve found there are three distinct personality characteristics that were evident early in my life and have evolved to equip me as a relational leader: They are, (1) empathy, (2) extroversion, and (3) humor.  The first rule of McKay, Davis, & Fanning’s (2009) guidelines for making contact is “you have to give what you would like to receive, which means the interest, respect, and liking that you want must also be something you offer to others” (p. 209).  One of my strongest qualities is empathy.  Every person has a deep-seated need to know they mattered.  They want to know someone cared.  I care. 

In Emotional Intelligence, Daniel Goleman (1995) said, “Empathy builds on self-awareness; the more open we are to our own emotions, the more skilled we will be in reading feelings” (p. 96).  McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009) said, “The hallmark of a good conversationalist is the ability to listen in such a way that others feel heard” (p. 214).  My family often comments on my ability to make people feel important, understood, accepted, and appreciated.  I don’t force it or pretend.  In other words, I am not trying to demonstrate empathy and hoping the person senses my concern.  I am empathic and understanding, so they sense my authenticity.  Here’s the thing: I really do care.  I’ve been told I have a “coaches” gift in that I inspire and encourage.  I see in men and women the person they were meant to be but aren’t yet living.  As a result, I have a great passion to draw out people’s potential and inspire them to want to make a difference.   

McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009) identified the second basic rule for successfully making contact as, “you have to have an outward rather than inward focus” (p. 209).  Every day each one of us is surrounded by incredible stories.  Some of the stories are joyous, some inspirational, and others painfully sad.  When I look at people at work, at a restaurant, the mall, or the local gas station, I see books, movies, compelling dramas, and untold possibilities.  Every person that walks past each of us is made up of a complex history filled with countless life experiences, choices, and consequences.  There is a desire in me to find out what it is.  I am driven to know them and I’m willing to share my life in the process.

            Outgoing and friendly, my demeanor welcomes strangers.  As an extrovert, I must also use wisdom.  This trait must be managed, as you do not want to appear “strange” but rather “safe” and friendly.  I find great pleasure in meeting new people and the possibility of developing new friendships.  Growing up in alcoholic family, I found an escape in friends and relationships.  While age has taught me to enjoy the solitude of a calm day, the passion of reading, and the quiet time with my wife, I still get energized by crowds.

            I find that most people are guarded.  They walk through offices and social gatherings with invisible walls protecting them from allowing people too close.  I’ve found the best way to disarm difficult people or help the hidden come out from behind their walls is by using humor.  Not slapstick or corny jokes; but rather, real life stories of people dealing with the challenges of life.  In my younger years, I used humor as an escape.  It helped me deal with the difficult situations that unfolded within my home.  As I grew older, I used humor to hide my true feelings.  However, today as a mature adult, I’m able to use humor to bring laughter and joy into people’s lives.  I’ve found people are more willing to trust and be vulnerable when you can make them truly laugh.  Goleman (1995) said, “Laughing, like elation, seems to help people think more broadly and associate more freely, noticing relationships that might have eluded them otherwise” (p. 85).

            Listening with empathy, initiating connection, and relaxing people with laughter have equipped me to flow in and out of conversations within a room or a social gathering with ease.  From story to story and person to person, my wife and family watch as I shake hands and make contact.  The regularly joke and tell people, “Steve is running for mayor.”  These skills have helped me in the Air Force as well.  As a senior leader, empathy facilitated wise counsel.  Being an extrovert equipped me for public speaking and team exercises.  And lastly, in a deployed environment, stress can be very weighty.  Lightening the mood with laughter helps bring balance to an otherwise tense and uncertain situation.

            As an avid learner seeking continuous growth, one of the areas identified by McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009) that can enhance my communication abilities, is “to take risks, particularly by revealing your negative feelings” (p. 217).  Oftentimes, I’ll hold back on immediately professing certain negative feelings toward another person.  Rather, I ponder the thoughts, weigh them in light of all the information, and often let them fade away.  Unfortunately, they usually come up again but with greater ferocity than had I brought up the feeling initially.  

            My pastor and I had lunch today and he said, “You never know the depth of a friendship until it’s tested.”  By practicing the social contact skills identified in McKay, Davis, & Fanning’s Messages and continuing to develop my leadership skills, I will grow even stronger as a friend and a confidant.

Legacy lives.

Steve

References:

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Random House.

McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.