Embracing Confusion: What Leaders Do When They Don't Know What to Do
Author(s): Barry C. Jentz and Jerome T. Murphy
Source: The Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 86, No. 5 (Jan., 2005), pp. 358-366
Published by: Phi Delta Kappa International
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20441787
Accessed: 22-03-2016 14:53 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Phi Delta Kappa International is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Phi Delta Kappan.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Embracing Confusion:
$S What Leaders Do When They
Don't Know What to Do
Rapid change is making confusion a defining feature of
management in the 21st century. Paradoxically, the authors
argue, leaders who accept their confusion can turn a perceived
weakness into a resource for learning and effective action.
BY BARRY C. JENTZ AND JEROME T. MURPHY
HILE we didn't know it at the time, the seed for this article was planted
some 20 years ago when Jerome Murphy became the new - and often con
fused - associate dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Blind
sided by unexpected problems and baffled by daunting institutional chal
lenges, Murphy often lost his sense of direction and simply didn't know what
to do. To make matters worse, he felt like a phony. "For God's sake," he said
to himself, "isn't a Harvard dean supposed to have the answers?"
Enter Barry Jentz, an organizational consultant who helped Murphy learn
that confusion is not a weakness to be ashamed of but a regular and inevitable condition of leader
ship. By learning to embrace their confusion, managers are able to set in motion a constructive
process for addressing baffling organizational issues. In fact, confusion turns out to be a fruitful en
vironment in which the best managers thrive by using the instability around them to open up better
lines of communication, test their old assumptions and values against changing realities, and develop
more creative approaches to problem solving.
THE LOST LEADER SYNDROME
The two of us were recently reminded of our early encounters with confusion when we had the
BARRY C. JENTZ is an organizational consultant to public and private schools, corporations, and private firms and a
lecturer in the Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. JEROME T MURPHY is Harold
Howe 11 Professor of Education and dean emeritus, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge,
Mass. He is currently a visiting professor at the Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsy/vania, Philadel- _
phia. The authors would like to thank their colleagues and the participants in the Superintendents Leadership Program,_
a? collaborative effort of the Graduate School of Education and the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard Univer
sity; Ron Heifetz for his enduring insights; and Sama?ntha Tan for her research assistance and counsel. The authors would_
particularly like to thank Thomas Champion for his extraordinary contributions to this article, and they are especially_
grateful to the Wallace Foundation for its support._
358 PHI DELTA KAPPAN Illustration: Artville
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
that we have come to call the Lost Leader Syndrome.
The standard pathology may look familiar. No matter
how capable or well prepared, managers regularly find
all of these superintendents had long since mastered themselves confronting bewildering events, perplexing
opportunity to work on issues of leadership with a dis
tinguished group of urban school superintendents. Giv
en the challenge of getting to their present positions,
the skill of presenting a confident, take-charge demean
information, or baffling situations that steal their time
or. But after developing enough trust to talk frankly
and hijack their carefully planned agendas. Disorient
with one another, these seasoned superintendents ad
mitted that they were often confused and sometimes
simply didn't know what they were doing - not that
ed by developments that just don't make sense and by
challenges that don't yield to easy solutions, these man
they could ever admit that in public.
This candid discussion revealed a pattern of behavior
agers become confused - sometimes even lost - and
don't know what to do.
Many managers inevitably will respond to these symp
toms by simply denying that they are confused. Others
will hide their confusion - their search for sense because they see it as a liability, telling themselves, "I'll
lose authority if I acknowledge that I can't provide di
T :w;ffi:f<w-si fiNg
lHi e r : 0j X . g
. $ R i iat: r ~.w
- <J 9~~~~~~~I
rection - I'm supposed to know the answers!" Acting as
if they are in control while really not knowing what to
do, these managers reflexively and unilaterally attempt
to impose quick fixes to restore their equilibrium.
Sometimes, these managerial responses may even suc
ceed in making the immediate symptoms of problems
go away, but they rarely address underlying causes. More
often, they lead to bad decision making, undermine cru
cial communication with colleagues and subordinates,
and make managers seem distant and out of touch. In
the long run, managers who hide their confusion also
damage their organizations' ability to learn from experi
ence and grow. Yet, despite these drawbacks, few man
agers can resist hiding their confusion.
We have observed this dysfunctional pattern hun
dreds of times in the public, private, and nonprofit sec
tors - in government agencies, corporations, universi
ties, and foundations - and believe that it is becom
ing more common as the pace of change accelerates.
Our recent discussions with school superintendents
suggest that this pattern of confusion and hiding or
covering up is particularly prevalent in the pressure
cooker world of public education. Parents, taxpayers,
and political and business leaders expect educators to
address issues for which there are no ready answers.
Tony Wagner maintains that "the overwhelming ma
jority of school and district leaders do not know how
to help teachers better prepare all students for the high
er learning standards."' Similarly, Richard Elmore ar
gues that "knowing the right thing to do is the cen
tral problem of school improvement."'
In these pages, we will look at a method by which
managers can transform their confusion from a liabil
ity into a resource and describe how this resource can
be used to promote learning, new ideas, and the abili
JANUARY 2005 359
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ty to take effective action. We call this method Reflec
tive Inquiry and Action (RIA), a five-step process through
which managers can assert their need to make sense and
enlist individuals and teams without sacrificing their
goals, values, or judgment. We believe that in the all too
frequent situation of not knowing what to do, manag
fusion. 'When the tape is played back, participants are
surprised to see the discrepancy between how they be
have and how they think they behave. They watch how
their retreat into hiding produces interpersonal dynam
ics characterized by posturing, guessing, arguing, and
ers can make progress and maintain their authority by
accusing - when the truth is that everyone is equal
ly confused.6
knowing how to move forward.
The RIA process is designed primarily for "micro"
work, such as that in private meetings between indi
viduals and small groups. But, as we shall see, several
By contrast, when one of the participants is able to
acknowledge her confusion without fear or shame
and to invoke the rigor of a structured inquiry - the
videotape reveals a palpable change in the participants'
of the guiding principles behind RIA - embracing
sense of energy, competence, and confidence. For a man
your confusion, structuring a process for moving for
ager who is capable of creating the conditions neces
ward, listening reflectively - can be quite useful on
a larger scale and even in public venues. Significantly,
these ideas can help leaders make headway while strug
gling with the daunting "macro" challenge of educat
ing all children in every school, often a cause of con
fusion.3
sary for interpersonal learning and for those who have
witnessed these methods at work, this moment of dis
covery raises hope that the RIA process can be the foun
dation for shared progress. For advocates of RIA, these
revelations are a powerful argument against dismiss
ing these ideas as too soft for a tough world.
THE "OH, NO!" MOMENT
THE TALE OF THE TAPE
Is "confusion" even the best term for that sense of
Imagine being the head of a team charged with pre
disorientation caused by having the rug pulled out from venting deadly radiation leaks at a nuclear power plant.
under one's feet or by being baffled in the face of an
You hear an alarm sound. Based on years of experience
unyielding challenge? It is certainly a loaded word in and training - and a quick review of the data - you
management circles, and to suggest that an educator make an educated guess about what the problem might
should acknowledge confusion, even to close and trust
ed colleagues, is risky. 'When a New York City teacher
recently posted on her weblog: "I have no idea how to
teach these kids, and I'm not sure I ever will," her prin
cipal called her in to assess her emotional state.4
Even if managers can privately bring themselves to ac
cept their confusion, can they truly use it as a resource
for effective management? Many managers dismiss this
idea as suspiciously touchy-feely. After all, phrases such
as "embracing your confusion" sound too much like
"getting in touch with your inner child" - hardly the
basis for making progress in a rough-and-tumble world.
Some managers may be unsettled by what they see as
the "soft" nature of RIA, even if deep down they know
that there is truth in the old diche that real men never
ask for directions - instead they end up driving around
in circles.5 (In the RIA model, real managers accept that
they are lost and metaphorically ask for directions.)
Nowhere is this skepticism more evident than in
RIA workshops. To overcome it and to get managers
to take these ideas seriously, we have learned to put par
ticipants in front of a video camera and ask them to re
spond to difficult scenarios that thrust them into con
"For the last time, we're not trying to see who can
finish first.11
360 PHI DELTA KAPPAN
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
be. Suddenly, one of your team members reports that
a key piece of information from the reactor systems
situation and its impact. Often this initial investiga
doesn't fit your hypothesis. In fact, it's the exact oppo
site of what it should be. You have encountered what
reality, and we find ourselves confused or even lost.
we refer to as an "Oh, No!" moment. You can't make
sense of what is going on. As you sit stunned in front
tion fails to reconcile our old assumptions with our new
One of the ironies of these disorienting situations
(and the "Oh, No!" moments that signal them) is that
we often forget how much we rely on our world to
make sense until our world is turned upside down by
new information or changing circumstances.
of your reactor-systems console, your team stares at
you, waiting for a decision.
Now imagine that you are a member of the team,
looking nervously to your leader. The last thing the
GOING INTO HIDING
situation requires is someone who:
In the face of an "Oh, No!" moment, few of us are
* instinctively blames circumstances or other peo
willing to reveal our confusion or our sense that maybe
ple when things go wrong;
* says he is open to input but regards any feedback
we are lost. To admit such a possibility opens the door
not only to the fear of losing authority but also to a
as criticism and doesn't listen to others;
* hates uncertainty and opts for action even when host of other troubling emotions and thoughts:
* Shame and loss of face: "You'll look like a fool!"
totally confused; or
* Panic and loss of control: "You've let this get out
* takes a polarized view of leadership in which any
of hand!"
thing less than take-charge decision making shows ab
* Incompetence and incapacitation: "You don't know
ject weakness.
We all understand that a manager who neither lis what you're doing!"
At the gut level, many managers believe that saying
tens to nor learns from others can quickly turn a messy
problem into a nightmare. "Oh, No!" moments are
familiar to all of us. They are caused not only by emer
gencies but also by a wide variety of everyday situa
tions that regularly arise out of the blue and call into
question our fundamental assumptions. We just can't
make sense of what's going on. Taken aback by these
"I'm at a loss here" is tantamount to declaring "I am not
fit to lead."
So, when faced with disorienting situations, most
managers deny, hide, or opt for the quick fix, rather
than openly acknowledge that they feel confused.7 De
nial takes the form of blaming themselves or others,
situations, managers become distracted from their stra
usually the person who delivers the counterintuitive
tegic agenda and reflexively respond to "Oh, No!" mo
ments like the following:
* A change in technology renders a valued program
information. Hiding leads to keeping their mouths shut
in self-protection, not wanting to risk exposure as any
thing other than completely composed and confident.
obsolete.
(One former school principal calls this the "art of the
* A promotion that everyone knows to be "ours"
goes to a rival.
bluff.") Many managers unilaterally go for the quick
* A key administrator resigns without warning, of
fering an explanation that we simply do not believe.
* After repeated efforts to address a strategic chal
lenge, we get feedback that our latest attempt is a fail
symptom rather than a root cause. In time, their unwill
ure.
fix, often making the wrong choice or dealing with a
ingness to consult with others and reluctance to seek
out new information isolates these managers even fur
ther - having earned a reputation for not getting it,
they are offered less and less candid information by
* The long hours that produce triumph at work al
so produce trouble at home.
In moments like these - and in many situations
that are more mundane but no less challenging - our
minds begin to teem with questions. Our stomachs
churn with emotion. Our old bearings no longer keep
us on course. We struggle to reorient ourselves because
the assumptions that gave meaning to our daily lives
are suddenly rendered inadequate. We grope for new
information that can help us make sense of this new
their colleagues and staff.
Managers who hide their confusion are also send
ing out a strong signal that open acknowledgment of
confusion is not acceptable behavior. Everyone else learns
to hide as well. Organizations can spend thousands of
dollars every year on development seminars that teach
the power of becoming a "learning organization" that
grows and improves over time, but managers who hide
their own difficulties send the opposite message. They
ensure that no growth occurs, that coworkers have no
JANUARY 2005 361
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
to herself. "What the hell is the problem? These are
zation drives around in circles, making the same mis my top people! How could they miss the mark on a
plan that should have been as easy as falling off a log?"
takes again and again.
And what did she do with her confusion? She buried
incentive to communicate openly, and that the organi
THE HIGH COST OF HIDING: A CASE IN POINT
Hiding is not only the natural managerial response
to the confiision created bv dramat
ic "Oh, No!" moments but also a
common reaction to many mundane,
everyday interactions, as illustrated
in the following case of a meeting of
a school district project team that
went disastrously awry.
The superintendent was starting
a reform effort with a tight and ag
gressive timetable. The changes had
been long discussed, but never in de
tail, and now it was time to make
definite plans. In her personal kick
it and admonished the group for not finding the right
"focus." Crucial weeks and many hundreds of staff hours
had been wasted.
by putting into place an overt arid orderly
process, you not only maintain your authority
but aloo contain the confusion, avoid
premature closure, and enlist your team in
finding the best way to move forward. You
turn your confusion into a resource.
off meeting with her business manager, chief deputy,
and a senior aide, the superintendent said, "We haven't
had much time to talk about the approach, but I'm
really not so concerned about that because the prob
lem here is really straightforward." The deputy super
intendent was confused. "'Not much time' is an un
derstatement!" he thought to himself.
He wanted to say, "I don't want to appear stupid,
but I need more clarification. I'm not at all sure of the
approach you expect." Instead, he chose to hide his con
fusion, saying, "I think I understand your perspective,
but can we talk about the approach a little bit more?"
To which the superintendent responded, "I'm afraid
I'm overdue for a meeting. If you get stuck, give me a
call. I've got full confidence in the team. We should
reconvene in two weeks."
As the superintendent left the room, the deputy
thought, "This looks about as clear as mud - but I
In a project post mortem, the superintendent ad
mitted that she had withheld her confusion after read
ing the team's first draft and asked why her people had
not voiced their own confusion during the first proj
ect meeting. Team members gradually acknowledged
that they had concealed their confusion because they
were afraid of looking stupid, making her angry, dis
appointing her, and being judged as not up to the job.
THE RIA MODEL
To succeed, managers must learn to embrace a new
approach - one that is deceptively easy to describe
but remarkably hard to practice. Yet this method can
be applied to a wide range of unexpected problems,
from time-sensitive emergencies to long-term projects.
Here are five steps for you to consider when you are
confused and uncertain about how to get from Point
A to Point B (or even unsure of what or where Point
B might be). By putting into place an overt and or
They'll lose confidence." Deciding once again to with
hold his confusion, the deputy said to the business man
derly process, you not only maintain your authority
ager, "It's too bad we didn't have more time with the but also contain the confusion, avoid premature clo
can't let the others think that I'm not on top of things.
superintendent, but I think we've got enough to go on.
sure (caused by internal or external pressure to act too
Let's flesh out the work plan." Meanwhile, the busi
quickly), and enlist your team in finding the best way
ness manager was thinking, "Boy, I'm glad I'm not the
to move forward. You turn your confusion into a re
one who has to make sense of this - but it looks like
source.
the deputy is clear. It'll probably work out all right."
When the superintendent saw the draft plan prepared
tice their implementation should be seen as flexible and
by her team, she was completely caught off guard.
"They're only about 60% on target here," she thought
These steps are presented as a sequence, but in prac
opportunistic. They should also be seen as a process
within a larger framework: you may need to use them
362 PHI DELTA KAPPAN
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
in multiple cycles or multiple venues in order to achieve
* "Leadership is not about pretending to have all the
the best effect.
Because going public with your confusion runs coun
answers but about having the courage to search with
others to discover solutions."
ter to conventional thinking, we suggest care in doing
Step 2. Assertyour need to make sense. Having prepared
yourself mentally, you now need to engage in dialogue.
so in circles that go beyond trusted team members,
advisors, and confidants. RIA should be tried out ini
tially in limited but critical venues (e.g., with those
who report to you directly), and even then you should
lay the groundwork carefully by discussing the antici
pated change in your problem-solving approach. Sched
ule a special meeting, distribute this article for discus
sion, and be open about the potential pros and perceived
cons of RIA.
This face-to-face interaction will normally take the form
of a meeting in which you describe your confusion so
that others will know the point you (and they) are start
ing from. You might say any one of the following:
* "This new information just doesn't make sense to
me.
* "I have a few thoughts about this, but I'll be the
first to say we don't have enough information to sug
Step 1. Embrace your confusion. When confronted
with disorienting problems, you need to do the one
thing you least want to do - acknowledge to your
self that you are confused and that you see this con
dition as a weakness. Indeed, the biggest hurdle in get
ting from Point A to Point B is first getting to Point
gest a definitive course of action."
* "Before I can make a decision, I need help in un
derstanding this situation and our options for dealing
with it."
Unless you come to recognize that being confused
is a normal - even necessary - consequence of lead
A - that is, acknowledging your true starting point.
ership, it will be difficult for you to state firmly that
Getting to Point A is extremely difficult because dis
orienting situations typically produce a painful split be
tween feeling confused and listening to the loud voice
you are at a loss. How you deliver this message is as
important as the words you use. Unless you unambig
uously assert, with conviction and without apology,
that says that "real" leaders are not supposed to feel this
your sense of being confused, others will fulfill your
worst expectations - concluding that you are weak
typically respond in primitive fight-or-flight terms, say - and they will be less willing to engage in a shared
way. In the grip of this ambivalence, managers will
process of interpersonal learning.
At the same time, publicly asserting your confusion
helps others to do the same - to claim their own con
fusion?" Neither of these predictable responses offers
fusion and begin trying to make sense out of a disori
a way to get beyond your inner conflict.
enting situation. By taking the lead, you make it eas
Rather than fight or flee, you need both to recognize
ier for others to follow. Together you and your team
and accept your tacit, yet firmly held, assumption that
confusion means weakness.8 You might take a deep breath will often discover that you share a common problem:
how best to structure a process that can turn confusion
and say to yourself, "I'm confused and that makes me
feel weak." Paradoxically, fully embracing where you into a productive, shared search for innovative solu
ing to themselves, "What's wrong with me for getting
into this mess?" or "How do I get rid of this awful con
start will not lead you to wallow in your confusion, but
tions.
rather frees you to move beyond your inner conflict.
Step 3. Structure the interaction. Publicly acknowl
edging that you are confused is important, but it is
only a beginning. Without skipping a beat, you must
next provide a structure for the search for new bear
ings that both asserts your authority and creates the
conditions for others to join you. You provide such a
structure by stating the purpose of the joint inquiry,
offering a set of specific steps or procedures to fulfill
that purpose, providing the timetable, and identify
ing the criteria and methods by which decisions will
You can then do what you most need to do - ques
tion your assumption that confusion is a weakness that
needs to be banished and entertain a new assumption
that confusion can be embraced as a resource for lead
ership. Because changing a firmly held belief is so dif
ficult, it helps to develop a personal mantra. Here are
some examples:
* "Confusion is not weakness, but the strength to
take in new information at the risk of challenging my
zasic assumptlons.
be made. By doing so, you will tacitly send the message,
* "Leadership is being out in front where I have no
"To be confiused is not incapacitating. I may not know
choice but to encounter situations that make no sense what course to take, but I know the next step. I know
how to structure a process that we can go through to
tO me.
JANUARY 2005 363
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
gether to make sense of our new situation and move
forward." In other words, you announce that you are
metaphorically asking for directions but that you are
come.
of reflective listening:
* "You seem to be saying that x caused y. Do I have
As an example, let's return to our story of the nu
clear power plant executive and recall that after hear
ing the alarm he receives a report
thrown into a state of confusion.
While it will not be easy for him, he
must acknowledge his confusion in
a spirit of inquiry so that others
might question his theories or offer
explanations for the discrepancy be
tween the expected and the actual
report. To establish a good structure
for this discussion, the manager might
say, "Listen up! We've got two min
utes, and then you'll get my decision.
she was trying to express. Finally, you come to a full stop
and allow the other person the time to confirm, retract,
or modify what she originally said. Here's the sound
still in charge of a process that will produce a clear out
telling him the exact opposite of
what he expected. Stunned, he is Reflective
reflecting back in your own words the essence of what
that right?"
listening is especially dificult when
you most need to do it - in situations where
new informatiotn threatens to undercut your
cherished assumptions. You tend to be blind
to what may seem obvious to those around
you; to you, their perceptions sound stupid,
wrong, and intentionally hurtful.
Between then and now, I'm going
to talk about what's got me confused, and you are going
to give me new information, feedback, or explanations
for what is going on."
As in this example, it normally makes sense to start
a meeting by revealing your state of mind, describing
how you propose to structure the interaction, and then
offering suggestions about the type of data you need
to clarify and resolve the problem.9
Step 4. Listen reflectively and learn. You now need to
listen reflectively as others respond to you. In the con
text of the RIA model, "reflective" carries both of its
common meanings: you reflect thoughtfully on what
other people have to say, and you consciously attempt
* "You're torn between two explanations. On one
hand, you think x accounts for z; on the other hand,
you thinky does?"
* "So you're angry because I am saying one thing
and yet doing quite another?"
Reflective listening sounds simple but is actually an
acquired skill that requires repeated practice, like hit
ting a backhand in a fast-paced tennis match. And
even after you have learned how to do it, you will still
encounter major challenges in applying it to real-world
situations. One such challenge is dealing with people
who typically are not very good listeners themselves.
In conversation with them, it will be only natural to
to reflect your understanding of what was said back
respond to their reflexive style by falling back into the
to the speaker.10
same pattern. Indeed, our habit of responding in kind
is such a powerful force that it has a name: the Norm
Reflective listening is not normal listening. Ordi
narily, most of us listen from a reflexive mindset that
of Reciprocity. ("If you don't listen to me, I'll be damned
automatically judges the other person. This mindset
is embodied in the question: "What's right or wrong
if I'll listen to you.")
To make matters worse, reflective listening is espe
cially difficult when you most need to do it - in sit
with what was just said and what am I going to do
about it?" In effect, your first mental act is to judge
uations where new information threatens to undercut
the worth of what was said, and your first verbal act is
your cherished assumptions. Because you are inside
to agree or disagree. This typically leads to a confron
your frame of reference, you tend to be blind to what
tation, not a joint inquiry.
may seem obvious to those around you; to you, their
perceptions sound stupid, wrong, and intentionally
By contrast, reflective listening requires you to put
yourself in the other person's shoes and, with an open
mind, reflect upon her words, tone, demeanor, and non
verbal behavior. You then test what you have heard by
hurtful.
For all these reasons, surprisingly little reflective lis
tening goes on in most organizations. Yet, as hard as
364 PHI DELTA KAPPAN
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
reflective listening may be, it is an essential tool for
checking the depth and accuracy of your understand
ing and thereby avoiding action based on untested in
teachers were not going to be scapegoats.
Confronted on all sides with demands for action,
the superintendent used RIA to interrupt the blame
ferences. Reflective listening also ensures that the other
people in the discussion feel that they have been heard
game, gain time for analysis, and avoid a rush to a quick
and understood, thus increasing their inclination to
trust and collaborate with you. By mastering and us
ing this skill, you produce conditions for joint inquiry
rather than confrontation.
fix, which he thought would exacerbate factional di
visions without solving the problem. He was also con
fident that he could deal with his confusion without
appearing weak or out of control.
Meeting privately with each board member, with
Step 5. Openly process your effort to make sense. Once
small groups of the district's administrative staff, and
vate search for new bearings. When you find the cour
age to externalize your intellectual process, you invite
others to engage in interpersonal learning. Working to
gether, you can discover the limitations of one anoth
approach, with only slightly less candor, with business
you have taken in what others are saying - some of with the head of the teacher union, he asserted his con
which will probably be puzzling and may be upsetting fusion about the test scores; he listened reflectively to
you need to process your responses out loud. You accusations, demands, and explanations for the poor
must suppress the automatic instinct to process inter results; and he argued that action should follow a bet
nally and simply announce the products of your pri
ter understanding of the problems. He used a similar
er's thinking - limitations that you cannot know as
long as you process privately. Here are three examples:
* "That's news to me. I haven't heard that before."
* "That really throws me. How do you get to that
from what you were saying?"
* "That helps me a lot by pointing out x."
If you end up using all of the available time with
out coming to a clear resolution, bring closure by ex
plicitly summarizing where you are in the learning and
decision-making process and describing next steps.
You can say something like, "Clearly, we have a dis
agreement here. Let's state it and put it aside for now.
We should move on and get next steps in place, includ
ing agreement on when and how this will be finally
decided."
ANOTHER CASE IN POINT: RIA ON A LARGER SCALE
and community leaders, parent groups, and the local
media. By listening carefully to everyone's concerns, the
superintendent was able to garner support for a period
of structured inquiry.
After these initial meetings, the superintendent cre
ated an inquiry group of teachers and administrators,
charging it to analyze existing student data to evalu
ate the competing explanations for the poor results.
As the group examined the data and tested hypothe
ses, everyone realized that they were all in the same
boat deeply confused. None of their assumptions
or preconceptions seemed to account for the low test
scores. That shared recognition freed them to work in
concert.
Within weeks, the inquiry group came up with three
significant findings: most of the nonreaders had entered
the district after the third grade and so had missed the
district's exemplary phonics program; the nonreaders
were clustered in several schools in disadvantaged neigh
borhoods; and the transfers of students from one grade
This case illustrates one way that the techniques of
RIA apply not only to isolated and limited interac
tions and meetings but also to larger-scale initiatives.
Two months into a new job, a school superinten
dent received the results of a statewide literacy assess
ment: 25% of his district's eighth-graders couldn't
read! A flash flood of dismay, blame, and calls for im
mediate action stormed in from the community, the
media, and the schools. Behind the scenes, the school
board demanded that the superintendent institute an
emergency remedial reading program in all elementary
schools and issue a strong "shape up" memo to the en
tire teaching staff. The teacher union made it clear that
"You reach an age where shredded homework is a
lot easier to digest."
JANUARY 2005 365
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
to the next were uncoordinated, so that those who need
ed long-term remedial assistance were not getting it.
On the basis of this new, shared understanding of
the problems, targeted programs were implemented
to address them, which led to an improvement in test
scores the following year. Moreover, the superintendent
gained widespread credibility because his more meas
ured and informed approach avoided an ill-considered
quick fix and produced results.
"So what?" a skeptic might say. "So the superinten
dent did his job - big deal." The fact remains that,
every day, managers in similar situations don't do their
jobs because they are afraid of their own confusion.
Instead of acting on it with some version of the steps
described in this article, they insist on denying it, hid
ing it from others, or trying to banish it with a quick
fix. And, all too often, the problems get worse.
CONFUSION AS A RESOURCE
In the 21st century, as rapid change makes confu
sion a defining characteristic of management, the com
petence of managers will be measured not only by what
they know but increasingly by how they behave when
they lose their sense of direction and become confused.
Organizational cultures that cling to the ideal of an
all-knowing, omnicompetent executive will pay a high
cost in time, resources, and progress, and will be send
ing the message to managers that it is better to hide
their confusion than to address it openly and construc
tively.
premature closure. It enlists the manager's team in find
ing the best way to make progress and promotes hon
esty, trust, and mutual respect. It turns a perceived weak
ness - confusion - into a resource for learning and
effective action.
Armed with confusion and the RIA process, leaders
can take timely, constructive action - even when they
don't yet know what to do.
1. Tony Wagner, "Beyond Testing: The 7 Disciplines for Strengthening
Instruction," Education Week, 12 November 2003, pp. 28, 30.
2. Richard E Elmore, "Knowing the Right Thing to Do: School Im
provement and Performance-Based Accountability," NGA Center for
BEST PRACTICES, August 2003, p. 9, available at www.nga.org/center.
Click on the center's logo, and search on the author's name.
3. When applied to these "macro" agendas, RIA may be seen as one of
many methodologies available to managers to pursue the larger-scale
challenges of long-term "adaptive" leadership, as described by Ronald
A. Heifetz in Leadership Without Easy Answers (Cambridge, Mass.: Har
vard University Press, 1994).
4. Mark Toner, "'Blogs' Help Educators Share Ideas, Air Frustrations,"
Education Week, 14 January 2004, p. 8. For many leaders, it's easier and
safer to employ humor or euphemism. After a long lifetime of blazing
trails on the American frontier, the octogenarian Daniel Boone was asked
by a friend if he'd ever been lost. "No, I can't say as ever I was lost,"
Boone replied, "but I was bewildered once for three days."
5. One of the lessons of our work in leadership and management train
ing is that this pattern of reluctance to seek assistance from others when
lost and confused is not limited to male executives. It may be that many
female leaders respond to the pressure of gender bias by cultivating a
style even more self-contained than that of their male colleagues.
6. The discrepancies between the way managers behave and the way they
think they behave has been extensively reviewed in the literature on lead
ership theory. See Chris Argyris and Donald Sch?n, Theory in Practice:
Increasing Professional Effectiveness (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1974).
7. Some managers may take their confusion "off-line," revealing it to
only one or two trusted confidants. As one veteran executive told us, "I
could never say something like that in public. It would be suicide. But
there are people I can call on to talk things through with and then say,
'This conversation never happened.'" Unfortunately, while this safety
valve provides a valuable sense of relief for managers wrestling with con
fusion, it doesn't help others in the organization to open up and engage
in productive conversation.
Being confused, however, does not mean being in
capacitated. Indeed, one of the most liberating truths
of leadership is that confusion is not quicksand from
which to escape but rather the potter's clay of leader
ship - the very stuff with which managers work. Man
agers can be confused yet still be able to exercise com 8. For a similar argument about the power of basic assumptions, see Robert
Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey, "The Real Reason People Won't Change,"
petent leadership by structuring a process of reflective
Harvard Business Review, November 2001, pp. 85-92.
inquiry and action. The MA process can help address 9. The joint inquiry model can be used on as small a scale as a one-on
the maddening "Oh, No!" moments that can hijack
one meeting but has obvious applications in larger situations as well. At
the macro level, one of the best situations in which to use this model is
managerial agendas. Equally important, the central prin
when a manager starts a new job. Obviously, entering a new workplace
ciples of RIA can be quite useful on a larger stage (as is bound to throw a manager into a state of confusion, since historical
seen in the school superintendent case) and can help explanations of key events will vary from source to source and there will
be little initial guidance about which sources are reliable (i.e., whom to
managers make progress when taking on longer-term,
strategic challenges, such as meeting the public expec trust). For a detailed account of "structuring the interaction" at the be
ginning of a new job, see Barry Jentz et al., Entry (McGraw-Hill, 1982;
tation that all children learn.
reprint, Leadership & Learning, Inc., available from www.entrybook.
com).
The RIA process provides an orderly way for man
10. The definitive article on listening remains Carl R. Rogers and F. J.
agers to move forward when they don't know what to
Roethlisberger, "Barriers and Gateways to Communication," Harvard
do, to stay "in charge" when confused and even lost, to
Business Review, November/December 1991, pp. 105-11. (Originally
contain shared confiusion and work on it, and to avoid
published in 1952.) IC
366 PHI DELTA KAPPAN
This content downloaded from 128.103.149.52 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:53:48 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions