WEBVTT
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.669
I have been in situations where it's like,"You know, we are constraining our conversation here to these possibilities.
00:00:07.070 --> 00:00:17.370
Did you realize that there's this whole other range of possibilities that opens up in a direction that's completely tangential to what we're talking about but still relevant?" And when that happens, Eno is right.
00:00:17.570 --> 00:00:17.879
There's...
00:00:17.890 --> 00:00:21.339
it's like,"Oh my gosh." Yes, we could go there!" Right?
00:00:21.339 --> 00:00:29.879
Like, that opens up possibilities that were just not visible before because your solution space did not stretch in that direction.
00:00:34.901 --> 00:00:37.180
You're listening to Traction Heroes.
00:00:37.301 --> 00:00:41.290
Digging In to Get Results with Harry Max and Jorge Arango.
00:00:45.076 --> 00:00:45.805
Hey, Harry.
00:00:45.805 --> 00:00:46.856
It's so good to see you again.
00:00:47.765 --> 00:00:51.445
Ah, I really appreciate you making time today to do this.
00:00:51.606 --> 00:00:53.625
I know you're busy, and this is a lot of fun.
00:00:54.026 --> 00:00:55.055
Oh, this is a lot of fun.
00:00:55.095 --> 00:00:57.006
And I've brought a really fun reading today.
00:00:58.496 --> 00:01:03.865
It's a longer reading than I normally bring, so I'm just gonna jump right into it so that we can devote more time to it.
00:01:04.194 --> 00:01:04.855
Sounds great.
00:01:04.855 --> 00:01:05.370
Go for it
00:01:07.975 --> 00:01:16.695
"An axis is a name for a continuum of possibilities between two extreme positions: so the axis between black and white is a scale of grays.
00:01:17.906 --> 00:01:21.786
I can illustrate this idea by applying it to the description of haircuts.
00:01:22.965 --> 00:01:35.286
Rather than only being able to say of someone's haircut that it is, for example, masculine or feminine, we're as likely to say that it's quite masculine or quite feminine or unisexual somewhere in the middle.
00:01:36.195 --> 00:01:47.906
When we do this, we acknowledge that the sexual possibilities of haircuts don't just fall squarely at one or another of the polar positions, masculine or feminine, but somewhere on the wide range of hybrids between them.
00:01:48.706 --> 00:01:54.665
In fact, we would feel constrained if we couldn't make descriptions in these fuzzy, hybrid, terms.
00:01:55.456 --> 00:02:05.146
If you were trying to describe a particular haircut, however, you'd probably want to say more than,'It’s quite feminine,' or some other comment about its gender connotations.
00:02:05.835 --> 00:02:09.395
You might also want to locate its position along other axes.
00:02:09.885 --> 00:02:13.665
For instance, along the axis neat to shaggy.
00:02:14.626 --> 00:02:31.276
'It’s slightly shaggy,' or,'It’s very neat.' If that then gave you enough descriptive language to say everything you could imagine ever wanting to say about haircuts, you could locate every example you ever met somewhere on a two-dimensional space, like this sheet of paper.
00:02:32.216 --> 00:02:38.195
So you could make a kind of graph, masculine to feminine on one axis, neat to shaggy on the other.
00:02:38.966 --> 00:02:49.235
On this graph, which is a simple cross in 2D space, any point represents a particular position in relation to the four polar possibilities, masculine to feminine and neat to shaggy.
00:02:50.605 --> 00:02:53.735
I call each of these points a cultural address.
00:02:54.586 --> 00:02:57.596
I could equally well call it a stylistic address.
00:02:58.216 --> 00:03:29.235
It is the identification of a particular point in stylistic space, a'possible haircut.' Those four terms still constitute an impoverished language in which to describe most haircuts, and to describe a wide range of possible haircuts, we would need several others: natural to contrived, rebel to conformist, wild to civilized, futuristic to nostalgic, businesslike to bohemian.
00:03:30.225 --> 00:03:49.786
Each of these polar pairs defines another axis along which any particular haircut could be located, and each of these exists as a dimension in the haircut space, which now becomes multidimensional and no longer easily drawable on a sheet of paper." I'm going to skip ahead a little bit now.
00:03:51.295 --> 00:04:05.895
"What strikes you as interesting when you begin thinking about stylistic decisions or moral or political decisions as being locatable in a multiaxial space of this kind is the recognition that some axes don't yet exist.
00:04:06.746 --> 00:04:12.156
For example, with hairstyles, as far as I know, there is no dirty to clean axis.
00:04:13.116 --> 00:04:21.776
That's to say your hairdresser isn't likely to ask you,'How dirty would you like it?' It's still assumed that there is no discussion about it.
00:04:22.165 --> 00:04:32.286
The axis has not been opened up: we would all want it as clean as possible." I'm gonna skip now a little bit to the final section here.
00:04:33.975 --> 00:04:41.005
"With punk, a brand-new axis opened up: professionally cut to hacked about by a brainless cretin.
00:04:42.235 --> 00:04:56.925
As often happens, this appeared and was intended to be an anti-style style, and was shocking because we had never previously considered the possibility that the concept'style' and the concept'hacked about by a brainless cretin' could overlap one another.
00:04:57.935 --> 00:05:04.755
But as usual, the effect was not to overthrow and eliminate the idea of style, but to give it new places in which to extend itself.
00:05:05.836 --> 00:05:14.586
'Hacked about by a brainless cretin' became not the death of hairstyling, but the furthest outpost of a new continuum of possible choices about how hair could look.
00:05:15.615 --> 00:05:27.295
This is a transition from polar thinking, the kind of thinking that says it's either this or it's that, or everything that isn't clearly this must be that, to axial thinking.
00:05:28.625 --> 00:05:36.485
Axial thinking doesn't deny that it could be this or that, but suggests that it's more likely to be somewhere between the two.
00:05:37.646 --> 00:05:47.065
As soon as that suggestion is in the air, it triggers an imaginative process, an attempt to locate and conceptualize the newly acknowledged grayscale positions.
00:05:48.286 --> 00:05:56.865
I am interested in these transitions, these moments when a stable duality dissolves into a proliferating and unstable sea of hybrids.
00:05:57.795 --> 00:06:07.045
What happens at such times is that all sorts of things become possible: there is a tremendous energy release, a great burst of experimentation.
00:06:08.206 --> 00:06:21.485
Not only do the emerging possible positions on this newborn axis have to be discovered and experienced and articulated, they have to be placed in context with other existing axes to see what new resonances appear."
00:06:23.785 --> 00:06:25.024
That is mind-blowing.
00:06:27.824 --> 00:06:29.375
Where in the world?
00:06:29.714 --> 00:06:36.464
I mean, the only author I can imagine having written something like that would be Rory Sutherland, but I'm guessing it's not Rory.
00:06:36.814 --> 00:06:43.024
So what was that reading and where did it come from and how did you find it?
00:06:43.125 --> 00:06:44.264
And oh my God...
00:06:46.069 --> 00:07:07.199
And actually I'll have to say this, this is one of the most challenging texts I've read here to excerpt because the entire essay is it's an essay, and it's fabulous, and It's one of those where like every sentence is meaningful and adds to the overall thing.
00:07:08.600 --> 00:07:12.100
So, I was tempted to read the whole thing, but then that would've used up all of our time.
00:07:12.649 --> 00:07:21.790
I'll tell you who the author is and this essay which, is available online and I'll link to it from the notes, but it is part of a book.
00:07:23.339 --> 00:07:24.850
The author is Brian Eno.
00:07:26.670 --> 00:07:27.480
No way.
00:07:27.670 --> 00:07:37.040
Yes, and this appeared in a book that is celebrating its 30th anniversary, I believe.
00:07:38.259 --> 00:07:41.939
It's called, A Year with Swollen Appendices.
00:07:44.875 --> 00:07:55.740
The, bulk of the book,"The Year," is Eno's diary for the year 1995, as I recall, and then he appended a bunch of essays at the end, those are the appendices.
00:07:56.069 --> 00:07:59.860
And the reading today comes from one of the appendices.
00:08:00.379 --> 00:08:10.240
It's called"Axis Thinking." And I came to this essay because I'm a big fan of Eno's.
00:08:11.060 --> 00:08:17.550
He's a systems doer, not just like a systems thinker, but he's like a systems doer, right?
00:08:17.689 --> 00:08:24.689
He's someone who's built a career out of understanding how systems, like cybernetic systems, work.
00:08:25.689 --> 00:08:31.300
And I saw he had written this book and I was like,"I gotta read it." And it was such a weird and mind-bending book, and I've...
00:08:31.680 --> 00:08:36.549
It's one of the few books that I've read many, many times over.
00:08:36.549 --> 00:08:38.409
It's become one of my favorite books.
00:08:41.129 --> 00:08:44.120
And I always learn something new when I read through it.
00:08:45.570 --> 00:08:49.090
But this essay in particular stood out to me, and it's been...
00:08:50.154 --> 00:08:58.005
you know that there are some works that become part of your core mental models?
00:08:58.816 --> 00:08:59.166
Yes.
00:08:59.850 --> 00:09:05.756
Like, if you were to diagram your mental models into a stack diagram, like these would be in the lower layers, right?
00:09:05.947 --> 00:09:08.397
These are part of the operating system.
00:09:09.047 --> 00:09:27.220
And I remember when I was a kid, the feedback that I got from other people, particularly my dad, was that two of my kind of overriding attributes were tenacity and what Eno calls polar thinking in that essay, right?
00:09:27.909 --> 00:09:31.139
This tendency to see things in terms of black and white.
00:09:31.460 --> 00:09:32.360
Extremes, right?
00:09:33.409 --> 00:10:03.259
"It's either this or it's that, and I'm like all about this!" And like,"the other thing is just bad, bad, bad!" And I remember my dad having pull me aside several times during my youth and say,"You know there are gray areas in between things." And one of the most important things that I learned from my dad is that the extremes are usually not where the right answers lie.
00:10:03.559 --> 00:10:10.250
Usually, there are subtleties and there are gray areas.
00:10:10.649 --> 00:10:15.580
And when I read this essay, it felt, first of all, so validating.
00:10:15.590 --> 00:10:31.139
It felt,"Oh my gosh, this is what my dad was talking about." But here it is presented, it is framed in such a way where it feels like a tool, like a mental tool that I can use, and I have used it.
00:10:31.409 --> 00:10:43.047
And I was trying to think prior to this conversation if I had a clear example, and I can't think of any that come up that would make for good stories because they're usually like small things in projects.
00:10:43.527 --> 00:11:00.236
This essay has given me the ability to be sitting in a meeting, for example, where people are discussing possible directions for a project and thinking,"We've lapsed into polar thinking." And then like questioning the axes.
00:11:00.236 --> 00:11:01.797
Like, is this the valid axis?
00:11:02.047 --> 00:11:04.106
Are these the valid endpoints in the axis?
00:11:04.706 --> 00:11:08.027
Are there other axes that we're not considering, right?
00:11:08.027 --> 00:11:12.996
Like this notion of multidimensional axis thinking has become really foundational for me.
00:11:13.397 --> 00:11:31.869
And I have seen this, where people become stuck in the axes that they've defined and have made them somehow like holy writ, when in reality they're just constructs and they're up for questioning, right?
00:11:32.756 --> 00:11:41.996
I have so many things to say, starting with the fact that kinda mind-blowing to me that you and I had kind of the opposite experience with our fathers, right?
00:11:41.996 --> 00:11:46.767
'Cause my dad was hyperpolar in his thinking in some ways, right?
00:11:46.767 --> 00:12:00.057
He was a theoretical plasma physicist, and everything was like,"Do it my way or you'll die." If you change the oil wrong, you're gonna die, right?
00:12:00.057 --> 00:12:04.996
If you cut this piece of paper wrong, you're gonna die, right?
00:12:05.287 --> 00:12:07.157
Everything was like super extreme.
00:12:07.197 --> 00:12:22.047
And I used to make him crazy because I was super artistic, and everything was some variant,"Oh, you could do it like this," or,"You could do it like that," or,"You could do it this other way." And it used to infuriate him because I was always looking for some other angle.
00:12:22.076 --> 00:12:26.267
I was looking for some shade of gray in terms of understanding things.
00:12:26.267 --> 00:12:28.197
So I think it's just interesting that you and I had that.
00:12:28.527 --> 00:12:33.736
that's just a random interesting fact that you and I grew up with almost polar opposite.
00:12:36.287 --> 00:12:41.567
The next thing I was gonna comment on was, like, I, don't want my martinis shaggy, but I'll take them dirty.
00:12:41.567 --> 00:12:42.496
Bringing the haircut to the martini for a minute.
00:12:42.496 --> 00:12:43.866
Then, I was going to ask you if you've read any of Barry Johnson's work on polarity management.
00:12:43.986 --> 00:12:44.096
that at all?
00:12:44.096 --> 00:12:44.466
No, I have not.
00:12:44.466 --> 00:13:01.616
What's the name of the author?
00:13:02.567 --> 00:13:08.937
Barry Johnson, and he wrote a book, and I know there's a number of books out there both by him and by some other folks.
00:13:09.386 --> 00:13:11.576
The topic is polarity management.
00:13:11.576 --> 00:13:21.216
And I encountered polarity management because, as you're probably aware, I did this TEDx talk years and years ago called The Problem Is Not The Problem, right?
00:13:21.386 --> 00:13:30.836
And the idea was it was a diagnostic framework for thinking about problems and opportunities.
00:13:31.336 --> 00:13:40.875
And I'm not gonna get into the details of it, but one of the waypoints in that framework was a dilemma, where you have a polar situation.
00:13:41.615 --> 00:14:00.715
And in that early thinking of mine where I put that TEDx talk together, I introduced the idea that the intervention strategy for a dilemma is to make a decision because you have a polar situation.
00:14:01.184 --> 00:14:48.514
And a fellow who I just have an extraordinary amount of respect for and am fortunate to call him a friend, don't see him everywhere near as much as I'd like to, Hoyt Ng, who I worked with at DreamWorks, introduced me to polarity management because he was looking at that problem framing and diagnostic thinking model that I did in the in The Problem Is Not The Problem, and he said,"You know, there's a more effective way to think about dilemmas than through this polar frame, and that's to actually to use polarity management, is to think about it in terms of polarities and where they can continue off the ends," in a sense.
00:14:48.514 --> 00:15:14.335
And if you're trying to manage for one side or the other, for each pole there are upsides and downsides, and if you aim in one direction for the purposes of gaining the upsides, you need to stay alert to the downsides starting to surface so that you can shift back to the other strategy, if you will, which might allow you to start decreasing the downsides and increasing the upsides of the other pole.
00:15:14.644 --> 00:15:21.634
And so that topic, polarity management, is applied in a number of different domains.
00:15:21.634 --> 00:15:33.335
It's certainly used in problem-solving, it's used in management, it's used in all sorts of interesting places.
00:15:33.335 --> 00:15:40.985
But I wasn't sure if you'd run into that because, it was a revelation for me in...
00:15:42.375 --> 00:15:45.544
I had this overly simplistic view of what a dilemma is.
00:15:45.875 --> 00:15:47.955
"Oh, you just need to make a decision and go.
00:15:47.955 --> 00:16:00.924
You just need to lean into one side or the other and choose." And Hoyt, basically said,"You know, that's lovely and incomplete.
00:16:01.184 --> 00:16:28.674
And a more complete way is to think about leaning toward one with a recognition that there are pluses and minuses on that end of a pole, and that you want a more dynamic, fluid way of relating to the dimension and to the points on that pole in order to be able to manage it more effectively." And I wish I could come up with a good story, but I can't right now, but I did wanna bring that up.
00:16:31.465 --> 00:16:36.144
The other thing too, gosh, you and I have talked about Brian Eno before.
00:16:36.144 --> 00:16:46.404
I think we stumbled on the fact that both of us love"Spinning Away," the song, which is probably one of my favorites of all time.
00:16:47.965 --> 00:16:53.424
And I crank that one up and go crazy.
00:16:54.134 --> 00:16:57.884
But what I am curious about from you...
00:16:57.975 --> 00:17:04.184
So it sounds like this was polar versus axial.
00:17:04.244 --> 00:17:11.894
Can you maybe simply describe the axial side of the equation again?
00:17:11.894 --> 00:17:15.335
Like, how to think about an axial thought or axial dimension?
00:17:15.765 --> 00:17:19.365
I think what he's saying, and I think this is slightly different from polarity management.
00:17:19.365 --> 00:17:20.345
They're obviously related.
00:17:20.565 --> 00:17:28.045
I mean, I obviously haven't read that work, but just from based on your description, it does sound like it's highly related.
00:17:29.914 --> 00:17:36.192
I think the point that Eno is making with this essay is that you can act...
00:17:36.892 --> 00:17:39.551
first of all, he's saying things are not black and white, right?
00:17:39.551 --> 00:17:43.432
Like, he's saying oftentimes the answers lie somewhere in the middle.
00:17:43.622 --> 00:17:52.204
I've come to understand that in most cases, the answer lies somewhere in the And"somewhere in the middle" depends on a lot of things.
00:17:52.454 --> 00:17:54.984
I didn't read a lot of things from the essay, like I was saying earlier.
00:17:55.474 --> 00:18:03.964
He talks about, for example, the fact that the location of some of these things is relative based on your culture, for example, right?
00:18:04.164 --> 00:18:12.384
What one culture considers to be masculine might be different than what another culture considers to be masculine.
00:18:12.484 --> 00:18:15.025
And, he doesn't say this explicitly, but that's the gist, right?
00:18:15.025 --> 00:18:16.865
Like these things are contextually dependent.
00:18:18.404 --> 00:18:47.683
But the other thing that I think is important and here's where I see a slight difference with polarity management is that he's saying that even if we understand that we are working within these matrices, in the case of the two-dimensional thing or these multidimensional constructs, and we locate the solution that we're working on as a point in that space, what he calls a cultural address, that's one way of working.
00:18:47.683 --> 00:18:51.894
Like you're working within an accepted set of axes.
00:18:53.180 --> 00:19:02.089
But he's also saying another way to work is to question the axes altogether, right?
00:19:02.269 --> 00:19:23.787
That's why I wanted to include that section about the punk rock thing, because he's saying one of the innovations of that aesthetic is that all of a sudden these unstyled styles became one of the possible ends in one of these axes.
00:19:24.386 --> 00:19:26.207
That hadn't been the case before.
00:19:26.237 --> 00:19:35.166
And his point is when something like that happens, there's a release of energy, there's a release of creativity.
00:19:35.967 --> 00:19:39.227
And that's one of the things that's become so important to me.
00:19:39.426 --> 00:19:59.386
And I'm trying to verbalize it as a difference I see with polarity management because the way that you describe polarity management, it's about knowing which side of the spectrum you're leaning towards, whether there are tendencies as opposed to like firm answers on one side or the other, that kind of thing.
00:20:00.116 --> 00:20:10.406
Maybe, and now I'm reading into it, maybe that also includes like knowing if there are any particular measurements you can make to tell where you lie on that spectrum.
00:20:11.260 --> 00:20:17.037
There's all these things that we can do to locate ourselves in that space, right?
00:20:17.446 --> 00:20:22.906
But what he's saying here is you can also open new dimensions to the space.
00:20:23.237 --> 00:20:25.747
That is also a possibility for an intervention.
00:20:26.967 --> 00:20:44.237
And that's what's been so useful to me, because I've been in situations and again, I can't cite any right off the top, but I have been in situations where it's like,"You know, we are constraining our conversation here to these possibilities.
00:20:44.636 --> 00:20:54.936
Did you realize that there's this whole other range of possibilities that opens up in a direction that's completely tangential to what we're talking about but still relevant?" And when that happens, Eno is right.
00:20:55.136 --> 00:20:55.446
There's...
00:20:55.457 --> 00:20:58.906
it's like,"Oh my gosh." Yes, we could go there!" Right?
00:20:58.906 --> 00:21:07.446
Like, that opens up possibilities that were just not visible before because your solution space did not stretch in that direction.
00:21:07.787 --> 00:21:09.136
I think that's the main thing.
00:21:09.186 --> 00:21:09.967
That's the point.
00:21:10.551 --> 00:21:11.261
So, I love that.
00:21:11.721 --> 00:21:20.041
And that's helpful, because I was trying to operationalize this for myself, and I realized that I think one of the things that people value about...
00:21:20.971 --> 00:21:26.321
At least for the folks that have worked with me, one of the things that people value is my"creativity," right?
00:21:26.632 --> 00:21:36.061
But I think that sense of creativity is just having a propensity toward moving away from polar thinking with flexibility and alacrity, right?
00:21:36.471 --> 00:21:54.071
And I think one of the techniques that I use for doing that is to shift from dimensional thinking and working within a cultural address book, if you will, to shifting to what questions could we be asking?
00:21:54.265 --> 00:22:03.805
I wanted to open the sort of the conversation with you about, what are the techniques that you use for expanding that space?
00:22:03.954 --> 00:22:07.055
For me, it's like,"Okay, I'm stuck.
00:22:07.365 --> 00:22:10.315
Let's just lay all the questions out we can think about.
00:22:10.345 --> 00:22:20.285
And then, let's compare them against each other and see which ones win so that then we can look at why the ones that are winning are winning.
00:22:20.875 --> 00:22:34.894
What is it about the winning questions that adds something to the conversation or the dimensional space that we're trying to work our way through?" So that's a technique that I use for"being creative," and that seems to work for me.
00:22:36.255 --> 00:22:38.914
Do you have any go-to techniques?
00:22:39.329 --> 00:22:53.707
Yeah, one of my favorites is splashing bright neon pink paint on the invisible elephant in the room, which is a luxury that you can have when you are an external consultant, right?
00:22:54.737 --> 00:23:02.507
And in particular, I like naming emerging tensions.
00:23:03.067 --> 00:23:11.116
So when I'm working in a project, oftentimes in the opening moves of the project, right?
00:23:11.116 --> 00:23:21.250
Like, when you're first having sessions and getting to understand the problem space and all that, one of the things that I'm on the lookout for are critical tensions that are emerging.
00:23:21.319 --> 00:23:25.470
So let's use one that came up in one of our previous conversations.
00:23:25.519 --> 00:23:37.869
Remember we talked about this project where the design team wanted an experience that was friction-free, and the compliance team wanted an experience that checked all the legal boxes.
00:23:37.920 --> 00:23:53.789
Those two things are in tension, and if you've noted that there is this tension inherent to this project, then you can start reverse engineering the axial space that leads to the emergence of that tension.
00:23:54.190 --> 00:24:11.309
For example, in that case, there is an axial space that is implied by the tension, which is there are experiences that are either very onerous, like they take a lot of effort, and on the opposite extreme are experiences that are completely friction-free, right?
00:24:11.829 --> 00:24:26.339
And then there's another dimension, there's another axis, which is there are experiences that are gonna get us in trouble with the SEC, and then there are experiences that are going to make all the lawyers very, very happy, right?
00:24:26.339 --> 00:24:31.380
And I can't give you a shortcut for what that would be right now, but I'm saying that would be an axis, right?
00:24:31.930 --> 00:24:39.069
And when you start naming it and painting the possible space, then the point is solutions might open up.
00:24:39.400 --> 00:24:46.490
But the point that Eno makes here is that that's like the natural solution space for that particular tension.
00:24:46.809 --> 00:24:57.630
The question then becomes what other axis might you open up that might help alleviate the pressure felt maybe in the extremes of that solution space?
00:25:00.878 --> 00:25:03.548
This has been a great conversation, and I super appreciate it.
00:25:03.868 --> 00:25:22.423
I know we're coming up on our time here, but it just feels like a rich opportunity to give people more tools for thinking more effectively when they're either lacking clarity or struggling to get traction in a particular direction.
00:25:23.634 --> 00:25:24.703
Well, it's certainly helped me.
00:25:24.874 --> 00:25:29.223
And I'm going to link to the essay in the show notes, so do check it out.
00:25:29.253 --> 00:25:30.094
Thank you, Harry.
00:25:30.094 --> 00:25:32.273
It's been awesome, sharing this with you.
00:25:33.183 --> 00:25:34.334
All right, I'll talk to you soon, Jorge.
00:25:37.164 --> 00:25:41.605
Thank you for listening to Traction Heroes with Harry Max and Jorge Arango.
00:25:42.265 --> 00:25:49.944
Check out the show notes at tractionheroes.com and if you enjoyed the show, please leave us a rating in Apple's podcasts app.
00:25:50.305 --> 00:25:50.755
Thanks.
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.669
I have been in situations where it's like,"You know, we are constraining our conversation here to these possibilities.
00:00:07.070 --> 00:00:17.370
Did you realize that there's this whole other range of possibilities that opens up in a direction that's completely tangential to what we're talking about but still relevant?" And when that happens, Eno is right.
00:00:17.570 --> 00:00:17.879
There's...
00:00:17.890 --> 00:00:21.339
it's like,"Oh my gosh." Yes, we could go there!" Right?
00:00:21.339 --> 00:00:29.879
Like, that opens up possibilities that were just not visible before because your solution space did not stretch in that direction.
00:00:34.901 --> 00:00:37.180
You're listening to Traction Heroes.
00:00:37.301 --> 00:00:41.290
Digging In to Get Results with Harry Max and Jorge Arango.
00:00:45.076 --> 00:00:45.805
Hey, Harry.
00:00:45.805 --> 00:00:46.856
It's so good to see you again.
00:00:47.765 --> 00:00:51.445
Ah, I really appreciate you making time today to do this.
00:00:51.606 --> 00:00:53.625
I know you're busy, and this is a lot of fun.
00:00:54.026 --> 00:00:55.055
Oh, this is a lot of fun.
00:00:55.095 --> 00:00:57.006
And I've brought a really fun reading today.
00:00:58.496 --> 00:01:03.865
It's a longer reading than I normally bring, so I'm just gonna jump right into it so that we can devote more time to it.
00:01:04.194 --> 00:01:04.855
Sounds great.
00:01:04.855 --> 00:01:05.370
Go for it
00:01:07.975 --> 00:01:16.695
"An axis is a name for a continuum of possibilities between two extreme positions: so the axis between black and white is a scale of grays.
00:01:17.906 --> 00:01:21.786
I can illustrate this idea by applying it to the description of haircuts.
00:01:22.965 --> 00:01:35.286
Rather than only being able to say of someone's haircut that it is, for example, masculine or feminine, we're as likely to say that it's quite masculine or quite feminine or unisexual somewhere in the middle.
00:01:36.195 --> 00:01:47.906
When we do this, we acknowledge that the sexual possibilities of haircuts don't just fall squarely at one or another of the polar positions, masculine or feminine, but somewhere on the wide range of hybrids between them.
00:01:48.706 --> 00:01:54.665
In fact, we would feel constrained if we couldn't make descriptions in these fuzzy, hybrid, terms.
00:01:55.456 --> 00:02:05.146
If you were trying to describe a particular haircut, however, you'd probably want to say more than,'It’s quite feminine,' or some other comment about its gender connotations.
00:02:05.835 --> 00:02:09.395
You might also want to locate its position along other axes.
00:02:09.885 --> 00:02:13.665
For instance, along the axis neat to shaggy.
00:02:14.626 --> 00:02:31.276
'It’s slightly shaggy,' or,'It’s very neat.' If that then gave you enough descriptive language to say everything you could imagine ever wanting to say about haircuts, you could locate every example you ever met somewhere on a two-dimensional space, like this sheet of paper.
00:02:32.216 --> 00:02:38.195
So you could make a kind of graph, masculine to feminine on one axis, neat to shaggy on the other.
00:02:38.966 --> 00:02:49.235
On this graph, which is a simple cross in 2D space, any point represents a particular position in relation to the four polar possibilities, masculine to feminine and neat to shaggy.
00:02:50.605 --> 00:02:53.735
I call each of these points a cultural address.
00:02:54.586 --> 00:02:57.596
I could equally well call it a stylistic address.
00:02:58.216 --> 00:03:29.235
It is the identification of a particular point in stylistic space, a'possible haircut.' Those four terms still constitute an impoverished language in which to describe most haircuts, and to describe a wide range of possible haircuts, we would need several others: natural to contrived, rebel to conformist, wild to civilized, futuristic to nostalgic, businesslike to bohemian.
00:03:30.225 --> 00:03:49.786
Each of these polar pairs defines another axis along which any particular haircut could be located, and each of these exists as a dimension in the haircut space, which now becomes multidimensional and no longer easily drawable on a sheet of paper." I'm going to skip ahead a little bit now.
00:03:51.295 --> 00:04:05.895
"What strikes you as interesting when you begin thinking about stylistic decisions or moral or political decisions as being locatable in a multiaxial space of this kind is the recognition that some axes don't yet exist.
00:04:06.746 --> 00:04:12.156
For example, with hairstyles, as far as I know, there is no dirty to clean axis.
00:04:13.116 --> 00:04:21.776
That's to say your hairdresser isn't likely to ask you,'How dirty would you like it?' It's still assumed that there is no discussion about it.
00:04:22.165 --> 00:04:32.286
The axis has not been opened up: we would all want it as clean as possible." I'm gonna skip now a little bit to the final section here.
00:04:33.975 --> 00:04:41.005
"With punk, a brand-new axis opened up: professionally cut to hacked about by a brainless cretin.
00:04:42.235 --> 00:04:56.925
As often happens, this appeared and was intended to be an anti-style style, and was shocking because we had never previously considered the possibility that the concept'style' and the concept'hacked about by a brainless cretin' could overlap one another.
00:04:57.935 --> 00:05:04.755
But as usual, the effect was not to overthrow and eliminate the idea of style, but to give it new places in which to extend itself.
00:05:05.836 --> 00:05:14.586
'Hacked about by a brainless cretin' became not the death of hairstyling, but the furthest outpost of a new continuum of possible choices about how hair could look.
00:05:15.615 --> 00:05:27.295
This is a transition from polar thinking, the kind of thinking that says it's either this or it's that, or everything that isn't clearly this must be that, to axial thinking.
00:05:28.625 --> 00:05:36.485
Axial thinking doesn't deny that it could be this or that, but suggests that it's more likely to be somewhere between the two.
00:05:37.646 --> 00:05:47.065
As soon as that suggestion is in the air, it triggers an imaginative process, an attempt to locate and conceptualize the newly acknowledged grayscale positions.
00:05:48.286 --> 00:05:56.865
I am interested in these transitions, these moments when a stable duality dissolves into a proliferating and unstable sea of hybrids.
00:05:57.795 --> 00:06:07.045
What happens at such times is that all sorts of things become possible: there is a tremendous energy release, a great burst of experimentation.
00:06:08.206 --> 00:06:21.485
Not only do the emerging possible positions on this newborn axis have to be discovered and experienced and articulated, they have to be placed in context with other existing axes to see what new resonances appear."
00:06:23.785 --> 00:06:25.024
That is mind-blowing.
00:06:27.824 --> 00:06:29.375
Where in the world?
00:06:29.714 --> 00:06:36.464
I mean, the only author I can imagine having written something like that would be Rory Sutherland, but I'm guessing it's not Rory.
00:06:36.814 --> 00:06:43.024
So what was that reading and where did it come from and how did you find it?
00:06:43.125 --> 00:06:44.264
And oh my God...
00:06:46.069 --> 00:07:07.199
And actually I'll have to say this, this is one of the most challenging texts I've read here to excerpt because the entire essay is it's an essay, and it's fabulous, and It's one of those where like every sentence is meaningful and adds to the overall thing.
00:07:08.600 --> 00:07:12.100
So, I was tempted to read the whole thing, but then that would've used up all of our time.
00:07:12.649 --> 00:07:21.790
I'll tell you who the author is and this essay which, is available online and I'll link to it from the notes, but it is part of a book.
00:07:23.339 --> 00:07:24.850
The author is Brian Eno.
00:07:26.670 --> 00:07:27.480
No way.
00:07:27.670 --> 00:07:37.040
Yes, and this appeared in a book that is celebrating its 30th anniversary, I believe.
00:07:38.259 --> 00:07:41.939
It's called, A Year with Swollen Appendices.
00:07:44.875 --> 00:07:55.740
The, bulk of the book,"The Year," is Eno's diary for the year 1995, as I recall, and then he appended a bunch of essays at the end, those are the appendices.
00:07:56.069 --> 00:07:59.860
And the reading today comes from one of the appendices.
00:08:00.379 --> 00:08:10.240
It's called"Axis Thinking." And I came to this essay because I'm a big fan of Eno's.
00:08:11.060 --> 00:08:17.550
He's a systems doer, not just like a systems thinker, but he's like a systems doer, right?
00:08:17.689 --> 00:08:24.689
He's someone who's built a career out of understanding how systems, like cybernetic systems, work.
00:08:25.689 --> 00:08:31.300
And I saw he had written this book and I was like,"I gotta read it." And it was such a weird and mind-bending book, and I've...
00:08:31.680 --> 00:08:36.549
It's one of the few books that I've read many, many times over.
00:08:36.549 --> 00:08:38.409
It's become one of my favorite books.
00:08:41.129 --> 00:08:44.120
And I always learn something new when I read through it.
00:08:45.570 --> 00:08:49.090
But this essay in particular stood out to me, and it's been...
00:08:50.154 --> 00:08:58.005
you know that there are some works that become part of your core mental models?
00:08:58.816 --> 00:08:59.166
Yes.
00:08:59.850 --> 00:09:05.756
Like, if you were to diagram your mental models into a stack diagram, like these would be in the lower layers, right?
00:09:05.947 --> 00:09:08.397
These are part of the operating system.
00:09:09.047 --> 00:09:27.220
And I remember when I was a kid, the feedback that I got from other people, particularly my dad, was that two of my kind of overriding attributes were tenacity and what Eno calls polar thinking in that essay, right?
00:09:27.909 --> 00:09:31.139
This tendency to see things in terms of black and white.
00:09:31.460 --> 00:09:32.360
Extremes, right?
00:09:33.409 --> 00:10:03.259
"It's either this or it's that, and I'm like all about this!" And like,"the other thing is just bad, bad, bad!" And I remember my dad having pull me aside several times during my youth and say,"You know there are gray areas in between things." And one of the most important things that I learned from my dad is that the extremes are usually not where the right answers lie.
00:10:03.559 --> 00:10:10.250
Usually, there are subtleties and there are gray areas.
00:10:10.649 --> 00:10:15.580
And when I read this essay, it felt, first of all, so validating.
00:10:15.590 --> 00:10:31.139
It felt,"Oh my gosh, this is what my dad was talking about." But here it is presented, it is framed in such a way where it feels like a tool, like a mental tool that I can use, and I have used it.
00:10:31.409 --> 00:10:43.047
And I was trying to think prior to this conversation if I had a clear example, and I can't think of any that come up that would make for good stories because they're usually like small things in projects.
00:10:43.527 --> 00:11:00.236
This essay has given me the ability to be sitting in a meeting, for example, where people are discussing possible directions for a project and thinking,"We've lapsed into polar thinking." And then like questioning the axes.
00:11:00.236 --> 00:11:01.797
Like, is this the valid axis?
00:11:02.047 --> 00:11:04.106
Are these the valid endpoints in the axis?
00:11:04.706 --> 00:11:08.027
Are there other axes that we're not considering, right?
00:11:08.027 --> 00:11:12.996
Like this notion of multidimensional axis thinking has become really foundational for me.
00:11:13.397 --> 00:11:31.869
And I have seen this, where people become stuck in the axes that they've defined and have made them somehow like holy writ, when in reality they're just constructs and they're up for questioning, right?
00:11:32.756 --> 00:11:41.996
I have so many things to say, starting with the fact that kinda mind-blowing to me that you and I had kind of the opposite experience with our fathers, right?
00:11:41.996 --> 00:11:46.767
'Cause my dad was hyperpolar in his thinking in some ways, right?
00:11:46.767 --> 00:12:00.057
He was a theoretical plasma physicist, and everything was like,"Do it my way or you'll die." If you change the oil wrong, you're gonna die, right?
00:12:00.057 --> 00:12:04.996
If you cut this piece of paper wrong, you're gonna die, right?
00:12:05.287 --> 00:12:07.157
Everything was like super extreme.
00:12:07.197 --> 00:12:22.047
And I used to make him crazy because I was super artistic, and everything was some variant,"Oh, you could do it like this," or,"You could do it like that," or,"You could do it this other way." And it used to infuriate him because I was always looking for some other angle.
00:12:22.076 --> 00:12:26.267
I was looking for some shade of gray in terms of understanding things.
00:12:26.267 --> 00:12:28.197
So I think it's just interesting that you and I had that.
00:12:28.527 --> 00:12:33.736
that's just a random interesting fact that you and I grew up with almost polar opposite.
00:12:36.287 --> 00:12:41.567
The next thing I was gonna comment on was, like, I, don't want my martinis shaggy, but I'll take them dirty.
00:12:41.567 --> 00:12:42.496
Bringing the haircut to the martini for a minute.
00:12:42.496 --> 00:12:43.866
Then, I was going to ask you if you've read any of Barry Johnson's work on polarity management.
00:12:43.986 --> 00:12:44.096
that at all?
00:12:44.096 --> 00:12:44.466
No, I have not.
00:12:44.466 --> 00:13:01.616
What's the name of the author?
00:13:02.567 --> 00:13:08.937
Barry Johnson, and he wrote a book, and I know there's a number of books out there both by him and by some other folks.
00:13:09.386 --> 00:13:11.576
The topic is polarity management.
00:13:11.576 --> 00:13:21.216
And I encountered polarity management because, as you're probably aware, I did this TEDx talk years and years ago called The Problem Is Not The Problem, right?
00:13:21.386 --> 00:13:30.836
And the idea was it was a diagnostic framework for thinking about problems and opportunities.
00:13:31.336 --> 00:13:40.875
And I'm not gonna get into the details of it, but one of the waypoints in that framework was a dilemma, where you have a polar situation.
00:13:41.615 --> 00:14:00.715
And in that early thinking of mine where I put that TEDx talk together, I introduced the idea that the intervention strategy for a dilemma is to make a decision because you have a polar situation.
00:14:01.184 --> 00:14:48.514
And a fellow who I just have an extraordinary amount of respect for and am fortunate to call him a friend, don't see him everywhere near as much as I'd like to, Hoyt Ng, who I worked with at DreamWorks, introduced me to polarity management because he was looking at that problem framing and diagnostic thinking model that I did in the in The Problem Is Not The Problem, and he said,"You know, there's a more effective way to think about dilemmas than through this polar frame, and that's to actually to use polarity management, is to think about it in terms of polarities and where they can continue off the ends," in a sense.
00:14:48.514 --> 00:15:14.335
And if you're trying to manage for one side or the other, for each pole there are upsides and downsides, and if you aim in one direction for the purposes of gaining the upsides, you need to stay alert to the downsides starting to surface so that you can shift back to the other strategy, if you will, which might allow you to start decreasing the downsides and increasing the upsides of the other pole.
00:15:14.644 --> 00:15:21.634
And so that topic, polarity management, is applied in a number of different domains.
00:15:21.634 --> 00:15:33.335
It's certainly used in problem-solving, it's used in management, it's used in all sorts of interesting places.
00:15:33.335 --> 00:15:40.985
But I wasn't sure if you'd run into that because, it was a revelation for me in...
00:15:42.375 --> 00:15:45.544
I had this overly simplistic view of what a dilemma is.
00:15:45.875 --> 00:15:47.955
"Oh, you just need to make a decision and go.
00:15:47.955 --> 00:16:00.924
You just need to lean into one side or the other and choose." And Hoyt, basically said,"You know, that's lovely and incomplete.
00:16:01.184 --> 00:16:28.674
And a more complete way is to think about leaning toward one with a recognition that there are pluses and minuses on that end of a pole, and that you want a more dynamic, fluid way of relating to the dimension and to the points on that pole in order to be able to manage it more effectively." And I wish I could come up with a good story, but I can't right now, but I did wanna bring that up.
00:16:31.465 --> 00:16:36.144
The other thing too, gosh, you and I have talked about Brian Eno before.
00:16:36.144 --> 00:16:46.404
I think we stumbled on the fact that both of us love"Spinning Away," the song, which is probably one of my favorites of all time.
00:16:47.965 --> 00:16:53.424
And I crank that one up and go crazy.
00:16:54.134 --> 00:16:57.884
But what I am curious about from you...
00:16:57.975 --> 00:17:04.184
So it sounds like this was polar versus axial.
00:17:04.244 --> 00:17:11.894
Can you maybe simply describe the axial side of the equation again?
00:17:11.894 --> 00:17:15.335
Like, how to think about an axial thought or axial dimension?
00:17:15.765 --> 00:17:19.365
I think what he's saying, and I think this is slightly different from polarity management.
00:17:19.365 --> 00:17:20.345
They're obviously related.
00:17:20.565 --> 00:17:28.045
I mean, I obviously haven't read that work, but just from based on your description, it does sound like it's highly related.
00:17:29.914 --> 00:17:36.192
I think the point that Eno is making with this essay is that you can act...
00:17:36.892 --> 00:17:39.551
first of all, he's saying things are not black and white, right?
00:17:39.551 --> 00:17:43.432
Like, he's saying oftentimes the answers lie somewhere in the middle.
00:17:43.622 --> 00:17:52.204
I've come to understand that in most cases, the answer lies somewhere in the And"somewhere in the middle" depends on a lot of things.
00:17:52.454 --> 00:17:54.984
I didn't read a lot of things from the essay, like I was saying earlier.
00:17:55.474 --> 00:18:03.964
He talks about, for example, the fact that the location of some of these things is relative based on your culture, for example, right?
00:18:04.164 --> 00:18:12.384
What one culture considers to be masculine might be different than what another culture considers to be masculine.
00:18:12.484 --> 00:18:15.025
And, he doesn't say this explicitly, but that's the gist, right?
00:18:15.025 --> 00:18:16.865
Like these things are contextually dependent.
00:18:18.404 --> 00:18:47.683
But the other thing that I think is important and here's where I see a slight difference with polarity management is that he's saying that even if we understand that we are working within these matrices, in the case of the two-dimensional thing or these multidimensional constructs, and we locate the solution that we're working on as a point in that space, what he calls a cultural address, that's one way of working.
00:18:47.683 --> 00:18:51.894
Like you're working within an accepted set of axes.
00:18:53.180 --> 00:19:02.089
But he's also saying another way to work is to question the axes altogether, right?
00:19:02.269 --> 00:19:23.787
That's why I wanted to include that section about the punk rock thing, because he's saying one of the innovations of that aesthetic is that all of a sudden these unstyled styles became one of the possible ends in one of these axes.
00:19:24.386 --> 00:19:26.207
That hadn't been the case before.
00:19:26.237 --> 00:19:35.166
And his point is when something like that happens, there's a release of energy, there's a release of creativity.
00:19:35.967 --> 00:19:39.227
And that's one of the things that's become so important to me.
00:19:39.426 --> 00:19:59.386
And I'm trying to verbalize it as a difference I see with polarity management because the way that you describe polarity management, it's about knowing which side of the spectrum you're leaning towards, whether there are tendencies as opposed to like firm answers on one side or the other, that kind of thing.
00:20:00.116 --> 00:20:10.406
Maybe, and now I'm reading into it, maybe that also includes like knowing if there are any particular measurements you can make to tell where you lie on that spectrum.
00:20:11.260 --> 00:20:17.037
There's all these things that we can do to locate ourselves in that space, right?
00:20:17.446 --> 00:20:22.906
But what he's saying here is you can also open new dimensions to the space.
00:20:23.237 --> 00:20:25.747
That is also a possibility for an intervention.
00:20:26.967 --> 00:20:44.237
And that's what's been so useful to me, because I've been in situations and again, I can't cite any right off the top, but I have been in situations where it's like,"You know, we are constraining our conversation here to these possibilities.
00:20:44.636 --> 00:20:54.936
Did you realize that there's this whole other range of possibilities that opens up in a direction that's completely tangential to what we're talking about but still relevant?" And when that happens, Eno is right.
00:20:55.136 --> 00:20:55.446
There's...
00:20:55.457 --> 00:20:58.906
it's like,"Oh my gosh." Yes, we could go there!" Right?
00:20:58.906 --> 00:21:07.446
Like, that opens up possibilities that were just not visible before because your solution space did not stretch in that direction.
00:21:07.787 --> 00:21:09.136
I think that's the main thing.
00:21:09.186 --> 00:21:09.967
That's the point.
00:21:10.551 --> 00:21:11.261
So, I love that.
00:21:11.721 --> 00:21:20.041
And that's helpful, because I was trying to operationalize this for myself, and I realized that I think one of the things that people value about...
00:21:20.971 --> 00:21:26.321
At least for the folks that have worked with me, one of the things that people value is my"creativity," right?
00:21:26.632 --> 00:21:36.061
But I think that sense of creativity is just having a propensity toward moving away from polar thinking with flexibility and alacrity, right?
00:21:36.471 --> 00:21:54.071
And I think one of the techniques that I use for doing that is to shift from dimensional thinking and working within a cultural address book, if you will, to shifting to what questions could we be asking?
00:21:54.265 --> 00:22:03.805
I wanted to open the sort of the conversation with you about, what are the techniques that you use for expanding that space?
00:22:03.954 --> 00:22:07.055
For me, it's like,"Okay, I'm stuck.
00:22:07.365 --> 00:22:10.315
Let's just lay all the questions out we can think about.
00:22:10.345 --> 00:22:20.285
And then, let's compare them against each other and see which ones win so that then we can look at why the ones that are winning are winning.
00:22:20.875 --> 00:22:34.894
What is it about the winning questions that adds something to the conversation or the dimensional space that we're trying to work our way through?" So that's a technique that I use for"being creative," and that seems to work for me.
00:22:36.255 --> 00:22:38.914
Do you have any go-to techniques?
00:22:39.329 --> 00:22:53.707
Yeah, one of my favorites is splashing bright neon pink paint on the invisible elephant in the room, which is a luxury that you can have when you are an external consultant, right?
00:22:54.737 --> 00:23:02.507
And in particular, I like naming emerging tensions.
00:23:03.067 --> 00:23:11.116
So when I'm working in a project, oftentimes in the opening moves of the project, right?
00:23:11.116 --> 00:23:21.250
Like, when you're first having sessions and getting to understand the problem space and all that, one of the things that I'm on the lookout for are critical tensions that are emerging.
00:23:21.319 --> 00:23:25.470
So let's use one that came up in one of our previous conversations.
00:23:25.519 --> 00:23:37.869
Remember we talked about this project where the design team wanted an experience that was friction-free, and the compliance team wanted an experience that checked all the legal boxes.
00:23:37.920 --> 00:23:53.789
Those two things are in tension, and if you've noted that there is this tension inherent to this project, then you can start reverse engineering the axial space that leads to the emergence of that tension.
00:23:54.190 --> 00:24:11.309
For example, in that case, there is an axial space that is implied by the tension, which is there are experiences that are either very onerous, like they take a lot of effort, and on the opposite extreme are experiences that are completely friction-free, right?
00:24:11.829 --> 00:24:26.339
And then there's another dimension, there's another axis, which is there are experiences that are gonna get us in trouble with the SEC, and then there are experiences that are going to make all the lawyers very, very happy, right?
00:24:26.339 --> 00:24:31.380
And I can't give you a shortcut for what that would be right now, but I'm saying that would be an axis, right?
00:24:31.930 --> 00:24:39.069
And when you start naming it and painting the possible space, then the point is solutions might open up.
00:24:39.400 --> 00:24:46.490
But the point that Eno makes here is that that's like the natural solution space for that particular tension.
00:24:46.809 --> 00:24:57.630
The question then becomes what other axis might you open up that might help alleviate the pressure felt maybe in the extremes of that solution space?
00:25:00.878 --> 00:25:03.548
This has been a great conversation, and I super appreciate it.
00:25:03.868 --> 00:25:22.423
I know we're coming up on our time here, but it just feels like a rich opportunity to give people more tools for thinking more effectively when they're either lacking clarity or struggling to get traction in a particular direction.
00:25:23.634 --> 00:25:24.703
Well, it's certainly helped me.
00:25:24.874 --> 00:25:29.223
And I'm going to link to the essay in the show notes, so do check it out.
00:25:29.253 --> 00:25:30.094
Thank you, Harry.
00:25:30.094 --> 00:25:32.273
It's been awesome, sharing this with you.
00:25:33.183 --> 00:25:34.334
All right, I'll talk to you soon, Jorge.
00:25:37.164 --> 00:25:41.605
Thank you for listening to Traction Heroes with Harry Max and Jorge Arango.
00:25:42.265 --> 00:25:49.944
Check out the show notes at tractionheroes.com and if you enjoyed the show, please leave us a rating in Apple's podcasts app.
00:25:50.305 --> 00:25:50.755
Thanks.
