Clark B. Montgomery Fast Company - Alternative Book #1 September, 1999

Systems Leadership Oshry, B. Leading Systems: Lessons From the Power Lab. Boston: Power and Systems, 1999.

Systems Leadership: Lessons From the Power Lab is a book written by Barry Oshry regarding his observations and subsequent conclusions about social system dynamics. The effort is a result of thirty years involvement with the Power Lab. Oshry, a former professor of anthropology at Boston University, created his agency, Power and Systems, in 1970 and has spent the years since conducting living laboratories as a tool for teaching and learning. Oshry describes the Power Lab as an event that people from around the world have come . . . to deepen their understanding of power and powerlessness in social system life and to strengthen their skills as system members and leaders (1).

Although much of this book discusses, complete with living example, how systems develop, human roles in systems, and components of strong and weak systems, the underlying theme behind all is the power of diversity. Somewhat subliminally and throughout, Oshry offers the welcoming and acceptance of diversity as the natural counterbalance to the, often, predictable conflict humans easily find themselves involved. A very significant statement by Oshry seems to summarize the importance of welcoming diversity, Systems save themselves from decay by developing countercultures. Countercultures are efforts by systems to bring themselves back into balance. Countercultures are resisted, sometimes reviled, and sometimes suppressed by the predominant culture, even though the counter culture is potentially the savior of the predominant culture (130).

Among all the ideas and information this text provided, two points surfaced that had particular meaning for me  understanding what diversity is and, consequently, recognizing its importance. A clear understanding of what the term diversity really means, and why that understanding is critical to humanity is, unfortunately, too often lacking in the real world. The connotation of diversity often becomes limited to obvious issues involving differences in race, religion, sexual preference, economic status, or whatever dispute is currently in effect. For many outside that specific culture group, those strong and sometimes combative examples of diversity become the definition of the word itself  often with negative reaction personified with hate, violence, court order, and yes, even political correctness. Its destructive, but its human nature.

According to Oshry, human beings possess two degrees of consciousness, the I and the US. In the I mode, individuals are living in the present, using reason, judgment and rationale as they navigate their way through life. However, when that consciousness becomes associated with otherness (culture groups), we enter the US mode. The US mode is characterized as emotional; it has its own logic which is not obvious to those who dont share that consciousness; it is historical such that past oppressions live powerfully in the present; and it is global in that when we are in the US consciousness we relate to one another not as person to person but as OPPRESSED TO OPPRESSOR (Oshry 150). An US consciousness cant be avoided, its part of each and every one of us. Simply understanding and recognizing the US consciousness is not enough for creating and maintaining strong social systems. To truly accomplish that, we need to UNDERSTAND and RESPECT one anothers US consciousness. That last statement, in a nutshell, is MY revelation to understanding what diversity really means and why welcoming it becomes so important.

The personal insights gained from reading Oshrys work didnt just jump out at me. In fact, it was several weeks after reading the material that I arrived at my interpretation. Although that construal strikes me as profound, what is more amazing is how I came to accept/recognize the message. Although I know Barry Oshry, and have great personal/intellectual respect for him, that alone was not enough to accept his thoughts. On reflection, I think that the message Barry was trying to convey was presented in an I fashion; his message was depersonalized so that it effectively suppressed an US consciousness -- and the obstruction/rejection that involves. Too often lessons about accepting diversity revolve around pleas, threats, and morality issues without really addressing the need, benefits and barriers that accepting diversity involves. Without dealing with those points, the US consciousness is likely to prevail.

Is my life changed because of these revelations? In some ways yes and in other ways no. My base values of life havent changed, nor do I think theyre required to change to accept what Ive learned. What I can do is try to understand and respect others US consciousness  at least until my own US prevails. I believe that doing so is going to benefit me (personally and professionally) and, in some small way, make the world a better place.

Throughout involvement with the Extension M.Ed. program this past year, the focus seems to have been to conduct instruction transformatively, thereby conveying the concepts of transformative learning to students. Although weve gained insight on how to conduct oneself transformatively, a solid definition of transformative learning has, and continues to be, elusive. Some time ago, I had reached the conclusion that the very foundation of transformative learning/teaching was involved with accepting diversity. After reading Oshrys work, my opinion is now that the terms are synonymous.

# # # #

-- Anonymous, September 22, 1999