NOVL Takes: Business as Usual

In this episode of NOVL Takes, we ask how the metaphors of war and conflict shape the business landscape and the kinds of opportunities we are capable of seeing.

Transcript

0:08

Hey, there are beautiful people. Welcome to NOVL Takes, the podcast where we lift the veil on business as usual, join us for novel takes on business, culture, and the art of getting things done. I'm partner and principal Rachel Gans-Boriskin And I am founder and principal Sarah Patrick. It's time for this week's NOVL Take. Today on the show, we're gonna explore the nature of business as usual. What informs the traditional business framework so many of us learn to operate in or still do, and how they function and who they serve. So I think a good way to start this is Sarah, have you ever heard the phrase "go to the mattresses?" Mm-hmm. right? So I don't know about you. I hear it all the time. Lots of references to Cannolis and things like that. Right? Because we're talking about the Godfather, right? Right. Right. And who is it, by the way, who makes these kinds of statements? Isn't it the boss? It's the boss... I always think it's guys well. Right. Right. Right. Right. Like it's it's men. Right. Men love the Godfather. Oh, right, right, right. I have to confess, I actually hadn't seen The Godfather until about like two years ago. I had managed not to, and then I was like, you know, everybody's talking about it. And it's, it's a good film. I mean, you know, I know it's a great film. But you know, it's, it's to me a very masculine tale. Right? It's a tale of conflict, of battle, of war. Mm-hmm. And I think that there's a reason men use this so often in business. As a reference, it works really well. You know, you're gonna put a horse head in someone's bed because it speaks to how we think about business in general. I think we can trace it back to, you know like any MBA program too. Right? Right, right. So much of the language that we use around business is that language of war- is that language of conflict. Right. Kill the competition. The language of winning is a very. Kind of power dominated, male dominated language. Right? Right. And, and you know, we can look like Sun Tzu- The Art of War is something that's really used in, you know, business schools of understanding, how you, you respond to the market, your competitors as your enemies. And even when we're not talking Sun Tzu, it's, a lot of business is around game theory. Mm. Right. It's how you are positioning things. We're not sitting here saying like, oh, you know, let's upend that. No need for it. No Those are useful metaphors, but I, I think it's important to identify what are the metaphors we're using? How do they dominate our thinking and how do they drive it and control what we see? I was thinking as we were preparing for this today about linguist Deborah Tannen, mm-hmm who wrote a book, I think like back in the nineties, dating myself here, called the Argument Culture. Mm-hmm. about how so much of our political life, our sociological life- everything is dominated by this language of an argument, of a fight. And you know, we, we end up sort of stealing ourselves for that. Um, It's ready for battle at all times. Right. Right. Right. And it, it's a battle of ideas. When we, we write news articles, it's, you know, it's this side says this and this side says that, and everything is a conflict. And to make that conflict more interesting, you're gonna choose the most extreme positions and you might miss out on all of the things in the middle. Mm-hmm. that people agree on. Mm-hmm. I think at the moment, culturally, things can be pretty tense and, and bitter. And, and we are sort of reflexively thinking about what divides us and not what we have in common. Right. And, and the metaphors that we use drive us there. Right, I think a, a great example of this is, the war on drugs. So say more about that. Like the war on drugs. Aside from being a, a somewhat failed policy. Mm. Right. With disastrous consequences, it comes from our understanding of the problem of drugs as something to be won, right? Like we're in a, it's a war, right? The war on drugs. So, but let's take that metaphor. Who fights in a regular war?. Right. Like soldiers. Right, right, right. Right. And who do you fight? The enemy. Right. in this war, who's doing the fighting in the war on drugs? Well, the police do you have some citizen soldiers right, right. Okay. But then who's the enemy? Well, it depends on the perspective, but in this case, anybody who's using drugs Like a user? A dealer? The drugs themselves? Right. Right. Right. Okay, so then, but like how do you know when you've won? Right. In a war... you eradicate the enemy. Right? All the enemies are dead. Right. Or they surrender. Right. Right. Right. So how do we know when the war on drugs is done? Right, I guess presumably it's when there are no more drugs and no more drug usage, which seems, I don't know, completely impractical. Right? I mean, like pharmaceutical drugs alone tell us, you know, this isn't gonna work. Right. Right. So we can look at this and say, you know, everyone arrested. We've actually kind of tried that. That's, you know, not working. Right. But as a metaphor itself, it falls down because however you might think of the drug problem out there, any of us who've had a family member or a friend who has struggled with addiction, we don't think of them as the enemy. Right. And we don't want them necessarily. Right. That has a whole army of folk coming after them. Right. Right. We, we don't want them necessarily imprisoned. What do we want for them? You want help. Right? Right. We want help. And that help is gonna come in the form of, therapy, interventions maybe medication. And that's a healthcare framework. Mm.. Mm-hmm.. Right? So if we follow the metaphor of the war on drugs, where should we spend our resources? it's police, it's, jails, it's all of that. But if our metaphor is one of addiction as illness, then we should be spending our money on social services and treatments. Right. Healthcare systems. Right. Right. And it's not that there isn't a place for a police response. Right. There's crime that goes with it. You know, it may be that we want a drug dealer in jail and we want somebody who's addicted to drugs to get help. It, it's not an either or, but our metaphors steer our thinking. Our perspective. Right. Right. And, and then we can't come up with something else. Well, steers our perspective and then like you're, like you're saying steers the action after that, right. We frame the perspective and then our actions are taken as an extension of that perspective. Right. And, you know, when we, go over to a business context, I can't count the number of times that I've, I've read a, a newspaper article about some sort of, corporate malfeasance and the response is, well, there's just a few bad apples. Hmm. Right. And, you know, first of all, like as a former professor, I've gotta like jump in there and be like, okay, but we're, we're misunderstanding what that metaphor even means. What that metaphor means. It was supposed to mean that one bad apple ruins the, you know, the bushel there. But we seem to have forgotten that. And what people think is, if you take out that one apple, problem solved. Right. Right. Okay. That's our metaphor-mangled as it is. That's the way people are, meaning it. Right. But what if, it was, this is a cancer in, the body politic of, you know, of this business. Well, cancer, you don't just say like, oh, we're going to first thing, just like, you know, amputate your leg and then problem solved. Right. It's, you know, there may be cancer cells elsewhere. Right. Right. So it's a systemic treatment. Right. So whatever it was in the culture of the business right that allowed people to bilk people out of money is still there whether you remove that person or not. Right. But the metaphor may make us say like, oh, okay, they've got this covered. And so I think it's always useful to be interrogating mm-hmm. those metaphors. So like we, you know, we started, I know, way back when the beginning of this conversation talking about the Godfather. Right. Right. And so that war metaphor mm-hmm. for business and you know, what, what might alternatives right. be? Right. Right, right. I, I'm curious though also before we get to alternatives, kind of who does this language serve? Right. The question of who it serves. So I, I guess there are two parts. One is I think it serves certain types of personalities that are more comfortable with conflict. Mm-hmm. I think there are plenty of people who don't like it. And then are not gonna be as successful in businesses where, where that frame is, is dominant. I think again, we can't escape the fact that in our culture, men are socialized to be aggressive and women are socialized to not be. Right? Mm-hmm. and to be conflict averse.. And this puts women in a bind. Because if you want to compete in business, you've gotta be aggressive. Right. But the moment you're aggressive, you're, you know, you're breaking your code, you're not feminine anymore. And, you know Like Kathleen Hall Jamieson talks about the, the double bind. And, and that, you know, as a woman, you can't be, smart and beautiful, right? And you can't be, powerful and, attractive or, or you know, approachable, right? In a way, we don't do that to men. and then men resent women who are not, that kind of idea of women and women get called all sorts of nasty names And then of course, we can add in, race and sexual orientation and, gender identity into that and all sorts of things.. And so especially if you are somebody who feels targeted, you may not feel comfortable, putting yourself out there Right in the same way. So I, I I think there's that. I, I think it also serves certain types of solutions. What are collaborative business strategies that we just don't think of because in war you don't have that same kind of collaboration? Maybe you have an alliance, but alliances shift. Right, right, right. And it's difficult to have an alliance if you think at any point, those alliances are gonna shift. Right. Well, and alliance and collaboration are two different things. Right. In an alliance, you're still thinking about your interests and the interests of your group first, right? And how a grouping with another entity might strategically best position your group. Right? Right. Collaboration is to actually combine the interests of your group with another or yourself with another. And to truly work in tandem to achieve a now set of shared goals. And I think that is an important differential cuz you're still in an alliance talk using war terminology. Right. Right, right. And when you start to drop that off and start to move into this space of like collaboration now you're talking about something different entirely. Right. And, and you know, then what is success? Right? Right. I think maybe it also helps us think of social responsibility for corporations in a different way. If social responsibility is sort of an add-on thing you do it's a separate division that's different than how you do business, which is about conquering mm-hmm. and winning. Right. And then social responsibility is this, oh yeah, we'll do this. But if collaboration is the model, mm-hmm if we are thinking about how what we do creates something better for not just, you know, this business but also your business, isn't there room then to expand it? To say, you know, how might this be good for the environment? Yeah. You know, what are the conditions that allow collaboration to be possible? What social capital, what kind of society underneath creates that environment? Yeah. And I, I think it opens up a new way of thinking. Which, you know, again, I mean, we're not sitting here saying like, let's undo capitalism and No, all of that. I mean, you know, Sarah and I, you know, we wanna make money as, as much as, as any business. But just the way in which our frames prevent us from seeing all kinds of options. Right, right. And I, I think what, you and I bring often is a different strategic lens. Mm-hmm. because it's a little broader.. And we have some, some experience of, discomfort. Right. Maybe with some of the argument framing, the battle framing, because you know, I hadn't seen the Godfather, I was missing out, you know? Right, right. Well we have experience in it, but we also have how all this experience stepping out of it as well. So we're bringing in, you know, both this experience within the traditional framework and this interest to frankly bucket sometimes and think about these other ways to work collaboratively, to work in unison and to see what exists in that middle ground when you're not in that battle state all the time. Right. And you know, and I think it's also important to step away from the binary. Right. Right. That this is, you know, masculine versus feminine. Right. And, and that really like, you know, It's actually human. Right. Right. These are all parts traits that we have. Right. Right. And that, you know, our cultures have encouraged certain traits in some and discouraged, traits in them and Absolutely, you know, back and forth. And so that we can look and say what happens if we open up the potential for everyone? Right. I think if we start welcoming in these other perspectives mm-hmm. you know, we open space. And again thinking about, you know, who do these metaphors serve who has been, you know, underserved by them. Right. And, and again, I go back to our DEI space of saying what is it about a conflict frame that may make certain people feel unwelcome? Right. Might make them feel unsafe. Right. Right. I would say think about, you know, your own personal life as well. if you have a, a friend or a partner where everything's an argument and you know that going in, you're tense, Mm-hmm Right? It changes the dynamic. Absolutely. Right? Yep. And there are some people who thrive right on that. I had a class I taught where there was a student in the class who fought me on everything, and I, I would feel myself walk into this class tense because everything I said, this kid was, you know, just ready to go. I, I mean, it was, it was my least favorite, you know, three hours of the week, . And at the end of the class, he comes up to me and he says he just wants to thank me. This is the best class he had. He looked forward to it all the time because he just really loved being able to argue and his, you know, ideas always came out sharper after. Wow. And I'm thinking, well, I'm glad one of us enjoyed us . You know, which, aside from it being just, you know, like ridiculous for me on some level and exhausting, it was also edifying for me. Yeah. Because, for me, that doesn't work. Right. As a model. Right? Right. But for him it did. There are some people who competition inspires them and that's what helps them work. Right. And so we need to be aware that sometimes we need both. Right. But that, in that interaction, one of us enjoyed it and one of us really didn't. Right. And, you know, it worked out okay because I was the one in charge. Right. Right. And so he could do that and, come through and I, I held my space, but I can imagine had I been a student in a class where a professor demanded that kind of argument, I would never raise my hand. Right. Well, I think too, you know, what you're talking about is the nature of that space. Mm-hmm.. Right? And this was an opportunity in that situation for the student. If the roles had switched and it was the case where the person in power demanded of the students, some sort of argumentative kind of nature where they had to be on their toes all the time and in constant conflict, then that changes the dynamic. It's not an opportunity, it's a requirement Right. At that point. Right. And so for those students who, for whom it does not feel like an opportunity, it does not feel like something that sharpens their points. It doesn't feel good. They are not in a learning environment. They're not in their learning bodies. This is not working for them. Right. Right. So I think to that question that I think I asked, earlier, what is the function of it? Right. I like, I don't think either one of us is trying to make the point of getting rid of this language, Mm-hmm but yes, to potentially upending some of that metaphor Right? Right. Of constantly needing to exist in a frame where that's the only option. Right. And where we have to exist in that frame all the time. Right. And, and saying, let's switch it up. Right. Right. For, the person who thrives in conflict, there are gonna be those moments where, maybe we need to have that adversarial debate. We need to talk about how would we crush the competition? Right. Right. But maybe for the other people, right there's a space where you say, well, what would it mean if we partnered with the competition? What would that look like? Right. And it could be that you end up with either one of those, but that the engagement between them, maybe, reveals a weakness that you could exploit. Mm-hmm.. . Right. Or maybe it helps us say, oh, that's a strength the other side has that could compliment us. Mm-hmm. and we could do this. So that then you're sitting there, you say, here are, strategic options. Hmm. And they're different. Right. And you can choose between them. Hmm. And to be aware, let's, let's change that lens. Like when you're going to the eye doctor and they say, this one or this one, which is clearer? Right. You don't know that that one you have isn't good until they put the second one in. You go, oh, whoa! I did not know that. Right. Like, those are letters. Right, right, right. Like, but until that happens, you don't know. So let's switch through. Right. You know, oh, this one's a little blurry, or this is coming into focus. Right. I think this is, is an opportunity. Right. But the first thing is to be able to identify, Right. These business as usual metaphors. Right. Right. And I think even if the sole objective, let's say you're in a room with clients and the sole objective is to think about like crushing the competition. What happens when you drop that language? Right? What happens when, we drop the adversarial language? So maybe we're not thinking about other opportunities like partnering with the competition. It's a little bit more singular and we're still kind of positioning ourselves to the competition in that way, but we're not together in our community, in such an adversarial way? What happens in that space? Right. I'm thinking about it in that way too. Because like you said, when you know that it's always gonna be adversarial, you come in shoulders up, tight, ready to go, ready to fight. Right, right. And you're limiting, right? You are super prepared for the argument, but you're limited to being able to do other things because you are in fight or flight. Right. And so, and you are, well, not even flight. You're ready to fight. Right. Right. So like you are in that like lowered part of your brain. You are not in prefrontal cortex. Right? Right. And so you are not thinking with your higher mind. Back to that point about metaphor and the importance of that language, when you begin to drop that use of that adversarial language, I'm just really curious about kind of what opportunities also come into the room. Right. We've been talking a lot about that externally, but the culture you create right, within an organization is the same. If you set up an organization where, everybody knows every year we're cutting the the bottom 10%. That sets up a very different relationship than if you say we are going to be rewarding the teams that are most effective. Right. Right. One way you get competition between your employees, the other, you get collaboration. Right. And it also means, there's an incentive in the first group to sabotage your colleagues mm-hmm. so that you don't end up in the bottom. Right. And there are many businesses that run that way. Right. They run into a problem because if every year you're letting go the 10%, the turnover is, you know, high. And at some point you were letting go of some really good people Right. Like That's right. Just to meet that quota. Right, right. But also, You're not developing your talent. Mm-hmm. Even if you are a company that is externally using, the Godfather, you're going to the mattresses, internally, how do you have a culture that fosters creativity and collaboration Right, right. To come up with that, you know, best battle plan. Right. Right. Right. Absolutely. So like using these together. It's not either or. Right. It's not a zero sum game. Right. All right. Well, I think we've, we've beaten this to death work the metaphor. So if this conversation has sparked any great ideas, piqued your interest and you wanna hear more about what we have to say, please stay tuned for other episodes. Please subscribe, rate, and review. Give us some love. And if you're curious about what we do over here at NOVL or you think we could be helpful to you or your organization, check us out and send us an inquiry over at thinkNOVL.com. That's T H I N K N O V L.com. That's it for us. Shout out to everyone who helped us make this show. To Mira, who helps edit and produce the show. And to Alva, who is forever an inspiration. This is NOVL Takes.