Assumption 9: "Someone's in Charge," or "Yes--We Are!"

In what may come to be called "the Katrina effect," we often see a tendency to assume that someone's in charge, and will make sure that needed steps will be taken to deal with problems. This assumption emerges directly from our experience in schools and jobs that are organized as authority hierarchies (see Design Principle One in my previous post). As noted earlier, most of us have been implicitly trained to be passive and well-behaved. Performance reviews consider whether a person is a "team-player," which usually means s/he does what s/he's told and doesn't make trouble, especially by asking unpleasant questions.

The lesson of the Katrina disaster, of course, is that the person in charge at FEMA did not do what was needed, nor did he make sure it was done. As one of many examples, out of 25,000 mobile homes the agency purchased for disaster refugee housing, only 1200 were actually used. Once the magnitude of this second disaster (the agency's tragic ineptness) became known, non-government relief efforts accelerated into action.

In a more recent disaster of a different kind, executives at financial institutions did not consider the untenable risks involved in extending mortgage credit to buyers who could not afford the payments. And the government regulators charged with overseeing the credit markets did not maintain control of those dangerous lending practices. Once the financial house of cards began to fall, the persons in charge stepped in with hundreds of billions of dollars to prop them up, but without oversight or conditions. At this writing, little or none of that money has gone to deal with the cause of the disaster, the high rate of housing foreclosures. Throughout all this, the rest of us watch the news reports, appalled. Where are the people in charge, and why are they not dealing with all this effectively?

A friend has pointed out that this is related to the Dunning-Kruger effect: Their research on incompetent people demonstrated that they "reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the meta-cognitive ability to realize it".

I have suggested, too, that such people tend to develop a kind of naïve arrogance, which often gets them elected or selected to leadership positions. Not a good combination when the times get tough, as they obviously have been! And more challenging conditions are on the way.

So what's to be done?

It seems clear from this perspective that none of us can any longer rest on the assumption that someone's in charge and will take care of things. The reality is that, actively or passively, we are all in charge. Each one of us has the responsibility to think about these questions, to talk with others about them, to learn what we need to about what is involved, and to engage in appropriate changes. This involves more horizontal coordination—among peers, friends, strangers, stake-holders. It's not easy. We haven't been educated or trained to work this way. But instead of being unconsciously incompetent, we are fully aware of the steep learning curve we are on. This is our strategic advantage.

Ironically, the person who will take on a position of authority in the US on January 20 seems to be a different kind of leader. He is very competent, but in a different, important way. He doesn't work from preconceived solutions and policies as much as from a commitment to bringing together the full range of relevant views, and working out together the best way to proceed.

Based on his very different orientation to leadership, his election appears to be sparking a spontaneous interest, an excitement, really, among people in organizations and communities throughout the US and also abroad. People seem to be thinking, "What can I do to be part of this? How can I start working with others in a different way?"

We may look back on this time and realize that we were part of the Obama Tipping Point—the fundamental shift from top-down politics and structures, to working together toward shared visions and goals. But is this really possible? As Barack Obama would say, "Yes, we can!"