We witness one element of Lincoln’s gift for sustaining relationships midst differences in his appreciation for contributions made by others (Kearn Goodwin, 2005, p. 468)
“‘The wisdom of the view of the Secretary of State struck me with very great force,’ Lincoln later told the artist Francis Carpenter. ‘It was an aspect of the case that, in all my thought upon the subject, I had entirely overlooked. The result was that I put the draft of the proclamation aside, as you do your sketch for a picture, waiting for a victory.'”
In this instance, Lincoln could not only appreciate diverse (mutating) contributions made by a member of his cabinet, but also rework his strategy based on this contribution. Lincoln’s own set regarding timing of the proclamation was challenged and subsequently reset. Lincoln could value and act on differences. A mutation was turned into a society-changing innovation as a result of Lincoln’s skillful management of diversity.
Breaking the Set
One of the major challenges in retaining the center of any system such as a Presidential cabinet (or classical music framework) is that of challenging basic assumption and frames of reference while also reaffirming the fundamental intentions of the system. Children do this through sometime remarkable—it is called “play.” They can pretend and try out something without violating the rules and norms of the “real” world. We find that same thing occurring among dogs who are playfully fighting with one another, and among many young mammals who are enacting courtship rituals prior to actually seeking out a mate (which is not unlike the traditional square dances in North America that allowed young men and women to “court” one another in a safe and playful round of dances.).
Morphological Analysis and the Medici Effect
I find that I can effectively introduce this element of play in my own work with organizations of many kinds—be they educational, governmental, security-based or human service-based. I have created a process called “morphological analysis” that encourages a program design team to “play” with alternative scenarios regarding a wide variety of parameters—such as the population being served, length of the program being offered, and location of the program delivery. We can design a program for 1 person that lasts five years and is totally digital, or a program for 1,000 people, provided for 5 minutes and offered in a National Park. Take your pick. The important point is that planning for this program enables a team to break their established set in a playful manner. Thus, they can come in with a looser framework when they sit down for “serious” deliberations regarding the envisioned programs—and might even incorporate some of the ideas generated in the morphological sessions (maybe a session or two that emanates digitally from a national park . . . ).
