We are, of course, individuals. Like snowflakes, each unique. We each have our own perfect and unique cocktail of interests, needs, talents and personality. We are also necessary parts of family, organizations, communities and societies. The snowflakes, each unique, would never accomplish a snowdrift if each were to go off on their wayward way. In fact, on its own, an individual snowflake is far more likely to melt than if it sticks with the group. Ultimately, with their uniqueness, each snowflake plays its part in building the pile of snow for its own preservation as well as to create something for the joy – or dismay – of kids and adults everywhere.
Our individuality is not a solitary affair. Whatever we do in every capacity, down to its miniscule detail, we impact the whole. And each individual member of the whole, reciprocally impacts us and indeed each other. How we show up, how we present ourselves, how we speak, walk, breath, all play a part in shaping the family, organizations, communities and societies in which we exist. Much like that butterfly flapping its wings at one end of the planet, rippling the air and making waves across the globe, in turn impacts all the other butterflies and the speed and direction of their flapping. In this way we are not individual at all. We are both our self and we are everyone, perfectly blended. Whereas communication can be in the first person, second person and third person, in making choices we might consider all these as one entity – something like “we are singular.”
Can a company really be focused on the individual?
Companies’ declaring they are individual focused, wanting to promote and encourage every individual’s needs, desires and interests does sound like a beautiful and considerate thing. And making each individual feel comfortable in their own individuality and uniqueness is of great value and can bring out some exceptional thought and talent. But arguably, all this individual thinking has the potential to slow down productivity and efficiency if the thoughts and efforts are also individually driven and not ultimately driving toward the greater company goals. Think about the current situation of companies trying to manage their flexible work force. Some individuals work better remotely. Others work better on-site with others. But what happens when the ones on-site are actually working alone because the needs of the others are to be off-site? Then who’s individual needs are being met? As stated before, whatever and however each body works, whether intended or not, still greatly impacts the entire environment; people’s experience in the office, their experience commuting, their experience at the lunch cart, the experience of the lunch cart workers, and on and on. The greater societal impact is absolutely changed on the simple decision on whether you decide to work from home today or go into the office. Your decision ideally should not be one for self alone, but for both self and other. Much like you might decide to show up to a friend’s party even if you are tired and inclined to finish binge watching Succession. You know your being there will positively impact your friend and the party and everyone attending simply because you are there and contributing to a vibe of a full room, if not also for your fabulous sense of humor and great conversation. On the other hand, if you are so exhausted that you can hardly stand up, your showing up will still impact the party but perhaps not in a way that will be as appreciated. Perhaps the decision to go or not to go should be based on the entirety of impact of your being there or not being there – on yourself, your friend, the other guests, etc. A singular decision with a plural impact – on me (first person), on you (second person) and on them (third person) – all at once.
On the other hand, complete lack of individuality, creating a highly constant unchanging environment with a company of clones all doing things exactly the same way, may efficiently achieve a single measured objective of the collective, but it does not promote innovation, growth, or improvement in any way. What then happens to all those individuals desperately desiring something new? If the collective sounds like something out of Star Trek’s Borg, there is a reason.
The obvious answer to the unasked question here is to find the balance between the two: the needs of the individual and the needs of the whole (aka organization, community, society, etc.)
So how do we find the balance?
As an executive coach, I am most often sought after by individuals looking to find balance; work/life balance, balancing delegating vs hand-holding, balancing managing up vs down, balancing family responsibility with personal time, balancing their needs vs those of their partners, boards, other departments, the list goes on. Why is balance so elusive that everyone is looking for it but rarely – arguably, if ever – find it?
Balance is achieved when two individual things are equally weighted to not tip one way or the other. Or one thing is perfectly balanced on the left and the right so as not to tip from the center point (wherever that may be.) But in life, when we are all in a constant state of self and other – always impacted and always impacting – there cannot be such a thing as balance because the two things are not distinct sides or entities to be balanced. Instead of trying to balance, we instead continuously strive for the integration and cohesion of what we would consider the two sides rather than an either/or.
To say a company needs to find the balance between their being individually focused and building a well-oiled in-synch team is to leave them with a lot of jargon but no way to get there. In an ever-changing world, there is never a balance. If each individual who flaps their wings shakes things up – even ever so slightly in some way – for everyone else, and their being shaken up sends waves as well, then the balance, if it were to exist, shifts again. A surfer, for example, is never perfectly balanced – they are always and constantly shifting and changing to stay standing. Their presence on the wave also shifts things for the next surfer over. And when they lose balance and fall in, they send ripples that impact the balance of the other surfers who will then have to shift and change their stance accordingly to stay vertical.
Like the surfer that is constantly adjusting to reach their objective of staying vertical, an adjusting mindset is the key to creating a company culture that can be both individual and collective.
An adjusting mindset culture relies on two key principles: A collective understanding and a healthy feedback loop.
The collective understanding is threefold: 1) that as a group, and members of the company, we are all charged and motivated to reach the common goals, mission and vision. 2) that we are all individuals and our unique thoughts, needs, skills, talents, etc , all contribute something to the environment around us, and by merely being part of this company and showing up, we are impacting it in some way and that is primarily a good thing. 3) that feedback to this end is also a good thing and key to being able to adjust as necessary to align our needs, skills, talents, etc. to drive toward the company goals as stated in 1.
A healthy feedback loop works when the presumption is that everyone understands the concept of the blend of self and other, and everyone wants to do best for all. Feedback is necessary because we cannot always know as much about other as we know about self. We can know we are impacting and being impacted by others but how do we know in what way or to what extent we are impacting? Have our butterfly wings created a delightful breeze or a hurricane? If we are open to the feedback, and our intentions are to adjust in order to minimize hurricanes, then feedback is critical.
Developing a company culture of positive and constructive feedback loops, and an adjustment mindset to go with it, enables individuals to thrive both for themselves and for the benefit of the company goals. Individuality is not stifled but encouraged, with the understanding that the individuals with their individuality, by their existence, makes a positive contribution. But with that is also the understanding that all individualistic tendencies can and should be adjusted for the benefit and consideration of everyone.