Good Trouble

There are a handful of books that are not considered literature (capital L) that deserve to be. They usually fall short on the timelessness dimension, seemingly trapped in the language and spirit of their day.  And not in a good way like Shakespeare or Iceberg Slim.

The best example is Robert Greenleaf’s Servant Leadership: brilliant ideas that sound like Wilford Brimley talking about Quaker Oats.  Like nearly every other business book before 1980, reading it out loud will make a Werther's hard candy magically appear in your pocket. 

I bring this up because that’s how I experience Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals (the focus of this piece).  It’s hard to read any important line in the book without adding a drawn-out 1970’s “man” at the end of the sentence.  “Power is what the enemy thinks you have… maaaan.”  

It’s brilliant, mind you.  Just dated.

It’s got its issues but what great book doesn’t?  For instance, the title is immediately divisive because the word radical is now inextricably tied to my jihadi cousins in the middle east– who represent that region and their faith in the same way that school shooters represent American kids and Christianity.  

It also doesn’t help that every well-intentioned person who references Alinsky tends to cut and paste his language (exactly as is) into their summaries; like it was his nuanced wordsmithing, not his timelessly pragmatic ideas, that makes it relevant.

What bugs me the most though— as someone who remains committed to making institutions more just from within– is the framing of social justice as having an enemy.  Alinsky uses that word like his legacy depends on it.  

I get why.  It’s a simple, powerful way to unite a community– by creating a demonized other to rally against.

City Hall, for instance, is the enemy!  And it might have been 50 years ago when the book was published.  But a lot of public servants since then have chosen their careers so that City Hall would stop being the enemy.  So… City Hall is no longer City Hall.

Fine, you say, then…. the federal government is the enemy!  The other party is the enemy!  Big business is the enemy!  Banks are the enemy!

[In a high pitched voice] “Aaaaaare they though?”   

Take the issue of diversity and inclusion at work.  There’s no bad guy on the other end of that ambition.  At least not in banking.  Every executive I’ve ever known– every employee I’ve ever met– has been or has wanted to be a staunch champion, an ally. The problems that get in their way are structural and extend well past the walls of their institutions.  

There isn’t some mustachioed villain hiding in Accounting.  

Well… maybe one.  I’m looking at you Wario!

Rules For Change from the Inside

I might not be the right person to do this but Alinsky’s language could use a rethink. If nothing else, it’s time to drop the word enemy in favor of a more inclusive, systems-informed view of challenges and opportunities.  

And he clearly doesn’t need 13 distinct rules.  It reminds me of authors today that have one great idea that goes viral and it leads to a book deal.  “What I really meant wasn’t this simple tweet… but these 7 universal laws that have nothing to do with me needing to fill 300 pages.”  

Oh, and there’s one other gaping flaw with Rules for Radicals.  Two of the rules are just plain cruel.  Rules 11 and 13 encourage organizers to make their fight about a specific person (i.e., a mayor) – so “the blame isn’t shifted”– and “to cut off that person’s support network to isolate them from sympathy.”

Not cool, maaaan.  

There’s no room– especially in the corporate setting– for tactics like “people hurt faster than institutions.”  

Of course they do.  We all know– and have known since kindergarten– that cruelty is effective. Which is why even the best companies still struggle with their “no assholes” rule.  It’s hard sometimes to see past their results.  

[Proof point: there’s literally no one on the planet struggling with whether or not to fire an under-performing asshole.]

The Actual Blog

What follows are Alinsky’s rules– minus the usual hasty cut-and-paste job.  They’ve been consolidated and reordered into 5 rules (not 13).  And to make them more relevant, they use the language and spirit of business today.  

To stay true to my own values– and in honor of International Women's Day– I try to illustrate the new rules through examples that anchor the piece on our industry’s goals around making work diverse, equitable, and inclusive; so that we may build a world where difference is valued and celebrated.

[You’re welcome!]

Rule 1: Know your people. Grow your people.  We all have an intuitive understanding of the power of connection, of networks and networking.  That’s why we’re drawn to social networking sites like… um… I can’t think of any right now.

As individuals, we tend to approach the actual practice of networking in one of three distinct patterns.  We either:

• keep our network small and focus on deepening each connection through regular, more intimate contact (folks that I call knowers)

• actively expand our networks in size with less regard for depth and intimacy (growers) or

• serve as a bridge between our own lightly-coupled groups of connections (bridges).

Every person might do a bit of each but we tend to anchor on one.  

When we organize as a community, we need all three to thrive: knowers to understand our community’s expertise; growers to actively fill in expertise gaps through continuous recruitment and continuous learning;  and bridges to connect our community’s capabilities with its ambitions.  

[Note: that paragraph is essentially Alinsky’s rules #2 and #3 combined.] 

And this might be obvious but organizing– like business itself– demands that you first get your talent story right.  Everything else builds on that rock. 

What’s less obvious is that this rule– like all of Alinsky’s– becomes especially powerful when a group chooses to step past its timid BAU of operating as a lightly-coupled community of interest and commits to a bolder future of advocacy and agitation for deeper, more structural changes.  That purposeful “step up” leads to rule 2. 

But before we jump there…

Let’s Apply Rule 1 at Work

If you’re a part of a women’s network at your company, you’re (hopefully) plugged into a rich, engaging and fulfilling community of practice.  The ones that I’ve participated in have evolved over time to provide social support, to coordinate mentoring activities, to organize learning events and to help with external recruiting.  

These practices are undeniably valuable.  Period.  

Aaaaand… they’re not as structurally-transformative as anyone in the network would like.  

[The deeper questions to ask are: why does a network need to support each other?  Isn’t that a reflection of a structural gap, a failing in the core design of the institution?  Isn’t the network just addressing the symptom?  Who is focused on the core break?  And are they hoping that it will fix itself once some mythical critical mass of forward-thinking hires is met?] 

If a network were to choose to pursue some good trouble at work– to organize and agitate for more satisfying structural changes– their first best step would be Rule 1: know and grow the community.  Because the more growers grow, the more knowers know, the more bridges can connect it all to purposeful ambition.   

[Note that the word bridge sets exactly the right tone here.  Remember my earlier point about how there’s no (human) villian on the other end of the diversity ambition?  That’s why it’s so important that bridges regularly engage senior decision-makers. Because that “enemy” isn’t “the enemy.”  They’re just busy allies. Their core values align with the networks’ but they suffer from… let’s call it… complete immersion in their day jobs.  One might even argue that that’s usually what lands them in those senior positions. And that is one of those structural problems that get in the way of any of us truly living our values: our day jobs are so powerfully immersive in their demands of our time, our attention, our minds… that we rarely get past agreeing on the value of diversity… before we’re late to our next meeting.  The real villain is that you blink and 20 years have passed.  And the victor is regret.]

So… encourage your bridges to proactively and collaboratively engage senior management.  Don’t wait for those seniors to tell you the help they need to bring more to the agenda.  Bring the knowledge and creativity that your knowers have uncovered to that task. And lead– really lead– through service.

[Whooosh!  Werthers!]

Rule 2: Take purposeful risk together.  Your leverage for creating positive change doesn’t just come from what you’re willing to risk, but what others (who share your values) think you might.

[For those keeping track, that sentence is essentially Alinsky’s rules 1, 4 and 9 combined.]  

The uninspired way to interpret this rule is: perception matters more than reality.  

[Fun side project: google that italicized phrase and see if it landed in some vapid cash-grab of a book. Extra points if it came from the American Right – which regularly demonizes Alinsky.]

The more inspired way to think about this rule is at the community level. In fact, all these rules (but especially this one) are ultimately about organizing your community, not solo climbing.  So the “you” in “what others think you might”  is not you by your lonesome.  It’s everyone like you– the people to your left and right who share your values and agenda.  

And that leverage is infinitely more powerful if the institution that you need to change already subscribes to your values.  And many do!

Let’s Apply Rule 2 at Work

So… imagine that the women’s network we mentioned earlier is in Bank X and they decide to step up into more purposeful action– to agitate for more structural changes.  And imagine that before they started really agitating, one of the bridges asked Bank Y if the entire community could move over to Bank Y.  

1) Is there any bank anywhere that would turn them down? Quick answer: no! 

2) Could that tension– that dynamic– accelerate the pace with which Bank X delivered on its own commitments to diversity?  

Does the group actually need to move to Bank Y?  Not really.  Does the bridge even need to reach out to Bank Y?  Nope.

It was never about perception being reality.  It was (and will always be) about understanding your worth, the leverage it gives you and locking arms with your community– which will inevitably include management.  

Just remember where the villainy lies.  Exercising creative leverage can reduce the gap between how we live our values and how urgent it is compared to keeping the engines running.  All you– as a community– are doing is helping your institution hold itself accountable to their own values.  

Rule 3: Connect with Humor and Warmth.  I’m going to keep this one short because I disagree with it.  Humor is inappropriate in all contexts, especially business.  

Plus, humor– as a skill– is more nature than nurture… unless by nurture we mean childhood trauma.  So being funny is inaccessible to all but a damaged few.  

Warmth on the other hand… is also inaccessible to all but a damaged few.

Oh and it’s so much more satisfying to laugh at people than with them. 

There!  I said it! Truth to power!  

Remember me when I’m gone.

[And that– if you’re still counting– is how one sums up Alinsky’s rules 5, 6 and 7.]

And… because I’m too OCD not to do this,

Let’s Apply Rule 3 at Work

A superficial read of this rule is “make sure your community is having fun.”  You should… but that’s not the deeper point.

At work, we tend to do storytelling poorly.  That’s an understatement btw.  We make it cold and humorless and call it analytics, or business case writing or lunch with Bob. 

But when it’s done right– when we weave stories out of data; when we make those stories personal, purposeful and actionable; when they’re positive and inspiring– storytelling becomes critical to a community’s success at work.

As per rule #1, your knowers can spot that skill, your growers can recruit it, and if worse comes to worst, it’s teachable.  Also, if your bridges are serious about filling in the gaps in senior diversity conversations, well… the data we usually look at doesn’t inspire much.  It’s usually inflows and outflows of diverse talent at a very high level. And if we’re really good, we also look at data about inbound talent pipelines and sponsorship for succession planning.  That mostly just inspires gloom.  Not because we’re failing to make progress but because it’s taking too damn long.

As per rule #2, taking purposeful risk together doesn’t happen without winning hearts and minds; without lighting up a room; without making people laugh.  Leading with purpose demands it.

Did you know, for instance, that Gandhi could do impressions?

[I made that up.  But he was known for his disarming humor. And that adjective is an important skill.]

Suffice it to say that diversity– especially its bigger, hairier challenges at a structural level– could do with better stories than the usual “look who broke through the glass ceiling.”  

Which is a good lead in to…

Rule 4: Abide by the Noah Principle. I’m breaking the don’t quote Alinsky rule but the way he put it (in rule 12) was: “the price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”  To me, that’s just a less peaceful version of the principle behind my writing:  

Don’t predict more rain if you’re not helping build the ark.

Let’s Apply Rule 4 at Work

If your women’s network is like ours, you have regular conversations about 1) how to improve the support you provide and 2) how to broaden and deepen membership.  Here’s how you might build that ark.

* Organize a lunchtime phone bank, staffed by your members.

* Call every woman in the organization with a simple message: we’d like to sponsor you into your next gig here.  

* Ask them what you can do to help.

* And then do it.  As a group.

Even if you don’t get an uptick in membership, you’ve led through service [whooosh!] and filled a cold, regret-sized void in your company with warmth and love.

[Hopefully that didn’t get too weird.]

And finally, 

Rule 5: Rinse. Repeat. Persist.  Keep the pressure on.   

[This combines Alinsky’s rule 8 and 10… and if I have to explain it or apply it for you, we have bigger problems–  ones humor can’t fix.]

Final Thoughts

Every good business is a community of communities. The path to getting them minimally organized is relatively straightforward and most companies today don’t need help with that since they’ve already established support networks.

The real question is whether those communities– once awakened– want to step up into more purposeful action.

I think they should. And a modern reading of Alinsky might help.

–

Will there be stigma attached to “activist” women and people of color who agitate for change within the corporate world?  

Abso-f%@#ing-lutely.

Will it be a sacrifice to walk across that bridge?

You know the answer.

Is it worth walking that bridge by yourself?  Maybe.  But why risk it?

Is it worth it locked arms with those who share your values and hopes for the world?

You know the answer.

–

Rather than quote Alinksy on the close, let me try ending with John Lewis.

“Never be afraid to make some noise and get in trouble.  Good trouble.  Necessary trouble.”

LinkedIn Tease:

Before the Edmund Pettus Bridge became a symbol of courage and hope, it was just a bridge. 

I think about that sometimes when I sit in meetings at work.  My office… your office… is just an office. 

The magic happens…history is made… justice is advanced… a place becomes more than a place… when we use that place to lock arms… purposefully. 

It makes me look at my office— my work, my life— differently. 

—

I originally wrote this article for #InternationalWomensDay, a week from today.  It bothered me (and still does) that we seem to be missing a modern playbook for how womens’ networks can agitate for change from within.  

I’m publishing it a week early because today is the last day of Black History Month here in the States and in my opinion, networks of color might also benefit from a refresher on how to lock arms… at least within the corporate world. 

The right place to start is the legacy of two people who I admire: Saul Alinsky, a community organizer who passed away 50 years ago this year and John Lewis— a legend in the civil rights movement who passed last year and who was one of those humble folks who gave that bridge meaning. 

–

Before you write off this article as a quick, obligatory like and a long read for women and people of color, remember that you are– without exception– a part of a community or two or three. 

It’s not just that everyone– regardless of gender or race– plays a role in building a more just world.   It’s also that– aside from some highly motivated fringe groups outside work– we as a society are lacking the skills and tools to organize our communities to purposeful ends.  That gap keeps the larger public conversation focused on the fringe.  And it creates support-network-sized echo chambers at work.  

In both cases, we all lose.

The same kind of respect and empowerment that’s long overdue for traditionally-defined under-served communities… is missing from *your* community.  For instance, if you live in #Pittsburgh or #Poland or #India and are managed out of #NY or #London or #Tokyo, then you have the same need to organize to purposeful action.  If you’re an engineer that’s overwhelmed by bureaucracy…. if you’re a veteran or neuro-diverse or LGBTQ or deeply religious… then you have the same need to organize to purposeful action.

If our time at work is to be as meaningful and inclusive as it should be, we need to pair every support network with the organizing skills that will help its community re-shape the structures that make that network necessary. 

That’s what Saul and John’s ideas and lives were really about (for me).  They can inspire us all to build a more equal world from wherever we are.  Even work.