HomeMy Public PortalAbout20110831 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 11-23 Midpeninsula Regional
' Open Space District
Meeting 11-23
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Hillview Community Center—Room 2
97 Hillview Avenue
Los Altos, CA 94022
Wednesday, August 31,2011
AGENDA
9:00 A.M. SPECIAL.MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT—
PUBL.IC SESSION
ROLL CALL
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
9:05 A.M. BOARD BUSINESS
l. Board and Management Retreat to Discuss Effective Board and Staff Working Relationships,the District
Planning Cycle and Future Strategic and Program Direction
4:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT
* Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed.Agenda is subject to change of order.
TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: The Chair will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is
considered by the Board of Directors. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes. Alternately,you
may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,if you need assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the District Clerk at(650)691-1200.
Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
Written materials relating to an item on this Agenda that are considered to be a public record and are distributed to Board members less than 72 hours prior to the
meeting,will be available far public inspection at the District's Administrative Office located at 330 Distel Circle,Los Altos,California 94022.
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I,Michelle Radcliffe,District Clerk for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(MROSD),declare that the foregoing amended agenda for the Special
Meeting of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on August 26,2011,at the Administrative Offices of MROSD,330 Diste)Circle,Los
Altos California,94022. The agenda is also available on the District's web site at http://www.openspace.org.
Signed this 26"'day of August,at I os Altos,California.
District Clerk August 26,2011
Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District
Board /Staff Planning Meeting
Aug. 31, 201 1; 9:OOam -4:OOpm
Purpose:
To synchronize the Board of Directors and Senior Managers in their
understanding of District planning cycle and priority setting
Objectives:
1. Gain consistent understanding of new planning cycle (30 min)
2. Identify improvements to new planning cycle (30 min)
3. Identify and resolve (or lay out next steps to resolve) outstanding issues
with strategic priorities outlined in July 14 memorandum to district staff
from Larry Hassett (120 min)
4. Identify, discuss and obtain general consensus on major project level
priorities for FY2012-13 (120 min)
Time Topic
9:00 Arrival, welcome, objectives
9:10 Agenda review ground rules
9:20 Warm-up - "Perspectives"
9:30 Review Board agreements from June board retreat
9:35 Revised Planning Cycle
10:05 Strategic Direction and Priorities
1 1:50 Public comment, if needed
Noon Lunch
1:00 FY2012-13 Project Level Priorities
2:30 Break
2:45 FY2012-13 Project Level Priorities continued
3:15 Public comment, if needed
3:25 Planning Process check-in (strengths, improvements)
3:45 Meeting evaluation
4:00 Adjourn
Disagree and Commit Anyway
- I am prepared to support the decision with my
words and actions,
- I will not criticize the decision-maker or others
who supported the decision, and
0 1 can explain the rational for the decision.
Omega Coaching
Do we have support?
Absolutely!
I can support it
I can support it if...
I can't support it unless...
Absolutely not!
if everyone can support the idea,you have consensus. Consensus is not the same as
unanimity. Rather,it is a state of affairs where communications have been open and the
group climate has been sufficiently supportive to make all members feel that they have had a
fair chance to influence the decision.
Omega Coaching
Start of Cyr%
0 NEW
. -
STAFF DRAFTS
ANNUAL
Action Plan &t
Budget
FULL BOARD REVIEW Et APPROVAL
APPROVAL OF BY GM
MIDYEAR
MIDYEAR REVIEW Et REVIEW Et APPROVAL
APPROVAL BY ABC ACTION PLAN Et BY ABC
BUDGET CYCLE
MIDYEAR REVIEW Et FULL BOARD
APPROVAL BY GM APPROVAL
do
STAFF DRAFTS REVIEW PREVIOUS YEAR
MIDYEAR Action Plan Et Budget
Action Plan Et Budget
stort of Cycle
STAFF DRAFTS
ANNUAL
Action Plan Et
•
Budget
FULL BOARD REVIEW Et APPROVAL
APPROVAL OF BY GM
MIDYEAR
f MIDYEAR REVIEW ft REVIEW Et APPROVAL
APPROVAL BY ABC BY ABC
PROPOSED
ACTION PLAN �
MIDYEAR REVIEW F1 FULL BOARD
APPROVAL BY GM BUDGET CYCLE APPROVAL
7
BOARD Et SENIORREVIEW PREVIOUS YEAR
RETREAT TO CONFIRM Action Plan Ft Budget
STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
;7-
STAFF DRAFTS STAFF DRAFTS
MIDYEAR ENVIRONMENTAL
Action Plan £t Budget SCAN
I
BOARD RETREAT ACTION ITEMS
Board Meeting Ground Rules
• If Board member is not ready to vote, OK to ask for more information and/or time to decide.
• If Board member is uncomfortable,express it—don't hold back.
• If you have"heartburn" regarding a staff recommendation, let GM and Board President know
ahead of time.
• Board member must take responsibility to show/share discomfort and Board members need to be
sensitive to colleagues concerns.
• It's OK to disagree with Board's decision, but you must support the decision.
Board-Staff Interactions
• If Board member is requesting for information, it's OK to ask staff. If Board member is requesting
analysis, this should go through GM.
• If a staff member contacts a Board member directly, Board member should ask, "Have you talked
to the GM about this?"and the Board member should inform GM that staff had contacted him/her.
• Staff provides Board member a"head's up"when staff engages with constituents (i.e., local event,
another agencies' meeting, etc.)
• Board would like feedback from Board Appointed employees on how they are doing.
• Possibly have a review of the Board-Staff Working Relationship Policy in Management Team
meeting to check in on how the Team/Board is doing.
Next Steps
• What do we need to have in front of us to remind us of agreements? (Steve, Helene, Michelle)
• Share Board Retreat Materials (agreements) (Steve)
Address how to inform Board members absent(Steve)
Planning cycle—flesh out with senior staff; consideration of Board comments (Steve)
• Start process to select potential dates for Board-Staff retreat Michelle
p
• Do report out at Wednesday's Board meeting (Board/Board Appointees)
• Make decision on mid-year budget and action plan process and how this year's review will change
(Steve)
i
PARKING LOT
1
• Possibly have Committee report-outs at Board meetings to allow for sharing Committee member
perspectives (i.e., Does the member agree/disagree with the Committee recommendation?)
• Examine how the Board can (should the Board) disagree with staff recommendation?
• Consider—as each member casts their vote, state the reasons for voting the way they are (risks:
media in audience, misquotes)
• Examine the sequence of events that proceed the vote regarding Mt. Umunhum
Examine role/use of Committees (regarding h A H e and the d Hoc Committee on Strategic Planning process)
( 9 9 9 9P )
• When looking at agenda items, General Manager will let Board President know that an item may
need further Board discussion.
• Study Sessions can be held for the Board to receive more information from the staff regarding a
particular agenda item/project.
• How do Board members stay consistent when communicating out in the public?
I
I
I
i
Department Must Do's
Public Affairs
i
1) Draft an outreach plan to garner public support for conservation vision. (between now and April
, 2012)
2) Implement outreach plan to garner public support for conservation vision (From April, 2012—
April, 2013)
3) Draft funding measure outreach plan (From April, 2012—April, 2013)
4) Implement outreach plan to build support for funding measure (From April, 2013—April, 2014)
5) election campaign (District limited in what it can do. 3rd party runs campaign)( From April, 2014
—November, 2014)
6) Conservation vision public support outreach (April 2012 —April 2013)
7) Funding Measure Public Support(April 2013 —April 2014)
Operations
1) Complete the two frequency District Wide Radio System. (First part of the Operations
Department Infrastructure Plan)
2) Begin to address the need to increase minimum staffing to 2 late shift rangers in each area
(requires 2 new ranger positions and two patrol vehicles). (First part of the Operations
Department 5-Year Staffing Plan)
3) Begin to address the need to increase administrative need in each field office (requires the
ability to increase the current half time Administrative Clerk positions to 2 full time
i
Administrative Assistants). (Second part of the Operations Department 5-Year Staffing Plan)
4) Continue the remodel and expansion of the Skyline Area Field Office Complex. (First part of the
Operations Department Infrastructure Plan)
5) Continue the process of creating a permanent South Area Field Office Complex. (Second part of
the Operations Department Infrastructure Plan)
6) Purchase a Large Excavator with masticator attachment. (Second part of the Large Equipment
Portion of the Operations Department 5-Year Capital Equipment Plan)
7) Complete the third and final volume of Operation Department policies (Administrative
Operations Manual). (Third part of the Operations Department 5-Year Policies and
Procedures Plan)
8) Evaluate and define the District's role in Fire Suppression. (Fourth part of the Operations
Department 5-Year Policies and Procedures Plan)
4.
qN Develop "Job Position Handbooks" for each Operation Department position to provide a source
mf consistent ongoing internal knowledge for future promotions and hires. (Fifth and final |
part mf the Operations Department 5-Year Policies and Procedures Plan)
Administration
1) Accounting software project implementation (Everyone)
2) Strategic Plan (Everyone)
3) Action Plan Development (Everymne)
4) Negotiations with FE/\(Human Resources)
5,� Class and Comp Study(Human \R�s�urc�s �
` ' �
6) Annual Staff Recognition Event (Human Resources)
7) Annual budget development and mid-year review (Budget and Accounting)
8"� The annual audit (Budget and �
` ' �
9) The Actuarial study for OPEB liabilities (will need to be done for June 30, 2011 and then again
every two years forever) (Budget and Accounting)
10)Re-districting (Clerk and Legal)
11)Biennial Review of the Conflict of Interest Code (Clerk and Legal)
12)Election for Wards 2, S, 4 and 7 (Clerk and Legal)
� Real Property
1) Greenbelt Preservation: Land additions/ Land Purchase partnerships/Coastside Protection Plan.
POST Proiects:
Madonna Creek Ranch, K8iramnmntes Ridge—H[F Grant Deadline
[ariUi, Sierra Azu| —SC\ANO Funding Partnership
Ra9|ey, Purioinma Creek Redwoods
� Horstrneyer, Sierra Azu|
Sempervirens Fund
/ -
/
� Ga|lomoav— Living Landscape Initiative
Lagnmarsinm—]t. Pumchase
0�
� - �
�
Saratoga tothe SeaHawthorns'Transfer—Town of Portola Valley
�
-
�
2) New Trail Easements �
� - CalWater Trail, ECdM �
�
3) Powell Dump Site Assessment, Monte Bello �
�
- Defer
Bear Creek Redwoods—Santa Clara County Parks
�
SF Bay Trail through SFPUC, Ravenswood
�
| Puhy1rnaUp|and/Guisti (purisimmabxthe Sea)
Ri6neVineyards Exchange, K4mnteBeUo
� -�-
Property Management
|
|
Managing Rental Accounts (Maintenance & Repair ofRentals)
District Radio System
GGNRATovver Co-location Project Management at Black Mountain
New Lease Negotiation vv/San Mateo County for District antennae at Pise Peak
Land Protection
�
GuUichspn Litigation at Saratoga Gap
Planning
�
� wng
1) Open Space/Conservation Vision
2) ECdK4 Parking and Trail Improvements
3) Guada|upeTK8DL
�N Hicks �
." �
5) W4indego Rennediation
6) Mt. Um Renmediation and Phase U Dernm|bimn
7) Mt. Um Implementation Phase U| - assuming grant funds are awarded |
| 8) Alma College Cleanup
� 9) ECdK4 Watershed Protection Program
y '
10)Action Plan and Budget Development and Reviews
11)Pond DR07-08 (Grant funding acquired)
12)Renewal of MOU with CDFG
13)South Area Field Office Planning and Design
14)Mindego Gateway Project
15)Cooley Landing Implementation
16)Fremont Older Safety Improvements
i
I
Me
The A,bne Pa rdox.a
The
MaIn7gement of
AgIvement
Jerry B. Harvey
JERRY B. HARvEY is professor of management sci- father-in-law suddenly said, "Let's get in the
ence at the George Washington University in car and go to Abilene and have dinner at the
Washington, D.C. He is a graduate of the Univer- cafeteria."
sity of Texas in Austin, where he earned an un- I thought, "What,go to Abilene?Fifty-three
dergraduate degree in business administration and miles? In this dust storm and heat?And in an
a Ph.D. in social psychology. unairconditioned 1958 Buick?"
A member of the International Consultant's But my wife chimed in with, "Sounds like
Foundation, a Diplomate of the American Board a great idea. I'd like to go. How about you,
of Professional Psychology, and a member of the Jerry?" Since my own preferences were obvi-
O.D. Network, he has served as a consultant to a ously out of step with the rest I replied,
wide variety of industrial,governmental, religious, "Sounds good to me,"and added, "I just hope
and voluntary organizations. He has written a your mother wants to go."
number of articles in the fields of organizational "Of course I want to go;' said my mother-in-
behavior and education and currently is involved law. "I haven't been to Abilene in a long time."
in the exploration of moral, ethical, and spiritual So into the car and off to Abilene we went.
issues of work. In the pursuit of that interest, his My predictions were fulfilled. The heat was
book, The Abilene Paradox and Other Medita- brutal. We were coated with a fine layer of
lions on Management, was published by Lex- dust that was cemented with perspiration by
ington Books in 1988. the time we arrived. The food at the cafeteria
provided first-rate testimonial material for
Tantacid commercials.
(population 5,607)was particularly hot—
he July afternoon in Coleman, Texas Some four hours and 106 miles later we re-
g Y g
104 degrees as measured b the Wal reen s
turned to Coleman ho
t and exhausted.We sat
Rexall Ex-Lax temperature gauge.In addition, in front of the fan for a long time in silence.
the wind was blowing fine-gained West Texas Then, both to be sociable and to break the si-
topsoil through the house. But the afternoon lence, I said, "It was a great trip, wasn't it?"
was still tolerable even potentially enjoy- No one spoke. Finally my mother-in-law
able.There was a fan going on the back porch; said, with some irritation, "Well, to tell the
there was cold lemonade; an truth, I reap didn't enjoy it much and would
d finally, there Y Y
Y
was entertainment. Dominoes. Perfect for the rather have stayed here. I just went along be-
conditions. The game required little more cause the three of you were so enthusiastic
physical exertion than an occasional mumbled about going. I wouldn't have gone if you all
comment, "Shuffle 'em," and an unhurried hadn't pressured me into it."
movement of the arm to place the spots in the I couldn't believe it. "What do you mean
appropriate perspective on the table.All in all, you all'?" I said. "Don't put me in the 'you
it had the makings of an agreeable Sunday all' group. I was delighted to be doing what
afternoon in Coleman—this is,it was until my we were doing. I didn't want to go. I only
From Organizational Dynamics,Summer 1988, pp. 17-43.® 1988 by the American Management Association, New York.All 1
rights reserved. Reprinted by permission.
went to satisfy the rest of you. You're the cul- scribe, in summarized case-study examples,
prits." how they occur in a variety of organizations;
My wife looked shocked. "Don't call me a (3) discuss the underlying causal dynamics;
culprit. You and Daddy and Mama were the (4) indicate some of the implications of accept-
ones who wanted to go. I just went along to ing this model for describing organizational be- J
be sociable and to keep you happy. I would havior; (5) make recommendations for coping
have had to be crazy to want to go out in heat with the paradox; and, in conclusion, (6) relate
like that." the paradox to a broader existential issue.
Her father entered the conversation
abruptly. "Hell!" he said.
He proceeded to expand on what was al- SYMPTOMS of THE PARADOX
ready absolutely clear."Listen,I never wanted The inability to manage agreement,not the in-
to go to Abilene. I just thought you might be ability to manage conflict, is the essential
bored.You visit so seldom I wanted to be sure symptom that defines organizations caught in
you enjoyed it. I would have preferred to play the web of the Abilene Paradox.That inability
another game of dominoes and eat the left- to manage agreement effectively is expressed
overs in the icebox." by six specific subsymptoms, all of which
After the outburst of recrimination we all were present in our family Abilene group.
sat back in silence. Here we were, four rea-
sonably sensible people who, of our own vo- as individuals,as to the nature of the situation
lition, had just taken a 106-mile trip across a or problem facing the organization.For exam-
godforsaken desert in a furnace-like tempera- ple, members of the Abilene group agreed
tore through a cloud-like dust storm to eat that they were enjoying themselves sitting in
unpalatable food at ahole-in-the-wall cafete- front of the fan, sipping lemonade, and play-
ria in Abilene, when none of us had really ing dominoes.
wanted to go. In fact, to be more accurate, 2. Organization members agree privately,
we'd done just the opposite of what we
ted to do. The whole situation simply as individuals, as to the steps that would be
want make sense. required to cope with the situation or problem
didn'At least it didn't make sense at the time. they face. For members of the Abilene group
But since that day in Coleman, I have ob- "more of the same"was a solution that would
have adequately satisfied their individual and
served, consulted with, and been a part of
collective desires.
more than one organization that has been
caught in the same situation. As a result, they 3. Organization members fail to accurately
have either taken aside-trip, or, occasionally, communicate their desires and/or beliefs to one
a terminal journey to Abilene, when Dallas or another. In fact, they do just the opposite and
Houston or Tokyo was where they really thereby lead one another into misperceiving the
collective reality. Each member of the Abilene
wanted to go. And for most of those organi-
zations, the negative consequences of such group, for example, communicated inaccurate
data to other members of the organization.The
trips, measured in terms of both human cols-
data,in effect,said, "Yeah,it's a great idea.Let's
ery and economic loss, have been much
greater than for our little Abilene group. go to Abilene;' when in reality members of the
This article is concerned with that pars- organization individually and collectively pre-
dox—the Abilene Paradox. Stated simply, it ferred to stay in Coleman.
is as follows: Organizations frequently take 4. With such invalid and inaccurate infor-
actions in contradiction to what they really mation, organization members make collec-
want to do and therefore defeat the very pur- five decisions that lead them to take actions
poses they are trying to achieve. It also deals contrary to what they want to do,and thereby
with a major corollary of the paradox, which arrive at results that are counterproductive to
is that the inability to manage agreement is a ma- the organization's intent and purposes. Thus,
jor source of organization dysfunction. Last, the the Abilene group went to Abilene when it
article is designed to help members of organi- preferred to do something else.
zations cope more effectively with the para- 5. As a result of taking actions that are coun-
dox's pernicious influence. terproductive, organization members experi-
As a means of accomplishing the above, I ence frustration, anger, irritation, and
shall: (1) describe the symptoms exhibited by dissatisfaction with their organization. Conse-
organizations caught in the paradox; (2) de- quently, they form subgroups with trusted ac-
2
quaintances and blame other subgroups for would make the company look bad in the
the organization's dilemma. Frequently, they press and, in addition, would probably cause
also blame authority figures and one another. his vice-president's ulcer to kick up or per-
Such phenomena were illustrated in the haps even cause him to quit, "because he has
Abilene group by the "culprit" argument that staked his professional reputation on the pro-
occurred when we had returned to the com- ject's success."
fort of the fan. Similarly, the vice-president for research
6. Finally, if organization members do not says he can't let the president or the research
deal with the generic issue—the inability to manager know of his reservations because the
manage agreement—the cycle repeats itself president is so committed to it that "I would
with greater intensity. The Abilene group, for probably get fired for insubordination if I
a variety of reasons, the most important of questioned the project."
which was that it became conscious of the Finally, the research manager says he can't
process, did not reach that point. let the president or vice-president know of his
To repeat, the Abilene Paradox reflects a doubts about the project because of their ex-
failure to manage agreement. In fact, it is my treme commitment to the project's success.
contention that the inability to cope with All indicate that in meetings ng s with one an
-
(manage) agreement, rather than the inability other, they try to maintain an optimistic facade
to cope with (manage) conflict, is the single so the others won't worry unduly about the
most pressing issue of modern organizations. project. The research director, in particular, ad-
mits to writing ambiguous progress reports so
"inter-
OTHER TRIPS To ABILFIVE the president and the vice-president can "inter-
pret them to suit themselves." In fact, he says
The Abilene Paradox is no respecter of indi- he tends to slant them to the "positive" side,
viduals,organizations,or institutions.Follow- "given how committed the brass are."
ing are descriptions of two other trips to The scent of the Abilene trail wafts from a
Abilene that illustrate both the pervasiveness paneled conference room where the project re-
of the paradox and its underlying dynamics. search budget is being considered for the fol-
lowing fiscal year. In the meeting itself,
Case No. 1: The Boardroom. praises are heaped on the questionable project
The Ozyx Corporation is a relatively small and a unanimous decision is made to con-
industrial company that has embarked on a tinue it for yet another year. Symbolically, the
trip to Abilene. The president of Ozyx has organization has boarded a bus to Abilene.
hired a consultant to help discover the rea-
sons for the poor profit picture of the com- In fact,although the real issue of agreement
pany in general and the low morale and was confronted approximately eight months
productivity of the R&D division in particu- after the bus departed, it was nearly too late.
lar. During the process of investigation, the The organization failed to meet a payroll and
consultant becomes interested in a research g p y
project in which the company has invested a underwent a two-year period of personnel
sizable proportion of its R&D budget. cutbacks, retrenchments, and austerity. Mo-
rale suffered, the most competent technical
When asked about the project by the con- personnel resigned, and the organization's
sultant in the privacy of their offices, the prestige in the industry declined.
president, the vice-president for research, and
the research manager each describes it as an Case No. 2: The Watergate.
idea that looked great on paper but will ulti- Apart from the grave question of who did
what, Watergate presents America with the
mately fail because of the unavailability of the profound puzzle of why. What is it that led
technology required to make it work. Each of such a wide assortment of men,many of them
them also acknowledges that continued sup- high public officials, possibly including the
port of the project will create cash flow prob- President himself, either to instigate or to go
lems that will jeopardize the very existence of along with and later try to hide a pattern of
behavior that by now appears not only repre-
the total organization. hensible,but stupid?(The Washington Star and
Furthermore, each individual indicates he Daily News,editorial,May 27, 1973.)
has not told the others about his reservations.
When asked why, the president says he can't One possible answer to the editorial
reveal his "true" feelings because abandoning writer's question can be found by probing
the project,which has been widely publicized, into the dynamics of the Abilene Paradox. I
3
shall let the reader reach his own conclusions, shared agreement. Third, the data surround-
though,on the basis of the following excerpts ing the case clearly indicate that the plan mul-
from testimony before the Senate investigat- tiplied the organization's problems rather
ing committee on "The Watergate Affair." than solved them. And finally, the organiza-
In one exchange, Senator Howard Baker lion broke into subgroups with the various
asked Herbert Porter, then a member of the principals, such as the President, Mitchell,
White House staff, why he (Porter) found Porter, Dean, and Magruder, blaming one an-
himself "in charge of or deeply involved in a other for the dilemma in which they found
dirty tricks operation of the campaign." In re- themselves, and internecine warfare ensued.
sponse, Porter indicated that he had had In summary, it is possible that because of
qualms about what he was doing, but that he the inability of White House staff members to
"... was not one to stand up in a meeting cope with the fact that they agreed, the or-
and say that this should be stopped....I kind ganization took a trip to Abilene.
of drifted along."
And when asked by Baker why he had
"drifted along," Porter replied, "In all honesty, ANALYZING THE PARADOX
because of the fear of the group pressure that
would ensue,of not being a team player,"and The Abilene Paradox can be stated succinctly
' .. . I felt a deep sense of loyalty to him [the as follows: Organizations frequently take ac-
President] or was appealed to on that basis." lions in contradiction to the data they have
for dealing with problems and, as a result,
(The Washington Post, June 8, 1973, p. 20.) compound their problems rather than solve
Jeb Magruder gave a similar response to a them. Like all paradoxes, the Abilene Paradox
question posed by committee counsel Dash. deals with absurdity.On the surface, it makes
Specifically, when asked about his, Mr. little sense for organizations,whether they are
Deari s, and Mr. Mitchell's reactions to Mr. couples or companies, bureaucracies or gov-
Liddy's proposal,which included bugging the
Watergate, Mr. Magruder replied, "I think all ernments, to take actions that are diametri-
three of us were appalled. The scope and size cally opposed to the data they possess for
of the project were something that at least in solving crucial organizational problems. Such
my mind were not envisioned. I do not think actions are particularly absurd since they tend
it was in Mr. Mitchell's mind or Mr. Deans, to compound the very problems they are de-
signed Ican't comment on their states of signed to solve and thereby defeat the pur-
mind at that time." poses the organization is trying to achieve.
Mr. Mitchell, an understated way, which However,as Robert Rapaport and others have
so cogently expressed it, paradoxes are gen-
was his way of dealing with difficult prob-
lems like this, indicated that this was not an Bally paradoxes only because they are based
"acceptable project." (The Washington Post, on a logic or rationale different from what we
June 15, 1973, p. A14.)
understand or expect.
Later in his testimony Mr. Magruder said, Discovering that different logic not only de-
" ...I think I can honestly say that no one stroys the paradoxical quality but also offers al-
was particularly overwhelmed with the pro- teunative ways for coping with similar
ject. But I think we felt that this information situations.Therefore,part of the dilemma facing
could be useful, and Mr. Mitchell agreed to an Abilene-bound organization may be the lack
approve the project, and I then notified the of a map—a theory or model—that provides ra-
parties of Mr.Mitchell's approval." (The Wash- tionality to the paradox.The purpose of the fol-
ington Post, June 15, 1973, p. A14.) lowing discussion is to provide such a map.
Although I obviously was not privy to the The map will be developed by examining
private conversations of the principal charac- the underlying psychological themes of the
ters, the data seem to reflect the essential ele- profit-making organization and the bureaucracy
ments of the Abilene Paradox. First, they and it will include the following landmarks: (1)
indicate agreement. Evidently, Mitchell, Por- Action Anxiety; (2) Negative Fantasies; (3)Real
ter, Dean, and Magruder agreed that the plan Risk; (4) Separation Anxiety; and (5) the Psy-
was inappropriate.("I think I can honestly say chological Reversal of Risk and Certainty.I hope
that no one was particularly overwhelmed that the discussion of such landmarks will pro-
with the project.") Second, the data indicate vide harried organization travelers with a new
that the principal figures then proceeded to map that will assist them in arriving at where
implement the plan in contradiction to their they really want to go and,in addition,will help
4
them in assessing the risks that are an inevi- might ask with equal justification Hamlet's
table part of the journey. subsequent searching question of what it is
that
ACTION ANXIETY makes us rather bear those ills we have than
Action anxiety provides the first landmark for fly to others we know not of. (Hamlet, Act
locating roadways that bypass Abilene. The III, Scene II)
concept of action anxiety says that the reasons
organization members take actions in contradic- In short, like the various Abilene protago-
tion to their understanding of the organization's nists, we are faced with a deeper question:
problems lies in the intense anxiety that is cre- Why does action anxiety occur?
ated as they think about acting in accordance
with what they believe needs to be done. As a NEGATIVE FANTASIES
result, they opt to endure the professional and
economic degradation of pursuing an unwork- Part of the answer to that question may be
able research project or the consequences of par- found in the negative fantasies organization
ticipating in an illegal activity rather than act in members have about acting in congruence
a manner congruent with their beliefs. It is not with what they believe should be done. Ham-
that organization members do not know what let experienced such fantasies.
needs to be done—they do know. For example, Specifically, Hamlet's fantasies of the alter-
the various principals in the research organiza- natives to the current evils were more evils,
tion cited knew they were working on a research and he didn't entertain the possibility that any
project that had no real possibility of succeed- action he might take could lead to an im-
ing. And the central figures of the Watergate provement in the situation. Hamlet's was not
episode apparently knew that, for a variety of an unusual case, though. In fact, the "Hamlet
reasons, the plan to bug the Watergate did not syndrome" clearly occurred in both organiza-
make sense. tions previously described. All of the organi-
Such action anxiety experienced by the zation protagonists had negative fantasies
various protagonists may not make sense,but about what would happen if they acted in ac-
the dilemma is not a new one. In fact, it is cordance with what they believed needed to
very similar to the anxiety experienced by be done.
Hamlet, who expressed it most eloquently in The various managers in the R&D organi-
the opening lines of his famous soliloquy: zation foresaw loss of face, prestige, position,
To be or not to be; that is the question: and even health as the outcome of confronting
Whether'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the issues about which they believed, incor-
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune rectly, that they disagreed.Similarly, members
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles of the White House staff feared being made
And by opposing, end them?... scapegoats,branded as disloyal, or ostracized
(Hamlet, Act III, Scene II)
as
non-team players if they acted in accord-
It is easyto translate Hamlet's anxious la-
ance with their understanding of reality.
ment into that of the research manager of our To sum up, action anxiety is supported by
the negative fantasies that organization m
g
em-
R&D organization as he contemplates -
es his re
p bers have about what will happen as a con-
port to the meeting of the budget committee. sequence of their actin in accordance with
It might go something like this: q g
their understanding of what is sensible. The
To maintain my sense of integrity and self- negative fantasies,in turn,serve an important
worth or compromise it,that is the question. function for the persons who have them.Spe-
Whether'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the cifically, they provide the individual with an
ignominy that comes from managing a non- excuse that releases him psychologically, both
sensical research project,or the fear and anxi- in his own eyes and frequently the a es of
ety that come from making a report the Y q Y m Y
president and V.P. may not like to hear. others,from the responsibility of having to act
to solve organization problems.
So, the anguish,procrastination, and coun- It is not sufficient, though, to stop with the
terproductive behavior of the research man- explanation of negative fantasies as the basis
ager or members of the White House staff are for the inability of organizations to cope with
not much different from those of Hamlet; all agreement. We must look deeper and ask still
5
other questions: What is the source of the and related and a reciprocal need not to be
negative fantasies? Why do they occur? separated or alone. Everyone of us, though,
has experienced aloneness. From the time the
REAL RISK umbilical cord was cut, we have experienced
the real anguish of separation—broken friend-
Risk is a reality of life, a condition of exist- ships, divorces, deaths, and exclusions. C. P.
ence. John Kennedy articulated it in another Snow vividly described the tragic interplay
way when he said at a news conference, "Life between loneliness and connection:
is unfair." By that I believe he meant we do
not know, nor can we predict or control with Each of us is alone; sometimes we escape
from our solitariness, through love and af-
certainty, either the events that impinge upon fection or perhaps creative moments, but
us or the outcomes of actions we undertake these triumphs of Iife are pools of light we
in response to those events. make for ourselves while the edge of the
Consequently,in the business environment, road is black. Each of us dies alone.
the research manager might find that con-
fronting the president and the vice-president That fear of taking risks that may result in
with the fact that the project was a "turkey' our separation from others is at the core of
might result in his being fired. And Mr. Por- the paradox. It finds expression in ways of
ter's saying that an illegal plan of surveillance which we may be unaware, and it is ulti-
should not be carried out could have caused mately the cause of the self-defeating, collec-
his ostracism as a non-team player. There are tive deception that leads to self-destructive
too many cases when confrontation of this decisions within organizations.
sort has resulted in such consequences. The Concretely,such fear of separation leads ce-
real question, though, is not, Are such fanta- search committees to fund projects that none
sized consequences possible? but, Are such of its members want and, perhaps, White
fantasized consequences likely? House staff members to engage in illegal ac-
Thus real risk is an existential condition, tivities that they don't really support.
and all actions do have consequences that, to
paraphrase Hamlet, may be worse than the
evils of the present. As a result of their un- THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVERSAL OF
willingness to accept existential risk as one of RISK AND CERTAINTY
life's givens,however,people may opt to take One piece of the map is still missing.It relates
their organizations to Abilene rather than run to the peculiar reversal that occurs in our
the risk, no matter how small, of ending up thought processes as we try to cope with the
somewhere worse. Abilene Paradox. For example, we frequently
Again, though, one must ask, What is the fail to take action in an organizational setting
real risk that underlies the decision to opt for because we fear that the actions we take may
Abilene? What is at the core of the paradox? result in our separation from others, or,in the
language of Mr. Porter, we are afraid of being
FEAR OF SEPARATION tabbed as"disloyal" or are afraid of being os-
tracized as "non-team players." But therein
One is tempted to say that the core of the lies a paradox within a paradox, because our
paradox lies in the individual's fear of the un- very unwillingness to take such risks virtu-
known. Actually, we do not fear what is un- ally ensures the separation and aloneness we
known, but we are afraid of things we do so fear. In effect, we reverse "real existential
know about. What do we know about that risk" and "fantasied risk" and by doing so
frightens us into such apparently inexplicable transform what is a probability statement
organizational behavior? into what, for all practical purposes,becomes
Separation, alienation, and loneliness are a certainty.
things we do know about—and fear. Both re- Take the R&D organization described ear-
search and experience indicate that ostracism is lier. When the project fails, some people will
one of the most powerful punishments that can get fired, demoted, or sentenced to the pur-
be devised.Solitary confinement does not draw gatory of a make-work job in an out-of-the-
its coercive strength from physical deprivation. way office. For those who remain, the
The evidence is overwhelming that we have a atmosphere of blame, distrust, suspicion, and
fundamental need to be connected, engaged, backbiting that accompanies such failure will
6
i
serve only to further alienate and separate Thus,arguments and accusations that identify
those who remain. victims and victimizers at best become symp-
The Watergate situation is similar.The prin- toms of the paradox, and, at worst, drain en-
cipals evidently feared being ostracized as ergy from the problem-solving efforts
disloyal non-team players.When the illegality required to redirect the organization along the
of the act surfaced, however, it was nearly in- route it really wants to take.
evitable that blaming, self-protective actions, • Collusion. A basic implication of the
and scapegoating would result in the very Abilene Paradox is that human problems of
emotional separation from both the President organization are reciprocal in nature. As
and one another that the principals feared. Robert Tannenbaum has pointed out, you
Thus, by reversing real and fantasied risk, can't have an autocratic boss unless subordi-
they had taken effective action to ensure the nates are willing to collude with his autocracy,
outcome they least desired. and you can't have obsequious subordinates
One final question remains: Why do we unless the boss is willing to collude with their
make this peculiar reversal?I support the gen- obsequiousness.
eral thesis of Alvin Toffler and Philip Slater, Thus, in plain terms, each person in a self-
who contend that our cultural emphasis on defeating, Abilene-bound organization col-
technology, competition, individualism, tem- ludes with others, including peers, superiors,
porariness, and mobility has resulted in a and subordinates, sometimes consciously and
population that has frequently experienced sometimes subconsciously, to create the di-
the terror of loneliness and seldom the satis- lemma in which the organization finds itself.
faction of engagement. Consequently, though To adopt a cliche of modern organization, "It
we have learned of the reality of separation, takes a real team effort to go to Abilene." In
we have not had the opportunity to learn the that sense each person, in his own collusive
reciprocal skills of connection, with the result manner, shares responsibility for the trip, so
that, like the ancient dinosaurs, we are breed- searching for a locus of blame outside oneself
ing organizations with self-destructive deci- serves no useful purpose for either the organi-
sion-making proclivities. zation or the individual. It neither helps the
organization handle its dilemma of unrecog-
nized agreement nor does it provide psycho-
A POSSIBLE ABILENE BYPASS logical relief for the individual, because
focusing on conflict when agreement is the is-
Existential risk is inherent in living, so it is sue is devoid of reality. In fact,it does just the
impossible to provide a map
that meets the opposite, for it causes the organization to fo-
no-risk criterion,but it may be possible to de- cus on managing conflict when it should be
scribe the route in terms that make the land- focusing on managing agreement.
marks understandable and that will clan the
clarify Responsibility problem-solving action. A
P tiJ for P S
risks involved. In order to do that, however, second question is,Who is responsible for get-
some commonly used terms such as victim, ting us out of this place? To that question is
victimizer, collusion, responsibility, conflict, frequently appended a third one, generally
conformity, courage, confrontation, reality, rhetorical in nature, with "should" overtones,
and knowledge have to be redefined. In ad- such as, Isn't it the boss (or the ranking gov-
dition,we need to explore the relevance of the ernment official) who is responsible for doing
redefined concepts for bypassing or getting something about the situation?
out of Abilene. The answer to that question is no,
• Victim and victimizer. Blaming and fault- The key to understanding the functionality
finding behavior is one of the basic symptoms of the no answer is the knowledge that, when
of organizations that have found their way to the dynamics of the paradox are in operation,
Abilene, and the target of blame generally the authority figure—and others—are in un-
doesn't include the one who criticizes. Stated knowing agreement with one another con-
in different terms, executives begin to assign cerning the organization's problems and the
one another to roles of victims and victimiz- steps necessary to solve them. Consequently,
ers. Ironic as it may seem, however, this as- the power to destroy the paradox's pernicious
signment of roles is both irrelevant and influence comes from confronting and speak-
dysfunctional, because once a business or a ing to the underlying reality of the situation,
government fails to manage its agreement and and not from one's hierarchical position
arrives in Abilene,all its members are victims. within the organization. Therefore, any or-
7
i
4
ganization member who chooses to risk con- two kinds of conflict—real and phony. On the
fronting that reality possesses the necessary surface, they look alike. But, like headaches,
leverage to release the organization from the they have different causes and therefore re-
paradox's grip. quire different treatment.
In one situation, it may be a research direc- Real conflict occurs when people have real
tor's saying, "I don't think this project can suc- differences("My reading of the research print-
ceed." In another, it may be Jeb Magruder's outs says that we can make the project prof-
response to this question of Senator Baker: itable." "I come to the opposite conclusion.")
If you were concerned because the action ("I suggest we'bug' the Watergate." "I'm not
was known to you to be illegal,because you in favor of it.")
thought it improper or unethical, you Phony conflict, on the other hand, occurs
thought the prospects for success were very when people agree on the actions they want
meager, and you doubted the reliability of
Mr. Liddy, what on earth would it have to take, and then do the opposite. The result-
taken to decide against the plan? ing anger, frustration, and blaming behavior
Magruder's reply was brief and to the point: generally termed "conflict" are not based on
real differences. Rather, they stem from the
Not very much, sir. I am sure that if I had protective reactions that occur when a deci-
fought vigorously against it, I think any of sion that no one believed in or was committed
us could have had the plan cancelled. (Time, to in the first place goes sour. In fact, as a
June 25, 1973, p. 12.) paradox within a paradox, such conflict is
• Reality, knowledge, confrontation. Accept- symptomatic of agreement!
ing the paradox as a model describing certain
kinds of organizational dilemmas also re- GROUP TYRANNY AND CONFORMITY
quires rethinking the nature of reality and
knowledge, as they are generally described in Understanding the dynamics of the Abilene
organizations.In brief,the underlying dynam- Paradox also requires a"reorientation'in think-
ics of the paradox clearly indicate that organ- ing about concepts such as "group tyranny"—
zation members generally know more about the loss of the individual's distinctiveness in a
issues confronting the organization than they group, and the impact of conformity pressures
don't know. The various principals attending on individual behavior in organizations. Group
the research budget meeting,for example,knew tyranny and its result, individual conformity,
the research project was doomed to failure.And generally refer to the coercive effect of group
Jeb Magruder spoke as a true Abilener when he pressures on individual behavior.Sometimes re-
said, "We knew it was illegal, probably, inap- ferred to as Groupthink, it has been damned as
propriate." (The Washington Post, June 15, 1973, the cause for everything from the lack of crea-
p.A16.) tivity in organizations ("A camel is a horse de-
Given this concept of reality and its relation- signed by a committee") to antisocial behavior
ship to knowledge, confrontation becomes the in juveniles("My Johnny is a good boy.He was
process of facing issues squarely, openly,and di- just pressured into shoplifting by the kids he
rectly in an effort to discover whether the nature runs around with").
of the underlying collective reality is agreement However, analysis of the dynamics under-
or conflict Accepting such a definition of con- lying the Abilene Paradox opens up the pos-
frontation has an important implication for sibility that individuals frequently perceive
change agents interested in making organizations and feel as if they are experiencing the coer-
more effective. That is, organization change and cive organization conformity pressures when,
effectiveness may be facilitated as much by con- in actuality, they are responding to the dy-
fronting the organization with what it knows and namics of mismanaged agreement. Conceptu-
agrees upon as by confronting it with what it alizing, experiencing, and responding to such
doesn't know or disagrees about. experiences as reflecting the tyrannical pres-
sures of a group again serves as an important
REAL CONFLICT AND PHONY CONFLICT psychological use for the individual: As was
previously said, it releases him from the re-
Conflict is a part of any organization. Cou- sponsibility of taking action and thus becomes
ples, R&D divisions, and White House staffs a defense against action.Thus,much behavior
all engage in it. However, analysis of the within an organization that heretofore has
Abilene paradox opens up the possibility of been conceptualized as reflecting the tyranny
I
of conformity pressures is really an expression easy to make a preliminary diagnosis as to
of collective anxiety and therefore must be re- whether an organization is on the way to
conceptualized as a defense against acting. Abilene or is involved in legitimate, substan-
A well-known example of such faulty con- tive conflict by responding to the Diagnostic
ceptualization comes to mind. It involves the Survey shown in the accompanying figure. If
heroic sheriff in the classic Western movies
who stands alone in the jailhouse door and ORGANIZATION
singlehandedly protects a suspected(and usu-
ally innocent) horse thief or murderer from DIAGNOSTIC SURVEY
the irrational, tyrannical forces of group be-
havior—that is, an armed lynch mob. Gener-
ally, as a part of the ritual, he threatens to Instructions:For each of the following statements
blow off the head of anyone who takes a step please indicate whether it is or is not charac-
toward the door. Few ever take the challenge, teristic of your organization.
1. There is conflict in the organization.
and the reason is not the sheriff's six-shooter. 2. Organization members feel frustrated,im-
What good would one pistol be against an potent, and unhappy when trying to deal
armed mob of several hundred people who with it.Many are looking for ways to escape.
really want to hang somebody? Thus, the gun They may avoid meetings at which the con-
in fact serves as a face-saving measure for flict is discussed, they may be looking for
other jobs,or they may spend as much time
people who don't wish to participate in a away from the office as possible by taking
hanging anyway. ("We had to back off. The unneeded trips or vacation or sick leave.
sheriff threatened to blow our heads off.") 3. Organization members place much of the
The situation is one involving agreement blame for the dilemma on the boss or other
management,for a careful investigator canvass- groups. In 'back room" conversations among
in the crowd under conditions in which the friends the boss is termed incompetent ineffec-
g tive, "out of touch,." or a candidate for early
anonymity of the interviewees'responses could retirement. To his face, nothing is said, or at
be guaranteed would probably find:(1)that few best,only oblique references are made concern-
of the individuals in the crowd really wanted ing his role in the organization's problems. If
to take part in the hanging; (2) that each per- the boss isn't blamed,some other group,divi-
sion,or unit is seem as the cause of the trouble:
sori s participation came about because he per- "We would do fine if it were not for the damn
ceived,falsely, that others wanted to do so;and fools in Division X."
(3) that each person was afraid that others in 4. Small subgroups of trusted friends and
the crowd would ostracize or in some other way associates meet informally over coffee,lunch,
punish him if he did not go along. and so on to discuss organizational prob-
lems. There is a lot of agreement among the
members of these subgroups as to the cause
of the troubles and the solutions that would
DIAGNOSING THE PARADOX be effective in solving them. Such conversa-
tions are frequently punctuated with state-
Most individuals like quick solutions "clean"so- ments beginning with, "We should do..."
lutions "no risk"solutions too organization rob-
rg p 5. In meetings where those same people
lems. Furthermore, they tend to prefer solutions meet with members from other subgroups to
based on mechanics and technology, rather than discuss the problem they "soften their posi-
on attitudes of"being."Unfortunately,the under- tions,"state them in ambiguous language,or
even reverse them to suit the apparentposi-
tions' reality of the paradox makes it impossible
PP i
lying tY P P taken b others.
to provide either no-risk solutions or action tech-
Y
P 6. After such meetings, members complain
nolo 'es divorced from existential attitudes and to trustedassocia
tes that they really
didn't
realities. I do,however,have two sets of sugges- say what they wanted to say, but also pro-
tions for dealing with these situations.One set of vide a list of convincing reasons why the
suggestions relates to diagnosing the situation, comments, suggestions, and reactions they
wanted to make would have been impossi-
the other to confronting it. ble. Trusted associates commiserate and say
When faced with the possibility that the the same was true for them.
paradox is operating, one must first make a di- 7. Attempts to solve the problem do not
agnosis of the situation, and the key to diagno- seem to work.In fact,such attempts seem to
add to the problem or make it worse.
sis is an answer to the question, Is the 8. Outside the organization individuals
organization involved in a conflict-management seem to get along better,be happier, and op-
or an agreement-management situation?As an erate more effectively than they do within it.
organization member, I have found it relatively
9 �
• I
i
I
the answer to the first question is "not char- don't know. Anyway, I am concerned that I
acteristic," the organization is probably not in may end up misleading you and that we
may end up misleading one another, and if
Abilene or conflict. If the answer is "charac- we aren't careful, we may continue to work
teristic," the organization has a problem of on a problem that none of us wants and that
either real or phony conflict, and the answers might even bankrupt us. That's why I need
to the succeeding questions help to determine to know where the rest of you stand.I would
which it is. appreciate any of your thoughts about the
In brief, for reasons that should be apparent project. Do you think it can succeed?
from the theory discussed here, the more times What kinds of results can one expect if he
"characteristic" is checked, the more likely the decides to undertake the process of confron-
organization is on its way to Abilene. In prac- tation? I have found that the results can be
tical terms, a process for managing agreement divided into two categories, at the technical
is called for. And finally, if the answer to the level and at the level of existential experience.
first question falls into the "characteristic' cate- Of the two, I have found that for the person
gory and most of the other answers fall into the who undertakes to initiate the process of con-
category "not characteristic," one may be rela- frontation, the existential experience takes
tively sure the organization is in a real conflict precedence in his ultimate evaluation of the
situation and some sort of conflict management outcome of the action he takes.
intervention is in order.
• The technical level. If one is correct in di-
n�. 'M 'm IM 0M Mb ' ' ' " " "" " agnosing the presence of the paradox, I have
COPING wrrH THE PARADOX found the solution to the technical problem
may be almost absurdly quick and simple,
Assuming a preliminary diagnosis leads one nearly on the order of this:
to believe he and/or his organization is on "Do you mean that you and I and the rest
the way to Abilene, the individual may of us have been dragging along with a re-
choose to actively confront the situation to de- search project that none of us has thought
termine directly whether the underlying real- would work? It's crazy. I can't believe we
ity is one of agreement or conflict. Although would do it, but we did. Let's figure out how
there are, perhaps, a number of ways to do it, we can cancel it and get to doing something
I have found one way in particular to be ef- productive." In fact, the simplicity and quick-
fective—confrontation in a group setting. The ness of the solution frequently don't seem
basic approach involves gathering organza- possible to most of us, since we have been
tion members who are key figures in the prob- trained to believe that the solution to conflict
lem and its solution into a group setting. requires a long, arduous process of debilitat-
Working within the context of a group is im- ing problem solving.
portant because the dynamics of the Abilene Also,since existential risk is always present,
Paradox involve collusion among group it is possible that one's diagnosis is incorrect,
members; therefore, to try to solve the di- and the process of confrontation lifts to the
lemma by working with individuals and level of public examination real, substantive
small subgroups would involve further collu- conflict, which may result in heated debate
sion with the dynamics leading up to the about technology, personalities, and/or ad-
paradox. ministrative approaches.There is evidence that
The first step in the meeting is for the in- such debates, properly managed, can be the
dividual who"calls" it(that is, the confronter) basis for creativity in organizational problem
to own up to his position first and be open solving. There is also the possibility, however,
to the feedback he gets. The owning up proc- that such debates cannot be managed, and
ess lets the others know that he is concerned substantiating the concept of existential risk,
lest the organization may be making a deci- the person who initiates the risk may get fired
sion contrary to the desires of any of its mem- or ostracized. But that again leads to the ne-
bers. A statement like this demonstrates the cessity of evaluating the results of such con-
beginning of such an approach: frontation at the existential level.
• Existential results. Evaluating the out-
I want to talk with you about the research come of confrontation from an existential
project. Although I have previously said framework is quite different from evaluating
things to the contrary, I frankly don't think q g
it will work,and I am very anxious about it. it from a set of technical criteria. How do I
I suspect others may feel the same, but I reach this conclusion?Simply from interview-
10
ing a variety of people who have chosen to THE ABILENE PARADOX AND THE
confront the paradox and listening to their re- MYTH OF SISYPHUS
sponses.In short,for them,psychological suc-
cess and failure apparently are divorced from In essence, this paper proposes that there is
what is traditionally accepted in organizations an underlying organizational reality that in-
as criteria for success and failure. cludes both agreement and disagreement, co-
For instance, some examples of success are operation and conflict. However, the decision
described when people are asked,"What hap- to confront the possibility of organization
agreement is all too difficult and rare, and its
pened when you confronted the issue?" They
may answer this way: opposite, the decision to accept the evils of
the present, is all to common. Yet those two
I was told we had enough boat rockers in decisions may reflect the essence of both our
the organization, and I got fired. It hurt at human potential and our human imperfecta-
first,but in retrospect it was the greatest day bility. Consequently, the choice to confront re-
of my life. I've got another job and I'm de- ality in the family, the church, the business,
lighted. I'm a free man. or the bureaucracy, though made only occa-
sionally, may reflect those "peak experiences"
Another description of success might be this: that provide meaning to the valleys.
In many ways, they may reflect the expe-
I said I don't think the research project can rience of Sisyphus. As you may remember,
succeed and the others looked shocked and Sisyphus was condemned by Pluto to a per-
quickly agreed.The upshot of the whole deal petuity of pushing a large stone to the top of
is that I got a promotion and am now known as a "rising star." It was the high point of a mountain, only to see it return to its original
my career. position when he released it. As Camus sug-
gested in his revision of the myth, Sisyphus's
Similarly, those who fail to confront the task was absurd and totally devoid of mean-
' paradox describe failure in terms divorced ing. For most of us, though, the lives we lead
from technical results. For example, one may pushing papers or hubcaps are no less absurd,
report: and in many ways we probably spend about
as much time pushing rocks in our organiza-
I didn't say anything and we rocked along bons as did Sisyphus.
until the whole thing exploded and Joe got Camus also points out, though, that on oc-
fired. There is still a lot of tension in the or- casion as Sisyphus released his rock and
ganization, and we are still in trouble, but I watched it return to its resting place at the
got a good performance review last time. I bottom of the hill, he was able to recognize
still feel lousy about the whole thing,though. the absurdity of his lot and, for brief periods
of time, transcend it.
From a different viewpoint, an individual So it may be with confronting the Abilene
may describe his sense of failure in these words:
Y Paradox. Confronting the absurd paradox of
agreement may provide, through activity,
I knew I should have said something and I what Sisyphus gained from his passive but
didn't.When the project failed, I was a con- conscious acceptance of his fate. Thus,
venient whipping boy.. I got demoted; I still
have a job, but my future here is definitely through the process of active confrontation
limited. In a way I deserve what I of but
with reality,
we may take respite frompu
sh-
it doesn't make it any easier to accept be- ing our rocks on their endless journeys and,
cause of that.
for brief moments, experience what C. P.
Snow termed "the triumphs of life we make
Most important, the act of confrontation for ourselves" within those absurdities we call
apparently provides intrinsic psychological organizations.
satisfaction, regardless of the technological
outcomes for those who attempt it. The real SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
meaning of that existential experience, and its
relevance to a wide variety of organizations, Chris Argyris in Intervention Theory and
may lie, therefore,not in the scientific analysis Method: A Behavioral Science View (Addison-
of decision making but in the plight of Sisy- Wesley, 1970) gives an excellent description of
phus. That is something the reader will have the process of"owning up"and being"open,"
to decide for himself. both of which are major skills required if one
11 �I
i
is to assist his organization in avoiding or ing with many of the dilemmas described in
leaving Abilene. "The Abilene Paradox." Specifically, many of
Albert Camus in The Myth of Sisyphus and the events that Janis describes as examples of
Other Essays (Vintage Books, Random House, conformity pressures (that is, group tyranny)
1955) provides an existential viewpoint for I would conceptualize as mismanaged
coping with absurdity, of which the Abilene agreement.
Paradox is a clear example. In his The Pursuit of Loneliness (Beacon Press,
Jerry B. Harvey and R. Albertson in "Neu-
rotic Organizations: Symptoms, Causes and 1970), Philip Slater contributes an in-depth de-
Treatment," Parts I and II, Personnel Journal scription of the impact of the role of alienation, i
(September and October 1971) provide a de- separation,and loneliness(a major contribution
tailed example of a third-party intervention to the Abilene Paradox) in our culture.
into an organization caught in a variety of Richard Walton in Interpersonal Peacemaking:
agreement-management dilemmas. Confrontation and Third Party Consultation (Ad-
Irving Janis in Victims of Groupthink dison-Wesley, 1969) describes a variety of ap-
(Houghton-Mifflin Co., 1972) offers an alter- proaches for dealing with conflict when it is
native viewpoint for understanding and deal- real, rather than phony.
I
I
12
I