Interview with Ichak Kalderon Adizes

A = Ichak Kalderon Adizes; Ra = Rafeket Keret-Karavani; Ro = Arnon Rolnik Ra

We would like to thank you very much for your time. You are well known for the methodology you developed and the work you are doing with organizations and governments as well.

We would like to talk with you about the implementations that the virtual world have on your work. What is your view on the current and the future trends regarding virtual communication, and what will be its influences on the world of consultancy?

A

I will start with what you called “world of consultancy” before we get into the virtual communication. I hope I created a new field which is not consulting but “organizational therapy.” Consulting usually follows the medical analogy, you come to me and I give you a prescription and you are responsible for implementing my advice. In therapy we enable the patient to solve his own problems, we give him the tools to deal with them, and to cope with the environment he is struggling with. The job is to eventually emancipate the patient from external help.

In family therapy we are not treating the individual, we are treatingthe interactions. This is true for companies. When interactions are stuck, and the energy does not flow easily through the channels correctly, you get destructive conflict which stops the company from dealing with the environment.

I created a methodology that tells me whom to get into the room at the same time, so I can change the culture, the interactions, performance, and behaviors of the organization. This distinction is important when we talk about virtual change management.

Whom do I need in the room depends on what the problem is. Who is necessary in order to solve this problem? Who is holding power or influence over the problem, who is holding it back? Sometimes like in family therapy, it is the mother-in-law. If you are sitting and treating only the husband and wife, you are wasting your time. You need the mother-in-law in the room.

This group can be between two to thirty people. If it is thirty people I cannot do it virtually. The room has too many people and I cannot see the faces of everyone. I need to see the faces, they tell me when I’m stepping on a nerve. I watch the body language very closely, because in my methodology I work with high discipline: who talks when, about what, in what sequence.

My therapy is very systematized so the invited participants areadvancing together in the process of finding a solution. I can get into Zoom session with up to seven people. I take the core of the thirty people. The minimal core will be: the CEO, head of sales, head of human recourses, head of finance and head of operations. That’s because there are four major subsystems in any organization: client interface subsystem which is sales and marketing, financial subsystem, the human resources subsystem, and the operation subsystem. Now I have the core representing the subsystems. All problems are caused by disintegration. So when marketing outpaces production, it’s a problem. When production outpaces financial capability it’s a problem. If disintegration is the source of all problems the solution is integration. They have to advance together. Nobody is left behind.

But I do not start therapy with Zoom because there is no personalrelationship that enables me to control them when I’m in Zoom. When the subject matter gets explosive they ignore the camera, they ignore me. I have to establish my authority in-person first. I will not go to Zoom therapy until I feel that I created enough authority.

After we have a first draft solution, an illumination, with the core group,we have to include the others who can undermine the solution this four people arrived at. We go back to the thirty people to accommodate: “What is the problem? How will the solution work out? Why will it work? Why will it not work?” So the thirty will accommodate the illumination of the four to seven, and we are done.

Ra

So, you are saying that you first meet them face-to-face, then you follow up by Zoom meeting and then, when you have the thirty people in the room, it’s face-to-face once again.

A

Right. I start with the four to seven first face-to-face. I don’t need all the thirty to establish the acceptance of my rules.

Ro

As many other psychotherapists, and you see yourself as a therapist of the organization, you suggest that the first meeting will be face-to-face in order to make sure there is a discipline. While any psychotherapist has the first meeting face-to-face in order to create intimacy, rather than intimacy, you talk about discipline. Am I correct?

A

Yes, you are.

Ra

I would like to ask you about the mutual trust and respect which is a core element in your methodology. Once you established your position and support, and you had two, three, six meeting in Zoom with your client. How using this platform is different (or not) from the face-to-face?

A

No difference, because mutual trust and respect in my methodology is not an intention. It’s not an attitude. It is a behavior. I control your behavior by giving you the tools which create the discipline. So, when you follow the rules, the behaviors of mutual trust and respect emerge by themselves.

Here is an example. You and me, Rakefet, are going through a very heavy emotional conflict. When you talk, who is the only person in the world who knows that you finished talking? You. Right? The typical mistake we all do, is when you stop talking I will start talking because I assume you finished. Not true. Because when you stop talking on an emotional subject, you replay to see if what you said is what you wanted to say. So when you stop talking, to whom are you listening? To yourself. So if I’m talking you don’t hear me. As a matter of fact I’m interfering with you listening to yourself. I’m annoying you.

So, the “Adizes rule” is when you finish talking you will turn to your right, (people sit in a semi-circle). You have to be conscious that you finished talking. Whoever wants to talk next raises his hand. If they are raising their hand when you are still talking, penalty! Why? Because they are interfering.

Then, you have to call the person by first name, not last name, not nick name, first name. You have to call by first name because when you call by last name it’s very formal, it creates distance. I try to break down formality, create a team.

At the beginning people talk long because they don’t know if other people are listening. By the third turn they speak very short. People say: “I agree, blablabla … next.” You know what is happening? A lot of respect. What happened? Listening! A miracle! Listening! Hear each other. Listening. Respect emerges if you follow the rules and trust emerges thereafter too.

Ra

Actually, we are talking about a very structured methodology, with a lot of rules. My question: does the platform influences in a way on the way you are working? For instance: if you want me to do pushups now (penalty), you were describing a lot of actions that you are doing with the people in the room. What happens when you work with them via video conference? What are the similarities? What are the differences?

A

I might be in the session talking no more than thirty percent of the session. Most of the time they are talking and I’m only watching. I am watching if they are breaking the rules. I only teach the tools, the rules, assign and monitor that tools are being done so I can emancipate the client. As long as they are going in the right direction, I let them go by themselves.

Ra

And it occurs both in the face-to-face and in the video conference as well?

A

Absolutely. In face-to-face they are sitting in horseshoe shape and I pull myself to be a little bit in the back of the first guy in the circle, because I try to prohibit them to look at me. It’s almost like in Zoom. I am not there but I’m there.

Ra

So, they are sitting in the room (looking at you in Zoom), and you are the only one who is not in a room. Is that’s what you are saying?

A

If they are sitting all in the same room, I need the capability to direct the camera to the one who is talking. When we are sitting in different countries, then it is easier. Why? Because the ones that talks automatically appears on the screen. When they are all in the same room I can see the total group. I can direct whom do I want to see. In Zoom I can see who is talking and I can direct the technology.

Ra

So, actually what you are saying is that this technology allows you to watch and to see each person that talks, which is very helpful because in the consultancy work these cues, like body language, are very delicate and the video gives you a lot of information. You can do your work.

A

Right, and I record every session and I give them the tape so they can watch it. So this is what the technology allows you to do. When you do it person-to-person you cannot record, you can but it’s very intrusive.

Ra

Actually, in Zoom we can see ourselves as well, which is definitely not the situation in face-to-face meetings, where we can only see the others. This is also a very critical element. A lot of times, and studies also show it, I’m influenced by the fact that I see myself all the time. I’m very aware of myself. Does this element also influence you? Or do you see it influences you clients?

A

Strangely enough people get so involved in the discussion they forget about the camera, or even me watching.

Ra

Other than the fact that videoconferencing allows you to do work virtually and then you don’t have to travel and bear less cost, do you see other benefits? Or if you could, would you have worked only face-to-face?

A

Virtual has advantages face-to-face does not have. Being in-person there, being close, they might try to break the rules. “You are one of us, we ate lunch together, let’s go have some dinner.” You get co-opted. When I’m in a Zoom meeting there is a very interesting advantage to my authority. I’m on a big screen talking from far away, like speaking from the sky… I have much more authority, so Zoom helps me to keep a distance.

Ra

It is both helping you to keep a distance and yet, form the relationship that you want face-to-face, and then to maintain these relationships in Zoom?

A

Right.

Ro

Since we are talking about meeting that takes place via videoconference, I want to mention the book Empowering Meeting written by Shoham Adizes and Nir Ben Lavi based on your methodology. In the book they refer to virtual meetings as well.

A

Great book. I think they mentioned that, for example, in order to follow the rule of talking by the sitting order, we ask participants (who sit separately from each other, in different places) to draw on paper a “horseshoe” setting with the names, so everyone can imagine as if they were sitting in the same room. That way the sequence of who speaks when is kept just like in a physical room.

Ra

The strict methodology and rules were made in order to regulate the spontaneous (often uncontrolled) communication people have, when they sit in the same room. From my experience, meeting in a videoconference while sitting individually in front of the screen, automatically creates different conditions, so it’s not only “copy/paste” of the way we facilitate face-to-face.

A

In video it’s easier to manage the discussion, because participants can’t talk stimulatingly like in the in-person meeting. They talk one by one, using the “horseshoe” for talking in turns. That way the discussion is managed quicker and easier.

Ra

In addition, you differentiate two kinds of meetings in the book: problem solving meetings and implementation meetings. Can I assume that the implementation meetings are more suitable for a videoconference use?

A

Yes, because they run in a top-down manner and require a command and control environment. The problem-solving meetings require a learning environment because their goal is to find solution, and people have to feel free to speak their mind. The meeting is also designed to gain cooperation, so all of this requires a non-hierarchical communication.

Ra

Right, the whole problem-solving meeting is about creating a more fluent and flexible interaction. It’s a management challenge considering the less spontaneous communication options.

A

This is the reason I highly recommend to start with the in-person meeting, to set the stage.

Ro

What is interesting is that, we don’t know each other personally but toward the end I think we kind of feel you a little bit more, and I want really to thank you.