The Paradox Principle

In our work developing the 4D programme we continuously look for solutions to increase employee engagement. Currently we are introducing our clients to some interesting idea sharing tools and exploring various ways that a culture of creativity and innovation can engage people.

One of the ideation processes we use is the ‘Paradox Principle’. This is thinking about an issue in terms of opposites and contradictions.


There are three types of paradoxical thinking:

Contrary thinking – Completely replacing something with it’s opposite.

Janusian thinking – Using two opposing features to create an effect through contrast e.g.white laces on black shoes or sweet and sour sauce.

and

Hegelian thinking- Bringing two opposites together to create a third thing e.g. blending black and white paint to make grey, combining a work and play activity to create a career (Golf caddy) or a pencil and an eraser to make a rubber pencil.

So we thought we might apply this to the term engagement itself and see what happened.

We asked the question: “When might the opposite of engagement be a good thing?”

If we take as a starting point the definition of engagement as an experience of being subjectively emersed in and involved with, an idea, person, place or thing, then disengagement may be thought of as being disconnected, objective and uninvolved.

Combining these opposites could mean taking a ‘witnessing’ position on a situation that you are experiencing. In other words becoming engaged in being disengaged!

Sometimes it is very difficult to see the bigger picture when all our 4 dimensions (physical, emotional, intellectual and spiritual) are fully involved in an experience. To be able to step back and witness what’s going on can be both a relief and a place from which a creative solution may emerge. Particularly when emotions are surfaced as emotional arousal can produce tunnel vision thinking and be less helpful.

An example might be when some one crosses one of our personal boundaries and offends us. We might leave a conversation feeling angry sad or humiliated. In this scenario we might find a space to be alone and take a moment to think and ask ourselves- who is it that feels upset and why? In other words try and take an objective view of our situation.

The idea is to conjure up and hold in our minds an objective representation of who and what we are so we can momentarily see ourselves from the outside. This may be a picture, a sound or a feeling.
.
We can then ask ourselves-

Who is it that is now taking this objective perspective?

This may seem strange at first but stick with it.

We might then ask-

Who is it that is witnessing the person taking the objective perspective?

With a little bit of practice you will notice that each time you ask the question you objectify the previous questioner (yourself).

In a gradual process of stepping further and further away from your subjective experience into the realm of objectivity you will soon come to a place of disengagement.

This could now be a good thing as from here you can view the 4 perspectives of human being much more clearly.

What was I really feeling and thinking and why?
What was I doing. How was I behaving?
Where was I and how was the environment impacting on me?
And who was I interacting with and how did their presence affect my experience?

From here we might get more insights into what was actually going on and which factors were most effecting and impacting us.

Give it a try and experience the power of the paradox of engaging in disengagement!