Kubler-Ross's 5 Stages of Grief Applied to Climate Change

Elizabeth Kubler-Ross identified five stages of grief which have recently been applied to many other types of change. The five stages are:

1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

It has long been my position that what is commonly referred to as resistance to change can be better understood as one of the first four stages of grief. In my own personal history I have experienced all five stages in relation to global climate change. And while I'll describe that in order, I want to emphasize that my progression through the stages has been far from linear. Before reaching acceptance I swirled and spiraled around and through the first four phases a number of times.

Denial - I became aware of 'global warming' as it was called, in 1991 when I was in high school. I wrote a term paper on rainforest deforestation my junior year and a term paper on global warming my senior year. I'd have to say that for me 'denial' was the first 16 years of my life when I loved being outdoors but had absolutely no sense of environmental ethics.

Anger - Throughout the 1990s I was very angry about the history of Western civilization, industry, and capitalism. In general I felt like the only way justice could be served was if ALL humans (including me) were anihilated and the Earth was left to heal herself.

Bargaining - In 2000 I joined the US Forest Service. I was a GS-4 Visitor Information Specialist. I spent my days talking with visitors about the natural environment and picking up cigarette butts in Sedona, AZ. During this phase I spent much of my time, both personally and professionally seeking ways to balance nature and humanity so that our species could perhaps learn from our mistakes and co-evolve with the Earth.

Depression - I've had seasons of depression throughout the previous stages. There have been times when I feel like we're completely doomed. There have been times when I have felt like some groups will survive but most others will experience cataclysmic demise and death. At I've sought to understand multiple perspectives I've encountered numerous religious, cultural, and philosophical perspectives which predict or suggest a huge die-off of humans. Each time this possibility presents itself to me I attempt to really feel the full depth of my dispair, or sometimes our collective dispair... and somehow, each time I dive deeply into the possibility of loosing everything, I end up experiencing some form of acceptance.

Acceptance - From within depression I have noticed the equisite beauty of the fragility of all of Earth, including humans. My sorrow has been a type of gateway, as if the tears have washed away the selfishness of my personal perspective and left me with the ability to appreciate all of creation. From this place of appreciation I noticed a sense of connectedness with all of creation. I should clarify that the sense of connectedness was not new, but noticing this unity of consciousness while standing on the bridge between depression and acceptance of global climate change provides an entirely different vista. In fact, acceptance has, for me, been a gateway to a sixth stage: hope.

Hope - I stand firmly rooted in acceptance of mankinds past foibles and follies. I can appreciate that every generation has always done the best they could with what they had. I have come to forgive the fires of industry as an amplification of a parent's deep drive to provide well for the family. In acceptance of our present global situation I discovered a number of people who were highly motivated to generate change. I have a deep sense of gratitude and hope for all of Earth and her children. I understand that we're connected and that though there may be a great deal of uncertainty and even catastrophe, I trust that we are learning and we will continue to evolve together.

In my next post I intend to broaden the application of these stages of change and apply them to the myriad of perspectives which I observe when considering the complexity of climate change. To do this I will share portions of a causal loop analysis which I've been developing along with several others.

Honoring Multiple Perspectives

It seems to me that there are a number of wicked problems facing the world today. There are challenges in the area of environment, economy, and society that are so exceedingly complex that no one person, or no one perspective, could possibly provide a useful solution.

Take, for example, the possibility of land managers collaborating on how to respond to climate change accross a particular landscape. Climate change is definitely a complex and controversial issue. There are myriad perspectives including

• The climate is not changing in any significant way, it has always been variable
• The climate is changing and it is part of a larger natural cycle
• The climate is changing and it is caused or exagerated by human activities
• The climate is getting warmer
• The climate is getting colder

How much agreement is necessary in order for people to collaborate on designing livable solutions to today's challenges?

In any particular region, land is managed by a number of different stakeholders including tribes, federal, state, and local government agencies, corporations, non-profit organizations, families, and individuals. Each of these groups has its own unique set of priorities and objectives for how and why the land should be managed. Even if all the land owners in a region agreed that it was strategically important and mutually beneficial to collaborate on a project, and even if they agreed upon what the challenges were, and even if they agreed upon what the solutions were, it would still be complex to balance the multiple missions, multiple objectives, and multiple organizational policies, in order to collaborate effectively.

But when collaboration is really the only solution to a problem, we can't simply ignore it due to the complexity and the challenges.

Lately I've been attempting to map the complexity of the multiple perspectives on climate change. The effort has been deeply transformative for me, and I wonder if sharing some of my own learning would be of service to anyone else. I'm hoping to have the time to blog a little more frequently than I have of late. My intention is to try and find ways to share something large and complex in small and easily digestible chunks. Even if it doesn't prove to be of value to anyone else, it will certainly be a useful excercise to me.

Life Lessons from my Chickens

We're hatching chicks in an incubator upstairs. The first few emerged on Saturday, several came on Easter sunday, and a few more are considering today as their birthday. My little kids are quite smitten by the chicks and fascinated by the process.

I am learning a great deal about transformation and life by watching the process. One thing I notice is that I really had a sense of pride for and affinity with the first brave chick. She didn't have the most effective exit strategy... she pecked for a very long time and finally broke through. I'm not sure what part of my programming has conditioned me to think that being first is best. I'm considering how much this notion serves me and perhaps I'll let it go.

The second chick had a much more efficient liberation. She pecked in a sort of straight line until she'd completed a circle and then gracefully pushed the whole top of the egg right off. She didn't have to fight nearly as much as the first. Why do I appreciate the struggle of the first more than the efficiency and grace of the second?

We have two kinds of hens, brown ones and black ones. For some reason the first 5 chicks born were brown and the next 4 chicks born were black. The black ones all died their first night. We think that they got too hot under the lamp and too dehydrated. Maybe the 5 brown chicks - being several hours older and therefore stronger - bullied the black chicks and kept them from the water? We don't know.

All the eggs began their 21 day incubation at the same time. Today there are two eggs with beaks sticking out of them, and I can see the chicks are breathing, but they appear to have no motivation to break out. This is the most interesting lesson of all to me... I put the eggs in and did what I was obligated to do. I can't do anything else. I can't break the shells open and let the chicks out because they would be weak. They MUST struggle by themselves in order to build up the muscle strength and determination needed to survive.

It doesn't matter if I'm fearful, helpful, prayerful, or facilitative... each of those chicks has to make its own choice to fight out of it's shell or to simply die.

Like the school we're working to start. I've done what I can to guide the visioning and the strategic planning process. At our last meeting we agreed to re-open a number of the variables which had been pinned down in the first iteration of the strategic plan draft. Some of the possibilities included realizing something less than what we had dreamt. We even came face to face with the possibility of giving up altogether. I encouraged everyone to sit in the place of uncertainty which we created by re-opening the variables. I asked them to see what the various options feel like.

I hope that what emerges from this time of incubation is a fight to live, a fight to emerge from our shell and grow feathers so that one day Leslie Creative Learning Cooperative might fly. Creation is a tender and fragile process, yet it is infinite and constant. Even if all my chicks don't hatch there will always be more chickens. The seeds I plan and tend to may never bloom, but there will always be flowers. For this, I am grateful.

The Importance of Contracting Gracefully

I often find myself advocating a natural systems perspective for organizational development. I frequenly am heard saying that "effective organizations are flexible and organic". I just recently had an "ah ha" moment around this:

In organizations, expansion implies success and contraction implies failure. To my systems thinking mind, expansion and contraction are just opposite forces or directions and are neither good nor bad. Only our experience of a this shift in movement is good or bad.

In order for an organization to truly be flexible and organic it must be capable to both expand and contract in a graceful and nimble way. Scaling up to serve an increase in demand is mathematically no different than scaling down in times of decreased demand. Why should scaling up feel like success to the people involved while scaling down feels like failure?

An organization is not just a math and physics equation, and contraction is not just movement in the opposite direction of expansion. The numbers of positions, for example, represent people who are concerned with paying mortgages and putting children through college. How then, can the organization become graceful in contraction?

I certainly don't have all the answers for this. This post is about exploring the topic in hopes for taking some of the sting out of the experience of contraction, both for indviduals and the organizaton.

Let's look at an example from the Forest Service. The Forest Service Enterprise Program is a group of small intraprises, or internal businesses which serve agency units via a signed work order agreement. Enterprise units don't receive appropriated funds in the annual agency budget, but rather sell goods and services to traditional agency units in order to cover all their costs.

The health of the ~17 Enterprise units is bound together in the agency's accounting system. If an Enterprise unit does not cover its costs and accrues a deficit then the team may be disbanded. The employees of the disbanded unit are placed in other positions, or sometimes exit the agency altogether. One core strength of the Enterprise Program is its flexibility to help a National Forest, for example, scale up for a particular project and scale back down when the project is over. Within the culture of the Enterprise Program, expanding one's Enterprise unit by increasing the number of employees and increasing the revenue is a mark of success.

However, if a unit is unable to cover its expenses (for any number of reasons), then a deficit accrues, the unit is a candidate for being disbanded by the Enterprise Steering Committee, and the unit's employees are at jeopardy of loosing their positions.

In our culture, this disbandment is interpreted as a failure. The leader of the unit has invested much time and energy in attempting to create a successful venture. It is personally dramatic to realize that the venture is not sustainable. There is also a personal sense of failure for the indivudual employees, especially if they were engaged in working hard to "turn it around" for a number of months before the disbandment. (I have first hand experience with this, I'll write about it in a separate post). It is all quite painful.

But what if there were another context, another connotation for disbandment of an Enterprise? What if Enterprises with deficits were responsible for coming forward and recommending that they be disbanded, rather than living in fear of a heavy hand coming down on them? What if struggling Enterprises were seen as courageous and heroic for choosing their own disbandment? One success of Enterprise is that it is a choice-based organization. Individuals choose to start units, why shouldn't they choose to end them?

It should be seen as courageous because of the risk and uncertainty involved in volunteering to have your box erased from the org chart. It should be heroic because a struggling unit which drags on and on is only increasing the deficit which is actually a burden on the entire program due to the interconnections in the accounting system.

Could being viewed as courageous and heroic take some of the sting out of the experience for the individuals? I believe it would. That was my own experience. Would shifting our cultural connotation from "failure" to "heroism" facilitate a more graceful contraction? Afterall, if an organization is going to be flexible and organic, they must exhale as effectively as then inhale.

"It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine"

I have more hope about the world than ever before. One big reason I feel so hopeful is because of all the turbulence and chaos. That might sound wierd, but it's true. I have an M.A. in Chaos Theory and Social Change. The reason I pursued that degree is that when I first discovered Chaos Theory it completely transformed my life. (I just love science... and my favorite theories are Chaos Theory, Gaia Theory, and the idea that the universe is a Holograph).

Chaos Theory is comprised of these simple tennets:

1. Turbulence precedes a jump to a new level of order
2. Feedback generates form
3. All systems are universal and self-similar
4. There is a sensitive dependence on initial conditions

I'm not going to bother with a lengthy explanation or trying to prove these ideas to you. My personal experience with growth and transformation is that when the 'poopie hits the fan' in my life it's feedback that I could make new choices and hopefully avoid the same kinds of problems in the future. This came after noticing that I was dealing with the same crap over and over again. Like attracting the same unhealthy relationships into my life. There had to be some reason I kept dating people who really were not interested in marriage and family. Perhaps it was because I hadn't made up my own mind about what I really wanted.

It was just about 10 years ago that I discovered Chaos Theory and since then everything is very different. I now see all turbulence as an opportunity. Everything which used to fall into the category of problem or catastrophe is now viewed as a gift. For example, take this ice storm we had which qualifies as a natural disaster. We went 19 days without power or running water. There were so many gifts, like neighbors coming together, we learned how prepared we are and how to be even more prepared, we stepped up our quest for renewable energy sources, my dad's building a wind generator, the storm was amazingly beautiful, and I got to spend lots of time with my family while I wasn't working.

Oh sure, there were challenges. And yes, there were 2 days of the 19 when I felt pretty depressed. But that was a gift as well.

If there was one thing I could give to any and every person on the planet it would be optimism. Choosing to percieve the bullshit as a gift is so much better for my health and well-being. Maybe that's what R.E.M. meant when they sang "It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine." There are a number of dysfunctional systems, patterns, and beliefs which I am ready to see come to an end. And as I watch them crumble, I feel fine.

Change: Are you Weary or Savvy?

These days the only constant is change. For some of us that leads to stress and uncertainty. For others change is an opportunity and a time to be creative. Let’s think about that for a moment. In an organization, first, a change is announced. Then there’s planning and implementation. Then, as the change is assessed we learn that there are more things to change, so the cycle continues, like a ball rolling down a hill (see the blue loop). For those of us who are change weary, we feel stressed when more change is announced and our morale and productivity suffers. And since change keeps happening, we just feel worse and worse (red loop).

But what about those people who see change as an opportunity? When change is announced they think creatively and trust that they will find a positive outcome. This helps them avoid the downward spiral of stress. While they are scanning the horizon for their next steps, their creative thinking helps them turn a change into an opportunity.
Are you change weary or change savvy? Which group of people is probably having more fun at work? Which group of people do you imagine feels healthier? Believe it or not but you have a choice. You can choose to have a negative experience of change, or you can choose to have a positive experience of change. Stay tuned to this blog to learn how to change your experiences and reactions to change and other stressful situations.