What do you think?
Rate this book
The Answer to How Is Yes: Acting on What Matters
Modern culture’s worship of “how-to” pragmatism has turned us into instruments of efficiency and commerce—but we’re doing more and more about things that mean less and less. We constantly ask “how? and still struggle to find purpose and act on what matters. Instead of acting on what we know to be of importance, we wait for bosses to change, we seek the latest fad, we invest in one more degree. Asking how keeps us safe—instead of being led by our hearts into uncharted territory, we keep our heads down and stick to the rules. But we are gaining the world and losing our souls.
Peter Block puts the “how-to” craze in perspective and presents a guide to the difficult and life-granting journey of bringing what we know is of personal value into an indifferent or even hostile corporate and cultural landscape. He raises our awareness of the trade-offs we’ve made in the name of practicality and expediency, and offers hope for a way of life in which we’re motivated not by what “works,” but by the things that truly matter in life—idealism, intimacy, depth and engagement.
Peter Block puts the “how-to” craze in perspective and presents a guide to the difficult and life-granting journey of bringing what we know is of personal value into an indifferent or even hostile corporate and cultural landscape. He raises our awareness of the trade-offs we’ve made in the name of practicality and expediency, and offers hope for a way of life in which we’re motivated not by what “works,” but by the things that truly matter in life—idealism, intimacy, depth and engagement.
202 pages, Paperback
Published October 1, 2003
114 people are currently reading
1666 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews
May 20, 2013
REMARKS ABOUT PUBLISHING:
This book really taught me something.
1. Pages total: The Answer to How is Yes: Acting on What Matters is 206 pages long--6 pages of which are index; 1 is bibliography; 2 are acknowledgements; 1 is author bio; another 2 of author's business profile and workshops; 1 about the publisher; 3 more of the publisher's books; and 15 repeat photos Bill Dan's wonderful rock sculpture (14 times too many). Total: 176 pages of material.
2. Repetition of material: By the second chapter of the book the author was still repeating material from the first, sometimes verbatim.
3. Fast reading: I am a fast reader. Why then--I found myself wondering on page 40-ish--WHY was the pace of this book so slow? What was slowing me down? The reason is that the lines of this large face type--blocky and bombastic--are not spaced at a usual 1-to-1 ratio, but at a 1.5 width, which renders a clunkier read. The eye, trained to slide from line to line is used to single space. A wider type-set also takes up more space. As much as thirty percent more. So essentially, this is a 116 page book
Conclusion: Write a single-concept book, package it beautifully between cloth covers and sell it for $25.00 to managers who delude themselves into thinking they want to make a difference. This is what Mr. Block did. Kudos on the good writing and the brief esoteric sorties. But essentially, what awes me is his culot.
Let me save you twenty-five bucks. Here's the walk-away: before you waste precious resources on planning, figure out if a project is in alignment with your values. If yes, it doesn't matter how many resources (project time, money, man-hours) you spend on it. If no, don't even bother contemplating it.
Change the resources part of the equation to calories spent and you've got basic biology, brother.
This book really taught me something.
1. Pages total: The Answer to How is Yes: Acting on What Matters is 206 pages long--6 pages of which are index; 1 is bibliography; 2 are acknowledgements; 1 is author bio; another 2 of author's business profile and workshops; 1 about the publisher; 3 more of the publisher's books; and 15 repeat photos Bill Dan's wonderful rock sculpture (14 times too many). Total: 176 pages of material.
2. Repetition of material: By the second chapter of the book the author was still repeating material from the first, sometimes verbatim.
3. Fast reading: I am a fast reader. Why then--I found myself wondering on page 40-ish--WHY was the pace of this book so slow? What was slowing me down? The reason is that the lines of this large face type--blocky and bombastic--are not spaced at a usual 1-to-1 ratio, but at a 1.5 width, which renders a clunkier read. The eye, trained to slide from line to line is used to single space. A wider type-set also takes up more space. As much as thirty percent more. So essentially, this is a 116 page book
Conclusion: Write a single-concept book, package it beautifully between cloth covers and sell it for $25.00 to managers who delude themselves into thinking they want to make a difference. This is what Mr. Block did. Kudos on the good writing and the brief esoteric sorties. But essentially, what awes me is his culot.
Let me save you twenty-five bucks. Here's the walk-away: before you waste precious resources on planning, figure out if a project is in alignment with your values. If yes, it doesn't matter how many resources (project time, money, man-hours) you spend on it. If no, don't even bother contemplating it.
Change the resources part of the equation to calories spent and you've got basic biology, brother.
July 19, 2019
"If we could agree that for six months we would not ask How? , something in our lives, our institutions, and our culture might shift for the better. It would force us to engage in conversations about why we do what we do, as individuals and as institutions. It would create the space for longer discussions about purpose, about what is worth doing. It would refocus our attention on deciding what is the right question, rather than what is the right answer.” — Peter Block
Peter Block has a way of bringing back big questions to local or personal commitments. It is a truism that change, even at a broader societal level, starts with someone somewhere taking a first step. Indeed, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” Most of us seem to delegate that responsibility to others. We wait, ensconced in our private bubble of felt ineptness, for others to take the lead. Block doesn’t let us of the hook. We all have the capacity and maturity, right now, to accept our accountability for the world around us, to pursue what we define as important, independent of whether it is in demand, or has market value. Personal commitment is rooted in the willingness to ask ourselves the right question, by naming the debate. These are not ‘how?’ questions but ‘what?’ questions.
in this book Block foregrounds the role of the ‘social architect’ as a person and professional who is able to create collaborative environments to ask these questions and act on them. He starts with the thesis that there are three aspects of the human condition that support our pursuit of what matters: idealism, intimacy and depth. And he explores how these basic dispositions are reflected in four professional archetypes: the engineer, the economist, the artist, and the architect. The former two, each in their own way, embody the instrumental culture that is so familiar to us. The artist is their antipode. She is a force that embodies the doubt, love of surprise, and the sense of discovery that accompanies the uncompromising confrontation with uncertainty. The architect is a mediator between these two poles. The real architect brings together two important spheres in her work: functionality (‘a program’), and meaning (archetypal forms and atmospheres). Block foregrounds Christopher Alexander, who developed an idiosyncratic ‘pattern language’ to design life-giving spaces, as a particularly telling example of engineer-economist-artist integration. He then transports that professional stance into the world of institutions and cooperative effort. Enter ‘the social architect’.
The social architect designs organizations that respond to three design criteria: do they encourage idealism? Is intimacy made possible? Is there space and demand for depth? This work pivots on a number of key contributions: (s)he convenes, names the question, initiates the conversations for learning, develops strategies for engagement and consent, and creates contexts for local choice and co-design.
“The design work of the social architect is to bring people together to create their own future. (…) It requires faith in common values and interest in the common good. It is the pure economist who believes people will act out of self-interest, the pure engineer who believes that there is only one path to the future, and the pure artist who thinks that joint effort and structure is life defeating.”
Well-written book that gets a spot in my cornerstone library.
"We must decide whether to give full service or lip service.” — Peter Block
Peter Block has a way of bringing back big questions to local or personal commitments. It is a truism that change, even at a broader societal level, starts with someone somewhere taking a first step. Indeed, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” Most of us seem to delegate that responsibility to others. We wait, ensconced in our private bubble of felt ineptness, for others to take the lead. Block doesn’t let us of the hook. We all have the capacity and maturity, right now, to accept our accountability for the world around us, to pursue what we define as important, independent of whether it is in demand, or has market value. Personal commitment is rooted in the willingness to ask ourselves the right question, by naming the debate. These are not ‘how?’ questions but ‘what?’ questions.
in this book Block foregrounds the role of the ‘social architect’ as a person and professional who is able to create collaborative environments to ask these questions and act on them. He starts with the thesis that there are three aspects of the human condition that support our pursuit of what matters: idealism, intimacy and depth. And he explores how these basic dispositions are reflected in four professional archetypes: the engineer, the economist, the artist, and the architect. The former two, each in their own way, embody the instrumental culture that is so familiar to us. The artist is their antipode. She is a force that embodies the doubt, love of surprise, and the sense of discovery that accompanies the uncompromising confrontation with uncertainty. The architect is a mediator between these two poles. The real architect brings together two important spheres in her work: functionality (‘a program’), and meaning (archetypal forms and atmospheres). Block foregrounds Christopher Alexander, who developed an idiosyncratic ‘pattern language’ to design life-giving spaces, as a particularly telling example of engineer-economist-artist integration. He then transports that professional stance into the world of institutions and cooperative effort. Enter ‘the social architect’.
The social architect designs organizations that respond to three design criteria: do they encourage idealism? Is intimacy made possible? Is there space and demand for depth? This work pivots on a number of key contributions: (s)he convenes, names the question, initiates the conversations for learning, develops strategies for engagement and consent, and creates contexts for local choice and co-design.
“The design work of the social architect is to bring people together to create their own future. (…) It requires faith in common values and interest in the common good. It is the pure economist who believes people will act out of self-interest, the pure engineer who believes that there is only one path to the future, and the pure artist who thinks that joint effort and structure is life defeating.”
Well-written book that gets a spot in my cornerstone library.
"We must decide whether to give full service or lip service.” — Peter Block
November 19, 2017
I never would have read this book if a consultant who worked with our school last year had not recommended it. This is a book that begs to be read with others, discussing each chapter along the way. At times I had to stop, ponder, reread sections, and think about how to apply this to my life and work.
Full of many relevant points, I must be honest that this book made me regret not reading it sooner so I could have applied some of these ideas when we began our competencies' work last year. However, I think our school can benefit from these ideas any time, and it's never too late if we are courageous enough to take the first step.
As the title suggests, Block encourages us to think about the types of questions we ask. Usually our focus is on getting things done, but we need to recognize that we should shift our thinking when it comes to the types of questions (too many how questions) that will help us meet our goals because sometimes there are no real answers. Once again, I am reminded of Elie Wiesel's remark in Night about questions being more powerful than answers. Pages 188-190 solidify the power of questions.
Block offers more than just questions. He shares the need for us to have a vision, purpose, goals, effective tools, opportunities for participation and empowerment, flexible structures, leadership, effective personal skills, and learning organizations that allow participants to fail and learn and experiment. He refers to the social architect whose responsibility is for organizing the group's convening. This means setting up a focus on who is in the room, caring for the physical space, providing high interaction activities, allowing airspace for all voices to be heard, discussing capacity, and honoring people's gifts and strengths; page 179 offers a framework for this. Block exhorts us to be undeterred by failure, to be vulnerable, and to care for the whole by valuing humans first. There is no room for a barter mindset if the group is to be successful. Oh, how I wish this is how we truly operated, but I fear that we give lip service too often to these points. We need to strive to make this happen.
For a long time, I found myself pondering Block's comments about bosses/those in power. He suggests that most people use their bosses as an excuse to deny their own power and that "most people in organizations are afraid of their boss." If not our immediate boss, all we have to do is move up the chain and we will find someone we fear. He further posits that the higher the position, the more anxiety those in that fulfill that position feel. Yes, much to ponder here.
In order to succeed, we need to give up ambition (which is seeking recognition from leaders, organizations, and our profession). Block challenges us with the thought that when we focus on loyalty to the organization, respect for leadership, and the idea that technology, speed, and efficiency are what we need , we are wrong. We need to make space for what matters, and if we do this for ourselves then we allow others to do the same.
I found Block's comments about the negative aspects of electronic reality similar to my own. I like and use technology daily, but......This felt like an aside in the book even though he harkens back to it when he reminds us that technology is not the answer to our questions.
Gee, I guess I've said enough. I started this review by saying I wish I had read this book with others because there is much to digest here. Alas, this review appears to be a conversation with myself!
Full of many relevant points, I must be honest that this book made me regret not reading it sooner so I could have applied some of these ideas when we began our competencies' work last year. However, I think our school can benefit from these ideas any time, and it's never too late if we are courageous enough to take the first step.
As the title suggests, Block encourages us to think about the types of questions we ask. Usually our focus is on getting things done, but we need to recognize that we should shift our thinking when it comes to the types of questions (too many how questions) that will help us meet our goals because sometimes there are no real answers. Once again, I am reminded of Elie Wiesel's remark in Night about questions being more powerful than answers. Pages 188-190 solidify the power of questions.
Block offers more than just questions. He shares the need for us to have a vision, purpose, goals, effective tools, opportunities for participation and empowerment, flexible structures, leadership, effective personal skills, and learning organizations that allow participants to fail and learn and experiment. He refers to the social architect whose responsibility is for organizing the group's convening. This means setting up a focus on who is in the room, caring for the physical space, providing high interaction activities, allowing airspace for all voices to be heard, discussing capacity, and honoring people's gifts and strengths; page 179 offers a framework for this. Block exhorts us to be undeterred by failure, to be vulnerable, and to care for the whole by valuing humans first. There is no room for a barter mindset if the group is to be successful. Oh, how I wish this is how we truly operated, but I fear that we give lip service too often to these points. We need to strive to make this happen.
For a long time, I found myself pondering Block's comments about bosses/those in power. He suggests that most people use their bosses as an excuse to deny their own power and that "most people in organizations are afraid of their boss." If not our immediate boss, all we have to do is move up the chain and we will find someone we fear. He further posits that the higher the position, the more anxiety those in that fulfill that position feel. Yes, much to ponder here.
In order to succeed, we need to give up ambition (which is seeking recognition from leaders, organizations, and our profession). Block challenges us with the thought that when we focus on loyalty to the organization, respect for leadership, and the idea that technology, speed, and efficiency are what we need , we are wrong. We need to make space for what matters, and if we do this for ourselves then we allow others to do the same.
I found Block's comments about the negative aspects of electronic reality similar to my own. I like and use technology daily, but......This felt like an aside in the book even though he harkens back to it when he reminds us that technology is not the answer to our questions.
Gee, I guess I've said enough. I started this review by saying I wish I had read this book with others because there is much to digest here. Alas, this review appears to be a conversation with myself!
October 14, 2016
I wanted to find a practical way to determine what the right things to do are, and then how to do them. Ends up this is the anti-how to book. Block argues that we give too much attention to questions of how to do things, especially when we start a new project. Asking how can be a cop-out. Instead, he suggests we try to figure out why we want to do things. He offers six questions he says are typical of folks using “how thinking” and then provides six counter questions that try to determine if you are doing the right thing.
While the message I took from the book was interesting and valuable, it could have been described simply and shortly. Instead, Block expands the story, sometimes channeling the mystic. The writing can be jumbled, like it was hard to write down the thoughts going on in the authors head. I found it hard to work my way through the book. I would be interested in Block’s consulting books, to see if the writing is similar.
While the message I took from the book was interesting and valuable, it could have been described simply and shortly. Instead, Block expands the story, sometimes channeling the mystic. The writing can be jumbled, like it was hard to write down the thoughts going on in the authors head. I found it hard to work my way through the book. I would be interested in Block’s consulting books, to see if the writing is similar.
May 4, 2018
Taking time to do what matters IS what matters
A lovely antidote to the current cultural moment where we have devalued meaningful goals for tactics and strategy to get the next thing done.
A clarion call for bringing the reality of the human condition to bear on the practicalities of life.
A lovely antidote to the current cultural moment where we have devalued meaningful goals for tactics and strategy to get the next thing done.
A clarion call for bringing the reality of the human condition to bear on the practicalities of life.
August 13, 2017
OK. So what makes an excellent book? I must be honest, I have enjoyed and resonated with other books perhaps more, but rarely have I been challenged as much or been in awe as much as I was with this book.
I am amazed. I have read a few of Peter Block's books. His style isn't my style. He is a very deep thinker, and I have to work at even getting half of what is in the book... but I found myself so grateful that even in what is not explicitly a Christian book, there are challenges in the book that we need to pay attention to more than ever before. His constant reflection on what matters is profound. His encouragement to pushing us to not lose our idealism, to push for intimacy and to long for depth is a wonderful alternative to the barter and consumer mentality that has become so pervasive in our culture with such very little push back.
Instantly, this book will now be used as a text for all Ethos Cohorts, and for the leadership courses I teach at various seminaries and institutions. It is a must read... again and again and again... slowly. Prayerfully. With pen and paper... and ... I will use it to help create an environment and community among our elders.
I am amazed. I have read a few of Peter Block's books. His style isn't my style. He is a very deep thinker, and I have to work at even getting half of what is in the book... but I found myself so grateful that even in what is not explicitly a Christian book, there are challenges in the book that we need to pay attention to more than ever before. His constant reflection on what matters is profound. His encouragement to pushing us to not lose our idealism, to push for intimacy and to long for depth is a wonderful alternative to the barter and consumer mentality that has become so pervasive in our culture with such very little push back.
Instantly, this book will now be used as a text for all Ethos Cohorts, and for the leadership courses I teach at various seminaries and institutions. It is a must read... again and again and again... slowly. Prayerfully. With pen and paper... and ... I will use it to help create an environment and community among our elders.
July 20, 2011
I was not a fan of this book but I enjoyed the discussions it sparked among my coworkers. We enjoyed many soul-searching sessions and I feel I've grown closer to my immediate work group and I'm grateful for that.
The style of writing was too wishy-washy and a bit contradictory of itself at times. Block shows a clear preference for one way of being in the world and I tend to be more inclusive of different personality styles (though I identified greatly with the Engineer Archetype he describes.)
Glad I read it, but didn't really like it.
The style of writing was too wishy-washy and a bit contradictory of itself at times. Block shows a clear preference for one way of being in the world and I tend to be more inclusive of different personality styles (though I identified greatly with the Engineer Archetype he describes.)
Glad I read it, but didn't really like it.
April 8, 2018
Great insights into living and working in meaningful ways to create a rich life and to change the world for the better. At times difficult to grasp what he's really saying. This book would be best supported with deep conversation, but there were times that I felt I needed to highlight pages at a time. Important work.
July 25, 2016
Game.Changer. Become a citizen of your own life.
December 14, 2018
Note: This is more of a reflection than a review
We can’t do it alone.
I have been listening to a podcast about comic books and comic book culture. It is my way of retaining my adult responsibilities, eschewing the commitment of actually purchasing and reading comic books, and still holding onto a semblance of my adolescent desire to escape the painful waking reality in which I dwell and run to the fantasy land of heroes and monsters. In listening to this particular podcast I have come to embrace the hosts’ aversion to the phrase, “I’ve got this.” Again and again on the comic page or in the movies a villain or monster or beast or some kind of challenge will emerge and threaten our heroes, and again and again one of group will step forward and say with just the right amount of bravado, “I’ve got this.” And I join in the groan at hearing such a phrase.
And it isn’t just that it feels like lazy writing, or a cheap one-liner that causes me to groan and rant, but that there is something more insidious that is embedded in such a phrase.
In that statement the individual is saying, “step back, don’t get involved, don’t do anything to help, in fact it might be best if you just get out of the way, take a seat, maybe do some knitting or something else to pass the time because I am so sure of myself with this impending challenge that any involvement on your behalf will only get in the way.” Or in other words, “I’ve got this.” It is a cheap and easy line that should just be avoided at all costs in almost any media, and yet it is a line that we hear all too often in the movies, in television shows, and radio dramas. I am not an editor, so it is not just the easy and low-hanging fruit of conflict writing that irks me with this phrase. It is the mentality behind such a phrase that bothers me. It is the sentiment that such a phrase speaks to that worries me. From a pastor’s point of view, saying, “I’ve got this” is much more dangerous and divisive than just the cheap and lazy writing. It is a statement that is contrary to the ideal community and that goes against the values of walking and working with others. It is a statement of power and individuality. It is a statement that has no place in the church.
When you are with a group of people, facing a challenge, and someone says to you, “I’ve got this,” you are being silenced and pushed aside. While there may be multiple ways to respond to the challenge or multiple ways to grapple with possible solutions, one individual is saying that he or she knows the best way and will engage in that way no matter what anyone else says suggesting that any other input is not necessary or needed. It is saying that the problem can and should be solved alone. And it is a way of bragging, a way of showing off and proving one’s power and might at the expense of the community.
In this approach to a problem a secondary challenge is created by the person claiming to “got” the solution; there is a potential problem with other people in the community. If a group faces a challenge and the attitude is one of individuality and the ethos is one of people crying out, “I’ve got this”, then people on the team may be competing with each other to see who can claim that they have “got” it first to show off one’s skill and power. The goal is to see who has the solution first and problem solving can quickly become a race and a competition. This is not how a community works. The attitude of “I’ve got this” is one where the solution most strongly argued for is seen as the only solution that is viable or possible. The solution that is offered is a solution that claims power and does not share it at all. It is an approach to problems and solutions that leads to a context where the leader carries all of the responsibility and everyone else is just there to follow like lemmings. This is an approach to conflict and challenges that has no place in any community, especially, the church.
Contributing to the challenge of individuality is a culture of experts; a culture of people who have trained in one area, reject the presence of the generalists, and claim that unless you have studied and worked and gained credentials in a specific area then you have no business speaking. This can also be a problem (says the guy with a PhD in Theology). If the challenge is about money then talk to an economist and no one else. If the problem is about building structures then talk to an engineer and no one else. Let those who have skills and abilities in their area be the hero of the day. Let the musician, the artist, the writer, the doctor take a back seat until their particular skills are needed and only allow them to speak to their own area of expertise. The cult of the expert adds credence to the individual uttering the phrase, “I’ve got this.” I’ve been trained, I know what I am doing, I am better than you so step aside because I’ve got this.
Now there is a degree to which this attitude can be good. If I need to have heart surgery then I do not want a bassoonist or a dancer to do the operation. I want someone who is trained, who has the technical skills and know-how to do the surgery right and well. If I want a piece of artwork to hang on the wall that will inspire and move and help me in times of difficulty I do not want an economist to paint it. When considering specific challenges with specific needs then it is good to have someone who is trained to “get it.” There are technical challenges with technical solutions that are appropriate to apply. I want the heart surgeon to look at my blocked arteries and say with confidence, “I’ve got this.” I want a theologian speaking to the nuanced differences in prayer and understanding and relation to God. There are many times when we need and desire the expert’s presence and intervention. Yet this should not be the approach for all things. There are the larger challenges, the broader challenges of culture and life where we still compartmentalize and de-emphasize the presence of people who may not seem to be the expert or the person with authority. This is not good. There can and should be a democratization of our culture in addressing and wrestling with the problems of the culture or of institutions that I am wrestling with.
In his book, The Answer to How is Yes, Peter Block suggests that we tend to face the majority of challenges in organizations and institutions with one or two lenses and neglect all others at the table. We tend to let those who have technical skills offer the answer again and again to what we assume is a technical problem no matter what. We let the economists or the engineer say, “I got this” and speak about numbers and figures while the rest of us step back and watch assuming that the doctor or the musician or the teacher or the plumber has nothing to offer. The problem that we face is put into one lens, one frame and nothing else is offered space.
Rather than acquiescing to one mode of thinking, or letting a problem be presented in one frame, Block suggests multiple approaches to consider a challenge together. He is suggesting that we look at a challenge or problem from multiple angles, inviting multiple perspectives to see and consider paths and ways towards change and solution. I see it as diffusing power, as allowing power to be shared among the community or the team. Block is suggesting that bringing in a variety of people with a variety of perspectives invites a “yes” to the “how.” It is letting people think about the challenges together, and the role of the leader is to make space for multiple people to engage in different ways. In his book, Block offers a number of typologies that may be helpful for those who like to have labels and categories and the like and suggests ways that these different typologies bring insight and perspective, offering a shift in the ways that many may view process and group dynamics. I, instead, would like to consider the deeper approach and idea of sharing power. I would like to work with Block’s notion of bringing multiple people to the table and consider that what it is that we are doing rather than how it is that it should be done is vital and important. Something radical is being suggested in Block’s approach to institutional and societal challenges and it moves towards inviting multiple voices into difficult conversations.
We are making space for people and this is scary, and radical, and exciting.
When someone says, “I’ve got this,” they are claiming all the space for themselves. They are closing out others and saying that their input is not vital or essential. But what if in response to the macho marking of territory someone else says, “Ok, and who else has this?” This is inviting others into the space and sharing the power. This is offering the “yes” to a question that has not even been asked yet. It is saying that no one person should be expected to have the solution because no one person may fully see or understand the challenge. It may even be that the challenge is not what everyone thinks it is. It may be that there is something that no one else is seeing or an approach that no one else has considered. Sharing the space invites more people to consider the challenge in different ways.
Let me get specific. I work with a church community. I am engaged in what really is an odd profession and share that odd profession with thousands of others across the country; professional ministry. Many of us struggle with how to be a pastor within a community. There has been, for many decades, an idea that the pastor is the leader of the church community. The pastor is the one who is supposed to give the vision, lead the church, save the church, save the community, and save the people. When tragedy strikes, it is the pastor who is supposed to say, “I’ve got this,” and all of the people in the church then step back, get out of the way, and make space for the pastor to “get” whatever it is that needs “getting.” This is a paradigm that is found in all structures and types of religious communities. From free-church traditions to the more liturgical and hierarchal traditions this approach has been the standard, and it has stunted the faith of all. No matter your theology of ordination, your understanding of what it means to be a pastor, the expectation that the pastor is called, anointed, blessed, enhanced, or whatever else, the pastor is still human and cannot see it all. The pastor cannot “get” everything, cannot be the one to have the solution for everything and when a pastor or a congregation tries to assume that the pastor does it usually does not go well.
We need to have space for multiple responses. People need to see where it is that they can say that they may have a part in the challenges and the solutions in their own way. The way of doing church that is emerging, painfully and slowly, is a way in which the pastor is a part of the community, but not the totality of the community. A way of doing church that is emerging is one in which the community itself that decides what “got” is ripe for “getting,” and what is beyond the “get” for whatever challenges are before the community. It is making sure that all the angles, especially the obscure ones are considered. Perhaps one of the best ways to practice this way of being a community when facing a challenge is to make sure that a child, between the ages of 6 and 12 is a part of every decision-making process. If you cannot explain the challenge you are facing to a child of that age, and in your explanation invite the child into the conversation, then you need to spend more time trying to understand the challenge yourself. If you cannot listen to possible answers that the child may give, then you are not making space for the Spirit to fully move through every person and part of the community. If you can, then you are also making space for dreamers and artists as well as the builders and planners. And you are giving up the space and inviting something new to happen.
It is scary to give up the space. For pastors it is scary to invite others into the space where decisions are made and to let go of control because, in part, it makes us wonder if we are needed at all. For churches it is scary to invite other churches, other faith traditions, other cultures into the space and to let go of control because, in part, it makes us wonder if we have a claim on the truth of our tradition or if it is a claim that we need to share. For people it is scary to give up the space and to see what might emerge within the community, the city, the state, or the nation because, in part, it may mean that we would have to share ideas and values. If we just forced the solution that we think is best then we force others out. If we offer space, then we offer change that we might not control.
Perhaps the best, and dangerously trite, example that I can think of is music. When a symphony plays, when an orchestra makes noise there are moments when a musician has to rest and make space for others to make music. There are moments when an instrument or section will shine. There are moments when all will shine. Not long ago I had the wonderful opportunity to be part of an orchestra playing Dvorák’s 8th symphony – often the “B” side to Dvorák’s 9th symphony. It is a fantastic work with a great beat to dance to. There are many great and wonderful bassoon parts in that work that I cherish playing. Yet in rehearsals and concerts, there was one part that caused me to smile again and again, that I would say was my favorite part of the piece. The odd thing is that it was not any moment when I was playing, but when the brass was playing. The brass was offering something as an ensemble that was beautiful and powerful and wonderful and at that time I was not a part of the music. If I decided to jump in and try to play along I would ruin the moment. I had to make space and to listen. I didn’t “have” this, and yet I would argue that I helped to make the moment in one way or another. By stepping back, by making space, something great occurred.
We have to let go to allow such moments to happen in the life of the church and our lives as well. We have to get to a place where we can invite a new consideration of the challenges as well as the solutions. With the church the time of individual heroes, the time of people playing the part of Christ is over. No longer should we be looking for that one person to say, “I’ve got this,” when we are facing our challenges and difficulties. We don’t have this on our own, but with others, in community, and with God we do. We need to open ourselves to make space for the wonderful and unknown ways that God might be working and saving and guiding us all. I don’t have this. You don’t have this. We have this.
We can’t do it alone.
I have been listening to a podcast about comic books and comic book culture. It is my way of retaining my adult responsibilities, eschewing the commitment of actually purchasing and reading comic books, and still holding onto a semblance of my adolescent desire to escape the painful waking reality in which I dwell and run to the fantasy land of heroes and monsters. In listening to this particular podcast I have come to embrace the hosts’ aversion to the phrase, “I’ve got this.” Again and again on the comic page or in the movies a villain or monster or beast or some kind of challenge will emerge and threaten our heroes, and again and again one of group will step forward and say with just the right amount of bravado, “I’ve got this.” And I join in the groan at hearing such a phrase.
And it isn’t just that it feels like lazy writing, or a cheap one-liner that causes me to groan and rant, but that there is something more insidious that is embedded in such a phrase.
In that statement the individual is saying, “step back, don’t get involved, don’t do anything to help, in fact it might be best if you just get out of the way, take a seat, maybe do some knitting or something else to pass the time because I am so sure of myself with this impending challenge that any involvement on your behalf will only get in the way.” Or in other words, “I’ve got this.” It is a cheap and easy line that should just be avoided at all costs in almost any media, and yet it is a line that we hear all too often in the movies, in television shows, and radio dramas. I am not an editor, so it is not just the easy and low-hanging fruit of conflict writing that irks me with this phrase. It is the mentality behind such a phrase that bothers me. It is the sentiment that such a phrase speaks to that worries me. From a pastor’s point of view, saying, “I’ve got this” is much more dangerous and divisive than just the cheap and lazy writing. It is a statement that is contrary to the ideal community and that goes against the values of walking and working with others. It is a statement of power and individuality. It is a statement that has no place in the church.
When you are with a group of people, facing a challenge, and someone says to you, “I’ve got this,” you are being silenced and pushed aside. While there may be multiple ways to respond to the challenge or multiple ways to grapple with possible solutions, one individual is saying that he or she knows the best way and will engage in that way no matter what anyone else says suggesting that any other input is not necessary or needed. It is saying that the problem can and should be solved alone. And it is a way of bragging, a way of showing off and proving one’s power and might at the expense of the community.
In this approach to a problem a secondary challenge is created by the person claiming to “got” the solution; there is a potential problem with other people in the community. If a group faces a challenge and the attitude is one of individuality and the ethos is one of people crying out, “I’ve got this”, then people on the team may be competing with each other to see who can claim that they have “got” it first to show off one’s skill and power. The goal is to see who has the solution first and problem solving can quickly become a race and a competition. This is not how a community works. The attitude of “I’ve got this” is one where the solution most strongly argued for is seen as the only solution that is viable or possible. The solution that is offered is a solution that claims power and does not share it at all. It is an approach to problems and solutions that leads to a context where the leader carries all of the responsibility and everyone else is just there to follow like lemmings. This is an approach to conflict and challenges that has no place in any community, especially, the church.
Contributing to the challenge of individuality is a culture of experts; a culture of people who have trained in one area, reject the presence of the generalists, and claim that unless you have studied and worked and gained credentials in a specific area then you have no business speaking. This can also be a problem (says the guy with a PhD in Theology). If the challenge is about money then talk to an economist and no one else. If the problem is about building structures then talk to an engineer and no one else. Let those who have skills and abilities in their area be the hero of the day. Let the musician, the artist, the writer, the doctor take a back seat until their particular skills are needed and only allow them to speak to their own area of expertise. The cult of the expert adds credence to the individual uttering the phrase, “I’ve got this.” I’ve been trained, I know what I am doing, I am better than you so step aside because I’ve got this.
Now there is a degree to which this attitude can be good. If I need to have heart surgery then I do not want a bassoonist or a dancer to do the operation. I want someone who is trained, who has the technical skills and know-how to do the surgery right and well. If I want a piece of artwork to hang on the wall that will inspire and move and help me in times of difficulty I do not want an economist to paint it. When considering specific challenges with specific needs then it is good to have someone who is trained to “get it.” There are technical challenges with technical solutions that are appropriate to apply. I want the heart surgeon to look at my blocked arteries and say with confidence, “I’ve got this.” I want a theologian speaking to the nuanced differences in prayer and understanding and relation to God. There are many times when we need and desire the expert’s presence and intervention. Yet this should not be the approach for all things. There are the larger challenges, the broader challenges of culture and life where we still compartmentalize and de-emphasize the presence of people who may not seem to be the expert or the person with authority. This is not good. There can and should be a democratization of our culture in addressing and wrestling with the problems of the culture or of institutions that I am wrestling with.
In his book, The Answer to How is Yes, Peter Block suggests that we tend to face the majority of challenges in organizations and institutions with one or two lenses and neglect all others at the table. We tend to let those who have technical skills offer the answer again and again to what we assume is a technical problem no matter what. We let the economists or the engineer say, “I got this” and speak about numbers and figures while the rest of us step back and watch assuming that the doctor or the musician or the teacher or the plumber has nothing to offer. The problem that we face is put into one lens, one frame and nothing else is offered space.
Rather than acquiescing to one mode of thinking, or letting a problem be presented in one frame, Block suggests multiple approaches to consider a challenge together. He is suggesting that we look at a challenge or problem from multiple angles, inviting multiple perspectives to see and consider paths and ways towards change and solution. I see it as diffusing power, as allowing power to be shared among the community or the team. Block is suggesting that bringing in a variety of people with a variety of perspectives invites a “yes” to the “how.” It is letting people think about the challenges together, and the role of the leader is to make space for multiple people to engage in different ways. In his book, Block offers a number of typologies that may be helpful for those who like to have labels and categories and the like and suggests ways that these different typologies bring insight and perspective, offering a shift in the ways that many may view process and group dynamics. I, instead, would like to consider the deeper approach and idea of sharing power. I would like to work with Block’s notion of bringing multiple people to the table and consider that what it is that we are doing rather than how it is that it should be done is vital and important. Something radical is being suggested in Block’s approach to institutional and societal challenges and it moves towards inviting multiple voices into difficult conversations.
We are making space for people and this is scary, and radical, and exciting.
When someone says, “I’ve got this,” they are claiming all the space for themselves. They are closing out others and saying that their input is not vital or essential. But what if in response to the macho marking of territory someone else says, “Ok, and who else has this?” This is inviting others into the space and sharing the power. This is offering the “yes” to a question that has not even been asked yet. It is saying that no one person should be expected to have the solution because no one person may fully see or understand the challenge. It may even be that the challenge is not what everyone thinks it is. It may be that there is something that no one else is seeing or an approach that no one else has considered. Sharing the space invites more people to consider the challenge in different ways.
Let me get specific. I work with a church community. I am engaged in what really is an odd profession and share that odd profession with thousands of others across the country; professional ministry. Many of us struggle with how to be a pastor within a community. There has been, for many decades, an idea that the pastor is the leader of the church community. The pastor is the one who is supposed to give the vision, lead the church, save the church, save the community, and save the people. When tragedy strikes, it is the pastor who is supposed to say, “I’ve got this,” and all of the people in the church then step back, get out of the way, and make space for the pastor to “get” whatever it is that needs “getting.” This is a paradigm that is found in all structures and types of religious communities. From free-church traditions to the more liturgical and hierarchal traditions this approach has been the standard, and it has stunted the faith of all. No matter your theology of ordination, your understanding of what it means to be a pastor, the expectation that the pastor is called, anointed, blessed, enhanced, or whatever else, the pastor is still human and cannot see it all. The pastor cannot “get” everything, cannot be the one to have the solution for everything and when a pastor or a congregation tries to assume that the pastor does it usually does not go well.
We need to have space for multiple responses. People need to see where it is that they can say that they may have a part in the challenges and the solutions in their own way. The way of doing church that is emerging, painfully and slowly, is a way in which the pastor is a part of the community, but not the totality of the community. A way of doing church that is emerging is one in which the community itself that decides what “got” is ripe for “getting,” and what is beyond the “get” for whatever challenges are before the community. It is making sure that all the angles, especially the obscure ones are considered. Perhaps one of the best ways to practice this way of being a community when facing a challenge is to make sure that a child, between the ages of 6 and 12 is a part of every decision-making process. If you cannot explain the challenge you are facing to a child of that age, and in your explanation invite the child into the conversation, then you need to spend more time trying to understand the challenge yourself. If you cannot listen to possible answers that the child may give, then you are not making space for the Spirit to fully move through every person and part of the community. If you can, then you are also making space for dreamers and artists as well as the builders and planners. And you are giving up the space and inviting something new to happen.
It is scary to give up the space. For pastors it is scary to invite others into the space where decisions are made and to let go of control because, in part, it makes us wonder if we are needed at all. For churches it is scary to invite other churches, other faith traditions, other cultures into the space and to let go of control because, in part, it makes us wonder if we have a claim on the truth of our tradition or if it is a claim that we need to share. For people it is scary to give up the space and to see what might emerge within the community, the city, the state, or the nation because, in part, it may mean that we would have to share ideas and values. If we just forced the solution that we think is best then we force others out. If we offer space, then we offer change that we might not control.
Perhaps the best, and dangerously trite, example that I can think of is music. When a symphony plays, when an orchestra makes noise there are moments when a musician has to rest and make space for others to make music. There are moments when an instrument or section will shine. There are moments when all will shine. Not long ago I had the wonderful opportunity to be part of an orchestra playing Dvorák’s 8th symphony – often the “B” side to Dvorák’s 9th symphony. It is a fantastic work with a great beat to dance to. There are many great and wonderful bassoon parts in that work that I cherish playing. Yet in rehearsals and concerts, there was one part that caused me to smile again and again, that I would say was my favorite part of the piece. The odd thing is that it was not any moment when I was playing, but when the brass was playing. The brass was offering something as an ensemble that was beautiful and powerful and wonderful and at that time I was not a part of the music. If I decided to jump in and try to play along I would ruin the moment. I had to make space and to listen. I didn’t “have” this, and yet I would argue that I helped to make the moment in one way or another. By stepping back, by making space, something great occurred.
We have to let go to allow such moments to happen in the life of the church and our lives as well. We have to get to a place where we can invite a new consideration of the challenges as well as the solutions. With the church the time of individual heroes, the time of people playing the part of Christ is over. No longer should we be looking for that one person to say, “I’ve got this,” when we are facing our challenges and difficulties. We don’t have this on our own, but with others, in community, and with God we do. We need to open ourselves to make space for the wonderful and unknown ways that God might be working and saving and guiding us all. I don’t have this. You don’t have this. We have this.
March 8, 2018
A very different type of business book. I quite enjoyed most of it. The struggle within me is, and always has been, is this really what I should be doing? Will I be happy that I'm doing this 1 year, 5 years, 10 years from now?
I think Peter Block does a fantastic job laying out the struggle, but recognizes that there really is no answer.
Summary
When we resort directly to “how?” questions when we have an idea or are thinking about acting on what matters what we are often expressing is our lack of faith in what we are trying to accomplish. We value practicality so much today that we tend to imitate others that are successful rather than seeking our own path that follows what we value.
Key Take Aways
We make time for the things that matter most.
If something is truly worth doing it is always difficult and stretching.
We avoid doing things that matter because they are difficult. We find excuses, cleverly, to justify why we cannot do those things that matter. They are impractical.
First we must start with why and what before we move onto how. How? Only becomes a good questions once we have understood why we should do something.
I think Peter Block does a fantastic job laying out the struggle, but recognizes that there really is no answer.
Summary
When we resort directly to “how?” questions when we have an idea or are thinking about acting on what matters what we are often expressing is our lack of faith in what we are trying to accomplish. We value practicality so much today that we tend to imitate others that are successful rather than seeking our own path that follows what we value.
Key Take Aways
We make time for the things that matter most.
If something is truly worth doing it is always difficult and stretching.
We avoid doing things that matter because they are difficult. We find excuses, cleverly, to justify why we cannot do those things that matter. They are impractical.
First we must start with why and what before we move onto how. How? Only becomes a good questions once we have understood why we should do something.
August 26, 2019
Reading this book has truly inspired me. The perspective shared here will delight idealists.
Acting on what matters means postponing the How? questions - the insecurities they express, the perceived need for predictability, the seek for certainty via expert answers - to focus on the questions that tap into our deepest values. "Our freedom begins with knowing our intentions, knowing what matters to us, knowing which values will guide our actions." How? questions are analyzed and contrasted with what the author calls "Yes" questions. "Yes affirms the value of participation, of being a player instead of a spectator to our own experience."
Jungian archetypes are brought into the mix to illustrate how the mindsets of the economist and the engineer dominate our society. The social architect is pictured as the one who brings people together to build their own future, as a driver of meaningful change. "Small groups change the world" :)
Acting on what matters means postponing the How? questions - the insecurities they express, the perceived need for predictability, the seek for certainty via expert answers - to focus on the questions that tap into our deepest values. "Our freedom begins with knowing our intentions, knowing what matters to us, knowing which values will guide our actions." How? questions are analyzed and contrasted with what the author calls "Yes" questions. "Yes affirms the value of participation, of being a player instead of a spectator to our own experience."
Jungian archetypes are brought into the mix to illustrate how the mindsets of the economist and the engineer dominate our society. The social architect is pictured as the one who brings people together to build their own future, as a driver of meaningful change. "Small groups change the world" :)
July 17, 2023
A marvelous book on the importance of doing what matters. Our culture has given inordinate voice to the "engineer" and "economist" archetype viewpoints in the name of efficiency and instrumentality, silencing the "artist" and thus depriving us of idealism, intimacy, and depth. A better balance of these can be realized by the work of the "social architect" archetype.
Best book I've read this year, a definite candidate for my "must read" shelf of the leadership stack.
Best book I've read this year, a definite candidate for my "must read" shelf of the leadership stack.
July 29, 2018
This book would be best read with others to discuss a few chapters at a time. There is a lot of good information. I would have liked to read it with colleagues so it could be put in context with our work.
There are many good insights and the best are in the chapter about archetypes of leaders.
I recommend this book.
There are many good insights and the best are in the chapter about archetypes of leaders.
I recommend this book.
January 4, 2019
He's trying to convince teams to stop rushing toward solutions and look at the bigger picture. He has a strong social conscience and I applaud his efforts and intentions! I love his writing and overall ambitions to bring what I consider a deeper, more ethical - let's call it spiritual - accountability to the workplace in all his books.
July 20, 2024
There was a time when the answer to the question "how can we... " was action to move to a commen goal. It just took extra time to.... get in action mode. To get common grounds...
This book reveals with compasion what made us - you and me - reluctant to do so... and how to say yes to whatever is also needed to choose freely and with dedication act together...
This book reveals with compasion what made us - you and me - reluctant to do so... and how to say yes to whatever is also needed to choose freely and with dedication act together...
December 16, 2016
At first when I saw this book, I thought with my self that I am not going to read this book. But suddenly one day I decided to read some few pages of this book cause I am addicted of reading books, and then I became a fan of this author,... just awesome, I leaned many things♥️ thank you
August 11, 2017
Most of the book really resonated with me and gave a timely reminder of questioning what is important. I liked the passages on idealism and being accountable to what matters. A few sections didn't resonate so much, but overall, worth a read.
March 4, 2021
By reading this book I learned you need to first say yes I can do this rather than how. We need to stay in tune with our heart and let our passions carry us through life. Live life it to the fullest. Be intune with our emotions rather than pushing them aside.
June 7, 2017
First half of the book was helpful. The second half was a critique of culture. The correction offered wasn't bad but not anything surprising or new.
December 28, 2018
A guide to "pursuing what most matters to us and living with the adventure and anxiety that this requires." A bit abstract and philosophical for my taste, but still a worthwhile read.
April 5, 2019
This book made me rethink all my business relationships in a fundamental way.
February 18, 2020
So hard to read. It is both repetitive and meandering. I wanted to like it, but at the end, I am not even sure what it was about.
June 29, 2024
A radical guide to taking on the personal responsibility to bring your soul into organizational life. This was a re-read, which shows you how much I like this book.
December 25, 2024
Self help book rather than philosophical one as I was hoping. Not practical, repetitive. I couldn’t finish it.
September 26, 2016
Like many of the self-help books out there, there is one central thought repeated ad nauseum. Not a bad concept - that one should consider if something is worth doing before becoming enmeshed in the practical details, but I didn't find it life-changing so much as common sense. But I did skip around and skim a great deal because of the repetition.
September 30, 2011
In all honesty, I picked up this book because of the title. I absolutely loved the sentiment and wanted to know more. After all, I have lots of projects that I've started or would like to start and always seem to run into the question (whether from others or in my own head) exactly how are you going to do this?
In this book, Block looks at how we are caught up in a results-oriented culture that looks for the right answers when perhaps we should be looking for the right questions. We want to know what to do before giving ourselves a chance to go deeper, to play with the questions, to think about what really matters to us. Block writes, "We are at times so eager to get practical right away that we set limits on ourselves. We become imprisoned in our belief that we don't know how and therefore need to keep asking the question." It's not that asking questions of "how" is wrong. It's that we tend to ask them too soon.
The most valuable part of this book for me were the first chapters when Block examines the questions of "how" and then shows how we can alter to them the question of yes. "Yes affirms the value of participation, of being a player instead of a spectator to our own experience." The second half of the book deals more specifically with business and organizations. While interesting and thought provoking, I was most captivated and inspired by the earlier chapters.
As I continue to pursue my projects and my dreams, this was a great reminder that getting too practical too soon is a sure way to kill my projects and my dreams. By going deeper, by focusing and acting on what matters most to me, I not only create more opportunity for myself but I help contribute to the community. Sometimes, you need to step away from the end-game, numbers-driven model and practice living what you want instead.
In this book, Block looks at how we are caught up in a results-oriented culture that looks for the right answers when perhaps we should be looking for the right questions. We want to know what to do before giving ourselves a chance to go deeper, to play with the questions, to think about what really matters to us. Block writes, "We are at times so eager to get practical right away that we set limits on ourselves. We become imprisoned in our belief that we don't know how and therefore need to keep asking the question." It's not that asking questions of "how" is wrong. It's that we tend to ask them too soon.
The most valuable part of this book for me were the first chapters when Block examines the questions of "how" and then shows how we can alter to them the question of yes. "Yes affirms the value of participation, of being a player instead of a spectator to our own experience." The second half of the book deals more specifically with business and organizations. While interesting and thought provoking, I was most captivated and inspired by the earlier chapters.
As I continue to pursue my projects and my dreams, this was a great reminder that getting too practical too soon is a sure way to kill my projects and my dreams. By going deeper, by focusing and acting on what matters most to me, I not only create more opportunity for myself but I help contribute to the community. Sometimes, you need to step away from the end-game, numbers-driven model and practice living what you want instead.
October 8, 2013
I think that for some of us--namely, me, once upon a time--who feel caught in a corporate culture that doesn't quite fit, it would be all too easy to dismiss Peter Block's book as a nice idea that "won't work here." Fortunately, Block doesn't let us off the hook so conveniently. The title of the book speaks to our rush to move to process instead of staying with more fundamental questions that ask us first to consider what matters. Otherwise, we find ourselves doing more and more about things that mean less and less: a fool's errand.
What resonated most for me in The Answer to How Is Yes was the importance of ownership. It is true that there are work environments that are not all we wish they were. And while they may never meet all our expectations and hopes, not owning that I am that environment almost surely ensures that it will remain that way. We can, Block reminds us, always nurture values of relationship, engagement, intimacy, responsibility, and meaning.
Not far into The Answer to How Is Yes I realized that it wasn't really a book about organizational management; it was about living a life with meaning and in community. The stories we create around why we can't do what makes us happy, or why we can't open our hearts more fully are not that different from those we espouse about our workplaces. Block's book is a keeper. I suspect it can be transformative, if we let it.
What resonated most for me in The Answer to How Is Yes was the importance of ownership. It is true that there are work environments that are not all we wish they were. And while they may never meet all our expectations and hopes, not owning that I am that environment almost surely ensures that it will remain that way. We can, Block reminds us, always nurture values of relationship, engagement, intimacy, responsibility, and meaning.
Not far into The Answer to How Is Yes I realized that it wasn't really a book about organizational management; it was about living a life with meaning and in community. The stories we create around why we can't do what makes us happy, or why we can't open our hearts more fully are not that different from those we espouse about our workplaces. Block's book is a keeper. I suspect it can be transformative, if we let it.
January 3, 2013
The main concept behind the book is that we have been conditioned to ask the wrong types of questions when making decisions. We often ask "How do I get X?" when we should first be asking "Why do I want this?" or "Is this Right?" If we base our decisions more on whether we're doing the right thing for the right reason (if we answer yes) then we can move to the how's of getting it done.
Organizations often place too much emphasis on the how versus why and that can lead to a stunted and ineffective environment. To act genuinely requires idealism, intimacy and depth. Business practicality often favors realism bordering on cynicism. We often forgo our values in business to simply get ahead. The author offers the idea that if you make yourself a commodity and you're willing to sell your values then others determine your worth and your life is left to the laws of supply and demand.
As the author puts it, "The diversity and imperfection of human soul is, ultimately, what makes institutions engaging, humane, and habitable. Human systems are imperfect, the homes for unsolvable problems. And we cannot take the tools and strategies of engineering and economics and apply them to the governance of organizations." To be effective, organizations need to be more humane and mindful of their values and motives.
Organizations often place too much emphasis on the how versus why and that can lead to a stunted and ineffective environment. To act genuinely requires idealism, intimacy and depth. Business practicality often favors realism bordering on cynicism. We often forgo our values in business to simply get ahead. The author offers the idea that if you make yourself a commodity and you're willing to sell your values then others determine your worth and your life is left to the laws of supply and demand.
As the author puts it, "The diversity and imperfection of human soul is, ultimately, what makes institutions engaging, humane, and habitable. Human systems are imperfect, the homes for unsolvable problems. And we cannot take the tools and strategies of engineering and economics and apply them to the governance of organizations." To be effective, organizations need to be more humane and mindful of their values and motives.
March 9, 2011
I read Block in graduate school. Bought this because the title intregued me. His responses to How - literally changed the way I think about my life and decdisions I have made. He sees "How" as the way to avoid the deeper questions. Block is unusual in the field of business writers. All of his books look, without fail, at what how we work determines the depth of our soul. This one leaves me with the question "what matters?"
Below is the publisher's review.
...morePeople keep asking "How?" as a defense against living their life, says best-selling author Peter Block. In this witty, insightful award-winning book, Block shows that many standard solutions and improvement efforts, reinforced by most of the literature, keep people paralyzed. Here he places the "how to" craze in perspective and teaches individuals, workers, and managers ways to act on what they know. This in turn allows them to reclaim their freedom and capacity to create the kind of world they want to live in. Block's "elements of choice" - the characteristic of a new workplace and a new world based on more positive values - include self-mentoring, investing in relationships, accepting the unpredictability of life, and realizing that the individual prospers only when the community does.
Below is the publisher's review.
...morePeople keep asking "How?" as a defense against living their life, says best-selling author Peter Block. In this witty, insightful award-winning book, Block shows that many standard solutions and improvement efforts, reinforced by most of the literature, keep people paralyzed. Here he places the "how to" craze in perspective and teaches individuals, workers, and managers ways to act on what they know. This in turn allows them to reclaim their freedom and capacity to create the kind of world they want to live in. Block's "elements of choice" - the characteristic of a new workplace and a new world based on more positive values - include self-mentoring, investing in relationships, accepting the unpredictability of life, and realizing that the individual prospers only when the community does.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 57 reviews