How does collective energy for action arise?

Alignment is a delicate matter. The corridor in which a team's common alignment takes place can be broader or narrower. If it becomes too narrow, the demand for binding commonality becomes a straitjacket. If it is very broad, there is a risk of arbitrariness and disintegration. Alignment does not necessarily refer only to the sharing of values and goals.  Above all, it is the synchronisation of energy for action. How this arises and what it takes to recreate it again and again is a crucial question for successful self-organisation. 

In the laboratory, we addressed, among other things, the question of which roles should be assigned in this difficult game of synchronising action energy, collective navigation and process continuity. In addition to the initiator (showing up) In self-organised teams, we believe that the personal ability to navigate between leading and following, as well as the ability to step aside and clear the way even when not 100% convinced of the project, are essential. Here is self-navigation in view of internal resistance and tensions and a reflective approach to dealing with them. This can ultimately lead to the formulation of a serious objection and thus put a stop to the project. 

In the laboratory, we investigate this in a case simulation, supported by the Alignment Pitch Deck. The progression has three rounds: 1. Introducing an impulse. 2. Exchange to evaluate the project. 3. Individual commitments.

​

Providing impetus 

Self-organised teams thrive on role-based responsibility, but also on moments of situational leadership. One person has an impulse, puts it out there, and others join in, either supporting the idea or opposing it. Often, the moment of introduction is unclear. Is it a wild idea or a concrete plan? Is it an invitation to contribute ideas, to get involved, or just information about a train that is already in motion? 

The pitch deck gives the person providing the impetus three possible options for this: The „Greenlight card expresses the desire for simple consent that the project can be carried out. It can be insightful to reflect on what scarce resource is being negotiated that makes the consent of others necessary in the first place. It could be the use of space and budget, or the use of time, attention and visibility. 

The second alternative is the „Invitation card – a pitch that opens the door to joint action without the expectation that everyone will join in. As a third option, the „Appeal card played, with a call to action being issued to the entire team to join in. 

In a subsequent information and opinion-forming round, questions/opinions can be expressed. It may become clear that it is not always sufficient for the impulse to be sorted exclusively by the person giving the impulse. Some things are introduced as green lights, but there are interests and demands within the team for active participation. Conversely, a binding appeal can also be downgraded to an invitation if the premise of „all or none“ is questioned.

​

Exchange for evaluation

In the second round, the project is evaluated on the basis of two sets of feedback cardsThe strategic assessment provides feedback on the potential for the team or the organisation as a whole – in terms of an assessment of effort and return. The personal assessment provides feedback on the individual „motivation factor“ and the capacity that enables or prevents participation. The cards are played and explained in rounds. Based on this feedback, the person who initiated the proposal can withdraw it, modify it or send it to the third round.

Individual commitments

The third round seals the deal with the Commitment cards the proposed project. The team members can choose between three cards:
A) I am on board and will participate to the best of my ability. B) I give my consent for the project to go ahead, but I will not be participating (either because I do not have the capacity or because I do not want to stand in the way, even though I am not 100% convinced). C) I have a serious objection and am in favour of the project not going ahead.

That the negotiationsThe laboratory quickly reveals that even with the pitch deck, the transmission of impulses does not proceed smoothly and painlessly. However, it also becomes clear that the formatting provided by the card set can create clarity and transparency, which accelerates the process and reduces complexity in the course of communication. 

The laboratory provides yet another insight: this is primal stuff. Approaching alignment ability is not solely a matter for the cerebral cortex. The moments in which it becomes physically apparent that a common wave is emerging or the flow is blocked, in which one's own positioning has an emotional component – whether in physical exercises or in the mindful perception of a conflict – are so powerful and essential that training such as the Seven muscles of self-organisation Here, too, there is no getting around the somatic approach to collective development.