Currently reading Meyerson & Scully (1995) on “Tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change”

I really had a hard time getting started with this article by Meyerson & Scully (1995) on “tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change“. They introduce that ““Tempered Radicals” are individuals who identify with and are committed to their organizations, and are also committed to a cause, community, or ideology that is fundamentally different from, and possibly at odds with the dominant culture of their organization“. Wow! But then things get weird in the introduction: “A woman executive can identify with feminist language” and at the same time be loyal to her organization — but is the implication that men cannot be feminist? Or why make this a gendered statement? And it continues like that with statements about what men and African-Americans can be. Why?? Anyway, the intention is good: They say they “write this paper about and for the people who work within mainstream organisations and professions and want also to transform them“, “those who do not fit well” but bring about change as change agents within organisations. And once I decided to overlook the language (maybe that is how people talked 30 years ago?) it was really interesting!

The term “tempered radicals” is used because on the one hand, these people are radical in their organisation, on the other hand they are tempered in its multiple meanings: both moderate, and hardened like steel, and with a temper! Meyerson & Scully (1995) describe the struggles that people experience when their personal and professional identities are not aligned, and how they themselves are in such a role, “struggling to act in ways that are appropriate professionally and authentic personally and politically“. They also describe the delicate balance that “tempered radicals” strike while always being seen too radical by some and too conservative by others, and the difficulty of containing two identities at once, of staying engaged in an organisation that requires this balance, a “state of enduring ambivalence“. This is a really difficult position to be in, an “outsiders within“, and “[s]ome observers may be confused about who the tempered radical is or what she “really” stands for” (which is a nice way of saying that she is likely to be accused of hypocrisy from both sides), but “The problem is that the tempered radical does not have a single identity that is “true” and another that is “staged.” The ambiguity of having two identities may cause others to believe the tempered radical is strategically managing impressions and trying to win approval from two audience“. And in order to not be identified too closely (or at all) with one of the audiences, tempered radicals might isolate themselves while also not fitting fully with the other audience, so many feel isolated, especially the higher they climb in hierarchy.

There are two main change-oriented strategies:

• Small wins is about managing emotional energy and approaching organisational change in the same way as you eat an elephant: one bite at a time. Small wins can create momentum through positive experiences and more opportunities. And: “As experiments, small wins act as a system diagnostic. With relatively minor visibility, risk, and disruption, small wins can test the boundaries of an organization’s capacity for change“. But on the downside, change driven by small wins can be slow, and if the actions are picked only by what opportunities present themselves, it is passively following change rather than driving it, even loosing sight of the big problems that needs addressing.
• Local, spontaneous, authentic actions happen also based on what opportunities present themselves, but are really about being authentic in the moment. This can be for example by not fully adapting language styles to the audience, but speaking both insider and outsider language to change what is normal and discover allies, or by making sure to keep strong ties with members of both identities, inside and outside of the organisation (for support, but also to stay fluent in both languages).

I can relate to these “outsider within” struggles a lot. I wrote a long paragraph about my personal experience in such a role, but decided to not publish it (at least not right now) in order to not risk the little bit of “insider” status that I have worked hard to achieve. At the same time, that means I am not calling out things that I really want to call out, also to show readers that they are not alone, that I see them, that I support them. And this is a balance that feels like no matter what I decide to do, it is letting someone down.

But long story short: Despite my initial reaction to the article, I now find it really helpful because it helps me recognize the importance of being a change agent on the inside, and also of seeing and acknowledging other change agents on the inside, and of having compassion and patience with them balancing identities in ways that I might find frustrating. And maybe also having compassion and patience with myself…

Meyerson, D. E., & Scully, M. A. (1995). Tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change. Crossroads. Organization Science, Sep. – Oct., 1995, Vol. 6, No. 5 (Sep. – Oct., 1995), pp. 585-600

Featured image today, and images below, are actually from this morning! I managed to go for a sunrise dip, and this little bit of care for myself still makes me feel better now in the evening.

Also, I think the pictures are beautiful. My favourite picknick spots and the lights of Malmö in the background…

And the beach!

Sunrise and sunset are the best times to take pictures of waves, because the shadows make it easiest to recognise all the different structures in the water.

For example, the zones in the lee of the land where there are no waves and the water is flat like a mirror…

Even more clearly visible below.

But I just love taking pictures from within the water.

Especially in the early morning when all the wave structures are so crispy and clear!

And pink clouds right before sunrise!

Now the sun is up. I had actually walked off the bridge already but then met a friend and joined her to walk back out and it was so beautiful!

I was a little sad I wasn’t in the water for the sunrise, but I also did not want to go back into a wet and cold swimsuit.

And now it’s really morning…