1

On a bright summer day in early June, 2005,a silver metallic Volvo station wagon pulls

into the driveway of a large brick house inSummit, New Jersey. The neighborhood, some 30miles from the skyscrapers of New York City, isplush and affluent, dotted with large ornate hous-es. With its well-manicured lawns, Summit ishome to several of America’s corporate leadersand Wall Street bigwigs, who enjoy the comfortsof spacious suburban living, and easy access tothe Big Apple.

Riitta Lipmanowicz steps out of the driver’sside of the station wagon, and opens the backdoor. A large, friendly dog hops out, sniffing the

ground, as Riitta unbuckles her precious cargo:her two granddaughters, Tessa and Sofia. To myeyes, Tessa looks about four years old and Sofia ashade under two.

“Grandpa, Grandpa, where are you?” Tessa’ssingsong voice echoes through the shrubs as sheraces inside the house. The toddling Sofia cannotkeep pace with her older sister, but Riitta helpsher along. As Tessa darts from the kitchenentrance into the living room, a sixty-somethingman, with salt and pepper hair and wearing khakitrousers and a full-sleeve blue denim shirt, tiptoesdown the staircase, hiding by the living roomwall. While Tessa continues to call out to her

TRUST is the LUBRICANTof ORGANIZATIONAL LIFELESSONS from the LIFE and CAREER of HENRI LIPMANOWICZ

by

Arvind Singhali

Deeper Learning • Volume I, Issue 1Plexus Institute

©2006. Arvind Singhal and Plexus Institute. Published by: Plexus Institute, 42 South Main Street, Allentown, NJ, 08501. While this work is copyrighted, we encourage the reader to share it widely, with appropriate credit and citation, for education-al and non-commercial purposes. The author welcomes your comments on this article at singhal@ohio.edu. Another article inthe Complexity in Practice Series is available at http://www.plexusinstitute.org/services/stories/show.cfm?id=35

2

grandfather, and as the tiny Sofia catches up withher sister, the man-in-hiding, with a playful wispof a grin, steps into the living room, approachesthe two girls and whispers: “Here I am.”

Kisses fly in the air, screams of delight per-meate the tall ceilings, and tiny hands cling to thedenim sleeves.

Riitta, glances at her husband, and softlyexclaims: “Oh, Henri!”

“What did you get for me, Grandpa?” Tessa asks.Two colorful Ndebele dolls with ornate metal-

lic jewelry adorn the side table, suggesting thatGrandpa prepared in advance for greeting hisgranddaughters. He playfully hands the dolls toTessa and Sofia, explaining the dolls are fromSouth Africa.

Looking at Grandpa Henri, I cannot tell thathe has just returned (earlier that morning) from

South Africa. The 30 hours of flying and airporttime does not show in the presence of adoringgranddaughters.

There are many ways to introduce HenriLipmanowicz – Grandpa to Tessa and Sofia, orhusband to Riitta for some 36 years. A black andwhite picture on the mantel shows a young Henriand Riitta on their marriage day in the late 1960s,walking the streets of Helsinki, Finland. Henriwearing a formal suit, sporting a playful grin(which now seems familiar), holds an executivebriefcase, and a glowing Riitta — in a white dressand neatly groomed hair – walks by his side.

“Why the executive briefcase?” I muse. “Thattoo on one’s wedding day?”

The briefcase holds clues to another facet ofHenri’s life – a life of extraordinary achievementand accomplishment as a corporate executive.The spacious brick house in Summit — with its

A reflective Henri Lipmanowicz, on the coast of the Dominican Republic with two of the important ladies of his life. 2006

3

well-manicured gardens, a gated swimming pool,and its artfully decorated living room – furtherechoes a life of understated affluence.

Eight years previously, in 1997, when HenriLipmanowicz – just short of his 60th birthday —decided to retire from Merck, the giant pharma-ceutical company, he was President of MerckIntercontinental Region(MIR) and Japan, responsi-ble for Merck’s operationsin over 160 countries ofAsia, Africa, EasternEurope, parts of NorthAmerica, South and CentralAmerica, and Australia andNew Zealand — that is,everything outside ofUnited States and WesternEurope. At retirement,Henri was overseeingMerck business worth awhopping $3 billion (U.S.).

As one spends personal time with Henri, andtalks to those who have known Henri from hisheady corporate days, and since then, one quick-ly realizes that Henri Lipmanowicz is, qualitative-ly, a different type of organizational leader thanmost others.

If one poses the question – what distinguish-es Henri from others? — the simple answer mightsay Henri’s managerial style embodies many prin-ciples of complexity science.

Interestingly, for most of his corporate life atMerck, Henri did not know about the emergingscience of complexity; for him, it was “plain com-mon sense”.

Henri’s JourneyAs we sit by Henri’s backyard pool, with the

afternoon sun shining overhead, Henri reflects onhis life’s journey. While we munch on a deli lunchof open-faced sandwiches, three-bean salad, hum-

mus, and ice-cold lemonade, Tessa splashes in thepool. Grandpa keeps a close watch on her whilehe ambles down memory lane.

Born and raised in France of Polish parents,who considered themselves lucky to surviveHitler’s Holocaust, Henri came to the U.S. on anexchange scholarship in the early 1960s, to get a

graduate degree in chemicalengineering at Yale. Boredwith the staid curriculum(most of which Henri hadcompleted in France), and“put off” by the all-maleelitism that pervaded theuniversity campus, Henritransferred, a year later, toattend Columbia Universityin New York City, earning amaster’s degree in industrialengineering and manage-ment.

Henri’s student visa allowed him, after thecompletion of his degree, to undertake practicaltraining in the U.S. for 18 months. To “gain somework experience,” Henri joined the businessplanning unit of Anheuser Busch. When his 18-month tenure was ending, and it was time toreturn to France, Henri sought employmentopportunities with American companies withbusiness operations in Europe. Around the sametime, Henri’s mentor and department chair atColumbia, Sebastian Littauer, told him about aletter he received from Merck, “looking for Ivy-educated multi-lingual Europeans.”

“I had never heard of Merck and I was notinterested in pharmaceuticals,” recalls Henri.Consumer product companies, such as Procterand Gamble, looked more attractive. However,goaded by his Columbia mentor (“it doesn’t costyou anything to go to the interview”), Henrispent the day at Merck’s international headquar-ters in New York City. He remembers: “I had the

“I became veryobsessive aboutfreedom. I considerit as the absolutelyessential ingredientfor people tobecome what theycan become.”

4

most fantastic series of interviews and conversa-tions. I was offered a job on the spot.”

Henri had served in Merck for only 18months (including a nine-month stint inCanada), when the company posted him toFinland as the Managing Director of its small sub-sidiary — a sales, marketing, and medical unit —which was losing money and considered a lostcause. “We have nothing to lose in Finland,”Henri was told. “If you can run the place, managepeople, and turn things around, perhaps you willhave a future in Merck.” “I was just a kid,”remembers Henri — barely 30 years old.

When Henri arrived in Helsinki, he noticedthe dozen-plus employees took little pride intheir work and lacked a sense of identity. “Whatchanged quickly,” Henri noted, were the intangi-bles – “the relationships, the way people connect-ed and interacted with each other.” Henri encour-aged a climate of openness, so everyone knew

what was going on. Hierarchy was debunked, fos-tering meaningful horizontal interactions.

Clear organizational objectives were set col-laboratively, foremost of which was “to be uncom-promising in quality and to be different.” By thetime Henri completed his second year in Finland,revenue was up 50 percent. There was also anupside in Henri’s personal life. Henri fell in lovewith co-employee Riitta and they married inHelsinki.

Henri’s success in Finland did not go unno-ticed. He was soon promoted to be Merck’sRegional Director in Scandinavia, in charge offour countries: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, andFinland. His stock within the company was ris-ing. A couple of decades later, it would take himto a top position!

The Making of HenriHenri’s parents were Polish Jews, who leftPoland without passports in the wake ofrising anti-Semitism, arriving in France in1930, wading their way through Germanyand Belgium. They settled in the smalltown of Carcassonne in Southern France,where Henri’s father worked as a tailor.Henri was born in 1938 in what he noteswas “a poor family of immigration par-ents” and grew up quite “aware of his fam-ily’s roots.” Growing up in France, under the closeshadows of Nazism (his father was pris-oner of war during World War II), anddeeply mindful of the anti-Semitismwhich claimed over six million Jewishlives in Hitler’s death factories in Europe,Henri notes: “I became very obsessiveabout freedom… I consider it as theabsolutely essential ingredient for peopleto become what they can become.” Adds Henri: “I feel so deeply and so per-sonally about freedom that I hate to beHome represents another haven for learning.

5

told arbitrarily what to do, or what I cannot do.”So, early in life Henri internalized the belief “thatif I don’t like something, it is highly likely thatothers would also not like it” This personal yard-stick of treating others with respect has charac-terized Henri’s life and career.

As a child, Henri learned the value of self-reliance and risk-taking,noting: “I could not usemy name or my father’slegacy to move forward. Ineeded to be goodenough to feel that I wasnot trapped, that I couldbe myself. So, to be ‘free’,I had to be successful ”

Henri was a brilliantstudent, jumping a fewclasses in school, beforehe undertook his studiesin chemical engineeringin Toulouse and Paris. A competitive summerscholarship provided Henri, barely 21, an oppor-tunity to work in Poland. He arrived in Poland“not speaking a word of Polish.” While he spokeGerman at work, he picked up Polish quickly.Similarly, his English was “dismal” when hearrived a year later in the U.S. But, thanks to longstints in front of the television set, he picked it upquickly.

For Henri, learning a language is not just anexercise in self-reliance, it also provides a windowinto a different culture, reflecting a different wayof knowing and expressing. Henri’s respect fordiversity – in thought, perspectives, and opinions– can, in part, be attributed to his wide exposureto different languages and cultures – both athome, school, and work environments.

While Henri is fluent in French and English,and comfortable with German, Finnish, andSwedish (and Polish, once upon a time), he grinsand notes: “I still swear and count in French.”

Retirement and Giving Birth to Plexus

“Why did you retire from Merck?” I ask. Henri grins and notes: “I wanted to leave

Merck at a time of my own choosing — at a timewhen the going was good. Merck’sIntercontinental Region and Japanese operations

were thriving; my divi-sion had been the fastestgrowing for several yearsin a row. It seemed likean ideal time to go.During my years atMerck I observed thatexecutives at the top lev-els of the company quiteoften retired unhappy:some overstayed, somewere pushed aside. I wasdetermined to avoid end-ing what had been (for

the most part) a wonderful career on a sour note.Also, my father who was living alone in Francewas getting quite old, unable to travel to the U.S.anymore, and I wished to spend more time withhim before it was too late. The idea of not suffer-ing from permanent jet lag and of having time forfamily and friends was also most appealing.”

“Was it difficult to retire?” I ask.“It is always difficult to leave a job that you

love doing and people that you care deeply aboutbut it was a ‘happy’ retirement,” reflects Henri. “Itwas happy precisely – and paradoxically - becauseI chose to retire at a time when I was both happyand very successful. There were a bunch of mem-orable farewell parties in various parts of theworld. I remember them as being warm, happy,and fun. A lot of people came to these parties,including secretaries and office personnel whom Ihad worked with over the years.” After amoment’s silence, Henri grins and notes: “In fact,it was pleasant. My heart was warmed by the ‘Iwill miss you’ whisperings and hugs.”

“I had no idea what todo and purposelymade no plans [forretirement].I wantedto leave the space openfor the unexpected toemerge.”

6

“What kind of a retired life did you have inmind?” I ask.

“I had no idea what to do and purposely madeno plans,” Henri notes. “I wanted to leave thespace open for the unexpected to emerge. I decid-ed I would not do what retired corporate execu-tives traditionally do – that is, serve on corporateboards. I wanted to dosomething meaningfuland different, but did notknow what.”

S e r e n d i p i t o u s l y,around the time of hisretirement, through somemutual friends, Henri’spath crossed with CurtLindberg, a senior officialof VHA, Inc. — analliance of 2,200 commu-nity hospitals — and aleading proponent ofusing concepts from com-plexity science to addressintractable health care issues.

“Curt is the greatest network builder I havemet,” muses Henri. “I admired how he hadbrought together corporate executives, healthcare professionals, science writers, and academicsaround the common purpose of learning how touse complexity science concepts in health care. Ienjoyed the time I spent with this network. Wemet several times over the next two to threeyears.”

“Were some directions emerging on how yourretirement was going to go?” I ask.

Henri notes: “There were several possibilities.One brewing idea was to start a small Foundationand engage in meaningful philanthropy aroundthe mission of helping executives develop organ-izations where people thrive. Around the sametime, I heard that Curt’s job at the VHA was beingretrenched. I told Curt what my ideas were and

asked him to consider the possibility of joiningme to start work on the prospective Foundation.”

“What happened then?” I ask. “Ten of us – all interested in complexity sci-

ence – met in Pittsburgh”, recalled Henri. Thediscussion centered on what work should comenext for Curt and how to continue the complexi-

ty network that he haddeveloped. Out of thesedeliberations came theidea of establishingPlexus Institute, a non-profit organization. Itsmission: “To foster thehealth of individuals,families, communities,organizations, and thenatural environment byhelping people use con-cepts emerging from thenew science of complexi-ty.”

A few monthslater, in Fall 2000, Curt and Henri took the leadin incorporating the Plexus Institute inAllentown, New Jersey. Curt would serve asPresident. Henri was elected Chairman.

So, three years after his retirement fromMerck, Henri Lipmanowicz was back in “busi-ness” — this time at the helm of a nonprofit cor-poration, promoting a wider understanding ofcomplexity science concepts to improve the qual-ity of peoples’ lives.

“Giving birth to the Plexus Institute withCurt and others was one of the most meaningfulevents in my life,” mused Henri.

“How have your last five years been withPlexus?” I ask.

“I enjoy my time with Plexus immensely for Ifeel that I am learning all the time and meetinglots of fascinating people such as you,” notedHenri. “And now I am even more convinced

“Trusting people andlooking after theirpersonal andprofessional welfarewent against theprevailingmanagement grainwhich believed inkeeping employees atan arm’s length.”

7

about the value of complexity science for busi-ness leaders and organizational managers.”

Experience Meets Science

It was only a couple of years prior to hisretirement from Merckthat Henri was formallyintroduced to the field ofcomplexity science.Upon the recommenda-tion of one of his col-leagues, Henri read twoof Margaret Wheatley’sbooks — Leadership andthe New Science and ASimpler Way.

The books grabbed Henri: “They gave me alanguage, a framework rooted in science, to seethe connections and threads of certain conven-tional and unconventional managerial practiceswhich really worked for me at Merck.”

“What unconventional practices?” I ask.“I routinely engaged in what the convention-

al management wisdom considered as deviantbehaviors.”

“Like what?” I ask.“For instance, I made a decision early in my

career that I would choose to trust people. Iwould give people the benefit of the doubt and Iwould organize on the assumption that, for themost part, people inside the company could betrusted,” noted Henri. “And, that if people weretreated fairly, with respect, the outcomes willmostly be good.” After a pause, Henri added:“Trusting people and looking after their personaland professional welfare went against the prevail-ing management grain which believed in keepingemployees at an arm’s length.”

“So close relationships, personal connections,and trust were at the center of your managementpractice,” I echoed.

“Yes, and it was consistent with what MegWheatley was writing and what my experiencetold me. That is, in a complex system such as anorganization, order arises from the interactionsbetween the people, and the nature of that orderis a function of the quality of those interactions.In a complex system, such interactions generate

self-organizing patternsthat are beyond the con-trol of management.Therefore the quality ofrelationships betweenactors is often moreimportant than the quali-ty of the actors,” notedHenri. “What MegWheatley did was she val-

idated my convictions, backing them with sci-ence. I, of course, had justified them all along onthe basis of common sense, my lived experience,and my understanding of individual psychologyin group situations.”

“Did you ever meet Meg Wheatley?” I ask.“Yes, I invited her to Merck. She spent two

days with my management team. We sat in stuffedcomfortable chairs and dialogued non-stop –there was no agenda. It was beautiful. It was pro-found and at the same time we had a ball. She toohad a ball.”

“So, Meg Wheatley was an important influ-ence on you,” I probe.

“Yes, when I first read her, I said ‘Wow! Thisis beautiful!’ It was something I was missing. Shehelped string together my various ‘deviant’ expe-riences.”

Trust: The Lubricant ofOrganizational Life

I encourage Henri to reflect back on his man-agerial practices at Merck. “What did you do todevelop trust with co-workers?” I ask.

“I took risks bytrusting the ideas ofpeople around me.”

8

Henri reflects: “Consciously, I took theresponsibility to act in a way that people couldtrust me. I went out of my way to be truthful, toshare all information freely, and to reward peoplefor speaking their mind including disagreeingwith me. I tried to avoid manipulating people. Iworked hard to create safe spaces for sharingideas, and to practicewhat I call ‘active hon-esty.’ It sounds obviousand simple but it reallyisn’t, which is why somany leaders don’tinspire trust. I believedthat people would nottrust me if I didn’t firstdemonstrate by myactions that I trustedthem. So I took risks by trusting the ideas of peo-ple around me.”

“Can you give me an example?” I ask.In response, Henri shared a story from his

early days with Merck in Finland. The year was1969 and Henri was trying to put Merck’s Finnishoperations back on track. He remembered:

“I hired Jorma Mantovaara — a very talented,knowledgeable, and dynamic Finnish man as mySales Director, luring him from Winthrop, anoth-er pharmaceutical company. Within weeks of his

joining our company, he came to me with an idea.He suggested that instead of using a detailingpresentation brochure – which had printed head-lines and text - to make presentations to physi-cians, our sales reps should perhaps use a flannelboard on which we could stick, and move around,the various presentation props.”

“What did you say toJorma?” I ask.“I said that’s an interest-ing idea. Why not try it?”After a pause, Henrinoted: “In essence, I wastelling Jorma I trust youand I am prepared to takea risk with your unprovenidea. This was early on inour relationship and it

was a very big thing for Jorma as he could not gethis previous boss at Winthrop to even try it out.”

“How did the flannel board fare?” I ask.Henri grins: “All the sales reps thought this

was a crazy idea. They had a whole raft of reasonsto explain why it would not work includingwhere would one put the flannel board given thedoctor’s table was always crowded. But it workedlike a charm….it was a big success. Doctors wereintrigued by this novel mode of presentation andmade space on their tables. The flannellograph

“My trust clearly costthe company money.But it was worthevery cent!”

Table 1. Henri’s Dos and Don’ts

Dos Don’tsBuild on Trust Depend on Controls

Give Freedom to Experiment Reward Conformity

Share Problems and Failures Kill Bad News

Celebrate Accomplishment Punish Failures

Admit Your Mistakes Abuse Your Authority

Take Risks Stand Still

Be Connected Isolate Yourself

Be a Role Model Expect Others to do More than You

Make Work Fun Allow Boredom

9

(as it began to be called) resulted in a more inter-active, dynamic, and memorable conversationbetween the sales reps and the physicians.Unbelievably, the physicians, absorbed in thepresentation, were giving our reps double thetime than they did previously. They now hadmore questions, which meant that the reps had tobe better trained. A smallchange in a presentationprop had a series of cas-cading positive out-comes. In retrospect, theflannellograph is a goodcomplexity story. Bychanging the quality ofinteractions, withoutchanging the actors,whole new patternsdeveloped.” Then Henribroke into a laugh andnoted: “Above all, theflannellograph was fun.”

“What did the flan-nellograph initiative doto your relationship withJorma?” I ask.

“It cemented our relationship as we workedclosely on creating flannellograph presentationsand developing this new medium. I gave Jormacredit for implementing this idea, and he becamemore and more creative. By trusting his first idea,by opening a space for experimenting with theflannellograph, other possibilities for innovationand creativity opened up. As the safe and sup-portive space grew larger, we moved further andfurther out on the edge of our capabilities to dothings that were truly unique.” Henri leanedback, sipped his lemonade, and said: “Innovation,as you know, happens on the edge.”

“So trusting people can yield surprising, andeven far-out, outcomes?” I ask.

Henri replies: “Yes, if a relationship isinvolved, trust is fundamental. But trust does not

have to be blind. In trusting people, I knew that Ihad to be prepared to be disappointed periodical-ly. But that was a price I was willing to pay. Thebenefits of trusting all the people who deserved itwere far too great to reverse course because ofsome occasional disappointment. Trust is a two-way street, and I wanted my employees to know

that they could trust meto trust them.”

“Can you give mean example of when youtrusted someone, and aprice had to be paid?” Iask.

Henri scratcheshis head: “Yes, I can.Here is a story fromwhen my trust clearlycost the companymoney.” But Henriquickly added: “But itwas worth every cent!”Henri recalled: “In 1992,Merck’s New Zealandoperations were headed

by Chris Moore, a young bright man, who report-ed directly to me. One problem for Merck in NewZealand was that their product distribution sys-tem was expensive, and Chris wanted to try a dif-ferent distribution strategy. However, I felt thatthe new course of action that Chris recommend-ed was not the right choice. We had long, open,free-spirited discussions about the variousoptions, and I explained to Chris my position,including the pitfalls of his recommendation. ButChris felt strongly about his position, was con-vinced that it was the right one to fix the problem,and stood by it.”

“What did you tell Chris?” I ask.Henri grins: “I told Chris you know how I feel

about this. But I also see what your position is.You have to do what you personally believe is

“Imagine how healthyyour body would be ifyour lungs startedlying to your heart. Orif your liver andkidneys only exchangedinformation once amonth! Now reflect onthe feedback patternsthat occur in mostorganizations.”

10

best. You have my approval and full support to tryout the new distribution system.”

“So you were implying that you trusted hisjudgment?” I ask.

“Yes, I genuinely trusted Chris. I also believethat it is essential for managers to be given thefreedom to make their own decisions so they cantake full responsibility for them, something theywill never do if decisions are imposed on themfrom above. He went to work with the new dis-tributor of his choice. Then some six monthslater, Chris called me. He sounded very sheepish,and noted that his decision to implement the newproduct distribution system had yielded poorresults. His tone of voice suggested that he wasready for me to explode and tell him ‘I told youso’.”

“Did you?” I ask.“No. I laughed instead and that totally sur-

prised him. I said, Chris, this is an expensive les-son so let’s appreciate it; let’s get our money’sworth in learning. How is everything else going?”

“What was Chris’ reaction?” I ask.“I think he was flabbergasted. He expected to

be beaten up. To be punished. He expected to

hear ‘I told you so.’ But everyone can make a mis-take, and sometimes mistakes are costly. But I didnot withdraw any authority from him. If I had,how could I expect him to trust me – his boss –down the pike? I had approved his decision andtold him that I would support him. Support is notjust for good times; it is most needed during badtimes. So, as a senior manager I was constantlymindful of what I needed to do in order for myteam members to trust me.”

“But, Henri, what does a manager do whenthere is little or no trust?” I ask.

“That happens a lot at the beginning of newrelationships,” notes Henri. “Trust has a soft nur-turing edge that improves the quality of interac-tions, but the absence of trust embodies a sharphard edge that leads to cracks, fissures, and rup-tures among people.”

“So, Henri, what should a manager do whentrust is missing in a relationship?” I ask. “Whatdid you do?”

In a measured steady tone, Henri notes: “Forme trust in a relationship was the foremost con-dition to continue to work together. It was thefoundation of a mutual contract. I prized it even

more than competence,as people can alwayspick up the neededskills. If trust contin-ued to be missing, thenthe relationship had tobe terminated.”

“Did this happenwhen you were atMerck?” I ask.

“A number oftimes,” Henri replies.After a pause, he con-tinues: “As I climbedthe managerial rungs atMerck, there weretimes when in a newposition I ‘inherited’

In all areas, Henri is backed by his principles.

11

certain managers. There were occasions when Ihad previously worked with or known these peo-ple and, for some reason, did not trust them; per-haps I found them to be dishonest, untruthful, orunreliable. These managers were often highly‘capable’ people and hence had survived, or per-haps even thrived, in the company.”

“What would you do with such ‘inheri-tance’?” I quip.

Henri’s tone rises an imperceptible notch: “Iwould meet these people without ado and say‘There is no point in us trying to work together.’And, the interesting thing is that usually therewas no outrage; no surprise. It was almost as ifthey were expecting it.”

“No surprise. Why?” I ask.“When you practice what you preach, you

develop a reputation. I guess people who hadworked with me knew that Lipmanowicz valueshonesty, integrity, and openness. Word does getaround, especially if you’ve been with the compa-ny a long time.”

“So, in essence, Henri, these people werefired?”

“Yes, they were let go and, usually, on gener-ous terms of severance. It was a civil process andwas clearly in everyone’s best interests.”

“So trust has a soft and a hard edge,” I muse.

Trust, Complexity, and Organizational Life

“How does the notion of trust in relationshipfit with a complexity science framework?” I ask.

Henri, who had obviously thought a greatdeal about this topic, answered cogently: “Anyhealthy complex system – whether an organiza-tion or an organism – is dependent on instanta-neous, authentic, and accurate informationexchange between and among its constituentparts. The level of trust in a relationship deter-mines the quality of the information that isexchanged. In a trusting relationship, more

authentic information will flow more quickly andreliably, allowing for more feedback loops. If thelevel of trust is low, less information will flowbetween the interacting agents, and the informa-tion will be distorted and delayed. So, trust is thelubricant of relationships, of organizational life.Whether the trust levels are high or low, orderwill emerge no matter. But what kind of order dowe want? Whether or not the patterns of interac-tions in a group are more healthy than dysfunc-tional is influenced by the level of trust within thegroup. ”

“How does this lubricant of trust manifestitself in organizational life?” I ask.

Henri’s assured reply is laced with threedecades of business experience: “People are openand transparent only when they trust you. Onlywhen people trust you can they come to you andexpose their vulnerabilities. Subjects that are usu-ally not talked about, that are sensitive, that aretaboo, become talkable. Trust improves the quali-ty of the feedback on a day-to-day basis. In mostorganizations, an employee receives feedbackonce a year – in the form of a performance evalu-ation which more often than not is cursory atbest. Circular feedback loops should be on-going,all the time, not annual.”

After pausing to sip some lemonade, Henricontinues: “Think of an organization as a com-plex system such as a human body. Now imaginehow healthy your body would be if your lungsstarted lying to your heart. Or if your liver andkidneys only exchanged information once amonth! Or if the neurons in your brain withheldinformation from your eyes? Now reflect on thefeedback patterns that occur in most organiza-tions.”

As I reflected on Henri’s emphasis on buildingtrusting relationships and providing continuousfeedback, it dawned on me that these representedattributes of a consummate mentor.

12

On Mentors and Mentoring

Henri is grateful to the mentors he had in life.He remembers with fondness a senior marketingofficial of Merck Canada, who mentored himearly in his career when Henri underwent a nine-month training in Canada. “He was helpful, gen-erous, and treated people with respect. I hadcountless discussions with him, and lookingback, I learned a lot from him because he gave mea lot of his time. Time is our most precious com-modity, much more so than money. How muchwe give to someone is probably the best measureof how much we care about that person”.

Prior to joining Merck, Henri was closelymentored by his department chairman atColumbia, Professor Sebastian Littauer, a RussianJew, who was a student of Norbert Wiener (fatherof cybernetics) at MIT. Notes Henri: “This wouldnot have happened in France. A French universi-ty would not have had the informality that wouldhave allowed a close mentoring relationship witha professor.”

Henri reflects on Littauer’s lasting influenceon him: “He’s the guy who encouraged me tothink in ways other than logical and deductive. Atthat time I had no clue what he meant by induc-tive reasoning and an experimental approach. Hetaught me that you could try something, andquestion it, and if it works, it’s good. That wasridiculous to me. In the engineering science I hadstudied, you didn’t do anything until you found aperfect solution.”

After a reflective pause, Henri added: “Yourmind opens up the moment you have acceptedthis idea of trying things to see if they work. It isthe first step in understanding and appreciatingthe process of adaptation and evolution.”

Henri, himself, is a quintessential mentor andrevels in the privilege and vanity that comes withit. In his own words: “The most satisfying andenjoyable thing to me is to see individuals and

groups blossom, succeed, and achieve beyondtheir own expectations.”

“So, what took you to South Africa this pastweek,” I inquire, sipping some lemonade.

Henri launches into another riveting story(he loves storytelling) of his travel to South Africato mentor and advise a former Merck employee,now the CEO of a company, with whom Henrideveloped a close relationship some decades ago.He values Henri’s counsel, and Henri loves thechallenge of introducing complexity science prin-ciples into an organization thousands of milesaway from home.

Curt Lindberg makes the following observa-tion on Henri’s mentoring: “When Henri goes toMerck now, even though he is retired, all the peo-ple he mentored come to talk to him. His impacton the company and its people is palpable.”

Once a mentor, always a mentor! “Mentoringhas longevity,” I muse.

Grey Warner, Senior Vice President of Merck’sLatin America Division, who worked with Henrifor nearly a decade and considers him to be hismentor, provided the following insights: “Henrihas an extraordinary intellect,” and “an inquiringmind that operates with the assumption thatthings are rarely what they seem at the surface.”

Those who know Henri well, including Greyand Curt, immediately grasp his innate ability to“open up conversations”. In essence, he rarely, ifever, takes a position which puts a damper on dis-sension, discussion, or free exchange of ideas.

Henri genuinely invites discussion by oftensaying something like this: “I am not sure aboutthis issue; it seems like one we should explore,what do you think?” Or “for the sake of discus-sion, what if we played devil’s advocate;” or “Arethere other possibilities which for some reason wehave not yet broached?” The purpose of these dis-cussions is to achieve clarity, to foster openness,and build trust. Once the ball rolls, Henri listensand questions with intensity.

13

When I probed Henri on his intense ques-tioning, Henri laughed and broke into anotherstory: “I was talking on the phone recently withHarald, one of my old friends from Scandinavia.He was the person I selected to be the ManagingDirector in Norway when I became RegionalDirector of Scandinavia. The Norwegian organi-zation was in bad shapebut Harald and I workedclosely and were able toturn it around. We werereminiscing about the olddays and at some pointHarald asked: ‘Henri, doyou remember the mostimportant word I learnedfrom you?” I had no cluewhat he was referring toand so I said ‘No, Harald, Idon’t remember.’ Hereplied ‘Why?’ I said‘because I am getting oldand forgetful.’ Haraldlaughed out loud and said: ‘I am not asking youwhy, I am telling you that the most importantword I learned from you is WHY, the word WHY.You always asked why and, after you got ananswer you would ask why again, and on and onuntil we finally got to the bottom of the issue andeverything was clear.’ I got what he meant androared with laughter!”

In any interaction, Grey notes that Henri“really connects with you – both in a profession-al and personal manner.” Henri gave a lot of roomto his managers, as he did to Grey, to experiment,to make mistakes, to learn, providing support asneeded: “He keeps the nonsense away from youso you can do what you do best.” Further, notesGrey: “Henri revels in introducing people to newthings, and has a willingness to look for new anddifferent ways of doing things.”

In many respects, Grey notes, “Henribecomes a father figure – one who has expertise.

And you respect him and at the same time haveaffection for him, as he does for you.”

In 1993, Henri appointed Grey to head all ofMerck’s operations in Latin America. Grey wassurprised as he was “not the obvious choice forthis job.” When Grey asked Henri for a jobdescription and list of responsibilities, Henri

noted: “The job is to deter-mine what needs to bedone, and to do it.” As theydiscussed the various con-stituencies, both externaland internal, that Grey’snew position would needto address, Henri advised:“Focus on a few importantthings and do them well.”

Grey notes, “Henri wasalways available for consul-tation,” much like a sound-ing board. While the own-ership of all importantdecisions rested with Grey,

Henri, as boss, would “quiz me on the process ofarriving at those decisions”. And, “if people orpersonnel issues were involved, Henri wouldalways probe a bit more.”

As I reflect on my association with Henri overthe past couple of years, and especially focus onthe past eight months (during the course of writ-ing this article) in which we talked either face-to-face or by phone for about 15 hours, I realizeHenri’s serendipitous mentoring influence on me.

Serendipitous Mentoring

In October, 2005, a few days after I hadreturned from Vientiane, Laos after participatingin a UNICEF-sponsored workshop on HIV/AIDSand Children, Henri and I spoke on the phone.The purpose of the phone call was for me to digdeeper into Henri’s management practices and see

“The choice is notbetweencompetition andcooperation in anorganization. Bothare simultaneouslyneeded amongorganizationalmembers.”

14

their connection to complexity science. However,Henri showed a genuine interest in my participa-tion in the Laos workshop, posing several ques-tions about how it was structured, who the par-ticipants were, and what the outcomes were. Atfirst I thought this was just chit-chat, but aftertalking about this for some 35 minutes, I began tosense it was more.

Henri asked me: “Whatwas the design of this work-shop?”

I answered: “We hadthree days of presentations.People got up, revved uptheir PowerPoint presenta-tions, spoke to the audi-ences, and if time allowedthere were questions andanswers.”

Henri asked again: “So,what was the design of theworkshop?”

I repeated pretty much the same banalities asI had done moments before.

I heard Henri sighing: “Sounds like the work-shop had no design. People came and talked. Theagenda was set, time-bound and rigid. It seemslecturing was privileged and there were fewopportunities for people to interact, catalyze theirdiverse experiences, and for ideas to shake, fer-ment, and emerge. An opportunity lost,” Henrisighed some more. “Next time you attend such aworkshop try and inquire about the design well inadvance and see if you can influence it to fostermore participation and interactions. If you suc-ceed you may end up contributing to the qualityof the outcomes much more than with your pres-entation.”

Then we moved on to discussing otherthings.

However, over the next two months, I foundmyself repeatedly reflecting on Henri’s question“What was the design of the workshop?” I reflect-

ed on my past 16 years of teaching practices atOhio University. I reflected on how I constructed(or rather “designed”) my course syllabi, my classactivities, and my assignments. Even though Ithought I did a pretty good job of creating a com-fortable learning environment in my classroomand fostering conversations and interactions

between and among par-ticipants, I asked myselfhow I could “design” mycourses differently to cre-ate even more opportuni-ties for interaction. I askedmyself how I could createmore possibilities for classparticipants to bring theirknowledge, experiences,and opinions to the sub-ject matter at hand, ratherthan “filling” them with afixed dose of content

derived from the assigned readings. In Winter Quarter 2006, based on my reflec-

tions on Henri’s pointed question, I found myselfchanging the “design” of my two courses. I incor-porated a wider variety of learning approachesthan I ever did before, including self-study, groupdiscussions and keynote presentations, story-telling, role plays, fishbowl conversations, doublecircles, guest speakers, case-studies, video view-ings, reflective learner notes, and synthesispapers. I began to give more weight to learner-centered reflections in the form of daily-journal-ing of ideas, reducing reliance on middle or endof the quarter instructor-centered assessments(i.e. mid-terms and final exams).

What perceptible changes can I see in mycourses this Winter Quarter? The classes now runthemselves, the participants are now more firedup, and we end up discussing topics and issueswhich would have never found a place in a pre-planned, teacher-centered, lecture-style format.To use Henri’s words now there is “more fermen-

“Complexity sciencehelps explain whysome of the mostwidely usedmanagementpractices are soineffective.”

15

tation” and more “chemical reaction”. I wish tocall it “creative alchemy.”

Those who have worked with Henri talkabout his gift of “adding value” to any conversa-tion, however, mundane it may seem.

Isn’t that what mentors do? A small chit-chat conversation on a certain

HIV/AIDS workshop inLaos creates ripples in aclassroom in Athens, Ohio,some 9,000 miles away.Welcome to non-lineardynamics!

Lessons for OrganizationalLeaders

What simple lessonsmight Henri’s life and cor-porate career hold for others?

Henri reflects: “I learned that how you dothings is often more important than what you do.For example, enthusiasm can be more importantthan the actual task in terms of quality of out-comes. An enthusiastic group can achieve fantas-tic results.”

“How can one fuel enthusiasm?”Henri notes: “People are more enthusiastic

about things they have chosen themselves. Youcan’t make people enthusiastic. What you can dois help them discover something about what theydo that is meaningful and important. In thisregard, recognizing achievement, however small,yields much”.

“What else?”Henri notes: “Most importantly, people don’t

like to be treated like cattle or robots. They don’tlike being beaten, physically or otherwise, andthey don’t like being exploited. They want to belistened to. People appreciate honesty and trust,and what gets organized around honesty and trustis what’s important. There are a number of

processes that can help surface peoples’ enthusi-asm.”

“What makes for a good manager?”Henri responds: “Foremost, a good manager

works for the people who report to him/her,developing quality relationships.”

“What else?” I ask. “A good manager should

not see things as black andwhite. I’ve become muchmore aware that much oflife is organized around thecoexistence of severalshades of grey. Trying toachieve something that ispredicated on the idea thatyou get one thing at theexpense of another is notthe real world.Organizational life is many

things at once. Many paradoxes must be cultivat-ed instead of resolved; for instance we need bothchange and stability and, the more we want tochange, the more we need stability to make it pos-sible. Similarly the choice is not between compe-tition and cooperation in an organization. Bothare simultaneously needed among organizationalmembers. Cultivating the paradox means pushingsimultaneously for more cooperation and compe-tition; a productive tension is then inducedamong organizational members that lead to ahigher and healthier quality of each. Similarly,managers need to encourage both the expressionof a diversity of views and the generation of astrong consensus. A consensus without diversityis worthless; it means acting like clones or lem-mings. And diversity in views without the capac-ity to reach a consensus spells chaos. Anotherconflict in organizations centers on autonomy (ordecentralization) and connectedness (or central-ization). It is a worthless battle. What we need tofigure out is how to increase both autonomy andconnectedness at the same time. When we look at

“Very few, if any,good ideas start atthe top of anorganization; badones do, however,and can’t be easilystopped.”

16

things with one set of lens it may make for a com-pelling picture, but it blinds us from seeing otherimages.”

I asked Curt Lindberg, Henri’s colleague atPlexus Institute, if he could provide an exampleof Henri’s ability to see, hold, and bring multipleperspectives on an issue.

Curt noted: “Last year Plexus Institute’s Board[of which Henri is Chair] conducted my perform-

ance evaluation, and in this process solicited writ-ten observations from each trustee. Henri sharedthe following statement with the trustees: ‘It isclear that Plexus would not exist without Curt orthat it would have turned into a different animal.The flip side of it is that Plexus, because it is sodependent on Curt, is too much a reflection ofwho Curt is.’ So, Henri has an uncanny ability tosimultaneously hold and express multiple per-

spectives, thereby enriching,enhancing, and deepening theunderstanding of that issue,” Curtnoted emphatically. Henri grinned and added: “Plexus

Institute at this time is a smallorganization with not enoughdiversity of perspectives. Withoutdiversity there is no fermentation,no chemical reaction, and nobroaching of new possibilities. Ahealthy organization is one inwhich there is diversity of per-spectives and unbridled trust – aplace where people can beunabashedly different and yet joy-ously co-exist.”In closing, I ask Henri, “What les-

sons does complexity science holdfor organizational leaders andbusiness managers?” Henri replies: “Complexity sci-

ence offers a new way of thinkingand acting, a new way of makingsense of the world around us. Itgives leaders concepts andmetaphors from the natural worldto better understand social struc-tures; concepts such as self-organ-ization, distributed control, emer-gence, the role of diversity, non-linearity, and the role of networks.Complexity science helps explain

The Open Space Law of Two Feet says if you're not learningor contributing where you are, march your two feet to aplace where you can be more productive.

17

why some of the most widely used managementpractices are so ineffective.”

“Can you say more?” I ask.“Yes, unlike conventional management think-

ing which privileges central control of the organ-ization, complexity-inspired managementassumes that order of the whole system does arisefrom distributed control —from interactions amongindividuals, leading to self-organization. This is a fun-damental difference. So theforemost task of an organi-zation leader must be tohelp create the conditionsthat foster free interactionsbetween diverse agents, andunleash the talents, creativ-ity, and risk-taking ability ofpeople.

“What are the benefitsof such an approach?” I ask.

Henri replies: “You can’thave a truly productive and effective organiza-tion, regardless of its mission, if the people in itare not really turned on and feeling personallyresponsible for what goes on around them. Thiswill not happen unless people are directly andtruly involved in the decisions that affect theirwork and role.”

“But, Henri, does this not fly in the face of thedictum that top managers have to make all thedecisions and always be in control?” I ask.

Smiles Henri: “In my humble opinion, leadersare paid to help make their organization success-ful, not to implement particular managementpractices. To thrive in today’s fast changing world,organizations need a continuous flow of goodideas and passionate people to implement themeffectively. For that, command and control is notvery useful because the emergence of good ideascan’t be programmed. Very few, if any, good ideasstart at the top of an organization; bad ones do,

however, start at the top and can’t be easilystopped. Enthusiasm can’t be ordered to sprout atthe will of senior management. What works isgiving everyone the freedom and opportunity toparticipate fully in the generation of ideas and intheir implementation.”

“Do you really mean everyone? Is that practi-cal? Wouldn’t involvingeveryone turn into anunending process?” I ask.

The conviction in Henri’stone is now palpable: “Yes, Imean everyone if at all pos-sible. And, no, it does nothave to be time consuminggiven the enormousamounts of time wasted bythe more traditional topdown approaches. First, thenotion that managers havea choice about involvingpeople in the decisions thataffect them is an illusion.

There is no choice; people will be involved nomatter what. The only choice is when. One caninvolve them in the process up front or deal withthe consequences afterwards during implementa-tion when people do not understand or resist thenew ideas. Second, involving people up front cre-ates an invaluable opportunity to benefit from thecollective intelligence and creativity that willemerge from the inclusion of multiple voices andexperiences. The quality and validity of what willemerge from such an inclusive process will infal-libly be superior to what can be generated by asmall group of experts. Finally when it will betime to implement, the involvement of everyoneup front will ensure a much, much faster and reli-able process.”

“That sounds so clear! And reasonable! Whydon’t all organizational leaders follow this inclu-sive approach?” I ask.

“In anyorganization therewill always be aneed to direct andcontrol but it needsto be balancedwith a mindset ofletting go.”

18

“Because that is not the way 99.9% of man-agers have learned or been trained to operate. Iam no exception. In my thirty years at Merck,which I believe to be one of the best corporationsin the world, I never learned that either.Whatever I did that was in that mode was out ofpersonal instinct and conviction, not because itwas mainstream practice. There was no trainingabout group processes; you just picked up how todo it by looking around you. What was custom-ary and institutionalized was top-down decision-making. Decisions were either taken alone, infor-mally in small groups, or more formally in a sen-ior management meeting.”

“So how can one involve large groups of peo-ple in a manner that is time effective?” I ask.

Henri’s eyes light up; his voice is collected –almost sage-like: “There are a number of process-es that can be used to achieve high levels of par-ticipation such as Open Space, ConversationCafés, Appreciative Inquiry, and PositiveDeviance. What these processes have in commonis that they facilitate and encourage the emer-gence of self-organization. Instead, sadly, the tra-ditional group process used millions of time everyday in organizations around the world is the busi-ness meeting. No matter whether the organiza-tion is for-profit or non-profit, the format is basi-

cally the same: a series of PowerPoint presenta-tions followed by some form of limited discussionusually dominated by two, three, or four people.This standard business meeting process isdesigned – purposely or not – to limit or preventparticipation. The agenda is tightly controlled, asis the schedule, as is the slate of attendees.Decisions are made by a small group and thenimposed on others who were not included butperhaps the most affected. No wonder there is somuch resistance to change in organizations andwhy so many change efforts eat a lot of time andresources. And, they often end up not makingmuch of a difference.”

Opening the Space in Venezuelaii

Keith McCandless, who often co-facilitateswith Henri in various organizational settings,recounts the following story from Caracas,Venezuela.

“It looked like Henri had not slept a wink.He had been up all night writing the script for thefirst 15 minutes of an Open Space Technologymeeting. We were working together with all 200members of Merck’s Venezuela subsidiary.Tension hung in the air and gloom was palpable

Conventional Management Practices Complexity-Inspired Management Practices

Leader as Director and Controller Leader as Liberator, Stimulator and Cultivator

Top-Down, One-Way Open Free-Flowing Interactions Among AllEmployees

Predicting and Forecasting Valuing and Preparing for Surprise.

Understanding Unpredictability, RigidImplementation of Plans

Emergence from Flexible Experimentation

Solving and Fixing Problems Building on What Works Well

Table 2. Complexity-Inspired Management Practices are About a New Way of Thinking and Acting.

19

as only a week ago the subsidiary had gonethrough significant downsizing. Everyone in thecompany – from the telephone operator, mail-man, clerical staff, to top management — wasincluded for an unprecedented three day event.The Managing Director of Merck’s Venezuelaoperations, Alison Joslyn, welcomed the partici-pants, noting such an all-inclusive meeting for-mat had never previously been attempted atMerck.

The pressure was on. The beginning of anOpen Space session relies heavily on establishingtrust with the participants. Participants mustbelieve that the conveners and the facilitatorsreally mean what they say — that each participanthas the responsibility and the freedom to organizearound the most important challenges faced bythe company. The agenda is created on the spot bythe participants, not the organizational leaders.

Henri looked tired but in control. Spanish isnot one of the five languages he speaks. His textneeded to be translated on the spot by a Merckcolleague David Gasser. David had never experi-enced the exhilaration of Open Space.

Henri and David worked together like sea-soned improvisationalists. They cracked jokes,played with language, offered some physical com-edy, and established the creative tension neededto launch the meeting. All this in the center oftwo concentric circles with 200 pairs of eyesglued to their every move.

The critical moment came soon after Henrioutlined the ground rules of Open Space. Anyparticipant could step forward and take responsi-bility to convene a working group around anyorganizational challenge they deemed to beimportant. Other participants have the freedom tojoin any group for open discussions, or movearound between groups. Usually, once an invita-tion is issued to the participants to step forward,a facilitator can expect a long uncomfortablesilence before anyone steps forward to the centerof the circle to launch a group.

Not in Venezuela and not for Henri. Within asplit second of Henri’s invitation, three then sixthen a dozen people jumped out of their seats andheaded straight for Henri. His surprise was pal-pable as it was rare. He hesitated, and thenstepped back a little. He seemed ready for every-thing except an avalanche of enthusiasm. Davidgave Henri a little nudge forward and he regainedall his composure. For the next several hours, weall stepped back and watched the unfolding ofself-organization in full splendor.

On the evening of the third day, when theOpen Space meeting ended, all participants cele-brated with a joyous party. People danced andsang. Over a cocktail, an employee confided: ‘Ihave worked in this company for over 20 years.Thanks to the Open Space meeting, I feel I waslistened to – for the first time.’”

Reflecting on the Venezuelan Open Spaceevents, Grey Warner, Senior Vice President ofMerck’s operations in Latin America (who consid-ers Henri as his mentor) commented: “By bestow-ing his trust, Henri helps people find the courageto try very different things. As leader of the sub-sidiary, it took enormous courage for AlisonJoslyn to convene the Open Space in Venezuela.She was able to do this in part because of the trusther management bestowed on her to try some-thing very different. This is part of the legacythat Henri left at Merck.”

On Directing and Controlling

“Henri, are you suggesting that leadersshould stop directing and controlling?” I ask.

“No, not at all,” responds Henri. “In anyorganization there will always be a need to directand control but it needs to be balanced with amindset of ‘letting go’ – that is, trust the peopleand the process. It requires a willingness to bedirected by the collective inputs of those deepdown in the organization, especially those on the

20

frontlines and, also heeding the voices of the out-siders with which the organization interacts.However, letting go is not easy to learn or do; it isinevitably messy compared to the ‘on-the-surface’orderly top down process. It scares the leaderbecause there is no way for him/her to know inadvance what outcomes this type of open discus-sion process will generate. Also, leaders are leeryof cutting down presentations and making spacefor conversations as it just doesn’t look leader-like! ”

“Henri, please explain what you mean by ‘on-the-surface’ orderly?” I ask.

“In the usual top-down way of implementingorganizational changes, the part that is visible tomanagement, namely what is happening in meet-ings, is most of the time orderly. Scripts have beenrehearsed, presentations are smooth, and peoplehesitate to voice strong opposition to issues thathave been decided at higher, sometimes the high-

est, levels. Everything looks under control. Themessy part is swept under the rug thanks to a wellcontrolled agenda. However, the dissension resur-faces as soon as people walk out of the meetings— in the corridor conversations and through thegrapevine. That is where disagreements are airedand people reinforce their misgivings about theproposed changes. That is where they invent waysof delaying implementation, avoiding it altogeth-er, or neutralizing it. That’s the invisible messunder the surface which takes a huge effort toovercome because it can’t be apprehended. Howcan you deal with obstacles that you don’t evenknow exist because they are not discussed in yourpresence? In contrast, in an open participativeprocess, the mess comes bubbling to the surfaceand remains visible for all to see until commonsolutions or resolutions emerge. That is a veryuncomfortable time for senior management;things look quite out of control and there is no

The spirit of a lifelong learner: An insatiable curiosity about the surrounding world.

21

certainty that there exist some good solutions onthe other side of the mess. I have been through awhole bunch of such messy processes and, nomatter how used to them I have become, mystomach still grinds and crunches, poised for anunexpected somersault. It takes a great deal ofself-control and trust in the process to not jumpin to stop the mess.”

“Henri, how can you not interfere when youknow that the rug that you are standing on can bepulled from under you?”

“I silently chant mantras like: ‘it’s a mess,that’s a good sign, something essential is happen-ing. There is no way to avoid the mess. Better amess now with everybody having a chance to par-ticipate than later. This is not about you Henri;the group needs to work its way through theissues. You can’t solve the mess for them; theyhave to do it themselves. You can’t go from doingthings one way to doing them another way with-out a messy transition. If it weren’t messy, worryand worry hard. You knucklehead you know

Endnotes

i Arvind Singhal is Professor and Presidential Research Scholar in the School of Communication Studies,

Ohio University, where he teaches and conducts research on the role of communication in organizing for

social change and promoting public health. He is author of several books, including Organizing for

Social Change: A Dialectic Journey of Theory and Practice (Sage, 2006), Combating AIDS: Communication

Strategies in Action (Sage, 2003), and Entertainment-Education: A Communication Strategy for Social

Change (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999). In recent years, Arvind has become a keen student of complexity

science, and serves on a voluntary basis on the Science Advisory Board of the Plexus Institute in

Allentown, New Jersey, of which Henri is the Chair of the Board and founding member.

In the past two years, Arvind met with Henri Lipmanowicz several times at various Plexus meetings, vis-

ited with him at his home in Summit, New Jersey in 2005 for an in-depth personal interview, and fol-

lowed that up with six phone conversations (including one when Henri was vacationing in France).

This article is a product of complexity-inspired processes: it was dialogically co-constructed with Henri

and his various colleagues over several iterations until certain patterns emerged and self-organized

themselves into headings and paragraphs. In this process, Arvind conducted interviews with Grey

Warner, Senior Vice President of Merck’s Latin America Division, Curt Lindberg, President and founder

of Plexus Institute, and Keith McCandless, a Seattle-based leadership consultant who along with Henri

co-facilitates complexity-inspired processes in organizational settings. This article also draws upon an

interview of Henri conducted by Prucia Buscell and Curt Lindberg on June 26, 2005, while driving in a

car from New Jersey to Boston. Both Grey and Curt and Keith provided feedback on previous versions of

this article, and Prucia provided a transcript of Henri’s car interview which was an invaluable resource.

Velvet Miller and Nancy Espenhorst, both colleagues of Curt and Henri at Plexus Institute, helped out

in various ways to take this manuscript to completion. This article arose out of a coffee conversation

with Curt Lindberg, who sees incredible possibilities, and makes them happen.

iiThe author is grateful to Keith McCandless for sharing this Open Space story from Venezuela, and to

Grey Warner for his help in contextualizing it.

22

damn well that if you interfere you will crash theprocess and the energy of the group will dissi-pate.’ To tell you the truth sometimes I can’t resistnot stepping in. Then I hope that there is some-body present who is smarter than I am whoshoves me back gently into my ‘letting go’ role.”

I ask: “Henri, what is the contribution ofcomplexity science to what you just described?”

Replies Henri: “Complexity science has givenme the confidence to back these ideas andprocesses. It comes from understanding andappreciating how, in nature, an infinite number ofmarvelous and beautiful structures have emerged,from crystals to plants to living organisms,through self-organization. When I look at hownature operates, I see the importance of self-organization, diversity, emergence, networks,interactions and relationships, cooperation andcompetition. When I put this understanding ofcomplexity science with what I have learnedabout individual and group behavior, it validatesthe processes and concepts I have outlined. Thisvalidation is essential because there exists a sea ofopposing viewpoints rooted in a linear, cause andeffect, mechanistic view of organizations. Thesestereotypes are unfortunately reinforced daily inmanagement practices, in educational institu-tions, and in the media. People want to have sim-ple answers to complex questions and there areplenty of consultants happy to oblige with the lat-est how-to fad.”

As the sun’s rays begin to slant and radiate areddish-orange hue over Summit, New Jersey, Iask: “Any final words, Henri, on complexity-inspired managerial practices?”

Henri leans back and notes: “In a complexity-inspired management practice, the leader is not acontroller, but rather a liberator, a stimulator anda cultivator, a role model and an influencer.People in all organizations are hungry for thiskind of leadership because, for the most part, theyare suffocating under the weight of top downdirectives, processes, and bureaucracy. If such

leadership is offered, they will inevitably respondwith quantum jumps in performance” (Table 2).

While my free-flowing conversation withHenri Lipmanowicz draws to a close, I carry theecho of our dialogue forward:

“Believe in people. Let go. Trust is the lubricantof organizational life.”

What do you think? n

Thanks to the Lipmanowicz family for the picture ofHenri with grandchildren.

Thanks to David Gasser of Merck for other photos.