Problem Solving Within Complexity - part #3

A Truth That Influences Their Feelings 

Jim Collins and Morten T. Hansen in their book, Great By Choice: Uncertainty, Chaos, and Luck - Why Some Thrive Despite Them All (HarperCollins, 2011), write “We cannot predict the future. But we can create it.” However, they note that in order to do this we need to begin now, and work on it routinely over time. As they note, “It’s what you do before the storm hits - the decisions and disciplines and buffers and shock absorbers already in place - that matters most in determining whether your enterprise pulls ahead, falls behind or dies when the storm hits.” Given the current “storms,” we should have begun preparing for them years ago. Still, all is not lost or hopeless. We can start now, and move forward step by step, clarifying who we are, i.e. defining our mission/common identity, and our common understanding/core values about who we work as one team. 

As we create this level of clarity and understanding, I am reminded of something John Kotter wrote about in his book, The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations (Harvard Business School Press, 2002). “The single most important message in this book is very simple,” writes Kotter. “People change what they do less because they are given analysis that shifts their thinking than because they are shown a truth that influences their feelings.” He then notes that “The flow of see-feel-change is more powerful than that of analysis-think-change.” He recommends that “... those who are most successful at significant change begin their work by creating a sense of urgency among relevant people.”

In order to increase this level of urgency, and from my perspective in order to increase the focus on working to make change successful at the group level, rather than just at the individual level, Kotter suggests we do two things. First, show “others the need for change with a compelling object that they can actually see, touch, and feel.” Second, show “people valid and dramatic evidence from outside the organization that demonstrates that change is required.” Kotter does not advocate on “focusing exclusively on building a ‘rational’ business case, getting top management approval, and racing ahead while mostly ignoring all the feelings that are blocking change.” He comprehends that feelings may not always be a true perception of reality, but they are, nevertheless, what are causing people to think and work in specific ways. 

Yet, as we focus on showing a truth that influences peoples’ feelings, which we hope will result in an increased level of urgency, we need to acknowledge that many people and organizations are quite content with status quo. John Kotter in his book, A Sense of Urgency (Harvard Press, 2008), writes “complacency is much more common than we might think and very often invisible to the people involved.” He continues by explaining that “the opposite of urgency is not only complacency. It’s also a false or misguided sense of urgency that is as prevalent today as complacency itself and more insidious. With a false sense of urgency, an organization does not have a great deal of energized action, but it’s driven by anxiety, anger, and frustration, and not a focused determination to win, and win as soon as is reasonably possible.”

From my experience and observations, complacency, anxiety, anger and frustration are running rampant right now at all levels of society and within many different organizations. This is especially true when attempting to solve problems within complexity. Therefore, leaders need to make an important choice. As Margaret Wheatley in her book, Restoring Sanity: Practices to Awaken Generosity, Creativity, & Kindness in Ourselves and Our Organizations (Berrett-Koehler, 2024), explains: “We change from acting and learning from our actions. We act, learn, and discover what works. Most of us know this is the best process, but we don’t do it. We have enough time to learn - we just keep digging ourselves deeper into the hole of ignorance and failure.” And for me, this is the key, namely to understand that urgency and change happen when we learn from our actions, and create networks of allies and confidants who can help us in this learning process. Then, the flow of see-feel-change becomes grounded in reality, and the subsequent urgency that comes from this grounding is focused and effective. 

The Path To Building Commitment And Advocacy

Increasing urgency over time, and convincing a group that a new collective consciousness is necessary in order to be effective is big work. But from my professional experiences and observations, I think there is a parallel track to this work that is not often recognized or valued, and yet is very important for the former to take place. 

Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall in their book, Nine Lies About Work: A Freethinking Leader’s Guide to the Real World (Harvard Business Review Press, 2019), write: “Instead of cascading goals, instead of cascading instructions for actions, we should cascade meaning and purpose. It is shared meaning that creates alignment, and this alignment is emergent, not coerced. Whereas cascaded goals are a control mechanism, cascaded meaning is a release mechanism…. Our people don’t need to be told what to do; they want to be told why.” 

It is clarity about the why factor in combination with the urgency factor, i.e. that business as usual is no longer acceptable and is actually dangerous, if not detrimental to the whole of the company, that will generate clarity that is emergent. When solving problems within complexity, I believe the goal should not just be the action of solving the problems before us. Instead, it should be to build action based on commitment and shared advocacy for action. When a team is willing to participate in change, and when there is a recognition that the work of change is meaningful and important, this level of commitment transforms people’s thinking at the individual and team level. And one powerful outcome of this level of commitment is that all involved tend to publicly recommend and support the action. In short, they promote and advocate for the changes that need to take place, i.e. they are champions for the process and outcome of change. 

To be continued next Monday. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

Problem Solving Within Complexity - part #2

Creating Agility In The Face Of Strategic Ambiguity

Many years ago, renowned business consultant, Richard Tanner Pascale in his article, “Laws of the Jungle and the New Laws of Business” (Leader to Leader, Spring 2001), wrote that “Two imperatives govern survival in many industries today. The first requires agility in the face of high levels of strategic ambiguity. The second is a shift in culture and capability from slow, deliberate organizations to forms that behave like living organisms, fostering entrepreneurial initiatives, consolidating learning and moving rapidly to exploit winning positions in the marketplace.” While this may have been written 25 years ago, it is still true today. Given current events, our leadership challenge is to translate these two imperatives into concrete and practical applications.

For this, I turn to the work of Richard Pascale, Mark Millemann and Linda Gioja and their book: Surfing The Edge of Chaos: The Laws of Nature and the New Laws of Business (Three Rivers Press, 2000). As they write, “Over many millions of years, nature has devised strategies for coping with prolonged periods of gradual change and occasional cataclysms in which only the most agile survive.” During times of turmoil, they note that “Equilibrium is a precursor to death…. When a living system is in a state of equilibrium, it is less responsive to changes occurring around it. This places it at maximum risk.” The authors then go on to explain the Law of Requisite Variety, which states that the “survival of any organism depends on its capacity to cultivate (not just tolerate) variety in its internal structure…. Failure to do so leads to an inability to cope successfully with variety when it is introduced from outside.”

One example of this from the book is the difference between a fish raised in a bowl and one that has grown up in the sea. The former swims, breeds, and obtains food with minimal effort due to there being no predators. As a result, these fish are very sensitive to the slightest disturbances. The later has worked hard to sustain themselves. They have had to evade many threats, and cope with much variation. Therefore, they are robust when faced with change.

Now, Pascale, Millemann and Goja recognize that the notion of equilibrium as a precursor of death or disaster “must be assessed in the context of scale and time.” As they explain, on the small scale and short time basis, equilibrium is desirable. However, on the large scale, long time basis, equilibrium is hazardous, because the environment is always changing. They explain that prolonged equilibrium dulls an organization “to arouse itself appropriately in the face of danger.” And given what we are experiencing right now, large scale and long time equilibrium can be disastrous and dangerous on many different levels. 

The Symmetry Of Shared Consciousness

General Stanley McChrystal with Tantum Collins, David Silverman and Chris Fussell understood this perspective when they wrote the book, Team of Teams: New Rules of Engagement For A Complex World (Portfolio/Penguin, 2015). General McChrystal  is known for his command of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) from 2003 to 2008 during which his organization was credited with the elimination of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). In the book, he wrote that in 2004 AQI “looked on the surface like a traditional insurgency. But under the surface it operated unlike anything we had seen before. In place of a traditional hierarchy, it took the form of a dispersed network that proved devastatingly effective against our objectively more qualified force.” As he explained, “AQI’s unorthodox structure allowed it to thrive in an operating environment that diverged radically from those we had traditionally faced: the twenty-first century is more connected, faster paced, and less predictable than previous eras. Though we encountered this shift on the battlefield, similar changes are affecting almost every sector of society.”

Recognizing this profound change in their operating environment, he explains that in order to win, JSOC had to change. “Surprisingly, that change was less about tactics or new technology than it was about internal architecture and culture of our force - in other words, our approach to management…. Our Task Force’s structure and culture of disciplined, stratified reductionism had its roots deep in military organizational history…. This organizational culture is not unique to the military; since the Industrial Revolution, most industries have subscribed to management doctrines informed by or similar to Frederick Taylor’s ‘Scientific Management,’ a system that is excellent for achieving highly efficient execution of known, repeatable processes at scale…. We were realizing in 2004 that despite the success of this approach throughout the 20th century, it had its limits. Like the Maginot Line, it was insufficient for tackling a new generation of threats. Efficiency is no longer enough.” In short, JSOC came to understand that they were working in a fast-paced world with a higher degree of interdependence, all of which was creating complexity. 

Over time, McChrystal and his team learned that “Complexity produces a fundamentally different situation from the complicated challenges of the past; complicated problems required great effort, but ultimately yielded to prediction. Complexity means that, in spite of our increase abilities to track and measure, the world has become, in many ways, vastly less predictable…. This unpredictability is fundamentally incompatible with reductionist managerial models based around planning and prediction. The new environment demands a new approach.” 

And for me, here is the essence of what they learned, and is the key message of their book: “At the core of the Task Force’s journey to adaptability lay a yin-and-yang symmetry of shared consciousness, achieved through strict, centralized forums for communication and extreme transparency, and empowered execution, which involved the decentralization of managerial authority. Together, these powered our Task Force; neither would suffice alone.”

Building A Common Identity And A Common Understanding

There is so much to unpack in the previous paragraph. I think the best place to start, when it comes to problem solving within complexity, is to focus on “shared consciousness, achieved through strict, centralized forums for communication.”

First, we must remember this famous quote, often attributed to Albert Einstein: “We cannot solve problems at the same level of thinking that we were at when we created those problems.” This implies that in order to find a solution or a greater understanding or perspective, a new level of “consciousness,” i.e. a new way of thinking, is required which transcends the limitations of the original thinking that caused the problem in the first place. 

Once we comprehend this huge insight, the difficulty, when dealing with problem solving within complexity, is that we have a convergence of two different things happening at the same time. First, at this time period, the reason why problem solving needs to take place is not being caused primarily by our actions, but instead by other people’s choices. Thus, we had to respond and solve a problem they created. Second, the consciousness we need to have in order to solve the problem they created, is going to require a shift in our shared consciousness, not just at the individual level of thinking and effort. So, with both of these elements in mind, we, as leaders, are challenged to change our own individual  consciousness as much as the group’s shared consciousness. This is a magnitude of personal and organizational change that is vastly more difficult than just attempting to change one person’s mind. Now, we are changing how a group thinks. 

Martine Haas and Mark Mortensen in their article called “The Secrets of Great Teamwork” (Harvard Business Review, June 2016) write about the importance of a “shared mindset” as one key element in creating great teamwork. As they explain,“Distance and diversity, as well as digital communication and changing membership, make them [teams] especially prone to the problems of “us versus them” thinking and incomplete information…. The solution to both is developing a shared mindset among team members - something team leaders can do by fostering a common identity and common understanding.” And in one short sentence, they unlock a key part of the solution, namely building a common identity and a common understanding. However, we need to recognize that this does not happen overnight. 

To be continued on Wednesday. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

Problem Solving Within Complexity - part #1

Introduction

It was a busy morning at the restaurant where we were meeting for breakfast. The tables were full. The food was good, and the coffee was flowing. Everyone around us was talking, laughing, and sharing. 

Meanwhile, the two of us were deep into a conversation about the latest changes happening at his company and their ongoing need to respond to evolving market conditions plus changing customer expectations. In particular, we were exploring the subject of problem solving within complex adaptive systems, and his desire to reduce disequilibrium in the midst of these problem solving processes. As we talked, I realized that I had engaged in multiple versions of this conversation over the last 90 days with a wide diversity of senior leaders, all of whom were seeking solutions within complexity. 

When Problems Evolve Faster Than Solutions Can Be Created

In the beginning, when there is fear, anxiety and turbulence within the company and within the market place, we need to remember that we have been solving complex problems long before current events. In the past, we analyzed the problem, defined the root cause, developed options, evaluated and/or tested the options, executed the best option, tracked progress, and made midcourse adjustments. This was a fine model, but it is no longer a functional model. 

Right now, we must recognize that the problems we are trying to solve keep evolving faster than the solutions can be created, and then successfully executed. This is happening, because we are experiencing four different challenges at the same time period. First, we are facing complex problems on multiple fronts, inside and outside the company. Second, many of the problems do not have a simple root cause. Third, many of the problems are cross-connected, rapidly evolving, and all are creating impact and precedence. Fourth, the resulting speed of change within the business ecosystem means that we often have incomplete data before we have to make a decision. The bottom line is that the old, centralized problem-solving model for complex problems can not handle the number of simultaneous problems, and the speed within which they are evolving.

Recognizing this reality, we need to reframe the problem solving process to not focusing on the solution, but instead to focus on a solution. This is because when we create a solution to a problem, we assume our solutions have a degree of permanency. We also assume that the solution will become a systemic solution, not an episodic solution. However, current events do not support this conclusion.

Next, we must recognize that the desired element of permanency is found in the processes that create a solution, not in the actual solution. When working within a dynamic environment, and when the problem or problems continue to evolve rapidly over time, the most important stage is the one where we engage in a process to create a solution. 

Furthermore, the health and well being of the group or team, and the relational space within which they gather to create a solution is the only constant in the midst of this dynamic complexity. As a long time and successful change agent recently shared with me, it is easier to make change happen when you plug into an existing network to make change happen rather than when you have to create a network in order to create a solution, and then ultimately make change happen. Thus, starting with a healthy and functional group, team or network, is a key element within problem solving within complexity. 

The Importance Of Creating Adaptable Processes

Recognizing these subtle but important distinctions, I am reminded of the work of John Paul Lederach and his book, The Moral Imagination: The Art And Soul Of Building Peace (Oxford University Press, 2005). Lederach advocates for the on-going creation and refinement of these kinds of processes which create solutions. As he notes, when this kind of work is done on a regular basis over time, it will change the evolution of the problems and the solutions that are surfacing. Still, Lederach writes about the importance of relationships, explaining that “… relational platforms to produce change are more important than the individual solutions they create. In other words, platforms that create responsive processes must be permanent and continuously adaptive.” The goal in the midst of complexity is to create processes and relationships that are adaptable, not just to focus on creating solutions to current problems. 

Yet, as we do this level of work, I also am reminded of the work of Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky and their book, Leadership On The Line: Staying Alive through the Dangers of Leading (Harvard Business School Press, 2002). As they write, “leadership requires disturbing people, but at a rate they can absorb.” People, who are disturbed, generally respond in four specific ways to the actions of the leader. First, they respond by marginalization with the goal of keeping the whole organization from confronting an issue. Second, they respond by division in order to divert your attention as a leader by broadening the agenda related to the problem, or by overwhelming the agenda with seemingly logical reasons for disrupting the proposed plan to solve the problem. Third, they respond by attack, namely attacking the leader in order to neutralize their message. Finally, they respond by seduction with the hope that the leader will loose their sense of purpose, and then becoming side tracked by an initiative which is likely to generate a short term win. Heifetz and Linsky note that “All four of these [responses]  reduce disequilibrium that would be generated were the people needing to address the issues brought up by change,” and “all four restore order and protect people from the pains of adaptive work.” In short, we as leaders must understand and accept that “avoidance is denial,” and this is a common response when people are disturbed by complexity. 

To be continued on Tuesday. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

The Third Place

In 1989, American sociologist Ray Oldenburg introduced the concept of a third place - a place that was neither home nor work, but somewhere in between. This third place was a location where people could go and unwind, find solace, and let the stresses of life fade away. 

And from my perspective, we need these third place locations more than ever right now. We need these islands of sanity, referencing the work of Margaret Wheatley. We need places to catch our breathe, to rediscover our center, and to remember what is important and meaningful in our lives. We also need places to remember what is important and meaningful in the lives of those we love, and in the lives of those with whom we get to work with on a daily basis. 

As for me, I have numerous third places in my life. First, I always enjoy going to The Serving Cafe in my hometown of West Branch. It is a welcoming place with great, home-cooked food. I especially love having breakfast there with friends and family. 

Next, a favorite third place of mine are the many perennial flower beds around out home. Whether I am on my hands and knees weeding, or just enjoying the endless flowers from March straight through to November, I find it a place that feeds my soul and restores my faith in the world. Being in the natural world is always good for my spirits. Other places like this are found walking along the water at Lake McBride near Solon, summer vacation time in Door County, or just about any good bookstore. All of them fill up my life with joy, perspective, and solace. 

Along with physical locations, I also have third place people who can see me, be present to me, and hear me when I am struggling, grieving, or processing the challenges in my life. These people, whom I affectionally call my “Kitchen Table Cabinet,” provide safe space for healing, insights, and perspective. They are people who meet my challenges with grace, offer support when asked, and celebrate my progress when I struggle to see the bigger journey. They are there for me, encourage me to keep moving forward. 

In world where it appears the values of compassion, dignity, and respect, the very foundation of our humanity, are not being role modeled by many people, my third place locations and people remind me that all is not lost or hopeless. For when I am with these people, and when I am in these spaces, I meet individuals who are embracing these values and recognizing the importance of these values. While I may not be able to change the whole world, I surely can be a role model in my local community, and within my local third places. For I believe that when this happens, when we choose to think global and focus local, we are indeed changing the world one relationship and one moment at a time. 

This week, I encourage you to find your third place and your third place people. And then, be a third place person for all whom cross your path. When we choose offer solace and support, comfort and grace, in this way, we are truly changing our life and the lives all we meet along life’s amazing journey. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change

Staying Close to What Matters Most

Introduction

“How do we stay close to what matters in a daily way in the midst of so many detours and distractions?,” writes the poet Mark Nepo in his book, The Fifth Season: Creativity in the Second Half of Life (St. Martin’s Essential, 2025). “Three essential ways come to mind. We stay close to what matters by remaining wholehearted, by clearing the confusion that constantly visits us, and by quieting the voices of lack that hoard what we have and compare what we don’t to all that is around us.”

Staying close to what matters the most on a daily basis is a life long challenge. We regularly get distracted and interrupted, which often leads to detours and rabbit holes. And when we get to the other side of managing all these details and engaging in problem solving related to the details, we often feel worn, overwhelmed, and deeply frustrated. Then, when this pattern is repeated, day after day, week after week, month after month, we loose sight of what really matters most, and succumb to a life of being busy and depleted. 

So, when Nepo encourages us to “stay close to what matters by remaining wholehearted,” I understand the importance of this choice, and yet, at times, I struggle with how to do this. I also struggle with the fact that there are days when I have lost the memory of what it feels like to stay close to what matters most. Still, all is not lost or hopeless. My intent is still strong. I just know I need to be more consistent and disciplined in my choices. 

Remaining Wholehearted

My first choice is “stay close to what matters by remaining wholehearted.” I think this is vitally important and very hard to do, because being wholehearted means to be devoted, determined and enthusiastic in life’s journey. When I think about being wholehearted, I am reminded of the work of Jungian psychoanalyst, James Hollis, Ph.D. As he wrote: “No matter how well intended we begin, sooner or later we all spend good portions of this journey stumbling through savannas of suffering, where in we nonetheless find tasks that, when addressed - even in those dismal, diminishing circumstances - enlarge us. Going through suffering, rather than denying or anesthetizing it, knowing that if we hang in there, it will bring us choices that can either enlarge us or diminish us, and that when we are least in control, we still retain the freedom of choosing what matters to us.”

The act of “stumbling through savannas of suffering” requires us to make important choices. Some of those choices may feel diminishing, and others will be enlarging. But, in the beginning, life is less about making things orderly and under control, and more about alignment, the convergence of intention, clarity, and heart. When we choose to put our whole heart into living, and also give ourselves permission to keep learning and growing, emotionally, mentally, and spiritually, we stay close to what matters, even when we stumble into a savanna of suffering. 

Clearing The Confusion

My second choice is “clearing the confusion that constantly visits us.” On the surface, this seems like an easy course of action, but I have come to understand that the act of clearing takes time, patience, and perspective. And given current events, our digital lives create a wide variety of cognitively demanding, wildly time absorbing, logistical tasks that do not generate quality living or quality outcomes. 

When talking with a young person about life’s challenges, she shared that many people are focused on “grindset, not mindset.” I had never heard this term, grindset, before, and through listing and reading, I learned that it is an unwavering focus on achieving goals through intense, relentless work, often at the expense of other aspects of life. Furthermore, it is a mentality that glories constant work, and is driven by the belief that success is solely achieved through dedication and effort. While it can be associated with positive traits like hard work and discipline, a grindset mentality can have negative consequences, leading to burnout, anxiety, and strained relationships. 

When I understood the meaning of the term, I realized that I had been caught in this cycle numerous times in my life journey, and that I had met many people, particularly those in leadership and management positions, who defined life as one big check list that needed to be done. And while they got lots done, they also paid a heavy price in terms of relationships, marriages, and health. In basic terms, they won at work, and lost at life. 

Yet, clearing the confusion that constantly visits us is still important. “In the absence of ‘wake-up calls’,” writes the late Stephen Covey, “many of us never really confront the critical issues of life. Instead of looking for deep chronic causes, we look for quick fix Band-Aids and aspirin to treat the acute pain. Fortified by temporary relief, we get busier and busier doing ‘good’ things and never even stop to ask ourselves if what we’re doing what really matters most.” And this is why, we need a network of support people in our lives who will listen carefully, and share openly so we can regain perspective about our choices and our overall mindset. 

Again, I turn to the poet Mark Nepo, who shares an important point about regaining perspective. As he explains, “Being ready centers on the foundational ground we stand on and the clarity of view we meet a situation with. We often mistake being prepared for being ready, through the process of getting prepared can be the exercise by which we ready ourselves inwardly to meet any situation…. In life and love and in meeting our suffering, we need both - to be prepared and to be ready. To be prepared is to know how to step. To be ready is to see where to step. To be prepared is to know how to pick up what is broken. To be ready is to have a some sense of how the pieces go back together. To be prepared is to make a schedule. To be ready is to lean into the day with an open heart when the schedule is lost in the rain.” And, as we all know, life always has it’s rainy days, no matter what we do. 

Quieting the Voices

My third choice relates to “quieting the voices of lack that hoard what we have and compare what we don’t to all that is around us.” All day and every day, we are talking to ourselves about what is happening around us and within us. This inner dialogue can be helpful, and it can be hurtful. 

What I have discovered from coaching people, and from being coached and supported by other people, is that our inner dialogue is often focused on self-criticism and self-judgement. We are mad that things are not going “right,” or that we are not getting our fair share. So, we direct this anger inward. Sometimes, we direct it outward, too. As a result, we have so much anger within us, and so little compassion for ourselves and others.

This on-going diet of internal criticism blinds us to see what is actually going right, and where small acts of progress are taking place. It also prevents us from understanding what triggered us in the first place, and what caused us to get lost in an internal trough of chaos.

When this happens, we need to engage in meta-awareness, namely we need to be aware of our awareness. When we do not quiet the voices of lack, we find ourselves in a world that can feel threatening and overwhelming. And as a result, we typically respond in four ways, namely to fight, flee, freeze, or faint/flop. Each of these normal stress responses are useful coping strategies. They keep us alive through the difficulties we are dealing with at this time period. However, they are all default responses.  

Once we are aware of how we are responding to life, we can then ask ourselves two important questions: Is this the best response given the circumstances before me?  Is my response hindering my ability to lead with clarity and integrity? By deploying our meta-awareness, we can thoughtfully and mindfully choose how to respond rather than react reflexively and unconsciously. 

As Brene’ Brown in her book, Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent and Lead ( Avery, 2012), reminds us: “What we know matters, but who we are matters more. Being rather than knowing requires showing up and letting ourselves be seen. It requires us to dare greatly, to be vulnerable. The first step of that journey is understanding where we are, what we’re up against, and where we need to go.” Through engaging our meta-awareness, we create time for recovery, resiliency, and the capacity to past the voices of fear, shame, and frustration. In short, we discover the pathway to staying close to what matters most.  

A Monumental Shift In Consciousness

“Life is not about you; you are about life,” writes Franciscan friar and ecumenical teacher, Father Richard Rohr. “You are an instance of a universal, and even eternal, patterns. Life is living itself in you. This realization is an earthquake in the brain, a hurricane in the heart, a Copernican revolution in the mind, and a monumental shift in consciousness.” And if we are to stay close to what matters most in our life, we need to embrace this insight, and engage in a monumental shift in consciousness 

This begins with the aforementioned three essential ways, but also expands to include more time and space in our lives to create and experience more moments of sharing and dialogue. For when we choose to make this a priority, we create room for inner growth, personal clarity, and deeper connections. As executive coach, Lindsay Leahy in her book, Take It All Apart: How to Live, Lead, and Work with Intention (River Grove Books, 2024), notes, “In its simplest form, connection is full presence and engagement. It’s what we experience when our heart, mind, body, and spirit are together and fully focused on where we are and what we are doing in the present moment.” 

With deeper connections and inner alignment, we comprehend the wisdom the Dalai Lama shared years: “A change in heart is always a change of mind.” The authors of the I-Ching, an ancient Chinese book that provides guidance and wisdom for navigating life’s challenges, understood this perspective when they wrote: “No revolution in outer things is possible without prior revolution in one’s inner way of being. Whatever change you aspire to . . . must be preceded by a change in heart” - I Ching Hexagram 49. 

For when we change our own heart, we also learn one more important lesson, namely “Del be del rah dareh,” which is a Farsi expression that means “Our hearts have pathways to one another.” We are all connected. And we are all part of something greater than us, even if it is not visible to us. For in the beginning, middle, and end, we are all a part of the universal and eternal pattern of life. And by staying close to what matters most, we are discovering the sacred within the ordinary, and are blessed because of this shift in consciousness. 

© Geery Howe 2026

Geery Howe, M.A. Executive Coach in Leadership, Strategic Planning, and Organizational Change