Do Not Obey in Advance: Making Space for Dissent in Organizations

We live in an unsettling time: an age of unrest and uncertainty, where the mood of the moment teeters between visions of hope and ominous clouds of darkness. Given this climate, many people have begun to look for solutions that will bring stability to their lives. And they've begun to revisit old questions - ones supposedly resolved decades ago: Does democracy work, or is it too slow, broken and messy? Are we still committed to the liberal vision of equality for all? Is it better to vest power in one strong leader who promises to clean things up and run our affairs more efficiently?

As a citizen, I'm paying close attention to these debates. As a student of leadership and change, I'm seeking to understand the mechanisms at work. And as a coach and consultant, I'm curious about the implications for those of us who live and breathe organizational life on a daily basis.

I'd like to focus on this last point and consider the role organizations play in the development of healthy, vibrant democratic societies. Too often we think of our places of work as free-standing entities that are more or less insulated from other spheres of life. By contrast, I see organizations as an integral part of the social fabric; systems with permeable boundaries that both influence and are influenced by the world around them. Moreover, given the amount of time most of us spend at work - learning how to collectively solve problems, resolve differences, and get things done - I've come to see organizations as vital sites for instilling the values that shape what kind of citizens we want to be.

The First Rule: Do Not Obey in Advance

Let's begin by understanding how autocracies work. Historians tell us that autocrats rarely acquire power through force. In fact, most authoritarian power is given freely by ordinary people who decide to go along, even if they find the system abhorrent. How can that be?

Many scholars have concluded this kind of power operates through a process of stifling critical thinking and creating new norms, which people then internalize, self-monitor, and obey. Steven Lukes (1970), for example, argued that the "the supreme and most insidious exercise of power" is not visible coercion but the invisible power to prevent dissent from arising in the first place by shaping people's "perceptions" so that they "accept their role in the existing order of things."

The historian Timothy Snyder (2017) builds on these ideas in his book, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. Initially, Snyder says, would-be autocrats bluff and test to find out what principles people will be willing to concede. Eventually, by letting things pass unchallenged, individuals give implicit consent to these new norms. Worse still, they begin to anticipate what a more repressive regime will want "and then offer themselves without being asked."

Clearly, Snyder's broader point is that autocracy in any form is fueled by such "heedless acts of conformity," leading him to his first and most important lesson: "Do not obey in advance."

Stirring the Embers of Dissent

Now, reflecting on our current climate - and Snyder's injunction, "Do not obey in advance" - I think it may be time to stir those embers. For those of you who care to join me, I offer three thoughts:

Tune into your practical wisdom

Times like this demand a more advanced form of intelligence: what Aristotle called phronesis, or practical wisdom. It's practical because it draws on our day-to-day lived experience within a specific, ever-evolving context. It's wise because it's focused on taking ethical action, grounded in the question, what is good and bad for humans and the earth we inhabit?

Know your ethical boundaries

The problems I've raised are rife with ethical ambiguity; they ask us to look beyond business goals and wrestle with boundaries between right and wrong. Questions you might pose to yourself, colleagues or clients include: Why is this bothering me? Who else matters? How will they be impacted? Is this causing harm? Am I being true to myself?

Listen for the "no"

Democracy requires dialogue, which is precisely what autocrats fear most. When voices are suppressed, the most powerful antidote is to listen for the unspoken 'no' that may come in the form of a colleague's hesitation or a group's silence in a meeting. When we ask a simple question like 'Who else feels this way?' we open the door to disparate voices.