UU����ֱ��

As leaders within complex organisations, senior in-house counsel face a range of tensions or ‘paradoxes’ which they need to address. UU����ֱ�� has just released a report that looks at this tension in depth.

In this blog I will explore how in-house lawyers can tell the difference between problems and paradoxes, and how to best manage the latter.

How can in-house lawyers spot the difference between a problem and a paradox?

It’s vital for General Counsel and those in positions of legal leadership to be able to understand the difference between a problem and a paradox.

A problem can have a right or best answer. You can find a clear solution to resolve it. On the other hand, paradoxes are ongoing, don’t have simple solutions and can even seem to contain opposing ideas.

For example, one organisational paradox might be the tension between 100% office-based working versus working from home. There are pros and cons to each, so there is no clear solution. There is also a tendency for people to become polarised around one of these options, for example, focusing on all the positive aspects of home working (cost savings, better work-life balance) while ignoring the downsides (communications take more effort, it’s more difficult to develop junior talent).

Some other examples of organisational paradoxes:

What is a paradox mindset?

According to Roger Martin, author and former Dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, successful business leaders “have the predisposition and the capacity to hold two diametrically opposing ideas in their heads” (or paradoxes) and they are “able to produce a synthesis that is superior to either opposing idea.”

In the context of an in-house legal team, this means GCs need to be able to hold two opposing ideas together at the same time, and work with other business stakeholders to find a synthesis superior to either opposing idea. So, to take the example of office-based working vs WFH, this means focusing on how to best achieve the wider strategic goal i.e. how best to achieve a productive and engaged workforce, rather than focusing too much on WFH or office-based working as end goals themselves.

The ability to spot such paradoxes and manage them requires the development of a “Paradox Mindset”.

Managing paradoxes – a practical framework

GCs and other in-house legal leaders can harness a paradox mindset to help them manage paradoxes they commonly face within their organisations.

The first step in managing a paradox is to spot it and reframe it as a paradox, rather than trying to solve it as a problem. This often means stepping back and gaining some perspective by focusing on wider strategic goals, considering all the issues presented by the paradox and approaching it holistically.

• The Polarities Management Framework™ provides a series of practical steps which can help to clarify the nature of a paradox and how best to manage it. The essential steps are:
  
• Identify the paradox
• Map the paradox – look at the positive and negative aspects, spot any early warning signs of negative issues and assign tangible actions to help manage the paradox
• Accept the effects of the paradox
• Learn from the overall situation
• Take tangible actions in response to the paradox and learn from them
  

At all stages of working through this framework, it’s vital to engage with relevant business stakeholders. Not only can this help to diffuse any tensions, but it also ensures that everyone involved is aware of the paradox and how best to manage it.

Global legal focus vs local legal focus – a paradox 

The research UU����ֱ�� conducted with General Counsel highlighted one paradox in particular as a key in-house leadership challenge: the tension between global standardisation (e.g. of contract templates policies and practices) versus local adaptation (prioritising customisation and flexibility).

Whilst a global methodology can help to ensure that an organisation’s customer experience matches the brand image, a localised focus has the benefit of providing customers with a more bespoke experience, relevant to their location.

In this example of global vs local paradox example, there are pros and cons of each approach. You need to take a step back from any particular side of the debate in order to see the broader aim of providing customer satisfaction and, ultimately, “winning against the competition”.

Gaining some perspective is the starting point for a legal leader to recognise the paradoxes they face in their role and embrace the paradox mindset, avoiding an either/or approach to challenges and trying to fix “problems” which are insoluble.

Want to know more about how in-house lawyers can develop a paradox mindset? Download the report ‘In-house leadership – from complexity to paradox’ now.

Practical support for in-house leadership

 is packed with practical content to support your development and thinking around effective in-house leadership. The  is a great starting point, whether you are new to leadership or seeking fresh perspectives as an experienced General Counsel.

Not currently a subscriber to LexisPSL? .