Typecast
What are the categories from the world of your problem that you just can’t escape? Is there a way to look at them differently?
This is Andrew Benedict-Nelson, social change strategist and innovation educator. Each week, I share a question that you and your organization can use to find a new perspective on the toughest problems you face. Reply to the e-mail or comment on the site and we can talk about them together!
NOW FOR THIS WEEK’S QUESTION…
As you or your organization go about addressing your social problem, what categories are frequently applied to you? Is there some adjective that is often used for you or your colleagues that doesn’t fit how you view yourselves? What changes might occur if you and everybody else were freed from this “typecasting”?
Everybody loves a character actor — the people who are really good at embodying a frequently occurring secondary role. My wife and I watched a documentary about them a while back, and we both kept saying the same things as new faces popped up on the screen: “Oh it’s that guy! I didn’t realize he was in so many movies!” It was clear that actors like Stephen Tobolowsky or Luis Guzmán were thriving. Yet all the featured actors explained that playing just one kind of part for all of one’s career can bring up complicated feelings.
After all, the word “typecast” has a negative connotation. A seasoned design researcher once warned me about this: while people have a natural affinity for sorting information about their world, almost all of us feel a little queasy when we have to publicly categorize or evaluate other people. In part it’s because we don’t want to be categorized ourselves, even though we know that everybody is doing it behind the scenes.
In this exercise, we use the feelings evoked by typecasting to understand the categories that structure thinking about your problem — and how to change them. Let’s give it a go.
HOW TO DO IT
What’s your type? - In most of the exercises I have shared on this site, I ask you to think about the big, intractable problem you are trying to solve rather than problems of your brand or organization. That’s now the case for this one — it’s time to look around you and honestly assess the categories people apply to you. Are you the brash upstart? Are you “always the bridesmaid, never the bride?” Write down anything for which you have even a shred of evidence, because it will all be useful.
Face the type - Now fearlessly face your feelings about the way in which you or your organization are typecast. These are usually strong feelings, but mixed one. If you are “a big fish in a small pond” you may feel comfortable about your social position but afraid you can never take on bigger issues. Also consider how outsiders or competitors may view your type. If you have enough data, try to identify some actions you have or have not taken because of the type. The point is that at the end of this step, you should be able to say “Here is what this means to me, whether I like it or not.”
It takes all types - Next, it’s time to take a broader view. Every type occurs within a broader set of categories, a cast of “fellow characters” if you will. Try to figure out where you fit within that broader spectrum. Who is the opposite of your type? Who is a more extreme version of your type? Who spends a lot of time worrying about this set of categories? Who doesn’t seem to worry about them at all? What other words, phrases or categories might be more important to them? A trick to answering all these questions is looking at other entities and imagining how they might answer question number one. In any case, you should end up with a cluster of different categories that are used
Typology - Before we return to your organization, take a moment to look at the different categories or “types” on their own, detached from any particular organization. For better or for worse, these are some of the categories people use to understand the world of your problem. What’s helpful and not helpful about them? Might there be better ways to sort people and organizations — not to mention information and opportunities? Be sure to consider whether there are any interesting possibilities that the current mix of categories leaves unexplored. For example, for many years there were almost no action movies with female leads — what’s the equivalent for your field?
Just my type (or not) - Finally, come back to your own type, whether you like it or not. Does it look different in the context of all the other types that are out there? Is it necessarily the asset or liability that you thought it was? Would you like to explore it further or abandon it for some other way of fitting into the rest of the “cast”? What about exploring a type no one has considered yet? All these outcomes are possible, but just remember the big takeaway from my exercises about language and categories: all this stuff was made up by people, and all of it can be changed if you’re committed to doing so.
CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE?
Yes, and it’s close to home. I’m from the Midwest, and for whatever reason, most of our organizations have a chip on their shoulder about being here. They imagine that larger institutions from the coasts or big philanthropic funders look down on them because of their region. Yet at the same time, these same institutions are constantly in search of some special Midwestern essence that they can embody, proving their legitimacy to the plain ol’ folks of the plains.
In my opinion, every organization needs to give this story a rest. True, many Midwestern institutions aren’t as prominent as the ones in New York, but neither are the ones in Baltimore or Maine. Meanwhile, no one looks at the most successful companies and nonprofits in this region and says, “They couldn’t have done it anywhere but Kansas.” Every region has its advantages and disadvantages, but you’re more likely to successfully navigate them using a different set of categories.
SO WHAT MAKES THIS WORK?
This question is an example of how to transform your thinking about a problem using the configuration dynamic. It’s one of six innovation dynamics I help people master to improve their critical thinking and build strategies for social change. Reply to this e-mail with your answer to the question and I’ll let you know what I think! Or learn more by visiting http://www.teachingsocialchange.com.
Illustration from Emory University’s Shakespeare postcard collection