Where am I now?

Part 2: Rocking the Boat

Reference:
Meyerson, Debra E. (2008). Rocking the boat: how to effect change without making trouble.
Harvard Business School Press: Boston, Massachusetts.

Task Zero - Review:

Every wonder why you or a colleague awkwardly stands out at work despite everyones
best attempts to fit in? It could be that you or your colleague(s) are a TEMPERED RADICAL,
someone who pushes for change in subtle and/ or not-so-subtle ways. This book takes you
through the stories and actions of tempered radicals from a variety of industries in order to
discuss commonalities within the tempered radical group. The book ultimately identifies five
similarities tempered radicals share: (1) radicals need to act, (2) radicals view their actions as
choices, (3) step one of action might be as simple as an interaction amongst co-workers, (4)
radicals frame their opportunities/ actions in terms of their agenda and (5) radicals depend on
others. You will notice that the book defines tempered radical not as heros, independently
enacting change but rather as everyday leaders who careful nudge change. Each small win
in the name of change is a celebration for tempered radicals who see it is the first step in
aligning personal beliefs and ideals. The stories and actions discussed in the book are
compared to the research literature in a meaningful way that gives real life examples to the
radicals who intentionally blend in. While Rocking the Boat can be repetitive, the realistic
portrayal of small wins earned by behind the scenes people is very relatable. It will have you
questioning your daily roles/ interactions in order to ask the question am I a tempered radical
enacting change or a upholder of the status quo?

Task One - How am I different:

Debra Meyerson gives many examples of how a person can be a tempered radical but
first she defines the three ways a person can be different from the majority: (1) have a different
social identity than the mainstream putting them outside the majority, (2) have a different social
identify than the mainstream that includes them in the cultural mixture of society or (3) having
different values, beliefs and agendas. I feel this view is limited. It assumes that a person's
social identity can be boiled down into one static category. I believe that ones deviation from
the majority will vary depending on the situations one finds themselves surrounded by on a
moment by moment basis. I understand why the categories were created but I experience all
three types of categories everyday and sometimes simultaneously. This is partially explained by
the fact I am a non-religious, lesbian, making me familiar to the non-mainstream. I am also an
adoptive mother of a interracial family, again non-mainstream. But while all families start
differently, cleaning up a childs mess or struggling to understand your child puts me in the
parenting group also known as the mainstream. My differences/ similarities are not just about
my personal identity. They are also professional. I constantly try new ideas and ask for various
accommodations for my work schedule. I believe change is good. I have a purpose in each of
my teacher actions but rarely do I base these option on improving our school report card.
Rather I focus the change on improving my students outcomes. Thus, I am different in my
personal values as compared to the beliefs within my school culture. This brings me full circle
to my belief that Meyerson has a limited view of three differences since she assumes someone
has a dominant identity. Implicitly ignoring people have fluid identities. People may emphasize
one identity because of certain environmental factors but more often than not people find
similarities and not differences. Our multiple identities allow us to adapt and take advantage of
situations around us.

Task Two - Becoming a Tempered Radical:

Rocking the Boat sets a continuum of ways to act as a tempered radical. It starts with
more quiet individual actions like staying true to ones self or turning threats into opportunities.
Then moves to the radicals middle ground with actions like neogrations and celebrating small
wins. Finally, it maxes out at organizing collective action. I have a few goals at my work. First
a personal goal, to make it more accepting of diverse people and families whether that be gay,
adoptive or racial. I did not receive a congratulations card for from the social community for my
marriage or my adoptions. I also have to deal with people saying I have never meet all your
children. I mean I saw your oldest at that event by the way who were those black children you
were with? Second, I want to stop this playing down to the poor, urban school children who
have had such a limited education so of course they need remedial courses. I flatly reject this.
Any struggles urban students face need to be meet with high standards and rigorous courses
that inspire thought and action. Based on current policies this would be a philosophical
difference that I have with my district. My third and final goal is about developing a sense of
drive within my students. I want them to find their motivation so we can create a plan for them
to pursue their goal(s). Based on my varied goals, I need varied actions. In fact, I believe I
need to simultaneously exist on multiple points of the tempered radical action continuum.
Creating school based groups to help increase the cognitive load on our students, celebrating
small wins such as science fair/ internships/ scholarships with students, negotiating field trips
with administration, making jokes like I do often care for random children on the street, and
trying to keep my emotions and identities on the up and up. The major lesson learned from the
stories in the book being each goal requires a different action, some are loud and some are
quietly proud.

Task Three - Facing Challenges:

We are all different and we all act in a way that tries to align our actions with our beliefs.
Misalignment is often thought as immature or the choice of the unhappy. So why then does
Debra Meyerson write a whole book about living as a tempered radical? The answer is
because tempered radical put up with a lot of grief. Meyerson describes four types of
challenges tempered radical must deal with: (1) tolls of ambivalence, (2) incremental lures of co-
optation, (3) damage to reputation, and (4) frustration and burnout. I like to think of these as (1)
I know it is wrong but I wont act to change it, (2) I acted like them until I actually became like
them, (3) I use to be cool and (4) Im done. Two of these I face simply by the environments I
place myself. For example, (4) Im done except I have three children, a wife and a mortgage.
Okay I am not done but I am binge watching Greys Anatomy in order to avoid the stress
momentarily. Or (2) co-optation only works when you are good at faking it. Somehow, I am not
good at fitting in because once a week their is a comment from a co-worker ousting me from the
group. The comments vary in collegial offense but boil down to thats a Roden thing. The
other challenges such as (3) damaging my reputation or (1) ambivalence, I have to take a more
active role. I think highly of myself, I believe I do a good job. Thus, I have to force myself to see
what I am not doing. I need to call my reputation into question. Keep my ego in check. At
which time, I find I am never as good as I think so on to new approaches. Ambivalence on the
other hand, I am not sure how to deal with this. Perhaps the solution to this challenge is just
keeping my voice. Overall, I think the challenges are best dealt with by keeping in mind the
purpose you are working towards. The goal is what will change you and the spaces around
you.