Hope Is Not A Strategy
What better time to take stock of one’s state of affairs than at the dawn of a new decade. As we enter 2010 I am reflective about the status of not only my own, but also acutely mindful of the status of the organizations (corporate, not-for-profit, and government) that drive so much of both the mundane and the extraordinary circumstances in which we find ourselves. In the few years leading up to 2010 we witnessed numerous historic events. We watched in horror as the U.S. economy, and many other economies around the globe, faltered. We saw giants in the automotive, finance, insurance, and other industries tumble. We saw natural disasters ruin the lives of tens of thousands and governments struggle to protect their citizens in the wake of those disasters. We were besieged by horrific acts of terrorism, we witnessed lapses in ethical judgment that no one could have anticipated, and we had a front row seat as norms of civility and integrity that governed behavior of former generations were violated.
Despite these very disturbing situations, the latter part of 2008 also marked an historic moment with the election of President Obama, the U.S.’s first African American president. His presidential campaign was earmarked by a belief —a hope—that there would be a better tomorrow, and that he was the man to lead us there. His award- winning book The Audacity of Hope served as a metaphor for the change he wanted to bring to our country and to the world. His message communicated a hope that things would in fact be different: that our economy would become stronger, that fighting nations would end their battles, that more diseases would be eradicated, and that legislation would pass that would enhance the life of American citizens. Perhaps it is not coincidence that this same message of hope likely influenced the Nobel Peace Award committee who chose to bestow this extreme honor on the U.S. President, despite little evidence at the time of the award that might indicate a realization of all that was being hoped for.
For all of the conversation of hope, I am reminded of a familiar saying, “hope is not a strategy.” Hope is a wish, it is an aspiration, but it is not a plan that when executed would necessarily create change. Change requires commitment to a set of actions that are often unpopular and uncomfortable. Change requires a sufficient understanding of the human psyche to know the appeal of the status quo (even when we are harmed by it), and it requires the finesse and motivational ability to create buy-in to a different vision. Change requires that we build relationships and coalitions. And it requires identifying and celebrating small victories along the way in order to keep people invested and motivated in working toward an ambiguous future. Finally, the manifestation of the change process must be more compelling—and worth the effort and pain that change causes—than the current state of affairs.
So no, hope is not a strategy. Developing a comprehensive change process is the strategy. Yet hope was enough to mobilize millions of Americans in a political sea change, which in and of itself put the U.S. on a different trajectory. Perhaps for a person or a group or an organization that is experiencing despair having hope can sustain them for a period of time longer than the absence of hope. I believe that hope does play an important role in creating a new future, but in and of itself hope is inadequate. Only when coupled with a clearly identified set of actions and a leader who can mobilize the troops to follow those actions will we experience real change. What hope does is give us the emotional fortitude to pursue that change.