Keeping channels open: creativity, connection, social threat and the SCARF model

Okay, let’s talk about our response to being threatened, and its consequences.  It might not seem particularly relevant to creative conversations and is clearly not a particular warming subject but bear with me.  The relevance will become clear. 

To start with I want to think about what it’s like to be physically threatened.  By that I mean having a sense that someone, or something, is likely to cause you physical harm.  In such situations our highly tuned self-preservation defence response kicks in.  Driven by the neural networks of our sympathetic nervous system a whole range of bodily functions are up-regulated to ensure that we optimise our oxygen intake and release energy to the appropriate muscles, those that control our ability to fight or flee.  At the same time, attention is diverted away from some activities which are less important at these acute times, for example our digestive and excretion processes.  Emotionally we are likely to feel an increase in anger at the expense of empathy.  Our thinking processes take a binary win/ lose aspect, with our abilities to process complex information side-lined in the presence of the threat.  In short, everything is tuned to allow for strength and speed.

Even in describing this to you I feel a little uncomfortable as I recall the memories of when I have felt physically threatened.  Fortunately, for most of us, these experiences are rare and our response to them is only ever intended to work over very short periods of time before our physiology, emotional state, and cognitive function returns to normal.  In short, being in a heightened state of alert, and/ or actual action, is something we can only sustain for very short bursts.  The aftermath, our return to normal function, is accompanied by a sense of exhaustion.

What about social threat?  First, what is it and when might it happen?  Social threat arises from our interpretation of the actions of other people in any and every social situation.  It might arise in a conversation between two people, either informal or formal.  It can occur in any group gathering, for example meetings or informal get togethers, and is just as possible in virtual connections as it is in face-to-face meetings.  It can occur in crowds where we might feel ill at ease with the sheer weight of numbers, or the uncertainty of dealing with some many people we don’t know.

In all of these situations we are constantly scanning social interactions to differentiate between those that offer a potential reward, and those that might represent a possible threat.   Those stimuli believed to be social threat encourage an avoid response which is similar to our response to physical threat.  In socially threatening situations there are physical, emotional and cognitive consequences, just the same as with a physical threat, although they may be less intense, less acute, and maybe not quite so instantaneous.

You will have you own unique physical response to social threat.  For me, I get a tenseness across the shoulders, a hollow feeling in the pit of my stomach, and although I don’t blush much any more my neck still goes a bit red!  What signs do you show that are either known only to you or visible to others as well?

Our emotional response, and what we feel as a result, is unique to each of us too.  What I want to focus on is the impact of our avoid response on our ability to think clearly.  We lose our ability to analyse complex data and ideas.  We tend to become more risk averse and inclined to ‘stick with what we know’.  We are inclined to be less vigilant for these more subtle signals of meaning from other people, and misinterpret them as a consequence.  We may become more dogmatic and entrenched in our own ideas.  We will be more inclined to generalisations and tend to lose our sense of proportion, something which will leak into our choice of language and the tone of our delivery.

It’s not great really, is it?!  Social threat can occur anywhere, either in the presence of other people, in our virtual connection with them, and in our reflections of our interaction with others, even when we are completely alone.  Most relevant for today is that our avoid response can easily play out, when we are sharing our ideas with other people, when we are collaborating, and when we are trying to be creative together.  All the limitations to thinking can come into play at the very time when we are wanting to be creative.  Sounds a bit self-limiting doesn’t it, and it most certainly can be.  Sometimes we stand in the way of our own progress if we are not careful!

Given all of this wouldn’t it be valuable to have some awareness of the triggers that are most likely to cause an avoid response?  How helpful it would be to understand what activates our own avoid response, as well as understanding on how we might trigger it in others, whether this be a workplace or social situation.  In this webinar I am interested in how this plays out in situations where we are sharing our ideas, ones we have invested our time in and to which we may have a strong attachment.  If during creative conversations all we manage to do is trigger an avoid response in others, or be triggered ourselves, then our ideas will always be constrained by the limits of our own capabilities.  We want to encourage an approach response from people when we are sharing ideas, for people to know that their ideas are welcomed. 

This is where the SCARF model can help.  SCARF, first described by David Rock in 2008, is an acronym for what Rock considers to be the most common triggers of an avoid response.  It stands for STATUS, CERTAINTY, AUTONOMY, RELATEDNESS, and FAIRNESS.  Let’s take each of them in turn.

The triggers of a defence response in an actual or perceived social threat, as described in David Rock's SCARF model

First then there is STATUS, a complex social measure which positions us on a spectrum of importance relative to other people.  It is complex by virtue of the fact that status is a mixture of factors.  Those might be positional, or experience, expertise, or age related, and all of these might be actual or perceived sense of status.    Status is then influenced by our own bias and is also defined differently across organisations, sectors, nations and cultures.  Sure, it is complicated, yet I am thinking that one thing we can all identify with is how we will feel when our status is threatened by people not affording us the respect we think is due to us.

Our sense of status is important to our wellbeing.  When we feel our status is recognised or enhanced, we tend to have a strong sense of improved wellbeing.   Unfortunately, we are very sensitive to it being threatened, with that threat being computed as someone else trying to ‘get one over on us’.  Sharing ideas, offering feedback, and commenting on performance are all areas that are important in collaboration, creativity and learning, and yet they are all potentially challenging to someone’s sense of status.  One way of avoiding triggering people in relation to status is to show that you are listening to their ideas by being interested in them.  Another, in feedback situations, is to encourage people to evaluate their own performance before offering them your view.

Next comes CERTAINTY.  We are all more comfortable with certainty and when it is stripped away from us it can be tremendously unsettling.   At a survival level certainty relates to being safe as it comes from a sense that ‘I have experienced this before, and I know what is going to happen’.  We tend to feel more comfortable in the places that we already know, and we are warmed to people who deliver on their promises as, in this instance, certainty translates into trust.  The impact of uncertainty on wellbeing is clearly being witnessed in the national and individual response to the COVID pandemic in which the question of ‘when is this all going to end?’ is central to the anxiety that many of us are feeling.

Creativity and learning are all about journeying into the unknown, so there is always a sense of uncertainty during these activities.  Ways of attenuating this are being clear in expressing a vision of what you are creating, or the value of the learning you are encouraging.  Reducing uncertainty is about breaking down big issue challenges into smaller ones, whose resolution can be more clearly understood and recognised.  On a more individual level it’s about always meeting the expectations you have set in the minds of other people.  Our need for certainty is an influence on so many major decisions we make in our lives – where to study, what to study, where to work, career changes, relationship decisions, and relocating our homes.  If you think of your own experience of these times it is likely that the concern you had at the time was influenced by uncertainty in relation to the outcome of your decision.  These feelings, when extended to the extreme, can lead to procrastination, indecision, and inertia.

AUTONOMY, that sense of independence, control and personal authority over what we do, is really important to us all.  It’s about having the opportunity to make our own choices.  Over the last few decades changes in the workplace, the increase in self-employment, and the growth of gig economy have all increased expectations of autonomy.  Greater autonomy has been shown to have positive influences on health and quality of life.  I have some lived experience of this in that my decision to set up my business was informed by a desire to have greater autonomy.  Looking back, I can see that this had a great impact on the quality of my life, even though I probably work harder than I ever have before!

A sense of autonomy that has been awarded then being removed can have a dramatic effect.  How do you feel when you have responsibility for leading on an idea when someone comes and questions your right to that role?  How do you respond to being ‘micromanaged’ by manager, family members or friends?   While in most situations the removal of another person’s autonomy is not deliberate there is a darker side to it in the controlling behaviour of bullies. 

Increasing the sense of autonomy in a collaborative creative space might sound like a contradiction in terms.  Perhaps the most important thing is to set clear expectations in relation to the balance between autonomy and collaborative practice.  Having done so those expectations then need to be met.

RELATEDNESS is perhaps a more subtle trigger as it is more about what happens in that relational space between ourselves and other people, rather than something contained within ourselves.  It’s about our sense of being part of tribe, or not.  It’s about our sense of belonging and being around people who we know and trust.  Again, it relates to our fundamental survival mechanism which identifies safety with who you know, and potential threat from people who you don’t know. 

Given the relatedness is an inter-relational trigger you will not be surprised that it plays out strongly in teams.   A change in team membership will completely alter the dynamic.  It is not just a difficult experience for the new person, it is also difficult for the established part of the team.  Often the latter of these two challenges is overlooked in the workplace.  Organisations have upped their game in the quality of their induction of new staff yet pay less attention to needs of the existing team.  Overcoming relatedness issues is achieved by doing something to make sure that you connect people, and that people value that connection.  Icebreakers are part and parcel of this.  Done well they are a great benefit; done badly they can alienate everyone!  A simple individual way of avoiding the relatedness trigger is to show genuine interest in the people within in your team, and get to know them as people, not just professionals.  

Finally, FAIRNESS, a social defence trigger that I think many people identify with most strongly as one that they experience themselves.  There are many time’s in my life where I have had an internal scream of ‘THAT’S JUST NOT FAIR’, sometimes I have even said it out loud.  It’s not always about whether its fair to me, more often it’s my sense of fairness being triggered on behalf of someone, or something else.  What I know is that in each of these situations I have a quite strong emotional response, I become more dogmatic in my opinions, possibly angry, and certainly less intelligent.  So in my pursuit of fairness, I become less effective!   I am thinking that this description might be true of your experience too, or am I just being unfair?!  In teams and organisations being fair is about setting boundaries and expectations and holding to them.  It is about being transparent and equitable in dealings with everybody.  It is about ensuring that everyone’s voice is heard, that it is listened to, and that it is an integral part of the way forward, whether the voice was in support or opposition.  These principles are important in creative conversations too.  I should point out, in all fairness, that the responsibility for ensuring that everyone’ voice is heard is as much with the person choosing to give voice to their idea, as it is with the people who are in a position to listen.

There you have the five SCARF triggers that might cause a avoid response in social situations.  Great to know, but how best to make use of that knowledge?  As you are effectively your own social science laboratory the place to start is by noting your response in social situations and accumulating data relating cause with effect. 

This starts with Noticing, such an importance skill in all forms of reflective practice.  What do we notice in social situations when we are being triggered into an avoid response.  What do you feel inside your body?  Is it that hollow feeling in your stomach, a sense of vertigo, a tenseness across your shoulders?   This is all data you can relate to what is actually happening when you feel these sensations.

What happens to your habits and behaviours that others might see when you are being triggered into an avoid response?  Do you blush, fidget or take a more defensive posture?  All this is data too!

Finally, what narrative is playing out in your mind as you tip towards an avoid responses.  Sometimes only you can hear it but you might also say it out loud.   In either case the language you are using is also useful data in helping you recognise that a trigger is being activated.

Having noticed the SCARF model can help you to be curious about what it is that is causing the avoid response.  Put another way you can analyse the data you accumulate through your noticing.  Your analysis will help you to understand how you can be more robust in keeping yourself in an approach state, even when feeling challenged. 

It is also worth noting that you can make use of your trusted friends and colleagues to help you notice and analyse what is happening.   Remember they are witnesses to your changes in behaviour.  You can give them permission to tell you what they are seeing.  Having done so you can connect this with what you are noticing about yourself and build a more robust understanding of how and when you respond to your triggers.

Having noticed and analysed you can then choose your behaviour, consciously selecting one over another, on the basis of which is most likely to help you achieve your desired outcome.  Having done so there is the opportunity to sense the reward in your chosen course of action from which you can learn and apply in future decision making.  Putting it another way you will learn how to stay in the approach state.  David Rock noted the importance of this, saying ‘the approach state is the necessary state for learning’.

Putting all of this together this brings us to concept of Surfing the Urge.  This is a term often used in the treatment of addiction.   In the case of an addiction the urge often refers to satisfying a material craving, for example alcohol, nicotine or other drugs. 

In the case of understanding your avoid response the urge is what happens when you are triggered by one of more of the SCARF triggers.   Giving into the urge is like a surfer cresting a wave and then crashing into the surf, out of control.  Surfing the urge is reaching the crest of the wave, taking stock and achieving balance, and then making a choice that will allow you to reach the calmer waters, while still in control.  It’s an image I like and can use in my mind’s eye as I feel myself careering into an avoid response.  At the crest of my wave I pause for a split second and in that moment give myself a chance to choose a purposeful path.

Surfing the urge seems a fitting metaphor to conclude this session with.  Improving our ability to surf the urge in socially threatening situations, even by only a small amount, offers considerable benefits because of how common these situations are at work and play.  Collaborative creativity is just one of these many situations, but a significant one when it comes to successfully bringing together differences of opinion and synthesising them into something that is better than a sum of its parts.  .  I’ll give the final word to Viktor Frankl, psychiatrist, psychologist and holocaust survivor.  It connects everything we have thought about today.  He said ‘‘Between stimulus and response there is a space.  In that space is our power to choose our response’.  Don’t ever forget…..you always have a choice!

SCARF is just one of the many frameworks and mindsets that inform my coaching work at Alpamayo Coaching Ltd.  The synthesis of all of these, combined with my lived experience, contribute to my unique way of coaching.  If you are interested in what that might be like for you to experience please do get in touch with me.