A521.2.3_SienkiewiczRaymond

Chiamamanda Adichie's talk on the danger of the single story presented an interesting second side to the coin that is storytelling. Although her talk dealt a great deal with what one may ordinarily see as considerations that must be taken in working with or around stereotypes, it could tie into springboard stories and general leadership story telling in rather interesting ways.

Adichie throughout her talk noted how different places (usually countries) could come loaded with certain baked in perceptions or stereotypes with a foreign audience. For instance, she once held particular perceptions about Mexico, and her roommate had view of Africa that alluded more to tribal culture or being removed from certain standards of living. Although a stretch, thinking back to Denning's elements of a springboard story that include stating a specific time and place, the mental image held of Seattle in the 2006-2010 time frame might vary greatly between myself as someone who resided in Seattle, and someone who's never been there and grew up in Dallas. Or, I can say that my friends from Portland hear about Biloxi, Mississipi (or frankly most any place in the south) and they have a difficult time thinking of anything positive about the experience of living there, let alone passing through. In short, even small elements such as place or the central protagonist can come loaded with the audience's perceptions and cause a distraction from the main message, especially if any of the audience members are prone to some of the listening blocks noted in the "Messages" text such as Judging, Dreaming, or even Identifying from past negative experiences.

The same could very well be true for the deliver of the message if they aren't being mindful of their storytelling, and a good storyteller might want to be aware of their personal biases before making a delivery. One piece of advice dropped by Whalen in "The Professional Communicator's Toolkit" is to "be a two-edged knife"...that is, touch on both sides of the issue. According to Whalen, this allows for your presentation to be more balanced and demonstrates consideration of multiple viewpoints. While this idea might be more difficult to apply mid-sentence in a presentation, it might be worth some thought for the leader that is trying to think of a springboard story to add to their tool kit. Overall, the overall process might include some final "proof-reading" questions such as what kind of reactions will come from the different elements (for better or for worse), and does this story cover the issues presented from all the angles?

Although it adds some extra steps to the process, Adichie does have a point with her talk on the single story. To tell one story from one perspective is probably the cleanest, simplest way to present a story so long as it is well tailored to the audience and the purpose for telling it. However, if not well vetted or if applied too much further beyond the boundaries of the story, there is the possibility of secondary effects that may form or reinforce a negative "single story," and set the stage for potential friction or otherwise when the exception(s) to the story story makes itself apparent. The leader would, therefore, best serve their people by being relevant and on point, but perhaps having a repertoire of stories to draw upon or at least being cognizant of the single stories that may be at play.

A521.1.4.RB_SienkiewiczRaymond

I'm a little hard pressed to think of any common stories I can share from my unit, but there is a broad swath of stories involving the Air Force going back over 65 years, and American military aviation for the last 100 years.

One story that gets told whether you're in a typical flying unit or working in an information technology function is that of General Billy Mitchell. General Mitchell is regarded as, essentially, one of the first visionary in the applications of aviation to military operations. In his time, airplanes were a relatively new invention and had been mainly utilized for scouting purposes, and sparsely being used for combat in the form of shooting handguns at enemy plans, or dropping small explosives over enemy territory.

After World War I, General Mitchell envisioned further applications for airplanes, particularly in the bomber role, and became a very vocal advocate. Despite the doubts of senior Army and Navy officers, he arranged for a demonstration of airplanes multiple time sinking battleships, the prestige weapon of the time. Although General Mitchell still didn't make significant headway after these demonstrations, and due to his approach earned further ire from other military leaders in the short term, history proved him to have a point. From WWII onward, air superiority would become an essential part of military doctrine, and there are now independent air services all across the world. For that, General Mitchell earned a posthumous promotion and his story lives on.

Although the literal story may not directly relate to non-flying sections of the Air Force, the overall themes of innovative, out of the box thinking and possessing the intellectual integrity to stand by good ideas are captured within the story. Additionally, it bolsters and defines the type of forward thinking culture, one that's open to new technologies and ideas, that the Air Force generally likes to promote. The story, overall, represents a root cause of our forward momentum and rapid development as an independent service. Whether discussing aircraft, or advances in space or information technology, leaders will often speak of General Mitchell's experiences and promote that same spirit of innovation. The fact that the story has lived for this long, and that it is still taught to cadets to this day, speaks for its effectiveness.