Podcast Ep26 – Maaike Nooitgedagt, Wendy Nieuwland – Collaborating on a book – and how it’s different from everyday collaboration

This is the twentysixth in a series of podcasts where Judy interviews people who have a track record of successful collaboration.

This series is for anyone interested in the nuts and bolts of real-life collaboration, especially collaboration among creative, intelligent, free-thinking individuals who are geographically dispersed. The interviews go well beyond the obvious, as metaphor master Judy Rees explores the hidden thinking that inspires collaboration that works.

Wendy: Hello! Good morning! My name is Wendy Nieuwland, for anyone who can pronounce it. I’m here with Maaike indeed next to me. We run a business in Holland called “Gewoon aan de slag” [Dutch] which basically translates as “Just do it”, but that name was taken. What we do is we facilitate change in organisations using our own approach, which has a strong undercurrent in clean language and systemic modelling.

Maaike: Hello! My name is I Maaike Nooitgedagt. Even fewer can pronounce that one. We are happy to join Judy today to talk about the way we work, the way we use Clean. As Wendy said, we’ve written a book about the way we work, which translated to English called “Change 3.0”, in which we lay out our ideas and vision on how to facilitate change in organisations from the inside out.

Judy: Exciting stuff! I wish the book were in English, as well as in Dutch obviously. Because I really want to read it and I’m really frustrated that I can’t.

Wendy: Just learn Dutch.

Maaike: It’s easy.

Judy: A trivial question.

Wendy: We plan that at some point it might be translated into English. It’s just been out for a month now, so we’re focused on releasing it here properly. Then – who knows? We are hoping that it will be translated into English as well.

Judy: Fingers crossed. Obviously, writing a book together is a big collaboration, but you guys have been collaborating in business for a long time.

Wendy: That’s right.

Maaike: I think we’re close to ten years now.

Judy: I’m going to ask each of you separately, when the two of you are collaborating at your best, that’s like what? For you Wendy, when you are collaborating at your best, that’s like what?

Wendy: The funny thing is when you ask me that, Judy, is that there are different ways of collaborating. We started introducing ourselves with the book. It’s different when we are collaborating on the book than we are collaborating in facilitating organisations. It’s not exactly the same. I’m trying to think in the meantime, because I haven’t prepared an answer for this, so I’m doing this on the spot. Let’s focus on the book for a second, because that was what we started with.

When I was collaborating at my best when writing the book, that was like being a box inside a bigger box with lots of openings to decide. Here I was doing my own bits, but in the meantime being aware that Maaike was doing her bits, and sometimes shutting those doors just to do something, because there’s a lot of just getting on with it involved. That made it tricky at points, because you get stuck in your own stuff so much that at some point you have to open up again and realise that someone else is doing this, has got an idea about this as well, and thoughts about this. Those doors had to be opened in between, so I guess there are doors in the box as well, which is interesting.

Judy: A box inside a box, and lots of doors.

Wendy: Yeah.

Judy:     Is there anything else about the box inside the box? What kind of box is that?

Wendy: I’m looking around now, and we’re in a kind of box where we sit right now. This may have triggered this little metaphor.

It is a bit like that. It’s like a box that has a lot of windows. It can be very open, but you can also shut the curtains. I’m looking, next to me on the right there actually are curtains here. You can put some of that blindfold stuff. It is light, but it can be closed for a moment as well. It’s not constantly in contact with what’s around it.

Judy: And the bigger box – what kind of box is that box?

Wendy: That is the box that contains other boxes potentially as well. It’s the bigger schemes. In this case it was… Oh, gosh it is turning into a babushka. Hey, look at that – I don’t recognise this is all for myself.

The first big box is just the book, the whole book, the entire book. I’m doing bits in that, but those are not the only bits that end up being in a book. There are other bits as well, which they have to interact with every now and again. In the end, the little box disappears as well into the book. That’s a box that stays there.

Again, it’s part of a bigger picture, because the book in itself, as proud as we are of it, it’s nothing in itself. It has to be alive. It has to be read. It has to be made for other people, for them, not for us. It has to be used. I can keep on going, but let’s stick to that little bit for now and not make it more confusing.

The first big box in this case is the book, the whole book.

Judy: Thank you. What about you, Maaike? When you were collaborating on the book at your best, for you that was like what?

Maaike: I was pondering on this question. A few thoughts came to mind. The first image that came up was an octopus. I’ll explain later. Then I was thinking that writing this book was a process that took us about three years. In the beginning, we had no idea of the end results and what it would be.

Basically, it was a journey of self-discovery for us, of joined self-discovery. What is it exactly that we think, and see, and feel, and know? How can some processes or some clients – how come it works there and not with others? There is also a journey involved I suppose. And it wasn’t just making of the book, but also being on that journey together. There’s a ‘joinedness’ in journeying together. If I go too fast, or too slow, we’re not together any more.

The octopus was the first thing that came to mind, which is an octopus that can connect to other octopuses. Through that, we can exchange information. When an octopus connects with another one, information can be exchanged. That was the first image. But then I thought that the journey is not in there. The image that came to mind was this TV show, I think, on Discovery, where a husband and wife were doing a survival trip together. They had do collaborate. They had to stay together. They had to have that joinedness to get out alive. It was all set-up, it’s not like that. It was nice to watch.

I think that would be my metaphor – to be like that, to be surviving in a jungle on a journey. You don’t know where you are, you don’t know where you are going. Your resources are limited. You have rely on each other and on your own strength at the same time. There’s a lot of “and, and” going on in that journey.

You don’t know where you are going to get. You’ve gone off into the jungle. And there are some dangers ahead, and nasty spiders, and swamps that can get you stuck. Then you need to get one another out. I think it would be like that.

Judy: Is there a relationship between that journey through the jungles and swamps and the octopus?

Maaike: I was thinking about that as well. It’s not that the octopus is doing the journey. That would be silly of course. That would be silly. Boxes in boxes are completely normal. Octopus? No, that can’t be.

Because writing this book was such an emerging process, there was something about information that we had to share. That’s what the octopus stands for. If I do my bit and Wendy does her bit, the emerging process is not going to happen the way it will if we connect and collaborate together. Maybe we need to do the journey in the jungle walking hand-in-hand.

Judy: Information needs to be communicated as the journey is going on. The information is to be communicated.

Maaike: Yes. Absolutely.

Judy: So, that’s the process of writing the book together. What about when you are collaborating to facilitate an organisation? For you, Maaike, when you are collaborating in that kind of context together, that’s like what?

Maaike: Maybe, that’s more the octopus. I can be on my own, solitary, and I can be together. There’s a strong back-and-forthness about working together with an organisation. From trust and the capabilities of Wendy there is me stepping back to give her room to use her talents. There’s also trust in myself to step forward when I see a space where my talents are greatly applicable. I think the foundation is trust. On that is like a switchboard. I can put myself a bit forward or backwards, depending on what the situation asks. The foundation is trust I think.

Judy: Is there anything else about the foundation when the foundation is trust like that?

Maaike: It’s a very solid foundation. After ten years, I have unfailing trust in Wendy’s capabilities, and also the limitations. There’s trust there too. Because of that trust, we can talk about the things that we see each other doing really well, and the things that we see not going too brilliantly, every now and then, say once every five years. But there is that trust which is like concrete. It’s very solid. It’s hard. It’s not fluff. You can stand on it.

Judy: When there is that trust and it’s concrete, not fluffy, you can really stand on it – that trust, that concrete is there when you are working in organisations, and it’s a switch-board like that. When you were working on the book and you were on that journey together through the jungles and the swamps, what happened to the concrete?

Maaike: I think in the beginning, it wasn’t there yet, because it was such a new way of working and a discovery for ourselves as well. I think later on, in those three years in the process of writing, it helped to strengthen that concrete. That wasn’t from the start. But for me that happened during that journey. It infused more solidness in the concrete, writing a book.

Judy: Wendy, for you, when you guys are collaborating in organisations, that kind of collaborating that’s like what?

Wendy: I’ve had an opportunity to think about it while Maaike was talking. Of course, I recognise a lot of what she says. Then I realised that for me if we’re collaborating I’m mostly thinking about the moments when we are actually facilitating groups or thinking about how we approach it.

To me it’s a bit like dancing. It’s like creating a dance with the client. If the clients are during a perfect dance together, we don’t do very much. If they are not dancing together very well, we look at each other and on some level, we know who’s going to step in and do what. And sometimes we don’t. I think I know, and then suddenly Maaike steps in and does something. I can look at it and recognise that basis of trust. “That’s interesting, what is she is going to do?”

We keep getting surprised. We understand dancing in this way, not in the other way as much as we do when we’re working like this.

And we are working like this. We both know we are solid dancers in here and we know that we can build on each other, we can enrich each other in the dance. Maaike would do something and I think, “Hey, that’s great”, and I can use it in the different direction, or the other way around. I don’t have to dance. If everything is going well, and Maaike is taking the group in their dance, and nothing else needs to be added, I don’t actually do anything at that point. I can just step back. I really recognise the switch theme that Maaike introduced there.

Judy: Is there a relationship between that dance and the box within a box with a doors?

Wendy: I realise that it’s the dancing that’s been described, put down into the box. First we had to find out what that box was. The first step in writing a book was discovering the boundaries of the book and discovering what the book is actually about. That is completely is based on the dancing and what we found have worked in the dancing, or what we found didn’t work in the dancing. The first thing we did is solidify what we’ve been dancing.

Maaike: Metaphorically speaking.

Wendy: Definitely metaphorically speaking. Though we do jump up and down sometimes. But there is always movement. I think there’s a thing there actually. It’s not that coincidental that this metaphor comes up. If we’re collaborating at our best, which is what we’re talking about now, there is always movement there. There is a flow that we try to create.

Maaike: Yeah, it can be mental movement and physical movement.

Wendy: We both can’t sit still very long. It’s ourselves. The relationship is definitely there. It’s the dancing that we sat down to put together. I suppose that’s why we struggle a bit in the beginning as well, because we don’t like sitting still and making anything static. There’s nothing much more static in our lives anyway than a book. That’s there.

Judy: So that process of solidifying was unfamiliar.

Wendy: And uncomfortable. I suppose that’s partly why it took us three years as well, why we had trouble getting started. Because as soon as you start writing, it moves. It’s not the same anymore as when book came out already. For me it’s a very-very different metaphor than a box, which is very firm and fixed. Even though it’s got doors and openings, it’s still a box. It’s pretty solid. Dancing is constantly moving and changing. In a way, I did enjoy both. Now I am thinking how come I ever got to sit down and do it. In a way, it’s cool as well to write down the results of that process.

Judy: I’m itching with lots of questions. The most sensible question to ask next is what questions does each of you have for the other about those metaphors?

Wendy: One of the questions that popped into my head when Maaike was describing her octopus – there’s the octopus and it’s got tentacles presumably. What are the tentacles? Is there anything else about those tentacles?

Maaike: Those tentacles are sensors. They are loaded with little sensors, not squirting beneath, but they can sense things: information, feelings, moods, necessary conditions, stuff like that. When an octopus connects with another octopus, they can co-sense each other’s needs, focuses, emotions, and have the intrinsic will to find the similarities in that, so that from there you can move in the same direction. Does that make sense?

Wendy: No. Sense is a big word, isn’t it? What I hear is – there are sensor on their tentacles and they sense a lot of things, so they connect with others octopuses nearby as well.

Maiike: You are an octopus.

Wendy: Oh, I’m an octopus as well? Okay. When I’m an octopus as well, and there are sensors that are sensing lots of things, is there anything else about those sensors?

Maaike: They get more sensitive. If one octopus connects with another octopus, the more they connect with each other, the more sensitive those sensors become. For example, me being an octopus if I connect with someone that I hardly know, then my sensors are less sensitive than when I connect with you for example, as an octopus. That’s because we connect all the time, and the sensors get more sensitive, which helps in a better collaboration.

Wendy: We can keep on going like this for a long time. I’m pretty aware that you are there, as well. Would you like to have a word now?

Judy: I’d like Maaike to have the opportunity to ask Wendy a question or two, if she would like to.

Maaike: About the boxes – the box in a box in a box in a box. I was curious, where about are you when there are all this boxes in boxes?

Wendy: That depends of course on what I’m doing. The box metaphor came up when we were talking about collaboration on the book. Even then, it’s my standard answer – it depends.

Maaike: She’s not very good with choosing.

Wendy: When I’m actually writing a book, I’m inside that middle box. I don’t think I am the box, but I am inside it. There’s other stuff in there as well that needs to be put down, so of course there’s another layer there.

When I’m done writing and I’m letting you read it or letting other people read it, I’m outside of that box showing the box to someone else. It’s connected and those doors are open as well. It’s being shared and connected to other bits in there. We’ve done this, in a process of doing a few weeks, when we’ve locked ourselves up in that one bigger box. Then we’re in and out of that small box, but in the bigger box. We stayed in the bigger box.

When we’re not writing, we’re outside of that again. The box is just there somewhere. It’s in my awareness, but not fully. I’m not in it. I’m not doing it, but I’m constantly aware. In this process, I think this is what you set as one in the beginning. We’ve learned so much from what we do by having that box there and knowing that we have to (and wanting to) bring it back there as well. We want to bring it back there as well. We’ve chosen to do that, so we did it. I’m outside of the box, so luckily I still move.

Judy: Here’s my next question for you guys. You both know this process, you use this process in organisations. Have you actually done this process together in relation to the book?

Maaike: Not in relation to the book. What we do do every year is in January sit down together and make a clean set-up for the year – what we like the year to be like and what we would to be like, and what we need from each other, how we can support each other. That is what we do every year, because of course every year is different. I don’t think we did it for the book.

Wendy: Not as a clear-cut. Not as “let’s sit down and talk about collaboration.” We have had lots of bits during the process.

I suppose when we started, to be honest, we didn’t even think it would be different from what we do in other occasions. That’s what clients do as well. They sit together and think, “Now, we can do this. Let’s go and do this.” And you just get on. At some point you feel the little ‘nidges’ and you think “Nuh-uh. This is kind of uncomfortable here.”

Luckily, we are professional enough within our own company. We are not of that plumber that always lets their own tap leak. We did sit down and talk about those things. I suppose we didn’t put a frame around it of how we do collaborate at our best. We didn’t think of how we were going to make this work, what’s happening in the moment, how we label that each for ourselves and what we need to get out of this. We have done those little bits, true, but not as a big frame of “Let’s talk about collaboration”.

We’ve done it around the book and we do it around facilitating together, we do it about having a business together, but not necessarily within the frame of collaboration.

Wendy: I guess it’s a theme that is always somewhere, in our attention, but not always explicitly in the foreground.

Judy: I was just curious as to what difference does knowing all of this about your working partner’s metaphors make?

Wendy: I got a great Christmas present!

I think, what I’m hearing mostly is when I hear Maaike talk about it, I hear different words for what I recognise. I think it is true that we know each other so well, and for other processes, we’ve got to know each other even better, because we do talk about it, just not with this frame.

What it’s always given us in the past to have images around is that you have words for it to use to talk about it, what’s happening to your sensors right now. It’s a great question to have when I feel like she’s out of touch, for instance. It’s better probably than this samurai sword which we once had. It didn’t really work. This is quite a nice little anecdote actually.

As everyone, we’re not always in our best state. Sometimes things happen and we do an even stronger setup before training in this case, than we normally do. Maaike came up with these brilliant metaphor. When I’m working at my best today, I’m like this samurai sword.

Maaike: Razor sharp.

Wendy: Razor sharp. At some point we say, “What can I do to help you be that samurai sword?” I say, “Well, when you notice that I’m not there, not razor sharp, just say, “Samurai sword” somewhere.” During the process, she was not sharp as a sword at all. She acknowledges this as well, it’s not just my perception.

Maaike: Yes, I do.

Wendy: At some point, I was literally standing in front of her with my face at about 20 centimetres from her, saying “Samurai sword!” Nothing, nothing, no response. So that metaphor wasn’t quite the right one to help you get back into that state.

Maaike: No, I’m doubtful that any metaphor could have helped in that period of time.

Wendy: Yeah, it’s true as well. This is an example of what didn’t really work. Part of me always thinks that maybe it wasn’t quite the right metaphor for that period of time. It’s a wishful thinking metaphor rather than a realistic one. Having all these sorts of words, going back to your question helps giving words to this as well.

What I notice when I hear Maaike talk, I think I go “click- click- click”. I think, “Yeah, that makes sense”, “Yeah, I understand”, “Yeah, I see that there”, “Hmm, that bit I don’t really understand so I can ask questions about it when it happens”.

Maaike: That gives you a shared language to talk about complex things in easy ways.

Judy: I think the samurai sword example says it’s not a universal panacea, as with everything. I haven’t really thought about this. Of course, metaphors are state-dependent, just as any learning is state-dependent. When you are in your panic state, or as it might be for me, I can’t even remember what I said when I was in a calm state earlier.

Wendy: Exactly.

Maaike: And the samurai sword metaphor was in a time when my mother-in-law was very ill and she was close to her deathbed. To have a samurai sword in that situation, I don’t know if that’s ever going to work. The whole thing with metaphors is that it has to fit the reality of the context of the moment. We all want World Peace, and of the end of hunger, and we all want to be like a samurai sword every day of the freaking week, but it’s not going to happen.

Wendy: I never want to be a samurai sword.

Maaike: Yes, you do, you just don’t know it yet.

Wendy: I realise this is all about collaboration. As we are talking, I’m noticing what is happening as one of us is talking. We are focused on collaboration, and we do know each other very well. I think, in all of that dancing and moving we really like to focus on how we can do things even better continuously. Sometimes we like that, sometimes it’s very tiring.

As Maaike is talking, I’m thinking “Aaah…”, “Can we…”, “But the…”, “If I…” I can feel myself trying to join up the metaphors. That in itself I find an interesting thing to notice in this process. Maybe there is even a meta-metaphor. A new word.

Judy: Let’s wait for another time to talk about that, because we’re nearly out of time. I want to make sure that people know how they can contact you guys, if they want to get the book, to talk about what you do, etc. How can they get in touch with you? What people should get in touch with you?

Wendy: Anyone can get in touch if they like it. We’re based in Holland. We’ve got a Dutch website called www.gewoonaandeslag.nl. We have now our ties to the UK, so they can contact you if they can’t remember this name.

Judy: Absolutely.

Wendy: … and they can ask (you) about our details – you’re very welcome to share our details and talk about how we work and what we do, and what this model of Change 3.0 consists of. Hopefully, we’ll have it translated at some point.

Judy: And the title of the book in Dutch is?

Wendy: Veranderen 3.0.

Judy: I can’t pronounce that either.

Maaike: Try that.

Wendy: Veranderen.

Maaike: We’ve written the book mainly for managers who are in a situation where they have to facilitate some sort of change in their organisation or team, and it just doesn’t work. No matter what you try, you just can’t get anything happening. That’s the group that we’ve written it for, to help them, to inspire them, to give them a new perspective.

Wendy: In the meantime, we’ve heard back that a lot of consultants really like it. They can use a lot of the insights in there. Employees like it as well from their point of view. They have something they can talk about with their managers if they see things that are going slightly different from how they would like it to be.

The people who we’d like to contact us about this are people who are actually in a position where they can make something happen, when they can take a step, that want to take us to have some sort of impact informally or formally on the organisation.

Judy: Brilliant. Thank you so much for taking the time to share your metaphors and your thoughts. It’s been absolutely excellent. I look forward to the English translation of the book very soon.

Wendy: So do we! Thank you for your questions and making us think about these metaphors that we didn’t know yet.