控制的矛盾性概念在焦点解决的实践和假设方面契合的很好，例如解决一个问题不需要全面了解这个问题的想法。意识到控制的矛盾性也扩展了焦点解决的使用范围，例如应对组织员工尚未处理好的焦虑和担心。控制的矛盾性也是复杂性对话过程中的一个概念，可以帮助组织成员理解他们的担忧和焦虑。我们也可以以此为起点来探讨管理者是否是“足够好”的领导者，以及他们责任的限制。这种方法将管理者看作是有责任的，同时也是自组织对话的参与者，并非永远对组织中的问题有正确答案。换句话说，控制的矛盾性是谈论管理领导和伦理的起点， 然而焦点解决实践和训练中仅仅略有涉及。

——高德明焦点解决高效教练督导团队译编

附：原文　

Paradox of Control

The paradox of control answers the question, “Who is in charge?”5 The traditional answer to this question is that managers are in charge. Managers are experts at problem-solving and getting people to work together to achieve organizational goals. That is why they are called managers. The traditional answer also defines managers as leaders who understand their organizations’ needs better than others who follow the policies set by managers. As leaders, managers are also accountable for the performances of the people that they lead and for the ethical propriety of their decisions and actions. This is a top-down view of social control in organizations.

Managers and consultants who treat organizations as sites of ongoing self-organizing conversations answer the question of “Who is in charge?” differently. They explain that while managers appear to be in control of their organizational units, their control is exercised within the context of self-organizing conversations in which no one is fully in control. Managers lead by not managing others in traditional ways. They also lead by accepting the paradox that planning for the future is essential to organizational operations and that the plans may never be realized in practice or that they may produce unintended consequences. As Streatfield (2001: 7) states, For me, management has come to mean living with both sides of the control paradox at the same time. This means acting on the basis of an expectation of an outcome, knowing full well that it is unlikely to materialize, requiring me to be ready to handle the consequences whatever they may be. It involves developing effective ways of handling the anxiety of “not knowing.”

The concept of the paradox of control fits well with aspects of solution-focused practices and assumptions, such as the belief that it is not necessary to fully understand a problem in order to move past it. Awareness of the paradox of control also expands solution-focused practices by orienting them to the anxieties and concerns that organization members may have difficulty stating in direct ways. The paradox of control is one concept within the vocabulary of complex response processes that may be useful to organization members in understanding and articulating their concerns and anxieties. It is also a beginning point for conversations about whether managers are “good enough” leaders and about the limits of their accountability. This approach treats managers as accountable for their facilitation of and participation in self-organizing conversations, not for always having the right answers to organizational problems. Put differently, the paradox of control is a starting point for talking about managerial leadership and ethics, an issue that is at best only implied in solution- focused training and practice.

学习、练习、实践、反思、督导，是一个SF取向工作者的快速成长之路。敬请期待下期分享。