A technical/first-order response to an adaptive/second-order challenge

One of the ways to make matters worse is to apply a technical/first-order response where the challenge can only be addressed by adaptive/second order change. One of the most pervasive technical/first order responses is to do nothing. A pristine example of this is cited in the March 12, 2010 New York Times. The headline reads:

Board's Decision to Close 28 Kansas City Schools Followed Years of Inaction

The article describes the responses to the Kansas City School Board's decision to close nearly half of its schools. The article states:

"The sudden move suggests a depth of dysfunction here that is rarely associated with Kansas City, a lively heartland town with a reputation for order. But a closer look at the school board's recent history reveals a chaotic, almost nonfunctioning body that put off making choices and even even routine improvements for generations. Experts said that in the board's years of inaction is a cautionary tale for school districts everywhere."

Doing nothing where action is necessary is an action, a specific choice. The eternal temptation where choices are hard is to do nothing, but doing nothing is itself a technical/first-order response, and it is one that will make the challenges more difficult to address in the future. It comes from a rule that lifts up peace, goodwill, avoidance of conflict, and such as an important values. It is frequently articulated in decisions to study something, to do a comprehensive plan, to wait for more information, to take actions that do not address the challenge but only mask the effects. The church is no stranger to doing nothing where something is necessary.

One of the characteristics of leadership is courage. Courage can emerge where leadership pushes to take action where most would prefer to put it off. Leadership in the church is so frequently understood as doing what everyone wants rather than doing what is right, good, proper, and such.