In this interview, Lisa Gill explores how stories shape emotions and vice‑versa, emphasizing the role of collective narratives—called paradigms—in guiding behavior. She describes the dominant leadership paradigm as a parent‑child dynamic and notes a cultural shift toward adult‑to‑adult relationships. As a coach, she guides people to first recognize the paradigms they inhabit, then consciously choose new stories that foster more empowering interactions. Gill connects this process to models like the hero’s journey, the crisis/grief curve, and Otto Scharmer’s Theory U, arguing that staying in the painful “bottom of the U” is essential for authentic transformation. Citing Matthew Lieberman’s work on social pain, she explains how the brain treats social rejection like physical injury, leading us to seek easy, comforting narratives—such as fake news that reinforces tribal belonging—rather than confronting discomfort. She stresses that lasting change must be emotional and embodied, not merely intellectual, crediting Meg Lightheart for highlighting this insight.
Chapters
Lisa, what do you think as a coach, what's the relationship between stories and emotion? Who comes first? Yeah, it's interesting. I think in a lot of the trainings that I lead, one of the places that I start is talking about paradigms. And I think one when a story becomes a collective story that's so strong and that we are conditioned in or that we inherit, it becomes a paradigm. So for example, I think a really strong collective story or a paradigm that we're in at the moment is a paradigm of leadership, which is, you could say, a bit parent-child, like a dynamic that's a bit like a parent towards a child. And I think the movements that we're seeing, many different movements in kind of new ways of working, the future of work, are all moving towards towards, I would say, a more adult-to-adult style of relating, which is kind of— it's kind of a process that I often coach people through, which is, you know, first acknowledge that we're in a paradigm and in many ways we're blind to it. And there are many other paradigms that we're in as well, kind of dominant paradigms. But the first step is to see it. And then you have a choice, right? You can act more from choice rather than automatically, and you can choose and create other stories. So you can choose to relate to someone's potential, for example, if you realize that, oh, actually my giving advice automatically is in part because I've had a story that I know better, or that person isn't fully capable, or, you know, and it's not always bad intentions or conscious, but I think recognizing that we have these stories is really useful. And I think as I was listening to both of you talk just then, and thinking about the pandemic and a lot of the big issues that we're facing today, like climate change is another one, thinking about this hero's journey, another model that I like is the crisis curve or the grief curve, it's sometimes called, which is sort of like, if you imagine the hero's journey as a circle, it's the same shape really, it's like a U, Otto Scharmer and his work of Theory U is a similar idea where, when we're faced with a story that's confronting, like your quote, your Viktor Frankl quote, despair, when there's no meaning, I think we can be a bit scared to stay in the bottom of the U, to sort of embrace feelings of grief and sadness and loss and fear, because of the way our brains are wired. And a book that was really influential for me was a book called "Social: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Connect" by Matthew Lieberman.. And I was really struck by what he said about how the brain knows no difference between social pain and actual pain. So, you know, when we have feelings of lack of meaning or isolation or fear of rejection or I don't belong, our brain is designed to protect itself and our brain is always designed to find the path of least resistance and shortcuts and habits. So what becomes dangerous then, thinking about what you were saying, Aditi, is that when we see fake news stories, for example, that confirm something that makes my life easier— oh good, if I believe that, that's much simpler, or that gives some meaning, and I don't need to confront anything difficult— then I'll go for that. And if there are people in that tribe, even better. Now I feel like I belong, I'm not alone, I'm not stupid. So I find that really interesting, that it's much easier to do that than what I think is really needed, the shift that's really needed, which is for us to be much more willing to stay in the bottom of the curve, to sit with those feelings, which is painful and difficult and takes courage. Because if we can do that, I think we can start to come out the other side with a new story, reorienting, finding some meaning. And then we can take action. But I really think that change and finding another story, for that to really work, I'm feeling more and more that it needs to be emotional and embodied. So it can't be an intellectual thing. And I have to give credit to Meg Lightheart, whose work I really admire, and it was her that said that first to me, that if the changes or the shifts that we're looking to make are not emotional and embodied, then I really question whether we're going deep enough.
