Protect a story's ability to reveal the unexpected
Why It Matters
Stories are not instruments. When we approach them as tools—to justify, illustrate, prove, or persuade—we close down what they might open. Protecting stories means resisting the pressure to make them useful. It means allowing for ambiguity, for loose ends, for implications you can't yet name. It means trusting that a story's value isn't diminished by uncertainty—it may be deepened by it.
What This Looks Like
An advocacy organization collects stories from people affected by a policy. The communications team wants to edit them into tight, emotional appeals with clear "asks" at the end. But the storytellers resist: their experiences are more complicated than that. The organization pauses. They create two tracks: unedited stories that live on their own terms, and separate advocacy materials that reference—but don't flatten—them.
Try This
Before using a story, ask: Am I asking this story to confirm something, or am I allowing it to reveal something? What happens if I hold it more loosely? What is this story trying to say that I might not be hearing?
Story Purpose Discernment
Pitfalls and Mitigations (particularly "Oversimplification of Complex Systems")
Watch For
The pull—internal or external—to make every story "useful." Also watch for editing stories into arguments, or framing them to land a predetermined point. And watch for the assumption that a story without a clear takeaway has failed.
“Stories aren’t instruments. When we approach them as tools , we close down what they might open.”