Now that the rockets and the bombs have stopped the hard part of this conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is beginning. How to keep the peace in the short term? How to build peace in the longer term?
I believe that one of the greatest challenges we all face as human beings is to be able to look objectively and brutally honestly not only at what others have done to me / us but more importantly what I / we have done to them.
When we have been hurt, we want the people who have hurt us to take responsibility. We want them to fix the harm they have caused and we want them to apologize and make it right. We can choose to point fingers at others and says "It is your fault" - that's blaming and it can make us feel better because then they are responsible and they are the ones that need to change.
But accountability is all about recognizing where I (and my 'group') have made mistakes and being willing to own them. We all make bad choices - it is part of being human. However when those bad choices are denied, ignored or justified by "look what they did to us" we just make the situation worse. In this situation, everyone has been hurt. Everyone has done the hurting. And it is not a competition to see who has been hurt the most, who has suffered the most. Acknowledging the pain others carry does not diminish my pain - it allows us to share it - and that can help a lot.
Personal and group accountability demonstrates a level of courage, integrity, honesty and a willingness to trust that can open the door to the other individual or group being willing to be accountable too. It sets a constructive tone to the dialogue that says "It's ok to be honest. It's ok to admit failure. It's ok to acknowledge the mistakes you have made because I am willing to be honest, admit failure and acknowledge my mistakes too. Then we can move forward with integrity. Then we can begin to heal. Then we can acknowledge not only our own pain but the pain of others too.
Until we can be brutally honest with ourselves and see the impact of my / our choices on others we will be trapped in our victim story - and that does not help me, you or anyone else. Many people have been hurt, many have died in the past weeks, in the past months and over the years. I do not believe that we honour the memories of those who have died if we use their deaths to cause more hurt, if we do not learn from our mistakes and if we are not willing to repair the harm that has been done.
In the Christian tradition there is a verse in the Bible that says "Make sure you take the log out of your own eye before you try to remove the speck from someone else's eye." It is a wise piece of advice.
It's easy to hurl things at each other. It's easy to bury our heads in the sand and pretend our actions were justified. It's easy to blame others. But that will only perpetuate the hate and the hurt.
The Conflict Resolution Workout for everyone involved is three simple but not easy questions:
1. No matter what side you are on and without any justifying, blaming or rationalizations - What did you and your side do to them?
2. How did you personally contribute to the war and to the hurt experienced by others?
3. If you could go back and start over, what would you do differently?
When we can each answer that question with brutal honesty and without trying to cover anything up, then we are ready to build peace. Until we get to that point, we will find it very difficult to create a peace that will last.
Peace be with you all...,שלום עם כל מה שאתה , السلام مع جميعكم
Ruth
Ruth Sirman is a veteran in the world of workplace mediation
specializing in assisting groups to find practical and workable
solutions to seemingly intractable conflicts. Her professional practice
takes her across North America working with federal, provincial and
territorial governments, corporations, NGO’s, churches, communities and
the courts. She designed and teaches the acclaimed Power to Resolve
Program including modules on Discovering Your Resolution Quotient, I’m
OK – It’s Everyone Else Who Needs Help!!, Mastering Difficult Situations
and People You Find Challenging, From Discord to Dialogue,
Organziational Conflict 911. Her website is www.canmediate.com
Showing posts with label blame. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blame. Show all posts
Thursday, 22 November 2012
Monday, 11 July 2011
When Conflict Makes Us Crazy!
When things happen to us we have choices we can make:
1. We can take it personally (the 'ME' view) and react negatively towards the individual or group by:
2. We can look at the bigger picture (the 'SYSTEM' view) and try to see what may be going on in the larger system that may be influencing what is happening to us.. in other words we can distance ourselves from assuming that because there has been a negative impact that the intention was to hurt / upset us.
The Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Think of a situation in which you have found yourself upset / angry at another person at work, at home or in your community:
1. What was your reaction / how were you feeling at the time? how have you been feeling since?
2. What story did you tell yourself about their actions or choices?
3. To what degree did you get caught in the 'Me' view or were you able to stay in the 'System' view?
4. What action did you choose to take?
5. What would it take for you to move from the 'Me' view to the 'System' view?
6. What would you gain and what would you lose by shifting your focus?
If a quick conversation with us would help you move from the 'ME' view to the 'SYSTEM' view, send us an email at info at canmediate.com.
1. We can take it personally (the 'ME' view) and react negatively towards the individual or group by:
- get angry or hurt,
- tell ourselves a story about how unfair this is,
- get caught up in the drama and tell others about our misfortune
- go on a blamestorming binge and demonize the person or group we believe have caused us this grief
- make choices or take action to rectify the situation which frequently includes some type of retribution against the guilty party(ies) or withdrawal / pulling back to protect ourselves from any further harm.
2. We can look at the bigger picture (the 'SYSTEM' view) and try to see what may be going on in the larger system that may be influencing what is happening to us.. in other words we can distance ourselves from assuming that because there has been a negative impact that the intention was to hurt / upset us.
The broader system view provides us with the potential to:
- understand what is going on for others,
- to step back from elevating assumptions to the level of fact (and then acting on those assumptions
- to avoid getting hooked and derailed by the story we have told ourselves
- maintain our focus on our priorities and doing what is necessary to achieve our goals and objectives
- continue to work collaboratively with others in our system to achieve success
The Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Think of a situation in which you have found yourself upset / angry at another person at work, at home or in your community:
1. What was your reaction / how were you feeling at the time? how have you been feeling since?
2. What story did you tell yourself about their actions or choices?
3. To what degree did you get caught in the 'Me' view or were you able to stay in the 'System' view?
4. What action did you choose to take?
5. What would it take for you to move from the 'Me' view to the 'System' view?
6. What would you gain and what would you lose by shifting your focus?
If a quick conversation with us would help you move from the 'ME' view to the 'SYSTEM' view, send us an email at info at canmediate.com.
Working as a mediator, trainer and speaker since 1992, Ruth Sirman is a veteran in the world of Alternative Dispute Resolution. She has been called a talented mediator, a high content speaker, an amazing trainer, a ‘tell-it-like-it-is realist, a stand up comedian with a message and a few others things as well… But no matter what you call her, know that her objective in life is to help people learn to manage the tough situations they create – and live to tell about it!
For more information, check out www.canmediate.com.
Thursday, 23 September 2010
What Is the Level of Toxicity In Your Organization or Workplace?
Where Are You On The Conflict Curve?
If you have a pond and on Day 1 in the pond there is 1 lily pad in the pond.
Every day the number of lily pads in the pond doubles.
On Day 30 the pond is completely full of lily pads.
When is the pond half full?
When it comes to conflict, workplaces, groups and organizations react much like ponds and lily pads. In the early stages it seems that everything is going well and things are fine. The impact of conflicts rarely shows up as a linear progression - it more closely approximates an exponential Time Delay curve. The impact of this is that in the early stages it is difficult to see what is happening as the changes will be subtle and imperceptible. By the time things deteriorate to where the problems become visible, the organization is often on the brink of crisis and the working environment has become toxic. High turnover rates, complaints, grievances, disgruntled employees and reduced productivity are typical. At this point remediation of the situation is often difficult, costly (in both human and $$ terms) and time consuming. It can be tough to get employees engaged in making changes as fear of repercussions, cynicism and skepticism are normal.
In answer to the question above -Because the number of lily pads in the pond doubles every day, the pond is half full on Day 29… Recognition and acknowledgment of the severity problems often happens between Day 25 and Day 29 as it gets harder to deny and avoid the problems at this stage. However, by this point the organization is in serious crisis. So it is important to know where your organization is at on the curve.The earlier the problems are recognized the easier (and cheaper) it is to deal with them.
Timing is as important as strategy in addressing conflict situations. It is critical to choose the strategy that will best fit the situation at this point in time. A good strategy used at the wrong time can actually make the situation worse.
So ultimately, the ideal is to employ strategies that will help an organization get to and maintain a position on the Time Curve somewhere between Days 1-15 over the long term. But it is not enough to just get to that stage; the critical factor here is the willingness to recognize that conflict is not bad and should not be ignored – after all nothing ever changes without conflict in some form and the willingness to invest in resolutions that have the capacity to address things thoroughly. Ultimately an organization that is willing to invest in achieving this goal and is able to maintain that position will be in good shape to weather the storms of conflict when they hit and will have the flexibility and robustness to survive in the world of business
The Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Think of an organization or group to which you belong and objectively assess the situation (or at least as objectively as you can) by asking yourself:
1. Where ‘Day’ are we on the Time Delay Curve?
2. If I asked others in the organization what ‘Day’ they see us at – what would they say?
3. What factors are contributing to the discrepancy (if there is one) between where I believe we are at and where they believe we are at?
4. What strategies have we used to address the situation so far?
5. How did it work?
6. Do we need help?
Ruth Sirman is a veteran in the world of workplace mediation specializing in assisting groups to find practical and workable solutions to seemingly intractable conflicts. Her professional practice takes her across North America working with federal, provincial and territorial governments, corporations, NGO’s, churches, communities and the courts. She designed and teaches the acclaimed Power to Resolve Program including modules on Discovering Your Resolution Quotient, I’m OK – It’s Everyone Else Who Needs Help!!, Mastering Difficult Situations and People You Find Challenging, From Discord to Dialogue, Organizational Conflict 911. Her website is www.canmediate.com
If you have a pond and on Day 1 in the pond there is 1 lily pad in the pond.
Every day the number of lily pads in the pond doubles.
On Day 30 the pond is completely full of lily pads.
When is the pond half full?
When it comes to conflict, workplaces, groups and organizations react much like ponds and lily pads. In the early stages it seems that everything is going well and things are fine. The impact of conflicts rarely shows up as a linear progression - it more closely approximates an exponential Time Delay curve. The impact of this is that in the early stages it is difficult to see what is happening as the changes will be subtle and imperceptible. By the time things deteriorate to where the problems become visible, the organization is often on the brink of crisis and the working environment has become toxic. High turnover rates, complaints, grievances, disgruntled employees and reduced productivity are typical. At this point remediation of the situation is often difficult, costly (in both human and $$ terms) and time consuming. It can be tough to get employees engaged in making changes as fear of repercussions, cynicism and skepticism are normal.
In answer to the question above -Because the number of lily pads in the pond doubles every day, the pond is half full on Day 29… Recognition and acknowledgment of the severity problems often happens between Day 25 and Day 29 as it gets harder to deny and avoid the problems at this stage. However, by this point the organization is in serious crisis. So it is important to know where your organization is at on the curve.The earlier the problems are recognized the easier (and cheaper) it is to deal with them.
Timing is as important as strategy in addressing conflict situations. It is critical to choose the strategy that will best fit the situation at this point in time. A good strategy used at the wrong time can actually make the situation worse.
So ultimately, the ideal is to employ strategies that will help an organization get to and maintain a position on the Time Curve somewhere between Days 1-15 over the long term. But it is not enough to just get to that stage; the critical factor here is the willingness to recognize that conflict is not bad and should not be ignored – after all nothing ever changes without conflict in some form and the willingness to invest in resolutions that have the capacity to address things thoroughly. Ultimately an organization that is willing to invest in achieving this goal and is able to maintain that position will be in good shape to weather the storms of conflict when they hit and will have the flexibility and robustness to survive in the world of business
The Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Think of an organization or group to which you belong and objectively assess the situation (or at least as objectively as you can) by asking yourself:
1. Where ‘Day’ are we on the Time Delay Curve?
2. If I asked others in the organization what ‘Day’ they see us at – what would they say?
3. What factors are contributing to the discrepancy (if there is one) between where I believe we are at and where they believe we are at?
4. What strategies have we used to address the situation so far?
5. How did it work?
6. Do we need help?
Ruth Sirman is a veteran in the world of workplace mediation specializing in assisting groups to find practical and workable solutions to seemingly intractable conflicts. Her professional practice takes her across North America working with federal, provincial and territorial governments, corporations, NGO’s, churches, communities and the courts. She designed and teaches the acclaimed Power to Resolve Program including modules on Discovering Your Resolution Quotient, I’m OK – It’s Everyone Else Who Needs Help!!, Mastering Difficult Situations and People You Find Challenging, From Discord to Dialogue, Organizational Conflict 911. Her website is www.canmediate.com
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
Wrongful Dismissal and Blame-storming – Its Impacts on Organizational Culture
By Ruth Sirman, CanMediate International
According to the CBC News today the PSLRB ruled today that Douglas Tipple’s employment with PWGSC was unfairly terminated by the federal government and that he did not deserve the slurs against his reputation, the loss of his position and the campaign to discredit him. While the impact for Mr. Tipple is significant as noted by the adjudicator Mr Quigley, it is also critical to look at the impact on this type of situation has on the organization as a whole.
People in organizations are rarely oblivious to the undercurrents present in their workplace. In other words, they know what’s going on and in the same way that children sense what is happening in families even when parents believe that they have managed to hide the tensions, employees are very adept at reading the energy and atmosphere in their workplaces. And they recognize toxicity, dysfunction and lack of credibility within organizations and their leadership.
Human beings have a very well developed sense of what is right and wrong, and while there may be times when they choose to ignore this, the type of situation that happened at PWGSC is typically one where that sense of fairness will be alive and well.
There is much talk these days about the need to create ‘healthy workplaces’. And certainly research supports the fact that employees are more productive when they are happy and feel safe.
However as human beings we seem to have an amazing capacity to create negative and dysfunctional working environments – and often leaders seem oblivious to the ripple effect and impact their choices have throughout their organizations.
In any organization whenever someone is ‘let go’ in a questionable way or where employees sense a level of cover-up or lack of fairness, it can trigger a chain reaction of feelings such as “if it could happen once (to them), then it could happen again - to me!” and “if this is going on what else is going on?” ultimately leaving employees with a sense that this is not a ‘safe’ place to work – and the guard goes up.
If I as an employee perceive that this is not a safe place to be and in particular not a safe place to make mistakes (or fail), then I will take steps to protect myself. Consequently a culture of wariness and risk aversion typically sets in and pervades the atmosphere of the workplace leading to people literally or at least figuratively looking over their shoulder and making choices that are perceived to be safer and less likely to bring me to the notice of the decision makers.
What does that mean for the organization?
When the organizational culture becomes wary, risk averse and self-protective, the impact on the organizations ability to thrive is huge. The most successful organizations out there who can thrive in continually changing economic and political climates are those which are flexible, robust and dynamic. They have organizational cultures that are built on creativity, accountability (NOT blame) and solid relationships that support the ability to adapt through solid, dynamic, creative responses to the challenges confronting them.
When the culture if perceived to be based on blame-storming (ie finger-pointing and scape-goating) the first things that get lost are openness and creativity. If I feel the need to protect myself, I will choose carefully what ideas I put out to the group, what decisions I make and what level of responsibility I am willing to assume. Protection becomes more important than contribution – and the organization suffers.
The Canadian Federal Public Service is currently struggling with many of these issues. There are a great many hard working, dedicated and top-notch employees in the Public Service who work long hours to provide great service to Canadians. And as Canadians we want our Public Service to be accountable for the way our tax dollars are spent. However the difference between accountability and blame seems to be generally misunderstood.
Blame is me telling you that you made a mistake. Accountability is when I step up and take responsibility for my actions and acknowledge that I made a mistake. There is a huge difference between the two. Both typically have consequences – in blame they are generally punitive in nature. In accountability they are more typically fair and reasonable.
However accountability will not happen without a perceived level of safety and fairness – and that must include any consequences that happen as a result of someone being accountable. As young children we learned that if we are ‘to blame’ for something the punishment that follows is likely going to hurt in some way. So typically we stopped owning up to what we did… and learned to lie, deflect, deny, and avoid whenever possible.
We have now created this same type of environment within much of our Public Service.
The reactionary, rules-based culture of blame-storming, deflection and denial that has been created as a response to the sponsorship Scandal and other similar nasty situations makes it almost impossible to get any work done. As former CDS Rick Hillier said in his book “A Soldier First” when he was describing the challenges in trying to fight a war under PWGSC procurement rules: “The process has become the product” – which to me means that there is a culture in PWGSC that is more concerned about what things look like than it is concerned about getting the job done.
And we will continue to see denial, deflection and finger-pointing so long as we tolerate a toxic and dysfunctional organizational culture within our Public Service that rewards this type of behaviour rather than one in which openness, transparency and fairness are the norm.
Can it be changed? Absolutely - but as Albert Einstein said "You can't solve a problem with the same mindset that created it". There would need to be a willingness on the part of leadership in the government and the public services to find a better way.
Ruth Sirman is a veteran in the world of workplace mediation specializing in assisting groups to find practical and workable solutions to seemingly intractable conflicts. Her professional practice takes her across North America working with federal, provincial and territorial governments, corporations, NGO’s, churches, communities and the courts. She designed and teaches the acclaimed Power to Resolve Program including modules on Discovering Your Resolution Quotient, I’m OK – It’s Everyone Else Who Needs Help!!, Mastering Difficult Situations and People You Find Challenging, From Discord to Dialogue, Organziational Conflict 911. Her website is www.canmediate.com.
According to the CBC News today the PSLRB ruled today that Douglas Tipple’s employment with PWGSC was unfairly terminated by the federal government and that he did not deserve the slurs against his reputation, the loss of his position and the campaign to discredit him. While the impact for Mr. Tipple is significant as noted by the adjudicator Mr Quigley, it is also critical to look at the impact on this type of situation has on the organization as a whole.
People in organizations are rarely oblivious to the undercurrents present in their workplace. In other words, they know what’s going on and in the same way that children sense what is happening in families even when parents believe that they have managed to hide the tensions, employees are very adept at reading the energy and atmosphere in their workplaces. And they recognize toxicity, dysfunction and lack of credibility within organizations and their leadership.
Human beings have a very well developed sense of what is right and wrong, and while there may be times when they choose to ignore this, the type of situation that happened at PWGSC is typically one where that sense of fairness will be alive and well.
There is much talk these days about the need to create ‘healthy workplaces’. And certainly research supports the fact that employees are more productive when they are happy and feel safe.
However as human beings we seem to have an amazing capacity to create negative and dysfunctional working environments – and often leaders seem oblivious to the ripple effect and impact their choices have throughout their organizations.
In any organization whenever someone is ‘let go’ in a questionable way or where employees sense a level of cover-up or lack of fairness, it can trigger a chain reaction of feelings such as “if it could happen once (to them), then it could happen again - to me!” and “if this is going on what else is going on?” ultimately leaving employees with a sense that this is not a ‘safe’ place to work – and the guard goes up.
If I as an employee perceive that this is not a safe place to be and in particular not a safe place to make mistakes (or fail), then I will take steps to protect myself. Consequently a culture of wariness and risk aversion typically sets in and pervades the atmosphere of the workplace leading to people literally or at least figuratively looking over their shoulder and making choices that are perceived to be safer and less likely to bring me to the notice of the decision makers.
What does that mean for the organization?
When the organizational culture becomes wary, risk averse and self-protective, the impact on the organizations ability to thrive is huge. The most successful organizations out there who can thrive in continually changing economic and political climates are those which are flexible, robust and dynamic. They have organizational cultures that are built on creativity, accountability (NOT blame) and solid relationships that support the ability to adapt through solid, dynamic, creative responses to the challenges confronting them.
When the culture if perceived to be based on blame-storming (ie finger-pointing and scape-goating) the first things that get lost are openness and creativity. If I feel the need to protect myself, I will choose carefully what ideas I put out to the group, what decisions I make and what level of responsibility I am willing to assume. Protection becomes more important than contribution – and the organization suffers.
The Canadian Federal Public Service is currently struggling with many of these issues. There are a great many hard working, dedicated and top-notch employees in the Public Service who work long hours to provide great service to Canadians. And as Canadians we want our Public Service to be accountable for the way our tax dollars are spent. However the difference between accountability and blame seems to be generally misunderstood.
Blame is me telling you that you made a mistake. Accountability is when I step up and take responsibility for my actions and acknowledge that I made a mistake. There is a huge difference between the two. Both typically have consequences – in blame they are generally punitive in nature. In accountability they are more typically fair and reasonable.
However accountability will not happen without a perceived level of safety and fairness – and that must include any consequences that happen as a result of someone being accountable. As young children we learned that if we are ‘to blame’ for something the punishment that follows is likely going to hurt in some way. So typically we stopped owning up to what we did… and learned to lie, deflect, deny, and avoid whenever possible.
We have now created this same type of environment within much of our Public Service.
The reactionary, rules-based culture of blame-storming, deflection and denial that has been created as a response to the sponsorship Scandal and other similar nasty situations makes it almost impossible to get any work done. As former CDS Rick Hillier said in his book “A Soldier First” when he was describing the challenges in trying to fight a war under PWGSC procurement rules: “The process has become the product” – which to me means that there is a culture in PWGSC that is more concerned about what things look like than it is concerned about getting the job done.
And we will continue to see denial, deflection and finger-pointing so long as we tolerate a toxic and dysfunctional organizational culture within our Public Service that rewards this type of behaviour rather than one in which openness, transparency and fairness are the norm.
Can it be changed? Absolutely - but as Albert Einstein said "You can't solve a problem with the same mindset that created it". There would need to be a willingness on the part of leadership in the government and the public services to find a better way.
Ruth Sirman is a veteran in the world of workplace mediation specializing in assisting groups to find practical and workable solutions to seemingly intractable conflicts. Her professional practice takes her across North America working with federal, provincial and territorial governments, corporations, NGO’s, churches, communities and the courts. She designed and teaches the acclaimed Power to Resolve Program including modules on Discovering Your Resolution Quotient, I’m OK – It’s Everyone Else Who Needs Help!!, Mastering Difficult Situations and People You Find Challenging, From Discord to Dialogue, Organziational Conflict 911. Her website is www.canmediate.com.
Friday, 8 August 2008
Leadership and the Global Crisis
We human beings are pretty smart folks! We've sent people (and monkeys) to the moon, built a space station, invented ways to take pictures on Mars, built huge dams that change the course of major waterways, created technology that lets us communicate instantaneously virtually anywhere in the world and lots more... Yep - there's no doubt about it we've got the smarts to do just about anything...
So if we're so smart, then why are we in such a mess? Globally our environment is deteriorating around our ears, wars are being waged in more places than we can count, children die of starvation by the thousands and our ground water is too polluted to drink in much of the world. Much of this is not as easily visible in North America as it is in other parts of the globe. We're pretty insulated over here from the harsh realities facing our brothers and sisters around the world.
Part of the problem as I see it is that those of us who can make a difference tend to avoid the problem. It's just easier that way. Afterall, if I were to admit my role in creating it, then I would be accountable to do something about it. And many people are now starting to recognize the magnitude of the problems we have created - and the implications those problems can have. Typically when something goes wrong our first instinct as human beings is to look around to see whose fault it is. After all - someone must be to blame! And there can be great relief in figuring out who is responsible... providing it's not us! Because whoever is at fault needs to fix things and make them right again. So we spend countless hours searching for someone we can pin the problem on.
The problem is that blame is a waste of time and energy! Blame always looks backwards and it can drain enormous amounts of energy that could be better employed solving the crises. It is always an education to listen to the various political leaders who have the "blamestorming" game down to a science. Just once I would like to hear someone stand up and quietly say "My government has failed to take the required action to prevent this situation from becoming a crisis - and as of today our priorities have changed. As of today, our focus will not be on getting re-elected, but rather on looking beyond our own agendas to analyse the crises we face and see how we can collaborate with other leaders to solve the problems". What a refreshing change that would be!
So what prevents this from happening? Well, when I am wrapped up in my own problems, it is hard for me to appreciate yours. So if our leaders are focused primarily on getting elected and then re-elected, how can we expect them to work constructively on major problems that may require hugely unpopular changes to resolve them? And if their terms are only 2-5 years long - will they have the incentive to take action with long term vision (beyond their own terms)? It is unlikely.
So how do we solve this dilemma? There are no quick fixes to this one but there is one irrefutable fact. When human beings face a major crisis and perceive their lives to be under threat we tend to set our own agendas aside and work together to deal with the greater problem. This happens all the time in terms of natural disasters - fires, floods, ice/snow/rain storms, earthquakes, tsunamis etc... What will it take to help us begin to work together in advance of the crisis?
I don't know - but I hope we can apply the massive collective intelligence we have to find a solution. After all the definition of insanity is to do the same thing again and again and expect different results! I hope we're smarter than that!
Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Take a few minutes and think about:
Ruth Sirman, CanMediate International, is a professional mediator and trainer who teaches the same skills she has used since 1996 to help groups resolve conflicts in government, corporations, communities, churches and schools. For more information, check out her website at http://www.canmediate.com/.
So if we're so smart, then why are we in such a mess? Globally our environment is deteriorating around our ears, wars are being waged in more places than we can count, children die of starvation by the thousands and our ground water is too polluted to drink in much of the world. Much of this is not as easily visible in North America as it is in other parts of the globe. We're pretty insulated over here from the harsh realities facing our brothers and sisters around the world.Part of the problem as I see it is that those of us who can make a difference tend to avoid the problem. It's just easier that way. Afterall, if I were to admit my role in creating it, then I would be accountable to do something about it. And many people are now starting to recognize the magnitude of the problems we have created - and the implications those problems can have. Typically when something goes wrong our first instinct as human beings is to look around to see whose fault it is. After all - someone must be to blame! And there can be great relief in figuring out who is responsible... providing it's not us! Because whoever is at fault needs to fix things and make them right again. So we spend countless hours searching for someone we can pin the problem on.
The problem is that blame is a waste of time and energy! Blame always looks backwards and it can drain enormous amounts of energy that could be better employed solving the crises. It is always an education to listen to the various political leaders who have the "blamestorming" game down to a science. Just once I would like to hear someone stand up and quietly say "My government has failed to take the required action to prevent this situation from becoming a crisis - and as of today our priorities have changed. As of today, our focus will not be on getting re-elected, but rather on looking beyond our own agendas to analyse the crises we face and see how we can collaborate with other leaders to solve the problems". What a refreshing change that would be!
So what prevents this from happening? Well, when I am wrapped up in my own problems, it is hard for me to appreciate yours. So if our leaders are focused primarily on getting elected and then re-elected, how can we expect them to work constructively on major problems that may require hugely unpopular changes to resolve them? And if their terms are only 2-5 years long - will they have the incentive to take action with long term vision (beyond their own terms)? It is unlikely.So how do we solve this dilemma? There are no quick fixes to this one but there is one irrefutable fact. When human beings face a major crisis and perceive their lives to be under threat we tend to set our own agendas aside and work together to deal with the greater problem. This happens all the time in terms of natural disasters - fires, floods, ice/snow/rain storms, earthquakes, tsunamis etc... What will it take to help us begin to work together in advance of the crisis?
I don't know - but I hope we can apply the massive collective intelligence we have to find a solution. After all the definition of insanity is to do the same thing again and again and expect different results! I hope we're smarter than that!
Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Take a few minutes and think about:
- What situations are happening in our world that you don't know enough about?
- How can you get accurate information about what is happening?
- Who else has a stake in this problem?
- What action could you take to invite these individuals or groups to start working together on the problem(s)?
- What obstacles might get in your way, in terms of getting things moving?
- What steps can you take to overcome these challenges?
Ruth Sirman, CanMediate International, is a professional mediator and trainer who teaches the same skills she has used since 1996 to help groups resolve conflicts in government, corporations, communities, churches and schools. For more information, check out her website at http://www.canmediate.com/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
