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 and rapidly becoming polluted in much of the rest of the world. Much of this is not as easily visible in North America as it is in other parts of the globe or at least not so ‘in your face’ so we can still ignore the mess we are in on a day to day basis. We're pretty insulated over here from the harsh realities facing our brothers and sisters around the world.
What about our leaders?
Many of the world leaders gathered in Toronto and Huntsville ON Canada this past weekend to put their collective heads together and ostensibly find solutions to these (and other) problems. So far as I have heard there were no earth shattering creative answers found during the talks. So despite the close to $1 billion dollars spent, we are still facing these global issues. And they will continue to haunt us until we start to work collectively, one step at a time to change how we think of our world.
Part of the problem as I see it is that collectively as a human species we have several types of response.
1. Many are so overwhelmed by the magnitude and complexity of the problem(s) that they just don’t know where to start to fix it. And for many there is a justifiable fear that if we get it wrong we will make it worse so ultimately we end up doing very little of consequence and justifying by rationalizations such as “Well, I’m only one person, what could I possibly do to help”.
2. A growing number of people who are seriously concerned about the choices being made at the political level and who seek to voice their collective concern through peaceful protests, education and awareness campaigns and activism. This group was out in large numbers in Toronto this past weekend, however for those of us who were only able to view what was going on through the media, there was very little coverage of the efforts of these groups to make their concerns heard by the decision makers.
3. There are those who will grab any chance to create havoc and chaos either constructively or destructively. We saw this in Toronto this weekend as a band of black clad masked ‘protesters’ left any pretense of constructive protesting behind in favour of vandalism, damage and destruction. Is this a legitimate form of protest? – not to this writer…
4. There are an increasing number of individuals and organizations who recognize the need to take action to decrease the overall human ‘footprint’ on the planet and who are beginning to make strides in changing the operational paradigms that drive choices and priorities. Check out Peter Senge’s book “The Necessary Revolution” for examples and analysis.
5. There is the political leadership at a global level which is beginning to see the necessity of making changes but who still seemed to be suffering from a series of afflictions that make it difficult to make any significant progress in creating significant constructive sustainable change at the global level.
a. ‘Analysis Paralysis’ – the perceived need to study everything to death. While there is a solid need for understanding the situation, analysis and studies can also be a way of procrastinating making choices and changes…
b. ‘It’s their problem… not ours… so they need to fix it.. not us’… - the tried and true strategy of deflection and digressing from the main issues by pointing the finger at others in an effort to avoid having the finger pointed at me. While there may be some individuals, countries, regions or ideologies that bear a greater responsibility than others, ultimately it’s like having a hole in the boat in which we are all riding.. If the boat sinks it doesn’t much matter which end of the boat had the hole because everyone’s going to be swimming irrespective of whose fault it was.
c. ‘Solid solutions to the long term global crisis are not congruent with my personal or national political agenda’ – While this is something that no political leader would ever articulate I’m sure, it would appear that the global crisis has not yet reached the Pain Point threshold that puts it as a more pressing concern than personal or national agendas. Consequently the global good is still being subjugated to those personal and national priorities – and will continue to be until such time as the crisis becomes a greater threat to individuals and nations than their own wants and needs.
Lets face it, the western world is the greatest user of global resources on a per capita basis and consequently this is also the group with the resources to make a difference. However collectively we tend to avoid the problem. It's just easier that way. After all, 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 "blame-storming" 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 analyze 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!
My grandmother used to say that 'Obstacles are what you see when you take your eyes off the goal..." - wise words that have the potential to help us change our world. If we are focused on making the changes we are able to make, then we are at least moving in the right direction. Baby steps are better than no steps!
Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Take a few minutes and think about:
1. What situations are happening in our world that you don't know enough about?
2. How can you get accurate information about what is happening?
3. Who else has a stake in this problem?
4. What action could you take to invite these individuals or groups to start working together the problem(s)?
5. What obstacles might get in your way, in terms of getting things moving?
6. What steps can you take to overcome these challenges?
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.
Monday, 28 June 2010
Disgruntled and Chronic Complainers and Their Long List of Complaints
Have you ever met a chronic complainer?
Most of us have met someone who seems to get a perverse pleasure from constantly and continually complaining. While sometimes it seems that the complainers in our lives will complain about anything they are typically set off by a specific set of triggers and the complaints are focused on particular topics.
One characteristic of complaints is the sweeping generalizations and absolutes that sound like “It’s all wrong”, “Nobody ever listens to me / us” or “They never give us what we need to do the job” or “The whole project is a complete washout” or “Nobody cares”. Unfortunately specific information that could be useful and relevant is conspicuous by its absence.
So why do people complain?
It’s a habit. For some, their standard form of communication has evolved into the adult equivalent of a whining child. Often the habitual complainer is unaware of what they sound like to others. They may have a negative outlook on life with expectations that can border on ‘unrealistic’. This can lead to an overall sense of
It’s worked for them in the past. Human beings are very prone to re-using strategies that have worked for them in other situations. After all, if it works why change it?
They want to be heard. Often chronic complainers are very detail focused individuals and they may actually have valuable information to share. However their choice of strategies typically minimizes the potential that their information will be heard as others tend to tune them out which prompts them to complain even more, setting up a vicious cycle.
They feel they have been subjected to some form of injustice. In some cases there may have been an injustice or series of injustices that have happened to them. In these circumstances most of us will complain and it can be therapeutic and cathartic. However chronic complainers get stuck and have trouble moving on. They may carry the past injustices around as baggage made up of their grudge list until it colours their worldview and becomes a habitual way of perceiving the world.
They feel that their world is beyond their control and in many cases are unsure of how to fix it. The sense of helplessness that this creates leaves the chronic complainer with a sense of futility that fuels the long tale(s) of woe.
So what can you do when you have to deal with a chronic complainer?
1. Avoid agreeing or disagreeing – just listen
2. Avoid trying to solve their problem for them – help them come up with possible solutions. If you solve the problem and it doesn’t work then there is just more to complain about.
3. Assess what you are hearing to determine if the information buried in the complaining may be relevant, valid and useful.
4. Ask questions that demonstrate you’re listening. Stay objective and impartial - Let them run down.
5. Help them get specific- even if you have to interrupt. Ask questions of clarification designed to get specifics rather than the sweeping generalizations. Once you have some specifics (and it may be a challenge) ask them how they would solve that specific problem (shift to a problem solving mode)
6. If their complaint(s) have substance, keep them in the loop re the progress in resolving the issues.
7. If necessary you may need to set some parameters in place to manage the amount of complaining to which you are subjected. Things like “If you have issues that need to be addressed, then bring me specifics and possible solutions.” Or “I’m happy to listen if what you want to talk about is how you plan to address the problem(s) but if this is just about complaining, then I would rather not be part of it.”
Chronic complaining has the potential to create a negative energy in a relationship, a family or a workplace. The person doing the complaining may have valid points to make however their style of communicating tends to cause others to shut down, thereby minimizing the successful impact of their message. There are ways to manage this if you are willing to invest the time and energy in supporting them to change the pattern.
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.
Most of us have met someone who seems to get a perverse pleasure from constantly and continually complaining. While sometimes it seems that the complainers in our lives will complain about anything they are typically set off by a specific set of triggers and the complaints are focused on particular topics.
One characteristic of complaints is the sweeping generalizations and absolutes that sound like “It’s all wrong”, “Nobody ever listens to me / us” or “They never give us what we need to do the job” or “The whole project is a complete washout” or “Nobody cares”. Unfortunately specific information that could be useful and relevant is conspicuous by its absence.
So why do people complain?
It’s a habit. For some, their standard form of communication has evolved into the adult equivalent of a whining child. Often the habitual complainer is unaware of what they sound like to others. They may have a negative outlook on life with expectations that can border on ‘unrealistic’. This can lead to an overall sense of
It’s worked for them in the past. Human beings are very prone to re-using strategies that have worked for them in other situations. After all, if it works why change it?
They want to be heard. Often chronic complainers are very detail focused individuals and they may actually have valuable information to share. However their choice of strategies typically minimizes the potential that their information will be heard as others tend to tune them out which prompts them to complain even more, setting up a vicious cycle.
They feel they have been subjected to some form of injustice. In some cases there may have been an injustice or series of injustices that have happened to them. In these circumstances most of us will complain and it can be therapeutic and cathartic. However chronic complainers get stuck and have trouble moving on. They may carry the past injustices around as baggage made up of their grudge list until it colours their worldview and becomes a habitual way of perceiving the world.
They feel that their world is beyond their control and in many cases are unsure of how to fix it. The sense of helplessness that this creates leaves the chronic complainer with a sense of futility that fuels the long tale(s) of woe.
So what can you do when you have to deal with a chronic complainer?
1. Avoid agreeing or disagreeing – just listen
2. Avoid trying to solve their problem for them – help them come up with possible solutions. If you solve the problem and it doesn’t work then there is just more to complain about.
3. Assess what you are hearing to determine if the information buried in the complaining may be relevant, valid and useful.
4. Ask questions that demonstrate you’re listening. Stay objective and impartial - Let them run down.
5. Help them get specific- even if you have to interrupt. Ask questions of clarification designed to get specifics rather than the sweeping generalizations. Once you have some specifics (and it may be a challenge) ask them how they would solve that specific problem (shift to a problem solving mode)
6. If their complaint(s) have substance, keep them in the loop re the progress in resolving the issues.
7. If necessary you may need to set some parameters in place to manage the amount of complaining to which you are subjected. Things like “If you have issues that need to be addressed, then bring me specifics and possible solutions.” Or “I’m happy to listen if what you want to talk about is how you plan to address the problem(s) but if this is just about complaining, then I would rather not be part of it.”
Chronic complaining has the potential to create a negative energy in a relationship, a family or a workplace. The person doing the complaining may have valid points to make however their style of communicating tends to cause others to shut down, thereby minimizing the successful impact of their message. There are ways to manage this if you are willing to invest the time and energy in supporting them to change the pattern.
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.
Saturday, 29 May 2010
Can Cars and Cyclists Share the Roads?
The road is a line – a strip of asphalt, that runs between 2 points. It gets people from point A to point B and it has become a serious source of concern for many who use it, particularly for those who drive cars and those who ride bicycles.
I listened to Goldhawk Live on Rogers Cable last night (http://www.rogerstv.com/option.asp?rid=16&lid=12&sid=266 ) where representatives of different groups and different points of view spent the better part of an hour discussing the challenges faced by all of us in terms of ensuring that all are able to get where they need to go in safety.
I lived beside a 80kmph highway for more than 20 years and as a cyclist going for a bike ride, particularly with my kids, it was often an unnerving experience. It's hard to ride on rough gravel shoulders. Big trucks and cars spew up dust, gravel and noise not to mention the wind they create has a tendency to throw you sideways and off-balance. That 6-10” strip of asphalt on the shoulder side of the yellow line does not provide much space for a bike and there is certainly no protection for anyone who is foolhardy enough to try to ride there. So the gravel was a safer albeit rougher option – and you learned to ride defensively or pay the price.
I have been cycling seriously since 1967 on the highways of rural eastern Ontario and through the city streets of Ottawa. I have my fair share of horror stories about close calls caused by my own poor choices, indifferent pedestrians, oblivious drivers, huge potholes, mechanical failures and more.
The current debate seems to stem from different perspectives about who is entitled to use the road, and who gets priority – and who should give way for whom. In many ways the current debates are very representative of our way of approaching the use of other common resources such as the environment, food, water and more.
The mindset that believes that MY needs, wants and priorities are most important and that those of others need to take a back seat to mine is an arrogant and problematic way of looking at the world. When I see drivers cut cyclists off, or I see cyclists going the wrong way up one way streets or running red lights I see this arrogant and indifferent mindset that contributes to the ongoing conflict over this issue.
In places like Holland where cycling is a mainstream mode of transportation, cyclists have access to cycle-only routes where cars are forbidden. There is a different level of resources available to cyclists than that found in North America. Of course the whole country is about the same size as one of our smaller provinces. Is this a viable option in a country the size of Canada? It would be a costly and difficult proposition and not necessarily the only possible solution. We need to find ways that work for us as Canadians - given our geography, weather patterns and culture. Finding that solution may take some time but as gas prices continue to rise and environmental consciousness increases, cycling is becoming an increasingly viable option for many.
What can an individual do?
As driver’s we have an obligation to be aware of the vulnerability of other users of the roads – cyclists and pedestrians as well as other motorized vehicles. Specifically:
- Take a quick look in the outside rear view mirror before opening the door when you’re parked (getting ‘doored’ hurts!).
- Give cyclists space both on city streets and on the highways
– the suction created by vehicles can throw a cyclist off balance (especially when it comes from a truck)
- Realize that a bike can’t hit big potholes and stay upright – so swerving is more than likely – it’s a given… and it may happen quickly so give them room
- Anticipate that cyclists will be turning at intersections and avoid crowding them
- Realize that the more cyclists we have on the road, the fewer cars there are and the less congestion there will be for you, the motorists!
As cyclists we need to understand that we have an obligation to share the road as well – and to cycle defensively. The most effective way I know to do that is to be as predictable and courteous as possible:
- stop for stop signs and red lights,
- cycle the same way you would drive – go the right way on one way roads, watch and only pass when it's safe especially in heavy traffic situations
- recall the rules of physics (Force = mass x acceleration). If a car hits a cyclist, the cyclist loses! A car cresting a hill at 80-100km/hour and finding 20 cyclists riding in a bunch and taking up the lane may not physically be able to stop before hitting people. Refusing to move into a single line and let cars go by is one sign of the 'sense of entitlement' that creates conflict. Who's right? Should cyclists be expected to move over? I'm not sure if it matters if it means that the cyclist is 'dead right'!
- realize that sidewalks are meant for pedestrians and sidewalk cycling is for pre-schoolers and very young children (under the age of 9 or10…) - if you qualify, feel free to use the sidewalk otherwise your bike belongs on the road!
- Cycle as if your 6 year old is watching you – all the time!
It may be someone else’s child watching… and copying… Much as it would be easier if this was not the case, as adult riders we are constantly modeling cycling behaviour that will be emulated by others – including our own kids… are we teaching them ways that will help them make good choices? Or is what we are showing them going to put them at risk?
What else will it take to resolve this? There is more than individuals involved in this – cycling groups, safety groups, governments, police and more…
On a group and society level we need:
1. A willingness to listen to the concerns of the other groups – and listen to understand rather than just to gather ammunition for rebuttal and attack.
2. A commitment on the part of governments and other interest groups to take steps to minimize the risks and maximize the support for safe practices – on the part of all
3. Increased education and awareness for all involved – teaching road safety and respect for others
4. Ways to engage those who don’t believe the rules should apply to them to see the value in improving their safety practices – if only for the sake of the kids who watch, see and copy.
5. A decrease in that sense of personal and group entitlement and an increase in the willingness to value others and their needs – a change in mindset that results in an internal level of engagement that prompts people to look out for others because they believe it’s the right thing to do rather than because someone is enforcing it (external motivation)
Conflict Resolution Workout:
1. How frequently do you find yourself making choices that you would have to justify to your children in terms of ‘don’t do this… only adults can do this…’? – This is a chance to be brutally honest with yourself!
2. What stories do you tell yourself about the 'others' on the road (either cyclists or drivers)? What level of self-justification and rationalization is at play in those stories? (honestly...)
3. What one action could you take that would make others safer today?
4. What concrete action will you commit to on a regular basis to build the habit of safety for you and others into your life?
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.
I listened to Goldhawk Live on Rogers Cable last night (http://www.rogerstv.com/option.asp?rid=16&lid=12&sid=266 ) where representatives of different groups and different points of view spent the better part of an hour discussing the challenges faced by all of us in terms of ensuring that all are able to get where they need to go in safety.
I lived beside a 80kmph highway for more than 20 years and as a cyclist going for a bike ride, particularly with my kids, it was often an unnerving experience. It's hard to ride on rough gravel shoulders. Big trucks and cars spew up dust, gravel and noise not to mention the wind they create has a tendency to throw you sideways and off-balance. That 6-10” strip of asphalt on the shoulder side of the yellow line does not provide much space for a bike and there is certainly no protection for anyone who is foolhardy enough to try to ride there. So the gravel was a safer albeit rougher option – and you learned to ride defensively or pay the price.
I have been cycling seriously since 1967 on the highways of rural eastern Ontario and through the city streets of Ottawa. I have my fair share of horror stories about close calls caused by my own poor choices, indifferent pedestrians, oblivious drivers, huge potholes, mechanical failures and more.
The current debate seems to stem from different perspectives about who is entitled to use the road, and who gets priority – and who should give way for whom. In many ways the current debates are very representative of our way of approaching the use of other common resources such as the environment, food, water and more.
The mindset that believes that MY needs, wants and priorities are most important and that those of others need to take a back seat to mine is an arrogant and problematic way of looking at the world. When I see drivers cut cyclists off, or I see cyclists going the wrong way up one way streets or running red lights I see this arrogant and indifferent mindset that contributes to the ongoing conflict over this issue.
In places like Holland where cycling is a mainstream mode of transportation, cyclists have access to cycle-only routes where cars are forbidden. There is a different level of resources available to cyclists than that found in North America. Of course the whole country is about the same size as one of our smaller provinces. Is this a viable option in a country the size of Canada? It would be a costly and difficult proposition and not necessarily the only possible solution. We need to find ways that work for us as Canadians - given our geography, weather patterns and culture. Finding that solution may take some time but as gas prices continue to rise and environmental consciousness increases, cycling is becoming an increasingly viable option for many.
What can an individual do?
As driver’s we have an obligation to be aware of the vulnerability of other users of the roads – cyclists and pedestrians as well as other motorized vehicles. Specifically:
- Take a quick look in the outside rear view mirror before opening the door when you’re parked (getting ‘doored’ hurts!).
- Give cyclists space both on city streets and on the highways
– the suction created by vehicles can throw a cyclist off balance (especially when it comes from a truck)
- Realize that a bike can’t hit big potholes and stay upright – so swerving is more than likely – it’s a given… and it may happen quickly so give them room
- Anticipate that cyclists will be turning at intersections and avoid crowding them
- Realize that the more cyclists we have on the road, the fewer cars there are and the less congestion there will be for you, the motorists!
As cyclists we need to understand that we have an obligation to share the road as well – and to cycle defensively. The most effective way I know to do that is to be as predictable and courteous as possible:
- stop for stop signs and red lights,
- cycle the same way you would drive – go the right way on one way roads, watch and only pass when it's safe especially in heavy traffic situations
- recall the rules of physics (Force = mass x acceleration). If a car hits a cyclist, the cyclist loses! A car cresting a hill at 80-100km/hour and finding 20 cyclists riding in a bunch and taking up the lane may not physically be able to stop before hitting people. Refusing to move into a single line and let cars go by is one sign of the 'sense of entitlement' that creates conflict. Who's right? Should cyclists be expected to move over? I'm not sure if it matters if it means that the cyclist is 'dead right'!
- realize that sidewalks are meant for pedestrians and sidewalk cycling is for pre-schoolers and very young children (under the age of 9 or10…) - if you qualify, feel free to use the sidewalk otherwise your bike belongs on the road!
- Cycle as if your 6 year old is watching you – all the time!
It may be someone else’s child watching… and copying… Much as it would be easier if this was not the case, as adult riders we are constantly modeling cycling behaviour that will be emulated by others – including our own kids… are we teaching them ways that will help them make good choices? Or is what we are showing them going to put them at risk?
What else will it take to resolve this? There is more than individuals involved in this – cycling groups, safety groups, governments, police and more…
On a group and society level we need:
1. A willingness to listen to the concerns of the other groups – and listen to understand rather than just to gather ammunition for rebuttal and attack.
2. A commitment on the part of governments and other interest groups to take steps to minimize the risks and maximize the support for safe practices – on the part of all
3. Increased education and awareness for all involved – teaching road safety and respect for others
4. Ways to engage those who don’t believe the rules should apply to them to see the value in improving their safety practices – if only for the sake of the kids who watch, see and copy.
5. A decrease in that sense of personal and group entitlement and an increase in the willingness to value others and their needs – a change in mindset that results in an internal level of engagement that prompts people to look out for others because they believe it’s the right thing to do rather than because someone is enforcing it (external motivation)
Conflict Resolution Workout:
1. How frequently do you find yourself making choices that you would have to justify to your children in terms of ‘don’t do this… only adults can do this…’? – This is a chance to be brutally honest with yourself!
2. What stories do you tell yourself about the 'others' on the road (either cyclists or drivers)? What level of self-justification and rationalization is at play in those stories? (honestly...)
3. What one action could you take that would make others safer today?
4. What concrete action will you commit to on a regular basis to build the habit of safety for you and others into your life?
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, 14 May 2010
Bill 168 - Another Tool to Stop Workplace Bullying, Harassment and Violence
Bill 168 is coming into force on June 15, 2010 in Ontario. What difference will it make? How will it affect you if you are an employer in Ontario, Canada? What impact will it have if you are an employee?
Bill 168 is following a trend for workplaces in Canada. There is increasing recognition that conflict, harassment and workplace violence are bad for business. Unhappy, stressed, tense and fearful employees are not as productive as they could be as they are busy trying to cope with whatever is causing them problems.
As a mediator who has worked in the field of harassment, discrimination and conflict management since 1996 I have watched an interesting transition in priorities in Canadian workplaces. Employers are much more aware these days of the underlying costs of conflict, harassment and workplace violence in their workplaces. The dollar costs of conducting investigations into formal complaints can be staggering. In my experience employers can expect to pay anywhere from $50,000.00 to $300,000.00 and up to deal with harassment and workplace violence situations. These figures are prohibitive for any employer but particularly so for small businesses.
The 1980 Supreme Court of Canada ruling on the Bonnie Robichaud case in 1980 determined that employers in Canada had a legal liability to provide a workplace free of harassment for their employees irrespective of whether they were aware of the situation or not. The shock wave this caused in the employment world triggered the development of conflict management and harassment policies in many organizations to bring them into compliance with the new era. This recognition of the cost of harassment was focused primarily on sexual harassment. The field has evolved greatly since 1980 to where policies in 2010 typically cover a range of actions and behaviour that are considered inappropriate. Sexual and personal harassment as well as abuse of authority provisions provide employees with a much broader level of protection than what was offered in the 80’s.
Bill 168 offers protections to the employees of Ontario that have not been written into legislation in the past. This puts a responsibility on employers and managers to educate themselves not only on the provisions of the legislation but also on how to work within it on a day to day operational basis. How can you ensure that your workplace is compliant not only with the letter of the law but also with the spirit of the law? The letter of the law is clearly spelled out on the Ministry of Labour website (www.mol.on.ca). It is much more of a challenge to create an organizational culture based on safety, respect, tolerance and understanding particularly in our increasingly diverse workplaces.
It is critical that managers, supervisors and employees are offered support by their employers to ensure that they have both the substantive knowledge of the requirements and the skills in conflict management and leadership that will support them to work with the employer to create the healthy workplaces that Bill 168 is trying to create.
Toxic workplaces cost money. In our experience they are less productive, have higher turnover rates, higher frequencies of absenteeism, grievances, complaints and disengaged employees. This is a recipe for putting a business or organization into trouble. It’s like having an abscessed tooth – the discomfort and pain makes it tough to focus on anything else. If the disproportionate amounts of energy, time and focus expended on trying to survive a toxic environment were redirected to getting the job done, the productivity levels would be stunning.
Managers and supervisors have a critical leadership role to play in creating these healthy workplaces. What steps can help?
1. Clear expectations regarding what constitutes acceptable behaviour,
2. Rewarding the desired behaviour and logical and reasonable consequences for transgressors,
3. Effective informal conflict management systems that help to prevent situations from escalating
4. Accountability from the employer and management with respect to learning the real nature of their workplaces (not what they ‘think’ is happening)
5. A willingness to talk about subjects that in the past have been considered less important than concrete task focused conversations – human interactions, organizational culture and workplace atmosphere
6. A solid commitment (with the teeth to back it up) that employees have the right to bring problems to the attention of management without fear of retribution either from peers or from management.
The fear of repercussions is one of the most critical issues that is raised time and time again in the organizations with which we work. When we come into an organization to do a Workplace Assessment as part of a Partnered Workplace Renewal Process™ employees are typically fearful and reluctant to engage and in some cases afraid even to talk to us. Why? Because they have no trust in management or their co-workers that their participation will not lead to some type of formal or informal payback and that what they tell us will somehow be found out by their employer or manager.
Until this is addressed in a credible and concrete fashion, very few will take the risk and those that do are typically those who see themselves on the way out the door anyhow – either due to retirement or because they have dusted off their c.v. and are exercising their right to vote with their feet and move on.
This fear of repercussions can also create a climate of silence. Not every employee who is subjected to harassment or workplace violence files a complaint – many are too afraid to do so. But much like children being bullied at schools the warning signs are there for those perceptive enough to see them. When this is an issue it is often impossible for the situation to be addressed by those inside the organization and outside help is needed. Employees need to have recourse to help they can trust and who is perceived to be at arms length from management and the employer.
Even then it can be difficult to build credibility with employees as the fear factor can be significant. On the other hand there is typically a strong desire to see things change that is warring with the fear of repercussions for getting involved in trying to make things better. The way to build credibility is different in every situation but there are some common steps that can help.
1. Be open and transparent about what you can do – and what you can’t do and live up to what you promise.
2. Don’t make promises you either can’t or won’t keep – broken promises are a fast ticket to cynicism and skepticism.
3. Make a business case to senior management for ensuring and protecting employees’ ability to participate without repercussions either from supervisors or managers or from co-workers.
4. Enlist a credible and very senior person within the organization to act as a recourse person should repercussions happen (or the employee feels that there are repercussions happening).
5. Take complaints seriously and take action to address concerns raised.
6. Ensure that supervisors and managers understand the ‘No repercussions’ policy and adhere to it.
7. Work with the group to discuss the changes that are needed to create a respectful and safe workplace. Engage participation by being open, transparent and accountable – particularly if you are at a senior level within the organization.
8. Create an accountability framework that is focused on constructive mechanisms to address issues rather than a blame focused punitive approach to problems.
9. Model the behaviour you want to see others use. Set expectations for respectful interactions and reward the behaviour you want to see.
10. Ensure that the operational reality and the articulated values of the organization are congruent, aligned and actually being implemented. In order for this to happen staff at all levels need to understand and buy into the organizational values being espoused by the employer and senior management groups.
11. Believe in the value of a healthy and safe working environment rather than complying with the legislation solely because it is the law.
Bill 168 is a piece of legislation that has the potential to help protect workers in Ontario. However it is also likely to be seen by some as an unnecessary burden that is just one more example of legislators trying to run people's lives. In our experience organizations that invest in creating healthy working environments as a core organizational value fundamental to the organizational culture are more productive, more able to adapt to changing economic environments and more successful overall. They make more money for shareholders and owners in the case of businesses. As a result, they tend to create more stable jobs for for their employees and naive as it sounds - everyone wins.
The Conflict Resolution Workout
We invite you to objectively assess the state of your organization or workplace:
1. On a 0-10 scale what rating would you give it if 0 = Toxic and 10 = Healthy?
2. Using that same 0-10 scale, how would you rate relationships between managers and employees? Between employees? Between the union(s) and management? Between other groups within your specific organization?
3. What level of resistance is there to making positive changes to the organizational culture? Where is that resistance coming from? What might be behind it?
4. What is one action that you could take tomorrow that would make your workplace a better place to work?
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.
Bill 168 is following a trend for workplaces in Canada. There is increasing recognition that conflict, harassment and workplace violence are bad for business. Unhappy, stressed, tense and fearful employees are not as productive as they could be as they are busy trying to cope with whatever is causing them problems.
As a mediator who has worked in the field of harassment, discrimination and conflict management since 1996 I have watched an interesting transition in priorities in Canadian workplaces. Employers are much more aware these days of the underlying costs of conflict, harassment and workplace violence in their workplaces. The dollar costs of conducting investigations into formal complaints can be staggering. In my experience employers can expect to pay anywhere from $50,000.00 to $300,000.00 and up to deal with harassment and workplace violence situations. These figures are prohibitive for any employer but particularly so for small businesses.
The 1980 Supreme Court of Canada ruling on the Bonnie Robichaud case in 1980 determined that employers in Canada had a legal liability to provide a workplace free of harassment for their employees irrespective of whether they were aware of the situation or not. The shock wave this caused in the employment world triggered the development of conflict management and harassment policies in many organizations to bring them into compliance with the new era. This recognition of the cost of harassment was focused primarily on sexual harassment. The field has evolved greatly since 1980 to where policies in 2010 typically cover a range of actions and behaviour that are considered inappropriate. Sexual and personal harassment as well as abuse of authority provisions provide employees with a much broader level of protection than what was offered in the 80’s.
Bill 168 offers protections to the employees of Ontario that have not been written into legislation in the past. This puts a responsibility on employers and managers to educate themselves not only on the provisions of the legislation but also on how to work within it on a day to day operational basis. How can you ensure that your workplace is compliant not only with the letter of the law but also with the spirit of the law? The letter of the law is clearly spelled out on the Ministry of Labour website (www.mol.on.ca). It is much more of a challenge to create an organizational culture based on safety, respect, tolerance and understanding particularly in our increasingly diverse workplaces.
It is critical that managers, supervisors and employees are offered support by their employers to ensure that they have both the substantive knowledge of the requirements and the skills in conflict management and leadership that will support them to work with the employer to create the healthy workplaces that Bill 168 is trying to create.
Toxic workplaces cost money. In our experience they are less productive, have higher turnover rates, higher frequencies of absenteeism, grievances, complaints and disengaged employees. This is a recipe for putting a business or organization into trouble. It’s like having an abscessed tooth – the discomfort and pain makes it tough to focus on anything else. If the disproportionate amounts of energy, time and focus expended on trying to survive a toxic environment were redirected to getting the job done, the productivity levels would be stunning.
Managers and supervisors have a critical leadership role to play in creating these healthy workplaces. What steps can help?
1. Clear expectations regarding what constitutes acceptable behaviour,
2. Rewarding the desired behaviour and logical and reasonable consequences for transgressors,
3. Effective informal conflict management systems that help to prevent situations from escalating
4. Accountability from the employer and management with respect to learning the real nature of their workplaces (not what they ‘think’ is happening)
5. A willingness to talk about subjects that in the past have been considered less important than concrete task focused conversations – human interactions, organizational culture and workplace atmosphere
6. A solid commitment (with the teeth to back it up) that employees have the right to bring problems to the attention of management without fear of retribution either from peers or from management.
The fear of repercussions is one of the most critical issues that is raised time and time again in the organizations with which we work. When we come into an organization to do a Workplace Assessment as part of a Partnered Workplace Renewal Process™ employees are typically fearful and reluctant to engage and in some cases afraid even to talk to us. Why? Because they have no trust in management or their co-workers that their participation will not lead to some type of formal or informal payback and that what they tell us will somehow be found out by their employer or manager.
Until this is addressed in a credible and concrete fashion, very few will take the risk and those that do are typically those who see themselves on the way out the door anyhow – either due to retirement or because they have dusted off their c.v. and are exercising their right to vote with their feet and move on.
This fear of repercussions can also create a climate of silence. Not every employee who is subjected to harassment or workplace violence files a complaint – many are too afraid to do so. But much like children being bullied at schools the warning signs are there for those perceptive enough to see them. When this is an issue it is often impossible for the situation to be addressed by those inside the organization and outside help is needed. Employees need to have recourse to help they can trust and who is perceived to be at arms length from management and the employer.
Even then it can be difficult to build credibility with employees as the fear factor can be significant. On the other hand there is typically a strong desire to see things change that is warring with the fear of repercussions for getting involved in trying to make things better. The way to build credibility is different in every situation but there are some common steps that can help.
1. Be open and transparent about what you can do – and what you can’t do and live up to what you promise.
2. Don’t make promises you either can’t or won’t keep – broken promises are a fast ticket to cynicism and skepticism.
3. Make a business case to senior management for ensuring and protecting employees’ ability to participate without repercussions either from supervisors or managers or from co-workers.
4. Enlist a credible and very senior person within the organization to act as a recourse person should repercussions happen (or the employee feels that there are repercussions happening).
5. Take complaints seriously and take action to address concerns raised.
6. Ensure that supervisors and managers understand the ‘No repercussions’ policy and adhere to it.
7. Work with the group to discuss the changes that are needed to create a respectful and safe workplace. Engage participation by being open, transparent and accountable – particularly if you are at a senior level within the organization.
8. Create an accountability framework that is focused on constructive mechanisms to address issues rather than a blame focused punitive approach to problems.
9. Model the behaviour you want to see others use. Set expectations for respectful interactions and reward the behaviour you want to see.
10. Ensure that the operational reality and the articulated values of the organization are congruent, aligned and actually being implemented. In order for this to happen staff at all levels need to understand and buy into the organizational values being espoused by the employer and senior management groups.
11. Believe in the value of a healthy and safe working environment rather than complying with the legislation solely because it is the law.
Bill 168 is a piece of legislation that has the potential to help protect workers in Ontario. However it is also likely to be seen by some as an unnecessary burden that is just one more example of legislators trying to run people's lives. In our experience organizations that invest in creating healthy working environments as a core organizational value fundamental to the organizational culture are more productive, more able to adapt to changing economic environments and more successful overall. They make more money for shareholders and owners in the case of businesses. As a result, they tend to create more stable jobs for for their employees and naive as it sounds - everyone wins.
The Conflict Resolution Workout
We invite you to objectively assess the state of your organization or workplace:
1. On a 0-10 scale what rating would you give it if 0 = Toxic and 10 = Healthy?
2. Using that same 0-10 scale, how would you rate relationships between managers and employees? Between employees? Between the union(s) and management? Between other groups within your specific organization?
3. What level of resistance is there to making positive changes to the organizational culture? Where is that resistance coming from? What might be behind it?
4. What is one action that you could take tomorrow that would make your workplace a better place to work?
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.
Monday, 10 May 2010
Intergenerational Conflicts - Surviving the Inevitable Fights between Parents and Teens
Have you ever noticed that parenting goes in spurts? When things are good parenting is a fun and rewarding experience that is unparalleled in terms of the paybacks you receive from your child or teen – the hugs, the gifts of big smiles and gratitude, the assertions that “You’re the best Mom (or dad) or the simple ‘Thanks Mom” or “Thanks, Dad”. Then there are the other times when parenting becomes a major challenge – things are not going well and something needs to be done. Whether it’s a crisis and your child needs help or a discipline problem that needs to be addressed – as a parent you know you have to step in and take action.
The taking action part is often where the challenge lies – what to say, how to say it, what to do and when to stop. How to make the point we need to make, how to get the message across and how to help make the situation better – without alienating the person one is trying to help. This becomes an even greater challenge when that child hits their teen years.
Think back to when you were a teenager (however far back it is for you). I recall incredible frustration with my parents who were desperately struggling to get through to this somewhat rebellious and definitely volatile person who I had become when I hit about 12. Like every other teenager, I was trying to figure out who I was and what I wanted – but I certainly knew what I didn’t want and having my parents step in and tell me what I could do and couldn’t do certainly fit in the ‘what I don’t want’ category. And so we spent a number of years frustrating each other to the nth degree. I recall a lot of yelling, door slamming and stomping out - mostly on my part. I remember my mother virtually in tears as one of our yelling matches worked its way towards the seemingly inevitable conclusion – me stomping out the door screaming “I’m leaving… It’s not fair… you never loved me.. you don’t care what happens to me…etc. etc. etc.” I am sure many times I sounded like a broken record on an endless loop. I was no angel and I certainly caused more than my fair share of grief for my parents. On one occasion I remember my mother being very angry at me for something I either had (or hadn’t) done and I believed I was in deep trouble. Yet all she said to me was the inevitable Parent’s Curse – “I hope someday you have a kid just like you!!!!” At the time I recall thinking – ‘that’s it? that’s all that’s going to happen? wow –that was easy’. And then I had kids.
I have 4 – now all in varying stages of sorting out their lives and careers as young adults – all fun, creative, interesting and smart. They have their own opinions and we have great conversations about life, the world and their views on it all. But I also remember being in that same position with my kids that my parents were in with me. – that desperate struggle to know what to do and how to do it. There is no ‘immediate feedback’ system that tells you if you’re on the right path. In many cases it takes many years before we can see whether our choices were the right ones or if we missed something. No child arrives with an operations manual or a set of instructions and every kid is different – what worked with one typically had no effect on another. So it was a continuous ongoing learning curve and frequently still is.
But in looking back now that my youngest is well into his 20’s and my oldest is 30 I realized that we have survived. Are there things I wish I had done differently? Absolutely. Did I / we get it right? Not always. Did we do ok? I believe so.
I recall reading somewhere that the best baseball players in the world bat 400. What does that mean? It means they miss 6 times out of 10. It means that as a parent I don’t need to be perfect to do well – but I do need to ensure that my batting average is as good as I can make it. The key strategy that worked for me was to think of my relationship with my kids as a bank account. The good times, the laughter, the fun and the love were the deposits. And the fights, the discipline, the times when I said the wrong thing or had the wrong reaction – they were the withdrawals.
The trick was not to lose sight of the balance – to ensure that the deposits outweighed the withdrawals. And to make sure that the withdrawals did not overwhelm the deposits by frequency or intensity. It meant sometimes putting the negative stuff on hold while we went out for lunch, went shopping, had friends over, played catch or whatever was important to that particular child. It did not mean being a pushover or conversely – a nag. It was somewhat like being in a dance and knowing when to lead and when to follow, when to step in and when to step back - when to rescue and when to let realistic consequences follow their natural course.
Sometimes having the courage NOT to rescue a child is the hardest – but also the best decision we can make for the long term. Will that child be forever scarred by failing a course, losing a friend or even spending a night sitting in a jail cell? Or will they learn a valuable lesson that will save them inevitable volumes of grief over the rest of their life? It’s tempting to be the hero – but it may be wiser to be the coach – offering support and a non-judgmental listening ear than to be the knight in shining armour with the white horse riding in to save the day. Ultimately the greatest challenge we own as parents, from my perspective, is to be able to make that choice wisely.
The Conflict Resolution Workout:
1. What is your bank balance in the relationship with each of your children (no matter what their ages)? Is that balance reasonably equitable for each child or is the balance significantly lower with one or more of your kids than with others?
2. What does the dance you are in with that child look like? If you were a fly on the wall watching the interaction between you and your child, would you want to have you as a parent?
3. What could make things better while still maintaining the goal of being an effective parent?
4. What one thing will you do today to improve the bank balance with each of your children (note – the choice for each child may be different)
5. Please post a comment on our blog and tell us how you’re doing.
6. Check out our website resource section – there is a bibliography listing books that you may find useful (we did) and articles and podcasts that may help.
We encourage you to find ways to enjoy your kids – the old adage that ‘they grow up so fast’ is true and they do move on (and move out…) leaving a sense of nostalgia for the days when they were young and possibly even a wish for the clock to roll back.
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.
The taking action part is often where the challenge lies – what to say, how to say it, what to do and when to stop. How to make the point we need to make, how to get the message across and how to help make the situation better – without alienating the person one is trying to help. This becomes an even greater challenge when that child hits their teen years.
Think back to when you were a teenager (however far back it is for you). I recall incredible frustration with my parents who were desperately struggling to get through to this somewhat rebellious and definitely volatile person who I had become when I hit about 12. Like every other teenager, I was trying to figure out who I was and what I wanted – but I certainly knew what I didn’t want and having my parents step in and tell me what I could do and couldn’t do certainly fit in the ‘what I don’t want’ category. And so we spent a number of years frustrating each other to the nth degree. I recall a lot of yelling, door slamming and stomping out - mostly on my part. I remember my mother virtually in tears as one of our yelling matches worked its way towards the seemingly inevitable conclusion – me stomping out the door screaming “I’m leaving… It’s not fair… you never loved me.. you don’t care what happens to me…etc. etc. etc.” I am sure many times I sounded like a broken record on an endless loop. I was no angel and I certainly caused more than my fair share of grief for my parents. On one occasion I remember my mother being very angry at me for something I either had (or hadn’t) done and I believed I was in deep trouble. Yet all she said to me was the inevitable Parent’s Curse – “I hope someday you have a kid just like you!!!!” At the time I recall thinking – ‘that’s it? that’s all that’s going to happen? wow –that was easy’. And then I had kids.
I have 4 – now all in varying stages of sorting out their lives and careers as young adults – all fun, creative, interesting and smart. They have their own opinions and we have great conversations about life, the world and their views on it all. But I also remember being in that same position with my kids that my parents were in with me. – that desperate struggle to know what to do and how to do it. There is no ‘immediate feedback’ system that tells you if you’re on the right path. In many cases it takes many years before we can see whether our choices were the right ones or if we missed something. No child arrives with an operations manual or a set of instructions and every kid is different – what worked with one typically had no effect on another. So it was a continuous ongoing learning curve and frequently still is.
But in looking back now that my youngest is well into his 20’s and my oldest is 30 I realized that we have survived. Are there things I wish I had done differently? Absolutely. Did I / we get it right? Not always. Did we do ok? I believe so.
I recall reading somewhere that the best baseball players in the world bat 400. What does that mean? It means they miss 6 times out of 10. It means that as a parent I don’t need to be perfect to do well – but I do need to ensure that my batting average is as good as I can make it. The key strategy that worked for me was to think of my relationship with my kids as a bank account. The good times, the laughter, the fun and the love were the deposits. And the fights, the discipline, the times when I said the wrong thing or had the wrong reaction – they were the withdrawals.
The trick was not to lose sight of the balance – to ensure that the deposits outweighed the withdrawals. And to make sure that the withdrawals did not overwhelm the deposits by frequency or intensity. It meant sometimes putting the negative stuff on hold while we went out for lunch, went shopping, had friends over, played catch or whatever was important to that particular child. It did not mean being a pushover or conversely – a nag. It was somewhat like being in a dance and knowing when to lead and when to follow, when to step in and when to step back - when to rescue and when to let realistic consequences follow their natural course.
Sometimes having the courage NOT to rescue a child is the hardest – but also the best decision we can make for the long term. Will that child be forever scarred by failing a course, losing a friend or even spending a night sitting in a jail cell? Or will they learn a valuable lesson that will save them inevitable volumes of grief over the rest of their life? It’s tempting to be the hero – but it may be wiser to be the coach – offering support and a non-judgmental listening ear than to be the knight in shining armour with the white horse riding in to save the day. Ultimately the greatest challenge we own as parents, from my perspective, is to be able to make that choice wisely.
The Conflict Resolution Workout:
1. What is your bank balance in the relationship with each of your children (no matter what their ages)? Is that balance reasonably equitable for each child or is the balance significantly lower with one or more of your kids than with others?
2. What does the dance you are in with that child look like? If you were a fly on the wall watching the interaction between you and your child, would you want to have you as a parent?
3. What could make things better while still maintaining the goal of being an effective parent?
4. What one thing will you do today to improve the bank balance with each of your children (note – the choice for each child may be different)
5. Please post a comment on our blog and tell us how you’re doing.
6. Check out our website resource section – there is a bibliography listing books that you may find useful (we did) and articles and podcasts that may help.
We encourage you to find ways to enjoy your kids – the old adage that ‘they grow up so fast’ is true and they do move on (and move out…) leaving a sense of nostalgia for the days when they were young and possibly even a wish for the clock to roll back.
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.
Wednesday, 17 December 2008
The Transit Strike In Ottawa ON – A Mediator’s Perspective
The Transit Strike In Ottawa – A Mediator’s Perspective
By Ruth Sirman, Workplace Conflict Expert, CanMediate International
Ottawa is scrambling to find ways to deal with a transit strike this week that has now created stress and disruption for tens of thousands of people – riders, drivers, company employees, municipal government and those on strike too…plus all those who are impacted by the change in routine this is evoking in the city – employers, business owners, kids, schools, entertainment venues, retail stores / malls and pretty much anyone who has a positive response to the pulse and respiration checks that indicate they are alive and vertical.
As a mediator who specializes in helping groups resolve tough intractable issues I have watched the evolution of this conflict for the past several weeks and it has followed very predictable pattern – little consolation for those who are struggling to deal with the collateral damage from the loss of transit service and those who are actively involved in the conflict. As it progresses and tempers flare it has the potential to get nasty. But how do we as human beings get ourselves into the weeds like this when we have a conflict?
Who’s right? And Who’s to Blame?
Like every other conflict that has erupted between humans throughout history, each group in this one has their story about what is going on, what led to the strike and how it should be resolved - based on their perspective of the situation. And as human beings we are very talented story tellers (even if we have never authored a book!) and inevitably we draft our story with the focus on how others have wronged us.
There is rarely any accountability for the role we might have played in the situation included in our stories – and we rarely paint ourselves as ‘the bad guy’. No, instead when we feel that something is unfair or that we have been mistreated, we have a powerful tendency to paint ourselves as the righteously screwed victim who was only doing the best that we could to deal with the rotten situation that someone else created and which THEY should fix – because after all it is THEIR fault and they are totally unreasonable and wrong.
And the more often we repeat our story, either to ourselves or to others, the more firmly it becomes entrenched as ‘the one and only true story’ – at least in our own minds. And typically as it gets told and retold (even to ourselves) the more it grows and gets embellished as we add more detail and more history to the growing tale. Interestingly enough, everyone in a conflict will be busy drafting and continually refining their story, looking for additional ammunition to justify the position they have taken.
And if we are really honest with ourselves about what we want out of the situation it would be that the other side would listen to our story, understand our hurt, frustration and anger, agree with us, tell us that we’re right and apologize for the horrible wrongs that they have perpetrated upon us…and promise never to do it again…
And what does the other group want? You guessed it – exactly the same thing - which leads us to a total impasse as everyone strives to protect themselves from being the first one to give in, the one to lose face in front of others and the side that is labeled as ‘the loser’. So we dig in and proclaim our story even louder and longer… and so do they.
Think of it as each group standing on a bar stool – hanging on tightly to their position while they shout their story to the world - a classic loggerhead ‘in your face’ conflict that just gets more intense the longer it is permitted to continue. The down side to our incredible bar stool stories we have created is that they leave us with little room to move and maneuver and they can quickly become a trap from which there is no easy way out without risking the devastation of seeing ourselves as having “lost” the fight. This makes it tough to resolve the problem because as long as I am firmly convinced that my story is the one and only RIGHT story – why would I waste my time listening to you? And as long as you are convinced that you own the one and only RIGHT story – why would you waste your time listening to me? And if this goes on long enough, we can actually start to believe our own fiction and buy our own invented reality.
And so who wins? No one. And who loses? Everyone – including those who have no direct connection to the issues at all. There is an old African proverb that says “When 2 elephants fight – it’s the grass that suffers the most!” – which certainly is the case in this situation.
So how do we help people get down off their bar stools?
Well it can be very tempting to invoke a power play that pushes people down or topples the bar stools – injunctions / back to work legislation / threats and coercion have been used many times to force people to give up the fight. But typically what happens here is that the minute they have the chance both sides will scramble back on to the bar stool and hang on tighter than ever.
Or we can wait it out until one group or another loses the will to fight. Have you ever watched Dr. Seus’ video “The Zaks” where they refused to budge for so long that the new highway had to be built around them?
Or we can dangle carrots at one or both parties to entice them to get down on their own – but carrots bread skepticism about the agenda of those dangling the carrots… and often lead to stoic resistance on the part of the targets.
Or we can work to get people ready to take at least the first baby steps towards climbing down on their own. This is by far the hardest solution – but also the one with the most potential to actually resolve the issue and bring closure that allows people to move on. It needs someone who has a reasonable level of credibility with all the parties, who can get their attention and help them to start to look at the situation more objectively. What is their story based on – facts or assumptions elevated to the level of fact but without any objective verification? Is there information that they don’t have that the other party might know? Are there questions they need answers to? Who can give them those answers? What is the real issue that needs to be resolved? (It is rarely the one that the parties are talking about.. that is likely a symptom of the real issue - but is not the fundamental underlying cause of the problem). What if they choose to stay trapped in their story and not resolve the problem? What if someone else in authority (boss, government, arbitrator) steps in and makes the decision for everyone – what will that look like?
But let’s get real folks! Nobody is going to give up their story if it means that the perception is that they lose and the other side wins… Collective bargaining is traditionally a pushing and shoving process in which both sides attempt to win ‘big’ by making the other side lose as much as possible. And it is traditionally based on compromise – people knowing that they will have to give up some things in order to gain others resulting in both sides offering less than they are willing to give and demanding more than they know they will get in order to create room to negotiate. But compromise does not solve problems when it is used in situations where the stakes are high – it typically creates short-term settlements that are often superficial and unsatisfactory for all concerned but are accepted as ‘the best we could do’.
So the challenge is how can we get all the parties working on the same problem? Because everyone owns some part of the resolution of this and none of us is as smart as all of us! The drivers, dispatchers, mechanics and administrative staff of OC Transpo know the reality of providing transit service in the city better than anyone – they DO it every day! And the city staff and municipal government know the reality of the budgets and commitments it takes to operate a city the size of Ottawa – they work with it every day. So how can we get out of this hole that we’re in?
1. Stop digging the deeper the hole the harder it is to get out of it!
2. Look at the long term implications for both the city and the union. Recognize that strikes hurt everyone and there will be negative impacts on both sides that will increase the longer it goes on. What if all those riders find that their alternative solutions work well and they get used to functioning without the transit system? Will they come back when the strike is over? What impact could that have?
3. Stop demonizing the other side and acknowledge that everyone owns part of the creation of this situation and everyone owns part of solving it
4. Change the mindset (just a LITTLE bit) and get curious – what don’t you know about the other party’s reality?
5. Start listening to each other and learning from each other (this may require some help from an experienced mediator / facilitator)
6. Recognize that there are 3 sides to every story – yours, mine and what really happened… Work to let go of ‘We own the one and only whole truth and we’re totally RIGHT – and recognize that there everyone’s perspective is valid to them – even if you don’t agree from it.
7. Look at it as a joint problem that needs all parties involved to solve it well – focus on “How can we deliver efficient cost-effective transit services while supporting our transit employees to have a good quality of life and a healthy working environment?”
8. Recognize that fighting and striking is the easy way out while committing to finding a resolution that works can be tough and difficult work – but it is the only way that things get fixed. It takes courage and guts to change directions and acknowledge there are other choices… Do the union and city leadership / negotiation teams have the courage? That remains to be seen!
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.
By Ruth Sirman, Workplace Conflict Expert, CanMediate International
Ottawa is scrambling to find ways to deal with a transit strike this week that has now created stress and disruption for tens of thousands of people – riders, drivers, company employees, municipal government and those on strike too…plus all those who are impacted by the change in routine this is evoking in the city – employers, business owners, kids, schools, entertainment venues, retail stores / malls and pretty much anyone who has a positive response to the pulse and respiration checks that indicate they are alive and vertical.
As a mediator who specializes in helping groups resolve tough intractable issues I have watched the evolution of this conflict for the past several weeks and it has followed very predictable pattern – little consolation for those who are struggling to deal with the collateral damage from the loss of transit service and those who are actively involved in the conflict. As it progresses and tempers flare it has the potential to get nasty. But how do we as human beings get ourselves into the weeds like this when we have a conflict?
Who’s right? And Who’s to Blame?
Like every other conflict that has erupted between humans throughout history, each group in this one has their story about what is going on, what led to the strike and how it should be resolved - based on their perspective of the situation. And as human beings we are very talented story tellers (even if we have never authored a book!) and inevitably we draft our story with the focus on how others have wronged us.
There is rarely any accountability for the role we might have played in the situation included in our stories – and we rarely paint ourselves as ‘the bad guy’. No, instead when we feel that something is unfair or that we have been mistreated, we have a powerful tendency to paint ourselves as the righteously screwed victim who was only doing the best that we could to deal with the rotten situation that someone else created and which THEY should fix – because after all it is THEIR fault and they are totally unreasonable and wrong.
And the more often we repeat our story, either to ourselves or to others, the more firmly it becomes entrenched as ‘the one and only true story’ – at least in our own minds. And typically as it gets told and retold (even to ourselves) the more it grows and gets embellished as we add more detail and more history to the growing tale. Interestingly enough, everyone in a conflict will be busy drafting and continually refining their story, looking for additional ammunition to justify the position they have taken.
And if we are really honest with ourselves about what we want out of the situation it would be that the other side would listen to our story, understand our hurt, frustration and anger, agree with us, tell us that we’re right and apologize for the horrible wrongs that they have perpetrated upon us…and promise never to do it again…
And what does the other group want? You guessed it – exactly the same thing - which leads us to a total impasse as everyone strives to protect themselves from being the first one to give in, the one to lose face in front of others and the side that is labeled as ‘the loser’. So we dig in and proclaim our story even louder and longer… and so do they.
Think of it as each group standing on a bar stool – hanging on tightly to their position while they shout their story to the world - a classic loggerhead ‘in your face’ conflict that just gets more intense the longer it is permitted to continue. The down side to our incredible bar stool stories we have created is that they leave us with little room to move and maneuver and they can quickly become a trap from which there is no easy way out without risking the devastation of seeing ourselves as having “lost” the fight. This makes it tough to resolve the problem because as long as I am firmly convinced that my story is the one and only RIGHT story – why would I waste my time listening to you? And as long as you are convinced that you own the one and only RIGHT story – why would you waste your time listening to me? And if this goes on long enough, we can actually start to believe our own fiction and buy our own invented reality.
And so who wins? No one. And who loses? Everyone – including those who have no direct connection to the issues at all. There is an old African proverb that says “When 2 elephants fight – it’s the grass that suffers the most!” – which certainly is the case in this situation.
So how do we help people get down off their bar stools?
Well it can be very tempting to invoke a power play that pushes people down or topples the bar stools – injunctions / back to work legislation / threats and coercion have been used many times to force people to give up the fight. But typically what happens here is that the minute they have the chance both sides will scramble back on to the bar stool and hang on tighter than ever.
Or we can wait it out until one group or another loses the will to fight. Have you ever watched Dr. Seus’ video “The Zaks” where they refused to budge for so long that the new highway had to be built around them?
Or we can dangle carrots at one or both parties to entice them to get down on their own – but carrots bread skepticism about the agenda of those dangling the carrots… and often lead to stoic resistance on the part of the targets.
Or we can work to get people ready to take at least the first baby steps towards climbing down on their own. This is by far the hardest solution – but also the one with the most potential to actually resolve the issue and bring closure that allows people to move on. It needs someone who has a reasonable level of credibility with all the parties, who can get their attention and help them to start to look at the situation more objectively. What is their story based on – facts or assumptions elevated to the level of fact but without any objective verification? Is there information that they don’t have that the other party might know? Are there questions they need answers to? Who can give them those answers? What is the real issue that needs to be resolved? (It is rarely the one that the parties are talking about.. that is likely a symptom of the real issue - but is not the fundamental underlying cause of the problem). What if they choose to stay trapped in their story and not resolve the problem? What if someone else in authority (boss, government, arbitrator) steps in and makes the decision for everyone – what will that look like?
But let’s get real folks! Nobody is going to give up their story if it means that the perception is that they lose and the other side wins… Collective bargaining is traditionally a pushing and shoving process in which both sides attempt to win ‘big’ by making the other side lose as much as possible. And it is traditionally based on compromise – people knowing that they will have to give up some things in order to gain others resulting in both sides offering less than they are willing to give and demanding more than they know they will get in order to create room to negotiate. But compromise does not solve problems when it is used in situations where the stakes are high – it typically creates short-term settlements that are often superficial and unsatisfactory for all concerned but are accepted as ‘the best we could do’.
So the challenge is how can we get all the parties working on the same problem? Because everyone owns some part of the resolution of this and none of us is as smart as all of us! The drivers, dispatchers, mechanics and administrative staff of OC Transpo know the reality of providing transit service in the city better than anyone – they DO it every day! And the city staff and municipal government know the reality of the budgets and commitments it takes to operate a city the size of Ottawa – they work with it every day. So how can we get out of this hole that we’re in?
1. Stop digging the deeper the hole the harder it is to get out of it!
2. Look at the long term implications for both the city and the union. Recognize that strikes hurt everyone and there will be negative impacts on both sides that will increase the longer it goes on. What if all those riders find that their alternative solutions work well and they get used to functioning without the transit system? Will they come back when the strike is over? What impact could that have?
3. Stop demonizing the other side and acknowledge that everyone owns part of the creation of this situation and everyone owns part of solving it
4. Change the mindset (just a LITTLE bit) and get curious – what don’t you know about the other party’s reality?
5. Start listening to each other and learning from each other (this may require some help from an experienced mediator / facilitator)
6. Recognize that there are 3 sides to every story – yours, mine and what really happened… Work to let go of ‘We own the one and only whole truth and we’re totally RIGHT – and recognize that there everyone’s perspective is valid to them – even if you don’t agree from it.
7. Look at it as a joint problem that needs all parties involved to solve it well – focus on “How can we deliver efficient cost-effective transit services while supporting our transit employees to have a good quality of life and a healthy working environment?”
8. Recognize that fighting and striking is the easy way out while committing to finding a resolution that works can be tough and difficult work – but it is the only way that things get fixed. It takes courage and guts to change directions and acknowledge there are other choices… Do the union and city leadership / negotiation teams have the courage? That remains to be seen!
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.
Wednesday, 24 September 2008
Discover Your RQ – Your Relationship and Resolution Quotient™
I had a conversation with my grandmother many years ago about a conflict in which I found myself and how the other person in the conflict had caused me so much grief and stress. It was just not fair!! My grandmother’s response has stuck with me over the years. She said “Ruth, I have been a part of many situations over the course of my life (she was 95 at the time) – and no matter what the situation was, or who was involved, there is one thing that is always the same. I bring ME to every situation in which I am involved…and so I own part of everything that happens to me.”
Her point was well taken. As human beings, we have a default blueprint for how we deal with conflict and difficult situations that we have developed over the course of our lifetime. This blueprint often operates in the background and we may be totally unaware of how it is impacting our decisions and actions unless we choose to delve into what the blueprint is and what influence it is having in our lives. How do we do that?
CanMediate International is offering a course called Discover Your RQ in Ottawa, ON Canada on Oct 7 as a fundraiser for the United Way / Centraide Ottawa. We have waived the tuition fees and will collect donations to the United Way / Centraide instead. For more information check out our website at www.canmediate.com or contact us at 613-256-3852.
Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Take a few moments and consider the following questions:
1. When you encounter a difficult situation or a conflict, what is your typical response?
2. How does this response change if you change the context (ie workplace v.s. home?)?
3. What works about this approach?
4. What does not work about this approach? (what could you do better?)
5. Who do you know in your family who tends to use a similar approach to conflict?
6. What areas of managing conflict could you improve in terms of your skills and approach?
7. How will you improve your skill levels and approach?
8. Create a plan of 3 actions that you will take within the next 7 days. Write them down and share them with someone who can help you achieve your goals.
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 www.canmediate.com
Her point was well taken. As human beings, we have a default blueprint for how we deal with conflict and difficult situations that we have developed over the course of our lifetime. This blueprint often operates in the background and we may be totally unaware of how it is impacting our decisions and actions unless we choose to delve into what the blueprint is and what influence it is having in our lives. How do we do that?
CanMediate International is offering a course called Discover Your RQ in Ottawa, ON Canada on Oct 7 as a fundraiser for the United Way / Centraide Ottawa. We have waived the tuition fees and will collect donations to the United Way / Centraide instead. For more information check out our website at www.canmediate.com or contact us at 613-256-3852.
Conflict Resolution Workout!!
Take a few moments and consider the following questions:
1. When you encounter a difficult situation or a conflict, what is your typical response?
2. How does this response change if you change the context (ie workplace v.s. home?)?
3. What works about this approach?
4. What does not work about this approach? (what could you do better?)
5. Who do you know in your family who tends to use a similar approach to conflict?
6. What areas of managing conflict could you improve in terms of your skills and approach?
7. How will you improve your skill levels and approach?
8. Create a plan of 3 actions that you will take within the next 7 days. Write them down and share them with someone who can help you achieve your goals.
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 www.canmediate.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
