When coaching or training people I frequently find that people are anxious over things that have not yet happened. These anxieties would be eased if people stayed with what is rather than what could happen. For example, the world markets are currently struggling due to the financial crisis in the USA. This situation could apparently lead us into a “bear” situation, that is a situation where markets fall and remain there for the foreseeable future. So, what do most people do – yes, worry. How does that help? They lose sleep at night, become agitated and snappy and decision-making becomes more difficult due to wariness let alone sleepiness. It is different if we consider the appropriate actions we could take and then take them. Worrying never actually got anyone anywhere, except worn out! Staying here and now is one way to avoid worrying.
Eastern philosophies have a lot to teach us about staying present. Meditation teaches us to remain in the moment, ignoring our thoughts which tend to keep us in our heads and out of our bodies. When we are in tune with our selves we are more likely to be in tune with others and with what needs to be done.
Becoming agitated and worried tends serves to move us more into our heads and away from a true sense of ourselves. When we stay with what is, stay connected with others and with our selves then we are more likely to be rested and flexible if / when difficulties do arise. Very often most of the things we have been worrying about don’t happen and yet we may have spent hours being uptight about it, which also wears us out.
Some years ago I read a story about the “precious present” and about a young man who discovered the meaning and the art of being in the present. Being in the present is precious as it holds so much more than the anxiety route. Having goals is great but we can only plan so far. If we hold on too tightly to these goals we can prevent flexibility let alone trust. But how to trust and who to trust? Trust in ourselves is the starting point. Many of us don’t trust. We don’t trust our bodies and what they tell us as we often try to over-ride the information. One way we do this is to rush. Rushing and hurrying up prevents us from getting in touch with now. What do I feel now, what do I think now, what action will I take now? If I don’t get in touch with now how will I know what action I need to take?
Many people are afraid to get in touch with now as they may need to move on from a situation they have been denying for too long. Being in the now is scary for many people as it means saying hello to themselves. It also means really listening to other people and experiencing them in the now, rather than what we project on to them. If I am now I really have to see you and learn who you are, rather than who I want you to be. I have to put all my prejudices and assumptions about others down and be prepared to experience anew. Berne said that “In order to say Hello, you first get rid of all the trash that has accumulated in your head ever since you came home from the maternity ward……..” ( Berne E. 1984, What Do You Say After You Say Hello, p4). This fits with Scott Peck’s theories on communities and relationships –
• Pseudocommunity is when we are conflict avoiding and people can get away with generalisations, and individuals tend to keep their feelings to themselves.
• Chaos is when people attempt to heal or convert others. There is often a vying for leadership. People attempt to Rescue, Persecute of become Victims and this reinforces their view of the world and the situation becomes chaotic.The motivation is to win, as this is about survival for whose norm will prevail. The arguments and struggle go nowhere as participants are not actually listening to each other.
• Emptiness. Other than moving out of the chaos into organisation, the other way to go is through what Peck call emptiness. This is the hardest part and was the point of the chaos stage, which was to resist being here. This is about moving into effective communication and in order to do so then people need to put down their defences. This, for Scott Peck means emptying ourselves of:
o Expectations and preconceptions
o Prejudices, Ideology, Theology and Solutions
o The Need to Heal, Convert, Fix, or Solve
o The Need to Control
• Community. When in this stage the group is quieter and more peaceful. People listen to each other, solve problems and resolve conflicts. Part of the task may be to decide whether to continue or not. Some groups may go back to previous stages and if this occurs it may be easier for some groups to go into authoritarian processes and forget about having a fun in the relationships. In this process they put task and productivity over their individual and the group's development. Whilst this stage offers more happiness it can also be more uncomfortable as conflicts are out in the open, but there is also the willingness to resolve differences. (Scott Peck, 1987, A Different Drum)
So, in their different ways both Berne and Peck both argue for staying in the present. The western culture tends to give recognition to thinking as opposed to feeling and to staying in touch with the now. If we want a more peaceful and healthy life let’s make sure that East meets West and we find ways to say Hello to ourselves and others in the now.
Tuesday, 4 September 2007
Wednesday, 8 August 2007
Being Assertive
Being Assertive
So many times when coaching individuals, or working in teams, people tell me that they cannot be OK with others when others do things that are wrong or when the other person or people treat them as not OK. However, if we treat others as if they are not OK then this is likely to just escalate the difficulty. This happens the world over from the micro to the macro – and where does it get us? It gets us into conflict on a local to an international scale.
Staying OK/OK with ourselves and others means believing that we all have a right to be in the world, it is what we do with those rights that is important.
Transactional Analysis is a method to improve communication and as such it is important to treat others well, even when they are not being so with us. When this occurs we can “cross the transaction”, namely invite them to respond to us in an OK/OK way. For example, I was giving facilitating what the organisation called a “masterclass” on motivation when a participant said very aggressively that I had not mentioned money as a motivator. At this point I had choices – I could become aggressive and respond accordingly, I could become compliant and feel put down, or I could cross his transaction which was from Criticising Mode to my Compliant Mode. I took the latter option and responded from my Accounting Adult mode “No, that’s right, would you like to know how come I haven’t done that?” At this point he either had to say “Yes” or “No”. I was inviting the participant to come and join me in Adult by asking him a question and contracting with him about what he wanted. Having said “Yes” I informed him of my rational and then moved the dialogue from him to other people in the audience and onto another topic. This same participant made similar comments twice more during the seminar and I was able to keep myself and him okay.
There are times when we need to put in the boundary more overtly than I did on that occasion, and at these times we still need to come from an OK/OK place. In this way we can say that someone has gone over a boundary but not ridicule them or be abusive either. In my experience coaching and training leaders and managers as well as working with shopfloor workforce, this ability to keep in relationship, respecting people and yet still be able to discipline people is a must for a productive organisation. This is more likely to encourage loyalty and increase production as everyone experiences fairness and equanimity.
For more on Okayness take a look at our information on TA on our web site.
So many times when coaching individuals, or working in teams, people tell me that they cannot be OK with others when others do things that are wrong or when the other person or people treat them as not OK. However, if we treat others as if they are not OK then this is likely to just escalate the difficulty. This happens the world over from the micro to the macro – and where does it get us? It gets us into conflict on a local to an international scale.
Staying OK/OK with ourselves and others means believing that we all have a right to be in the world, it is what we do with those rights that is important.
Transactional Analysis is a method to improve communication and as such it is important to treat others well, even when they are not being so with us. When this occurs we can “cross the transaction”, namely invite them to respond to us in an OK/OK way. For example, I was giving facilitating what the organisation called a “masterclass” on motivation when a participant said very aggressively that I had not mentioned money as a motivator. At this point I had choices – I could become aggressive and respond accordingly, I could become compliant and feel put down, or I could cross his transaction which was from Criticising Mode to my Compliant Mode. I took the latter option and responded from my Accounting Adult mode “No, that’s right, would you like to know how come I haven’t done that?” At this point he either had to say “Yes” or “No”. I was inviting the participant to come and join me in Adult by asking him a question and contracting with him about what he wanted. Having said “Yes” I informed him of my rational and then moved the dialogue from him to other people in the audience and onto another topic. This same participant made similar comments twice more during the seminar and I was able to keep myself and him okay.
There are times when we need to put in the boundary more overtly than I did on that occasion, and at these times we still need to come from an OK/OK place. In this way we can say that someone has gone over a boundary but not ridicule them or be abusive either. In my experience coaching and training leaders and managers as well as working with shopfloor workforce, this ability to keep in relationship, respecting people and yet still be able to discipline people is a must for a productive organisation. This is more likely to encourage loyalty and increase production as everyone experiences fairness and equanimity.
For more on Okayness take a look at our information on TA on our web site.
Wednesday, 6 June 2007
Getting Buy-In to Decision Making at Work
How many times at a meeting do you leave wondering if everyone is really going to do what they say they will do?
Here is a brief outline of how to check this out with people.
1. Existence - First clearly outline the issue that has brought about the discussion. Do all parties agree that it needs discussing? If not then the discussion has to be at this level to ensure that everyone is on board with even having the discussion. Without this individuals may sabotage the process.
2. Seriousness - Once everyone agrees that the topic needs discussing then you can move on to the seriousness of the issue i.e. the importance or place it takes at the moment. At this stage, if everyone agrees that there is an issue to discuss and it is sufficiently important then you can move on, if not you will need to return to (1) to ensure that everyone agrees that an issue exists
3. Change Possibilities – Having discussed the issue you can now move on to agreeing what options there are for change. At this stage you will need to check that everyone agrees that change is possible and that there are options. Whilst people rarely say “There are no options” they may well say things like “We’ve tried this before” or “They would never allow that” or other “Yes but….. ” type answers. If this happens you will need to return to the seriousness level and ask questions to establish whether they still agree there is an issue and that it is sufficiently important to take some action about.
4. Personal Ability – This is the stage where you have to decide who will do what and by when. If someone says they will do it, but without conviction, you will need to check their level of commitment or confidence in undertaking the task. Reluctance can lead to sabotage of the process, so ensuring people really do agree to take the action and are motivated is important. If individuals are not willing or confident to take action then the previous levels will need to be returned to.
The point of this checklist is to avoid the tedious outcome where you think you have all agreed something only to find that action is not taken because everyone thought someone else was doing it, they had other priorities, they did not believe change was possible or that they had the ability to do it. Taking time at the meeting is better than waiting six months to find out that nothing has happened.
All of these levels need to considered and discussed in a non-threatening way so people to share their views.
To find out how to improve your communication sign up for our two-day Official Introduction to Transactional Analysis course, to be held on 11/12 September, 2007.
Contact Mountain Associates - www.mountain-associates.co.uk/ta101.html
Here is a brief outline of how to check this out with people.
1. Existence - First clearly outline the issue that has brought about the discussion. Do all parties agree that it needs discussing? If not then the discussion has to be at this level to ensure that everyone is on board with even having the discussion. Without this individuals may sabotage the process.
2. Seriousness - Once everyone agrees that the topic needs discussing then you can move on to the seriousness of the issue i.e. the importance or place it takes at the moment. At this stage, if everyone agrees that there is an issue to discuss and it is sufficiently important then you can move on, if not you will need to return to (1) to ensure that everyone agrees that an issue exists
3. Change Possibilities – Having discussed the issue you can now move on to agreeing what options there are for change. At this stage you will need to check that everyone agrees that change is possible and that there are options. Whilst people rarely say “There are no options” they may well say things like “We’ve tried this before” or “They would never allow that” or other “Yes but….. ” type answers. If this happens you will need to return to the seriousness level and ask questions to establish whether they still agree there is an issue and that it is sufficiently important to take some action about.
4. Personal Ability – This is the stage where you have to decide who will do what and by when. If someone says they will do it, but without conviction, you will need to check their level of commitment or confidence in undertaking the task. Reluctance can lead to sabotage of the process, so ensuring people really do agree to take the action and are motivated is important. If individuals are not willing or confident to take action then the previous levels will need to be returned to.
The point of this checklist is to avoid the tedious outcome where you think you have all agreed something only to find that action is not taken because everyone thought someone else was doing it, they had other priorities, they did not believe change was possible or that they had the ability to do it. Taking time at the meeting is better than waiting six months to find out that nothing has happened.
All of these levels need to considered and discussed in a non-threatening way so people to share their views.
To find out how to improve your communication sign up for our two-day Official Introduction to Transactional Analysis course, to be held on 11/12 September, 2007.
Contact Mountain Associates - www.mountain-associates.co.uk/ta101.html
Perception and Communication
How we perceive the world affects how we are with others, the decisions we make and how we create what happens to us.
For example, we were recently working in Russia and were taken out to a rather touristy show, some of which was dreadful, but most, interesting. There were Russian folk songs, Cossack dancing and Russian folk music, all of which I thoroughly enjoyed. On talking about the show to our host, Olga, she discussed how much this show bought up memories of her childhood. Her whole village would make the opportunity to sing and dance on the streets. Tables would be brought out and food provided by everyone for everyone. Today this does not happen and Olga was seeing the show through her own eyes and the memories it brought back to her. We, on the other hand were experiencing the performances as examples of Russian folk history and music and because we did not have any personal experiences to go back to purely saw the show in the here and now.
So, what has this to do with work? At work we are all aiming to communicate and very often it goes awry. Often this is because we all have different perceptions of the same issue and even the same experience – just like Olga and I and how we were experiencing the show. Frankie Armstrong, a singer, songwriter, author and performer said that we don’t see “with our eyes we see through our eyes”. We all bring our history, experiences, culture and expectations to the table when we communicate and problem solve. Perhaps if we accepted this fact we might we might be more tolerant and interested in how come the other person thinks or says something rather than trying to beat them over the head with what we believe or think.
Diversity enables us to co-create imaginative responses as long as we are willing to put down our prejudices and expectations and see who is before us.
How we perceive the world affects how we are with others, the decisions we make and how we create what happens to us.
For example, we were recently working in Russia and were taken out to a rather touristy show, some of which was dreadful, but most, interesting. There were Russian folk songs, Cossack dancing and Russian folk music, all of which I thoroughly enjoyed. On talking about the show to our host, Olga, she discussed how much this show bought up memories of her childhood. Her whole village would make the opportunity to sing and dance on the streets. Tables would be brought out and food provided by everyone for everyone. Today this does not happen and Olga was seeing the show through her own eyes and the memories it brought back to her. We, on the other hand were experiencing the performances as examples of Russian folk history and music and because we did not have any personal experiences to go back to purely saw the show in the here and now.
So, what has this to do with work? At work we are all aiming to communicate and very often it goes awry. Often this is because we all have different perceptions of the same issue and even the same experience – just like Olga and I and how we were experiencing the show. Frankie Armstrong, a singer, songwriter, author and performer said that we don’t see “with our eyes we see through our eyes”. We all bring our history, experiences, culture and expectations to the table when we communicate and problem solve. Perhaps if we accepted this fact we might we might be more tolerant and interested in how come the other person thinks or says something rather than trying to beat them over the head with what we believe or think.
Diversity enables us to co-create imaginative responses as long as we are willing to put down our prejudices and expectations and see who is before us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)