1. HEALTH - The Value of New

Click here to read this on my blog and leave a comment!
 
Recently, my podcast colleague, Gordon White, and I have launched a new season of our podcast, the onconflictpodcast.
 
It took us a while to land on what we wanted our focus to be for a second season.  We had to face questions like:

• Do we want to continue with this project at all?
• What was worthwhile about it about this endeavour so far?
• What could be worthwhile about it in the future?

• Be responsible
• Think systemically
• Coach
• Have and model difficult conversations
• Mediate as appropriate
• Know how to do (and do) team development
• Be committed to continuous improvement

If you want to hear our first episode with these dimensions discussed, check this out.

There is something exciting about choosing the new in the context of the stable.  We still have a podcast, but we’re embarking together into new territory.  Newness allows you to be a learner again, to have a beginner’s mind and to delight in the things you are learning.
 
What about you?  What is causing you delight in its newness?

“To us, the value of a work lies in its newness: the invention of new forms, or a novel combination of old forms, the discovery of unknown worlds or the exploration of unfamiliar areas in worlds already discovered - revelations, surprises.”  …Octavio Paz
 

Click here to read this on my blog and leave a comment!

2. ENVIRONMENT - Shattering Paradigms

Click here to read this on my blog and leave a comment!
 

I recently came across a woman named Monica Gagliano, who is a scientist, ecologist and author.  Her way of looking at the world has shattered my own, in a good way. 

She tells the story of having started her career focused on animals, with an early assignment studying fish in the coral reefs.  In her studies, she would observe the fish, who would come out to greet her.  She established a relationship with them such that they would recognize her over time and she would often be met by various favourites.
 
But then it came time to end the science experiment with its common conclusion: it was time to kill them to study them as specimens.  What surprised her is when the day came, none of the fish came out to greet her.  She couldn’t find any of them.  She wondered if they could perhaps sense what she was there to do, but that was not how she was trained.  She was trained that these were unsensing beings and that her job was to continue with the experiment. 

Continue she did, although she said it was very difficult and horrifying for her, as they wouldn’t come out and then she had to chase them down and they put up intense fights.  It was not pleasant.
 
She left that experience shaken and determined that she would not participate in that kind of science anymore. As fate would have it, she got the opportunity to study plants.
 
Yet, new insights awaited her there too.  She came to realize that all of life has a sentient nature to it.  We are all electrical beings and so why would we not relate electrically? 
 
The shattering for me is when she made the point that our physical brains as humans is what enables us to be sentient and conscious and present, to relate to the outer world.  But just because that is the physical apparatus we possess, that does not mean all beings need possess the same physical apparatus to be able to think and feel.
 
Think about that statement.
 
It has profound implications.  And it explains every possible connection people have to plants and other beings. 

Why can’t we connect on a level that is beyond what we humans have come to understand as the language of relating?

Doesn’t this open up a whole new world? 

If you are intrigued, check out Monica’s new book entitled:  Thus Spoke the Plants.
 
“We like to assume that language is a purely human property, our exclusive possession, and that everything else is basically mute.” … David Abram

Click here to read this on my blog and leave a comment!

---

3. NEGOTIATION - Taking Responsibility for Icebergs

Click here to read this on my blog and leave a comment!
 

In my work with organizations, I often receive calls from leaders hoping I might be able to solve a conflict problem for them.  It often looks like two people in conflict.  There is a pain point.   Perhaps someone is refusing to communicate with someone else.  Perhaps harsh words have been spoken or tears shed.

There was something that brought the situation to the place where a leader has decided that it’s time to bring someone in.
 
This step of taking action is the first foundational competency of a Collaborative Leader.  To take responsibility for conflict is key. 
 
The question quickly arises “Who’s conflict is this anyway?”   When I hear answers like this from a leader, I know I have my work cut out for me:
 

• “It’s their problem.They just need to learn how to get along.”
• “They are acting like children.”
• “We just need to separate them. That should solve it.”

 
These type of answer do not lead to a leader taking action.  Instead, the conflict “problem” stays with the individuals involved who are struggling.  It is certainly common enough to believe that a conflict resides with the two people from where it may originate.  “It’s none of my business.”  “It’s nosy to pry.”  “They’ll ask for help if they need it.”
 
These type of comments are based on an individualistic notion of conflict.  In the dominant North American culture, we expect conflict to take place and be resolved with individuals. 
 
In a community-oriented culture, conflict is everyone’s business.  William Ury, in his book The Third Side, had the opportunity to study peace-oriented cultures. A key discovery is that they all had a place, a circle, where individual conflicts could be brought to “talk, talk, talk.”  When interviewing Martin Winiecki recently for our podcast, he spoke about how his intentional community in Portugual does not expect people to be “alone” with their conflicts.  The community is there for individuals and their conflicts.
 
This way of looking at conflict takes some getting used to.  Usually, when conflict is present, most want to ignore it.  So, it takes an act of will, an act of taking responsibility for things to be different. It can help to think of the conflict itself as only the proverbial “tip of the iceberg”.  For things to come to a head, as it were, there are often complex and intertwined reasons.  It takes more minds to help solve the situation.  It takes more minds and more time.
 
It takes circles and “talk, talk, talk.”
 
What would it be like for you to consider that conflict is more like an iceberg and that conflict is: everybody’s problem.
 
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”  … John Stuart Mill

Click here to read this on my blog and leave a comment!

---

CONTACT: