[ICYMI] No Parking Here

“Sign, sign, everywhere a sign. Blockin’ out the scenery, breakin’ my mind. Do this, don’t do that, can’t you read the sign?” – Five Man Electrical Band (1971)

In this week’s post “How to Autopsy a Conflict,” we here at Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT) addressed some of the methods which our conflict consultant (and many other mediators and peace practitioners in the field) use to examine conflicts almost after the fact.
There are many ways of communicating in the world today and a conflict communication situation came to us recently and we’d like to address it here, for the benefit of our readers.
In any conflict, both parties have three options in how they can choose to communicate:
  • They can be nonassertive “What good would it do to speak up?” Or, “Whatever you decide is fine with me.”
  • They can be passive aggressive: “I’m going to spy on you and then tell on you later to a person or entity up the ladder.”
  • They can be aggressive: “I am the boss. What I say goes.”

There is an apartment complex in Binghamton, NY, somewhere around the NYSEG stadium where the Binghamton Mets play. This apartment complex has on the street parking.

Typically, a  friend of ours (for the purposes of this blog post, we’ll refer to him as C.) parks all the way up to the sign that reads this:

no-parking-to-corner

In essence, his selfish act of kindness, provides somewhere near an extra half to full space requirement for the vehicle behind his to park on what is a crowded, on-street parking, apartment living situation.

Now, one would expect such largesse to eventually be rewarded and acknowledged. And it is:
Car Note
The person who wrote this…well…let’s get a direct quote from C. about this:
“This person clearly has a f—king problem.” (We had to edit that, we’ve got kids reading over our shoulders as we write this.)
Profanity aside, the head consultant here at HSCT agrees. As a matter of fact, we would call this type of communication passive aggressive at best.
Since we are about solutions to this, we have about three for you, our dear reader, our friend C., and the note leaver, that may help alleviate issues like this in the future:
In a previous post, (click here) we addressed getting to know your neighbor.
This would be our recommended course of action in this situation. You may key a stranger’s car, but not a friend’s.
Assertive, not aggressive, communication is the key. A note, left under a windshield with a message on it, provides the first, subtle message that escalation is not only OK, but preferable and acceptable.
Intimidation, fear, closed-off-ness, and anxiety are all present in this note and lay deep in the subtext of C’s feelings as well as his verbalized response.
The antidotes for all of those are collaboration through mutual understanding, clarification of perspectives and by having a rigid goal, but being flexible in the means to get there.
Finally, if you just can’t correct the parking situation on your own, call in a third party: A good friend, the police or the conflict communication and resolution professionals at HSCT.
We’ll take care of it all, from notes to nuts.
Originally published on July 10, 2013.
Download the FREE E-Book, The Savvy Peace Builder by heading to http://www.hsconsultingandtraining.com/e-book-the-savvy-peace-builder/ today!

[Advice] Collaboration and the Commons

The tragedy of the commons is an environmental science concept that cuts to the core of two areas critical to organizational (and personal) conflict management.

Opposites

The first idea is that there are so many resources available—time, money, talent, etc.—that there will never be a depletion. Until there is.

This conception of  material and personnel resource abundance is the reason that black swan events at a macroscale, such as the 2008 economic crash, or at a microscale, such as a wife finding out that her husband is cheating (or vice-versa) hit impacted parties so hard and take such a financial, emotional, psychological and spiritual toll.

The second idea is that once resources are depleted, there is no compelling reason for any one individual to take the blame (or accept the accountability and responsibility) for replenishing them, because “Everybody was taking from it.” In a divorce proceeding (following infidelity), neither party wants to admit guilt—or their own level of responsibility in creating the situation that fostered the infidelity in the first place. After 2008, how many bankers went to jail, globally, in relation to the level of damage their decisions caused?

In an environmental science context, the solution to tragedy of the commons is to fine and otherwise economically penalize people (resource depleters, polluters, etc.) in the belief that a bigger negative downside will lead to greater self-imposed, self-interested, selflessness.

In conflict engagement and conflict management, sometimes it’s best to abandon the commons (the shared relationship, the collaborative enterprise, the cooperative partnership) rather than take on the emotional, psychological and spiritual effort to save the commons.

True emotional labor, however, requires quieting the lizard brain, accepting responsibility for the tragedy (even if there’s no commensurate feeling of a need for the taking of responsibility) and moving forward collaboratively and selflessly with people and organizations that we would really rather not.

Otherwise, who will be left in the emotional commons but the spoilers, the discontented and the selfish?

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: hsconsultingandtraining@gmail.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[Advice] Sorting Emotional Intelligence

In a physical emergency, triage is the best way to address issues.

CRaaS In the Workplace

Originating during the Napoleonic Wars, triage divides wounded people into three categories:

  • Those who are likely to live, regardless of what care they receive;
  • Those who are likely to die, regardless of what care they receive;
  • Those for whom immediate care might make a positive difference in outcome.

In a conflict, confrontation or difficulty, people often have no trouble dividing their approaches to relationships in the exact same manner:

  • Those situations that are not likely to become conflicts, no matter what I do;
  • Those situations that are likely to become conflicts, no matter what I do;
  • Those situations that are likely to have a positive outcome if I address them as best I can right now.

Many people in their individual lives triage situations, relationships and other people, and mistakenly believe that they are acting with the best interests of other people in mind, and that they are acting within the bounds of emotional intelligence.

When asked, they will swear up and down that they are good at reading other people and examining what conflicts to engage in, what conflicts to avoid, and what conflicts to be neutral about.

Unfortunately, true emotional intelligence takes years of self-examination to master. Somewhere around 10,000 hours. The true test of developing emotional intelligence is moving the inner space from concerns about self (“I triage this situation with these people really well!”) to concerns about self and the other person (“How are we going to triage this situation together?”).

Some people like conflict, confrontation and the feeling of powerfulness that such ability to trigger a conflict or confrontation in others’ produces.

Some people don’t like conflict and will run away at the first hint of even a little difficulty.

Some people are neutral on all of this and genuinely have the ability to triage effectively.

However, in the complex business and social worlds that we inhabit (with complexity increasing rather than decreasing every day); people can rarely afford to avoid, attack or remain neutral when the opportunity for greater, deeper and more meaningful engagement presents itself.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[Opinion] Justice Is Blind

Justice is blind.

Justice is  Blind

Or so it is said in Western culture.

The issue with justice is not the fact of justice, which is applied through law, morals, appeals to theology and philosophy. The issue with justice is that the narratives around it are often confused with several other things.

Desire for vengeance. Dissatisfaction with outcomes. Disappointment at a lack of desired consequences.

Crime victim families walk before cameras and state: “We came here for justice and justice was done.” Or, “We came here for justice, but there was no justice today.”

A character in a movie once stated that, “Karma is justice without the satisfaction. I don’t believe in justice.” Another character infamously intoned in another film “For justice, we will go to Don Corleone!” We should remember that Lady Justice carries both scales–and a sword.

Many people scream loudly for a narrative that includes and envelops justice. They even make signs and placards with the phrase, “no justice, no peace” emblazoned upon them, but what they are really seeking is karmic retribution.

Retribution, vengeance, revenge; wrongs righted with immediacy and swift, unambivalent consequences. Punishment, meted out by at the highest order, in the fastest way, with as few innocent people harmed as possible.

There is a revolution underway in both the Western world and at a larger, global level.  Societies, groups, cultures and even individuals are confusing the results of that revolution with their own desires for karmic retribution. The karmic retribution narrative begins something like this:

“Never before in the history of world, do we (typically meaning “I” or “my in-group”) have access to more information, more money and more power to transform the world in ways reflecting how we would like it to be, rather than the frustrating, unjust ways that it has always been. No longer will we (typically meaning “I” or “my in-group”) wander the world, merely satisfied with outcomes formerly guaranteed to us by ‘people in power.’ We want more. And if we don’t receive the more we are guaranteed, then we will either move on those in power to get it. Or we will call for justice until we get the material outcomes we seek.”

This narrative underlies many current calls for justice, with the immediacy of the narrative being employed, following ever newly discovered injustices, as wave after wave of more access, more mobility and more individualized power seems to wash over the societies and cultures we inhabit.

But so what, right? Under a Rawlian (or even a Lockean) philosophical world view, why shouldn’t narratives be reframed and cries for justice recried?

Well, conflicts occur when narratives differ, when perceptions of justice don’t match and whenever disruptions happen. Conflicts happen when narratives of injustices (and perceived narratives of injustice) rub up against each other.

And when the only resolutions come in the form of power transfers and shifts, conflicts escalate quickly to violence. And, while this is nothing new (see Don Corleone) one need only look at incidents around the United States (and the world) last year to see the evidence of the conflicts and how quickly and irrevocably they can escalate.

What are we to do?

What is the balance between justice, vengeance, and the more revolution that we are experiencing worldwide?

What is the most unambiguous way for all people (even those who have chosen not to participate due to inability, lack of ability or lact of interest) to benefit from the new largesse that our recent scientific/moral/ethical/legal revolutions promise to provide?

What are societies and cultures to do, even as the center disintegrates and the power holders in culture, media, journalism and on and on, lose out in the shifting narratives of our times?

Who gets to choose?

Who gets to make the world?

We don’t know the answers to any of these questions.

But far more energy should be spent on discussing and solving those questions and advancing the narrative of peace. Much less energy should be spent on advancing narratives that cry out for karmic vengeance, too often framed in the language of justice, while always proclaiming that fairness and equitable treatment are the ultimate goals.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[Opinion] You May Have Already Won – Part Two

The future isn’t guaranteed to anyone.

You

There are so many industries, assumptions and pieces of our culture that are being disrupted by software applications and technology, that it feels like a whirlwind. But there is a growing problem.

In the world of technology, minorities, women and other underrepresented individuals and groups in the old economy are even more underrepresented in the new economy.

The future isn’t guaranteed to anyone.

The problem is not the wealth gap, or the inequality gap, or even the person gap. The problem is threefold:

  • Access—this is becoming the driving issue of the 21st century. People who will have access to technology and the ability to access understanding about advancements in technology, (regardless of group affiliation, economic level, gender or nationality) will have access to the virtual/physical integration that mobile technologies and the internet represent. They will also have access to the financial, spiritual and emotional rewards that will flow from this access, first in a trickle, then in a stream, and finally an endless flood. People who won’t have access will be effectively “locked out” of opportunity and advancement and will (to use the line from Braveheart) “scramble for the scraps from Longshank’s table.”
  • Understanding—there are many people (regardless of race) who have no idea, who, what or how the world that is coming is being built. Case in point: We recently had a conversation with a 20 year old the other day who had no idea that the content he consumes on YouTube was actually created by someone. We had to show him some of the behind the scenes stuff that goes on around here at HSCT in order to make all of this happen. Suddenly, he was able to make the connection between “boring” writing and studying classes and developing the discipline to write, research and publish every day.
  • Identity—many people have voted with their feet (and their wallets) in this new economic situation. They use Air BnB, Uber, Yelp, and pay attention to Amazon.com reviews. They book tickets to the movies through Fandango, they use Urban Spoon or Open Table to book a restaurant, and they have multiple applications on their smart phones and move with ease through the neighborhoods that each application represents in the community of the internet. However, there are also still people who shop at Wal-mart and won’t buy an I-phone until it shows up there. Marketers call these people lat adopters, but their identities are wrapped up (their stories, if you will) in being late adopters. Identity still is a driver for a lot of issues.

The future isn’t guaranteed to anyone.

Yes, there are many people who “Just want it to work,” no matter what it is—the economy, their family, their job, their car or their house. They don’t want to wrestle with questions about access, have to get more education to interface with new technology or worry about what their mobile phone choices say about them as a consumer/person. They just want things to work in their lives so that they can interact with a scary, chaotic and disquieting modern world with a measure of control, safety, security and reasonable level of prosperity.

These are the people for whom the future is not guaranteed.

Mediators, social workers, conflict specialists, lawyers, and social scientists have a responsibility to act as ambassadors between these two groups, advocate for the groups that are having identity, access and education issues and make the argument to the technical folks that are building our new economy and new world, that there are people being left behind.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA

Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[ICYMI] Jezebel’s Without a Blog

Outside of Western mysticism, or Hollywood entertainment, there isn’t much talk in the wider world about the presence, or influence, of demons, or evil spirits, anymore.

And if a person or organization does address them, they are immediately cast as a retrograde individual with little contemporary understanding of psychology, sociology, social justice or basic science.

And yet, the cosmopolitan modern civilization that we have built, actively acknowledges that there are positive spiritual elements to some of the work that peace builders perform in the restorative justice space, the mindfulness space, and even in the space where emotional intelligence crosses over into social work.

And yet we struggle to assign and define a negative spiritual element to the damaging consequences of traumas, conflicts, disputes and disruptions.

We collectively, actively acknowledge that there is an entire world outside of the world that we experience through our five natural senses, but we struggle to identify the nature of that world within the comfortable scientific realms of psychology, sociology, or biology.

Thus, we identify people as having behavioral and personality issues and problems, but we too often neglect the long-term, hard work of nurturing their spirit, in favor of the easy, short-term work of medicating their biology.

Nowhere is this more evident that in the church, where high conflict people exist. High conflict people—in the natural, biological sense—have issues that cannot be remedied through just “talking it out.”

There is plenty of writing and theological research around the area of Jezebel spirits, named after the queen in 1Kings 9-37, not the 4th wave feminist blogging website. But when the Christian conciliator attempts to bring knowledge of this spirit into the secular world of workplace conflicts, they run the risk of being laughed out of the room.

At best.

So, here’s the rule for the Christian conciliator: As with a high conflict individual, recognizing a Jezebel spirit’s presence in a secular workplace, should be kept as a private diagnoses, rather than a public proclamation.

In the church however, an open acknowledgement may be required of the presence of such a disruptive and conflict generating spirit—along with the realization that some people behave in the manner of high conflict individuals.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Sorrells79

[Advice] What Cultural Competency Looks Like…

So, if culture matters, and the people in your organization drive your culture forward, what does competency look like?

Priorities_and_Struggles

  • Cultural competency looks like the founder/CEO knowing what the organization is going to look like. And then sticking to that vision.
  • Cultural competency looks like the team being composed of people who buy into the vision and will push it forward relentlessly. But, the team is not a collection of mere “yes” men…or “yes” women…
  • Cultural competency looks like hiring people based on your internal gut reactions—backed up by trustworthy people—rather than merely relying on cultural inertia to move an organization forward.

Culture eats strategy gets repeated over and over, and then a group, a speaker, or a room, laughs and moves forward with their own preconceived notions of strategically implementing whatever organizational changes are deemed necessary.

And, in the process, losing the very culture they were trying so hard to preserve through strategic means.

Deep competency looks like strategy servicing culture in order to move and organization forward, without worrying about change or innovation.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[Advice] Culture Matters

Culture means something.

Hire_For_Soft-Skills_Train_For_Hard_Skills

We forget about the clarion call of culture in our pell-mell run toward the future. But culture matters, particularly in companies and organizations. Culture, as defined by the cultural anthropologist E. B. Taylor, is the complex whole that includes morals, knowledge, arts, beliefs, law, customs, capabilities and habits, acquired by people as a part of society.

Culture means human beings connecting with other human beings.

Start-ups get this sometimes. The ones that don’t fail, the ones that do succeed beyond their wildest dreams.

Established organizations forget that culture matters after a certain level of cultural inertia happens. When organizations begin hiring, and it expands to more than 150 people, culture is often forgotten in the pursuit of making profits and appealing to the shareholders’ demands.

Nonprofits underestimate the power of the culture they create and that they help develop. Then they wonder why they can’t raise more money, or struggle to justify grant funding year-on-year.

All of these different stories about culture in different organizations create the dynamic cloud that covers the creation of a society, and an overall culture.

There are three things to remember when developing a culture for your project:

  • Conflicts will happen, whether you have 30 people or 150 people. It seems cool when you’re talking about 30 people and “how exciting it all is,” but how people deal with conflicts will determine how the project grows…or doesn’t…
  • Hiring people is really important. Teams, belonging, and pedigree matter. Or they don’t. When building a company culture, knowing what you’re going to emphasize versus what you’re not going to emphasize is important. And it has to show up on more than just your website’s home page.
  • Failure is not an option, but learning is. This is not an excuse to make bad decisions. There are enough of those excuses out there. However, learning about how people—customers, clients, investors, fans, audience members, etc.—react and respond to your product and your culture, gives you an opportunity toward growth. Typically called a feedback loop, we here at HSCT call it a learning curve.

Here is the challenge question for your organization: If culture means something when developing your project, when was the last time you took the time, to examine how your culture could be better?

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[Advice] 4 Locus of Control Questions

Confirmation bias occurs when a person believes that the situations and experiences they continually run into, reaffirm their persepctive on their place in the world, and their preconceived beliefs or practices.

Conflicts-Are-The-Symptoms

Case in point: When a person looks at the amount in their paycheck every week and mutters “ Well, I guess we’ll always be middle class.”

Or, when a person tells another before a difficult decision, or contlict, “Well, you had to know that Bob was going to react that way.”

Confirmation bias occurs because we want reassurance that the stories we tell ourselves are the only way reality could possibly be organized. This is why we emotionally, psychologically and somtimes even physically, resist when we are confronted by a different outcome someone else has experienced in the same situation. The fact of the matter is, we are in charge of our own stories—and the stories that we tell ourselves—but we often don’t believe it.

This dovetails with locus of control.

Based in studies and research from the 1950’s, locus of control says that some people believe they are in control of their lives, and other people believe outside forces determine the  direction of their lives and their decision making processes.

People with a high internal locus of control believe the world is something they control.

People with a high external locus of control, believes the world controls them.

Confirmation bias reinforces the stories of both personality types: If I believe that I’m in charge of my destiny, then I will continually tell myself the ” I’m In Charge Story.” But if I believe that destiny is in charge of me, then I will continually tell myself the “I’m Not In Charge Story.”

Most often, when things are going well, confirmation bias and locus of control concerns become secondary to a good time. But in a difficulty, confrontation or a conflict around things that matter, confirmation bias and locus of control (both internal and external) can serve as drivers that both intitiate and continue the conflict spiral.

Perceptions, stories and triggers are the fuel in the car of conflict situations, and the only person who can alter the fuel successfully is you. Here are four challenge questions for determining your conflict story:

  • What did I learn about difficulty, confrontation, control and conflict from my family?

Family is the world’s first organizational structure. And many of us learned the wrong lessons from those in charge. But the real issue is that we keep confirming the same lessons repeatedly with others.

  • What did I learn about control over my environment when I left the home?

Formal schooling in (at least in the United States) begins at around 4 or 5. This is when true confusion sets in, and when uncomfortable questions get asked about “reality”—and sometimes hushed up.

  • What messages have I had reinforced through my friends, associates and even the media I chose to consume?

There is a reason that many individuals with high internal locuses of control, refuse to watch the news, choose their friends carefully and are elitist about companies to whom they decide to give their money, time and talent.

  • What messages am I sending out to the world that are reinforcing difficulty, confrontation, control and conflict stories that are no longer relevant to my experience?

If you have succeeded in overcoming a poor story, or have moved the needle on your locus of control, revisiting old stories that are no longer relevant is the surest way to experience the same things over again.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

[ICYMI] Committing to Persisting

Persistence is tough.

mobile_conflict_flow

The savvy peacebuilding consultant knows this, because she has dealt with clients who would rather give up and return to the comfort of their past dysfunction, rather than attempt to go through the hard work of pushing through to create something new.

Persistence requires energy.

The savvy peacebuilding consultant knows this because she is drained at the end of a coaching session, a mediation session, a workshop session, or after writing a blog post about her work.

Persistence is formidable.

The savvy peacebuilding consultant knows this because, she realizes that having the will to do what another consultant won’t (as long as that thing is moral, ethical, legal and not fattening) is the difference between success and failure for her project, her clients, and for the niche she serves.

The savvy peacebuilder commits to persist, even when it’s not sexy, interesting or engaging, because she knows that one less peacebuilding project in the world turns out one more candle in the dark.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: hsconsultingandtraining@gmail.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/