Let's Give Them Something to Talk About
By Peter Block
Read a
response to this article.
This is the second
in a series of columns about how changing the conversation can change
the culture. One way to understand culture is to look at the nature of
the public debate and which questions are worth answering. The public
picture we receive of the culture of the American workplace is that all
that counts is financial performance, executive rising and falling, and
the drama of mergers and acquisitions.
--We
are constantly told that the only really important people are CEO’s, and
workers are commodities to be moved around at the convenience of
institutional requirements. Questions about purpose and the quality of
life in our organizations are offered as an occasionally interesting
human interest sidelight.
--For
example, TV business shows ask few questions about employee
perspectives, the dominance businesses have over their community or the
social value of the products produced. The last thing the media
confronts is why businesses have such a contemptuous relationship with
government, why they so condemn public education and the management
abilities of the not for profit sector. We do not have to let the public
dialogue defined by other interests control the conversations we choose
to create.
Our Common Wound
Barry Lopez, a writer who lives in Oregon, spoke recently about a
tragedy where a young boy brought a gun to school and started shooting.
Lopez said that for the three weeks the media was in town, all that got
discussed was gun control, violence in the media, safety in the schools
and the breakdown of the family and latch key kids.
--After
the media left, he said a different conversation began about the fact
that the tragedy was a failure in community. The question shifted to
what role do we, as neighbors and citizens , play in supporting families
in crisis so as to prevent this kind of loss. This is a very different
question than what is usually discussed. Instead of talking laws, TV
programming, and blame towards schools and parents, the talk shifted to
community, compassion and our collective accountability for the wound
this violence created. This conversation became the basis for hope,
where the earlier conversation only led to despair.
--What
this means for the workplace is that we can shift its culture by
redefining what is worth talking about. Lets talk about freedom,
justice, forgiveness, faith and collective responsibility. Why not call
these the bottom line issues and let economics, technology and control
be concerns we attend to as occasionally interesting human interest
sidelights.
Management by
Forgiveness
There is a movement in some cities which is changing how they deal with
justice and forgiveness that we might apply to our workplaces. This is
an effort called Restorative Justice, an alternative to a legal process
built on punishment and shame. It is designed for the offender and the
victim to voluntarily sit together and face the physical and emotional
consequences of the crime. In a circle which includes a facilitator and
the friends and family of both sides, the victim faces the offender with
all the costs of their action. In turn, the offender speaks to their own
experience of what happened.
--The
offender then decides what restitution would be appropriate for what
they have done. They offer to the victim either tangible assets or some
action which would signify that the offender confesses their crime, is
truly apologetic and has a sincere wish to make amends. The final
decision is in the hands of the victim who can accept, renegotiate or
refuse the offer of apology and restitution. The process is more
complicated than this, but these are the essentials. I am learning about
it from Thom Allena, who is working with justice departments to
implement this practice.
--It
is a local example of the Commission on Truth and Reconciliation that
has been South Africa’s way of dealing with its violent history. Their
stance, in stark contrast to the Nuremberg trials after World War II, is
designed to restore wholeness to a divided nation. Bishop Desmond Tutu
is chairman of the Commission which is betting its future on the power
of confession and forgiveness. He says that retributive justice, which
is what we now do, is built on punishment and has the effect of keeping
the cycle of harm going. All that changes over time is who is persecutor
and who is getting hurt. Penology originally meant restoration of
harmony, a far cry from our common thinking about justice.
--Both
of these approaches are really large scale searches for new, more
productive, conversations.
Confession is
Underrated
So, what would this all mean for our organizations? It would put an end
to our thinking that the institution needs to be ever watchful about
holding people accountable and rewarding and punishing behavior that is
desirable or not. We would stop being obsessed with the low performers
and deciding how to motivate and control others. When there is a
failure, we would create structures so that confession and admission of
responsibility would be valued, forgiveness would be formally offered
and defense and denial would be irrelevant.
--Why
not begin some programs in our workplace about faith and justice. Why
not take a page from South Africa and put someone in charge of truth and
reconciliation. I would be willing to design a form for annual
forgiveness and compassion reviews. How about a training program on
hope, confession, and making amends. These could be the new millenium’s
definition of organization excellence.
--We
would talk about how we all played a part in plans that went awry and we
would focus on our contribution to the problem. We would stop “setting
examples” as a deterrent to failure, which it isn’t.
--We
would recognize that we are all creating the system we live within, and
each part’s success and failure is not simply an individual act but a
sign that something more is required from us all. This emphasis on
confession and forgiveness would support learning and restore harmony
and connection.
--Our
fear of restorative rather than punitive strategies is that forgiveness
means we have condoned the failure. Not so. To understand is not to
condone but to acknowledge that these are intertwined human systems
filled with human beings.
--Lets
sponsor a conference on how to create a culture of forgiveness? A
culture where confession is not reserved for the sanctuary, where faith
is a workplace and business practice. When we make these the questions
of common interest, the culture will have started to shift simply in the
choice to raise the questions. We will have shifted the dialogue and
begun to rename what is real and important. This gives us something to
talk about.
This
article appeared in
News for a Change published by AQP in March 1999
|
