I want to thank everyone who has contributed to this discussion--both on
and off the list--concerning the group case I wrote of not long ago. I
knew I could count on this group for ideas and alternate perspectives!
I wrote about this to the LO list both to seek help in sifting through
some of the issues embedded in the group's behaviors (including my own,
the director, and the manager) and to perhaps generate some discussion
concerning the complexities involved in collective work such as this.
When working towards participatory work and solidarity within the
workplace, hopefully moving towards a more natural and vital sense of
work, these are the kinds of complexities we meet with every day.
I do the formal report-back next week (not a good timetable, but necessary
because of people's vacation schedules). part of that will involve
somehow illuminating the ways in which the director and manager
participated in this group's behavior; part of my 'task' was to help them
see how they could handle things differently in the future. I think if we
can approach this from a perspective of curiosity rather than one of
blame, maybe some progress can be made. The mirror metaphor a couple of
you used is a good one.
I've agreed with much (maybe most) of what has been written concerning the
case. Clearly there is grief work involved, and the need for the group to
complete or move on from this. I can even see where some anima/animus
factors might be influencing; our psychic development and consciousness
has so much to do with our behaviors. And many of your comments have
given me some pause for thought concerning my own behaviors and ways in
which I might have approached the work differently, which is extremely
helpful to me.
There will be the opportunity to work with the manager in terms of her
interactions with this group, which will be interesting. She at least
appears to be a ready and willing learner, and seems to be approaching her
work from that perspective. As for the group itself, I'm not sure at this
point what steps will be taken to address the passive-aggressive
behaviors; to my knowledge, they continue to work effectively and
accomplish the major objectives for their unit (though the day after the
group meeting, they did seem to throw something of a silent tantrum by
dumping their work gloves and coveralls all over the work area and leaving
materials and equipment out that are normally put away; the manager
cleaned up herself early the next morning when she'd seen what they'd
done, and didn't say anything about it to them--we talked later of how she
might have handled this differently!).
An issue I've not happily resolved for myself, though, lies with something
a few of you brought out. To what extent can we ethically work to change
the behaviors of others, when they have no inclination to change and see
'no problem' amongst themselves? At least right now, the group's owned
goals do not include any change: their productivity is not a problem, and
they appear content with the existing relationships. The fact that they
are in effect creating a hostile work environment for someone else does
not appear to bother them at all. They have no fear of losing their jobs
because of the tight labor pool right now--they could go to work elsewhere
quite easily, whereas the company would have some trouble replacing them
(still, canning the whole bunch of them is an option the director seems to
be considering; that's not necessarily a decision that will in the
long-run help the development of the organization--it seems more important
that they learn how to effectively address these tensions, as they will
surely arise in one form or another again).
It is easy to sit back, from my vantage point, and say Those people need
to change, what they're doing is not healthy, real growth in their
capacity won't occur otherwise... In some respects, possible
interventions seem almost manipulative, which goes against the principles
of vital work or of LO's. When asked, then yes I can provide counsel or
suggestions of some sort. But as some have pointed out, this group did
not ask me to intervene, the manager and director did (hmmmm, that sounds
now like my task is to work with the manager and director then, and not
the group, doesn't it? Perhaps I've answered my own question).
How do the rest of you resolve such issues? At times, I wonder if what I
do is much different from the heavier, top-down authority and control
regime--just more subtle. I try not to just provide answers to
organizational difficulties, but focus more on helping the members create
solutions for themselves. Still, there are times when I really do battle
with some of these gray areas.
Would appreciate any thoughts people have on this, or any other aspect of
working with reluctant people.
--Terri A Deems tadeems@aol.com
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>