The Visionary Notion

What if the primary driving force behind commercial and economic endeavors wasn’t the pursuit of profits, but rather benefiting society, the species, Gaia, and the planet? A visionary notion, to be sure, that seems to defy conventional capitalist wisdom. Nevertheless, if we allow our imaginations to roam freely and look back at periods in history where ethical business practices held sway, we can depict a world truly transformed by this paradigm shift.

Profit Motives vs. Ethics and Humanity

Throughout most of human history, the profit motive has reigned supreme in the business realm. However, there have been notable exceptions driven by religious teachings, philosophical movements, and social ideals that prioritised ethical conduct over mere grubby accumulation of more and more wealth. The Quakers, for instance, were renowned for their commitment to honest dealings and consideration of employee welfare, exemplified by the socially-conscious British chocolate makers like Cadbury. The 19th century cooperative movement aimed to create enterprises that equitably shared profits with worker-owners and the local community.

The Beauty of Ethical Business

Would we call businesses truly putting the greater good before profits “beautiful”? At first, such a description may seem like an odd coupling of aesthetics with commerce. But perhaps there is an inherent beauty to enterprises that create sustainable value for society while exhibiting ethical conduct.

Just as we find natural wonders, artistic works, or selfless acts emotionally moving due to their harmony with higher ideals of truth, goodness, and transcendence of ego, so could businesses centered on benefiting all stakeholders embody a different kind of beauty. One not necessarily based on physical appearance, but on being skillfully crafted exemplars of how our economic activities can align with ethical, aesthetic, environmental and humanitarian principles.

This beauty manifests through their products, services, and operations, harmonising with the world rather than undermining it through greed, despoilment, or exploitation. Beautiful businesses are sustainable and circular by design, creating goods to be celebrated and cherished rather than cynically designed for disposability.They invest in creating opportunity and dignity for workers and communities rather than grinding them underfoot for profit margins.

Where today’s shareholder-driven corporations often exemplify grotesque machineries of extraction, ethical enterprises putting people and planet over money could be sublime new exemplars of applied aesthetics – aspiring toward perfection not through profit metrics, but through positively impacting all they engage with. Their beauty would shine through in becoming tightly interwoven threads in an interdependent tapestry, creating joyful, resilient and regenerative systems that elevate our shared potential.

While the traditional business vernacular focuses on the uglyness of lucrative processes, revenue growth, and reputational brand value, a world where ethical enterprises reign would celebrate hallmarks of perfected form: generative models that produce societal good, environmental integrity, attending to folks’ needs, and uplifting the human spirit. Perhaps then, we could appreciate the highest “good companies” not just pragmatically, but aesthetically – as living artworks of conscious, ethical organisation.

A World Oriented Toward the Greater Good

In such a world oriented toward the greater good, companies measure success not just by financial returns, but by positive impacts. Ethical practices like those espoused by certain faith traditions and thinkers are the norm across these industries. Sustainability is prized over short-term gain, with environmental stewardship prioritised over resource exploitation. We’ve seen glimpses of this in recent decades through the rise of corporate social responsibility (CSR), socially conscious investing, and the emergence of benefit corporations legally bound to creating public benefit, not just profits. But such examples have remained the exception rather than the rule in a profit-driven system.

The Global Ethos of the Greater Good

Imagine if this ethos becomes the core operating principle globally. Rather than lobbying for narrow interests, these businesses advocate for the common good. Tax avoidance schemes would be abandoned in a system where contributing one’s fair share is the ethical baseline. Worker rights and equity are vigorously protected, not eroded in pursuit of higher margins. On an individual level, cutthroat workplace could gives way to healthier cooperation, and integration with our personal and community values and family lives. Ethical conduct is rewarded over pure profit-generation at any cost. Kudos is not derived from endless growth metrics, but to positive impacts created for all the Folks That Matter.

A Sustainable Economic Model

Of course, enterprises still need to generate income to remain viable and reinvest in their social missions. But growth is pursued by creating genuine value for society rather than extracting it. Sustainable, circular economic models replace those premised on endless consumption and planned obsolescence.

A Radical Yet Possible Vision

Such a world may seem naively idealistic to modern sensibilities, conditioned to accept profit as the prime directive. But is it any more far-fetched than an entrenched global system that relentlessly exploits people and finite resources in pursuit of perpetual economic expansion on a finite planet? By orienting business toward the greater good, as past ethical movements have done, we might create an economy that better serves humanity. This may read as a utopian ideal today, but it has been a reality at various points throughout our history. A world where businesses prioritise society over self-interest may not be inevitable, but it is possible if we dare to imagine and build it together.

Do you have even the briefest five minutes to contemplate how things might be different?

Further Reading

Ackoff, R. L. (2011). The aesthetics of work. In Skip Walter’s blog post retrieved from https://skipwalter.net/2011/12/25/russ-ackoff-the-aesthetics-of-work/

Many human societies have domination systems, as explained by American theologian Walter Wink – interlocking structures which allow one group to dominate and exploit others. This can permeate across political, social and economic spheres.

Those who benefit from these systems often propagate a “myth of redemptive violence”. This refers to the narrative that violence is a morally purifying and redemptive act to uphold order and law. Systems of inequality indoctrinate the privileged to believe their violence against the marginalised serves the greater good.

However, thinkers like Martin Luther King Jr. and Mohandas Gandhi challenged this myth. They spearheaded nonviolent civil resistance against injustice in America and British-ruled India respectively. Both believed redemptive violence was an untruth – it only perpetuated further harm without achieving moral redemption.

Gandhi pioneered satyagraha or “truth-force”, inspiring India’s independence struggle through nonviolent protest, civil disobedience and economic non-cooperation. Rather than defeating the British, the goal was to convert them from wrong to right.

Martin Luther King was profoundly influenced by Gandhi. King described nonviolence as the most powerful means for oppressed minorities to reclaim basic dignity and rights. As with Gandhi, King’s vision was for nonviolent activism to transform social consciousness and achieve justice without bloodshed.

Tragically, extremists assassinated Gandhi in 1948 and King in 1968. However, their movements succeeded in dismantling unjust systems nonviolently. India gained independence in 1947 after decades of Gandhian civil resistance. In America, landmark civil rights legislation was passed prohibiting racial discrimination.

Through sustained truth and love, Gandhi and King’s seminal campaigns proved domination systems perpetuate themselves by making violence seem routine, necessary and even honourable. And that nonviolent change is not only possible, but a moral obligation.

Do you see how this makes the world a violent place, and so also for organisations?

“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” This insightful quote from sci-fi legend Isaac Asimov succinctly captures a disturbing truth – that those in positions of power often resort to bullying, threats, and aggression when their own abilities fall short. Unfortunately, such “management violence” remains an all-too-common occurrence in workplaces today. In case your wondering just what I mean by violence, here’s my definition: What Is Violence?

Note the four horsemen of violence in the workplace: Fear, Obligation, Guilt and Shame.

Tools

From shouting matches in the boardroom to abusive emails sent in the dead of night, many managers still wield violence and aggression in the belief that these actions are a legimate and expected part of thier jobs.. They berated subordinates to divert attention from poor decision-making, hurl staplers in a desperate grab at authority, or issue unjustified threats of dismissal to paper over their lack of managerial competence. Given the near ubiquity of such violence, we can see how few managers are anything but hugely incompetent.

Inspiration Not Intimidation

Such behaviours undoubtedly emerge from a position of weakness, not strength. Truly effective managers (is that an oxymoron?) succeed through inspiration, not intimidation. They encourage excellence through positive engagement and earned respect – not fear. If violence is your management style, you’ve already failed. And marked yourself as amongst the truly incompetent majority.

Ubiquitous

In today’s workplaces, management violence can become seen as ubiquitous and even normalised. We expect that bosses will shout and threaten, rather than mentor and support. But we can choose to challenge these assumptions. Let’s never accept aggression as simply “part of the job”.

Behind every angry, desperate ahole of a boss, there lies a fundamental incompetence awaiting exposure. Their posturing attempts to conceal a shortfall in interpersonal, analytical and interpersonal abilities. Their bluster and manipulations ring hollow, unable to disguise their fundamental inadequacies as managers.

The lingering ubiquity of management violence therefore reflects the persistence of mediocre management in too many organisations. Companies can choose to take a stand by instituting clear anti-violence policies and programmes focused on ethical, compassionate management. Employees might choose to unite to call out unacceptable behaviours whenever they witness it.

Together, we can make violence the very last resort of the flailing, incompetent manager. The strengths of positive leadership, teamwork and progress must prevail.

Footnote

Given the near ubiquity of management and management violence, and its signposting of incompetence, is the real problem not individual managers, but the whole idea of “management”?

Further Reading

Hamel, G. (2011). First, let’s fire all the managers. Harvard Business Review, 89(12), 48-60. https://hbr.org/2011/12/first-lets-fire-all-the-managers

What’s Behind Expectations?

Expectations seem benign, almost a part of our daily life that we accept without question. Yet they carry a violent undertone. Why? Because each expectation imposes an obligation. This very act places the burden of fulfilling said expectation on the other person, encroaching on their autonomy.

Are All Expectations Harmful?

Yes, expectations are inherently harmful and violent. This isn’t just about the high expectations that place immense pressure on someone to succeed, or the low expectations that can limit a person’s growth. The violence exists in all expectations, big or small.

Why Focus on Obligation?

Obligation is a form of manipulation, falling under the umbrella of what is known as F.O.G.S.—Fear, Obligation, Guilt, and Shame. These are tools of control, used to manipulate emotions and actions. When you expect something from someone, you instantly obligate them to act according to your will. They become, even if only subtly, beholden to you.

What’s the Impact on Relationships?

Expectations, fuelled by obligation, harm relationships at their core. The freedom to choose, love, and grow gets stifled. Whether it’s a personal relationship or a professional one, the imposition of expectations ruins the natural dynamic, making the relationship transactional, conditional, and ultimately, brittle.

How Do We Move Forward?

Recognising the violent nature of expectations is the first step. From there, it’s about letting go, eliminating these imposed obligations from your interactions with others. The absence of expectation fosters mutual respect and allows for authentic relationships to flourish.

So, would you be willing to confront your expectations for what they are—a form of violence—and make a conscious choice to eliminate them from your life?

Can NVC Elevate Workplace Relationships?

Nonviolent Communication (NVC) isn’t just a concept; it’s a practice. It consists of observing without judgment, expressing feelings, articulating needs, and making clear requests. In a work environment, these principles can go a long way to build mutual respect and understanding. They promote constructive criticism and foster an open dialogue.

What Does NVC Bring to Group Dynamics?

When it comes to group interactions, NVC shines in its ability to alleviate tension and solve conflict. By focusing on unmet needs instead of blame, NVC creates a constructive pathway to solutions. Teams can navigate disagreements and reach a mutual understanding. In this space, everybody’s needs get a chance to be heard, fostering collaboration and creativity.

Dissolves Tension Through Empathy

One of the most immediate effects of applying NVC in a group setting is the reduction of tension. Often, disagreements escalate because people feel misunderstood or attacked. NVC replaces these barriers with empathy. Team members learn to listen actively and validate each other’s feelings and needs, which in turn lowers emotional walls and facilitates productive dialogue.

Redirects the Focus to Unmet Needs

In traditional models of communication, a point of conflict often leads to a blame game. This not only stifles resolution but can also create animosity within the group. NVC shifts this focus from assigning blame to identifying unmet needs. When group members express what they require instead of blaming others, it encourages a problem-solving mindset. This can lead to more equitable outcomes that respect the needs of all involved.

Enables Mutual Understanding

NVC encourages people to express themselves clearly and concisely, focusing on what they observe, feel, need, and request. This clarity helps group members to better understand each other’s perspectives and constraints. Misunderstandings are resolved more quickly, as the communication becomes more transparent. As everyone gains a more nuanced understanding of each other’s needs and contributions, a deeper mutual respect develops.

Boosts Collaboration and Creativity

Once the groundwork of empathy and understanding is laid, teams find it easier to collaborate. Everyone becomes more invested in each other’s success, setting the stage for more cohesive teamwork. Moreover, as trust within the group increases, members are more willing to share creative ideas without the fear of ridicule or misunderstanding. NVC thus acts as a catalyst for innovation, allowing the collective intelligence of the group to flourish.

Creates an Inclusive Environment

In a group dynamic where NVC is practiced, every voice matters. The inherent respect for each individual’s needs and feelings fosters an inclusive atmosphere. Team members from diverse backgrounds, who may have different styles of communication or varying viewpoints, find it easier to integrate and contribute. This inclusivity not only enriches the group’s overall skill set but also enhances its problem-solving capabilities.

In summary, NVC in group dynamics works as a multifaceted tool. It dissolves tension, redirects focus from blame to needs, fosters mutual understanding, enhances collaboration and creativity, and encourages inclusivity. It’s not just a communication style but a comprehensive approach to improving how groups interact and function.

Do Relationships Outside Work Benefit from NVC?

NVC isn’t just for professional settings. Families, couples, and friends can find value in its principles. In intimate relationships, NVC helps in the articulation of emotional needs and ensures that both parties feel heard and understood. Open, honest communication is encouraged, deepening the emotional connection.

Enhances Emotional Expression

One of the most significant benefits of NVC in personal relationships is that it encourages the open expression of emotions. Traditional communication often falls short in this aspect, making it difficult for individuals to convey what they’re feeling. NVC provides the tools for a more nuanced expression of emotions, eliminating misunderstandings and allowing people to feel genuinely understood by their loved ones.

Fosters Authentic Conversations

Most relationships suffer from a lack of honest and open communication. People often conceal their true feelings to avoid conflict or because they fear judgment. NVC breaks down these barriers by fostering a non-judgmental space where individuals can express their authentic selves. This leads to more meaningful conversations that serve to deepen the relationship.

Resolves Conflicts Harmoniously

Conflict is an inevitable part of any relationship. What sets healthy relationships apart from dysfunctional ones is the ability to resolve these conflicts in a mutually satisfying way. NVC shifts the conflict resolution focus from winning an argument to understanding and meeting the underlying needs of each party involved. The result is a more harmonious resolution that strengthens the relationship rather than erodes it.

Enhances Empathy and Mutual Respect

By focusing on empathetic listening and understanding, NVC cultivates a culture of mutual respect within relationships. Each person learns to appreciate the feelings and needs of the other, which encourages a supportive and nurturing environment. This mutual respect further solidifies the relationship and makes it more resilient in the face of challenges.

Strengthens Emotional Bonds

Last but not least, NVC significantly contributes to strengthening emotional bonds between individuals. When people feel heard and valued, their emotional attachment to each other deepens. Emotional intimacy is crucial for any long-lasting, fulfilling relationship, and NVC provides the framework to achieve this.

To summarise, the influence of NVC extends well beyond professional settings and offers significant advantages in personal relationships. By facilitating emotional expression, authentic conversations, harmonious conflict resolution, empathy, and stronger emotional bonds, NVC serves as a cornerstone for healthier, more fulfilling relationships outside the workplace.

Summary: Is NVC the Relationship Game-Changer?

In both workplace relationships and broader social circles, NVC stands out as an effective tool for building stronger, more open interactions. By focusing on empathy and understanding, it paves the way for improved communication and stronger bonds.

NVC has a far-reaching impact. From conference rooms to living rooms to bedrooms, its principles can transform how we relate to one another. It offers the promise of not just better conversations but also enriched relationships. So, why not give it a try?

Further Reading

What’s Workplace Abuse?

Workplace abuse includes a variety of behaviours that create a toxic environment. This can range from overt actions like bullying and harassment to more subtle forms such as undermining someone’s performance.

How Does It Affect the Brain?

Evidence shows workplace abuse has tangible effects on the brain. Chronic stress from a toxic workplace can lead to the release of stress hormones, which in turn can affect areas of the brain responsible for memory, decision-making, and emotional regulation.

Scans Prove It

MRI scans can reveal changes in brain structure and function in people who have experienced workplace abuse. Regions like the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex, responsible for emotional processing and executive functions respectively, show discernible alterations.

What’s the Real Cost?

Beyond the immediate mental health impact, brain changes due to workplace abuse can also lead to long-term issues like depression, anxiety disorders, and even a decline in cognitive functions.

How Do We Address It?

Addressing workplace abuse is essential not just for employee well-being but also for organisational health. Support systems, clear grievance mechanisms, and a zero-tolerance policy towards abuse can contribute to a healthier work environment.

Is Change Possible?

Absolutely. While brain changes from abuse are concerning, the brain also possesses a remarkable ability to adapt and heal. Supportive environments can facilitate this process, creating a positive feedback loop for both individuals and organisations.

Dancing on a knife’s edge, where either side of the knife is not a nice place to be, the subtle boundary between coercion and bullying in the workplace becomes an awkward dance in which managers and employees engage. It’s a line easily blurred, especially when the pressure is on to meet targets and deadlines. And a knife we’re all better off without.

Definitions

Coercion can be understood as the act of persuading someone to do something through force or threats. While this is often applied as part of the management toolkit, often it edges dangerously close to bullying. Bullying, unlike coercion, is a persistent and malevolent act to intentionally harm or intimidate someone.

In the workplace, it’s the responsibility of management to ensure that encouragement and motivation don’t evolve into a dark force. How can we be rid of the knife entirely?

The Dance of Requests

Consider the concept of “refusable requests.” In the workplace, it is a nonviolent communication tool that acknowledges the freedom and autonomy of the individual. Rather than demanding or pressuring, a refusable request invites collaboration, allowing the other party the genuine option to say no.

Let’s explore how this plays out.

Management’s Perspective

For managers, the practice of refusable requests can act as a safeguard against accidental coercion. By framing requests as something that an employee can genuinely and safely agree or disagree with, they’re promoting a culture of respect and empathy.

That said, it isn’t an escape route from leadership responsibilities. It requires a skillful combination of clarity in communication and an understanding of the unique dynamics within the team. Managers have a natural fear that if their requests are refusable, then their authority and getting things done will quickly go to hell in a handbasket. Few seem aware of how the use of even mild coercion leads to disengagement, loss of motivation, and the provebial path to hell. Few again trust their employees to have the best interests of the organisation at heart, and tthus to response to refusable requests in good faith.

Employees’ Perspective

Employees who feel that their voices are heard and their autonomy respected are more likely to engage positively with their work. The use of refusable requests creates an environment where they can express their opinions and concerns without fear of retribution. It opens doors to healthy negotiation and fosters a more harmonious relationship between management and employees.

The Role of Organisational Culture

The way an organisation frames its culture and communication policies plays a pivotal role in defining the line between autonomy, coercion and bullying. By adopting strategies like refusable requests, businesses can build a nonviolent interaction model that fosters collaboration, trust, and mutual respect.

Conclusion

Walking the tightrope between coercion and bullying requires finesse, empathy, and a solid grasp of human dynamics. In an era where the mental wellbeing of employees is as vital as their physical health, the practice of refusable requests shines a light on a nonviolent way to foster growth and productivity.

It’s a dance that we can all learn to perform, with grace, understanding, and a keen awareness of the profound impact our words and actions can have on others in the workplace. It’s not about dominance or submission; it’s about harmony, collaboration, and respect.

“Ghosting”, a term once confined to the realm of online dating, has stealthily crept into the corridors of business relations and community interactions. It describes the abrupt end of communication from one party, without any explanation or closure. This puzzling phenomenon now pervades various spheres, manifesting in unanswered emails, silent exits from ongoing projects, and an unanticipated distancing from community members.

The Ripple Effect of Ghosting

Ghosting, in its silent exit, leaves in its wake feelings of disrespect, confusion, and devaluation. It can sow seeds of doubt in one’s self-worth, particularly as there is no closure or understanding. In the business context, this abrupt severance disrupts workflows, delays projects, and fosters an atmosphere of uncertainty. Within communities, it fractures cohesion and trust, hampering the collective ability to grow and learn together.

The Ghosters and Their Motives

The motivations behind ghosting are as diverse as the individuals themselves. Some may ghost to avoid confrontations or uncomfortable situations, while others may unintentionally vanish due to personal emergencies or health crises. In business, feelings of being overwhelmed, or inability to meet commitments, may lead some to ghost their partners. However, the central theme here is the lack of communication.

Counteracting Ghosting: Strategies and Approaches

Combating ghosting requires empathy, understanding, and the fostering of open communication. Here are some strategies:

Encouraging Openness

Promote an environment where open communication is the norm. This fosters a culture where individuals feel comfortable voicing concerns and challenges, deterring potential ghosting scenarios.

Mastering The Art of Non-Confrontational Confrontation

If you’ve been ghosted, refrain from personalising the situation. Rather, reach out with a non-threatening message, allowing the other party an opportunity to explain.

Finding Self-Closure

In cases where the ghoster remains unresponsive, it’s crucial to seek closure independently. Validate your feelings, but remember your worth isn’t dependent on the other person’s actions.

Establishing Boundaries

Setting clear expectations and boundaries from the start can help prevent ghosting. This could include outlining communication norms, project commitments, or guidelines for respectful engagement.

Ghosting: A Subtle Form of Violence?

The emotional and psychological stress caused by ghosting calls into question whether this silent act could be considered a form of violence. Violence isn’t just physical harm; it also includes psychological and emotional harm. Ghosting can inflict emotional trauma akin to a form of neglect or abuse, thus aligning with this broader understanding of violence.If you’ve ever been ghosted, you might know the feelings it induces.

However, not all may agree with this perspective due to the variance in the ghoster’s intent. The term “violence” generally implies an intent to harm, but many ghosters may lack this intent. Nevertheless, we might choose to consider the potential damage ghosting can cause and work towards fostering empathy and emotional literacy.

Summary

Ghosting, whether in personal or professional relationships, is a silent yet powerful signal reminding us of the timeless values of respect, communication, and empath.

Auftragstaktik, an organisational philosophy originating from the Prussian military in the 19th century, and more recently the USMC, has found resonance in various spheres, from combat planning to corporate management. At its core, Auftragstaktik focuses on the principle of needs-oriented leadership. It’s the idea that leaders should define goals – the “commander’s intent – and provide the necessary resources, but leave the “how” to subordinates, thus enabling those subordinates’ creativity, flexibility, and autonomy.

However, an emerging question is how to apply Auftragstaktik in environments that seek to de-emphasise hierarchical management structures and instead foster a sense of fellowship. Specifically, in the world of software development, the traditional reliance on junior officer analogues such as team leaders, Scrum Masters, senior developers, or middle managers is evolving. There is an increasing push to build a more egalitarian and collaborative culture, which can sometimes appear at odds with the military hierarchy from which Auftragstaktik emerged.

Here’s how we can reconcile these two approaches and effectively apply Auftragstaktik in software development environments that prioritise fellowship over hierarchical roles:

Foster a Culture of Ownership

The beauty of Auftragstaktik is that it promotes a sense of ownership among team members by providing them the freedom to approach work in ways they find most effective. In a fellowship-oriented culture, this sense of ownership becomes even more profound. Fellowship empowers teams to not only implement solutions, but also identify problems, propose assignments, and provide feedback to others. This fosters a sense of mutual respect, collaboration, and shared responsibility that is central to a high-productivity culture.

Value Collective Intelligence

A fellowship-oriented culture values collective intelligence above individual contribution. Similarly, Auftragstaktik can be implemented in a way that emphasises the strength of the collective team. By articulating clear needs to be attended to (cf. the Needsscape) and allowing the team to collaborate on the means to meet these needs, you draw on the diverse skills, experiences, and perspectives within the team. This maximises innovation and problem-solving capabilities.

Encourage Continuous Learning

For Auftragstaktik to work effectively within a fellowship model, an organisation might choose to promote and value continuous learning. Teams may choose to cultivate their ability to assess their strategies, learn from their mistakes, and continuously adapt. This invites the organisation to provide space for reflection, constructive feedback, and iteration.

Promote Transparency and Trust

Trust is the bedrock of Auftragstaktik and a fellowship-oriented culture. The organisation might choose to trust their teams to devise the best strategies, while team members need to trust each other to carry out their respective parts. This trust is cultivated through transparency in communication, objectives, expectations, and feedback.

Equip Your Team

Finally, for teams to take responsibility for the “how,” they need to be adequately equipped with the necessary tools and resources. This includes not only tangible assets, such as software tools, but also intangible ones such as information, knowledge, skills, budgets, and support.

Summary

In conclusion, applying Auftragstaktik in a fellowship-oriented environment requires a slight shift in focus from the traditional approach. Instead of concentrating on hierarchy and rigid roles, the emphasis should be on mutual trust, transparency, and the empowerment of the team. Such an approach would not only harness the power of Auftragstaktik but also foster a culture of camaraderie, collaboration, and collective ownership, which are at the heart of the fellowship model.

Further Reading

For a complete book detailing the convergence of Auftragstaktik and Fellowship (and Aikido, too), look no futher than my awesome book, “Product Aikido“:

Marshall, R. W. (2013). Product Aikido. Retrieved from https://flowchainsensei.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/productaikido041016.pdf

In the quest to create a harmonious environment, many institutions, corporations, and communities implement Codes of Conduct (CoCs). Designed to guide behaviour and promote respectful interaction, these rules have become standard procedure in many contexts. However, not everyone agrees with the sentiment behind them or the methods used to enforce them. In British slang, the phrase “CoCs are cock” might resonate with those who find themselves trapped by the paradox of trying to dissuade violence or improper conduct by enforcing sometimes rigid and demanding regulations.

The Ideals Behind Codes of Conduct

CoCs are generally conceived with good intentions. They aim to create an environment where everyone can feel safe, respected, and free from harassment. These principles are built around empathy, understanding, and the willingness to embrace diversity.

The Paradox: Obligation to Conform

The paradox arises when the enforcement of these principles takes on a form that may be perceived as violent or oppressive in itself. The need to conform, comply, and the often swift punishment for transgressions can lead to an atmosphere of fear or resentment. The very tools used to foster harmony can create discord.

1. Rigid Rules vs. Human Nature

People are diverse, complex, and often unpredictable. The rigid rules in some CoCs might not always allow for this diversity of human expression, leading to misunderstandings and perceived unfair treatment.

2. Suppression of Free Speech

While the intention is to prevent hate speech and promote respectful dialogue, the line between what is deemed offensive and what is an honest expression of opinion can be blurred. This might lead to the suppression of free speech and the stifling of genuine debate and growth.

3. Inconsistency in Enforcement

In some cases, the enforcement of CoCs might be inconsistent, leading to feelings of injustice. When rules are applied selectively or interpreted in different ways, it undermines the very principles they are supposed to uphold.

Finding the Balance

Finding the right balance between maintaining order and freedom is a complex challenge. CoCs should ideally be living documents, adapting and evolving with the community they serve. Open dialogue, transparency, flexibility, and a focus on education rather than mere punishment might be the keys to successful implementation.

Conclusion

The phrase “CoCs are cock” may be a colloquial way to express dissatisfaction with a system that sometimes seems paradoxical. While the goal of creating respectful and harmonious environments is noble, the approach to achieving this goal must be carefully considered. It’s vital to recognise that the path to a more compassionate community might require not rules but rather a deeper understanding of human nature, empathy, and the complex dynamics of human interaction. The paradox lies not in the intention but often in the implementation, and it’s a challenge that requires ongoing attention, reflection, and evolution.

Q: What’s the most challenging aspect of leading and managing teams?

A: Avoiding violence.

The most challenging aspect of leading and managing teams, especially in today’s modern workplaces, can be encapsulated in a single phrase: avoiding violence. The concept of violence in this context extends beyond the conventional understanding of physical aggression to include psychological violence, passive violence, and domination structures prevalent in organisations.

When discussing violence in a team setting, we must also consider psychological violence, often termed ‘abuse’ or ‘mental cruelty.’ This form of violence is inflicted not physically but emotionally and mentally. Passive violence is another important aspect to note. It encompasses consciously ignoring someone’s physical, psychological, or emotional needs or failing to ensure their safety and well-being. In both scenarios, the effect on team morale, engagement, and overall productivity can be profoundly negative.

The Roots

Renowned author and psychotherapist Marshall Rosenberg provides a critical insight into this subject, stating that “classifying and judging people promotes violence.” In essence, the root cause of most violence – verbal, psychological, or physical – is a kind of thinking that attributes conflict to wrongness in one’s adversaries.

Domination structures within organisations can be a significant source of violence. Scholar and activist Walter Wink coined the term “Domination Structures” or “Domination Culture,” highlighting a system where authority is concentrated at the top and obedience and compliance is demanded from the lower ranks. This form of structure promotes systemic beliefs, often maintained through coercive violence, which can suppress creativity, hinder collaboration, impair cognitive function, and breed a culture of fear and silence.

Relevance

The relevance of nonviolence to everyday business operations, particularly software development, is significant. Domination structures and their resulting violence lead to ineffective organisations marked by disengaged employees, low morale, and poor productivity.

Understanding and addressing these forms of violence in teams require an evolved fellowship style that promotes egalitarian, mutually respectful, and affirming relationships. It involves creating an environment that values empathy and understanding, fostering a culture that is at the ‘partnership’ end of the spectrum rather than the ‘domination’ end.

In conclusion, managing and leading teams is a challenging task that goes beyond task allocation and performance tracking. It requires navigating the delicate nuances of human emotions and creating a safe, respectful, and empathetic work environment, free from all forms of violence. This, undoubtedly, is the most demanding aspect of leadership and management, but when achieved, it can pave the way for exceptional team performance.

Definition

Professionalism can be seen as a set of obligations or responsibilities that individuals have to adhere to certain standards of behavior, ethics, and conduct in their work or professional roles.

Self-violence

The idea that professionalism is equivalent to self-violence is a controversial and complex statement that requires careful consideration.

On the one hand, the pressure to conform to strict standards of professionalism can create feelings of obligation, and thus stress, anxiety, and burnout among individuals who feel they must suppress their authentic selves in order to meet these standards. This can result in a sense of self-violence, as individuals may feel they are denying their true identity in order to meet external expectations.

On the other hand, some argue that professionalism is a necessary component of creating a safe and respectful work environment, and that adhering to certain standards of behavior and conduct can promote positive relationships and effective communication among colleagues and clients.

Ultimately, the relationship between professionalism and self-violence is complex. While professionalism can be a positive force in some cases, it is important to recognize and address the potential negative impacts that obligatory adherence to professional standards can have on individuals and organisations.

Imagine a world where guilt, shame, and pressure dissolve, replaced by empowerment and self-determination. Discover the transformative impact of switching from “shoulding” to “might choose to,” and watch as conversations, writings, and thoughts become more authentic and humane.

“Shoulding” refers to the practice of imposing expectations, obligations, or judgments on oneself or others, often leading to feelings of guilt, shame, opposition, or resentment. This habit can negatively impact mental health, relationships, and communication.

If you would like to eliminate “shoulding” from your conversations, writings, and thoughts, consider using the phrase “might choose to” instead. This alternative promotes a sense of autonomy and flexibility, encouraging individuals to make decisions based on personal values and preferences rather than societal pressures or perceived obligations. By embracing this approach, we can foster healthier, more empowering communication styles and thought patterns.

Relationship-building is an undervalued but vital tool in the arsenal of the modern-day employee. It is not enough to simply march in the streets or hold a sign aloft; building connections with like-minded individuals and fostering a sense of community is essential to creating lasting change. However, many businesses today actively work to undermine relationship-building in the workplace, promoting division and competition among employees at the expense of cooperation and collaboration.

This insidiousness can take many forms, from pitting employees against each other for promotions to encouraging a toxic work culture that values individual achievement over teamwork. But through active relationship-building, we protest against these destructive practices and create a workplace that values fellowship, cooperation and solidarity.

By forging connections with our fellow employees and working to create a sense of community, we challenge the dominant narrative of competition and individualism. This is not just a matter of improving our own working conditions; it is a powerful form of protest that strikes at the very heart of the capitalist system that pits workers against each other for the benefit of the few.

So let us not underestimate the power of fellowship as a form of protest. By standing together and fostering a sense of community in the workplace, we can create a better world for ourselves and for future generations.

Violence is a pervasive issue in our society. In fact, the workplace is one of the most common settings where violence takes place. This is not just physical violence, but also psychological aggression, such as bullying, harassment, and discrimination. Unfortunately, this workplace violence has a ripple effect on society as a whole, perpetuating a cycle of violence that affects individuals and communities both.

The consequences of violence in the workplace are severe. For employees, it can lead to emotional distress, physical injury, and decreased job satisfaction. For employers, workplace violence can lead to increased insurance costs, decreased employee retention, and decreased employee morale. This creates a vicious cycle, where the violence in the workplace contributes to the violence in society, and vice versa.

Moreover, workplace violence is not limited to specific industries. It can occur in any type of workplace, from a construction site to a corporate office. This is due, in part, to the cultural norms and values that are prevalent in our society. For example, in many cultures, there is a belief that aggression and dominance are desirable traits in a leader, leading to a workplace environment that is prone to violence.

Similarly, cultural norms may also dictate that employees should be passive, leading to an environment where violence is tolerated and unreported.

The culture of violence in the workplace also extends to the wider society. For example, those who are subjected to violence in the workplace are more likely to become victims of violence in their personal lives.

In addition, exposure to violence in the workplace can desensitize individuals to violence, leading to a more violent society. For example, individuals who experience bullying or harassment in the workplace may be more likely to engage in violent behavior in their personal lives.

The cycle of violence between the workplace and society is not easily broken. To address this issue, we might look to changing the cultural norms and values that perpetuate violence in the workplace and society. Additionally, we might choose to provide support and resources to individuals who have experienced workplace violence, such as counseling, legal assistance, and simple compassion

In conclusion, violence in the workplace is a significant issue that has far-reaching consequences. By addressing workplace violence, we can help to break the cycle of violence that affects individuals and communities, and create a safer and more respectful work environment. The key to this is changing the cultural norms and values that perpetuate violence in our society, and promoting a culture of respect and nonviolence.

Linguistic Relativity is the idea that language shapes the way we think. In programming, the imperative style is widely used in which instructions are given to the computer. The immersion in imperative communication via programming languages raises the question of whether this influences the programmer’s thinking and contributes to the preservation of command-and-control behavior in organisations. The use of “should” in modern Behavior Driven Development (BDD) is an example of rampant imperativism in language.

E-Prime is a modified form English proposed by D. David Bourland to reduce misunderstandings and conflicts. The idea of modifying language to improve thinking is not new.

The concept of a Nonviolent Programming language based on the Four Steps of Nonviolent Communication is an intriguing one. It raises the question of what a Nonviolent Programming language would look like and feel like to use and whether it would have knock-on advantages for Nonviolent BDD. If Gandhi, for example, had been a programmer instead of a lawyer, what would his code have looked like? If he had been immersed in programming languages for 40 hours a week, would he have held the same views on non-violence?

Adopting a Nonviolent Programming language and style could have positive implications for our personal and work-related communication, as seen through the lens of Linguistic Relativity. Spending 40 hours a week on Nonviolent Programming could contribute to the health and well-being of our human dialogues and personal interactions.

See also: Nonviolent Programming

I don’t have a regular job because I just can’t stand the insanity of it all any more. Is that my loss or the world’s?

The world of work is a meat-grinder, a place where the only thing that matters is ego, violence and stupidity. It’s a place where the only thing that counts is one’s ability to serve oneself, to cosy down and protect one’s own interests to the exclusion of all else. I can’t live like that.

I can’t stand the way that people are treated like nothing more than numbers, like nothing more than cogs in a machine, like so many adjuncts of a Borg unimatrix.

Similar to how Gandhi couldn’t stand the deep injustices and intolerability of British imperial rule in India, I can’t stand the world of work as it is now. He stepped away from his comfortable life to fight for what he believed in. Similarly, I have stepped away from the world of traditional wage-slavery to pursue other avenues, other ways of making a difference in the world.

I don’t know if my decision is a loss for me, or for the world. I just know that I can’t continue to be an acquiescing adjunct to something that I find so deeply troubling and unjust. I have little expectation that in the future, the corporate world will change, that it will become a place where people are valued for the content of their character and their heart, not for how much money they can make. But for now, I know that I need to step away, and that’s what I have done. I suspect I’m not by any means alone.

#work #culture #change #people #justice #insanity

This post is close to my heart, having suffered and seen bullying on numerous occasions in various organisations, include Fujitsu Siemens, CPA Global and News International (now News UK).

Violence in organisations is a pandemic in and of itself. It can take many forms, including verbal abuse, physical violence, and cyberbullying. This type of behavior can have a detrimental effect on folks mental and physical well-being, as well as on the overall productivity and morale of the workplace.

One of the most common forms of bullying in the IT and software industries is verbal abuse. This can include name-calling, belittling, harassment, and intimidation. It can lead to feelings of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem, and can make it difficult for individuals to feel comfortable and confident in their work.

Another, albeit less common, form of bullying is physical violence. This can include pushing, shoving, and other forms of physical aggression.. It can create a hostile and dangerous work environment, which makes it difficult for employees to feel safe and secure.

Cyberbullying is also prevalent in the IT and software industries. This can include sending threatening emails, messages, or posts, or spreading rumors and false information online to harass or bully others.

Cyberbullying can be particularly damaging as it can be done anonymously, and can reach a wide audience.

The effects of bullying in the IT and software industries can be severe and long-lasting. Victims of bullying may experience a range of physical and mental health problems, such as anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). They may also suffer from poor sleep and eating habits, and will struggle to concentrate or perform well in their work.

In addition, bullying can lead to high turnover rates and lower productivity, as employees who are being bullied may be less motivated and less engaged in their work.

To address bullying it’s important for employers to take a proactive approach. This can include implementing a zero-tolerance policy for bullying, providing training for employees on how to recognise and report bullying, and taking swift and appropriate action when bullying is reported. It is also important for employers to create a culture of respect and inclusivity, where employees feel valued and supported. Don’t leave it to HR to handle.

In conclusion, bullying and other forms of violence is a serious issue that can have a detrimental effect on the mental and physical well-being of those who are targeted, as well as on the overall productivity and morale of the workplace. Employers have a legal and moral responsibility address this issue, by, for example, implementing a zero-tolerance policy for bullying, providing training for employees, and creating a culture of respect and inclusivity in the workplace.

One-on-one meetings are crucial for building effective and productive relationships within any organisation. To ensure that these meetings are successful, understand the social style of the person you are meeting with and adapt your communication and behaviour accordingly. One valuable technique for this the Wilson Learning Social Styles Model. This model identifies four different social styles, each with their own unique strengths and communication preferences. By understanding the social style of the person you are meeting with, you can adapt your communication and behaviour to better suit their needs and build a more effective and productive relationship. The model suggests that there are four social styles: the Analytical, Driving, Amiable, and Expressive. Each of these has its own characteristics, communication preferences, strengths, and potential development areas. By understanding the social style of the person you are meeting with, you can adapt your communication and behaviour to better suit their needs and build a more effective and productive relationship.

Additionally, the principle of nonviolence and the practice of Nonviolent Communication (NVC) can also play a key role in making one-on-one meetings more effective and productive. NVC emphasises the importance of understanding and expressing our own needs and feelings, as well as listening deeply to the needs and feelings of others. By using NVC techniques, we can communicate in a way that is more compassionate and understanding and avoid the use of blame, criticism, or judgement. This helps to create a more positive and open environment for communication. Additionally, by approaching conflicts and disagreements with a non-violent mindset, we can avoid escalating tensions and find more constructive solutions.

Another valuable technique for one-on-one meetings is Nancy Kline’s Time to Think (and More Time to Think). This approach emphasises the importance of giving people enough time to think and reflect before responding, rather than expecting immediate answers or solutions. By creating a safe and quiet space for people to think and actively listening without interruption, we can help them to access their own wisdom and insights. Additionally, by encouraging people to share their thoughts and ideas, we can tap into the collective wisdom and potential of the group. This can foster a more collaborative and productive working relationship.

In summary, the key to great one-on-one meetings is a combination of understanding the social style of the person you are meeting with, incorporating principles of nonviolence and NVC, and using techniques like Time to Think. By implementing these approaches, you can create a more conducive environment for effective communication and problem-solving in one-on-one meetings, resulting in better outcomes for all parties involved.

The quote “When you see people as trees, you don’t get tangled up in their branches” by Ram Dass highlights the idea that when we choose to see people as we see trees, we can avoid getting caught up in their flaws and imperfections. We can appreciate the unique beauty and complexity of each individual without getting embroiled in judgment or criticism.

This non-judgmental attitude is key to nonviolence, both in our personal interactions and in larger social and political contexts. When we can approach others without judgment, we are more likely to respond to conflicts and disagreements with empathy and understanding, rather than with anger or aggression. And in recognising interconnectedness and the impact of systemic injustices, we can actively work to dismantle them.