In Stephen Covey’s book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, the author recommends that one teach or at least discuss the material in the book within 48 hours of reading it. I first read the book not long after its 1989 publication date. A few weeks ago I started teaching from it. That’s a little over the 48-hour recommended gap between learning and teaching but it took that long for the teaching opportunity to come along.
As I’ve gone through the book again, I’ve been surprised by how much of it I have retained, not necessarily in my mind as something I read in that particular book, but as a “habit,” you might say. I have a personal mission statement that I first developed while reading that book and have updated periodically over the years. I review it now and again and consider how my default priorities correlate with the goals therein. I try to plan by the month and week rather than one day at a time - when I’m on top of things enough to plan at all. An occasional thought pops into my mind about things like paradigm shifts and emotional bank accounts and the contrast between my "circle of concern" and my "circle of influence", concepts I first encountered in The 7 Habits ...
I’ve also forgotten much of what I read in the book, enough that I’m pretty much stuck at being sort of rather than highly effective. Maybe teaching it will help my retention and I will be able to move up to somewhat effective. Or maybe not.
Last week’s lesson was on Habit #6 – “Synergize®” As predicted, teaching the material is increasing its impact in my own mind. I’ve been pondering the concept of synergy (the whole is more than the sum of the parts) all week.
There’s a graph in the chapter on synergy. I’m a mathematical thinker. Graphs speak to me and stick with me. On the graph, the ‘y’ axis is trust; the ‘x’ axis is cooperation. When trust and cooperation are low, people tend to find Win/Lose solutions to conflict. One side wins, the other loses. Moderate levels of trust and cooperation might lead to compromise, everyone loses a little and wins a little. It takes high levels of both trust and cooperation to discover Win/Win solutions through synergy, a final answer better than any of the initial solutions proposed by those involved in the discussion/conflict.
Set against this concept in my mind are some frustrating situations in my life. I’m banging my head against the wall. I look at the situations and long for an atmosphere that would enable synergistic Win/Win solutions. Instead, I find people who are too bent on winning to care that I’m losing and who are not interested in cooperating with me. As a result, according to Habit #4 (Think Win/Win) we’re all losing. Dr. Covey makes the point in that chapter that those who make Win/Lose choices actually lose. In the end, there is no Win/Lose or Lose/Win, only Win/Win or Lose/Lose.
This frustrates me, to put it mildly. Why can’t we sit down and let synergy do its magic as we come up with a Win/Win solution that is better than any one person can formulate alone? I’m not the only one frustrated by walls being erected in the organization as a result of mistrust. Why can’t we address the issues together and work toward synergistic solutions?
As I’ve thought about this, it has occurred to me that my own frustration is both a symptom of the problem and a cause of the problem. Those building the walls don’t trust me and are not willing to cooperate with me. They simply put up walls and shut me out of the decision-making process. Hearing me bang my head against those walls bolsters their confidence that the walls were a good idea. As my frustration at losing mounts, their desire to interact with me decreases. Shut the door. Keep her out. She can’t be trusted. There’s no use trying to cooperate with her. Take the win. Don’t worry about the losers. Losers are emotionally unstable and irrational. I end up isolated and alone behind the wall. No one hears my cries. Many around me are dealing with their own walls.
There is one other option besides Win/Win or Lose/Lose according to Dr. Covey - No Deal. Neither side wins; neither side loses. The parties involved agree that there will be no solution and either go their separate ways or move on to other priorities depending on the desirability of a continued relationship.
One side cannot force a Win/Win solution if the other side isn’t willing to trust and cooperate. That leaves Lose/Lose or No Deal. However, if a wonderful, synergistic Win/Win solution is lost through No Deal, isn’t that also a loss?
To reach Win/Win, one side has to decide to trust and cooperate with the other, even when trust has been previously violated. I can’t do it. These people have shown a willingness to shut people out (including me), a lack of concern for the interests of others. Even though it may be my own frustration that has prompted them to shut the door on me, I still can’t trust them enough to take the first step toward cooperation while they're still blocking me out.
It’s at this point that I’m thrown back on my faith. I can’t trust the people involved to care about me, but I can choose to trust God to do so. Jesus taught that those who freely accept Lose/Win decisions that are forced on them are winners in the end. (See Matthew 5:38-41) That Win may be a long time coming. Or maybe not. If I offer cooperation and express trust in God that the wall will not finally defeat me, is there hope that trust and cooperation will be offered in return? It’s something to ponder anyhow.
An old poem whose origins are lost to me comes to mind:
He drew a circle that shut me out
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win,
We drew a circle that took him in.
I need to go look for some circle-drawing chalk.
2 comments:
Thanks for the interesting comments, Andrew. I encountered Prisoner's Dilemma while doing a research paper several years ago but had forgotten about it. It has some interesting implications for the trust/cooperate pattern, as you point out.
You're right about the graph. It portrayed trust and cooperation as always increasing proportionately rather than as independent variables.
I especially appreciate what you said about the no-deal position in your last paragraph. You've given me more to ponder.
:-)
Thank you to my friend Wanda for providing the author of the circle epigram (my vocabulary word for the day). It was written by Edwin Markham.
I don't suppose there's much excuse for not giving proper credit when posting someone else's literary efforts on the internet. After all, google is never more than a few keystrokes away. My feeble excuse is that I could either finish the post or do the research in the time available and chose to do the post.
Anyway, now I know. Thanks, Wanda.
Post a Comment