Is It Just Semantics?
Here’s another example of my taking current events and looking at them with a managerial lens.
It doesn’t even matter what the article is about! For me, it’s about the language being used in discourse. I mean, let’s not get carried away: this isn’t about “survival”. It doesn’t even have to be a “fight”, and it certainly *shouldn’t* be a “battleground”. Using these terms is divisive and unhelpful.
You may notice in my previous post that I put the word “win” in quotations. That’s because no one “wins” these things. It’s our company; we shouldn’t want to have any “losers”!
What we want is a place where people (smart, capable people) come together to have discussions, where they can share their myriad perspectives and back them up with evidence (not just strong feelings or loud voices). We want those people to be open to hearing what the others have to say, to debate the merits of certain suggestions, to point out the weak spots – and the strengths. And then we want them to work together to create the best possible solution (at least for that time with the constraints that are in place). In leaving the discussion, we want each person to feel heard and valued, even if their solution didn’t come out as the one worth doing now.
What steps have you taken to invite additional points-of-view? How do you support healthy dialogue and even conflict? What happens after a decision is made; do you follow-up with people who went away unhappy?