The More Things Change....

Tonight I watched the documentary on PBS about Roy Stryker and his photography program. I used to work for the American Archives and I spent a year working on the papers of the WPA (Work Progress Administration) so I knew about some of the photographers and I knew about the importance of their work. The records they created of the Great Depression, of the suffering and injustice at 44% of the American people were suffering at that time was historic. People who lived n the cities had no idea of what was happening in the more rural parts of America and Congress was not interested. Roosevelt was amazing in his foresight and heart. It was the photos taken by these photographers (many of whom are now famous Dorthea Lange, Gregory parks, Ben Shaun) that convinced Congress to fund the New Deal programs. Still these program were killed, the funding stopped because people did not want to see the discrepancies the photos represented. The programs were called socialist, communist and more. They were discredited and called fakes. How hard it must have been to be the brunt of that name calling and disinformation, yet Stryker fought.


How different is it today? the same issue - what is the purpose of government -
is still being fought. The current administration is on the other side, business instead of people. Roosevelt was dealing with the result of a 100 years of results of those kinds of policies, yet we still keep that conversation going. Instead of getting smarter about how to help folks we question if we should. We question if the tax payers money should be spent on behalf of the taxpayer.

Part of that discussion has gotten wrapped up in the the ideal of individualism versus community, only community is seen as socialism or worse instead of the natural way people live. We have never lived as individuals, society is all about community, the species would have died out is we had not learned to live n community, yet now we question the idea and pride ourselves on thinking we really live in the illusion of individualism. The wonderful paradox that community is composed of individuals should be richly treasured and explored, not exploited.

That paradox is a part of what this next election is all about. Just how "individual" do we really want to be? Is it really working out to have every person fend for themselves? What should be the rules of community? What are the responsibilites of individuals - of communities? Do we need another WPA?

Evolution, Ah, Evolution

Finally - we are beginning to have a REAL discussion about the foolish and very dangerous resistance to evolution. The NY Times article by Olivia Judson touches the tip of that iceberg! Those who are resisting (no matter on what grounds) have tried to make it an issue of "right and wrong," but it is sooooo much more than that. What is truly shocking and unethical is the caviler disregard for facts.

It seems laughable that people would really believe that people walked the Earth at the same time as the dinosaurs, but that is what a biblical theme park is maintaining. Now think for a moment, how can that jibe with our understanding of the stars and astronomy? Is all that to be thrown out? How does that jibe with geology? Is all that to be thrown out? All this because people have such a limited ability to trust their own minds and prefer to "trust" words written thousands of years ago. By taking spiritual words literally they actually demean the value and wisdom contained in those words and often miss the deeper and very useful insights they contain.

I wonder if they are at all interested in how microbes are “evolving” in ways that can make us, and them, much sicker. Are they interested in the newer medicines that are being developed to address these issues or are they happy with the older more “traditional” medicines that are having difficulty working with the new strains of viruses?

The whole argument against evolution is spacious and it’s about time they got called on it! Believe in “Intelligent Design” if you want to. It’s very poetic and there is nothing in it that denies the possibility of evolution, unless you are limiting Gods ability and arguing with the processes God has developed to bring reality into existence. My request is that you do not hamstring the minds of young children and limit the potential for their success in the world.

Business-Bear Arms

The Business Relevance of the "Right to Bear Arms"

By Kathryn Alexander, Ethical Impact, Inc.

What an interesting situation. The Supreme Court validated our right to own guns. I"m not a gun owner, I don't believe in it. I love to shoot and I lean toward a non-violent approach to life. Disclosures over, I don't see how they could have come up with a different verdict. I do think the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. That said, what are the ethical implications and considerations that lie under this issue?

The essay by Donald M. Wolfe in Executive Integrity edited by Suresh Shrivasta, set my perspective on this a long time ago. He posits primary and secondary ethics. Primary ethics are the ethics of survival. This is the ethical stance that the NRA (National Rifle Association) and many pro-gun folks take. The ability to protect oneself is a primary right. We have even coded this into law assuring our ability to self-defend. What becomes unethical is the conscious fostering of fear (The Bush Administration's terrorism mantra) to stimulate and maintain that fear.

Secondary ethics moves away from the fixation on individual survival and moves into community and relationship. Secondary ethics deals with fear through strengthening relationships and community governance. Here the focus is on long-term solutions and sees the needs of the community as paramount. This is the reason for the tension around this ruling.

It is clear to most people that the rule of law comes under threat when we regress into fears about individual survival.In doing so we negate our faith in law, community, relationships and principled discussion and instead put our faith in force and might.

This is an underlying tension in many organizations as well. The more secretive and heavy handed the leadership, the more primary ethics holds sway. Authoritarian leadership styles give permission for "me first" behavior - often at the expense of the company. It opens up the company to ethical issues and violations. In fact the justification for much of the illegal and unethical behavior that companies confront is the "They deserved it" logic that stems from  disgruntled employees who have felt they have been dealt with unfairly. Unfair treatment often results in feeling of powerlessness which activates fear and acts of vengeance.

Justice Anthony Scalia made it very clear that control and regulation of hand guns ownership is still possible. We as a people and as a Nation, need to decide if we will move toward a more civil Union or devolve into every person for him or her self. Freedom requires responsibility to ensure people understand and accept their individual responsibility they need: information to be freely and easily accessible; to be educated to be able to think critically and effectively; to be supported in their personal growth, development and understanding so they can manage their own emotions and personal hurt effectively; and to be nurtured and cared for a children so that normal growth and development IS a norm. This is a tall order, but isn't this one of underlying drivers of civilization? Isn't our striving as a species, to create an environment where we are free enough from fear that we can develop, explore and express our true capabilities? If we want to reach a place where the true potential of humanity is developed and expressed is a hand gun in every home the way to go?

This is the path that business is on as well. The volatility of the marketplace, the rapid advances of technology and the shrinking of the globe all call for new ways of working together. To address these issues and if business answers the call, then, as employees and leaders rise to the occasion, they will transform a fear-based environment into one of innovative collaboration - out of necessity.

This is my belief, hope and vision for business. I believe that the external pressures combined with the drive for success will create a crucible of transformation. At the heart of that transformation is a rock solid knowledge in the exquisite capacity of humans, the courage of an o9pen heart as we all come together, and the wisdom to use the collective intelligence of participation to create a world we WANT to live in.

Thoughts from Bill Moyers and Affirmative Action

I've had a concern about the political machine that is working in several states to remove affirmative action by saying that ALL people need to be treated equally. I fear that Ocala’s success will validate this belief for many whites. It SOUNDS logical and right. The point discussed on the show and which I would like input is that affirmative action can be "universalized" by moving it from a "Black" issue to one of poverty. Bill Lowery's point was that there are more poor white folks than black and just in numbers that could effectively remarginalize blacks. I believe that this is very possible. However - what is the solution? What other strategies are out there to address the issues that poverty and history creates in a community? The Hispanic community is also beginning to be effected this way. Illegal immigrants are really caught in a new form of slavery. Their children are adapting to their social pressures in much the same way that poor black children do. This is an AMERICAN problem that is being most strongly showcased in two ethnic communities. What is the language, the approach that can be developed to deal with it?

Ethically ALL people should have the same opportunities, but slavery - in all it's forms, past AND present has made that impossible - at present. The new book Slavery by Another Name, talks about how the legal system has been used since the civil war to re-inslave Blacks. Now illegal immigration is doing the same thing to Hispanics. Affirmative action was the countries response to that injustice and an attempt to do something about it. We still have that responsibility.

What do we need to do politically to ensure that ALL children of this country are supported to become strong contributing citizens? We all loose when the promise of a young life is corrupted by circumstances beyond their or their families control. Poverty creates such circumstances.

Of immediate importance is a public conversation that will help white people see the insidiousness of the anti-affirmative action ballot initiatives that are being put forward in several states, including Colorado and that have passed in states like Michigan. In truth affirmative action is NOT just about the Black community - it is about poverty, but any conversation about poverty must not be allowed to minimize or ignore the real need in both Hispanic and Black communities for targeted support.

Democracy as a Business Option

I don't know about you, but I've been so alarmed with what is going on in the world - from our government's politics, to global warming - that I feel a crushing need to do something. Maybe you can resonate with the fact that that seems easier to say than to do. overwhelm doesn't begin to describe the feeling.

One things is very clear to me. We need to think and act very differently from how we think and act now. These crises are turning who we thought we were and we thought the world works on its head.

Bill McKibben, in a recent issue of "Yes" talks about national policy changes. A new understanding, for instance, that national security interests can only be met by shipping China technology that will help them use less coal and not by shipping missals and arms to China's enemies. With the planet dying who is our enemy? Everyone? That's a pretty hopeless scenario. We are all in this together and we will only get out of it together. In fact that's one of the ways of thinking that has to change. The fear of others that makes them enemies instead of reaching for the understanding that will make them friends. The whole terrorism issue is interlaced with that.

Togetherness - community - these have begun to surface as the real keys to the survival of life on the planet. For Americans this is a huge challenge. We've been indoctrinated in the illusion of individualism. This has never been true about our country. Historically it was through community (barn raising?) that we "conquered" the frontier. Holding onto the illusion of separateness is an illusion that will kill us.

Russel Ackoff, of MIT fame, was moved over 12 years ago to inquire into the lack of Democracy in our organizations. Democracy can only flourish in community. Democracy is all about having people involved in governance. It takes real conversations by real people with free and easy access to information to make Democracy work. This is why the founding fathers supported public education. Only an educated person can find and use the information necessary to make informed decision about the Country's future, their future and the future of others.

How different would your organization be if it was run democratically? Does that send shiver down your spine? What thoughts are running through your head? Are you afraid of what the employees might do? Do you think they would not know what to do? Do you think they would take all the money? Would it take too long to make decisions? What, exactly do you think would happen?

Now why do fear what we are fighting so fiercely for in Iraq? Why do we think that governing democratically in our organizations would cause them to fail? What about democracy do we not trust? What is it about us as individuals that resists the sharing and openness that is needed to act in concert with our "cherished" beliefs?

Ricardo Semler, a Brazilian businessman, wrote Maverick, the story about his success building a successful business whilst inflation was running at up to 900%. He writes about his epiphany when his employees wanted to take the business in a direction he didn't what to go. He realized that he need to act in concert with the beliefs he had been proposing for years, the beliefs that had made a stunning success of his company, he needed to let go. He did, and it worked very well.

Jack Stack, of Springfield Reengineering, learned much the same lesson. After buying a business the employees (including him) realized they did not know how to run the business. He, however did an amazing thing, he created a process where everyone had access to the information they needed to make decisions (now called The Great Game of Business) so everyone could help in running it effectively. It worked and he now teaches other organizations to follow suite.

For both of these men the process was slow. People were educated, everyone underwent personal growth, trust was acquired on day at a time, risks were taken and great leaps of faith were made. Jack faced a situation where, early in the process, they lost their biggest customer. He was looking at layoffs. He agonized for days - then he did an amazing thing - he told the employees the news, he asked for their ideas. They had ideas - they all took pay cuts, they all marketed and they came out of that year ahead of where they would have been if nothing had happened.

Ben Franklin said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." He was a wise man, yet that is exactly what we do. If we treat people as if they don't know what they are doing, if we treat people as if they wouldn't understand, if we treat people as if we are afraid of them, then why should we be surprised when that is how they act? This is one of the prime lessons of parenting. What you expect is what you get. Yet we keep doing the same things over and over and expect different results. When those results don't come to pass - we blame others and use that experience to reinforce our beliefs. What a silly set of circumstances - if it weren't so sad.

Here's your chance to set a different tone. I'm hear to tell you that increasing the participation of your employees is a transforming experience. Nothing will generate improvements faster. Nothing will cut costs, increase innovation and make work a more enjoyable and personally satisfying experience, Nothing! Over the years make techniques have been developed to allow people to have input quickly and satisfactorily. When ever you get people together to make decisions, plan, or think together, there is a technique that will work, often in surprising ways.

Keys to success are: get the right people in the room (you may have never talked to them before), follow a process that has been designed for participation, take the time to do it right (no one hour meetings), Be clear on the purpose and needed outcome, make sure all the needed information is easily available. I've used Appreciative Inquiry, Future Search, Dialogue, the Four Tools Process, ACI/ToP methods, all to great advantage.

Using Future Search with the Juvenal Justice system in Sacramento, California we brought together judges, lawyers, parents (of both victim and perpetrator), legislators and others to spend two day talking about changes need to the system. It was an astounding success. People learned things they never knew and gained a new perspective on the role and purpose of juvenal justice.

You CAN do this. It is not rocket science. All it takes a willingness to try something different. This is one step we ALL can take to begin to make the changes we need to make to shift our world. If we want to survive we need to learn to work together. That doesn't mean that we all do what I want. It means using the brains and experience of everyone who is involved or impacted by the choices we are making. If you want to learn how to do this, you can begin to enlist everyone in your firm's success. Call me - Google the techniques, there are tons of resources.

Everything needs to shift - changing how we work together will allow us to think differently about the pressing issues of our time. We Can Do It!

An American Myth

Rugged individualism – that’s the pap we are fed with our mother’s milk, the driven person with a vision who takes on all odds and WINS. All pieces of this myth are vital.

Rugged Individualism
The only people who really tried to go it alone were the mountain men. They often “married” Indian women, and they had friends they depended upon too. Most settlers came in groups, lived in groups and families, raised barns together etc. This was certainly true of the pilgrims. Who did it alone? Billy the Kid? He had a “band” he ran with. Who did it all by themselves? Isn’t it about time we put that old saw to rest?

Driven with vision
This part has some truth to it. Many of the “visions” were to escape from bad debts, poverty, scrapes with the law, but such things did provide drive and were a kind of a vision. The dream of a few acres of land can’t be left out of the equitation as both a driver and a vision. Most of the “visions” were personal – about bettering an individual’s life and perhaps that of his family. Maybe that’s where the “rugged individualism” came from.

Takes on all odds
This piece is interesting because I believe it is al the heart of so much that‘s gone wrong. The premise underlying this belief is that everything is against us. This belief underscores the idea that we need to fight for everything – take it – in order to achieve anything of value. We certainly did live this way – and we still do. Holding this belief doesn’t make it true, or even effective. Like all force there are certain short-term gains. These gains hide the fact that there are long-term consequences, consequences we are still paying for. We fought the Indians, why? Because we didn’t believe they could be talked to and when we did make treaties with them we discovered that we would be denied our desires by our own commitments. It was easier to kill them than to act from integrity. Isn’t this a key to human nature, particularly in the west? We really want to be good and we really want others to be good to, but when our culture puts such a focus on “winning” it’s hard to be “good”. (See previous post on this topic.) We need moral support from others to act from our highest self. It’s all about the culture.

Winning
Ah, yes, winning. The need to come out on top as defined by this culture, which means with money or tangible goods that have been taken from someone else. Winning as the be all and end all of relationships is a teenage view of the world. In my model that I use when working with organizations it is the Eagles point of view. There are other points of view, but they are often drowned out by the hooting and hollering done by cheerleaders rooting for their home teams. In this culture we regard winning at any cost a long as you don’t get caught. Getting caught is the real sin, not the actions we take to win.



The New American Myth
If we rewrote this myth what would it be like? Would it sound something like this: America was founded on a vision of cooperative effort and he cheerful undertaking of difficult tasks by folks who wished to live peacefully with their neighbors and who created this peacefulness by living in integrity with both themselves and others. Is it too late for us to adopt this myth?

The Morality of Global Warming

If you haven’t seen “An Inconvenient Truth” yet, put it on your list! It is a very powerful movie and very well done. I learned something and I’ve been following global warming for many years,

Ethics, morality – what are the ethics and morality involved here? When my daughter came to visit we went to take a tour of NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) The tour was interesting, but what was depressing was how many times the tour leader had to say that they (he) couldn’t discuss the research they (NCAR) are doing on the global climate. What kind of government would put pressure on scientists to prevent them from talking about their research? I know this is not new news, but it hurts doubly when it hits so close to home. Where is our out rage at this kind of behavior from the government? One of the gravest sins of this administration has been their willingness to change and hide scientific research. What other governments have done this kind of thing? Are WE to be in their league? The distortion of science is lying on a grand scale. The damage they are doing may last for years and maybe compounded as others make use of this faulty data. This is despicable behavior.

I work with a non-profit and when I researched our field in preparation for a grant proposal I discovered that the government had changed criteria so that they could do a “study” that would give them the numbers they wanted to allow them to claim success when all they did was ask different questions. Their “data” flew in the face of everyone else’s’ research. This had nothing to do with science, but everything to do with the image of this administration. At what cost? If I’d quoted the government “research” I would have eliminated the need for the grant!

Al Gore’s call to face up to the morality of global warming is perfect timing! Here is a real opportunity for western civilization to stand tall and claim the moral high ground. We can stand up and declare that our comfort is not worth the lives of millions of people and PROVE we care by our actions. In the future we will be able to say that we DO care for the people of the world and no one can deny the truth of that statement IF we take the actions needed to stop global warming.

Tim Flannery, author of Weather Makers, stated that to end global warming we need to reduce our CO2 emissions by 70%. Someone asked what they, as an individual could do. He response was that if everyone who drove, drove a hybrid they would be reducing their personal emissions by 70%. What will YOUR next can be, and when will you buy it?