Citizen Leadership Skills
Active Listening
Active Listening is listening with the Heart and the Head. The listener acknowledges the emotions expressed in the comment and the content of the comment by paraphrasing the comment back to the speaker so the speaker feels head:
“Wow, I get it. You are really angry about ___. What I hear you saying is _. Do I have it right?”
a. A scripture that speaks to this is James 1:19 “. . . let everyone be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger.”
b. Consider expressions of anger to be simply expressions of “Energy.” Don’t take it personally. It’s not about You; it’s about them. Be present to them with Compassion.
c. Active Listening helps close the communications loop so that the speaker feels “heard” by the listener. The listener need not agree to the truth of the speaker’s statement for the Active Listening process to be effective. Active Listening helps the parties shift from “demonizing” one another to “humanizing” one another.
My experience is that until Active Listening happens, nothing is possible; once it happens, everything is possible.
Active Listening is a gateway to the resolution of conflict. Here are two examples:
Navy Budget Allocation Dispute
The operations commands and the supply commands of the United States Seventh Fleet had a dispute about how to allocate scarce funds of a decreased budget. I was asked to design and facilitate an Issue Resolution – Partnering Session to resolve the matter. The meeting took place at the Pearl Country Club with views that overlooked the beautiful golf course that sloped down to the water and the USS Arizona memorial in the distance.
The participants included Navy admirals, captains, commanders, and other officers who comprised the management team of the Seventh Fleet. I seated the participants at round tables, three operations command officers and three supply command officers at each table. Using Active Listening, one supply command officer at each table told the “supply command perspective” to the operations command officers, who could respond only with clarifying questions. When the supply command officer had finished speaking, an operations command officer paraphrased back to the supply officer what he had said, so that the speaker knew that his views had been heard and understood, not necessarily
agreed to, but heard and understood by the operations command officers.
Next, an operations command officer at each table stated the operations command perspective to the supply command officers, who, after asking clarifying questions, paraphrased back to the operations command officer speaker what that speaker had said. This was confirmation to the speaker that his views had been heard and understood, not necessarily agreed to.
As the Active Listening process continued, I began to hear laughter at every table. The participants were laughing because they discovered that their pre-meeting information was wrong and that they were misinformed.
Working together as one group, the participants developed a vision of a successful resolution, identified six strategies to implement the vision, and developed tactical action plans to implement the strategies. The successful implementation of one strategy saved the Navy millions of dollars in budget costs.
Business Partners Resolved 13 Years of Conflict and Reinvented their Business
Four business partners lived in four different cities in the United States. Professionally, they were among the best engineering firms in their specialty in the country. Personally, they could not survive for one hour in their quarterly in person firm meetings without nearly coming to blows.
The partners asked me to help them resolve their issues. First, they participated in an activity in which they re-experienced the joy and success they had experienced in working together before becoming mired in conflict.
Next, Partner A and Partner B participated in a four hour Active Listening session in which they took turns stating their views on many subjects, asking clarifying questions, and paraphrasing back to the speaker what they heard the speaker say, so the communications loop was closed. Next, Partner A and Partner C engaged in a similar Active Listening session to resolve their personal issues, which also lasted four hours.
Using the Active Listening process, the partners resolved disputes among them going back 13 years. This provided a “clean slate” on which the partners reinvented their business with great success.
See the book America Evolving: the Best is Yet to Come – Strategies to Heal a Divided Nation and Form a More Perfect Union for information about “Communications Skills to Navigate Difficult Conversations with Family and Friends.”
Participants will learn a 13 step process to help them have tough conversations on controversial topics with family members and friends in ways that preserve or enhance personal relationships. Participants will feel equipped with confidence to risk participating constructively in difficult conversations and to see conflict as opportunity
to foster mutual understanding and resolution.
Dialogue
One definition of dialogue is a conversation that involves two or more people. It provides the opportunity for the participants to speak and reflect on what one another is saying and formulate a thoughtful response. This is a stark contrast to the partisan “talking bubbles” prevalent in social media, cable news, and talk radio.
An example of this listening and reflecting process is known as the “Talking Stick” process. Up to seven people are seated at one table. They proceed as follows:
a. Round One – Everyone speaks for 1 minute. No responses. Pass the stick to the next
person
b. Round Two – Same
c. Round Three – People may respond. Raise hand to receive stick and speak for 1 minute. Round 3 is completed when everyone who wants to speak has spoken twice.
Talking Stick Process Helps Business Partners Choose New Healthcare Funding Plan
Four business partners were in the process of reinventing their business and considering options for the funding of their healthcare plan. They used the Talking Stick process. In rounds one and two the partners spoke and there was no response. The partners responded to one another in rounds three and four and there was no
consensus. In round five there was a sudden alignment on the option to adopt. It was an
amazing experience to witness.
Divergent and Convergent Thinking
Divergent thinking involves generating many responses to a question. Convergent
thinking refers to evaluating many option by certain criteria in order to select a single
option as the desired choice.
I used divergent thinking and convergent thinking to help a construction project team
resolve disputes about liability and costs to repair defects in the placement of concrete
on on a Reach of the American Canal, along the Rio Grande River in South Texas.
Using divergent thinking, the project team identified eight different ways to solve the
defective concrete placement issue, including “paint the concrete green so martians
will land on it,,” “make it into a skateboard park,” and “hire a construction concrete
expert" and adopt his recommendations. Using convergent thinking, the project team
selected the criteria to evaluate the options: ”easy to apply and cost-effective.” They
chose to hire the construction concrete placement expert and adopt his
recommendations.
Sample Creative Problem-Solving Workshop Agenda
See the book America Evolving: the Best is Yet to Come – Strategies to Heal a Divided Nation and Form a More Perfect Union for additional information about Creative Problem-Solving and a sample Creative Problem Solving Workshop Agenda.
Win-Win Conflict Resolution
My experience has been that every conflict can be resolved, as long as the following three elements are present:
- All parties sincerely want to resolve the conflict
- The parties are willing to participate in a structure that fosters mutual respect, open communication, and the possibility of trust.
- All parties participate in the structured process
Win Win Conflict Resolution is a dispute resolution process that helps parties identify a Joint Ideal Outcome to the dispute and then develop solutions to implement the Joint Ideal Outcome and a monitoring process to evaluate the effectiveness of the solutions. Support is available, if desired, to help the parties stay on track.
Here are the basics of the Win Win Conflict Resolution Model:
1. The parties shift from being “adversaries” fighting over a problem to “partners” committed to resolving the problem;
Creative Responsibility The parties ask:
a. Is it possible that I caused or contributed to this problem by what I did or did not do, or by what I said or did not say?
b. Is it possible that there is an opportunity in this situation, if we look for it?
c. Is it possible that the behavior I object to in the other person is a reflection of my own behavior that I am projecting onto the other person?
2. The parties develop a Joint Ideal Outcome to the conflict;
3. The parties develop Solutions to implement the Joint Ideal Outcome; and
4. The parties develop a monitoring matrix to monitor the success of the solution implementation; and
5. Provide follow-up support, as requested, to keep solution implementation on track.
I have used Win Win Conflict Resolution for nearly thirty years to help individuals and organizations resolve conflict in a wide variety of conflicts in business and government.
Active Listening, where the parties alternatively share their perspectives with one another, while the listener paraphrases back to the speaker what he/she heard the speaker say, is an important step in the Win Win Conflict Resolution process. It closes the communications loop and helps the parties shift from “demonizing” one another to “humanizing” one another. In my experience until this happens, nothing is possible. Once this happens, anything Is possible. See Skill One, above.
Completion of any of the Creative Responsibility steps is likely to “break the resistance” that the conflicted parties have to one another, so they can then ask “What is it that we really want here?”
Example of applying the steps of “creative responsibility” to break the conflicted parties’ resistance to one another and help resolve conflict
Construction project defective concrete placement dispute. I shared how the creative problem-solving skills of Divergent Thinking and Convergent Thinking were used to find a solution to this conflict in the previous chapter, Skill Two Dialogue.
Now, I will share with you how the steps of Creative Responsibility were used to help resolve the dispute. Essentially, the contractor placed concrete on Reach B of the American Canal, which is along the bank of the Rio Grande River on the U. S. side. The owner believed there were defects in the concrete and wanted the contractor to accept responsibility for the defects and pay to correct the defects.
I was asked to mediate the dispute. The owner team and the contractor team sat at separate tables. I asked the two teams to reflect on the project and answer the question: “Is it possible that I caused or contributed to this problem by what I did or did not do, or by what I said or did not say?”
The first person to speak was the contractor’s vice president, who said that the company was building a large number of projects at that time, and he wanted to get the concrete placed for that job that day.
The next person to speak was the owner’s inspector. He stated that when the concrete truck showed up on the job site for the concrete pour, he knew it was a bad day to place concrete because the weather was very hot and windy, and it is difficult for concrete to set up properly in those conditions. Instead of advising the contractor not to pour concrete, he thought that means and methods of doing the work are the contractor’s problem. So, he said nothing.
The next person to speak was the contractor’s project manager. He said that when the vice president called him, he knew that it was a bad day to place concrete due to the hot and windy weather. But instead of telling the vice president about the weather, he figured that the vice president is the boss, so he should do what he said.
As the owner and contractor team members recognized that they had all contributed to the
problem, they were ready to collaborate successfully in finding a solution, as explained earlier in
the section on divergent and convergent thinking.
See the book America Evolving; the Best is Yet to Come – Strategies to Heal a Divided Nation and
Form a More Perfect Union for more information about the steps of the Win Win Conflict
Resolution model and examples of its use.
Partnering
“Partnering” is a project management team building process that brings together all stakeholders to a business or public project and helps them develop collaborative working relationships so they can complete the project on schedule and on budget in an atmosphere of teamwork and trust.
The Partnering team building process has been used throughout the United States since the early 1990’s not only in the construction industry, but also in government agencies and industries widely.
The Partnering Session has five objectives:
a. Build an effective project team
b. Establish successful communications processes
c. Establish effective problem-solving processes
d. Develop the Partnering Tool Kit
1. Partnering Charter – Mission Statement
2. Issue Resolution Escalation Process
3. Partnering Evaluation Process
e. Resolve Project Challenges and Issues
The Partnering process has four basic elements:
a. Commitment
b. Communications
c. Win Win Conflict Resolution
d. Continuous Evaluation
A Partnering Session usually lasts between three and eight hours, and is facilitated by an experienced “independent neutral” facilitator.
Team building concepts discussed in a Partnering Session include:
- "Project First" Thinking
- “One Team throughout the Project”
- “Above the Line and Below the Line” Behavior: Solving Problems vs. Causing Problems
I have facilitated hundreds of Partnering Sessions in every region of our country, and worked with men and women of every race, creed, color national origin, and ethnic background.
Partnering works. I have facilitated Partnering Sessions for construction project teams that have built facilities for the U. S. Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Navy, and Marine Corps that keep our nation strong and free.
Working in the transportation sector, I have facilitated Partnering Sessions for construction project teams that have built roads, bridges, highways, transit systems and railroad facilities for state highway departments, regional transit agencies, and national railroads that keep our people and our commerce moving.
A Partnering Session provides the opportunity for the construction project team to experience collaboration during the meeting and learn collaboration skills to apply on the project after the meeting. Here is an example.
The Kitt Peak National Observatory Road Project
I facilitated a Partnering Session in Tucson, Arizona in the early 1990’s for the Arizona Department of Transportation and Granite Construction Co. for the Kitt Peak National Observatory Road project, a road from Tucson up to the world famous observatory in the mountains.
During the Partnering Session several questions about the design of the project were raised by the project team. I asked the team to form several working groups, each with Arizona DOT members, Granite Construction members and a set of the project plans. One at a time the working groups discussed each design question and a proposed solution to the question among themselves, while reviewing the plans. After fifteen minutes or so, I called the meeting to order
and asked each working group to report to the entire group their proposed solution to the first design question. After each working group had reported their proposed solution to the entire group, I facilitated a collaborative discussion among the working groups about the proposed solutions until we had a consensus on the best solution to the design question. When consensus was reached, the District Engineer called the Arizona DOT Design Section at the headquarters in Phoenix and got the solution approved as a design change. We repeated this process to resolve all design questions, and got each agreed to solution approved by the Arizona DOT Design Section as a design change.
The project team relied on this experience of successful collaboration to resolve a problem that developed during the construction of the project. The team discovered that the geotech readings regarding the soil into which pilings were to be driven in support of the construction of a bridge. Instead of blaming one another for the problem, the project team came together and chose a collaborative solution to the problem. Recognizing that it would take time to partially redesign the project to account for the corrected geoteach readings, the contractor offered to put his construction equipment onto a neighboring project and start that project early. The amount of fill needed for the bridge construction was recalculated. The contractor gave the Arizona DOT a fair price for the new fill requirements and the project was actually completed on time.
The Kitt Peak Road Project was awarded one of the first Marvin M Black Partnering Excellence Awards by the Associated General Contractors of America because of the successful collaboration among members of the project team.
One of the most meaningful Partnering Sessions that I have facilitated was in support of a Navy fighter squadron that my father was associated with during his service in the Korean War.
I Facilitated a Partnering Session in Support of the Dambusters
During the Korean War, my father, Lieutenant Commander Benjamin H. Fisher, USN served aboard the aircraft carrier USS Princeton as a Naval intelligence Officer and the Strike Officer of Task Force 77, the U. S. Navy force operating in the waters off Korea. On May 1, 1951 Dad helped plan and execute a daring raid by AD Sky Raider fighter bombers of Striker Fighter Squadron 195 (VFA 195) to disable the heavily defended and strategically important Hwcheon Dam in North Korea using MK -13 aerial torpedoes. Dad flew in the last plane to take the bomb damage assessment photos.
The pilots were all awarded the Navy Distinguished Flying Cross, the Navy’s highest honor. It is given only to pilots. Thanks to the persistent efforts of the Squadron Commander, Gustav “Swede” Carlson, USN, Dad was awarded, posthumously, the Air Medal for his contributions to the raid’s success at a ceremony at the Moffat Field, formerly Naval Air Station Moffett Field, in Santa Clara County, California, ln May of 2009.
Since May 1, 1951 Striker Fighter Squadron 195 (VFA 195) has been known as the “Dambusters”and is now a United States F/A-18E Super Hornet Fighter Squadron stationed at Marine Corps Air Station, Iwakuni, Japan. The squadron is part of Carrier Air Wing Five (CVW-5).
On February 27, 2017 I had the honor of facilitating a Partnering Session in support of the Dambusters. The name of the project is:
P-603 Security Modifications to MC158-T Project
(CVW-5 Operational Training Facility)
Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan
The project included a simulator training facility for the pilots of the fighter squadron. The contractor of the project was Gilbane Federal and the construction manager was the Japan District of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The fighter squadron was represented at the Partnering Session. I had the opportunity to tell the story of the first Dambusters and their heroic raid on the Hwcheon Dam in North Korea. It was one of the proudest moments of my professional career.
Partnering builds successful project teams in the construction industry. We, Americans, know Team, and we love Team. From little league to the NFL, the NBA, and the WNBA, we love our teams!
I am inviting Americans to become Citizen Teams to come together, listen to one another, develop mutual understanding and to work collaboratively to resolve our public policy issues.
See the book America Evolving: the Best is Yet to Come – Strategies to Heal a Divided Nation and Form a More Perfect Union for more information about Partnering.
Collaborative Citizen Team Building and Problem-Solving
Collaborative Citizen Team Building and Problem-Solving is a process that helps stakeholder organizations or groups come together, resolve conflict, and develop successful collaborative relationships to develop and implement common goals.
I will identify the steps of the process and provide an example of how the process has
been used.
Here are the steps:
- Identify the stakeholders involved, such as public agencies, organizations,businesses, or groups;
- Select a “Thought Leader Team” comprised of a representative of each major stakeholder to work with the facilitator to design a process agenda that is agreeable to all stakeholders;
- Thought Leader Team and facilitator identify the individual participants for the first Collaborative Team Building – Problem Solving Session;
- Conduct pre-session preparation, including online survey of participant top issues, solutions, and goals, key participant telephone interviews, report of pre-session survey results and interviews, and distribute report to invited participants;
- Facilitator designs meeting agenda and shares it with Thought Leader Team for input; and
- Collaborative Citizen Team Building – Problem – Solving Session takes place using team building, conflict resolution, partnering, creative problem- solving, and strategic planning processes.
Use of the Process to Resolve Labor – Management Conflicts and Reinvent National
Healthcare Practice
I was asked to help resolve conflicts between healthcare practitioners and corporate management of a national healthcare practice with offices in a number of American cities. A Thought Leader Team was developed that included the physician who was the leader of the labor activists and representatives of the corporate management. The Thought Leader Team worked with me for several months to create and engage with pre-session preparation of participant surveys, key participant interviews and, a report of the results of the pre-session activities.
The Thought Leader Team was very involved in creating the meeting agenda with me.
The meeting lasted for nearly two days. The first day was devoted to a number of conflict resolution activities. A dinner of all participants took place on the evening of the first day. During the dinner the physician leader of the labor activists thanked the corporate president for all that the president had done to secure the funds to keep the practice going. This break through enable the participants to actually reinvent their business with
great success.
Contact Us
Email:
Phone:
