[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
limitations and to appreciate the rich resources available through interaction with the hearts and minds
of other human beings. That person values the differences because those differences add to his
knowledge, to his understanding of reality. When we're left to our own experiences, we constantly
suffer from a shortage of data.
Is it logical that two people can disagree and that both can be right? It's not logical: it's psychological.
And it's very real. You see the young lady; I see the old woman. We're both looking at the same
picture, and both of us are right. We see the same black lines, the same white spaces. But we
interpret them differently because we've been conditioned to interpret them differently.
And unless we value the differences in our perceptions, unless we value each other and give
credence to the possibility that we're both right, that life is not always a dichotomous either/or, that
there are almost always Third Alternatives, we will never be able to transcend the limits of that
THE SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE Brought to you by FlyHeart
conditioning.
All I may see is the old woman. But I realize that you see something else. And I value you. I
value your perception. I want to understand.
So when I become aware of the difference in our perceptions, I say, "Good! You see it differently!
Help me see what you see."
If two people have the same opinion, one is unnecessary. It's not going to do me any good at all to
communicate with someone else who sees only the old woman also. I don't want to talk, to
communicate, with someone who agrees with me; I want to communicate with you because you see it
differently. I value that difference.
By doing that, I not only increase my own awareness; I also affirm you. I give you psychological
air. I take my foot off the brake and release the negative energy you may have invested in defending a
particular position. I create an environment for synergy.
The importance of valuing the difference is captured in an often-quoted fable called "The Animal
School," written by educator Dr. R. H. Reeves.
Once upon a time, the animals decided they must do something heroic to meet the problems of a
"New World," so they organized a school. They adopted an activity curriculum consisting of running,
climbing, swimming, and flying. To make it easier to administer, all animals took all the subjects.
The duck was excellent in swimming, better in fact than his instructor, and made excellent grades in
flying, but he was very poor in running. Since he was low in running he had to stay after school and
also drop swimming to practice running. This was kept up until his web feet were badly worn and he
was only average in swimming. But average was acceptable in school, so nobody worried about that
except the duck.
The rabbit started at the top of the class in running, but had a nervous breakdown because of so
much makeup in swimming.
The squirrel was excellent in climbing until he developed frustrations in the flying class where his
teacher made him start from the ground up instead of from the tree-top down. He also developed
charley horses from over-exertion and he got a C in climbing and a D in running.
The eagle was a problem child and had to be disciplined severely. In climbing class he beat all the
others to the top of the tree, but insisted on using his own way of getting there.
At the end of the year, an abnormal eel that could swim exceedingly well and also could run, climb
and fly a little had the highest average and was valedictorian.
The prairie dogs stayed out of school and fought the tax levy because the administration would not
add digging and burrowing to the curriculum. They apprenticed their children to the badger and later
joined the groundhogs and gophers to start a successful private school.
Force Field Analysis
In an interdependent situation, synergy is particularly powerful in dealing with negative forces that
work against growth and change.
Sociologist Kurt Lewin developed a "Force Field Analysis" model in which he described any current
level of performance or being as a state of equilibrium between the driving forces that encourage
upward movement and the restraining forces that discourage it.
Driving forces generally are positive, reasonable, logical, conscious, and economic. In juxtaposition,
restraining forces are often negative, emotional, illogical, unconscious, and social/psychological. Both
sets of forces are very real and must be taken into account in dealing with change.
In a family, for example, you have a certain "climate" in the home -- a certain level of positive or
negative interaction, of feeling safe or unsafe in expressing feelings or talking about concerns, of respect
or disrespect in communication among family members.
THE SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE Brought to you by FlyHeart
You may really want to change that level. You may want to create a climate that is more positive,
more respectful, more open and trusting. Your logical reasons for doing that are the driving forces
that act to raise the level..
But increasing those driving forces is not enough. Your efforts are opposed by restraining forces --
by the competitive spirit between children in the family, by the different scripting of home life you and
your spouse have brought to the relationship, by habits that have developed in the family, by work or
other demands on your time and energies.
Increasing the driving forces may bring results -- for a while. But as long as the restraining forces
are there, it becomes increasingly harder. It's like pushing against a spring: the harder you push, the
harder it is to push until the force of the spring suddenly thrusts the level back down.
The resulting up and down, yo-yo effect causes you to feel, after several attempts, that people are
"just the way they are" and that "it's too difficult to change."
But when you introduce synergy, you use the motive of Habit 4, the skill of Habit 5, and the
interaction of Habit 6 to work directly on the restraining forces. You unfreeze them, loosen them up,
and create new insights that actually transform those restraining forces into driving ones. You involve
people in the problem, immerse them in it, so that they soak it in and feel it is their problem and they
tend to become an important part of the solution.
As a result, new goals, shared goals, are created, and the whole enterprise moves upward, often in
ways that no one could have anticipated. And the excitement contained within that movement creates
a new culture. The people involved in it are enmeshed in each other's humanity and empowered by
new, fresh thinking, by new creative alternatives and opportunities.
I've been involved several times in negotiations between people who were angry at each other and
hired lawyers to defend their positions. And all that did was to exacerbate the problem because the
interpersonal communication deteriorated as it went through the legal process. But the trust level was
so low that the parties felt they had no other alternative than to take the issues to court.
"Would you be interested in going for a win-win solution that both parties feel really good about?" I
would ask.
The response was usually affirmative, but most people didn't really think it was possible.
"If I can get the other party to agree, would you be willing to start the process of really
communicating with each other?"
Again, the answer was usually "yes."
The results in almost every case have been astounding. Problems that had been legally and
psychologically wrangled about for months have been settled in a matter of a few hours or days. Most [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl rafalstec.xlx.pl
limitations and to appreciate the rich resources available through interaction with the hearts and minds
of other human beings. That person values the differences because those differences add to his
knowledge, to his understanding of reality. When we're left to our own experiences, we constantly
suffer from a shortage of data.
Is it logical that two people can disagree and that both can be right? It's not logical: it's psychological.
And it's very real. You see the young lady; I see the old woman. We're both looking at the same
picture, and both of us are right. We see the same black lines, the same white spaces. But we
interpret them differently because we've been conditioned to interpret them differently.
And unless we value the differences in our perceptions, unless we value each other and give
credence to the possibility that we're both right, that life is not always a dichotomous either/or, that
there are almost always Third Alternatives, we will never be able to transcend the limits of that
THE SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE Brought to you by FlyHeart
conditioning.
All I may see is the old woman. But I realize that you see something else. And I value you. I
value your perception. I want to understand.
So when I become aware of the difference in our perceptions, I say, "Good! You see it differently!
Help me see what you see."
If two people have the same opinion, one is unnecessary. It's not going to do me any good at all to
communicate with someone else who sees only the old woman also. I don't want to talk, to
communicate, with someone who agrees with me; I want to communicate with you because you see it
differently. I value that difference.
By doing that, I not only increase my own awareness; I also affirm you. I give you psychological
air. I take my foot off the brake and release the negative energy you may have invested in defending a
particular position. I create an environment for synergy.
The importance of valuing the difference is captured in an often-quoted fable called "The Animal
School," written by educator Dr. R. H. Reeves.
Once upon a time, the animals decided they must do something heroic to meet the problems of a
"New World," so they organized a school. They adopted an activity curriculum consisting of running,
climbing, swimming, and flying. To make it easier to administer, all animals took all the subjects.
The duck was excellent in swimming, better in fact than his instructor, and made excellent grades in
flying, but he was very poor in running. Since he was low in running he had to stay after school and
also drop swimming to practice running. This was kept up until his web feet were badly worn and he
was only average in swimming. But average was acceptable in school, so nobody worried about that
except the duck.
The rabbit started at the top of the class in running, but had a nervous breakdown because of so
much makeup in swimming.
The squirrel was excellent in climbing until he developed frustrations in the flying class where his
teacher made him start from the ground up instead of from the tree-top down. He also developed
charley horses from over-exertion and he got a C in climbing and a D in running.
The eagle was a problem child and had to be disciplined severely. In climbing class he beat all the
others to the top of the tree, but insisted on using his own way of getting there.
At the end of the year, an abnormal eel that could swim exceedingly well and also could run, climb
and fly a little had the highest average and was valedictorian.
The prairie dogs stayed out of school and fought the tax levy because the administration would not
add digging and burrowing to the curriculum. They apprenticed their children to the badger and later
joined the groundhogs and gophers to start a successful private school.
Force Field Analysis
In an interdependent situation, synergy is particularly powerful in dealing with negative forces that
work against growth and change.
Sociologist Kurt Lewin developed a "Force Field Analysis" model in which he described any current
level of performance or being as a state of equilibrium between the driving forces that encourage
upward movement and the restraining forces that discourage it.
Driving forces generally are positive, reasonable, logical, conscious, and economic. In juxtaposition,
restraining forces are often negative, emotional, illogical, unconscious, and social/psychological. Both
sets of forces are very real and must be taken into account in dealing with change.
In a family, for example, you have a certain "climate" in the home -- a certain level of positive or
negative interaction, of feeling safe or unsafe in expressing feelings or talking about concerns, of respect
or disrespect in communication among family members.
THE SEVEN HABITS OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE Brought to you by FlyHeart
You may really want to change that level. You may want to create a climate that is more positive,
more respectful, more open and trusting. Your logical reasons for doing that are the driving forces
that act to raise the level..
But increasing those driving forces is not enough. Your efforts are opposed by restraining forces --
by the competitive spirit between children in the family, by the different scripting of home life you and
your spouse have brought to the relationship, by habits that have developed in the family, by work or
other demands on your time and energies.
Increasing the driving forces may bring results -- for a while. But as long as the restraining forces
are there, it becomes increasingly harder. It's like pushing against a spring: the harder you push, the
harder it is to push until the force of the spring suddenly thrusts the level back down.
The resulting up and down, yo-yo effect causes you to feel, after several attempts, that people are
"just the way they are" and that "it's too difficult to change."
But when you introduce synergy, you use the motive of Habit 4, the skill of Habit 5, and the
interaction of Habit 6 to work directly on the restraining forces. You unfreeze them, loosen them up,
and create new insights that actually transform those restraining forces into driving ones. You involve
people in the problem, immerse them in it, so that they soak it in and feel it is their problem and they
tend to become an important part of the solution.
As a result, new goals, shared goals, are created, and the whole enterprise moves upward, often in
ways that no one could have anticipated. And the excitement contained within that movement creates
a new culture. The people involved in it are enmeshed in each other's humanity and empowered by
new, fresh thinking, by new creative alternatives and opportunities.
I've been involved several times in negotiations between people who were angry at each other and
hired lawyers to defend their positions. And all that did was to exacerbate the problem because the
interpersonal communication deteriorated as it went through the legal process. But the trust level was
so low that the parties felt they had no other alternative than to take the issues to court.
"Would you be interested in going for a win-win solution that both parties feel really good about?" I
would ask.
The response was usually affirmative, but most people didn't really think it was possible.
"If I can get the other party to agree, would you be willing to start the process of really
communicating with each other?"
Again, the answer was usually "yes."
The results in almost every case have been astounding. Problems that had been legally and
psychologically wrangled about for months have been settled in a matter of a few hours or days. Most [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]