Category: General Learning

This week I learned more about Compassion in Action. It was Reverend Bob Thompson who shared a great story of people everywhere picking up the practice of compassion. It arises from some simple, yet powerful questions — what would it take for us to be more kind together? It arrises from a desire to create large scale practice with the least amount of management necessary.

Earlier this month I also worked with a faith community and congregation just beginning to pick up the values of trust, listening, and kindness. TLK, comes from a exercise in which I invited them to name values that would most influence their community if practiced widely. Practiced without finish line. Practiced spontaneously, again without need for managing.

Both of these experiences are about creating culture. What a group of people are known for. The palpable, obvious stuff. “If nothing else, do this” kinds of practices. Compassion, trust, listening, kindness.

What I learn among these is that some people want to massage definitions extensively. I get that the purpose is clarity. Yet, it is overlooking the primary purpose that is named in this photo. The definition matters less — that is an endless inquiry, and sometimes debate of nuance and personal experience. What matters more is the inquiry that surrounds it. “What does compassion mean to you?” “In what way is kindness here now?”

It is the inquiry that creates the culture. The particular topic matters, but it is merely the gateway to the the community of people taking care of themselves, learning, growing, even in differences.

The Flow Game is a training that I first took in 2009. It was at Toke Moeller’s invitation, a man that I deeply respect for his simplicity and friendship. Toke is a person committed to flow, to being in relation to the energy of life.

The Flow Game is a board game that invokes the use of question and story to create clarity. It is a game that welcomes engagement with people, sometimes in silence, to add meaning. It is a game that invites attention to the symbolic energy of the four directions.

I got to host a short version of the Flow Game this week. I’m glad to say that I was reminded of all of these qualities, all of these potentials. I loved that way that the six of us drew cards and questions that invited reflection about our intention, and that each card was in some way drawn for all of us.

I’m looking forward to bring more of the Flow Game back to my work and offerings.

.

This week I was in a very interesting conversation in which a person said this simple phrase, “Not all pumpkins are the same.” She went on to describe the pumpkins that interest her. Less about the perfectly rounded, smooth, orange pumpkins. More about the pumpkins that have other color and a few warts.

The context of this pumpkin conversation was about unity consciousness. This same person offered an impassioned plea from an appreciation of unity amidst diversity.

I am moved by this conversation. I am moved by this person’s compassion and conviction.

I have been thinking a lot about this lately. What to do when harmful behavior in an individual shows up in a participative event. When it feels like an individual is hijacking attention. When it feels like an attack.

Intervene? Let it rides it’s course? Make sure that chairs don’t get thrown? Sustain the tension and uncertainty so that something new can come from how the rest of the group responds? Challenge others to speak their truth? Sustain the tension so that the group can respond and deal with it’s business. All of these can help in some way.

In times like these, I find myself aware of recent teachings that I got from Christina Baldwin. First, that there is a difference between shadow (an unspoken tension or projection of judgement that is present) and sabotage (willful disruption of the group and process for personal means). Second, that if it’s shadow, part of the facilitator’s job is to pull the shadow off of the person willing to speak it into the group. OK, that all requires some discernment, on the spot, and some good skill. That’s some of the nuance.

But, back to harmful behavior, and one option that I want to try next time.

The first thing to do is name that the behavior appears to be harmful. Be transparent with it and dare to name it out loud. “What you are saying appears to be a very harmful thing. It feels like an attack on a particular person. I imagine that there is some good that you are intending. Is there? Can you say what is the good that you are trying to point towards with this behavior?”

This takes the behavior head on. Is an act of kindness to the person speaking. Is an act of kindness to the person being attacked. It is an act of kindness to the group, to use what is present for some changes.

The second step is to invite a broader inquiry. “Can you imagine that there may be other ways to accomplish that good? Would you be willing to enter a dialogue about that?”

This creates alternative to burying the shadow, and unintentionally creating further resentment. It creates an opportunity for wisdom from the group. It counts on the group to bring forth wisdom around the caring. To bring forth wisdom around alternative choices, which I would argue, are always present.

I suppose there is something further in this will be for attention another day. As facilitator, I’ve got some plans for the group. Hijacking interferes with that. It is useful to name that that disturbance, even that harmful behavior, is entry point to needed work. It can really clear the room.

Yes, there are choices.