All posts by Dorothy Nesbit

The anatomy of an action

Emotional Intelligence, ,

Currently, it seems that all sorts of snippets are coming my way about the way the brain works and the impact on such things as emotional intelligence. I am reminded of the French phrase jamais deux sans trois – receiving the brief description below, it’s as if all the buses have turned up at once.

I was curious about the following brief description of an experiment by Benjamin Libet, who died in 2007. Libet’s experiments challenged our traditional view of how we make decisions. This description was part of an invitation to a talk this evening which, sadly, I am unable to attend.

Benjamin Libet (1916-2007) was a pioneering scientist in the field of human consciousness. His classic experiment showed that when subjects were asked to press a button, prior to their decision to do so, their unconscious brains had already started getting them ready to act. This implies that things happen in the following order: first comes automatic brain activity, then a conscious decision, then the action itself.

These findings seem to challenge our common sense idea of ourselves. ‘We’ seem to be nothing more than conscious decision-makers with the occasional power of veto over unconscious forces.

The role of the unconscious mind has been the subject of exploration and conjecture throughout history. Freud stands out in the twentieth Century as having made attempts to understand the unconscious mind, for example, and many therapeutic approaches explore the unconscious.

I think of neurolinguistic programming (or NLP) as one area in my own experience which engages with the unconscious mind on an ongoing basis, recognising that it’s possible to speak directly to the unconscious, and also inviting the unconscious to speak. As I write I recognise how many questions in coaching are addressed directly to the unconscious mind.

We live in an extraordinary era in the science of the brain, an era in which, increasingly, scientists are able to understand what is actually happening in the brain that creates the behaviours we observe. I regret that I shall not be hearing more about this this evening.

Connecting – via the written word

Clients and testimonials, Coaching, , , ,

Recently I have wondered whether to put my name forward to join the published list of NVC (that’s nonviolent communication) trainers in the UK. I am not a certified trainer and don’t plan to become one – at least for now. And still, I’d enjoy having some coaching clients coming my way who are interested to develop a compassionate (‘nonviolent’) approach. Equally, since I work extensively with clients in corporations, I’d enjoy having someone – an HR Director, perhaps – contact me one day and ask to talk about the use of nonviolent communication in organisations.

What better way, I thought, than to seek the view of people who are already listed? So I put out an invitation to my colleagues to share their thoughts. One e-mail touched me deeply – I had the sense of being seen at my very best. It also reminded me of the power of social media, coming as it did from someone I have yet to meet and whose impressions of me come largely via the written word. With her kind permission, I share it with you.

This e-mail came to me from Jo McHale, whose business (at http://www.talking-truly.com/) focuses on converting conflict into connection. Here’s what she wrote:

Dear Dorothy

We haven’t met yet – and I trust we will before long – yet I feel moved to respond to your e-mail about joining the NVC-UK trainers list.

I have read your contributions to the NVC-UK group’s discussions. I have heard your voice on the conference call. I have read your response to a thread on the LinkedIn Coaching At Work group in which you commented on something Bill Tate wrote (Bill is my partner). I’ve also read your website/blog. And let’s not forget I first encountered you in the UKHRD Forum [now the Training Journal Daily Digest].

From each of these I have a sense of someone who is grounded, compassionate, passionate, thoughtful and wise. I find it easy to listen to what you say with an open mind and open heart, and to trust the place you’re speaking from.

It would indeed gladden my heart if you were to join the list. My understanding of the procedure is that you need the endorsement of three (not sure of the number of) people who know you and are prepared to ‘speak’ on your behalf. If my words contribute to this, I’m very happy for them to be used.

In anticipation of future connections,

Jo

Jo McHale

When science proves ancient wisdom: the empathy neurons

Emotional Intelligence, ,

In the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century, our understanding of the brain has accelerated to an extraordinary degree. Some of this work has been brought to a wide audience (if you like, ‘popularised’) by Daniel Goleman in his books on Emotional Intelligence.

Sometimes, the new brain science helps us to make sense of things we already knew. Why is it, for example, that to visualise something ahead of time (from having a baby to winning the Olympics) is to make it far more likely that it will happen? How is it that we are able to empathise with others? To what degree is the Eastern philosophical idea that we are all connected (and that any idea that we are not is an illusion) an objective truth?

Today, I enjoyed watching VS Ramachandran sharing just 8 minutes’ worth of new science, in which he describes the role played by ‘mirror neurons’. You can find this clip at http://www.ted.com/ under the heading The neurons that shaped civilization.

I am grateful to Gina Lawrie for sharing this clip. Gina is one of the UK’s foremost trainers in the field of Nonviolent Communication – and happy to see more and more examples of science proving ancient wisdom.

To be or not to be

Emotional Intelligence, , ,

Shona Cameron, one of my colleagues in the world of Nonviolent Communication (or NVC) sends through a link to a fascinating article in the Guardian about something called e-prime: This column will change your life: to be or not to be…

The article, by Oliver Burkeman, refers to an idea I had not come across before. David Bourland, proposes – in an essay about something he calls e-prime – to eliminate the use of the verb “to be”. Burkeman references one of Bourland’s teachers, Alfred Korzybski, known especially for his assertion that “the map is not the territory”.

It seems to me that Bourland’s idea, put forward some 45 years ago, reflects Korzybski’s teaching. For if you can no longer say “John is lazy”, you are obliged to find some other way of putting your idea forward, perhaps a way that reflects you own responsibility for reaching this conclusion (“It’s my view that John does not work as hard as some of his colleagues”, for example). This new linguistic turn of phrase does more to highlight the gap between the map and the territory it seeks to represent, making clear the role of the viewer in the viewing. Perhaps this different turn of phrase might even highlight this gap to the viewer and invite greater self-accountability. How many performance appraisals might be transformed by such a fine distinction? How many family arguments might never take place?

The article’s author asserts that e-prime never really caught on and yet the distinctions made by Bourland and Korzybski have found their way into many schools of thinking. Our ability to distinguish between what we observe and our response to what we observe is an essential part of Nonviolent Communication, for example, whilst Korzybski’s phrase “the map is not the territory” has been adopted as a core presupposition in the world of Neurolinguistic Programming (or NLP).

How widely understood is the gap between the “map” and the “territory”? Not very. One might even observe that in any relationship in which one party wishes to expercise power and influence it can help to obscure the distinction. If, though, we aspire to honest open relationships in which people make free, informed choices, we might find that e-prime’s elimination of the verb “to be” invites greater transparency of thought.

Mmm… before I press the “publish post” button, let me just check this posting for my use of the verb “to be”…

NVC and the Skilled Facilitator Approach

All articles, Alternative approaches,

This posting is for those people in my network who are interested in Marshall Rosenberg’s work in the area of nonviolent communication and/or Roger Schwarz’s Skilled Facilitator Approach (SFA). How do they compare? And because this is a blog posting rather than a full article I’m sharing – for now at least – my first impressions.

Let’s start with values. A core value amongst practitioners of Nonviolent Communication (NVC) is compassion. As it happens, compassion is also a core value of the Skilled Facilitator Approach – amongst others. As I look down the list of values on my SFA card – transparency, curiosity, accountability, informed choice, compassion – I wonder whether the Skilled Facilitator Approach doesn’t make explicit some of the values implicit in NVC. None of them seem at odds.

In the Skilled Facilitator Approach, the mutual learning cycle begins with something which is also at the heart of NVC – making an observation. In NVC this may be noticing your own thoughts and actions or noticing someone else’s. It may also be noticing the voice with which you are speaking – with compassion (called speaking in giraffe) or from a place of non-compassion or anger (speaking in jackal).

There are some similarities here and some differences between NVC and the Skilled Facilitator Approach. In NVC our attention is on the needs we have or the needs we think the other person is expressing, together with the feelings that give rise to those needs. In the Skilled Facilitator Approach, the same focus is reflected in a rule: focus on interests, not positions. At the same time, the Skilled Facilitator Approach places a great deal of emphasis on checking our observations (“I think I heard you say…”) and our inferences (“I’m thinking you might be thinking… What do you think?”) This seems to me to be at odds with the view held by Marshall that to focus on thinking can get in the way of understanding needs. Whilst the goal of each approach is the same, the route seems to be different.

There’s a rule in the Skilled Facilitator Approach that seems to me to add something to the practices of Nonviolent Communication: explain reasoning and intent. According to this rule, you might add to a question an explanation (“the reason I’m asking is…”). In NVC, we share the needs that might be met when we make a request – again, a different route to the same end – so I wonder what it is this different approach adds. Perhaps it’s a different way of expressing the same thing – and perhaps it’s the language in which an intention is expressed. Sometimes in NVC the language of needs can be a barrier to easy understanding because it is so foreign in our wider culture.

I notice that I could go on – making comparisons – and yet the more I do the more I encounter a challenge. For it seems that for every aspect I identify of the Skilled Facilitator Approach I find an equivalent in NVC. For now, I am left with a belief that engaging with both approaches is adding each to the other and yet, I don’t know what.

I wonder if you, my reader, have thoughts? If you do, I’d be glad to hear them.

Memories of Elektra

About Dorothy

Nowhere in my life is the way we lay down memories more apparent than in my role as a member of the London Symphony Chorus. For with 120 members of the choir singing in any one concert, we lay down 120 versions of our experience. Different members of the chorus notice different things about the experience. Different members of the chorus respond to those different things in different ways. Years later, when we compare notes, these differences are highly apparent. Were we at the same concert?

Talking with my friend and former chorus member Jenny Tomlinson in the run up to last week’s two performances of Elektra, it’s clear that Jenny laid down a few memories I had forgotten about our performance in 1989. She reminds me how one of our fellow sopranos, Eileen Fox, stood in for Christa Ludwig to do her scream in the role of Clytemnestra. Now, it isn’t normally seen as a compliment to describe someone as a ‘screamer’ in the context of the London Symphony Chorus, but hey! When you’ve deputised for Christa Ludwig, well, that’s an altogether different matter.

Once again, in 2010, Eileen is asked to offer her scream and draws the admiration and respect of fellow Chorus members. The stage staff who open the door for her make jokes after her first attempt (“honest! We could barely hear you!”) and are spotted wearing ear plugs next time round.

Helen Palmer, whose sister Felicity is utterly magnificent in the role of Clytemnestra, will no doubt lay down a few memories of the way eager audience members asked her for her autograph and Valerie Gergiev, too, did a quick double-take before realising that no, this was not Felicity Palmer.

James Mallinson laid down a particular kind of memory, laying down the tracks that will become the LSO Live recording to be issued in a few months time. The critics laid down a variety of highly positive memories in their reviews (not one of them about the chorus – though what can you expect when we only have a handful of bars to sing?). I would add my own “quite right, too!” as I think of the fine array of soloists and the orchestra’s exciting performance. The chorus as a whole may well lay down a memory of the various places we were instructed to sing from before finally gathering near the stage door.

Personally, I lay down one memory amongst the others which is personal to me. Standing at the back of the little group of “servant wenches” by the stage door I have barely enough light to see my music. Noticing this, one of the stage door staff takes out his mobile phone to shine the light over my music, following my finger as I highlight where the light needs to go. A small act of kindness which I treasure.

Confidentiality in coaching

Coaching,

Sometimes it helps me with my time to take something that I’m writing elsewhere and to post it on my blog. This posting is one I made to the Coaching At Work group on LinkedIn before Christmas and also to subscribers to the Training Journal Daily Digest and I’d love to extend the invitation to readers of my blog to join this discussion. I wrote:

Well, I’m just back from spending a week with Roger Schwarz, author of The Skilled Facilitator Approach. It was an immensely nourishing, enriching, challenging and thought-provoking experience.

Over dinner one evening, I was part of a discussion about confidentiality in coaching. A core value of Roger’s approach is transparency and we discussed the implications of transparency in coaching.

So I’d like to extend the question to you: what is the purpose of confidentiality in coaching? Yes we all understand that clients can feel safer to share themselves fully in coaching if they know their coach is committed to maintain confidentiality. But how often do we propose a contract of confidentiality whether the client asks for it or not – without discussion, even? And with what implications?

I’m guessing that most clients would love to work in a wider environment in which it’s safe to share and so I’m wondering – how does agreeing this contract of confidentiality in coaching serve this broader aspiration?

I found our discussion over dinner thought-provoking and I wonder: what thoughts do you have? And what practices?

Even as I write I’m grateful to John Fisher, one of my colleagues on the Digest for reshaping my question in a way which adds clarity and simplicity: do we use confidentiality for our benefit, the client’s or because we “just always do it”?

The Skilled Facilitator Approach on LinkedIn

All articles, Alternative approaches

Sometimes in the world of deep learning it’s possible to feel quite lonely. For as much as some people appreciate those people who, by their learning, lead the way towards approaches that are as yet scarcely known, others can find them irksome and over analytical. On the surface it’s hard to argue with the Skilled Facilitator Approach – I doubt that many people would find much to contradict in its underlying values and ground rules. Still, this does not mean that many people put it into practice.

For this reason, when I feed back to members of the Training Journal Daily Digest, I am thrilled to hear from someone whose company has been working with Roger to increase their effectiveness using the Skilled Facilitator Approach – and I wonder who else is out there. I check on LinkedIn to see if there is a group and, finding none, decide to set one up.

This requires some thought about how to describe the group and I go to Roger’s website for inspiration. This is the description I come up with:

Are you learning to apply the Skilled Facilitator Approach in your personal and professional life? This group is a place where you can discuss this approach, seek help and share your experiences.

The Skilled Facilitator approach is an approach to effective human interaction – an approach Roger Schwarz and his colleagues have been developing since 1980 when Roger began teaching facilitation skills.

You can learn more by visiting Roger’s website at http://www.schwarzassociates.com

The Skilled Facilitator Approach – first steps to learning

All articles, Alternative approaches

I’ve already mentioned in my postings this week that I have found Roger Schwarz’s book, The Skilled Facilitator: A Comprehensive Resource for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers, Trainers and Coaches, just a tad unwieldy. So I thought it might be worth mentioning a few alternatives – for anyone who’s interested in a starter before going on to the main course.

Of course, Roger’s website is a great place to go. The website offers the full range of information you might expect from an organisation with expertise to sell, including a free monthly newsletter.

One article is available which gives a succinct introduction to the Skilled Facilitator Approach. It’s called Ground Rules for Effective Groups and is in its third edition.

Mmm… and maybe I should take care not to put you off Roger’s book. This is also available via his website.

The Skilled Facilitator Approach – a vehicle for holding courageous conversations

All articles, Alternative approaches

Sitting at my desk preparing to write about my week with Roger Schwarz and his colleagues in December I look down at the card we all received as part of our training. The two-sided laminated card offers a reminder of the core values which guide Roger’s approach, the ground rules and the six steps of the mutual learning cycle.

Perhaps there’s no surprise that this approach touched me deeply. At one level, with its focus on effective communication, the Skilled Facilitator Approach is a business tool, available for use by facilitators, managers, coaches, trainers… the list could go on. Somehow, we have depersonalised communication in the business world and yet it’s deeply personal – we may be part of the business machine and still we are real people, with thoughts, feelings, emotions. The Skilled Facilitator Approach invites us to engage deeply with them in service of our communication with others.

What is the appeal to me? Firstly, with so much research on what it takes to be a great leader, parent, teacher (McGregor’s X and Y theory springs to mind) it can seem strange that we live in a world in which the learnings have not been applied. It seems to me that the Skilled Facilitator Approach maps out in very practical ways what it means to embody this theory. I am particularly drawn to an approach which is grounded in a clear set of values and assumptions (and I recognise how much they reflect my own aspirations). Perhaps at root, this approach has a deep appeal to me with my preference for holding real and courageous conversations.

Now, I set out to write about the training itself and I recognise that I have not done this. Still, I want to express my gratitude to Roger Schwarz, to Matt Beane and to Annie Bentz for embodying this approach in their training with us. For this is a rare sight – the espoused theory in practice. And I know it is borne of an ongoing commitment which few people demonstrate in their lives to put into practice a set of values, rules and behaviours. Roger, Matt and Annie, I thank you all.