怎样规避“信任税”（下）

    我们在本系列的第一部分中探讨了合作的性质，合作关系从何而来？合作关系为什么会破裂？我们给合作下的定义是：“所有人为他们所参与的活动获得成功而共同努力。”我们同时发现，一旦人们之间“出现状况”，他们就会编造故事，加入个人感情，变得怒不可遏，然后合作关系就走向终点。

    这种情况并不是每次都会发生，也不是每个人都会碰上，但它出现的频率非常高。出现这样的局面时，我们就进入了巴里•奥什里所说的“舍本逐末”的境地。它充满了戏剧性，它缺乏信任，人们互相责难，相互羞辱，它导致整个体系损失大量的能量。因为陷入了消极心理，或者奥什里所说的“舍本逐末”的“老步调”，我们再也不会“为了自己所参与的活动、过程或项目获得成功而齐心协力。”

    合作关系的破裂给组织机构的成功造成的损失令人震惊。“舍本逐末”每年都会给企业和个人带来数十亿美元的成本，和真正的战争别无二致。具有讽刺意味的是，围绕“这些状况”的争端经常是因为人们相互为对方编造的故事而起……随后他们甚至还会把这些故事当真！

    有没有另外一种可能性？好消息是，换上一幅新的眼镜来观察和体会他人世界中的“先决条件”后，我们就有可能创建起奥什里所说的组织机构“核心圈”。在这个核心圈中，人们之间的合作生机勃勃，一片繁荣。人与人之间高度信任，员工流失率很低。工作进展迅速，障碍得到扫除，目标得以实现。人们对自己成为其中一员既兴奋又高兴，甚至愿意向前多走一步，而这正是员工积极主动的定义。没错，所有这些都有可能实现。不过，它需要管理者对自己所领导的整个体系有清晰的认知，而且有能力引领别人也看到整个体系。

    长期以来，科学方法一直认为，要想得到不同的结果，就要调整实验变量。奥什里建议我们考虑进行下列调整：

    • 学习在自己所处的体系中主动体会让他人苦苦挣扎的那些“条件”。

    • 确立个人立场，做出承诺，保持合作关系，不要陷入“老步调”而不能自拔——也就是在“出现某些状况”时变得消极起来。

    • 定期挤出一些时间，以便体系中的所有成员都有机会向别人说明他们自己的“世界”中局势如何，这样其他人就能了解他们的情况；这样做还能让他们为体系中的其他部门提供后者需要的有价值信息，以便推进项目的进展。

    领导的新定义。这个理论听起来头头是道，但说起来容易做起来难。管理者在其中必须发挥作用。但在这里我们要赋予“领导”这个词什么样的定义呢？

    “领导者是这样一批人，无论他们在组织机构中担任什么样的职位或责任，他们的立场一直是支持和维护自己所在体系中的所有合作关系，以便帮助这个体系中的所有成员获得成功。”

    领导意味着通过以身作则来引领别人。有些“东西”似乎不可避免地针对我们，对此我们都要决定自己将做出怎样的反应。我们可以本能地作出反应，然后进入“舍本逐末”这样一个下行螺旋之中；或者我们也可以不慌不忙地观察自己的反应，然后选择最有利于追求合作的方式。实际情况表明，“舍本逐末”不仅似曾相似，而且可以预见。而核心圈的生态则不可预知，虽然它是人类的可能状态，而且一直都存在。

    In part 1 of this series we looked at the nature of partnerships, where they come from and how they can be lost. We adopted a definition of partnership: “when each person is jointly committed to the success of whatever endeavor they are in.” And, we saw that when “stuff happens” between people, they make up stories, take things personally, get angry and that’s the end of partnership.

    Not every time, not everyone, but with great regularity. When this happens, we are living in what Barry Oshry calls “The Side Show” – a place of drama, loss of trust, blaming and shaming – with great energy loss for the system. Because when we are in the reactive mentality or “Old Dance” of the “Side Show,” we are no longer “jointly committed to the success of whatever endeavor, process, or project we are in.”

    And the cost of failed partnerships to organizational success can be staggering.

    Not unlike true war, the “Side Show” costs businesses and people billions of dollars every single year. Ironically, the war of “stuff” is regularly triggered by the stories we make up about each other…and then take as real!

    What Else is Possible? The good news is that, with a new set of lenses that allow us to see into and experience the “pre-existing conditions” of others’ worlds, we have the possibility to create what Oshry calls “The Center Ring” of the organization. In the Center Ring, partnerships flourish and prosper. Trust is high and stays high. Things happen quickly, obstacles are overcome, objectives achieved. And people are excited and happy to be a part of it–even ready to “go the extra mile” –the very definition of the Actively Engaged employee. Yes, all that IS possible. However, it requires leaders who can clearly see the entire system they are leading, and who are capable of leading others to see the whole system as well.

    The Scientific Method has long held that to obtain a different outcome, one should change the experimental variables. These are several changes that Oshry suggests we consider:

    • Learn to have active empathy for the “conditions” in which other players in the system struggle to survive.

    • Take a personal stand, a commitment, to stay in partnership, rather than fall into the trance of “The Old Dance” – being reactive when “Stuff happens.”

    • Create regular “Times Out of Time” in which there are opportunities for all members of the system to express what is happening in their “worlds,” so that others can understand their experience, and to share valuable information needed by other parts of the system in order to move their projects ahead.

    New Definition of Leadership. All of this theory sounds good, but it is easier said than done. This is where leaders must play their roles. But what is the definition of leadership we are using here?

    “Leaders are those people, who regardless of their position or role in the organization, consistently take a stand to support and maintain partnerships throughout the system they are in, to support the success of everyone in the system.”

    Leading means leading by personal example. Each of us has a choice about how we respond to the “Stuff” that inevitably seems directed at us. We can react instinctively and enter the downward spiral of the Side Show, or we can take the time to observe our reactions and then choose in favor of our commitment to partnership. The Side Show, it turns out, is familiar and predictable. Living in the Center Ring is not predictable, though it is always there as a human possibility.