A class of preschoolers sits with something like wonder and awe in their eyes as they pass a small driftwood stick. They don’t really look at the stick, nor do they hit each other with it, or argue over whose turn it is to hold it. These four and five year old kids practice circle process and appear to love every minute of it. It seems that everyone enjoys the chance to tell their story and that is the power of the stick; it serves as a visual reminder of who has the floor.
Processes create a space where people feel respected and safe enough to share. Sometimes when trust has been broken, a process with guidelines and a facilitator can structure conversation where trust can be rebuilt. Other times processes like these can be used to draw voices into conversation that would otherwise remain silent. Of course, the preschool class uses a simplified version, but here are some ideas behind this way of talking and listening:
• Circle process uses a talking piece. For many generations Native Americans used this action of passing an object to signify whose turn it is to speak. As the preschoolers say, “if you have the talking piece, use your mouth; if you don’t have the talking piece, use your ears.”
• Each circle needs a keeper or facilitator. Since the talking piece provides structure in who speaks, the keepers’ role becomes to encourage an environment of safety, respect and vulnerability through managing the process. Circle process encourages this through guidelines set in place by the entire circle, as well as beginning and ending ritual. Facilitators may speak without a talking piece but only to monitor the process.
• Circles assume equality among their participants. Though members of the group may possess varying levels of education, wealth, or other forms of personal power; each member, including the facilitator, has equal opportunity to share from their experience though no one is forced to participate.
• Circle Process works to build relationships between people through the act of listening to each others’ stories. Such listening takes time, but it becomes a gift and a sign of respect.
• Circle process can provide a setting for consensus decision making. Circles emphasize relationship building; however decisions can be made in circles using the process of consensus. Consensus fits well with the values of circle process including strengthening ties through listening to each perspective.
Whether a child, young adult, parent, or grandparent, it seems sacred to be able to speak without interruption and listen without thinking about how to respond. Even busy four year old children sit for a while, holding power in the form of a drift wood stick, and enjoy the silence before telling their story and respectfully passing the stick on to the person beside them.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
"What did you say?"
Any time we talk to each other we follow a cycle of communication. The speaker sends a message which the listener decodes; the listener then sends feedback which the speaker decodes. This cycle looks something like this:
This drawing of the process of communication seems to validate the ease with which misunderstandings happen. However, this drawing also shows that understanding increases when listeners provide feedback. We give feedback in numerous ways both verbal and nonverbal: opinions, feelings, advice, tone of voice, and body posture are all types of feedback. NVC suggests one specific type of feedback called paraphrasing.
Paraphrasing, also called reflecting back, works toward increased clarity. This tool is especially useful with emotionally charged language used in tense situations. Reflecting back what we hear helps us check our understanding. This kind of feedback also allows the speaker to hear how they were perceived, and clarify if necessary. This not only leads toward greater understanding for the listener, it can work to help the speaker become aware of feelings and needs as well as articulate them.
When reflecting back:
- First, give a distancing statement: “It sounds like…,” “Are you saying….” This takes the blame away from yourself; it is nothing about you or your actions but rather what you hear them say.
- Reframe what you hear into feelings, values, and needs: disappointment, importance of relationship, and need for companionship for example. Rather than parroting back the evaluations or opinions you hear, reframe them into feelings, needs, or values.
- Ask a question. People are very sensitive to sarcasm when they work to express themselves. Framing reflections as questions signifies that the listener wants to work toward understanding instead of turning the situation into a joke. Questions also allow for correction if the reflection was not what the speaker meant to say.
Example: A reflection to “You’re so lazy!” could sound like this: “Are you saying that you are disappointed because working together to get a job done is important to you?”
Sources:
Conflict Resolution Center of Montgomery County
Nonviolent Communication: A language of Life, Marshall Rosenberg
Practical Sills for Managing Interpersonal Conflict Manual, 2008, KIPCOR
This drawing of the process of communication seems to validate the ease with which misunderstandings happen. However, this drawing also shows that understanding increases when listeners provide feedback. We give feedback in numerous ways both verbal and nonverbal: opinions, feelings, advice, tone of voice, and body posture are all types of feedback. NVC suggests one specific type of feedback called paraphrasing.
Paraphrasing, also called reflecting back, works toward increased clarity. This tool is especially useful with emotionally charged language used in tense situations. Reflecting back what we hear helps us check our understanding. This kind of feedback also allows the speaker to hear how they were perceived, and clarify if necessary. This not only leads toward greater understanding for the listener, it can work to help the speaker become aware of feelings and needs as well as articulate them.
When reflecting back:
- First, give a distancing statement: “It sounds like…,” “Are you saying….” This takes the blame away from yourself; it is nothing about you or your actions but rather what you hear them say.
- Reframe what you hear into feelings, values, and needs: disappointment, importance of relationship, and need for companionship for example. Rather than parroting back the evaluations or opinions you hear, reframe them into feelings, needs, or values.
- Ask a question. People are very sensitive to sarcasm when they work to express themselves. Framing reflections as questions signifies that the listener wants to work toward understanding instead of turning the situation into a joke. Questions also allow for correction if the reflection was not what the speaker meant to say.
Example: A reflection to “You’re so lazy!” could sound like this: “Are you saying that you are disappointed because working together to get a job done is important to you?”
Sources:
Conflict Resolution Center of Montgomery County
Nonviolent Communication: A language of Life, Marshall Rosenberg
Practical Sills for Managing Interpersonal Conflict Manual, 2008, KIPCOR
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Choosing how we hear
Has anyone ever yelled or cursed at you? Perhaps you’ve been blamed for something, left in the middle of a conversation, or experienced the “silent treatment?” Most likely we have all experienced behavior like this, and perhaps even behaved in similar ways. Some times we call actions like this “difficult,” “bad,” or “bullying.” Though no one can change the behavior of others, we each have the capability to change the way we perceive such negative interactions.
When someone directs negative language or emotionally charged messages at us we can choose the way we hear what they say. Marshall Rosenberg, author of Nonviolent Communication: a Language of Life writes that we have four options:
1. Blame ourselves
2. Blame others
Blaming comes about when we internalize the emotion, evaluations, or judgments we hear from the other. Blame comes as a reaction to what we perceive they think about us.
3. Empathize with our own feelings and needs
4. Empathize with others feelings and needs
In choosing to empathize rather than blame, we look at the message differently. Empathizing means laying aside our own evaluations and opinions for the moment in order to be fully present with the other and hear what they have to say.
Behind behaviors lie emotions and needs. Though perhaps not consciously, we tell each other what we need through our actions. Truly hearing people and choosing to empathize means listening for the feelings and needs behind the behavior we find offensive. If we choose to focus on the behavior that we perceive as difficult we will find a bully. If we choose to look for needs, feelings, and values behind the negative messages we hear we will begin to see a person making a request as they know how. When we see these needs and emotions we find our similarities and shared humanity.
Kathryn Jackson tells a story about a lion who bullied all of the other animals (Tawny Scrawny Lion). For obvious reasons the other animals didn’t feel safe, so they tried to talk things over with the lion from a great distance. The only reply he gave was that they were at fault for running away, if he didn’t have to run for his food he wouldn’t have to eat so much! Desperate for one peaceful day they sent a little rabbit over to “talk things over” with the lion. But the story takes an unexpected turn. When the rabbit came up close he saw all of the lions ribs. “You look much too scrawny to talk things over,…so how about supper at my house first?” the little rabbit asked. After a week of no casualties the big animals came to visit the rabbit. “Rabbit,’ they said. ‘O you wonderful rabbit! What in the world did you talk to the tawny, scrawny, hungry, terrible lion about?” The rabbit responded, “Oh, my goodness! We had such a good time with that nice, jolly lion that I guess we forgot to talk about anything at all!”
When someone directs negative language or emotionally charged messages at us we can choose the way we hear what they say. Marshall Rosenberg, author of Nonviolent Communication: a Language of Life writes that we have four options:
1. Blame ourselves
2. Blame others
Blaming comes about when we internalize the emotion, evaluations, or judgments we hear from the other. Blame comes as a reaction to what we perceive they think about us.
3. Empathize with our own feelings and needs
4. Empathize with others feelings and needs
In choosing to empathize rather than blame, we look at the message differently. Empathizing means laying aside our own evaluations and opinions for the moment in order to be fully present with the other and hear what they have to say.
Behind behaviors lie emotions and needs. Though perhaps not consciously, we tell each other what we need through our actions. Truly hearing people and choosing to empathize means listening for the feelings and needs behind the behavior we find offensive. If we choose to focus on the behavior that we perceive as difficult we will find a bully. If we choose to look for needs, feelings, and values behind the negative messages we hear we will begin to see a person making a request as they know how. When we see these needs and emotions we find our similarities and shared humanity.
Kathryn Jackson tells a story about a lion who bullied all of the other animals (Tawny Scrawny Lion). For obvious reasons the other animals didn’t feel safe, so they tried to talk things over with the lion from a great distance. The only reply he gave was that they were at fault for running away, if he didn’t have to run for his food he wouldn’t have to eat so much! Desperate for one peaceful day they sent a little rabbit over to “talk things over” with the lion. But the story takes an unexpected turn. When the rabbit came up close he saw all of the lions ribs. “You look much too scrawny to talk things over,…so how about supper at my house first?” the little rabbit asked. After a week of no casualties the big animals came to visit the rabbit. “Rabbit,’ they said. ‘O you wonderful rabbit! What in the world did you talk to the tawny, scrawny, hungry, terrible lion about?” The rabbit responded, “Oh, my goodness! We had such a good time with that nice, jolly lion that I guess we forgot to talk about anything at all!”
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Nonviolent Communication
My siblings enjoy telling a story about one particular occasion when I became very angry with them. I was about four at the time and my childish vocabulary did not include the necessary language to express my frustration so I borrowed a line from The Berenstain Bears book, The Double Dare. “Sister was so angry she could hardly speak!” I sputtered with my hands on my hips. Of course, my choice of expression produced shouts of laughter; and does to this day. Emotion is something that everyone experiences, sometimes reacts to, and needs to express. Without learning tools to constructively tell someone what we are thinking and feeling, we fall back on patterns of behavior that can be unproductive and unhelpful. In our reactions our words can become unintentional weapons to others and ourselves while leading to miscommunications. There are numerous ways to learn healthy communication skills, one of which is nonviolent communication. This style of communication suggests many skills, including practicing a pattern that we can fall back on in times of high emotion and tension.
In his book Nonviolent Communication: a Language of Life Marshall Rosenberg explains a four-step template for confrontation which many have found helpful.
1. This pattern begins with an observation. An observation consists of a specific action or inaction. For example, “I noticed that you arrived thirty minutes later than we planned.” It is easy to put evaluations in place of a simple observation however people often feel defensive when confronted with what we think of their action rather than an observation of what we have experienced.
2. The next step involves stating the emotion experienced in the interaction. Though perhaps seen as simple, this step contains three important points: clear communication of our experience, self awareness of what we are feeling, and choosing to take responsibility for our emotions rather than placing blame. Rosenberg also makes the important observation that our language allows for words describing emotions and descriptors of evaluations to be interchangeable. “I feel angry when you text while I’m talking to you” states emotion while “I feel like you’re not listening to me” states evaluation.
3. The following step in nonviolent communication consists of the statement of unmet needs or values behind our emotion. For example, “Respect and connection are important to me.” These needs and values are often at the root of emotions experienced and the expression of them can provide insight for those involved in the conversation.
4. Finally, a specific request of what would help meet the need completes the template. A specific request could be, “Would you be willing to wait to text your friend until after we are finished talking?” Being explicit with requests creates clear communication, being aware of whether our requests are really demands raises awareness of our motives, and intentionally framing requests replaces passive aggressive behavior.
Perhaps you have heard the adage, “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” This saying seems to be created out of wishful thinking. Words do hurt sometimes, and communication can be violent. Stopping physical violence makes up a large part of building peace. However, learning to use language intentionally to articulate ourselves, understand others, and build people up is peacebuilding too.
In his book Nonviolent Communication: a Language of Life Marshall Rosenberg explains a four-step template for confrontation which many have found helpful.
1. This pattern begins with an observation. An observation consists of a specific action or inaction. For example, “I noticed that you arrived thirty minutes later than we planned.” It is easy to put evaluations in place of a simple observation however people often feel defensive when confronted with what we think of their action rather than an observation of what we have experienced.
2. The next step involves stating the emotion experienced in the interaction. Though perhaps seen as simple, this step contains three important points: clear communication of our experience, self awareness of what we are feeling, and choosing to take responsibility for our emotions rather than placing blame. Rosenberg also makes the important observation that our language allows for words describing emotions and descriptors of evaluations to be interchangeable. “I feel angry when you text while I’m talking to you” states emotion while “I feel like you’re not listening to me” states evaluation.
3. The following step in nonviolent communication consists of the statement of unmet needs or values behind our emotion. For example, “Respect and connection are important to me.” These needs and values are often at the root of emotions experienced and the expression of them can provide insight for those involved in the conversation.
4. Finally, a specific request of what would help meet the need completes the template. A specific request could be, “Would you be willing to wait to text your friend until after we are finished talking?” Being explicit with requests creates clear communication, being aware of whether our requests are really demands raises awareness of our motives, and intentionally framing requests replaces passive aggressive behavior.
Perhaps you have heard the adage, “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” This saying seems to be created out of wishful thinking. Words do hurt sometimes, and communication can be violent. Stopping physical violence makes up a large part of building peace. However, learning to use language intentionally to articulate ourselves, understand others, and build people up is peacebuilding too.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Positions, Interests, and Needs
I’ve seen a role-play scenario that goes something like this: there is one orange and two people. Voices rise as each expresses his or her opinion; “I need the orange,” “No, I need that orange.” A pause in the debate allows observers to suggest possible solutions. What about cutting the orange in half? The participants agree that half an orange just isn’t enough, “I can’t do anything with half an orange, if that is all I get I might as well not get any at all…” We could buy another. Again the participants argue that their needs are urgent and there isn’t time for a grocery store run. The argument goes on; neither agreement nor compromise seems feasible until someone asks a simple question. “Why do you need that orange?” One confides that they are getting a sore throat and a healthy dose of orange juice is the only thing that keeps a cold at bay. The other explains that they offered to bring the cake to a friend’s birthday party in the evening and the recipe calls for the zest from one orange.
When we argue we naturally debate using our positions. Positions are the outcome we have subconsciously decided would best suit us. These positions are often made up of hidden agendas and incomplete information and can narrow the opportunity for creative solutions. In our hypothetical situation each participant’s position is that they need the orange. These positions are framed from our interests: concerns, goals, or hopes. One member of the role-play has the interest of staying healthy, the other the interest of baking a cake for a friend. Behind these interests, like another layer of an onion, are basic human needs. Every human has needs; physical, emotional, and relational. While positions in an argument seem mutually exclusive, interests only sometimes conflict, and in human needs people often find similarities. These needs drive much of our behavior, influence the decisions we make, and, if met for everyone can increase the chance of finding a creative successful agreement.
The language we use often determines whether the discussion includes needs and interests, or merely positions. Nonviolent communication suggests listening for others’ observations and feelings in order to become more aware of what they are saying and to gain a sense of the interests and needs behind their stated position. Reflecting what has been heard then allows for clarification if necessary and a greater understanding between those communicating. As seen in our story, asking the questions “Why” or “Why not” often give a glimpse of interests as well. Ask these questions in order to initiate conversation about the needs or concerns which back the position rather than to elicit defense of decisions. Taking time to reflect on and identify our own needs, emotions, and interests increases our self-awareness and our ability to express ourselves. Likewise, slowing down communication and asking questions in order to more fully understand others’ feelings, needs, and interests de-escalates conflict and broadens the opportunity for creative solutions.
Sources used:
Armster, ME, & Stutzman Amstutz, L. (Ed.). (2008). Conflict Transformation and Restorative Justice manual. Akron, PA: Mennonite Central Committee Office on Justice and Peacebuilding.
Fisher, R. , & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes. New York: Penguin Books.
Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). Nonviolent communication: a language of life. Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.
When we argue we naturally debate using our positions. Positions are the outcome we have subconsciously decided would best suit us. These positions are often made up of hidden agendas and incomplete information and can narrow the opportunity for creative solutions. In our hypothetical situation each participant’s position is that they need the orange. These positions are framed from our interests: concerns, goals, or hopes. One member of the role-play has the interest of staying healthy, the other the interest of baking a cake for a friend. Behind these interests, like another layer of an onion, are basic human needs. Every human has needs; physical, emotional, and relational. While positions in an argument seem mutually exclusive, interests only sometimes conflict, and in human needs people often find similarities. These needs drive much of our behavior, influence the decisions we make, and, if met for everyone can increase the chance of finding a creative successful agreement.
The language we use often determines whether the discussion includes needs and interests, or merely positions. Nonviolent communication suggests listening for others’ observations and feelings in order to become more aware of what they are saying and to gain a sense of the interests and needs behind their stated position. Reflecting what has been heard then allows for clarification if necessary and a greater understanding between those communicating. As seen in our story, asking the questions “Why” or “Why not” often give a glimpse of interests as well. Ask these questions in order to initiate conversation about the needs or concerns which back the position rather than to elicit defense of decisions. Taking time to reflect on and identify our own needs, emotions, and interests increases our self-awareness and our ability to express ourselves. Likewise, slowing down communication and asking questions in order to more fully understand others’ feelings, needs, and interests de-escalates conflict and broadens the opportunity for creative solutions.
Sources used:
Armster, ME, & Stutzman Amstutz, L. (Ed.). (2008). Conflict Transformation and Restorative Justice manual. Akron, PA: Mennonite Central Committee Office on Justice and Peacebuilding.
Fisher, R. , & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes. New York: Penguin Books.
Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). Nonviolent communication: a language of life. Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Stories
My family tells stories just about any time of the year but during the holidays, when we all get together, the story telling becomes more animated. Everyone’s slightly different account of the event adds dimension and stories grow. Sometimes the conversation ends with gales of laughter, and sometimes with a thoughtful silence. The role that stories occupy in personal health, self awareness, and group cohesion is pertinent any time of the year. As the holiday season draws near and people travel far and wide to be with those they care about, perhaps the importance of such conversation grows. While most people love a good story; theorists write of the social importance of narrative, and practitioners use story as a tool.
Author Israel Galindo differentiates between story and experience by explaining that creating a story involves putting meaning behind the experiences of day to day life. Tying occurrences, meaningless until made into story, into the framework of our beliefs and values teaches us lessons from our history and yet enables movement beyond past experiences into the present (Galindo, 2004 p. 128). The action of telling stories also creates a sense of ownership over one’s life. Telling the story of a traumatic event to an attentive listener, perhaps several times, generates a space where one can reframe the event and decide how this story fits into the broader narrative of life. The act of telling, retelling, and reframing in the presence of a nonjudgmental listener facilitates an important step toward healing (MCC Manual, 2008 p. 228). Story helps generate group health as well as individual health. Corporate memory acts as a cohesive for groups and the interpretation of such memory provides a valuable source of group identity. As members know, share, and buy into corporate story a strong foundation is formed for collective movement forward (Galindo, 2004 p. 127-128).
Several of the processes used by practitioners in the field of peacebuilding utilize storytelling. As briefly mentioned above, trauma healing embraces the act of creating story as a path out of pain toward healing. Circle process, a tool used by some facilitators for meetings where misunderstanding, disagreements, and strong emotion exist, bases understanding on the power of story. Sharing story creates vulnerability through which connectedness and recognition of common humanity can emerge. Such storytelling increases both self awareness and interpersonal connectedness and common insights for movement forward emerge (Pranis, 2005 p. 40). A third example, mediation sets aside a stage near the beginning of the process for storytelling. The obvious goal for this step is for the mediator to gain knowledge about the issue the participants bring to mediation. Underneath this overt purpose lies the opportunity for the mediator to gain trust and build understanding through careful listening to each participant’s experience and how they have framed a story (MCC Manual, 2008 p. 150). Storytelling, more than a child’s pastime or entertainment during family reunions, embodies an important part of living together as people. The act of story helps build group identity and cohesion, and creates a path toward individual self awareness and healing.
Sources Used:
Armster, ME, & Stutzman Amstutz, L. (Ed.). (2008). Conflict Transformation and Restorative
Justice manual. Akron, PA: Mennonite Central Committee Office on Justice and
Peacebuilding.
Galindo, I. (2004). The Hidden lives of congregations. Herndon, VA: The Alban Institute.
Pranis, K. (2005). The Little Book of Circle Processes. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
Author Israel Galindo differentiates between story and experience by explaining that creating a story involves putting meaning behind the experiences of day to day life. Tying occurrences, meaningless until made into story, into the framework of our beliefs and values teaches us lessons from our history and yet enables movement beyond past experiences into the present (Galindo, 2004 p. 128). The action of telling stories also creates a sense of ownership over one’s life. Telling the story of a traumatic event to an attentive listener, perhaps several times, generates a space where one can reframe the event and decide how this story fits into the broader narrative of life. The act of telling, retelling, and reframing in the presence of a nonjudgmental listener facilitates an important step toward healing (MCC Manual, 2008 p. 228). Story helps generate group health as well as individual health. Corporate memory acts as a cohesive for groups and the interpretation of such memory provides a valuable source of group identity. As members know, share, and buy into corporate story a strong foundation is formed for collective movement forward (Galindo, 2004 p. 127-128).
Several of the processes used by practitioners in the field of peacebuilding utilize storytelling. As briefly mentioned above, trauma healing embraces the act of creating story as a path out of pain toward healing. Circle process, a tool used by some facilitators for meetings where misunderstanding, disagreements, and strong emotion exist, bases understanding on the power of story. Sharing story creates vulnerability through which connectedness and recognition of common humanity can emerge. Such storytelling increases both self awareness and interpersonal connectedness and common insights for movement forward emerge (Pranis, 2005 p. 40). A third example, mediation sets aside a stage near the beginning of the process for storytelling. The obvious goal for this step is for the mediator to gain knowledge about the issue the participants bring to mediation. Underneath this overt purpose lies the opportunity for the mediator to gain trust and build understanding through careful listening to each participant’s experience and how they have framed a story (MCC Manual, 2008 p. 150). Storytelling, more than a child’s pastime or entertainment during family reunions, embodies an important part of living together as people. The act of story helps build group identity and cohesion, and creates a path toward individual self awareness and healing.
Sources Used:
Armster, ME, & Stutzman Amstutz, L. (Ed.). (2008). Conflict Transformation and Restorative
Justice manual. Akron, PA: Mennonite Central Committee Office on Justice and
Peacebuilding.
Galindo, I. (2004). The Hidden lives of congregations. Herndon, VA: The Alban Institute.
Pranis, K. (2005). The Little Book of Circle Processes. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
Monday, October 18, 2010
In Harmony
Not long ago I read a story which the author ended by assuring readers that the characters were living “in harmony” with one another. When used in the context of people relating with each other, this phrase hints at a metaphor. The language of music usually surrounds this word “harmony.” When I sing something other than the melody of a song, I am harmonizing; or one may comment on the harmony in a certain piece of music. Many people enjoy music: music they make alone or with others and music performed by another. Music speaks to people, bringing back memories, or affecting someone’s mood. Perhaps music can also teach us about interacting with others. Metaphors often show another perspective on a subject, so what can we learn about “living in harmony” from how we experience music?
A soloist, singing a tune alone can be awe inspiring; and unison singing where all sing the same note is beautiful in its own way. Often, however, I find myself missing the other notes that make up the chord. Many different parts sung or played together to make up one musical piece creates a special kind of beauty. Such diversity is present in most songs. With common knowledge about the song and the key a wide variety of notes can be sung and yet all is “in harmony.” Though many of us appreciate such diversity when in filling out a song, it comes as no surprise that diversity in groups can be uncomfortable. Humans tend to gravitate to those with whom they share commonalities. Diversity comes on many levels: surface levels such as appearance and demographical differences exist, as do deeper levels of difference on issues of beliefs and values (Burn 232-233). However, just as different harmonies have their place and their role in beautifying a single song, diversity can enhance social process. The “value-in-diversity hypothesis” suggests that encouraging diversity in a group creates positive outcomes. Diversifying the skills, perspectives, and knowledge bases represented also increases the skills available to the group, the knowledge presented in group discussion, and perspectives through which each topic is weighed. Diversity viewed in this way enhances group productivity and strengthens collective decisions (Burn 243).
Just as diversity potentially strengthens a group it also presents greater opportunity for conflict. Heavy with the connotation of pain and loss, conflict seems to increase the incentive to work towards group homogenization. Some, however, paint a different picture of the role of conflict. Freedom of choice and the differences between people simultaneously enrich our lives and lead to disagreements. Conflict then, is normal and natural (Lederach 117). If this is so, then peace can hardly be the absence of such conflict but rather the way in which we work through the inevitable disagreements. Musically, we often prefer songs in which interest is added through dissonance. For example, many hymns which have been preserved and passed down through generations embrace this clash and resolve. Even "Amazing Grace" allows for a few minor chords, and "Great is Thy Faithfulness" exemplifies several instances of dissonance and resolution within the inner voices. Many of our favorite musical pieces show us the beauty of moving through conflict toward resolution; a movement which enriches the entire experience. Likewise, conflict handled constructively can deepen our relationships, strengthen our decisions, and instigate positive change (Burn 202).
In his book The Moral Imagination author John Paul Lederach writes that metaphor, “creates an image of what the experience of living in the world is like” (72). Next time you hear music, listen for the metaphor of “living in harmony.” Listen for the individuality of the various parts joined in creating one song. Revel in the movement through dissonance toward resolution. Music calls these phenomena normal and in turn we call it beautiful.
Sources used:
Burn, Shawn Meghan. Groups: Theory and Practice. Canada:Thomson Wadsworth, 2004. Print.
Lederach, John Paul. The Journey Towards Reconciliation. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1999. Print.
Lederach, John Paul. The Moral Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.
A soloist, singing a tune alone can be awe inspiring; and unison singing where all sing the same note is beautiful in its own way. Often, however, I find myself missing the other notes that make up the chord. Many different parts sung or played together to make up one musical piece creates a special kind of beauty. Such diversity is present in most songs. With common knowledge about the song and the key a wide variety of notes can be sung and yet all is “in harmony.” Though many of us appreciate such diversity when in filling out a song, it comes as no surprise that diversity in groups can be uncomfortable. Humans tend to gravitate to those with whom they share commonalities. Diversity comes on many levels: surface levels such as appearance and demographical differences exist, as do deeper levels of difference on issues of beliefs and values (Burn 232-233). However, just as different harmonies have their place and their role in beautifying a single song, diversity can enhance social process. The “value-in-diversity hypothesis” suggests that encouraging diversity in a group creates positive outcomes. Diversifying the skills, perspectives, and knowledge bases represented also increases the skills available to the group, the knowledge presented in group discussion, and perspectives through which each topic is weighed. Diversity viewed in this way enhances group productivity and strengthens collective decisions (Burn 243).
Just as diversity potentially strengthens a group it also presents greater opportunity for conflict. Heavy with the connotation of pain and loss, conflict seems to increase the incentive to work towards group homogenization. Some, however, paint a different picture of the role of conflict. Freedom of choice and the differences between people simultaneously enrich our lives and lead to disagreements. Conflict then, is normal and natural (Lederach 117). If this is so, then peace can hardly be the absence of such conflict but rather the way in which we work through the inevitable disagreements. Musically, we often prefer songs in which interest is added through dissonance. For example, many hymns which have been preserved and passed down through generations embrace this clash and resolve. Even "Amazing Grace" allows for a few minor chords, and "Great is Thy Faithfulness" exemplifies several instances of dissonance and resolution within the inner voices. Many of our favorite musical pieces show us the beauty of moving through conflict toward resolution; a movement which enriches the entire experience. Likewise, conflict handled constructively can deepen our relationships, strengthen our decisions, and instigate positive change (Burn 202).
In his book The Moral Imagination author John Paul Lederach writes that metaphor, “creates an image of what the experience of living in the world is like” (72). Next time you hear music, listen for the metaphor of “living in harmony.” Listen for the individuality of the various parts joined in creating one song. Revel in the movement through dissonance toward resolution. Music calls these phenomena normal and in turn we call it beautiful.
Sources used:
Burn, Shawn Meghan. Groups: Theory and Practice. Canada:Thomson Wadsworth, 2004. Print.
Lederach, John Paul. The Journey Towards Reconciliation. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1999. Print.
Lederach, John Paul. The Moral Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)