PROOFREADING TODAY I KEPT THINKING OF THE UKRAINE

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© March 7, 2014

REFERENCE:

Call me a bit odd, and you would not be the first, but in proofreading my copy of “Work Without Managers” in a chapter called “Echoing Footsteps,” I found myself thinking of the Ukraine.  I’ve never been to that country, but I have been to Russia, as well as to Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia along the Baltic Sea coastline, all part of the former Soviet Union. 

I was moved by the people in these Baltic nations, and how much they relished their independence.  Never before had I been so aware of the importance of freedom. 

But that, alone, did not trigger this response.  I watched Tom Donilon, former National Security Advisor to President Obama, speak on the situation in the Crimea peninsula and the nation of Ukraine on the Charlie Rose show on PBS television. 

I am a student of corporate speak, as my background and, indeed, my books indicate.  Tom Donilon has corporate speak down to such eloquence that you forget that these are just words, and our president is very good with words, as is Charlie Rose, who also displays a facility with corporate speak.

In this snippet from WWMs, it concerns the pusillanimity of training, or training for training’s sake, when we need to be educated and enlightened in dealing with the challenges of the day, from the simple making of things to the complexity of dealing with people, all people in all situations, from all backgrounds, nationalities, ethnicities, traditions, histories, cultures, and, yes, the biases that they entail.  I found the idea of “training” transmogrifying into détente.

There was a single word in the Donilon interview that I took from the Charlie Rose session, and it was “reconciliation.”  He sees the people of the Ukraine nation being pushed and pulled between President Putin in the East and Europe and the United States in the West. 

Neither is relevant insofar as the people are concerned.  What is relevant and what is only relevant is what is in the best interest of the Ukrainian nation.   Geopolitical ideas, no matter how sound, from the outside have little impact on the minds and hearts of the people in the middle of the maelstrom. 

My mind was wandering to this fact as I was proofreading this section on “echoing footsteps.”

xxxxxxxxxxx

More importantly, training has little impact on cultural biases.  Therefore, for all intent and purposes, these billions of dollars are being poured into a bottomless pit. This is because training is not designed to deal with cultural change. Only education can deal with the organization’s cultural resistance to change because it uses previous learning as a basis for building a bridge to new learning experiences.

Education does this by assisting the individual worker in exploring their cultural basis of operation and how it meets, or fails to meet their performance needs.

Such engagement, over time, generally finds them discarding the old and making way for the new. It is a slow and patient process that is generated by the momentum established by the will of the worker.

Once this momentum takes hold, however, there is breakthrough to incredible achievement. Meanwhile, training is too frequently a panic response to an ill-defined problem.

Regrettably, when this occurs, training comes to be known as an activity for its own sake and little more.  As for technical leadership and economic clout, these are evanescent when it comes to individual will and creative spirit. Will and spirit are intangibles that personify the thrust of a national psyche.

Here reside the sense and will to survive, founded in common values and beliefs.

These abstractions are energized by the pain of history and the challenge of reality. But when the twin cultural narcotics — comfort and complacency — invade the American psyche (as they surely have), then there is little sense of the danger ahead, for few can hear ‘the echoing footsteps.’

Ironically, it is the gift of technology that has deadened the senses. There is only one reason man has survived on this planet: the human brain. The brain is a necessary apparatus for human survival, with the human mind the software recording of that struggle.

What is imprinted upon the mind dictates the way human beings behave. Paradoxically, as technology has pushed back the veil of ignorance, it has lost the coordinates of wisdom and humor.

Whether science or religion, whenever either becomes dogma or ritualistic consensus, civilization takes a step back into the Dark Ages. Awareness and acceptance have become buried in these times, yet the situation mandates that the American people disavow their resistance to reality and embrace what reality demands.

Our inclination, however, is denial. Today, defensiveness, excuses, justifications, and denials combine with comfort and complacency to depict the landscape of catastrophe.

Unfortunately, these are words. Only words. If they are not felt, not valued, not believed, not understood, the echoing footsteps of catastrophe will not be heard. What is so disconcerting is that this seems to be the case.

Organizations, because they refuse to deal with workers differently than in the past, appear helpless in the face of mounting challenges. Despite expending enormous amounts of energy, time, and money, it seems impossible for them to see the situation clearly.

American organizations are currently throwing prodigious amounts of resources at their cant nemesis — poor quality. Quality has become the New Messiah, with ‘salvation through quality’ the new litany. “It will save us from ourselves, and win our redemption.”

This is a panic response to the strategic issue of “how do we get back on track?”

Global issues require global strategies. But we are not comfortable thinking in such terms. Global strategies require a conceptual framework and theoretical speculation. But thinking conceptually gives us a headache, and we have little time for theories (or, for that matter, for theoreticians). Such a framework entails qualitative analysis, or subjective thinking. But we are extremely skeptical of this type of analysis, finding it too abstract and fuzzy-headed.

We prefer quantitative analysis, with concrete references. This we see as objective and ‘value free.’ No matter how often this disappoints or fails us, we invariably return to the ‘quick and dirty’ solution, the newest fad, or the ‘miraculous.’ We live in the Prison of Panic Called ‘Now,’ and have little desire to escape its punishing comfort.

This, then, explains the popularity of Harris Polls, questionnaires, statistical analysis, and astrology. It is reduced to quantitative mathematics, neat and tidy summaries — not messy, inconclusive speculation.

We want something that deludes us into thinking, “If we do this (reduce cost) and this (improve quality), the problem will automatically solve itself.”

This implies that our problems are more quantitative than qualitative; more operational than psychological. Therefore, cost cutting and continuous quality improvement necessarily will improve the health and stability of the organization.

None of this is true, of course. On the contrary, it is a cultural issue. If you design a bad system, and the people believe in it, it will work. If you design a ‘perfect’ system, and the people do not believe in it, it will invariably fail. It is true that Western Europe and China are setting the economic pace in the world market. But to focus on their quality and productivity as an exclusive algorithm would be unwise!

Western Europe, in particular — because the culture is so richly nurtured and maintained — has been responsive to almost any economic system. Max Weber’s authoritarian bureaucracy is firmly in place. The Germans, especially, are a resourceful people and respectful of their authoritarian tradition. This resourcefulness is not to be confused with being industrious, which they are not. Certainly, they are not nearly as industrious as Americans.  Germans can, however, be accused of working smarter than Americans, as they are more apt to work on the "right things" than attempt to do everything right.  That said industrious effort, alone, is not a good gauge of productivity.

But when Germans work, they work. They find little solace in ‘working for work’s sake.’ Moreover, with an average annual vacation of five weeks, and an additional nine to 14 paid holidays, they make the average American’s two-week vacation look anemic.

Ironically, Europeans seldom carry vacation over to the next year, whereas this is common with American workers. There is a saying, “When Europeans are working, they are thinking about their holiday. When Americans are on holiday, they are thinking about their work.”

THE UGLY SIDE OF PERSONHOOD! IS THIS SIDE TO PREVAIL? AN EXCERPT FROM THE SECOND EDITION OF “WORK WITHOUT MANAGERS”

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© March 6, 2014

REFERENCE:

Work Without Managers: A View from the Trenches created a bit of a stir when it was released a quarter century ago.  In late April 2014 the Second Edition will be released by TATE Publishing Company.  TATE is investing its reputation and coin in re-releasing nine of my books in the genre of organizational development psychology, and a first edition, Confident Thinking.

As well as WWMs was received in 1990, little has changed.  One of the ideas expressed in that original book has come to haunt us today, as little moment was given to what that idea entailed.  The idea?  PERSONHOOD!  This is an excerpt from the Second Edition on this idea?

 

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 



 

WWMs argued primarily about the pervasiveness of the “six silent killers” that were destroying the organization from within, silently and unobtrusively in passivity, behaviors difficult to detect:


Passive Aggression -- coming in late, leaving early, doing as little as possible to get by.

Passive Responsive -- doing only what told to do, then standing around waiting for orders.

Passive Defensive -- always having an excuse why something doesn't get done or done on time.

Approach Avoidance -- accepting assignments not planning to complete, or to complete on time.

Malicious Obedience -- spreading disinformation or rumors about the company or others, or withholding information vital to a project.

Obsessive compulsive -- always wanting to have or be what others have or are, always seeing the grass greener on the other side of the fence.

 

Periodically, indicative of the rise of professionals is displayed in the egregious overt behavior of some, behavior that can and often does have world shattering consequences.  This has been allowed to happen largely because of the narcissistic arrogance of institutional leadership.

Nicholas Leeson, a young derivative trader for Barings Bank of Great Britain, an investment bank founded in 1762, conducted fraudulent, unauthorized speculative trading out of Barings’s Singapore operation that led to the bank’s total collapse and insolvency in 1995.  Barings suffered losses that exceeded 208 million British pounds sterling, and vanished.

 

Edward Snowden, a low level analyst in the National Security Agency (NSA), leaked highly sensitive classified secret documents to the public relating to NSA’s spy program.  These documents revealed how extensive the United States was spying on its allies as well as its enemies.

 

Bradley Manning, an enlisted man in the US Army, a person working in US Army Intelligence, released 720,000 highly secretive documents from the State and Defense Departments of the United States to Julian Assange, who promptly published them on WikiLeaks to the world on the Internet.

 

At this writing, Snowden is in Russia, which has no extradition treaty with the United States; Manning is in prison for violating the US Espionage Act, serving a thirty-five year prison term; Assange is on the run, and in hiding, wanted in Sweden on a rape charge, and in several other countries for unethical and/or criminal practices.

 

These three men of no demonstrable distinction other than the brazen character of their acts, are representative of the overt side of personhood, whereas the “six silent killers” are representative of the covert side of this mindset.

 

Leeson, Snowden, Manning and Assange indicate in their behaviors no countervailing common good restrain.  They are the face of the world of tomorrow where individuals with special knowledge and skills will have the power to impact, disrupt, embarrass, or destroy ancient institutions with alacrity should they so desire.  That is, if the responsible side of personhood does not prevail, and it will not prevail if it is not acknowledged to in fact exist.

These miscreants were not so much motivated by material gain as for other reasons.  Leeson was simply caught in a game that became an addiction.  He didn’t profit from the game, or attempt to do so, as that was never his intent. 

Snowden and Manning were righteous whistle blowers, while Assange had an obvious palpable hatred of the power of institutions, and of the money and celebrity classes.  In various ways, they were driven by misplaced morality codes perceived in the context of personhood in an age of greed and duplicity. 

 

CONFIDENT SELLING -- INSIDE THE DOOR ONCE YOU OPEN IT WITH YOUR KEY

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© March 4, 2014

 

INTRODUCTION – THE MOST IMPORTANT SALE OF ALL

Seeing Clearly

Infallible Guide – The Right Reasons

Sorting Out the Actors

ONE – SELLING AND CONFIDENCE

Three Parts of Every Good Sales Person

You Are Indispensable

TWO – SELLING AND YOU – POWER OF A PROPER ATTITUDE

The Best Person to Understand is Yourself

How Attitudes Affect the Sales Person

              How to fight Worry

Ten Commandments of Selling Anything

THREE – SELLING AND OTHERS – POWER OF EMPATHETIC UNDERSTANDING

Four Keys for Understanding Others

Understanding The Three Levels Of Communications

Checklist of better Listening Habits

Developing the Thinking Level of Communications

FOUR – OVERCOMING COMMON OBSTACLES TO SUCCESS – POWER OF SKILLFUL PERSUASION

Four Keys to Human Tendencies

Checklist For Offsetting Invalid Assumptions

Techniques for gaining skills in Persuasion

FIVE – REASONS FOR SUCCEEDING – POWER OF DYNAMIC MOTIVATION

What is Motivation?

How to make Motivation work for you.

How to use Incentives

SIX – THE FINISHING TOUCH FOR CONFIDENT SELLING

Conquering Fear of Failure

On the Nature of Fear

On the Nature of Courage

Overcoming Fear with Confidence

 

CONFIDENT SELLING – soon to be released by TATE Publishing Co. (www.tatepublishing.com) -- $15.99 (plus S&H)

 

YOU ARE THE WORLD! THE KEY TO THE FUTURE IS IN YOUR HANDS -- ANNOUNCING THE PRE-PUBLICATION OF CONFIDENT SELLING!

YOU ARE THE WORLD!

THE KEY TO THE FUTURE IS IN YOUR HANDS

ANNOUNCING THE PRE-PUBLICATION OF

CONFIDENT SELLING!

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© March 3, 2014

ADVANCED ANNOUNCEMENT:

The premise of CONFIDENT SELLING is that you are the world, and if you know how to look and learn, then the door is there, and the key is in your hand.  Nobody can give you that key, or open that door but you.

Another premise is that we are all selling something. Therefore, we are all sellers.  If selling is your profession, and you have what it takes, but haven’t reached your true potential, then this book is for you.

CONFIDENT SELLING is designed to help you help yourself by developing the confidence that will bring you success to continuing success.

By opening that door with that key you become all that you can become, self-confident, self-reliant, and self-directed.  You are ready to make the biggest sale of your life, belief in yourself.   

CONFIDENT SELLING, TATE Publishing Company, www.tatepublishing.com -- $15.99 (plus S&H)

IS THERE AN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM -- RESPONSE TO "BE HAPPY, DON'T WORRY!"

 

IS THERE AN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM?

RESPONSE TO "BE HAPPY, DON'T WORRY!"

 

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© March 1, 2014

 

REFERENCE:

If you like statistics, for every missive I post, it is usually not before 10,000 have read it, mulled it over in their minds, digested it, and then taken the trouble to compose a compelling and succinct essay that responds to what I have written.  This response emphasizes a truism: 

We are all connected, and as discouraging as it might be for us to consider, we think essentially about the same things, not only because we have similar equipment with which to do so, but because subliminal stimuli bombards our senses with the same incessant messages.

A READER WRITES:  

Dr. Fisher,

One statement in your "Be Happy" piece prompted me to sit down this morning and write about something that has long been fermenting.  Your statement was, "The major problem in life is one we never discuss."

I am following your example, and passing it on w/o letting it age and solidify overnight, and probably will be appalled when I re-read it tomorrow.  The title of my piece is this:

The Often Erotic and Potentially Dangerous “Elephant in the Room”                        

        

Dare we even discuss it?  The subject is one that rarely exists outside perhaps a trusted counselor’s quarters, or maybe overheard briefly in a mental ward.  It is that secret and private life we all live.

It takes place only between our ears. The thoughts that we are certain would disgust and appall our closest friends and loved ones. 

Careful scrutiny will reveal that It is a necessary construct of an evolved society.  The very nature of our modern interdependence requires that we must too often maintain polite and functional relationships with persons we don’t like or respect.  To the extent that we can hold harsh judgments or highly erotic thoughts without acting on them is the foundation of, and makes up the fabric of a civilized society.

We witness the catastrophic results when the barriers to acting on those types of thoughts fail to constrain behavior.  I leave to the reader to think about current international conflicts, with innumerable deaths injuries and displacements.  School shootings, sexual violence in the military and the work place, and family violence are familiar and heart-breaking consequences of instances of the “Elephant,” escaping the realm of thought and morphing into destructive behavior.

At a personnel level, what should we make of our own unsharable thoughts?  Should we try and displace them with healthier subject matter?  Is it even possible?  If (or is it presumptuous to say when) displacement fails, should we experience guilt?

What about our developing children?

Do we reveal the existence of the “elephant” in everyone's room by following the example of our parents, that is, letting our children struggle with their own inner-thought demons?

If you were expecting a resolution to the quandary, you will be sadly disappointed.  However, maybe it would relieve a psychological burden if we all were aware that our inner thoughts are really not that unique, or different from those of others.

The only thing others have a right to know (and often a duty) to judge is our behavior.

GQ

 

DR. FISHER RESPONDS:

The “elephant in the room” is an apt metaphor familiar to us all, given our cultural conditioning of guilt, fear, shame, anger, lust and regret.  It is the combat zone of thought.

In a way, thought is a movie picture in our head, which we may try to edit without success.  

It is our private entertainment, which we need share with no one.  As much as we might desire, others cannot understand what belongs only to us and not to them, no matter how close others are to us.

Thought, pleasure and pain ride on this elephant and it doesn’t always take us where we intend to go.  But don’t despair.  It is endemic to our society.  We seldom end up where our dreams promise we are going.

There isn’t an enterprise no matter how sophisticated that doesn’t have its “elephant in the room,” often the elephant takes it where it doesn’t intend to go. 

We have seen this with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, with Obamacare, with failed interventions. 

Before we declare our biases, or attempt to justify them, the “elephant in the room” does not discriminate between Democrats and Republicans, Catholics and Protestants, Jews and Palestinians, and so on.  It is common to them all.

That said thought can be controlled counterintuitively by embracing it and allowing it to flow in the privacy of a walk, a shower, painting the house, working in the garage or garden, listening to music, and I don’t mean the noise that goes for music today, shooting baskets, strolling through the mall, or any number of quiet- like-times when the self is unimpeded.  It has no agenda. 

Some call this “meditation.”  I call this our creative verve, which is obvious in the tempo and cadence of your remarks.  You should do this more often.  It is not only healthy, but wise.

The kind of thought I’m talking about doesn’t leave a mark.  It is like the eagle in flight, not like the person trying to solve a problem. 

The thought is free.  When it is free, the “elephant in the room” is quiet.  There is nothing to fear.  The ledger is empty.

The mind is a wonderful playground.  When the mind is allowed to release verbal explanations and nonverbal perceptions, it discovers that the explanation is never the thing described for words can never be the thing.  Words, as you point out, are not actions, but actions are expressions of the state of the mind.  Society has confused this all of my life.

Ergo, when the mind gives itself permission to inquire, as you have been doing, about its biases, conclusions, concepts, ideals, and ideas, you are moving towards intimacy and away from fear, for there need be no fear at all.  You are love.  With love, there is peace.  There is no place for violence as there is no rationale to justify it. 

Religions, and I'm speaking of the four major religions, all commenced with this thought in mind, only to become entangled in explanations and perceptions losing their way into violence.  

Thank you for sharing.

Dr. Fisher

 

    

 

 

BE HAPPY, DON'T WORRY! YOU DON'T NEED TO BE A PERFECT PERSON, YOU NEED ONLY TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE WONDERFUL PERSON YOU ARE!

BE HAPPY DON’T WORRY!

YOU DON’T NEED TO BE A PERFECT PERSON

YOU NEED ONLY TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE WONDERFUL PERSON YOU ARE

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© February 28, 2014

If you will stop a minute beating up on yourself, the wonderful person within, crying to be released to the world, will surface to everyone’s joy.  As often as we are told “attitude is everything,” we are conditioned to interpret that to mean, “our attitude towards other people,” not our attitude about or towards ourselves. 

Next time you are down on yourself, next time you’re going through another watershed moment, which we all do several times in our lives, reflect on these little homilies:

To have a friend, you must be a friend, starting with yourself.

The greatest desire any of us has is to be needed, to be loved and wanted and appreciated.  By creating self-acceptance in ourselves, such feelings towards others surface naturally, resulting in our being loved and wanted and appreciated.

The greatest virtue is kindness, to express kindness towards others we must first show kindness towards ourselves.  It is impossible to love everyone, but it is possible to be kind to anyone.

Once we have a tolerance for ourselves, as we are, we will have a natural tolerance for others as we find them.  Then, we won’t find it necessary for us to impress them, but will allow them to impress us.

In order to accept anyone else, it requires that we first accept ourselves.  Self-acceptance is the same as liking ourselves, having a sense of humor about ourselves as we are.

Find joy in doing.  Such joy comes naturally in doing something that we enjoy.  Don’t let others tell us what brings joy, or decide for us what is worthwhile or joyful, and what is not.  Another word for joy is “enthusiasm,” and enthusiasm is nothing less than quintessential joy.

Recognize that with the positive there is a negative, with optimism there is pessimism, with love there is hate.  We are not made up of one charge, either positive or negative, nor should we always be optimistic when circumstances are clearly pessimistic, indeed, as loving as we are we are equally hating of some things, soma behaviors, and some developments.  This is called reality, and we shouldn’t apologize for having a firm grasp of reality, for with it, we lead, we are in charge, and we are secure in our person.

Courtesy is another word for self-respect.  It is as impossible to be uncivil to others as it is possible to self-respecting and still be disrespectful of others.  With self-respect, no person whatever his or her station is more important than any other person.  Respecting one’s achievements and station in life is one thing, to put those achievements or station above personal regard for others of more modest achievements or station is quite another.

To experience self-dignity has nothing to do with always being right, never being wrong, always succeeding never failing, always saying and doing the right thing, and never misspeaking or misbehaving.  Self-dignity is a personal reverence for being human and seeing others in the same light.

To listen is to learn, to always be talking is to take up precious time away from learning.  The highest compliment we can pay others is not only to listen to them, not only to hear what they are saying, but to experience the rhythm and tempo and music of what they are thinking, because when you do, you are connecting with a fellow human being in a way that is richer than all the gold in Fort Knox.

We disparage gossip and yet we gossip.  There would be no novels, no television dramas, no plays on Broadway, no operas or symphonies were gossip to disappear, as gossip is the language that escapes no highbrow or lowbrow, no scholar or scientist, no saint or sinner.  It is the running commentary of life speaking to itself about itself in the moment.  When gossip is malicious, it is evil, and since we are all sinners as well as saints, we can be malicious by accident as well as on purpose.  A word to the wise, then, is always be on our guard when it comes to gossip.

The old limerick, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me,” we know is garbage.  Words do hurt, and the words that hurt a hundred years ago may still hurt today, as do words just spoken.  That is because words have become weapons for good and evil, celebration and destruction.  When we become too sensitive to words, however, the danger is that words can become more important than what they refer to.  Then, we are no longer in charge and are obsessively compulsively worried about being politically correct when it comes to words.

The beauty of being human is that we are as conscious of being cheerful as we are conscious of being sad.  There are times when it is impossible to be cheerful, times when it is important for us to embrace our sadness and allow it to run its course.  This is not only wise it is necessary.  We need apologize to no one for this, including to ourselves.

We are told from an early age never to argue about race, religion or politics.  The word “argue” is an operational word that implies that whatever opinions we may have about race, religion or politics, or for that matter, anything else, we should keep to ourselves.  If each of us was living in a vacuum, that might be possible but we live in a society in which race, religion and politics are part of the dynamic of life.  A better operational word would be “to discuss.”  We don’t live in a vacuum, and we do have opinions on race, religion and politics, among many other things.  We grow as a society by open discussion and exchange of such opinions.  It would be as wrong not to be confrontational when someone says something harmful, or hurtful as it would be to retire into ourselves in submission.  We differ as individuals, and it is impossible to avoid conflict between us, as it is to avoid conflict within us.  With discussion, and good will, conflict can be managed, and the benefit of such management is that we find it is the glue that holds us together and to our purpose.

There is a place for deprecating humor, as where would late night television comedians be without it?  Self-deprecating humor, if it is used to create a sense of balance, is one thing, but if it is used as self-assassination is quite another.  Were deprecating humor excised from comedians, there would be no audience, as people love to have the high and mighty brought down to size with such humor.  The danger is when deprecating humor becomes a license to make racial, ethnic, religious, cultural, social or personal slurs.   Some euphemize the justification for this claiming it is only sarcasm, but behind every sarcasm is likely to be found a bully.   

The major problem in life is one we never discuss.  Is it because we assume we know the answer, or do we think the answer is self-evident?  Whatever the case may be the hardest person in the world to accept is ourselves.  Saying this doesn’t change anything.  But there is a key to penetrating this conundrum and that is by helping others to like themselves.  When someone says, “Thanks to your help, I feel better about myself,” we are on the road to doing the same for ourselves.
 

Likewise, when we succeed in getting others to talk about their dreams, their ambitions, their ideas, and opinions, we release them from their self-imprisonment, and in doing so, we release ourselves from ours.  

They say it takes many more muscles to frown than to smile.  Try smiling when you least feel like smiling, not for any specific reason, other than to reduce the tension in your soul.  A crazy thing is likely to occur, as you say to yourself, only an idiot would be smiling under the circumstances, and I’m smiling.  As this registers, you are likely to break into a broad grin, and possibly a ruckus laugh at such delightful insanity, for insanity is nothing other than “being out of your mind" in the moment.  

What goes around comes around, we simply cannot change that.  By doing unto others as we would have them do unto us, we get a little better, happier, and yes, wiser, one person at a time.  It all ends where it begins with the Golden Rule.

  

   

SEX ROLE IDENTITY and THE FISHER MODEL OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION ©™

SEX ROLE IDENTITY AND THE FISHER MODEL OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION©™

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© February 23, 2014

Michael Sam, an outstanding college football player, announced to the world that he was gay before the National Football League went into the draft phase of selecting college players for the next season.  It has been a controversial and courageous act for this young man, but it does not compare with American Olympic Gold Medalist, Greg Louganis, who won two Gold Medals for diving in both the 1984 and 1988 Olympics.  He received death threats, ostracism, and contemplated suicide.  It moved the late Murray Kempton to write, “Why, America, did you, in your arrogance, teach so many of your children to hate themselves?” 

For this reason, alone, Michael Sam’s coming out in this most macho sport is a sign America is a little less arrogant and a little more tolerant of differences.   

We spend a lifetime figuring out who and what we are, never certain to the end.  This includes our sexuality.  Sex role identity is learned behavior.  The gender of male and female is not in our DNA.  Yet religious taboo puts something of a stranglehold on gender roles and what it is to be male and female, or not.  The cosmic irony is that God put DNA of both sexes in our genes to complicate these gender roles and those identities. 

I am not an advocate of hetero or homogeneity.  Perhaps that is because I have never had to struggle with gender role identity or physical attraction, as I sense many do and have.  Can you imagine the courage it must take to find yourself more attracted to what society construes is “the wrong gender,” and then have to build a life around that?   Well, I can’t. 

What I can understand, and I have spent a good bit of my life dealing with this is the “self” and “role demands” on that self.  I have attempted to capture this in a paradigm.    

What follows has been taken from CONFIDENT THINKING (TATE Publishing 2014).  It is offered here to suggest the struggle in daily life is within ourselves and between ourselves and others.  Sex role identity is but one issue, and is unlikely to be the most pressing one. 

THE FISHER MODEL OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION © ™

PSYCHOLOGICAL FORCES WITHIN INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS

When you deal with others, you must ask yourself, “Who is speaking?” That is what I asked myself with author Richard Dawkins’ declaration that God is a delusion. He has every right to say that and I have every right to differ with him.  Now, “who is speaking,” not only applies to the person sharing his views, but also to “who is listening” in terms of his reaction to such views.  This brings us to the nature of what I call “the ideal self“ and “the real self.”

How we interpret and react to what we hear is predetermined largely by how we define the information in terms of our “ideal self“ and “real self” to a specific situation. They are both valid parts of each of us and influence greatly whether we define the situation well or poorly.

Taking this one step further, acting on our minds will be two further dimensions of this process, and that is “self-demands” and “role demands.” Once it is clear that our reaction to a given situation is either in terms of our “ideal self“ or “real self,” then it follows that either our “self-demands” or “role demands“ will surface and come into play.

There are two pressures acting on us at all times, the “real self” and the “ideal self.” The “real self” is how we actually are, a side we show when we think nobody is watching.  If we accept our “real self,” chances are we won’t get all bent out of shape when someone penetrates our facade. Given this, there is a good chance we will define our situation clearly and act on it appropriately.

Once we start to think on our own, once we get beyond the support system of our family, and process information in the light of experience, that voice in the back of our head that was our parents is now quiet. It is still there.  But we have grown beyond that voice and have developed our own. We have discovered our authentic self. We cannot have an authentic identity or self until we are acquainted with and comfortable being that “real self” as our friend.

Only we can establish identity consistent with our nature. No one else can do that for us. This gives birth to the “adult ego state,” which is another expression for the “real self.” Thus we have the emotional maturity to see the situation as it is, not as it should be. We are ready to deal with each situation as it arises in terms of its real demands, which might be labeled “role demands.”

The “ideal self“ is how we have been programmed or think we should behave. It is a combination of the “critical parent” (judgmental parent) and “nurturing parent” (parent as apologist).  The irony is once our parents are out of the picture, or remotely associated with us, those two parents wage constant war on our psyches.  Our children are very familiar with these two “parents” as they confuse creating mixed messages.  Why?  Because often when parents should be critical, they aren’t, and when they should be understanding and solicitous, they are critical. 

The “ideal self“ is the “superego state” or “moral self.” It is the judgmental self that owns everyone’s problems seeing every situation in terms of black and white, expecting the situation to behave as it should, not as it is does. Complicating matters further, guilt and self-loathing can take residence in a parent for not having been a perfect child.  Fearing somehow this might be revealed, the parent projects an "ideal self" that has never existed.  For that reason, the parent fears honesty is not only a bad policy but may result in the child stumbling into the same treacherous messes.

The perfectionist mania of Leonardo da Vinci may have contributed to his failure to often complete tasks (see Sigmund Freud’s “Leonardo da Vinci,” 1916). It was a way to presage his brilliance “as if only” the work had been completed.  Take the incomplete masterpiece Mona Lisa for example.

The “ideal self” denies its shortcomings and therefore is crippled by them. It is common with passive-receptive personalities to be emotionally dependent on others to make choices for them, to give them advice, and take control. They want someone to blame should things go wrong. By abdicating responsibility, they see themselves as blameless when they misstep.

“Self-demands“ are prominent if we are needy. Needy persons need attention, approval, to appear to be somebody, to have others available to protect their fragile egos, and act as a sounding board for all their woes. Such persons need to make a good impression, need people to know how important they are, need to be associated with people of prominence, need to name drop, need to attend a prestigious university, need to be included in everything, and need constant reassurance.

“Self-demands“ find it impossible for the person to listen, as he is only interested in what is important to him and what he thinks. He can be easily offended with the slightest criticism, but thinks nothing of criticizing others. He is a rumormonger, a gossip, and tends to be passive aggressive, maliciously obedient, or obsessive compulsive.

“Role demands” focus on the situation. “Role demands” constantly change. They differ when listening to a friend, completing a work assignment, or providing emotional support to a loved one. The person who has a firm grip on “role demands“ shows an easy grace and self-confidence as he changes from one demand to another never confusing the demands or the situation. He is not the center of the focus, the demands of the situation are.  He is not judgmental as that is not in his repertoire.  And he doesn’t own other people’s problems.

He brings the best out in others because he pays attention. He actively listens. This does not mean he allows others to set up straw men to compromise him. For example, he would not let a problem drinker get off the hook by hiding in “his disease.” He is not a patsy for his or anyone else’s excesses.

To better understand the difference between these two demands in terms of confident thinking, there is a simple checklist:

With “self-demands,” it is evident that you need to protect your fragile ego when you need others to share your personal biases toward everybody and everything. If others don’t fall in line with your thinking, you are inclined to classify them in belittling stereotypes.

With “role demands,” you perceive the situation in light of its specific demands.  You demonstrate confidence and caring. For this, you earn group trust. You see a synergistic connection between individual and group needs. You have no inclination to compare and compete, to divide and conquer, or put one individual or group against another. You are kind, considerate, consistent, fair and respectful, but also firm. You treat everyone alike with dignity, while holding behavior to a high standard, according to the demands of the situation. You are no pushover. You display confident thinking without badgering others with it. Others feel better for being in your company. You know life is not fair, but that is not relevant. You are not an apologist. The idea of “feel good” applies to “self-demands,” not “role demands.”

You expect your life and work to be judged critically, but fairly, and you expect you won’t always see eye-to-eye with your bosses. So, it is no surprise that others don’t always see eye-to-eye with you. You know life is not divided into semesters where you can bone up for exams, but a series of daily pop quizzes. Success comes when preparation meets opportunity. There is no luck involved as everyone gets a report card every day. The key to “role demands” is readiness.

Consequently, if a person is obsessed with his “ideal self “and “self-demands,” the situation will be poorly defined, misperceived and misinterpreted. It is the blindness of old logic, a fraction that always seeks its integer.  Reason will not convince such a person to think otherwise. It is “the system” that is against him, and he will have it no other way.  He is the victim. It is not his fault. He did nothing wrong. That may be true, but even truer is that he most likely did nothing right. He is an emotional cripple heading toward self-defeat, and if not corrected, a victim of chronic disappointment.  Since the confident thinker is comfortable with the “real self” and “role demands,” he will define the situation accurately.

He will embrace the consequences of his actions, and nip problems in the bud before they explode out of control.  For this attention, his personal security will be enhanced, his professional influence solidified, and his aspirations on the road to self-realization.

This is not to imply that for every step forward there is not a step back, or that surprise and failure do not occur on occasion. It means he is ready for the most stressful situation.  Even when everything is not going well, adaptive tension gets him through the difficulty. He is not paralyzed by maladaptive tension.  This is because he embraces his fears rather than runs from them, accepts the challenges at hand and deals with them the best that he can. At the end of the day, he is satisfied he did his best. The body and mind are one and resolutely resilient. 

“Role demands” place the focus on the job at work and in life off the job.  In that sense, they are contagious, helping others to adjust to what they can do rather than what they can’t do and into accepting who they are rather than who they should be.

There is a natural dynamic in the “zone of conflict” where these forces compete for dominance. It is the tension between the “real self” and “ideal self,” and “self-demands” and “role demands.”  If the "ideal self" and "self-demands" are winning the struggle, it is in the direction of self-defeat.  If the "real self" and "role demands" is winning, it is in the direction of self-realization.

This determines whether the situation is clearly or poorly defined.  The drama of mounting anger is first rehearsed in our heads, often unbeknown to us, before it explodes between us and someone else.  If only we were more self-aware, when social pressure starts to build, we could take a deep breath, count to three, excuse ourselves, go somewhere private, take out a handkerchief and clean our glasses, or any number of other things to bring our pressure gauge down to where we could react without embarrassment.

Too often we “pop off.” This is a form of rage. This was the case with actor, Mel Gibson, a deeply religious zealot, director of the acclaimed film, “The Passion of the Christ“(2004), when he was stopped for erratic driving. He resisted arrest, and went into a hysterical tirade against Jews, police and society, inconsistent with what he professed to be his “real self.”  Gibson insisted this was an aberration, and simply the harangue of a “wild ass drunk.”

Freud would not agree. He would say he had real issues between his “ideal self“ and “real self,” as well as between his “self-demands“ and “role demands,” and that the persona he attempted to project of the devout Roman Catholic was loaded with conflict and inconsistency, and that all this repressed tension had to eventually surface. Unfortunately, when such rage finally surfaces, it is almost always ill timed.  Before you judge Mr. Gibson harshly know that part of us has little interest in our best interests; part of us has little regard whether our actions are destructive or constructive. The angels and demons of our nature are always active and likely to surface the more we confine ourselves to high stress situations with little down time. 

The Fisher Model of Conflict Resolution©™ is never static, never one-dimensional, and can be accelerated or retarded by the clash of emotional temperaments. While we are at war within ourselves, this same conflict goes on within others as well.  Consequently, a given situation can be perceived in multiple ways. This complexity can be mind-boggling but it need not be.  Be kind and accepting of yourself and you will inevitably find yourself kind and accepting of others, whatever your predilections.

TRUTH AND NATURE, A COMMON TAPESTRY

TRUTH AND NATURE, A COMMON TAPESTRY

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© February 23, 2014

 

REFERENCE:

RW is a person I’ve only met once.  I have been a fan of her essays on the Dr. Donald Farr e-mail Network for some time.  Her words are descriptive of nature that are akin to her spirit.  Nature is her theatre and she blesses it and is blessed by it, and expresses that rapture with such joy that it becomes the reader’s as well.  I confessed to her in an earlier exchange that although from Iowa I have never been on a farm, never been into animals with the possible exception of the human species, and was ashamed of my ignorance.  Next time Betty and I are in Iowa she has agreed to give us an educational experience, which we are looking forward to.  In this essay she bridges her world with mine in a most kind way.

 

A READER WRITES   

 

TO OPENING the wonders of nature to you and Betty...would be much like you revealing your thoughts on mankind.  They are foreign one to the other. 

While an appreciation of nature takes complete immersion, I only see you completely lost in wild thoughts of mankind and the battle you do refining the various cultures and histories into a whole tapestry. 

You must deal with art, religion, schools of thought, and possess the complete dedication to sort among them to find truth.

Nature is easy, note and reflect, accept and appreciate.  Four directions: each its own way; the elements: fire, wind, water and to me light.  Nature reveals more mysteries than man's mind ever uncovers. 

Thomas Macaulay wrote much about man but he is dead to today's world.  A great shame his essays on life and death, his value of history is forgotten as today history omits much of the struggle to arrive at conclusions, as seen by many denying the basics of WWII. 

Thomas Merton was a chicken as he ducked much that you wrestle to the ground.  You rise again to battle yet again.  You embrace the machinery of fairness and correctness in the work place.  You have condensed daily life to the best one can squeeze from its overwhelming complications.

However, the world of man has lost its compass and morality is an eradicated word from the vocabulary of leaders.  What makes a leader would be a conflict in itself. 

Give me the snow melt and the world beneath it as is my world today...a new mystery tomorrow.  E.O. Wilson balances the world of nature and science in his study of ants, and applies it to man's struggle to work together.  This gives little to the ponderings your mind uncovers. 

As I have said before, walk on in your ponderings.  Great things can be revealed but only to those strong enough to endure. 

I often laugh at our cats spending hours watching for the voles to emerge from their nests, and Mark reminds me of the time I spend marveling and recording the comings and goings of the whole of Nature. 

Be well, Jim and Betty!  And, Betty, the day will arrive when you can spend your time in the luxury of staying home.  Your book could be life with Jim.  I know how hard it is to have a mate you have to knock on his head to enter his world.  Hands on face and pull it to yours as he is so completely immersed in his own world of thought. 

RW

 

DR. FISHER RESPONDS:

I feel blessed that I know RW, and I know my wife Betty does as well.  What is more authentic and true than to be one with nature?  Thank you, RW, and

Always be well,

Jim

PUNISHMENT NOW, ABSOLUTION LATER! THE ORDEAL OF BOOK SIGNINGS AND WHY DO AUTHORS ENDURE THEM!

PUNISHMENT NOW, ABSOLUTION LATER! THE ORDEAL OF BOOK SIGNINGS AND WHY DO AUTHORS ENDURE THEM!

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.

© February 22, 2014

It has been some time since I last had a book signing.  They have become camp for book publishers large and small, and crucial for self-publishing or semi-self-publishing authors.  I don’t exactly fit in these defined categories as I have had my own publishing company, been published by established publishing companies of long histories, and have most recently been published by what I would call a hybrid of these categories in that its primary business is self-publishing authors, but for some reason chose to give me a contract for ten of my books, nine second editions and one, first edition.

                           Long time friend, Janet, at the "book signing."

           

   This publisher has invested a great deal of labor intensive time and publishing acumen in this project.  My sense is that it took far more time than the publisher expected thinking republishing my books would be a slam dunk.  In other words, the publisher, once it received the copyrighted manuscripts, thought creating second editions would take a minimum of editing to put them between soft covers.  Implicit in this strategy was that the author would self-promote and self-market these books with its expert guidance.  Not apparently considered was that the author was in his dotage and not a fresh talent.

It mystified me from the beginning that this publisher wanted to enter such a contract with me, first, because my books span 44-years, second, because they are mainly to a niche market that chose mainly to ignore them when first published with rare exception, and third, because I don’t write to any choir but to an audience that may or may not relate to my empirical experience and my cut on that experience. 

I have had the benefit of some brilliant people who have done a yeoman like job to connect me with an audience, at some risk to their profession, reputation and own careers, yet they have done it, and for that I will be eternally grateful.

I am thinking in particular of an author, an academic and a mainstream editor and journalist.  I don’t hear from them anymore for I have a reputation of wearing people out as I can be quite demanding.   There is no bend or no give in my integrity, not even the width of a hair follicle.  I don’t say this with false pride or bravado.  It is just the way I am built. 

Yesterday, I had a "book signing," in which one person showed up and bought two books.  She is a great supporter of my work and a loyal friend.  Many planned on coming but were otherwise engaged, or simply forgot or just didn’t feel it was worth the effort.  In any case, I share this with you, my loyal readers from around the world, who reads my books and this blog.

By some curious happenstance, “Fragments of a Philosophy” that I occasionally post draws the biggest international audience and response.  My muse for these is Ralph Waldo Emerson, whom I believe knocked them off with equal alacrity and spontaneity that I do.  Consequently, I suspect when I am gone that they will endure if my works otherwise do not. 

My daughter, Laurie, drove me to the "book signing" in downtown Tampa in a crowded quaint little coffee and sandwich shop.  She is a model and although well into her fifties has not lost her beauty as the picture here shows.

 

Dr. Fisher with his daughter, Laurie, at the "book signing."

As we were sitting there with our one client, whom I have known for several years, Laurie, who is not known to be philosophical was just that.  She is tall, six-two, strong of will and thought, and of my four birth children, the second oldest but always the strongest, the mother hen of the four, the person who has always been there for the other three, while the other three have never been there for her, because she being strong and them being weak they never saw the need. 

Yet, she confessed that was not true, as she sat there with me and our one client.  She said that she often hurt, often felt alone, and could use someone to talk to, someone she could trust to say her mind, someone she could connect with, but alas, it seemed that others always had a greater need to share their woes with her and little time or inclination to entertain hers. 

Laurie is another reason why I have such a high regard for women.  I have never met a man in my life as strong as my daughter.

That said I wasn’t prepared this morning when I woke up to remember some words she said at the “book signing.”  I think she feared I was depressed or disappointed with only one person showing up for the book signing.  I was actually relieved.  I prefer being where I am here, right now, writing these words in the sanctuary of my study, contemplating, composing, constructing and creating a litany of words that rises out of my soul and finds a way before my eyes as they do now.

Laurie said to Janet, the lone client at this book signing,

“Authors are important to us.  They record our lives and tell us who we are.  They tell us stories of those lives that were they not to tell us those stories we would miss the joy of living.  I cannot imagine life without authors or without the stories they tell us about ourselves.  I’m glad they have the courage to write and record their thoughts when most of us simply take these thoughts for granted.” 

She went on talking to Janet while my mind drifted off into other things for, at the time, the wisdom and the insight her words conveyed bounced off my tympanic membrane without as much as a tinkle.  But somehow that vibrating mechanism penetrated my psyche to collect in my dreams and resurface as a sensation with significance as I woke up today.

The other thought was the title of this piece, “Punishment and Absolution,” which also came to mind as I woke this morning.  Writing is something akin to punishment because few things are more difficult, and yet people write and write and write some more.  I hope they enjoy something like the absolution that I experienced in my daughter’s words that rose, unexpectantly, from her dreamy eyes.