Tag: leadership

Bullying At Church – What Is It?

What is a bully?

A bully is someone who asserts their wishes on others to the detriment of the other person. Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior that usually involves a power imbalance. These individuals want to get their way and control others. They can cause havoc and create conflict.

Wikipedia defines bullying as the “use of force, threat, or coercion to intimidate or dominate others.” This behavior is intentional, repetitive and habitual. Bullies tend to isolate and intimidate people they perceive as weaker. Sadly, most bullies were abused as children.

Adult bullies operate in a set behavior. They are not interested in working things out or compromising their position. They want power and domination over others. They believe that they alone know best how to do things. Bullies can be staff or members of local churches.

Different types of bullying

  • Verbal: teasing,  making inappropriate comments, spreading rumors
  • Social: embarrassing someone in public, leaving a person out of a decision intentionally to belittle them, or making threats (i.e. stop giving financially to the church, leave and take people with you, etc.)
  • Physical: pushing another person, making rude gestures, or touching another person in an intimidating manner
  • Cyber: sending email threats to staff, leaders, or members to sway them to a specific action. It tends to mention anonymous support for their solution to make others believe the problem is bigger than it is, or that they are in a stronger position than they are.

9 traits that help you to recognize bullies

Thomas S. Rainer, a healthy church consultant,  describes 9 traits to recognize bullies before they do too much damage. They tend to exert their will in the following ways:

  1. See themselves as the real “heroes” who know better than others how to save the church. They are willing to fight for their outcome.
  2. Have a personal or self-serving agenda – they alone know best how the church should do things. They tend to think more highly of themselves and put others down.
  3. Form power alliances with people they perceive as weaker. Thhis is why they tend to triangulate staff members and leaders to conquer them.
  4. Show intense and emotional personalities and can “blow up” quickly.
  5. Famous for being the “storyteller” in the congregation. They claim  “people are saying…”; “If you do that then the majority of the church will leave…”; or financial giving will suffer…”; etc.
  6. Thrive in churches with low expectations of members or where membership is seen as an entitlement to get your own way.
  7. Grow more powerful and relentless when no one stands up to challenge them.
  8. Create conflict and wreack havoc by exerting excessive force, dividing people, manipulation or making threats.
  9. Move on to other churches after they have done significant damage or are forced out.

Basically, a bully says “it is my way or the highway!” They belittle others into submission or convince people to their way of thinking to keep the peace. When church staff are bullies they tend to build a fiefdom of supporters who they incite to do their work. This causes dissension.

What can be done to prevent bullying?

Remember: you have choices. When bullying exists you are either a victim, a bully, or a bystander. You are not powerless – no matter what the bullies want you to believe!

Bullying is more common in churches than most people think. The good news is that with careful attention and focused effort, bullies can be rendered powerless in your organization. Look over the following list carefully. Note what you are already doing well and celebrate it, but do not stop there. Consider adding 2-3 new things to your ministry practice to further strengthen your group.

  1. Pray – don’t prey. Encourage people to pray for God’s guidance in difficult decisions rather than be swayed by the loudest voice or view in the room. Take a time out to pray about a matter rather than rushing to a vote.
  2. Encourage people to speak up for themselves. Practice open, direct communication whenever possible. Use “I” statements to own opinions rather than speaking for others.  Respond rather than react. Bullies thrive where people are silent or passive.
  3. Have a zero tolerance for bullying. Know what it looks and feels like.  Churches with smaller cliques where key decisions are made, or where publicly made insensitive comments are left unchallenged are at a higher risk of bullies.
  4. Be a “high expectation” congregation. Be clear on what it takes to be a member. Activities such as active participation in worship and a small group is essential. Do you expect people to be annually involved in a mission project? These settings provide an opportunity to get to know one another well and strengthens the spiritual practices necessary in a faith group to treat one another well.
  5. Take bullying seriously. Don’t give advice that permits bullying. Do not excuse aggressive behavior by saying: “don’t let them get to you”, “rise above it and ignore them”, or “that’s just the way they are – we’re supposed to love them anyway.” Try to restore people that bully but do not hesitate to challenge the behavior whenever it presents itself.
  6. Know who handles complaints in your church. Every congregation deserves a committee or group that handles the discontent and murmurs.  Some denominations have a Staff-Parish, or Mutual Ministry team that addresses significant issues. An “Acts 6” group can be useful in helping  congregation deal with matters before they escalate into open conflict that handles the murmurs of members.
  7. Create a safe environment for people to be involved in the total life of the church without being bullied. Complete a Behavioral Covenant and be sure that new members know what actions are supported by the document. Review it often and display in a public place for people to see.
  8. Teach the process of descalating conflictbetween people found in Matthew 18. In the case of bullying, skip straight to the second step and provide monitors to go to the bully and be direct in what you want them to do. Let them know how their behavior is intimidating or manipulative. Ask them to stop and provide concrete ways they can be a part of the group. If they refuse to cooperate, then take it to the Church Council for appropriate action to limit the bully’s influence. It is best to lose one bully than lose several people. Exercise church discipline.
  9. Vet your leaders carefully. Get to know people and recognize their talents or gifts. Put well-qualified people in positions of authority. It’s best not just to let people volunteer for a job when you do not know them well. Be clear about meeting schedules and expectations.
  10. Create consequences. People should know what happens when a bully tries to exert their authority aggressively over a group. Provide a warning and name the next step. Bullies should not be allowed to hold leadership positions! It’s important to know that bullies tend to get stronger when left unchallenged.
  11. Use a fair process to make decisions. ParliamentaryProcessess tend to create winners and losers in an organization. It is easy with these methods to have a loud persuasive voice carry the vote or sway a decision. Consider using a consensus building process to make decisions that encourage full participation and innovative ideas to flourish. Work toward cooperation and unity that is won through respectful discussion.
  12. Train Staff. Most pastors and key leaders do not know how to handle conflict well or address obnoxious people soundly. Beware of keeping secrets and trying to deal with bullies one on one.
  13. Seek help! When you find yourself in a place where you are in over your head or the situation deteriorating quickly, do not be afraid to get help. Find someone who can take care of the situation decisively. Your Judicatory leader, local school counselor, or a trained mediator can address the situation fairly. Don’t wait too long to resolve the challenge. It only gets worse.
  14. Be more joyful than judicial. Bullies have a hard time influencing a group when things are going well and acknowledged.

 Conclusion

Bullies never leave or change on their own. If you know the warning signs you can reduce the chances of a bully getting into a place of power. However if they are at work, start to address the situation early.

In the post next week we look at why bullies operate in the church, some practical examples and some more ideas on what you can do to address them.

Violence and disagreement

Violence as a response to disagreement

What’s wrong with this picture?!!

Apparently in US political discourse it is fine to point a gun to show that you don’t like something! A US Senator is running this advertisement. In it he shoots at a document that represents the views of his political opponents.

There are too many people who think that the way to oppose something is to be violent towards it. The symbolism in this advertisement says that this is OK. It doesn’t matter what your politics, or views on a subject, violence is always wrong!

It is both apalling and alarming that a sitting US Senator thinks that it is OK to use the symbolism of violence and death as a way to express dissent. There is no pleasure to see that 2,925 people love that post. That is thousands of people shouting their approval for shooting first and asking questions later (maybe skip the questions bit). Tragic, distressing and unacceptable.

Blessed are the Peacemakers (Matthew 5:9)

The children of God are peacemakers. The children of God

  • seek reconcilliation,
  • offer and seek forgiveness
  • strengthen the chords that bind
  • never lose sight of the fact that God loves those that we might want to hate
  • resist the  accepted norms of violence and oppression in society.

In churches around the world there are people who think it is OK to injure others, to lie about and demean their opponents, who cheat, harm and use their power to win battles over their opponents. Shame! Such people can never claim to be the children of God.

Violence and Consensus Building

It is the aggressive behaviour of people in the churches that is the greatest encouragement to finding a new way of making decisions. At the same time it is the violent / aggressive behaviour of opponents to consensus based discernment that is one of the greatest obstacles to its introduction.

Consensus based discernment is counter cultural in most places. To move to it in our churches calls for courageous leaders who denounce the abuse, intimidation and aggression that passes for “robust debate” in too many churches today.

The Senator’s advertisement seeks to make  a culture of violence normal, acceptable, to be expected. In too many churches the way disagreements are handled seeks to make  a culture of violence normal, acceptable, to be expected. We must stop making violence seem normal!

Prophetic courage is needed

It is time for all the peace-making children of God to stand up against violence in the church (and anywhere they see it). Speak a powerful word of hope that there is a better way to be in communnity around difficult conversations. Offer the vision of consensus building discernment as an alternative world view to the one that normalizes violence.

But be warned! Matthew 5:11 & 12 may happen to you if you are a prophet of hope. “Happy are you when people insult you and harass you and speak all kinds of bad and false things about you, all because of me. Be full of joy and be glad, because you have a great reward in heaven. In the same way, people harassed the prophets who came before you.”

9 reasons you may struggle to bring change – and what to do about it (Pt 2)

Bringing about change needs energy! In electricity, resistance is a measurement of the difficulty encountered by a power source in forcing electric current through a circuit. So it also indicates the amount of power used up in the circuit.

Measuring resistance let’s you know how much energy it will take to get a result. The same applies when bringing change to an organisation. If you use too little energy then the resistance will prevent the power moving through the system. If you have too much energy coming to low resistance then you’ll blow up the circuit!

So it is worthwhile to examine your group for resistance (and other challenges) as you decide the best way to bring about change!

‪1. It just doesn’t fit the official picture.

Churches develop a culture just like any other group. Part of the culture of a group is the way that decisions get made. What this means is that sometimes change doesn’t happen because it just doesn’t fit the “official” culture.

A consensus approach may even be seen to be working in other situations but “that is them” and “this is us”. When something doesn’t feel like a natural fit, or like a clash of cultures, then people resist considering it. Change to something different needs to feel like a “fit” for a group.

Strategies to change culture in a group

The first thing to note is that cultures in groups are complicated. There is not just one culture or value. There are many values in a group. It is just that some get more prominence than others.

So, when thinking about the different cultures of a consensus discernment approach and a parliamentary style, ask where the common ground might be.  By identifying the common values you can then offer consensus building approaches as the way to support the traditional values. For example parliamentary ways of making decisions value the right of anyone to participate in the debate; resist capricious actions by the Chair in favor of democracy; value clear reasons and principled decision-making; and want people to accept the final decision; among others. These are all held in common with consensus building approaches to decision-making!

Talk about the common values. Give prominence to the once that align with consensus based approaches. Then recommend consensus strategies that affirm and support the group’s cultural values. This is not so much about changing a culture as realigning its priorities so that it is more true to what it says. Now that could change how things look and feel!

Change of culture often requires that the dominant culture is challenged. One great way to do this in the context of church meetings is to remind people of the broader culture of the Christian faith. Many times people behave in meetings in ways that just don’t look like mature Christian behavior. So point out the culture of the group and what we understand to be the proper culture of the church.  A Bible study on the character of Christian community is a great tool to help people reflect on their practice. Or develop a worksheet that lists the practices of the group in one column and Christian virtues in another. Get people to draw links between them and see how many are not aligned with Christian virtues – or could be changed to better reflect / support Christian practices.

2. A lack of people who understand how the process works.

Absolutely an issue!! When people have a bad experience of a consensus building process it can put them off it for a very long time. It’s a pity the same doesn’t seem to happen when Roberts Rules of Order give people a bad experience!

Induct, train and coach

It is not fair or smart to expect people to change to a process that they do not understand. Therefore before bringing in any change you have to train people in the process. In the context of a meeting you need to induct them by walking through the key points. This is not just the flow of the meeting and the techniques. It is also very important to speak about the values that lie behind the process – the “why” and not just the “how”.

The times I’ve been involved in ‘unsuccessful’ consensus decision making the main problem has been that the meeting chairperson doesn’t understand, or sufficiently understand, the process. Therefore this key leader cannot help people to use it well. It is impossible to overstate the importance of thorough training for Chairpersons and others who will lead the process. Key leaders also include the meeting secretary, people presenting proposals, small group leaders and the Facilitation Group (if using them).

Even the number one ranked tennis players in the world have a coach. So it makes sense that when you are using a new process you should have a coach. Don’t underestimate the value of having someone alongside you as you learn to implement the consensus approach to discernment. The coaching can include helping you to prepare, comprehensively, for the meeting; responding to questions and scenarios that you expect to face or have met in a meeting; even being present at a meeting to assist you on site. I encourage you to think about what kind of coaching option is best for you.

3. Things get really confusing and the discussion rambles on

A very common complaint is that because consensus often seems to be asking people why they can’t agree to what has just been said, the talk just goes on and on. “We never seem to get anywhere” is a complaint that I have heard a bit.

Related to this concern is that many people don’t know what they are making a decision on. The ramble leads to confusion about what is being discussed and therefore what has been decided. Clearly, a consensus approach isn’t helpful when it ends in an untested ramble and no one knows what was decided. Deliberation has to end in a decision or no discernment has happened.

When the decision taken is not clear to people then you often have people saying later that “I didn’t agree to that”. Or, for other reasons, there is less support for a decision than there should be.

How to cut through the ramble and confusion

The first thing to do is to have a Chairperson who understands the process! When asking for input from people who are showing a blue card there are more options than asking “Why don’t you agree?” That can be a useful question but it often leads to the dead ends that were discussed above.

There isn’t space here to go into all the training but Chairpersons and other leaders need to hold a key goal in mind as they think about how to move the discussion forward. The goal of the process is to build consensus.

If we are going to achieve that goal we need to be exploring what will overcome the reasons that a person is showing a blue card. So a follow up question might be “What could be done to help address your concern?” Or if it has come up a few times ask “Does anyone have any ideas about how we can meet these needs?” A Chairperson or secretary could summarise and / or reframe the issues that are being raised (by one or more people) and offer a way forward. There is an end point to the process! Keep working to overcome the reasons that people cannot support the option that is before the meeting.

Confusion at the point of making a decision is best avoided by being clear at each point on the wording as it is developed. In larger meetings it is a good idea to have the words of the proposal on a screen and make changes as the discussion progresses. The changes can be agreed to as the discussion proceeds. So that by the time the group is ready to conclude the discussion there will be little left to adjust.

At the point of determination always read out the words that will be recorded as the decision of the meeting. Just because the process is incredibly fluid doesn’t mean that it has to be sloppy at the end!

4. We don’t need training in how to be Christian!

I have certainly met people who think that it is very judgemental and unfair to suggest that they don’t know how to behave in a Christian way. As a result, they resist any reflection on their meeting practice and training in how to do things better.

Let’s do some theology

I agree that love is natural (for a person born of water and of the Spirit). That’s a theological affirmation. Does that mean that we then know how to live the Christian life – in every part of our life? I’m sure we don’t have time for a treatise on justification and sanctification / conversion and holiness – but surely that is relevant. Being Christian doesn’t prove that we know how to get it right all the time. So the faithful Christian posture is always humility and openness to correction.

In the context of meeting processes we can easily think about the relevance of a conversation on what love would look like in a Christian meeting. A Bible study on 1 Corinthians 13: 4ff might be a good place to start.

The other tac to take is that we are not just talking about values and character training. We are talking about skills training. Being a Christian doesn’t mean that people have no need to learn how to listen well; to find words that invite participation and show respect; to be humble, vulnerable and excited by the potential that different perspectives bring; etc. Heaven knows that I’ve needed to learn how to do these things!

5. Rushing to an agreement because it seems bad to question a proposal

There was a fascinating example of the consensus process at work in a recent meeting of a Uniting Church in Australia (UCA) Synod. A major proposal for change and refocus for  youth ministry in the Synod was put forward. When it was presented people were asked their first impressions. It was strongly supported and the Chairperson quickly moved to have the Synod determine the proposal. All orange cards – except one. To everyone’s astonishment, it was the proposer who held up a blue card.

He said that he felt the project was too important to be so easily agreed to. It  actually warranted more discussion so that the Synod was sure that it had fully understood what it was committing to. So there was more discussion, with people engaged with the complexities and challenges in a deeper way.

‪When a little while later it came again for determination the proposal was unanimously approved.

‪The point of this is that the idea of ‘consensus decision-making working’ should not be taken merely as ‘getting all orange cards held up’. As the proposer of the Synod proposal pointed, out rushing to a consensus can sometimes be a bad decision. The process is intended to facilitate discernment and some issues do require more work than others.

Slowing things down

One of the most important outcomes of consensus processes is that they build the strength of support for a decision. That decision may be either for support or putting an idea aside. When we rush to a decision without deliberation then this important building of confidence that “this is the way to go” is forfeited. So slow things down. Make it clear that there is no such thing as a foolish question. If something looks like a ‘motherhood motion” then get people talking in table groups around some well constructed discussion questions. For example: “What questions come to your mind as you hear this proposal?” “What might people who have not heard this presentation have to say about the proposal?” “Does the proposal address all the possible considerations?” The particular questions (usually only one or two used each time) will be shaped by the proposal and the context.

Another way to slow down the rush to a decision is to remember that in consensus decision-making there isn’t a vote. It is a determination. Holding this distinction before us helps to reduce the risk of using the cards as simple voting cards and so undermining the process by drawing people into thinking “yes” or “no”. Orange doesn’t mean “yes” and “blue” doesn’t mean “no”. Blue cards mean (among other things) “I am not ready yet.” Asking if people are ready to make a decision may lead to a different response than asking are they ready to agree to the proposal.

Conclusion

There are always things that will help and hinder the implementation of consensus based discernment. I hope that these couple of posts have given you encouragement that there is always a way to bring about change.

Frankly, the best way to get through these problems is to just have a go at it. learn by doing and grow your capacity through experience, study and reflection on your practice. If you have any comments or questions then drop us a note here, on our Facebook page @makingchurchdecisions or drop me a line at terence@makingchurchdecisions.com

9 reasons you may struggle to bring change – and what to do about it! (Pt 1)

When groups first try a consensus approach to discernment they can come up against obstacles. Today I start to look at 8 struggles that prevent consensus decision-making from being effective. Better still I offer responses to each of them!

Other common resistance points are covered in Chapter 6 of The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together  “Yes ….but …. Addressing Resistance”.

1. Tradition. “We’ve always done it this way. Why change?”

This is a very common explanation for why people don’t embrace change. People know what they like and they like what they know. Yet most people don’t usually put it as bluntly as saying “we’ve always done it this way.”

What we usually see is an inbuilt inertia in groups that make any change difficult. The tracks have been laid down over time and that’s the way things run. So the key to maximizing the chance of change is to explore where these tracks are taking you, or discuss the way decisions are made in other contexts, or introduce key elements of a consensus approach into the established processes.

Identify negative outcomes of current processes

For example, bad feelings after meetings, poor decisions, lack of buy-in, exclusion of some people/perspectives, etc. Use an annual review of the performance of your Board, Committee, Congregation, etc as a context in which to raise a discussion on whether your current approach is working for you. This may start a helpful discussion on what needs to change.

Explore alternatives from other contexts

I wonder if the people who resist consensus in meetings use the same methods/processes to make decisions in families, as a couple, or in business negotiations. Certainly, the western parliamentary approach is in sharp contrast to the way in which other cultures have traditionally made decisions. The issue here is “Whose tradition are we talking about?” It is only one tradition and it is a very narrowly applied practice.

There are many opportunities for continuing education for Boards, Committees and church members in general. Create a learning event where alternative ways of making decisions are explored. Perhaps it could be in the framework of understanding how a different cultural group makes decisions, or a workshop on how to engage in dialogue with family members, or invite a local community action group to talk about their work and how they get to agreements and commitment. Often these groups use consensus decision-making because they cannot force volunteers to do anything that they don’t want to do. The focus doesn’t even have to be on church meeting procedures! You can extrapolate later from the learning into that discussion.

Introduce consensus processes into your current meetings

Consensus building values and techniques can be present in a parliamentary style of meeting. As an add-on they will not change a culture but they can provide a taster of what is possible when change is made. Examples of things that a Chairperson can do include: make sure that everyone understands the issues before starting the debate; include more prayer and spiritual disciplines in the meeting; create spaces where alternative voices can be heard; don’t rush to a vote just because it looks like there is a clear majority; and more. Chairpersons should lead into an alternative experience of Christian community around decision-making. Change can be gradual and incremental – until there is ownership of the decision to make real change.

2. Some people need to “win”

Winning is “fun”. It’s natural that when people value a position that they want to see it happen. I’m sure we have all been in that situation. However what is embedded in this comment is insidious. There are people who actively resist and undermine a move to consensus because they know how to get their way under the current rules. Getting their way has become the prime goal and they do not want to empower others to have a chance of changing the outcomes. They want to keep control.

I have met people like this in local and international meetings. It is both sad, disappointing and serious. Changes in the power balance affect who has influence. Some people get this and try to keep ahead of the curve by shutting down the chance for change. There are solutions but they need to be tailored to your context. If this is your situation maybe you need a coach to help you work it through.

However, in addition to handling the pushback from cynical and frightened power brokers, there are conversations that can be fostered. Even people who like to get their preferred decision in a church meeting are willing to count the cost. Very few people embrace a pyrrhic victory.

I am sure that you have seen many examples of where the “win” that was achieved came at a high price. It could be as serious as people leaving the church, a significant drop in income, loss of morale, the development of factions, or loss of support for a pastor. The losses might be more subtle: the person who stops volunteering, loss of a skilled person on the church Board, people don’t turn up to congregational meetings because of the atmosphere, a negative vibe develops in the congregation, etc.

Maybe the people who think they are winning are not winning at all. Develop a case study on how the handling of a decision led to negative consequences for a congregation or group. It doesn’t have to be from your congregation but if there is a recent example I encourage you to be brave enough to name it. Focus particularly on developing a “ledger” of wins on one side and losses on the other side. Get people to put a value (not all will be a $ value) on the “entries” on each side of the ledger. The lesson that people are encouraged to learn is to be aware of the consequences of their actions and to not just focus on the task of “getting the decision I want”.

A great follow up – maybe at the next meeting – is to explore “What could we have done differently that would have avoided or reduced these costs?” That’s where your knowledge of the whole range of consensus-based discernment tools will allow you to shine. The most comprehensive collection of resources for this is in our book The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together 

3. We don’t need cards because everyone here is able to speak up.

This is quite a common perception. The orange and blue cards are a very important part of the Uniting Church in Australia’s consensus process. They are also used in the World Council of Churches, the World Communion of Reformed Churches and other places. They are also often seriously misunderstood.

The idea in this resistance point is that the cards are the way to get attention so that you can get the floor. So if you believe that everyone is able to contribute due to the healthy culture and processes of the meeting then it seems like you don’t need cards. The cards are more than the equivalent of lining up at the microphone to get the Chairperson’s attention. But let’s start the conversation on the terms that it is offered.

In my experience, such a statement is very rarely accurate. There are always people who remain silent. They do so for many reasons. It is not just because they cannot get the attention of the Chair.

As a test for this hypothesis have a person quietly keep tabs on the names of who speaks, the frequency and time taken by various speakers over a few meetings.  Report on the results.  This could make for an interesting conversation.

However, the cards serve a much richer purpose than indicating a desire to speak. Members are to show a card whenever a person makes a contribution. If they are warm to a comment then they display the orange card. If they are cool to the idea or not persuaded by it they show blue. This process encourages active listening. Also, it allows every person to indicate their perspective – without the need for speaking. In fact, the opposite of the opening statement is true. You actually need the cards so that everyone can contribute!

4. Power imbalances

Power is real and some people have it in groups and others do not. When power is used to limit the participation of all people then consensus discernment will struggle. Not all power is malicious or used deliberately to put people down. Although sometimes it is.

For example:

  • Some lay people don’t think they should argue with Ministers
  • In some cultures women or young people don’t value their voice
  • Patriarchy exists in a lot of churches and oppresses women
  • Language and education can give more power to some participants
  • Knowledge is power – who understands the business or process best?
  • What other examples can you add?
Plan to deal with power

You are very wise not to underestimate the importance of power dynamics. So once you have taken it seriously it’s important to do strategic thinking ahead of time on how to address power imbalances.

There are a number of strategies available in addition to a well led use of consensus processes. Consensus processes make it possible to address power imbalances but they have to be used very well to do so.

Preparation includes thinking about the power imbalances and what strategies can be put in place to limit their power. Examples include: deciding when translation is required; how to ensure everyone has the same information; when small group discussions (maybe in cultural, gender or age groups) can help people to find their voice that can then be fed back into the larger group. As you prepare for your meeting list the power dynamics and line up alongside them the tools that help to overcome them.

Also the leaders must model alternative ways of being in community. They  must demonstrate and support a culture of collaboration and equality.

Conclusion

I encourage you to respond to pushback in a way that is respectful and consistent with the values of consensus discernment. Ask questions so that you understand what they are saying. Probe for what is behind the comments. Assume goodwill until there is a good reason to do otherwise. Strengthen your fellowship in the face of difference.

Once you understand the issue before you there are simple and practical things that you can do that make a constructive response. Don’t argue but rather invite exploration through the types of processes offered in this article.

Change is possible! Next week I’ll look at some other things that may cause consensus to struggle.

‪

8 Tools for the Mediator Leader

Getting Started

The Mediator leader brings a distinctive mindset, operational style and hopefulness to a conflict. The Mediator is a marked contrast with the Demagogue and the Manager. Mediator leaders are not necessarily professionally trained as mediators. In this context, it means leaders who are seeking to bring disputing parties together by seeking bridges of understanding leading to an agreement. Therefore they must approach conflict in a specific way, and use a suite of skills that build relationships, trust and shared solutions.

The 8 tools used by the Mediator leader are outlined below. They are a brief summary from the book Leading Through Conflict: How Successful Leaders Transform Differences into Opportunities, by Mark Gerzon.

Integral Vision

When a conflict erupts the first thought is to try and calm things down and to fix it as quickly as possible. If you are involved as a leader you see people hurting, the congregation threatening to fracture, funding at risk – it seems to demand action. But the first thing to do is – nothing!

If no one’s life is in danger then take a step back. Unless you take time to understand the whole picture – in all its complexity and inter-related parts – then you will make an inappropriate intervention. The vision required of a Mediator leader is an integral vision – one that integrates the parts of a  conflict into a whole.

The skills required when using integral vision are to question, reject and test the validity of anything that seeks to put dividing walls between the parties. This includes rejecting labels, disrespecting the integrity of those with different opinions and nurturing the webs that connect us.

Systems Thinking

Once you are focused on the whole conflict you need to work at understanding how the parts are connected. So you will look at relationships and history between the parts. You will seek to understand the character, goals and values of the different parties to the conflict. The goal here is to think systemically!

The skills one uses here are probing questions that seek to unpack the relationships that give rise to the conflict. For example: Why does this church always push out its Pastor every 3 years? What is the personal and faith history of the people that are on opposite sides of support for a new building project? What is it in our church’s story that makes change difficult?

Think of integral vision as making sure that you have all the pieces of a jigsaw in front of you before you start. Then systems thinking is searching for which piece connects to the next.

Presence

More than our minds are required to solve a conflict. When you bring all your emotional, mental and spiritual resources to the midst of a conflict – this is presence. A leader needs to be very self-aware in order to be present in a conflict. So s/he needs to acknowledge their fears, anguish, hopes, anger, etc and deal with them.

The goal of presence is to be calm, available, attentive and capable of contributing to the transformation of the conflict.

Developing that ability requires the application of specific skills. Leaders address their emotional response to conflict and learn to be peaceful in it through a variety of strategies. Examples include solitude, coaching, prayer and spiritual direction, feedback from colleagues, intentional 360 reviews, meditation, playing music or creative art.

Calm, attentive persons who can bring the whole of themselves to their role as Mediator leader have presence. Presence is the master tool and makes it possible to use all the other tools. Because it is so very difficult to be this detached when one is very involved in a conflict it is wise to know when to bring in an external mediator.

Inquiry

Accurate and comprehensive data and analysis are essential for understanding. Without understanding it is impossible to transform a conflicted situation. It is amazing how many leaders go ahead with proposals on how to end a conflict before taking all the time necessary to understand it.

Mediator leaders value understanding and will not short circuit this stage. They also know that they do not have all the insights required in order to get a handle on the issues in a conflict. Therefore they seek the opinions of others – parties to the conflict, outside observers, professional sources of data. Mediator leaders understand that quality information is what makes it possible to find solutions that meet the needs of the parties.

Two skills go with this tool – questions and listening. Valuable inquiring questions begin with who, when, where, how, what, why, what else. Because understanding requires taking in information a Mediator leader is a good listener. So they always make sure that they “get it”. Often they will check back with a speaker to be certain that they understand the point. In the listening, they are understanding what is accurate and inaccurate; and monitoring spoken and unspoken communications.

These first four steps are preparation. Constructive, trust-building processes are essential to achieving transforming and positive outcomes to a conflict. Skip them at your own peril.

Conscious Conversation

Mediators know that people have choices about the way that they communicate. Their goal is to create a setting in which the parties can relate to each other is more constructive ways.

The skills involved include reminding, or perhaps educating, participants about the different ways they can use to engage in communications with each other. The range includes verbal brawling, debate, discussion, making presentations, negotiation, offering counsel, and silence. A negotiated Behavioral Covenant can be helpful preparation for dialogue in conflict situations.

By making it possible to have conscious conversations a Mediator leader is offering and nurturing alternative ways for the parties to engage. Thoughtless counter attacks and knee-jerk reactions are replaced with conscious conversations. Then out of these new ways comes deeper understanding and hence new options can emerge.

Dialogue

Dialogue is possible because the first five tools have been employed. The Mediator’s goal in using this tool is to get parties to connect across what divides them. Then from this comes a greater awareness of interests and a catalyst to reduce attachment to the original positions.

The skill required of the Mediator leader is to keep the parties focused on exploring their interests or goals. Usually, people want to focus on their “positions” or strategies that they believe will achieve their goals. Explore interests and not positions.

Interests based mediation or negotiation has been effectively used for many decades in local and international disputes. The classic and still relevant presentation of this approach is by Fisher and Ury – Getting to Yes. This book is an easy to read introduction to the goals and strategies of dialogue.

Bridging

Talk is not enough to resolve a conflict. The participants must do something quite different in relation to each other or in response to the presenting issues that gave rise to the dispute. However, these ideas will not come from the genius of one side or the other. Rather the bridge needs to be built from both sides so that it can meet in the middle.

A Mediator leader is like an engineer who has the drawings and believes in the possibility of constructing something wonderful. However it is the parties that must bring the materials.

The skills that are required are the things that make it possible for the materials to be delivered to the site. They are trust, social capital, respect, healing, empathy, understanding, courage, collaboration, caring, even love. The Mediator leader fosters, protects and encourages these things

When the bridging happens it can come suddenly and surprisingly. At play here is a “fundamental and mysterious truth: the energy between the parties must change in order for conflict to be transformed.” (Gerzon p. 57)

Innovation

Innovation is the breakthrough that now seems to provide an alternative to an ongoing conflict. While such an idea might have been imagined before, it could not be achieved until now.

The Mediator leader sustains the hope of the participants that around the next bend there may be a light at the end of the tunnel. Their skill is to help the parties recognise and celebrate the bridge they are building and to affirm and test the innovations that arise.

Equally as important is to make sure that there are very high levels of agreement with the proposed solution. This is more than some parties sitting silently and sullenly while others rejoice. It means testing that the stakeholders will promote the solutions among their constituencies and resource its implementation.

Afterword

Don’t pop the champagne corks just yet! Things sometimes unravel and great hopes are dashed. Your role as a leader at this time is to support the leaders who have seen an alternative vision for relationships in their community. You do this by reminding them of their agreements and how positive they felt. Coach them in how to carry the conversations forward into their constituencies. Maintain the hope and keep pointing out the path that has been created. Within Christian communities, this obviously includes the use of Scripture, prayer and other spiritual disciplines.

These are 8 tools that really work. They have been used successfully in many apparently intractable conflicts – large and small. Remain hopeful, grow your skills and then use them.