Learning and Healing in Addictive Workplaces:
the Consultant's Role
by Roger Harrison PhD
Life on Earth Remembering Earth's Wisdom
The essential
process for any organization attempting to survive in today's chaotic
environment is learning. There has been a lot of attention given to
"the learning organization" in the recent past, most of which promotes
the value of a shift from command and control, to organizational learning.
I have been concerned about the barriers in our culture which militate
against this shift (Harrison, 1993), and in this present paper I address
them once again.
Learning
does not happen with ease in adults, and it is usually even more difficult
in organizations. We have much to unlearn, and we resist the feelings
of anxiety and uncertainty that result from unlearning. In addition,
there are blocks to learning which are present in the culture of all
organizations. I identify four blocks to learning which are especially
potent today. They are:
- The
inhibition of learning by the presence of fear, anxiety, and
other strong negative emotions in the organization.
- The
inability to acknowledge the shadow: aspects of the organization’s
doing and being that are contrary to the ways organization leaders
and members would like to think about themselves.
- The
unmet needs for healing in organizations that are undergoing
major changes, such as downsizing.
- The
bias for short term problem solving, action and competitiveness
that are embedded in the character of most leaders and managers,
and in the cultures of their organizations.
I have
previously discussed these blocks in my monograph, Towards the Learning
Organization - Pitfalls and Promises (Harrison, 1993). Their effect
is such that many of the efforts that managers, trainers and consultants
make towards the creation of "learning organizations" fall far short
of their intended results.
When I
wrote Towards the Learning Organization, I was focused on blocks
and barriers, and when I was finished, I am afraid I had not made as
positive a contribution as I wanted to. Since then I have pondered long
and deeply what I might do to contribute to the enhancement of learning
in organizations and more generally in our working lives. I start with
some observations of the world in which I live. I see several things
that form the context within which we do our work. Other conclusions
are possible, and I do not want to establish some polarized debate,
but rather to be clear about where I am coming from and what I see.
- The
economic activity which stems from the dominant assumptions
of our culture is destructive to our means of life. We are,
perhaps irrevocably, degrading the environment which nurtures
and supports us in countless ways.
- The
corporation is a major instrument of our economic activity.
In its current form as a means of social and economic organization,
the corporation is a life-negating force. The more successful
a corporation is, the more it will, in general, deplete the
non-renewing resources of the planet.
- Significant
remedies for the corporation's negative impact on the planet
will not be internally generated.
- The
effects of the prolonged attack of our economic activities upon
the life-sustaining capacities of the planet are increasingly
difficult to ignore. However, we are deeply schooled and indoctrinated
in the basic assumptions on which our economic relationship
to Earth are based. For many people, questioning those basic
assumptions is experienced as an assault upon deep principles
and beliefs of our culture. For them, it is unthinkable that
these assumptions are wrong, and they are quick to say so. For
those who feel intuitively that there is something deeply and
fundamentally wrong with our relationship to earth, there are
many voices ready to lull us into the belief that we are mistaken,
or at least unnecessarily extreme and alarmist.
- As
time goes on, the magnitude of the contradictions between what
is necessary to sustain life and what we are doing to the life-giving
processes of the planet is becoming so great and so frightening
that most people cannot face it. We slip into denial.
- The
need to avoid full awareness of those contractions brings into
play all the psychological defenses of which we are capable,
in our need to avoid the fear, grief and anger which are normal
responses to the awareness of impending disaster.
- When
the psychological defense processes of one person are shared
with another, they reinforce one another. What results is a
social defense process. Social defense processes are difficult
to change, because they are mutually reinforcing.
Addictions
are one form of psychological defense against fear, grief and anger.
Addiction is a pattern of behavior, thought and feeling which alleviates
or anesthetizes pain and suffering without affecting their causes. The
addiction absorbs mental, physical, emotional and economic resources
which are then unavailable to the individual for altering the circumstances
which cause the pain.
When a
particular addiction is shared by many members of a social system as
a psychological defense, it becomes institutionalized as a quality of
the culture of that system. It then becomes part of the beliefs, attitudes
and modes of perceiving and thinking (mindset) that make up the culture.
When this occurs, the behaviors and preferences that constitute the
addiction are valued and rewarded within the culture.
At the
same time as the awareness of the end of our way of life is becoming
more difficult to suppress, we are developing in the western democracies
structures and processes of relationship that favor a high degree of
individualism. With all its glories, individualism has a dark side:
alienation, loneliness, isolation and indifference to others' suffering
(Harrison, 1995a, Chapter 13). We seem currently to be close to the
high water mark of a tide of individualism in North America and elsewhere.
Individualistic and competitive behaviors, values, attitudes and feelings
are taught, rewarded and celebrated in all the ways in which a dominant
culture can reinforce its own continuation.
As individualism
has become more pervasive and extreme, the pain and suffering which
flow from its darker aspects are increasing. In the same way in which
our beliefs in the economic institutions of our society are reinforced,
we are encouraged to believe that individualism and competition are
fundamentally natural and right. We fail to notice their negative effects
on the quality of our lives, or we attribute these effects to other
causes, or we believe that they are inevitable.
Much of
the behavior currently rewarded in organizations and in our culture
is addictive to a significant degree. People's absorption in addictive
patterns of thought, feeling and behavior is increasing as our suppressed
fear, grief and anger over the likely collapse of our ways of life become
more intense. Addictive patterns in organizations are also fed by people's
needs to assuage isolation, alienation, and the lack of love.
Anne Wilson
Schaef has written in The Addictive Organization about the organization
as addict, and about addictive behavior in organizations (Schaef &
Fassel, 1988). Written nearly ten years ago, her work is still fresh
and relevant. These notes are from my reading of that book:
When the
organization is addicted, it has all the characteristics of people who
are addicts. Addicts are people
- whose
lives are unmanageable because they have lost control over their
addiction.
- whose
lives are progressively "taken over" by the addictive process.
- who
have lost a sense of their values and personal morality.
- who
function primarily out of self-centeredness, the illusion of
control, and dishonesty.
- who
become progressively isolated from input from society, family,
and friends.
- who,
as they become internally more chaotic, exert progressively
more control over those they depend on and on their immediate
surroundings.
- whose
thinking process is confused, obsessive, and paranoid-like.
Many organizations
today show more than a little of these characteristics, and many of
those most admired, such as high tech organizations, show high levels
of addiction.
The thinking
processes in addictive organizations have characteristics typical of
those in many present day organizations. Addictive thinking includes:
- Putting
corporate survival above all else. This produces ruthless managers,
and a power-and-crisis-oriented organization culture.
- Responding
to crisis by aggressiveness and a warrior or siege mentality
towards the outside world. Addicts and addicted organizations
are self-preoccupied, they project, displace and deny their
responsibility for the problems they face.
- Short-term
goals, bottom line focus, abandoning vision and values, and
avoiding risk, combined with a loss of ethics and morality.
- Manipulative
and calculating use of participation and employee involvement,
in an addictive and dishonest system.
- Viewing
all allegiances as expendable, and unilaterally abandoning long
term implicit contracts with employees, customers, suppliers
and the public.
- Inability
to endure tension and ambiguity, preference for quick fixes,
and impulsive decision making, so as to avoid deep reflection.
- Frequent
changes (often reversing previous changes) instead of changing
fundamentally: taking up one fad or "flavor of the month" after
another.
Within
organizations, the primary addiction to which individuals are prone
is workaholism. Schaef mentions several characteristics typical of that
disease:
- We
become addicted to the process of work, using it as a fix to
get ahead, be successful, avoid feeling, and ultimately to avoid
living.
- When
workaholics are most into their disease, they feel most alive.
The fix may be an adrenaline high which accompanies the work,
a surge of energy which the workaholic doesn't experience with
family, friends, etc. Workaholics experience letdown and depression
when they are not at work or thinking about work.
- The
period between projects, when one rests and enjoys relationships
and non-work activities, are experienced negatively by the workaholic,
who is uneasy at being out of touch with his/her "fix."
- Stress
reduction activities appear healthy, but actually take the focus
off the addiction, support it and allow them to prolong it.
- Workaholism
is destructive to families and personal relationships. Stories
of children growing up in a workaholic's family sound much like
those told by adult children of alcoholics (ACAs).
- Many
workaholics have secondary addictions to alcohol, food, drugs,
etc., which reduce awareness of the pain associated with the
main disease. For example, people who work hard all week, then
drink or engage in compulsive activities, rather than face questions
about the value of their work.
- Workaholism
is celebrated in popular myth and story, for example magazines
for career women. The message: work like this, and you will
succeed. Successful people are quoted: "I am a workaholic, and
I love it."
- Organizations
are blind to the effects of the disease and thoroughly into
denial of it. Many organizations have workaholic norms, such
as not taking lunch breaks or vacations, and scheduling training
and team development events on weekends.
- In
many organizations, damaging one's life and relationships with
loved ones is acceptable if it produces something useful in
the way of work.
- There
is black/white thinking about workaholism: if one good thing
can be said about it (e.g., that it produces useful results
in society), then the whole of it is considered "good."
- The
dominant culture promotes workaholism, with its image of the
good citizen as one who works hard and thus contributes to society.
I believe
that workaholic behavior as defined above is on the increase in organizations,
to the point of being endemic. Addicted individuals are very difficult
to work with, and addicted organizations are even more so. Here is how
I believe organizations must change to become more healthy, and these
are the goals of my work within organizations.
- The
mission of the organization will be supported by the structure.
People will not find themselves in activities which undermine
the goals of the organization, or doing meaningless activities
of an addictive nature.
- There
will be awareness that the structure and the system, the way
of organizing the work, are integral to the company's mission
and must support and facilitate the work of the organization.
- As
within, so without. Organizations will walk their talk: for
example, organizations promoting health products will make health
a priority for their employees.
- Organizations
will be moral.
- Organizations
will develop permeable boundaries and will not pretend, and
protect themselves from information from the outside.
- Communication
within will be multidirectional and will flow easily. It will
be used for understanding, and not manipulation and control.
The content will be about important issues.
- Leadership
will be diffused and situational. The concept will be that everyone
will have a leadership role. Everyone will take a learning role.
Leaders' power will come from honesty, from the ability to help
others see the deeper meanings and significance in events, and
from their willingness to "walk the talk."
How
do we get from here to there?
What is
currently going on with those of us who endeavor to assist organizations?
We are not immune to the ills that beset our clients. On the contrary,
we who endeavor to help organizations cope with the results of their
addictions often assist in the maintenance of the addiction. In the
same way that co-dependent family members support the continuation of
disease by shielding addicts from the consequences of their behavior,
consultants may collude to support the organization as addict, and workaholism
in its members. According to Schaef (1988) and also to me(!) consultants
may engage in the following co-dependent behaviors:
- Saying
what clients want to hear, rather than the truth. In this way,
validating the lies and the denial of the organization.
- As
co-dependents, we suppress the operation of our own professional
standards in favor of responding to the wants of our clients.
Endeavoring to meet client demands for quick fixes is an example.
- As
a dedicated helpers, we set aside our own needs in order to
help clients, and become burned out as a result.
- There
is a direct connection between seeing ourselves as "helpers"
and becoming enmeshed as co-dependents. We act as rescuers,
propping up the sick organization, and manipulating it to make
themselves indispensable and powerful.
- As
co-dependents we are excellent observers, picking up clients'
cues as to what responses they want. We avoid expressing our
genuine opinions and feelings in favor of being "objective"
and "professional."
- "Objectivity"
is a dangerous, dualistic illusion, inviting us either to remain
aloof and treat others and the self as an object, or to become
"lost" and enmeshed in the organization. Consultants need to
have feelings, and share them, without becoming enmeshed. The
idea is to be a participant, but a compassionate and detached
one.
Right
livelihood for consultants
What I
have to say about the right work for OD consultants today is absurdly
simple and, in my experience, devastatingly difficult. I propose that
we
- wake
ourselves up: acknowledge both the dark and the light of our
world's unfolding condition, and that of the organizations and
their members with whom we work. We must own and accept the
feelings that accompany such awareness.
- learn
to support and nurture ourselves in the loneliness and despair
of being awake in the midst of sleepers, a key element of which
is compassionate detachment;
- assist
others to wake up, by telling the truth as we see it, and also
by convening and facilitating conversations which support others
in discovering and speaking their truth.
- join
together with others who are awake to nurture
and support one another, and
- decide
upon and take joint action based on our awareness.
One key
to awakening I have experienced recently in my own life is detachment,
or letting go. Awakening requires us to step outside the mental models
which we share with our clients and with other consultants, and to walk
the lonely road of what Marsha Sinetar in Ordinary People as Monks
and Mystics (1986) calls "social transcendence."
By social
transcendence, I mean emotional independence or detachment from societal
influences, even from other people when necessary. The consultant as
monk has detached emotionally from a known, familiar and comfortable
way of life in order to embark on an uncharted inner journey. Such a
consultant responds to an inner call, reinterpreting his or her basic
way of being in the world - which might include reinterpreting the way
he or she relates to others, work, marriage, Church or other organizational
status, and even includes a renewed definition of oneself and one's
basic place in the scheme of things. (Sinetar, 1986, p.5)
Most of
us who practice organization development have always done this to a
degree. What makes us valuable to our clients is in part our different
ways of seeing and valuing. For example, many of us have steadfastly
held a mental model that organizations which liberate the human spirit
will also be productive and economically viable. I think of that as
a small and manageable difference from our clients.
However,
when we come to believe that the organizations with which we consult
are leading us to destroy the environment, perhaps irretrievably, and
that both society and business are addicted to destructive patterns,
we have a larger problem of maintaining rapport and communication. The
path I am advocating requires that we allow that problem to develop
as we free ourselves from the denial and rationalization which validate
and give meaning to the continuation of business and societal practices
which are destructive of life on earth, and as we fit ourselves to assist
others to awaken in their turn.
I want
to make it clear that I do not believe I or we have a special pipeline
to some great truth about organizations that we see and no one else
does. Nor do I believe it to be important that others see the world
just as we do. What I do believe is that each of us has access through
our intuitions and through our love for life to know something of the
ways in which our current paths are inconsistent with that love and
with our inner voice. I focus on the interplay of light and shadow within
organizations; that absorption has been my gift and my curse over many
years. Others' insights may be focused on the environment, on issues
of social and economic justice, on the quality of our relationships
within organizations, families and the wider society, or on some other
aspect of our existence. All those are part of the pattern of the whole,
and they are all important. I believe that awakening is not about agreeing
on priorities for constructive action; it is about giving support and
encouragement to our own love of truth, and helping others to do the
same.
What is
important in this time of turning is for each of us to free ourselves
from those social and organizational influences which obscure for us
what our hearts know to be true. Because of individual history, interests
and aptitudes, each of us will certainly focus on different aspects
of the truth about our world, and the ways in which our way of living
is life-negating. It is even more certain that we shall have different
ideas about the best ways forward for healing ourselves and our relationships
with earth and the cosmos. My plea is for us to support one another
and our clients in the search for awakening and for truth, rather than
support their denial and avoidance by means of our own codependency.
Codependency
or detachment?
Probably
most of us have read or heard quite a lot about codependency and about
liberating ourselves from such destructive relationship patterns. Many
of us are fed up with the constant repetition, perhaps in the same way
we become fed up with bad news about our world - not that it isn't true,
but it is painful.
The task
of separating oneself from the addictions of other individuals with
whom we may be codependent is similar to that of separating from the
addictions of our culture. It is a spiritual practice, and a demanding
one. There are lots of guides and teachers, books about liberating oneself
from codependency and programs for helping one to do so, Al-Anon and
other Twelve-Step programs being examples. They are relevant to the
task of awakening. Based upon my own experience, here is my understanding
of what is required of us to awaken and remain awake in relationship
to the organizations with which we are codependent, and in relationship
to the dominant culture. I think of this as the spiritual discipline
required to consult with integrity in this time of a great turning.
One way of thinking of this path is to see it as a way for spiritual
warriors.
- First
and foremost, we practice detachment. We let go of worry about
situations in our client organizations, and we do not attempt
to control what happens there. We abandon the idea that our
mission is to make our clients healthier, or to teach them to
live better. We learn not to depend on our clients emotionally
or financially, neither for bread, nor for love, nor for approval.
- We
walk with our clients in integrity and with compassion, neither
proselytizing for our own version of the truth, nor distorting
our truth to make it more palatable to others. We develop the
courage to stand alone when the truth requires it, and to forego
the rewards available for always being a comfortable person
to have around.
- We
let go of responsibility for the harm that our client organizations
do in the world, and for undoing or preventing it, except through
bearing witness to the truth. We do not take credit for the
good they do, or for the progress they make, even to ourselves.
We learn not to subject ourselves to shame, guilt, or self-satisfaction
on account of the action or inaction of any organization, or
of society as a whole.
- We
acknowledge to ourselves and to others our own faults, inadequacies
and betrayals. To the best of our ability, we forgive the faults,
inadequacies and betrayals of our clients.
- We
seek over time to experience to the full the sorrow and despair
which we feel over what is happening in the world, so that we
can move on to be free of the apathy, powerlessness and emotional
deadness that attend the suppression of our grief.
- Although
we accept the pain of knowing that our world is in a mess, and
accept our sorrow that we cannot fix it, we continue, with or
without hope, to learn to act in ways we believe are constructive.
We take responsibility for behaving in ways that contribute
to the future we desire for all of life on Earth.
- We
develop the ability to practice forgiveness for ourselves and
others, no matter what the issue about which we are holding
negativity. We do this primarily for ourselves, not for the
benefit of others. We learn to forgive because doing so frees
us of the toxic energies of resentment, anger, guilt and shame,
and leaves us with much more energy available for our work in
the world.
- We
practice on a regular basis, alone or with others, one or more
of the many forms of self-healing that are available to us:
meditation, prayer, Reiki, Qi Gong, journal writing, MAP (see
Wright, 1994), visualization, shamanic journeying. When we can,
we offer healing to others.
Finding
our way
It unlikely
that we can achieve such growth alone. Certainly my own modest steps
in that direction have been immensely aided by working with others in
a mutually supportive setting, often aided by skilled and caring facilitators.
The path proposed here is both demanding and lonely, and in consequence,
those who are on it need to build supportive learning and healing relationships
with like-minded colleagues. Years ago I wrote a paper giving guidelines
for the care and feeding of internal consultants (Chapter 3 in Harrison,
1995a). I recommended that we "arrange most of the work in teams and
pairs for mutual learning and mutual support. People should not have
to work alone in high stress and high risk situations until they are
quite experienced [or ever!]. ...[We must] take special pains to build
strong personal support relationships among OD unit members. Frequent
team building sessions and some T-group or group process work are helpful
in achieving this."
There
even more potent reasons for following this council now. When we operate
alone in a situation in which we are holding to a perception of reality
which is highly divergent from that of our clients, the seduction of
adopting their view of the world can be overpowering. It is like the
young person in a story told by Idries Shah in one of his many books
on Sufi lore, who heard a voice while gathering water at the village
well one day. The voice said, "Store up as much water as you can, for
tomorrow anyone who drinks from this well will become mad." The young
person did as the voice directed, and on the morrow the rest of the
village did indeed go mad. But by the end of a week or so s/he had become
so lonely and isolated by her inability to communicate with the others
in the village that in desperation s/he went to the well and drank.
When we feel ourselves to be awake in the midst of sleepers, we desperately
need the collegiality, validation and support of others with like minds.
What
we do for our clients
Nothing
I have said should be taken as meaning that I believe each of us should
intuit what is true for us, and then shout it from the housetops. For
me, the essential work of the awakened consultant is to create enough
rapport with each person we work with to support conversing about difficult
truths pertaining to the organization, its relationships with the larger
whole, and its internal states of health and well being. The stronger
the feelings of trust and confidence we can create with the other, the
more of our truth the relationship with them can carry, and the more
likely it is that we can confront addictive behavior and still stay
connected.
Part of
creating rapport is in the creation of settings for conversation, of
which more later. Part is in the processes and behaviors by which we
engage with others. In the sixties, when I used to be active in sensitivity
training and T groups, I learned that aggressive and insensitive truth
telling usually creates more heat than light. Since then I have worked
hard to know when and how to speak my truth. The key to that is the
creation and maintenance of rapport, which is both a matter of timing,
and a matter of the heart.
As consultants,
we all face the dilemma of confronting differences versus maintaining
rapport. My own experiences with this dilemma as a professional began
in the sixties when my initial experiences in growth groups led me to
speak my truth in the form of "feedback" rather indiscriminately. Others
were often offended or upset, and I began to work on ways to be open
without breaking rapport. First I learned that people were happier to
hear about my inadequacies than they were about their own, and I could
build rapport by being the first to share vulnerability.
I also
learned not to confront defensiveness too vigorously or press to prove
my points. If an observation I make about a client's process is correct,
opportunities will come up again and again to come back to it, because
patterns of behavior are repetitious and cyclical. If a group or individual
disagrees with my interpretation, I can afford to let it go and wait
until it comes around again.
I learned
a lot from people in the dramatic and martial arts. From Terry Dobson,
aikido master, I learned to move with the energy of an attack or criticism
rather than rebutting or countering it. I now make it a matter of personal
pride not to defend my points with an argument. When a point I make
is criticized, I strive to remember to acknowledge that it is merely
my opinion or my personal experience. To avoid polarization between
myself and the questioner, I invite others to join the dialogue, and
then others have the opportunity to learn together, rather than participating
as spectators. When the energy is dissipated, I acknowledge what I have
learned from it and then move on.
Sue Walden,
a teacher of improvisational theater in San Francisco, teaches the principle
of "Yes, and . . ." In improvisation, each person keeps the energy flowing
by picking up the other's train of thought, honoring it, and only then
changing the energy in some way. When I practice "Yes, and . . ." the
effect on the group and also on myself can be magical. It expands our
thinking, and it opens our hearts to one another. We begin by acting
as if we are in harmony. We often end with a shared feeling of
deep attunement.
From Neil
Rackham I learned about maintaining rapport during negotiations. One
of the greatest "currencies" in a negotiation is a person's feeling
of being acknowledged to be in the right. In my negotiation workshops
I used to say, "You can get anything you want in a negotiation as long
as you are willing to make the other person right. If you blame, criticize,
or attack, you will have to give up some of your 'bottom line' objectives
to balance the transaction."
My greatest
learning about rapport is a subtle extension of this principle. I have
found that I can say almost anything and remain in rapport as long as
I can say it with compassion, without attachment to how it is received,
and without an emotional charge: no judgments, no anger, no pulling
of guilt or shame. Although there are many times when I fall into judgment
and anger, or I take on responsibility for the outcome, being mindful
of the principle of nonattachment to outcomes, and intending to follow
that principle, greatly increases my ability to hold rapport.
To summarize
these points:
- Establish
rapport first, and be quick to repair it when it is damaged.
- When
others deny observations and interpretations, don't push back.
If it's true, it will come up again, and can be addressed when
the time is right.
- Be
the first to take modest risks of self disclosure; model disclosure
before pushing others for depth of thought and feeling.
- Be
willing to express your own opinions and ideas when asked. Avoid
unresponsiveness, and the "consultant-as-blank-screen" mode
of relating to clients.
- Avoid
giving negative feedback or criticism in anger. You can say
almost anything without breaking rapport, as long as you don't
have an emotional charge on the issue.
- Be
aware of timing - wait for others' moments of openness. A keen
sense of timing is acquired through experience. It is perhaps
the most powerful of our skills, and is one of the ways old
consultants stay gainfully employed!
For those
clients who are ready to venture beyond issues of who is right and who
is wrong, and those who can be induced to slow down to the pace of reflective
inquiry, the practice of "dialogue" in the style of the late David Bohm
can show ways out of our addictive and competitive patterns. Together
with my spouse and partner, Margaret Harris, I have been spending a
lot of time facilitating dialogue. Some guidelines we use in this work
are given at the end of this paper.
For us,
the essence of dialogue is the avoidance of polarization and debate,
in favor of staying with the tension of differences, and exploring the
thoughts, feelings and assumptions people hold which bring them into
disagreement. Continuing our listening and inquiry in the face of disagreement
puts us on a path to new insights, meanings and understandings, and
does so more reliably and powerfully than any interactive process we
know. As Einstein said, we cannot solve our current problems unless
we learn to think differently. Debate and argument tend to freeze our
thought in their current channels. Dialogue breaches the levees that
contain our stream of thought, enabling our ideas to spread into fertile
meadows and flow into new channels.
During
the recent past we consultants have been given a wealth of means for
learning together with our clients. Appreciative Inquiry, Future Search,
Open Space and other such technologies of participative inquiry have
similar results and effects to dialogue. Critical to all of these approaches,
of course, is that the participants be ready to enter into a learning
mode with one another, and that they be able to manage the tension and
anxiety that arise when people forego action in favor of reflection.
Of course,
addictions make it difficult for people to be together in inquiry. Initiating
reflective inquiry in and addictive organization is like trying to talk
strategy in a football huddle, while the quarterback is calling the
next play. It is an experience most of us have had too often. Now, however,
Margaret and I believe we have found a path which promises to bring
down that urgent energy and help people to ground themselves, slow down,
and open out to one another. We discovered that path through offering
learning events we call "Life on Earth."
When we
moved to the Pacific Northwest in 1995, we were drawn there by a wish
to engage more actively in healing relationships between humankind and
the natural world. We were already involved in dialogue, and in looking
for ways to serve Earth, we found our preference for cooperation and
conversation did not lead us into activism. Rather, we began a search
for processes through which we could share with others our great love
for the natural world, our feelings of grief and loss for the pain of
so much of the life on earth today, human and non-human, and our hopeful
intention to live more sustainably.
With the
help of colleagues in The Whidbey Institute at Chinook, on Whidbey Island,
we evolved a process which is half dialogue, and is half guided sensory
experiences out-of-doors in a setting of natural beauty. These experiences
have been deeply meaningful for us and for our guests, and for two day
events, surprisingly powerful. We found it difficult to account for
this potency, and we have spent a lot of time puzzling over why these
events so quickly bring people into a space of reflective receptivity
to inner and outer events, feelings and perception.
Our working
hypothesis is that these simple and undemanding sensory experiences
in the natural world have a kind of anti-addictive effect. The calming,
slowing, and nurturing by nature helps people stay grounded in dialogue
and supports them in staying open to their own and others' feelings,
opinions, attitudes and perspectives. They listen easily and well to
one another.
Our findings
are congruent with those of Michael Cohen, of NatureConnect, who has
been using exercises connecting people with the natural world to treat
addictions and other psychological disorders. Our hypothesis has been
supported by the observation that in our events the most dramatic shifts
into a learning mode occur for just those people who are most harried,
driven, and distracted when they arrive - for example, the people who
usually can't take a break without pulling out their cell phones and
making business calls.
We think
the connection with nature works together with dialogue to open us to
learning by moving us out of compulsive thought patterns, and into our
physical and emotional bodies. We believe new learning does not take
place in our heads alone, in the absence of a connection with body and
feeling. We are coming to rely upon the natural world to make that shift
for us, and everything is easier after that.
So the
leading edge of our work now is to continue to explore the power of
the connections between the natural world and reflective inquiry to
move us out of our addictive patterns and into new ways of thinking
and learning. It is an exciting edge, and we expect it to engross us
for a long time to come.
