Belgium is going through tough social times. November and December have been particularly intense in terms of manifestations and strikes. And it may not be over yet.
Union leaders say that people are very worried and afraid for all the (possible) consequences of the government’s intentions. They say it was not really difficult to mobilize their members to strike. Union members are – according to the union leadership – very ready to strike.
I fully respect the worries and emotions of people but I doubt whether strike is the proper solution. We’re not going to solve that in a blog. But the aspect of fear occupied my mind this week.
Why are people afraid ? Is it fear that drives them into striking ? Why don’t they have faith ? Faith that using other ways (e.g. dialogue instead of strike) will lead to better solutions ?
And if there isn’t any faith or trust left between unions and government, how has it come that far ?
Many questions. No simple answers.
I use sometimes the “SCARF” framework, developed by Dr. David Rock in 2008.
It explains that when our Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness (SCARF) are at stake, our brain releases reactive energy. Our brain makes us use our energy in trying to defend and keep what we have. “Let’s not loose !”
Whenever the same aspects seem to be improved (the opposite of being at stake), also exactly the opposite happens: our brain releases proactive energy. Our brain makes us highly engaged and collaborative to adopt the change. “Let’s win !”
So we move away from the change in the first case. And move towards the change in the second case.
Any simple communication on change can be enough to start this movement. Our brain continuously screens for physical, social threats and rewards. It tries to decrease danger and maximize reward. It makes decisions about everything you interact with in the world.
This is important to understand:
Resistance may take various forms. One can fight (e.g. by striking) or flee or freeze. It is not a rational process. People react out of their emotional brain. They act threatened and feel being victims.
We use rational statements to articulate our preferences but tend to rely on our feelings when we actually make choices.
Fear drives us away from change. What is needed to drive us towards change ? Even if the change may impact our SCARF negatively ?
The faith of winning on the long-term, if we’re prepared to “loose” on the short-term ?
The faith that dialogue instead will bring us faster and more efficient in that future ?
The faith that together (unions and government) everybody wins more and faster than each one staying on their own SCARF ?
I get the impression this necessary faith or trust is no longer where it should be between parties. Have some people chosen for radical self-destruction ? I do not understand why the efforts to restart dialogue and trust building, have been so low on the priority list for such a long time
What is needed to reinstall this faith ?
So far we’ve seen very “macho” behavior: government versus unions and unions versus government. What is going on behind the macho-masks ? Fear at both sides ? The feeling of being powerless ? The conviction the “other side” needs to take the first step ? An honest and vulnerable declaration, like “please, let’s stop this, please let’s listen and talk to each other” may help. No matter from which side it’s coming. Let’s hope these things do happen behind the screens.
Does the one side really cares for the other ? And for the general benefit ? Is the government truly feeling the worries of people ?
Are the unions truly worried about the economy on the long-term and about necessary efforts to be made ?
We need both to survive: happy, engaged people, embracing change, and an economy to work in.
In stead of yelling to and fighting with each other on the streets, one could consider to listen. Listen, not to reply, not to give solutions on the short-term, not to recommend, not to decide, and certainly not to judge. But listen, just to listen.
And even if we do that, I think there is still a long way to go. But at least we will be going towards each other, and not away from each other.
Fear and Faith are Allies
Fear and faith could be excellent allies to make us move from the “away” side to the “towards” side. Vulnerability, empathy and listening are the keys for a successful marriage between fear and faith.
In this movie David Rock himself explains the SCARF framework.
Trust is like a tree. Once axed, it takes a long time to have a new tree. That is why any leader should cherish trust within a team. Without trust coöperation becomes difficult, if not impossible. But sometimes you have to work in a situation where there is no trust because there is no relationship. So how do you do that?
Closing down the House
I remember the time I was handling the closure of a warehouse. The warehouse was in the Liège area and was heavily unionized. The mission was contradictory. I had to announce the closure of the warehouse but should avoid strikes as it was high season. Moreover the budget for the closure was far too low. I had no relation whatsoever with the people in the warehouse – the day that I announced the closure was only my second visit – so there was no trust. I was the bad man who executed a decision taken a long way from the warehouse.
On top of that I had to work with the unions and had to deal with a corporate management that was very suspicious. I was under heavy surveillance and every move I made was scrutinised. I could not afford to make any mistake, that was clear. So I felt like squeezed between two sides that did not trust me. I can tell you, this was one of the most difficult periods in my professional career. I had to handle the closure, build trust with (furious) unions and manage the relationship with headquarters. But I have learned how to build trust in the process.
8 ways to build Trust
Here’s what you can do when you need to build trust.
Map the Landscape
The first thing you need to do is map the landscape. What’s the mission? What’s the interest? Where are interests in conflict and where’s the common ground? Who are the allies? Who are the adversaries? Who is trustworthy and who isn’t?
Making this analysis is important because it gives you insights in the dynamics of the process. You might think this is political, and yes you are right. Any political action starts with an analysis of the landscape. But the purpose of this analysis is to find fertile soil to grow trust upon.
This is the eternal advice. At all cost you need to stay yourself. If you start playing a role, you will end up in a web of lies. You are you. This means that you should make personal comments, laugh at a joke someone tells you, be sincere. Don’t try to be the person you are not.
Be present and available
Presence is important. If people see you regularly you become part of the scenery. They get used to you. Being together with the people you want to build a trusting relationship with is almost the physical basis for trust. Being present generates ample opportunities to talk, to help, to show you care. Being present generates opportunities for informal conversation, which is more effective than a formal meeting, as far as building trust is concerned.
Show that you are interested in what the others think, feel. Ask questions. Be empathic. Acknowledge understanding. Be open to what others think and feel. If people see that you genuinely care, they open up. Don’t manipulate. Don’t act as if you care. People will sense that.
Some times it might be difficult to be transparent. Maybe you did not have a mandate to tell everything. But you need to negotiate that mandate. Nobody can expect you to tell lies. Lying by omission can be attractive, but if you apply the salami technique to show information slice by slice, you might end up with a backdraft. It’s usually better to present the sour apple in one piece at the start of the process. Remember that you always have a choice to be transparent or not.
Consistency is a major source of trust. Do not change opinions all the time. Do what you say. Keep promises. And if you change plans, talk about it. Explain why. Consistency is not limited to the plan. It includes consistent behaviour and being reliable.
When it’s appropriate, be vulnerable. If you do not know something, acknowledge that. If the counterpart offers you new information, accept that. You cannot know everything. Don’t be unreasonable about information that does not fit your scheme. Show others that you are willing to accept other opinions and be open to them. If you have made a mistake, admit it. Change your plan if that is useful. Being right is not the purpose, doing the right thing is. Don’t worry about losing your face. It’s a source of personality building. Your pride is not that important.
Fairness is one of the most difficult things in a difficult situation. However this is the test of the pudding. Are you willing to be fair even when this means that you deviate from a predefined course? Are you willing to be fair even when this means you need to stand up against others who care less about fairness?
Take the Heat
The closure of the plant started under bad circumstances. Belgian and European law requires you to start a process of information before the decision is taken. So you have to first announce your intention to close operations, after which a period of social bargaining starts. This should allow the unions to come up with alternative options, ask questions, make suggestions. Very often this is a formal and therefore cruel requirement that has no relation with economic or social considerations.
I got yelled at and called names in French I had never heard before. So it was understandable that people were angry. If you understand the emotion, and you acknowledge this understanding, you are half way. It does not mean that you have to change the decision because of the emotions. It only means that you relate to them, that you’re human.
At the end of the process we reached a deal, with only half a day of strike. The process took longer than normal because of this request to avoid strikes but in terms of time and budget the closure went well. On the human side, I experienced a process that started in turmoil but ended in mutual appreciation. Local union representatives had sent away their regional representatives because they found that insulting me was not helping at all. We found an understanding and there was mutual appreciation.
Leaders who keep a distance from the heat will never experience this process. But they will never reach a level of trust. They will be seen as indifferent, impersonal, untrustworthy. I believe you can accelerate the process of creating trust, but it’s only by being human that you can do that. So take the heat.