May 2010


I’ve been pondering for some time now, since my Global & International OD class at Benedictine back in March, the first of four key principle’s of Confucius’ “pragmatic rules for daily life derived from Chinese history.”  (Hofstede, Cultures & Organizations: Software of the Mind, p. 208)  It reads:

The stability of society is based on unequal relationships between people.  …[Confucius] distinguished five basic relationships (the wu lun):  ruler-subject, father-son, older-brother-younger brother, husband-wife, and senior friend-junior friend.  These relationships are based on mutual and complementary obligations: for example, the junior partner owes the senior partner respect and obedience, and the senior owes the junior partner protection and consideration.

I have to admit that the concept, what I’ve always known of it and upon initial readings, left me rather uncomfortable.  The word “obedience” leaves me cold to be honest.  So, I’ve re-read and re-read and pondered and soul searched, and something has occurred to me.  But first, let me mention that there are those, plenty I’m sure, and including my mother who will say – something to the effect of – “We had respect for our elders back when I was growing up.  It was the me generation that screwed everything up and now children no longer respect their elders.”

Ok.  So I’m not sure how prolific this disrespect is though it is certainly perceived.  Here’s the thing that has struck me.  Reading the last half of the last sentence is of incredible importance, because like others, I get hung up on the respect and obedience of elders bit.  Let me reiterate:  the senior owes the junior partner protection and consideration.  I really think this should come first because if we think of the parent child relationship, the older should be the wiser and should give the protection and consideration that would stir the respect and obedience Confucius obviously observed in healthy working relationships.  And this, I feel, is where the respect broke down, culturally and in the broadest sense for us here in the US, and perhaps in broader Western societies.

Consider the breakdown of the closeness of our extended families.  With this breakdown toward nuclear families, parents lost a natural source of learning to be a parent from experienced, knowledgeable and wise older family members.  We are left to figuring it out amongst ourselves, by trial and error, over the internet and through reading of books.  As humans, though we have the capacity to learn visually and aurally, we forget that we are foundationally kinesthetic learners who learn at first, and throughout life at the core, through mimicry.  So, without models, we lost what it means to protect and consider our children, or junior roles.  What I get is that consideration is the respect we give our junior counterparts and how they learn what it is to respect.  But when parents who lack this understanding live by “do as I say not as I do”, what other outcome could there possibly be than rebellion and disrespect?!

That said, I’m still not sure about the husband-wife concept.  For me, true consensual partnership is the goal in my relationship.  I just truly believe there is great learning here for a good number of relationships, especially the parent-child relationships.  Elders/Seniors need to realize that respect must be earned and find every opportunity to learn the how of doing so.  If you’re interested, let me know.  I’m happy to share options that have worked for me.

Further thought… It has since occurred to me that senior/junior can merely represent the level of knowledge or wisdom comparatively holds in relationship to another.  With regard to my marriage, there are times when I am more “in the know” on a matter and times when my husband is.  In this way, we compliment one another, drawing on our respective strengths.  So, though this comparative wisdom piece may perhaps be more skewed in age related relationships, it occurs to me that any partnership might be served to recognize the wisdom and strength of both parties.  What parent has not learned from their children?

Until next time, make life marvelous!

Hugs out to ya…

Advertisements

Something has got to give.  If you haven’t read it, Hofstede’s Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind has a lot of great insight.  I’d like to share a piece with you here.   Hofstede refers to differences between cultures that have either a short-term or long-term orientation.  One of these differences is the axiom that serves as the code to how cultures approach differences.  The axioms are that we can look at our differences in two ways:  1) If A is true, it’s opposite B must be false or 2) If A is true, it’s opposite B can also be true.  Within the broader text, the second axiom goes further to say … and together they produce a wisdom superior to either A or B.

There are a number of interpretations that might be drawn.  Win-Lose vs Win-Win being one.  When we are able to accept another’s perspective and appreciate both our own needs and those of another or others, with time, attention and effort, we are often able to produce a greater solution.  One could argue that such ability is key to innovation.  Perspectives come together to find a solution taking into account as many angles as exist perspectives.  This brings to mind how valuable diversity of thought can be when we are able to transcend our need to win at another’s expense and appreciate and assimilate alternate viewpoints.

The question is raised, how does this happen?  How do we create such a situation?  I submit it starts with creating a foundation of trust, starting with self trust, which inevitably builds our trust of others.  Because we see the world as we are, when we trust ourselves, we in turn trust the world around us.  Such trust enables us to approach others and situations trusting unknown intent.  We drop the assumption of bad intent and replace it with good.  Just following the 80/20 rule, a vast majority of the time, especially within communities, whether neighborhood or professional, we are going to encounter trustworthiness.  I would go so far as to argue that even half of the 20% encompasses misinterpreation and miscommunication.

Folks, there is more positive than negative in our world.  It is simply our focus on the negative that magnifies it.  We want more of the same than our need to “win” will let us realize.  So next time someone has a different view than you, practice listening with heart.  You might just hear something familiar.  I’m willing to bet on it.

Hugs,

Jacqueline