Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Cultivating the Heart of the Peacebuilder

Cultivating the Heart of the Peacebuilder:
Why Incorporating “Being” into Training Matters
By David Dyck

“Conflict transformation requires the use of the most effective mediation strategies and techniques, but ultimately requires something beyond technique – an inner centeredness of the mediator (trainer etc). Once we see ourselves as providers of a safe and trusting presence, and not simply as mediation technicians, we will be more comfortable inviting people to get close to their pain, to reflect on their inner struggles, values and learnings.” Mark Chupp

She was driving me crazy! Dominating the large group discussion. Prickly with other participants, constantly vigilant for any perceived slight, ready to take offense. Sucking up all the air time in small group exercises, showing total disregard for her co-participants’ need to practice or share. Then constantly approaching me before the day, at breaks, and after the day for private conversations.

We have all been there, have we not? We have all worked with the training participant whose ability to understand, much less integrate and make use of the conflict resolutions frameworks and skills we teach, is clearly compromised by an inner lack of centeredness. Likewise, we have all been that trainer whose ability to serve as an effective catalyst to our students’ learning is compromised by our own struggle – at least in a given moment or two - to truly embody the values or underlying spirit of the material we are teaching. On the other hand, we have also all had the wonderful experience (arguably more frequently) of the training participant who, through their self-awareness, insight, and gentleness, truly serves as our best ally. This is the person who gives energy back in spades, contributing to large group discussion in thoughtful and concise ways, and facilitating her co-participants’ breakthrough insights.

And, likewise, surely we have all had the experience of being “on” as the facilitator, centered to the point where even the neediest student not only does not throw us off but where we actually keenly feel our kinship with their struggle – even if for but a moment - and thus find moments of grace wherein something much greater than the skill or topic at hand is illuminated. In such moments, the very bonds that make us human are strengthened and the deepest level of learning takes place, a level that cannot be planned for.

Or can it? Is it possible to plan and execute training workshops in such a way as to facilitate such moments – for and by participants, for and by trainers - on a more regular basis? Daniel Bowling certainly thinks so. Bowling, a professional mediator, trainer, and long-time respected practitioner and teacher of mindfulness, believes that such moments come about more frequently when we are intentional about attending to the realm of what he refers to as “presence” or “being.” Bowling contends that the most healing dimension any of us can bring to a situation of conflict is that of our own centered, non-reactive, compassionate presence. It is this conscious choosing of how we wish to “be” in relation to the emotions, issues, and other persons in the conflict – and not the particular skills (which Bowling calls “doing”) or specific concepts (“knowing”) we bring – that is the most significant element in transforming a conflict situation in life-giving ways.

This is not to suggest that “Doing” or “Knowing” are not important. Investing energy in developing proficiency in communication skills, techniques, and collaborative processes remain absolutely vital. This article should not be read as a summons to take short-cuts. Rather, it is to suggest that it is our presence, our ability to truly connect with another human being, which “gives (our tools) meaning and renders them powerful” (Schrock-Shenk, 2000). Thus it is the “being” dimension – Bowling argues persuasively - which remains the most critical and the most neglected area of intentional development within the realm of professional conflict resolution training. Simply put, who we are matters more, ultimately, than what we can do or what we know.

This seems to accord with a conversation Karen Ridd and I had way back in 1999. Our conversation was purely anecdotal, but I remember comparing notes with Karen and eventually wondering aloud whether about 80% of a person’s effectiveness with conflict is about personal centeredness and what we teach at MS is the other 20%. We went on to agree that when the deeper 80% is in place, the top 20% sticks quite easily but arguably only slightly enhances the effectiveness of a person who has already came to us as a healing presence in the world. And if the deeper 80% is not in place? Well, we further concurred, it sometimes feels like in those cases no matter how hard or creatively we work at the top 20%, it just is not likely to stick or make much difference, at least in the sense of sparking fundamental change.

If there is some truth to that 10-year-old conversation (as I believe there is), and even if our estimates were off, it begs the question, why not go to the core? Why not teach the deeper 70% or 80%, the inner work? Why not more actively seek to cultivate the heart of the peacebuilder?

But, one could argue, is it not up to the individual to pursue that sort of thing on their own? After all, we are not therapists or spiritual directors or Jungian psychoanalysts, we are conflict resolution practitioners and trainers. Let’s not forget that we are here to help people resolve their conflicts, not attain enlightenment. And don’t we risk opening a can of politically incorrect worms by venturing into the realm of what many might consider the religious?

We must go there because although we are practitioners of conflict resolution we are also practitioners of conflict transformation. We know that a great many conflicts in life have a universal quality, they recur in patterns and will never be truly “resolved” in the sense of bringing them to a final conclusion. It was Hocker and Wilmot who taught us “Anything you fight about more than 3 times is not about that thing, it’s about your relationship.” Isn’t, in fact, that what most of life’s conflicts are like? Carl Jung put it this way, “All the greatest and most important problems of life are fundamentally insoluble...They can never be solved, but only outgrown.” And if he is even partially right, do we not owe it to our workshop participants to at least actively engage the question of being, that is, how do you want to “be” in relation to these insoluble issues? I think we do.

A final reflection which brings me full circle to my opening story of that training participant who was driving me nuts. That very night, I picked up Pema Chodron’s book Comfortable with Uncertainty, and read the following words related to the practice of cultivating loving-kindness:

(An) image for loving-kindness is that of a mother bird who protects and cares for her young until they are strong enough to fly away. People sometimes ask: “Who am I in this image – the mother or the chick?” The answer is we’re both: both the loving mother and those ugly little chicks...blind, raw, and desperate for attention. We are a poignant mixture of something that isn’t all that beautiful and yet is dearly loved.

So then, what disquieting aspect of myself did I see mirrored back to me in the face, voice, and frenetic energy of this training participant? And in what way was my reaction to her – one of strong aversion - in some way a reflection of the raw, vulnerable, desperate, and needy parts of me? These questions landed hard with me that night and I have been alternatively holding them gently and wrestling with them ever since. And the next morning – when again confronted by her before class - I actually felt something more like kinship, and even something bordering on a touch of affection.

Yes, the questions invoked by the invitation to cultivating “being” are indeed complex. For starters, how do we talk and work with this realm in a manner that works for the non-religious, the traditional religious, and the alternative spiritual alike? And what would it look and sound like to build this aspect more intentionally into all aspects of our training work? And what might be the inevitable unintended consequences of a shift? But as many questions and risks as there are, there is also surely “gold in them thar hills.” So, let us set about figuring out how to mine it together, shall we?

No comments:

Post a Comment