Sustainable leadership

Federico Fioretto has been entrepreneur and manager; he works internationally as leadership, conflict management and communication consultant, trainer and keynote speaker. He has published essays on the values and practices of the sustainable business, on the crisis of contemporary societies, on communication and conflict transformation and specifically on communication and relationships in healthcare. He has designed and directed award winning trainings on communication and teamwork in healthcare. He is also a passionate scholar in the field of Peace Studies, whence he acquired part of his expertise in conflict management, which he later integrated with his business background. A member of various international scientific societies, he is a passionate advocate of sustainability in the business world and as a mean of social and economic development.

He is currently among the trainers chosen by President Obama's Young African Leadership Initiative project to train a new generation of leaders for the development of the African Continent.

More information about him and his work can be found on his website www.federicofioretto.biz Cover design: Silvio Boselli

Euro 16,00 (I.i.)

Federico Fioretto

SUSTAINABLE LEADERSHIP The CASE© Method: transforming conflicts by effective communication

SUSTAINABLE LEADERSHIP

The CASE© Method is a Four Phases, Nine Steps approach to the transformation of conflicts and the enhancement of leadership and performance.

The Method also provides practical guidelines to focus and act effectively in the most intricate, multi-stakeholders decision making situation.

Transformative Communication and its applicative Method are excellent tools to deal with the conflicts which physiologically and frequently arise from complex activities and situations, as well as it happens in the everyday life of organizations.

A conflict is triggered when an obstacle prevents a person or an organization from achieving his/her/its objectives. The CASE© Method brings about a clearer vision of the situation and a change in perspective which leads to overcome the obstacle, while transforming the difficulty into an opportunity. It has also proved to be a fitting complement to Risk Management and Stakeholder Engagement policies andsystems.

Through the implementation of the CASE© decision making process, initially hostile stakeholders can be turned into precious allies and partners in the pursuit of Win/Win solutions and better outcomes, making the organization more sustainable and successful.

Indeed, the long lasting success of an organization is proof of its sustainability. To achieve such goal, the organization's leadership must be able to transform the conflicts arising among the people involved in its processes as well as between priorities and objectives of its various components.

Transformative Communication and its CASE© Method are here to serve such purpose.

This book is addressed to entrepreneurs, executives and managers of organizations and institutions both private and public, business or no-profit, to government officials and public managers. In a nutshell, Sustainable Leadership is for all those who manage or operate within complex structures and wish to acquire skills and tools apt to improve their work environment and their organization's performance.

Federico Fioretto

ISBN 978-88-6153-193-2

9

78886

53 932

edizioni la meridiana p a r t e n z e

Federico Fioretto

Sustainable Leadership The CASEŠ Method: transforming conflicts by effective communication

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Working out this manual has been a long work, which I could not attain without help.

I want first to thank my former Harvard Professor, now colleague and friend Robert (Bob) B. Pojasek, PhD, for opening my eyes on the many facets of sustainability, on the world of performance frameworks and on the importance of the Leading Indicators. More thanks to another friend, and inspiring soul of Neotopia NGO, prof. Piero P. Giorgi, PhD, for paving the way to my discovery of practical applications of the methodologies of nonviolence in the world of business, and for giving me the insights in anthropology and neurophysiology which have allowed me to understand my kin in depth.

Also thanks to all the other trainers that I have encountered in my life: I am passionate about learning and I have met many amazing teachers and scholars, who have opened my eyes any time a further degree.

Thanks to the publisher who rejected the previous version of this book: they have missed an opportunity, but given me a wonderful one of improving this manual a great deal.

Thanks to edizioni la meridiana, Italy – publisher of the Italian edition – for having trusted the value of this English e-book edition; I am sure they will be rewarded.

Thanks to my father Enzo for the support and guidance that he has always offered in the difficult moments of my life, including some along the development of the CASE© Method and the writing of this book.

Thanks to my extraordinary partner in life, Sophie, precious inspirer, reliable colleague and inflexible verifier that I “walk the talk” of Transformative Communication every day.

Finally but most importantly, thanks to prof. Frank F. Vincenzi, PhD, a wonderful and generous friend who has had the patience and perseverance to edit my translation to English, getting rid of all of the flaws of a non-native writing. As with previous English editions of my books, this one owes a lot to Frank, and without him it would not be born.

1. FEW WORDS OF INTRODUCTION 1.1 What is Transformative Communication (TC) and why it can be useful for you TC consists in the conscious use of specific communication skills to transform conflict situations into opportunities to reach the goals of all parties – at times even better ones – at a lower energy cost. The skills are implemented along the 4 Phases of the CASE© Method (Cognitive, Analytic, Strategic and Executive).

Through its purposeful 9 Steps the CASE© Method will guide you to the transformation of conflicts but also in your daily tasks as a Leader; indeed the Model has its own application in any situation where you have to make a decision. The Method allows you to focus all of the relevant facets of a given situation and achieve positive and lasting effects by appropriate actions.

CASE© is also a powerful tool for decision making thanks to which you will discover precious and unexpected allies in your professional environment; you will thus minimize the effects of uncertainty on your capacity to achieve your objectives, thus exerting the most effective Risk Management.

Due to these characteristics The CASE© Method is fit for many situations, i.e. every time that there are communication, relationships, choices or decisions to be made; finally, you can use it in any moment of your life, be it professional or private. Here’s why I feel comfortable in stating quite boldly that TC can change your life for the better, much better. I will show you this with illustrations, like I will do many further times along the book.

Conflict, for reasons that I will explain later, is an unnatural, albeit frequent, situation in which an obstacle is interposed between a person and the achievement of his/her objectives. The obstacle generates the illusion that it is another person – or more persons – to prevent us from reaching our goals or that they pursue objectives which are incompatible with ours; thus we waste our energy to fight one another, more or less metaphorically. You will notice that in the illustration above I have placed your antagonist before a red bar called “The Obstacle” while you are in the mirror image position for him/her; it is the obstacle to prevent us from reaching our goals, but for reasons that we will see later it appears that it is the other person to frustrate all our efforts: that’s why I have been talking of illusion. Further in the book we will see that the same principle applies in the multi-subject, or “stakeholders”, situations; let’s walk a step at the time and consider a two-persons-situation for simplicity.

The first movement that TC suggests is to set yourself free from this illusion and see how things really are: both you and your antagonist are people who can’t reach their objectives because of an obstacle.

Obstacles can be more than one, but in this illustration I have represented one larger obstacle for both. The conflict is generated by the false perception that the frustration caused by the obstacle is originated by the other person and because of this we tend to focus our aggressiveness against him/her.

TC permits a move that changes the angle of approach to the objectives completely and uses your energy and effort in a useful, efficient and effective way. Thanks to the CASE© Method you will discover how you can overcome the obstacles, transforming them into opportunities; you’ll also often find that an initially hostile stakeholder becomes an ally and the bearer of part of the solution to the problem. This movement can happen in any conflict situation that you experience, even for your own inner conflicts when two priorities or wishes clash because they appear irreconcilable. This peculiar aspect of TC and CASE© will be particularly useful when dealing with conflicts within or between organizations; then you will discover the full potential of TC as a complexity management tool for the sustainable and far-seeing Leader. Moreover, all of our life is communication and relationships as well as oftentimes we have to make decisions or choices; therefore you might join me in thinking that CASE© can be very useful for anyone facilitating the collaborative quest for sustainable solutions to common problems.

Beware, though: as any book, method or theory, TC can only give you information and tools to make changes, for instance the CASE© Method: implementing it and making the actual shift, with perseverance and engagement, is up to you. Please be aware that, as it happened and still happens to my collaborators and me you will still slip into old behavioural patterns as if you had all but forgotten what you had learned with TC. Stand up! Remember what Winston Churchill, a leader who achieved historical objectives, said once: “Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm”. The CASE© Method helps you arise and resume your problem resolution activity without lasting and serious damages due to the slip.

One of my many teachers presented me once with a precious gift, i.e. a description of the learning process: at the beginning we are “Unconsciously incompetent”, then we become “Consciously incompetent”, thus we begin to learn. The next step is to become “Consciously competent, i.e. we have the knowledge but we need attention and commitment to implement it. The last step is to become “Unconsciously competent”: what we have learned has become part of our very being and we don’t need any effort or conscious thought to practice it. Likewise while you learn TC and the CASE© Method step by step your communication will become increasingly effective; the energy applied to the achievement of your objectives will be used with increasing efficacy and you will achieve a success after another.

1.2 How CASE© was born?

I have developed TC along decades of teaching and consulting in the field of communication and conflict transformation; on the latter I have been working either at micro, i.e. interpersonal, or meso and macro levels, i.e. within and between organizations or social systems. We could thus say that TC grew up step by step. It stems from the integration of my career as entrepreneur and manager in many diverse business fields – construction, luxury brands, consulting services, telecommunications to name some – with my passion for research in modern peace studies and for the application of conflict resolution methods to the business world. As a methodology TC has been formalized and structured into The CASE© Method only in 2012-2013 when incoming feedbacks brought evidence that TC improved people’s lives, making them happier, more prosperous, and increased organizations’ performance. The fact is that TC fosters the expression of the full potential of any person working in the organization at any level, thus maximizing their performance and the organization’s as well.

The CASE© approach is particularly apt to stakeholder engagement, i.e. the involvement of all who influence or are influenced by the activity of an organization1 into its strategies and decision making; a practice which is finally being considered in all its paramount relevance by the business World. This characteristic makes The CASE© Method specifically suitable when implemented before and as integration to all performance frameworks – e.g. the Baldrige in the USA or the EFQM in Europe – and management systems, first of all the ISO31000 – Risk Management Framework. The best way to prevent negative risks and seize positive ones (opportunities) is, indeed, to implement smooth and effective communications between all of the subjects involved in a given situation. That’s the reason why it is not uncommon that a TC intervention is requested when starting the implementation of an industrial management system.

In order to be immediately comprehensible and easily applicable, the Method is organized into four consecutive Phases. These are to be implemented with the attitudes indicated by the “Pillars” and walking through the clearly described “Steps”. The book describes the process, allowing those who have not yet partaken in a seminar or availed themselves of a direct consulting to acquire notions and mechanisms of The CASE© Method; two specific frameworks are also illustrated in detail – the conflict transformation and the decision making ones – with lots of examples in many different contexts. Indeed, to partake in a training workshop of The CASE© Method, either individually or as members of an organization, is a more comprehensive experience, because it allows one to practice the technique and its dynamics in a protected and experimental environment; ideally reading the book and taking the training should be combined. As in a classical Win/Win solution – we’ll see later what this means – the best approach is the And-And one, This And That, to maximize efficacy and efficiency in the use of energy.

1.3 For whom is this book Transformative Communication is useful in any human relational context; nonetheless I believe that in the form of The CASE© Method one of its fundamental applications can be in the organizational structures where people pass a great deal of their lives and by which Homo Sapiens Sapiens exerts the majority of its influence on society and the environment: business companies, public administrations, institutions and so on. It is also for the above reason, beyond my three-decades experience in that world that the focus of this book is on business companies and organizations. In this field it is even more important to have a guide for the implementation of the Method because that’s where it is more complicated to find out the true, deep roots of the conflicts. Thus, entrepreneurs, top managers, executives of any organization, like mid and lower management figures and all who work inside complex organizational structures, can benefit from learning the Method.

Due to previous considerations I have linked The CASE© Method since its very beginning – starting from the book’s title – to sustainable leadership: the long lasting success of an organization is the proof of its sustainability. To achieve it a leadership that can reconcile, i.e. transform, conflicts between people, processes, objectives and priorities is indispensable. Indeed, organizations are first of all made of people rather than processes and the daily hardships that they face are very much alike; this is the reason I wanted to keep the examples on a simple and clear level and also to discuss some pretty common interpersonal situations in which everyone can identify independently from their professional role.

1.4 How to use the book I wish to invite the reader to take it as the suggestion of a working method: it is a bunch of tools, attitudes and principles that have worked for me, for other people and for the most diverse organizations.

1

On this point I fully agree with the statement in B. Groysberg e M. Slind, Leadership is a conversation, Boston, Harvard Business Review, June 2012: “Smart leaders today, we have found, engage with employees in a way that resembles an ordinary person-to- person conversation more than it does a series of commands from on high. Furthermore, they initiate practices and foster cultural norms that instill a conversational sensibility throughout their organizations..

The CASE© Method and its founding theory are solidly founded on the most recent knowledge in anthropology, neuroscience, modern peace studies and on economic research dealing with sustainability.

Notwithstanding, it doesn’t contain any “absolute truth” but tools to acquire new points of view from which one can discover some possible solutions to the common problems of human life, be it private, professional or of the organizations by whose activity society pursues its objectives. In the beginning, my advice to the reader is to apply the methodology at his/her positioning in communications and relationships as they are, concentrating on his/her reactions while going through Phases and Steps like a checklist. Remember the learning process recalled at the beginning: it is when you become unconsciously competent that you can roam freely around the Method in ways that will be originally yours, guided by your intuitive wisdom. After practicing with the support of a well tested framework as it is, everyone will find his/her own way to adapt it, personalizing the Pillars and Steps; success comes also through respect for different personalities, inclinations and, most of all, real-life situations. Unlike Pillars and Steps I think that the Four Phases of the process are less prone to influence by contingencies, therefore I recommend that they be articulated as shown in the Method. However my team of trainers and I are here, with workshops, follow-up assistance and consulting to help in any circumstance. The Method’s framework that is given in the book will guide you until you have consolidated your knowledge and expertise enough to feel secure in introducing your own variations; of course with our help it is possible to personalize it more quickly and make it more adherent to specific contexts. Partaking in CASE© Workshops multiplies by N times the Method’s implementation potential, because the participant is taken by hand to experience how it works, its effects and his/her capacity to implement it with help from experienced trainers and practitioners. Moreover, especially in collective contexts, a stranger who is well trained in the Method and familiar with organizations’ complexities can facilitate the implementation of CASE© in situations which seldom correspond to theoretical models; thus the maximum adaptation at the specific case and the best outcomes are more easily achieved. Business corporations, hospitals, public administrations…. the thousands of forms of organizations each has its own infinite complexities, while they share many common issues. I have reported many examples in the text but, of course, a book can’t cover every possibility. In the case of a CASE© expert’s consulting intervention, his/her work will be facilitated if the internal interlocutors will have already learned the Method’s fundamentals. This is one of the reasons I have devised specific trainings for Teams and Organizations.

Let’s now enter the very heart of The CASE© Method and its foundations; first we’ll deal with a few concepts and lingo that will be needed later to master the tools of Transformative Communication. I invite you to deal with the following more theoretically oriented pages with ease; first of all they will not be many!

Besides they are full of examples to show practical implementations of the Method; moreover I think that understanding the framework within which Transformative Communication was developed is important to acquire the approach to life, professional or private, which permits one to make the most of it.

Finally, if you are really a theory-proof reader and want to go immediately hands-on, you can try to jump to the “Transforming” chapter and see how you manage it; in the end this is a hands-on method and its Phases and Steps structure is partly motivated by the awareness that there are people to whom “knowing too much” itches… They too deserve access to this simple and effective method.

2. SOME DEFINITIONS AND A LOGICAL-FUNCTIONAL PREMISE: 2.1 Conflict What is “Communication” we’ll see at a later point; let’s instead see immediately what a conflict is. Too often it is taken for granted to agree on the meaning of the term, which is not necessarily the case: I personally know some well reputed experts in peace and conflict studies who harshly disagree between themselves about the meaning of conflict.

To understand the meaning of a word I like to start from its etymology: despite the later evolution that the word has had in English2, “conflict” means “an armed struggle, a dispute referred to the use of arms, a war involving two ore more parties”3. Metaphorically, outside of actual war situations, we call “conflict” the clash or the contrast between points of view, which are antagonists or in contraposition. In psychology we can call “conflict” a contrast between tendencies, needs or motivations belonging to the same person in equal antagonist condition. I wrote of “points of view”, of tendencies and needs for psychology, but it can be about values, objectives, beliefs, interests, demands, ethnicity… you name it! Within a business it might be about the contrast between two different investment priorities, e.g. between the development of the sales network or of the R&D department. This said, it is common experience that the most frequent goal of the actions of conflicting parties is to prevail one upon the other: e.g. to get one’s project funded at the expense of the others’. Such a prevailing attitude adopted in conflicts is called Or/Or approach: mine OR yours; it is also named a Win/Lose approach. Much less common is the search for an agreement which allows the co-existence of both positions; even less frequent is the goal to create a new reality which is a mix of the original two positions with the added value of creativity infused along the process, or even something completely new and never thought of before. In the given example it might be the investment in a brand new research field identified jointly by the R&D and Sales departments. We’ll see later how we can achieve such solutions, which we call And/And or Win/Win approach, with The CASE© Method. Johan Galtung, a very important character for our work that we will meet more in depth later, defined conflict an “incompatibility of goals”, or the situation in which one can’t achieve his/her objectives because another person is of hindrance.

Such conflicting attitude, nonetheless, is not natural to Homo Sapiens Sapiens, being instead a precise cultural choice. I will spend some words on this because I find indispensable to become aware that we are NOT condemned to conflict by our nature. Those who state “war has always existed”, or “violence is a natural instinct of human beings” or “human nature is instinctively oriented to maximize the individual interest” are just repeating commonplace remarks and showing their ignorance in the matter4. By our nature of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, indeed, we are a social species; this means that, ontologically, we need a united group around ourselves, made of beings from the same species to guarantee our survival and prosperity along with that of the group5.

Just to make an example, we have a very different destiny than that of tigers, solitary carnivore predators, which meet just for mating but in packs couldn’t survive due to their extremely competitive and combative nature. This characteristic of social animals, added to the substantial lack of instincts of our species6, has

2

In Italian, the native language of the Author, the situation is simpler as the meaning is preserved closer to the original.

The word comes from Latin Conflictus, “clash”, derived from Confligere, collide, combat, generally intended between armies.

4 Those willing to deepen their knowledge of the issue can refer to the work of Prof. Piero P. Giorgi through www.pierogiorgi.org. where they can download for free “The origins of violence by cultural evolution”.

5 I refer to the works of professor Giacomo Rizzolatti, University of Parma - discoverer with his team and top world expert on mirror neurons - and prof. Frans De Waal, primatologist, to have evidence of this. They can do much better than me.

6 Instinct is defined as a specific behaviour which doesn’t need learning to be performed. We have just a basic handful of them; this evolutionary choice, made long long ago, has made Homo Sapiens Sapiens one of the most adaptable living beings on Earth. At the same time this tells us that human behaviour is not the result of instinct but of the joint effect of genetic predispositions – which determine the degree of difficulty of learning 3

led in hundreds of thousands of years of evolution to develop cooperative and conflict resolution attitudes which helped preserve peace and collaboration within the group. Moreover, the need to reinforce the “group” identity in the interest of all of its members has made some behavioural traits innate which naturally privilege an equanimous behaviour provided that different cultural conditionings are absent. These behaviours aim either at reinforcing the social role of the individual member (e.g. good member of the clan, generous though reasonable donor, to “save the face” of self and the other in a dispute…) or to support the whole of the group, taking directly care of it. This widespread relational approach has been well documented by numerous anthropological studies in the early XX Century and proved by some experiments related to Game Theory7; this evidence definitely refutes the over-quoted saying by Hobbes8 “Homo homini lupus” – “Man is a wolf to his fellow Man”9). The innate propensity to solidarity and cooperation among humans reminds us instead that human beings, IF not differently conditioned, tend to act in ways that satisfy not only their own individual needs but also those of their fellow humans. Lucius Annaeus Seneca10 was more in the right when he wrote Homo, sacra res homini (Man is something sacred for man). Man has also a natural propensity to preserve the environment in which it lives, thus allowing its group to survive and thrive: Homo homini utilissimus (Man is very useful to other man), stated Baruch Spinoza11 in XVII Century.

So: well documented anthropological evidence and ancient wisdom confirm that the human being is naturally inclined to behave in ways that bring forth a society where wealth and wellbeing is widespread, which is harmonious and peaceful, collaborative and creative. Thus if we think of an organization, business or other functional group, it is obvious that the human being, provided it is free to express its full potential, is naturally inclined to cooperate in the interest of the whole. We therefore understand that within an organization, any conflict situation that is dysfunctional to the collective subject’s interest, is pathological and as such, if appropriately cured, can heal. If the conflict is not cared for, instead, it can bring disability, even death, to the organization; in this case “disability” can be inefficiency or waste of resources, profits under the potential level, loss of human talents and many other forms.

The fact that, despite our nature, we live immersed in a sort of permanent serious and widespread conflict is due to a feature of human societies which is called Structural Violence: it is defined as the complex of structures, beliefs, norms, institutions, social systems and processes which limit the full expression of the human potential. This is not the place to go deep into the issue of Structural Violence, nor where it comes from, but those willing to learn more can find lots of documents around12. Something that may be relevant to our ends is to know how a conflict was dealt with by the human society existing before structural violence came about: the Palaeolithic society. In those little groups, very much like the Bushmen’s of today, seldom of hundreds, more often of tens of people, any contrast was quickly brought before the whole group13, or a council of elders, so as to become the community’s own problem and be resolved; indeed the contrast, in such a small community, was a threat to survival or wellbeing of the group itself. In fact private property did not exist at the time and whatever was hunted or picked was shared among all members; besides there was no idea of an accumulation of resources, except for little reserves for very short periods of time. A contrast which became an open conflict and consumed resources (time, energy, capacity to something - and post natal experiences. Practically speaking human behavior is completely conditioned by the environment, thus socially and culturally conditioned.

7 Made popular by the great work of mathematician John Nash, father of the namesake Equilibrium 8 Thomas Hobbes, English philosopher, 1588 - 1679, author of the famous “The Leviathan”.

9 A saying which, BTW, demonstrates how Hobbes, besides an inaccurate understanding of human nature, knew very little about wolves and their sophisticated social dynamics. To be fair to Hobbes I must remember that in the dedication of his De cive he wrote: “To speak impartially, both sayings are very true; that Man to Man is a kind of God; and that Man to Man is an errant wolf”, then differentiating between various circumstances.

10 Roman philosopher, Cordoba (Spain) 4 BC - Rome AD 65.

11 Dutch philosopher of Jewish origin: Amsterdam 1632, The Hague 1677.

12 Again I suggest interested readers to check P.P. Giorgi’s work and even contact him for the more recent and updated works on the issue.

13 Anthropologists who, since the end of the XIX Century to the first decades of the XX, have long studied the few remaining hunter-gatherer populations that still lived in unexplored areas of Earth have very well documented such behaviours.

gather food, wood for fire or water) would immediately impact the wellbeing of the whole community; a break in communication between two or more individuals as a consequence of the conflict within a small group, where everyone was strictly dependent on the others, would bring doom. With agriculture’s discovery this “primeval” social structure, although very efficient, was shattered: crafts began to differentiate and so did their profitability while resources – now mostly private – began to be accumulated unequally. Life was more and more governed by rules and social norms, determining what was “normal” and what not; well defined and structured processes assured preservation of the status quo of functional and power relationships within society.

2.2 Conflict and the art of Leadership Without delving too deep into such a socio-historical analysis, I invite the reader to imagine a parallel between what has just been said about human communities and organizations: let’s take as example a small business, about twenty employees, family business, where the owner and chief executive started his career as craftsman-worker. Let’s now compare this business with a multinational corporate, say twenty thousand employees, a stretched chain of command hierarchically structured with multiple executive and managers layers. Without wanting to mythologize the small enterprise or the worker-entrepreneur – there are many such businesses which perform very well but also many others which are certainly not an example of effective management – nor demonize the big one, I think that it is common experience that in small groups it’s easier to allow the free expression of individuality to some serious extent. The group can take into account individual situations, the CEO often knows well the life of his/her collaborators and the employee’s performance evaluation is based on direct knowledge of the person and can include elements that are outside the strict boundaries of work alone. A company’s success can be lived as the victory of a soccer team – possibly there is really one inside where more or less all employees play – while a difficult moment can easily generate internal solidarity and a cooperative struggle.

Likewise in the soccer team an outstanding champion can score a miracle-goal from time to time and save the game, in the small business there is often more room for creative solutions and individual initiative14. It is likely that many “players” have been raised inside the company’s nursery and will spend a significant time of their career there; some of them will stay until they help or replace the founder, knowing all too well the situation about which they will make decisions and take responsibilities. There are certainly rules, but they can be enforced with flexibility and ample scope for interpretation because it is well understood that they exist for the benefit of the group, its success, and not for the sake of their enforcement. The “human” dimension of the group, its capacity to remain united and to preserve strong internal bonds is a value that leaders of an organization need to keep very well in mind.

Vice-versa, in the multinational twenty-thousand-employee corporation it is very likely that rigid management systems are in place and scores of KPIs15 are the inflexible measure of the actions and deeds of individuals and functions. The majority of employees don’t know each other and very often people have to make decisions having effects, neither foreseen nor foreseeable, upon unknown others. At times in the top positions we find people who come from elsewhere, knowing nothing of the daily life of the organization but having just studied numbers on paper, maybe stock exchange data only. The corporate’s processes are so fragmented that every employee knows only some parts of them and for the rest he/she remains in blind ignorance of what the majority of the other members of this huge team does. There are instructions for all, procedures and protocols aiming to keep the herd on track, pursuing the noble goal of the maximum efficiency but at the same time harnessing the talents and motivation of its members. It is expected that every individual does exactly what is described in his/her job-description, be it more or less formalized; any 14 15

Such a free and creative environment was the secret of success of Steve Jobs’ Apple.

Acronym for Key Performance Indicator.

departure – or personalization – from what is expected is seen as a possible threat to the good functioning of the organization. Managing such a complexity is really a difficult art, like walking on a tightrope between two skyscrapers; to achieve this strong values are necessary, along with clear ideas and a farsighted vision: rare qualities indeed (albeit existent, which Transformative Communication – from now on often TC – helps develop). A degree of natural predisposition can very much help, but it is not enough because what is needed here is an extraordinary leader, not a desk jockey: a true “Leader of Transformation” is what is needed. When this hard mission is achieved, when people are valued one by one and as a group, when the system remembers to be at the service of people and not vice versa, then Structural Violence is removed and you can get extraordinary results.

Just after World War II, Adriano Olivetti16 was reflecting about the transition from the factory at his father’s time, when 600 employees formed a community where each one knew everybody else, and the company that he was actually managing, with thousands of employees and plants all around the World. Adriano’s concern was the same as his father’s: by enlarging the company they feared to lose it’s “humanity”. It was a well-founded fear, as we see in today’s multinational companies or in elephantine administrations where often people are considered only as numbers and the only “value” is money.

Adriano Olivetti’s answer, problematic and sincere, mirrors his enlightened vision: “We will be (then) guided by spiritual values. Such values are eternal; following those values, material goods will arise spontaneously without the need for us to pursue them.” An extraordinary person such as Adriano Olivetti could dare so much; the more ordinary people that we are can translate his words into an attention to ethics and human interactions, where direct relationships, knowledge, respect and good communication are given high value.

In that way people can well understand each other while tasks are clear, vision and mission are internalized and shared; in another occasion, indeed, Olivetti told his workers “You have to be made aware of where the company is going and why it is going there”. The exceptional business results of Adriano’s company are the best confirmation of the validity of his approach to management: maximum reciprocal knowledge and understanding among stakeholders, good circulation of information, engagement of all stakeholders in the life and mission of the organization. Adriano Olivetti remains one of the few exceptions in the despairing economic and social landscape of the XX – and so far XXI – Centuries, while the Structural Violence model was ever more uniformly implemented across organizations, social and economic systems.

Even small organizations in time became committed to the prevailing competitive and individualistic model; at the end of the XX Century the latter has come close to be a single mind-set at a global level. We will see how this way is very poor in terms of efficiency17; the current systemic crisis – economic, environmental and social – that we are undergoing is pushing us to take on more meaningful ways. When I talk about “effectiveness and efficiency” I mean “the best way to use available resources, with the least waste, the best output and the maximum possible degree of preservation of resources for the future generations”; more yet I mean the generation of value for the whole human community. “Value”, of course, in this context is composed of both material and immaterial, therefore not exclusively of goods, money and financial gains but also of health, happiness, wellbeing in a wide sense. Among the beneficiaries of this value all members of the community impacted by the subject – the stakeholders – must be included. Data from the World Health Organization on depression are the most authoritative confirmation of how ineffective, against nature and finally damaging this social and economic model based on competition and individualism is18.

16

Adriano Olivetti, (Ivrea 1901-1960) was an Italian industrialist, social and political innovator who ran the namesake company Olivetti, where the Personal Computer was born side by side with social and economic innovations tenths of years ahead of time.

Talking of this I dare quote myself and point out to the reader my It’s good business to do good with business, Amazon Publishing, 2013.

18 Depression is soon going to be the second cause of death and lost days at work (DALY Index) for people between 15 and 45 years in the World.

17

4. TRANSFORMATION, CONFLICTS AND LEADERSHIP Let’s discover how to use Transforming Communication techniques for the transformation of conflict and sustainable decision-making.

4.1 Towards the perfect point of Transformation

We have already seen how to represent the conflict and the Request satisfaction area graphically. Let’s start from there: in the graph the A-B line represents the maximum extent of satisfaction of the parties Requests when the conflict is dealt with in current Win/Lose mode, i.e. having the sole possibility of a confrontation; to the 100% for A will correspond 0% for B and vice-versa, while on the dotted line will lie the various compromise solutions. From a theoretical point of view we can call “Point of Transformation” a place whatsoever lying in the area beyond the A-B line, tending to the point of satisfaction of 100% of the requests of both

58

parties, which is called the perfect Point of Transformation (Galtung uses the term

“transcendence” instead).

58

Again: the dynamic is the same, just more complex to manage, when the conflict has more than two parties involved.

The Point in which, due to the habitual confrontational way to deal with conflicts, both parties lose any chance to have their Requests satisfied is the Point of Collapse of the conflict. The purity of logic shall not mislead the reader: conflicts are not Cartesian theorems, perfectly rational and resolvable in a second with the exact mathematical formula. They overflow with emotions, “tears, sweat and blood” we might call them; they have long stories, complex ones, with many protagonists living and dead, family and historical memories… Conflicts are the kingdom of complexity because they have to do with living beings – actual or fictitious – multidimensional and of infinite variety. Therefore, to be able to wander in the area of transformation we need a basic shrewdness and all of the tools learned so far; particularly we need to reduce the complexity of the situation to get down to simple Foundations upon which to build Win/Win solutions.

Let’s adjust our graph a little: we won’t pursue the satisfaction of A’s and B’s Requests, but instead of their Basic Needs. Thus the two axes of the graph will change name accordingly.

The perfect Point of Transformation of A-B conflict will thus become the point in which the Basic Needs of both, manifested through the conflict, are 100% satisfied and the parties find peace. Such peace is stable because it is first of all within. It is found in the moment when the fire of survival instinct, ignited by the threat to a Basic Need, is extinguished. The person whose Basic Needs are met is naturally inclined to peace. The reason is that conflict is a very inefficient situation from the point of view of energy utilization. Thus, the healthy living being avoids it whenever it doesn’t feel forced into it by compelling reasons. Unlike the free animal, living wholly in the present time and responding to actual and direct stimuli, the human being is more complex and the roots of its stress – or state of conflict – can lie in memories of the past, thought or concerns regarding the future, fears or projections without actual concreteness. They can even be found in genealogical memories, which for sure the other party to the conflict can’t recognize at first sight. While the animal, once ceased the immediate threat, discharges the stress by appropriate physiological measures (trembling, movement, fast breathing, sweating and so on), the human being can preserve the memory of an event endangering its Basic Needs long after the risk is no longer actual. It’s the reverse of the coin of our very powerful mind; when used well it allows the human being to access excellent levels of thought and problem solving, while if used in the wrong way it can generate problems of unimaginable complexity. All this

is to be kept in mind to deal successfully with the conflict according to the transformation process. With this awareness, and the right attitude, transformation is at the reach of everyone.

There is a sequence at the beginning of the “Patch Adams” movie that describes perfectly the attitude to have facing a conflict in order to achieve its transformation. Hunter Adams is voluntarily admitted to a psychiatric hospital following a suicide attempt; he is lost and looks for help. A fellow inmate, also self hospitalized, challenges all other inmates by showing them the hand with four extended fingers and asking how many fingers they see; when he gets the obvious answer of “four” he blurts complaining that they are all crazy. Hunter is curious and one evening he goes to visit the old man in his room. After a first contemptuous remark, the man understands that Adams really wants to know and agrees to ask again the question, showing him the hand and the four fingers. When Hunter, disconsolate, answers “four fingers”, the man replies that he is concentrating on the problem while to give the good answer he should need to look beyond, towards the solution. At that point Adams looks at the face of the old man, behind the hand, this last becomes blurred and the image of the fingers doubles, showing eight of them, with Hunter’s surprise. “Eight is a good answer”, concedes the old man satisfied. That’s it: to achieve the transformation of a conflict it is necessary to stop focusing on the problem and to look beyond. We must believe in the possibility of a Win/Win solution that answers the Needs of all parties. At that point we are ready to see the solutions.

Usually the “defeated” ones, the “eternal victims”, are those who are nailed to conflicts, concentrated on the problem and on the negative aspects of a situation, which does nothing but making it heavier. Finally they give up or, at best, they are ready to accept miserable compromises; they never get to the point where a Win/Win solution can emerge. Instead, for as much as a conflict can look unsolvable, to believe that its transformation is possible is a strong incentive to look for it, a support to reach the moment when we’ll perceive solutions beyond the problem. The CASE© Method was born specifically to help you to deal with conflicts, and with difficult and complex decision-making processes, with the ease to have a guide to follow in order to achieve the satisfaction of the Basic Needs of all parties.

4.2 The four Phases of The CASE© Method

To be really useful an instrument has to be simple, understandable and applicable by anyone. The CASE© Method has these characteristics and it is probably because of this that it works so well. It is articulated in four Phases, along which 9 subsequent Steps are performed. To get the best satisfaction possible of the Basic Needs it is useful to apply those that I have called the 9 Pillars, or the best appropriate attitudes. The Steps and the Pillars are described in detail later; now I want to discuss the 4 Phases so that before we deal with Communication it is already clear how it will be used to implement the Method.

4.2.1 Pre-Phase: recognizing the conflict Admitting the conflict’s existence is an essential condition for the transformative process to begin. Denial prevents a priori any possibility to transform a difficulty in an opportunity. That’s why I have called this a “prePhase”: without this recognition the 4 Phases don’t even come into being. Nonetheless, recognition deserves a special mention because it is not obvious. Sometimes to admit that there is a conflict or a difficulty is hard.

It clashes with a false self-image or with an idea about the situation that we fear to discuss and forces us to take responsibility of our reactions. Thus I want you to be aware that there is a preliminary step in order to start a CASE© process.

4.2.2 First Phase: Cognitive In this Phase we assemble precise knowledge of the situation, the facts occurring, people or functions involved, resources available and so on. Another important element in this Phase is the emotions at play. If we don’t distinguish emotions from facts we’ll never act effectively in a situation. It would be like trying to hit a target blindfolded. First of all it is fundamental to recognize one’s own emotions and assume the correspondent responsibility: “How do I feel” with regard to this situation, “What is happening that’s making me feel emotions such as: fear, rage, discouragement, humiliation, frustration, shame…” The emotions that a situation can arouse are as diverse as the people involved and it’s fundamental to be aware of that. It is also very important to gather first-hand direct information as much as possible; few things are as dangerous as the “hearsay” in trying to untangle a conflict. Therefore, to fulfill adequately the Cognitive Phase, try to know as much as possible, in the most factual and objective way possible, about the situation and the reactions that is arouses in all of the conflict’s parties, including yourself. In a conflict between functions or organizations, generally between collective subjects, the Phase is identical, just more complex to evaluate as for the emotional elements. This aspect is dealt with in depth in the training CASE© courses designed specifically for teams and organizations.

4.2.3 Second Phase: Analytical

In the second step of the process the causal chain of the conflict – Needs → Foundations → Requests → Conflict – is trod, but in the reverse sense, beginning with search for the Foundations by the key question of this research: “Why do you want it?” This process is important because it helps elucidate what usually remains in the subconscious; step-by-step the true unconscious demands that have to be answered to resolve the conflict can come to the surface. The question has to be asked with insistence and honesty, first of all of oneself, “Why do I want…” to understand the motivation behind the request. Understanding why something is demanded is very important and sometimes it is already sufficient to transform a person’s, an organization’s or a stakeholder’s attitude in the relationship. Comprehension of motives subtracts power from the conflict; besides, we are naturally inclined to empathy

59

– i.e. to understand the reasons that can move a

human being to act in pursuit of certain objectives – since we all have the same four Basic Needs.

Sometimes one party sets in the conflict mode – defense or attack – just for fear that the other has acted with the aim of hurting. Generally this is not the case. Thus, the fact of knowing the other’s motivation as absolutely innocent can dissolve the conflict. If this is not enough, then the process will proceed to the next 59

Cfr. F. De Waal, The age of Empathy, New York, Harmony Books, 2009.

step of the Phase, investigating the Basic Needs in play. My personal experience is that this process is very powerful. Investigating the Needs that have taken to the conflict is usually enlightening. In this case, too, the investigation is often sufficient to lower the tension further and to allow the solutions to emerge spontaneously. Notwithstanding, conflicts can be very intricate, thus if clarity doesn’t emerge spontaneously it will be by successive and ever better aimed questions that we’ll get to understand where is the root that needs to be eradicated. The fact of having to look to just four possible prime causes of the conflict using the Basic Needs is one of the reasons of the great efficacy of The CASE© Method. At times you may feel uncertain about how to make out which of two Needs is the right one. It may indeed be that there is more than one. In the next Phase you will establish priorities of action.

4.2.4 Third Phase: Strategic In the Strategic Phase there is one paramount thing to remember, and the Method helps you in this: to place the conflict at the appropriate level. This passage is essential to implement appropriate actions to resolve it.

I have often met people frustrated because they lived the same situation since a long time; they stated that they had tried a thousand times to resolve it but any time it was like bouncing against a rubber wall. This happens when we deal with a situation with inappropriate means. For instance, I face a difficulty due to a dysfunctional process within a Company and this causes me to have frequent disputes with colleagues of another department. If I just keep observing the colleagues, blaming their ill will or their “bad temper” for the difficulty that I am facing, I will never work out the problem. They are “victims” of a badly organized process as well as I am. The only way to overcome the conflict would be to recognize it as belonging to the organizational level and engage all of the subjects who have a say at that level in the process: managers, supervisors, people with responsibilities for the process. In fields where organizations are very complex and subject to strict legislative frameworks, like healthcare or public transport for instance, the conflict is oftentimes influenced by the political level, one which requires ways and times very different from the interpersonal to which the majority of people are used to. The issue of the level of the conflict is so important that I will dedicate a whole paragraph to it after the Phases, with appropriate examples to clarify the concept.

Apart from the attribution of the level, the Strategic Phase presents other important passages. One is the thorough clarification of the objectives that the parties decide to pursue. This can occur once the causes of the conflict are discovered. The majority of people – or organizations – who do not achieve their objectives have finally to admit that they didn’t have them clearly and well defined in the beginning. The CASE© Strategic Phase, instead, requires that you clarify well the objectives and keep such clarity all throughout the process. Objectives may change along the process, or be refined. Such changes, though, have to come through a conscious process so that at the end of the journey the result will be consistent with one’s desires and not something that happened by mere chance.

Finally, in this Phase objectives are transformed into projects of a Win/Win solution, in which the Basic Needs of all the parties (functions, stakeholders…) are satisfied. A lot of creativity comes into play at this point. Along with awareness of the Needs and with clear goals goodwill, good faith and honesty are required.

Remember also that transformation is not a search for compromise, where the only choice is about what to renounce in order to strike a deal, no matter the cost. In CASE© we talk intentionally of strategy, not of a spirit of renunciation or sacrifice. It needs be creative, able to get off the schemes like in Patch Adams’ episode. One of my Masters taught me one day, while sailing, a striking lesson: no matter our intention, we go in the direction we look to. In this Phase look with conscious trust to the possibility of a transforming solution so as to reach it. Remaining within the boundaries of what is known, of past experience of the common man who walks on rails and knows nothing of transformation, looking only to the problem, you’ll never come out of it.

4.2.5 Fourth Phase: Executive

Here we are at the final Phase, where strategy is transduced into actions: there’s not so much to say here, because it’s all about transforming all that has been developed into facts along the process. Three things are fundamental in this last part of the process: • Keeping clear the objectives: they have to remain clear all the time and attention has to stay fixed on them: where you look, there you will arrive.

• Adapt actions and expectations to a time frame appropriate to the level of the conflict. For instance, to expect a conflict belonging to the economic national policy to be transformed in a day or in a week – as it is usually possible at the interpersonal level – brings about burning frustration; be reasonable in your expectations, patient and persistent.

• Implement a system to check the progress towards objectives; it is important to check that our actions are effective so that if they are not we can correct them. Continuous improvement through result analysis 60

(Deming cycle ) is indispensable to achieve good results efficiently. Be flexible and versatile.

4.3 Levels, ways, times Oftentimes people, trying to resolve a problem, set unrealistic expectations. They begin enthusiastically then end up very rapidly downhearted, disappointed and demotivated. This happens because they don’t consider the necessity of placing the problem at the appropriate level of complexity-competence and to apply methods and timings accordingly.

Let me explain better: sometimes we would make miracles, achieve the results we desire in the blinking of an eye, by changing difficult situations or circumstances affecting those we love. Alas, there are objectives or situations that can be dealt with by a few words, with a person (or with oneself) and resolved instantly, while

60

W. E. Deming, (1900 - 1993) American physicist and statistician, he is at the origin of knowledge related to Quality Management systems and of the idea of TQM - Total Quality Management. He developed the original Plan, Do, Check, Act, cycle, whose more famous version is that of K. Ishikawa.

others need very long time. To transform a relational difficulty between colleagues a masterly action in the coffee break can suffice. On the other hand, to untangle a conflict between investment priorities in a multinational Company or in a big hospital it is necessary to gather information, prepare credible and sound analysis of the data and accept an open and serious dialogue with fierce opponents who will not be easily moved from their positions. It is necessary from time to time to encounter other habits, prejudices and difficulties in order to understand problems that we are not used to. Such are very strong reasons that can 61

set us off balance . Sometimes to achieve the primary result can take decades, while some minor objectives can take just weeks or months dealing with them at a “micro” or interpersonal level; none of the two is exclusive. For Win/Win solutions we have to adopt the And/And mode, i.e. One AND the Other! Woe to those who give up intermediate objectives, achievable with little steps in short term while working also in direction of the main objective with methods suited to the long term!

Luckily, most of the times we are confronted with situations where the level and the way of action to adopt is only one. But this has to be identified carefully before acting; missing this step causes dispersion of energy and very likely will bring us to miss the target. Within organizations there are often conflicts that have a misleading appearance, mostly when they are interwoven with peculiar aspects of the parties’ personalities.

Other times it happens that conflicts are born between different departments due a to defective flow of information or failure to comply with a procedure. Very often these situations result in continuous friction between people at interpersonal level, and don’t go beyond a stage where they cause enmity and stomach ulcers.

Let’s take as an example a conflict between the purchasing office and production due to the bad habit of “purchasing” to fail to comply with procedures aimed at respecting the needs of “production” about availability of materials – of course the Company suffers due to this conflict. Except in the case of particular predisposition to conciliation by the involved people, it is very unlikely that the conflict will be resolved at the interpersonal level. It is more likely that it will get worse because of the hostile inner dialogue of the parties stirred up by the continuous complaints. Instead this conflict should be attributed to the appropriate level of 62

complexity-competence, in this case the organizational one . It is in the interest of the whole organization and its stakeholders that the conflict emerges. We now know that this has not to do with search for guilt but with identification of causes – and with the people responsible at the appropriate level taking charge of its transformation. The leader of a function of the organization who is aware of his/her role and responsibilities will not hesitate a second to act to foster the transformation of a conflict which has been pinpointed; if this is not the case, he/she had better be removed swiftly. Unfortunately this doesn’t always happen: self-styled leaders shillyshally, specializing in the rebound game and in shedding responsibilities. This is a serious pathology of organizations to which true leaders and stakeholders must pay maximum attention – this also doesn’t happen too often!

Another example from my professional activity is about an administration whose electronic acceptance and registration system crashed regularly, causing inconveniences to the users and loss of time – not talking of stress – to the staff. The latter, after some unsuccessful interpersonal approach at the immediate superior hierarchical level, instead of exhausting themselves against the rubber wall of negligent referents, decided to act at another level. They organized a thorough and meticulous gathering of data about the system crashes: time, dates, duration, time wasted on paper procedures with later digital recording and so on. At the same time, any time the system crashed, they asked for collaboration by the users, suggesting that they went to the “Relations with the Public” office to complain about the disservice. A problem that appeared to last 61

Indeed we need to enter any discussion open to change our mind if convinced by the new information we get. The final goal is the greater wellbeing, while consistency per se is not a value.

Actually the quality management systems should help in this, as well as any system based on the Deming cycle; unfortunately very often, due to lack in trust or scarce understanding and engagement of the internal stakeholders, the improvement effect of these systems is minimal.

62

forever in the turn of a couple of months was resolved due to the impact on the General Management on one side of the rigorous documentation of the problem, on the other by the discontent expressed by so many citizens. An alliance between internal and external stakeholders and the appropriate use of the right instruments – with some creativity and ingenuity – had produced a final solution.

In any case, giving the right attention at levels and methods to deal with a conflict or a problem fosters the passage from mere complaints, with its related feeling of impotency and frustration, to action and power to change the situation. It is thus common interest within organizations that the ways to deal with problems, according to their nature and level, are clear and known by everybody: procedures, referents, appropriate spaces and channels of communication. All of this has to be determined and shared throughout the organization, unto the last member. It is also necessary that the top management of an organization understands that one pinpointing a problem, even a whistleblower, is not a troublemaker but a very active and precious stakeholder who has to be used with ingenuity in the common interest.

Thus, I think that competence in Transformative Communication is very important for organization’s leaders and for this reason I have developed the training “Leader of the Transformation” based on The CASE© Method. An organization whose leaders have these competencies secures the advantage of a constructive use of conflicts; it highlights the weak points and the dark spots of the organization, allowing their transformation and the reinforcement of the whole. Everything fostering harmony among all of the stakeholders makes a decisive contribution to the achievement of objectives and therefore to the lasting prosperity of the organization.

Federico Fioretto has been entrepreneur and manager; he works internationally as leadership, conflict management and communication consultant, trainer and keynote speaker. He has published essays on the values and practices of the sustainable business, on the crisis of contemporary societies, on communication and conflict transformation and specifically on communication and relationships in healthcare. He has designed and directed award winning trainings on communication and teamwork in healthcare. He is also a passionate scholar in the field of Peace Studies, whence he acquired part of his expertise in conflict management, which he later integrated with his business background. A member of various international scientific societies, he is a passionate advocate of sustainability in the business world and as a mean of social and economic development.

He is currently among the trainers chosen by President Obama's Young African Leadership Initiative project to train a new generation of leaders for the development of the African Continent.

More information about him and his work can be found on his website www.federicofioretto.biz Cover design: Silvio Boselli

Euro 16,00 (I.i.)

Federico Fioretto

SUSTAINABLE LEADERSHIP The CASE© Method: transforming conflicts by effective communication

SUSTAINABLE LEADERSHIP

The CASE© Method is a Four Phases, Nine Steps approach to the transformation of conflicts and the enhancement of leadership and performance.

The Method also provides practical guidelines to focus and act effectively in the most intricate, multi-stakeholders decision making situation.

Transformative Communication and its applicative Method are excellent tools to deal with the conflicts which physiologically and frequently arise from complex activities and situations, as well as it happens in the everyday life of organizations.

A conflict is triggered when an obstacle prevents a person or an organization from achieving his/her/its objectives. The CASE© Method brings about a clearer vision of the situation and a change in perspective which leads to overcome the obstacle, while transforming the difficulty into an opportunity. It has also proved to be a fitting complement to Risk Management and Stakeholder Engagement policies andsystems.

Through the implementation of the CASE© decision making process, initially hostile stakeholders can be turned into precious allies and partners in the pursuit of Win/Win solutions and better outcomes, making the organization more sustainable and successful.

Indeed, the long lasting success of an organization is proof of its sustainability. To achieve such goal, the organization's leadership must be able to transform the conflicts arising among the people involved in its processes as well as between priorities and objectives of its various components.

Transformative Communication and its CASE© Method are here to serve such purpose.

This book is addressed to entrepreneurs, executives and managers of organizations and institutions both private and public, business or no-profit, to government officials and public managers. In a nutshell, Sustainable Leadership is for all those who manage or operate within complex structures and wish to acquire skills and tools apt to improve their work environment and their organization's performance.

Federico Fioretto

ISBN 978-88-6153-193-2

9

78886

53 932

edizioni la meridiana p a r t e n z e