Maury:
Thank for your thoughtful post and all that you do for Collaborative
Practice. Some of the best learning comes from these posts.
Here are a couple of thoughts to contribute.
NY now mandates diversity training as part of CLE license certification.
You should have heard the lawyers in my building grumbling about this new
requirement!
The instructor for the training asked us to suspend judgment, shame, blame
and put down our defenses for only one hour.
(Brene Brown has written extensively on this topic: "I Thought It Was Just
Me"; "Daring Greatly"; The Gifts of Imperfection")
What followed was a brilliant re-frame.
We are drawn to kindred spirits; people like us, people who think like us,
people who look like us.
Like minded thinkers think alike.
That is normal for comfort, for solidarity and for support that we all
crave and need as humans.
We feel more comfortable working with collaborators that think like us.
What about all the learning that comes from collaborators not like us?
Curiosity and openness are important tools with which to navigate life.
Our thinking is not wrong nor right. Our group think is not wrong or right.
The Instructor asked that the next time we hire, meet, or connect with
someone who is not like us, if we could acknowledge our first impression
and then dig deeper so see what we could learn from our differences.
So my expectation of feeling uncomfortable in that training was unwarranted
and these ideas dovetail with our collaborative work, seamlessly.
Your group doesn't think alike. Think for a moment about all the false
dichotomies in our culture. Does ___________________think alike? Fill
in this blank with Republicans, Democrats, Men, Women, People of Color,
Police Officers, Professors, Voters, People of different sexual
preferences...... There is almost a never ending list. Let's add the
two factions of your group.
I wonder if attorney client centered v. process centered collaborations is
a false dichotomy.
Why can't it be both?
We don't have to give up advocacy and our good sense while working
collaboratively.
On the contrary, isn't that where advocacy should flourish?
We should not expect that an advocate has to attend a public hanging of a
client nor should we accept only a traditional definition of advocacy.
As an advocate, ask yourself; why do you do this work and what do you get
out of it? What kind of clients do you like to represent? Why? What
issues are uncomfortable for you? I submit that it isn't only about the
client. Collaborators have needs too.
I can share that I want to feel respected, valued and appreciated by
everyone at the table and I receive enormous satisfaction from
collaborative work, done well.
That definition encompasses advocacy.
If I am not getting that from some train wreck collaborative experience, I
am asking why not, to all the professionals involved.
I need to show up and demonstrate the same values to everyone else.
Are the two factions in your group feeling respected? Does everyone in
each group think about this concern in the same way?
A Mediator in your group may be helpful to facilitate a learning
conversation and dig deeper. There must be more to know.
I had a collaboration that was not going so well this year and I had the
briefest of conversations with a neutral that was helpful.
My collaborative colleague does mostly litigation and she wove her
litigation horror stories into collaborative conversations.
The clients were horrified and it felt like a version of scared straight!
The neutral's advice was "she (my colleague) is working hard on her skills;
her heart is in the right place"
My first blink was that I am process oriented and client centered and she
was steering the collaboration as a partisan litigation advocate. I was
wrong.
I was judging her by the impact of her actions and judging myself by my
intent.
The shift in my attitude made a difference and we finished with a creative
collaborative agreement.
Her motivation was from a good heart; she was pointing out how to avoid
disasters she has experienced in litigation.
We have to keep asking questions until we figure it out!
It seems ridiculous that I need to re-learn that lesson at 66 years of age,
but I do. We all do. (Anatomy of Peace Arbinger Institute)
Collaborative groups are maturing and there are benefits and opportunities
that come with it.
Splitting into two groups because of differences is a choice.
There is an opportunity to see how both ideas can fit in the collaborative
circle that renews and flourishes each time we take one small step towards
seeing another point of view.
Best,
Dave Murch
Rochester, New York
April 26th, 2018
