Reach

“A friend of mine once described dialogue as a state out of which we are continuously falling.”

(John Gray)

We missed each other.

The pace of the meeting had accelerated. The promise of action felt close and the anxiety provoked by my question could then be quickly resolved.

I hadn’t anticipated that my views would be so contentious. I was trying to express an ideal, a better way of working, but among the faces on the crowded Zoom screen, I could sense the discomfort in my colleague as she began to outline a counter proposal. I knew of the difficult, bruising circumstances that underpinned her reasoning and it seemed that we were trying to arrive at a similar solution. So, sensing that the conversation was closing down, I quickly restated my views.

The actions were announced. We needed to move on.

I stayed quiet on the call after that.

Fearful that I had offended a valued friend, one who had generously offered her time and care when things had been tough for me, I felt ashamed of my clumsy assertiveness. Wondering if she was OK, I looked into my diary for when we would next speak and I might repair our relationship.

A couple of days later, a ‘ping’ announced the arrival of an email that began, “Hey, I was wondering if you had a few minutes….? I’m worried that we missed each other on that last call….”

We know that virtual ‘conversation’ narrows our communicative bandwidth and exhausts us as we face the dissonance between our human need for embodied relationships and the two-dimensional, tiny speaking heads on our screens. But our tendency to skim across the surfaces, to discuss and debate rather than offering the time to genuinely explore each other’s unique and precious perspectives, isn’t limited to the virtual world.

The atmosphere seems to change as soon as an agenda and a timetable is announced; relaxed collegiality and friendship shifts into a ‘professional’ way of conducting ourselves. Our care for each other is displaced by expediency and agency; we don’t have time for anything else.

Yet no one survives alone; how do we forget that we are fundamentally relational beings? Isn’t that we ‘organise’ for?

It was a small moment, a ripple in a conversation, but then my colleague took the time to reach out.

And I will always be grateful.

Notes:

As I pursued my potentially utopian vision for our group, I might have considered Arnold Mindell’s view that ‘Utopian visions replace tyranny with tyranny, or drive its forces underground.’ Mindell’s work with groups, where he seeks true understanding, not just ‘agreement,’is described in his excellent book, “Sitting in the Fire: Large group transformation using conflict and diversity.”

An enduring favourite of mine and the source for my opening quotation is, “Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together” by William Isaacs.

I was lucky enough to meet with Bill Isaacs when I last attended a conference hosted by the Academy of Professional Dialogue. The Academy offers a range of events and conferences which, if dialogue is your ‘thing’ would be well worth your time.

Finally, if you are interested in how this essential relational work, the ‘emotional labour’ of our organisations is consistently discounted or ignored, take a look at Joyce Fletcher’s ‘Disappearing Acts: Gender, Power, and Relational Practice at Work.’ From my side of the gender divide, it has been an eye-opener.