By Mac
Bogert
I was working with a leadership development group on the
topic of conflict (one of my favorites, since I grew up in a family that didn't
have conflict HAHAHA). Rarely do I use another person's slides, but that's how
this one worked out.
I put up a slide—which I'd missed seeing somehow—that
suggested we "develop a tolerance for others' beliefs and norms." My first
thought was "How the *&$# did I miss this awful slide?" I was immediately
glad I did miss it. Words are important. The class took a turn into what I
always hope for—chaos, our greatest ally for learning. Some of them were
offended by the word tolerance, some couldn't understand what was
wrong.
Tolerance is one of those words we throw
around, like empowerment, another of my least-favorite buzzwords.
Empower is a transitive verb, which means we do it to people. When I
brag about empowering my employees or my students (or my children), I'm
highlighting my own power: If I DO IT to them, who really has the
power? I direct the folks I coach to reframe the idea as power
sharing, which you don't do to people but with people. When we
speak differently, we think differently.
The root meaning of tolerance is a person's ability
to bear pain. So if I proudly proclaim how tolerant I am, I'm citing my
ability to bear the pain of others' differences. I heard a politician talking
about England's decision to leave the EU, and he suggested "we need to be better
at tolerating each other’s differences." Ouch. I don't think he even considered
what he was saying.
Tolerance is condescending. It's most often
touted by the dominant group within a culture, organization, or bureaucracy
(like school systems), seldom by those on the receiving end of the you're
different stick. We only need to tolerate differences if those
differences cause us pain. Why should any teacher, supervisor, or trainer ever
think that tolerance is anything but divisive? Being on the receiving end of
pale tolerance is downlifting (the opposite of uplifting).
Let those of us with apparent power, especially when
we're responsible for leading others, start to embrace, and practice,
acceptance. I'm a recovering English teacher, so words fascinate me
enough to really pay attention. Acceptance evolved from words meaning
to receive willingly. How much more powerful and inclusive is that than
pale tolerance? I tolerate your difference, I accept our
difference. Which position promotes better understanding?
After a time, when we grow comfortable with
acceptance and see how much better we start to learn from others and
they from us, we can progress to celebrating our differences. And that
word's deepest meaning is assemble to honor.
What if our workplaces celebrated our differences? What
if schools moved from the industrial/assembly line tolerance of difference to a
celebration? I listen to students all the time, and they feel the
condescension of pale tolerance from their teachers and administrators,
as do the people I coach in the adult work place.
When we start changing the language we use, our
understanding will follow. Acceptance and celebration are for
people. Tolerance is for injuries.
BTW, the class agreed to change the slide to
acceptance. It was a turning point and well worth the chaos that got us
there.
Mac Bogert is the founder of AZA Learning, which provides
leadership coaching and learning-design support to 200 clients nationwide. His
latest publication is "Learning Chaos: How Disorder Can Save Education." The
book explores the disconnect between what schools do and how people learn. In
it, Bogert suggests concrete steps to remove barriers to learning in schools and
training centers.
No comments:
Post a Comment