Tag: policy

Posted on

Solidification, Policy, and Fear

For a number of years, I helped run a small satellite organization of a much larger international one. It was a place where people could gather and learn something about themselves within a nice social context. The number of people who came fluctuated, but there was a core group who came and helped support the week-to-week operations, including donating money to rent space. The group was loosely organized. We did have someone who took care of money and someone who took care of our web presence. Other tasks were more spontaneous, but it worked.

But, when I moved away the larger organization stepped in (the timing was impeccably bad) with requests for aligning to certain policies, which related to getting insurance coverage through their carrier and giving a certain amount of money to the central office every month. Well, that little policy maneuver is going to end the group. They will quietly dissolve into nothingness, leaving a number of people high and dry. And, what hurts so much is that these people could have benefited by the continued existence of this group, even if it was struggling and hobbling along. The group provided support and inspiration for the people who came. And, now, because of the inflexibility of “policy,” they will be abandoned.

I was around when this “big” organization was small and had no policies. It dealt with situations as they arose. There was a sense of personal connection with everything that was done. Now, dealing with the organization feels remote and cold. And, they talk about how to make it more personal, but they shoot themselves in the foot before they even begin.

Policy solidifies everything. The minute you start creating policy, you doom your organization to an inability to change, to an inability to be flexible or to adapt. Such solidification of the ways in which “things” function has led to the extinction of organisms. If a species doesn’t have the ability to adjust to changes in the environment, it is not going to survive over long periods of time.

Fossil 3248b

Such a tendency to solidify things, such as creating policy, seems to be rooted in a fundamental fear of change. People are afraid of change and of things that are different. So, we solidify what we can. We solidify our view and opinions. We solidify who we think we are. We see this solidification in prejudices and biases of all kinds, in hate, in acts of violence and aggression, and in acts of avoidance. Policy and bigotry are parts of the same beast. “Policy” sounds official and legitimate and is easily justifiable with all kinds of seemingly rational reasons for the existence of policy, but it still arises out of a basic fear of change, uncertainty, and difference.

How many of you have had issues with businesses where their response is, “well, it is our policy….”? Such statements are an immediate attempt to shut down the conversation. Problem solved. They do not have to think about the issue at hand. It’s policy. All the while, you have been screwed. My response to that statement is that I could care less about their policy. There is an issue here that usually borders on some level of illegality that needs to be addressed whether they like it or not and whether there’s a policy or not. I also recently encountered a new twist on policy with a medical practice. I had an appointment for my son with a top specialist, but he really needed to see someone sooner. My question was, could he see someone sooner, but still keep his original appointment. The answer was, “no, he would have to only see the new person. He could never see the original specialist. It was policy.” Who benefits from that policy? Not the patient. It’s for the convenience of the medical practice, or for the egos of the practitioners. On the other hand, I went to see specialist group where I’ve seen different doctors. They tag team so that patients can get in to see someone as needed. Who benefits from the flexibility? The patients.

Policy and solidification is a way of freezing our hearts. We lose our hearts. We need more than ever before to re-connect with one another as fellow human beings. We need to try to understand one another. We need to empathize and share our humanity. Policy and other solidifications disconnect. They harden our hearts and narrow our minds.

Posted on

In the Heartlessland of America

Sometimes we get so caught up in the speed of everyday life, we don’t take the time to ponder what’s happening around us. As for me, I feel like I’ve been going about my everyday business with blinders on. It’s embarrassing. I feel like I’m extremely slow on the uptake.

Maybe this time too many things happened on too many fronts to ignore the message:

Our society is becoming increasingly heartless.

It’s becoming so bad, I cringe when I listen to the radio, watch TV news, or pick up a newspaper. But, it doesn’t stop there. Events at work and encounters with a variety of people all demonstrate a huge disconnect with heart… with our basic humanity.

As a golfer I’ve followed and admired Tiger Woods. Now, he’s been crucified. A simple story on his screw-up would have sufficed, but the drive for headlines, money, and recognition, reporters have lost their hearts and lynched Tiger for their own benefit. Of course, the same sort of lynching took place with President Clinton, but not so much with the governor of South Carolina and the many others who have made some sort of “social transgression.”

Buddhists have a slogan, which goes something like this:

“don’t seek benefit from the misfortunes of others.”

This slogan has to do with how we can practice being compassionate or how we can practice living with heart. I wonder how many of these same journalists have had affairs or have acted in ways that may have been inappropriate, hurtful, or unethical?

At work, many of my colleagues were becoming increasingly alarmed and worried about one our colleagues. He wasn’t showing up to teach classes, wasn’t turning in final grades, and became impossible to contact. Then, the administration stepped in and fired him. When some colleagues pleaded to have him put on sick-leave and to get him help, the response was basically “we’re following policy.” As we found out later, he was suffering from severe depression and the medications were adversely affecting him. His wife (from a very different culture and with little English language ability) could not advocate for him. He, his wife, and his children are now without income and health benefits. How does “policy” address the needs of human beings? In this dramatic case, five people were treated with heartlessness and damaged in ways we have yet to see.

At the scale of our government and probably more significantly at the scale of corporations, we see huge collections of heartless people running the show. These people make decisions and take actions based on self-interest, money, and power, not for the good of people struggling to survive in an increasingly complex and challenging world. In fact, the policies created to run a society or corporation serve mostly to decrease flexibility in dealing with individual human beings. “Zero tolerance,” “cell phone service contracts,” “disclaimers,” “photo radar,” “Roberts rules of order,” and the millions of others all serve to create a rigidity that doesn’t allow for exceptions or for individual circumstances. It’s the “letter of the law,” not the “spirit of the law.” Neither the individual nor the society as a whole is valued. Only the “good” of the rich and powerful is considered.

This neglect of the individual and of the society has resulted in our inability to care for our poor and sick, for our children, and for our elderly. This neglect also has produced an education system that serves as political capital for leaders at all levels of scale, yet fails to meet the needs of most of its students. Even those who score well on tests are left without self-confidence and feelings of self-worth, without essential social skills, without abilities to think deeply and critically, and with little if any creativity. From a very early age, children adeptly observe and learn about social interactions. They are tremendously curious and think in surprisingly complex ways, while being unboundedly creative. By the time they reach grade 6, their self-confidence, social skills, curiosity, complex thinking, and creativity have been reduced to little more than memories of the adults who knew these children 6 years earlier. By this time, heartlessness has begun to take root, as modeled by a system of schooling steeped in heartlessness within a society without heart.

We care more about the “material goods” than about human beings. These “material” goods range from the ephemeral, such as test scores, achievement, power, our own self-images and desires, stock market “indices,” and ratings and statistics of all kinds, to the more concrete but “immaterial,” such as money, houses, cars, and goods of all kinds. In this materialistic world, there is no room for making connections to oneself, to others, to the delicate environment in which we live, and to the wonderful world of ideas.

(originally published December 30, 2009)