Tag Archives: communication

Good pushback

3 Replies

Yesterday I wrote Winning is Everything and on LinkedIn I got a couple really good comments that (justifiably) pushed back on this idea. Here are the comments and my responses:

Manuel Are:

Thought provoking!

While the mindset of “winning is everything” can drive success and achievement in various contexts, it’s important to balance this with ethical considerations, personal well-being, and long-term sustainability. Sometimes, focusing on personal growth, collaboration, and enjoying the process can lead to more fulfilling outcomes than solely prioritizing winning.

Is this the cultural condition of the times? Is this the societal and cultural pressure that we have now? The standards of the time? The psychological satisfaction?

What about if we teach the future of the value of losing? Of ethical perspectives? Of relationships? Of outcomes?

What if I gained the world but loses my humanity in return?

Dave Truss:

Yes, so true. I work at a school where we show the value of learning through failure. I describe a bit about this here: Educon 17 Conversation

You’ve probably read enough of my blog to know that this is not a typical post for me. I’m very focused on collaboration, teamwork, community, and belonging. This post might seem out of character for me and invited the wonderful counterbalance that you shared…

But I think sometimes we push too much on being ok with just doing our best, and the message of striving, pushing, and thriving from going the extra mile is somehow undervalued or missed.

While collaboration and teamwork are essential life skills, I don’t think we should teach these at the expense of those individualized skills that winning athletes all seem to exude… these too are attributes that help people get what they want out of life.

Mona Haraty:

Doesn’t it serve us all better to believe that everyone can be a winner if they engage more in non-zero-sum games in their lives? It’s easy to lose perspective in zero-sum games like sports.

Dave Truss:

Yes… and no. We do so much in our schools to promote collaboration and teamwork, and we spend a lot more time praising students for what they can do. But how often do we put students into competitive situations where they have to push themselves farther than they think they can go?
We see kids getting ‘A’s all through high school who can’t hack 1st year university because they never understood how to push themselves despite their glowing marks.
This is a bit of a push-back post. Most of my readers will disagree, and I value the time and attention it takes to comment (thank you)… Most of what I do as a school leader is contrary to this philosophy, but I think the pendulum has swung a little too far. We (also) need to praise students who seek individual accolades and who put themselves out there to be the best… while also teaching non-zero-sum games and activities.
Not everyone wins, but most who do win know how to push beyond most who don’t… do we teach that at all these days? Do we let students shine far above others who can’t?
Again, I’m not disagreeing with you, but I wonder if sometimes we aren’t crushing the excellence out of high performers?

Mona Haraty:

I agree that we should definitely encourage excellence, and that we are crushing the excellence out of high performers precisely because they are being compared to their classmates using the same tests or challenges. I tell my kids that if the problems they are working on are too easy, they should skip them because there’s no learning in that—there’s no point in getting an A without being challenged.

Once we encourage excellence and take into account the level and growth of each student, grades become even less relevant.

As you said “most who do win know how to push beyond most who don’t” and we can help students build perseverance and resilience by challenging them at their own appropriate level.

I love this kind of professional learning dialogue. This is the kind of conversation that pushes thinking. This is the kind of dialogue I used to see on my Pair-a-Dimes educational blog regularly 10-15 years ago. The pushback is framed positively, and the intent is to shed light… and learning. I don’t see a lot of this on social media anymore. In fact, I seldom even go to comments on other’s writing anymore. For that reason, I truly thank Manuel and Mona for taking the time to question what I said, and to invite further conversation.

When I wrote ‘Winning is Everything’ I fully intended on following up with a post titled, ‘Winning ISN’T Everything’ to counterbalance it with points shared in the comments above. However, to me the better topic is that others beat me to the punch. Their comments and my responses did more to counter balance, to provide pushback on, yesterday’s post than I could have done on my own.

So please, I invite feedback and pushback whenever I say something that doesn’t resonate with you… or simply to ask a clarifying question. And like Manuel and Mona, it can be on a platform besides my blog. While I like blog comments because then the comments are archived with my post, I also appreciate the feedback wherever you are willing to share it.

_____

*UPDATE* – One more comment and response came in on LinkedIn, which is like to add here: 

James Linzel:

I’m glad you describe the importance of collaborative skills. An excellent argument can be formed that winner take all systems dominate our society. Schools are literally designed to rank humans rather than maximize potential. Sports focuses on winning. Politics has become winner take all by leveraging voter blocks. Nationalism is given more importance than humanism.
I’d like to see a 180 from the present competition focused society to a more equity, collaborative, competency based society. I’m not saying eliminate competition, but prevent it from having the pedestal its presently given.
When your original post claimed winning is more important than sportsmanship, then I cannot agree. That position leads to the worst in humanity.

Dave Truss:

Excellent points.
I have competed in sports at a fairly high level. I’m not a natural athlete and had to work my butt off at every level, and was never the best player playing. But I had games and moments where I felt that drive and that competitiveness that pushed me harder than I thought I could go, where winning the game was everything, and the hours of hard practice paid off. That’s not something you can easily achieve in an environment that doesn’t foster competitiveness, and those moments are powerful memories of achievement through hard work… that’s what I was trying to describe in my post.

But in reality, I think your points are extremely relevant. I think people like Andrew Tate and many others including a particular political leader, glorify the idea of selfishness and being first, or being losers. Your point that, “Nationalism is given more importance than humanism,” is so on point, and strikes a counterpoint that I wholeheartedly agree with.
I invite you to see my follow up post: Good pushback

I have now included your comment and this response there as an update.
Thank you for sharing your insights!

You have my divided attention

1 Reply

There is no such thing as ‘full attention’. Our minds don’t work that way. The questions to ask yourself are how much attention am I truly giving? And, am I sustaining that attention?

A perfect example is listening to someone telling you a story. You can tune out distractions and be mostly paying attention, but if you are listening carefully you will also be creating visuals to go with the story, thinking of what’s happening, what’s unsaid, asking questions in your head… and making connections to your own experience. None of this is truly full attention. Even if it’s related or connected, the things you think are distractions.

There are moments of clarity, focus and determination, but those are internal moments. The moment someone else enters the equation, attention is divided.

So, you have my divided attention, but I will do my best to give you as much of it as I can. Some days you can get quite a bit, other days the hamster wheel in my mind is spinning too fast, and you won’t get as much of it.

This isn’t an apology, it’s an observation. You never get someone else’s full attention.

____

Inspired by Joe Truss.

AI and languages

Leave a reply

I just watched a video where the new Chat GPT-4o seamlessly translated a conversation between an Italian and English speaker. I know this isn’t the first tool to do this, but it’s the first time I’ve seen an example where I thought about how useful this is. It gave me the realization that instant language translation will revitalize diversity of language

In my travels, I’ve noticed that English is a language that is becoming more and more widespread. Not everyone knows English, but recently in both France and Spain I had far less challenges communicating compared to my travels to France 12 years earlier. I think this stems from a move towards everyone desiring to speak a common language. Want to be able to talk to people in most parts of the world? Learn English.

But maybe that desire will diminish now. If I get to speak in my mother tongue and someone who speaks English can hear a seamless translation, do I really need to learn English? Maybe in the future people will be less likely to pick up a new language? Will we see a slowdown in the acquisition of the English language?

While I think we’ll see this shift, it won’t be drastic. Yet I can see both positives and benefits to this. A positive is that people will be more likely to hold on to the language of their heritage. A negative could be that in countries with high immigration the effort to learn the country’s home language might be less desirable. While this won’t necessarily cause an issue communicating since these AI tools can help, it can potentially undermine the social fabric of the country.

And maybe that’s not as big a concern as I’m making it out to be?

Still, I’m excited about the ease with which I’ll be able to travel to countries where the primary language isn’t English. I look forward to having conversations I could not have previously had. Tools like this make almost every person in the entire world a possible acquaintance, colleague, and friend. That’s a pretty exciting thing to think about.

~~~

As an aside, a lot of AI image creators still have issues with text, as the image accompanying this post demonstrates. This was my prompt: An English, Spanish, and French person sitting at a table, each saying “Good Morning” in their own language, in a speech bubble.

Missing the big picture

Leave a reply

A couple weeks back I was in a problem solving situation where I was brought in to give some perspective on how one of my programs could assist with a problem at a school. I was an add-on to a conversation that was already happening, and I found it frustrating. I kept having to speak up and give perspective on the big picture and how what seemed like a simple fix was actually something that would have unforeseen consequences. My grandfather used to say, “Don’t put lipstick on a pig,” and that seemed to be the approach. “Let’s make it look like we are addressing the issue, all the while just making an ugly situation seem like it’s not as bad.

Yesterday I was in a meeting and it was completely different. Everyone was thinking big picture. How does this affect students? Staff? Funding? Optics? When a suggestion was brought up, the team of people I was working with took each idea and put it through a big picture lens. When a suggestion was knocked down, there were no egos attached, it was just a change in frame, and the new perspective provided more useful information.

A one hour meeting took over an hour and a half, and afterwards I had another 45 minutes of hammering out one possible solution, which may not be the one we go with. However, even if the idea I suggest isn’t the one we go with, I know the final decision will be one that considers multiple perspectives, and will be a viable solution to the problem we are working on.

What a contrast it is between these two scenarios. In the first case, the focus was on a quick fix, and in the second case the focus was on a sustainable solution. The difference was being with a team of people focused on the big picture rather than just trying to make a problem go away.

It’s a matter of the frame you put around your problem… and when in fix-it mode, the bigger the frame the better.

Message in a bottle

2 Replies

Write a note, put it in a bottle, cork it, and throw it into the ocean. The tides move the bottle from one shore to another and the message is picked up randomly by a stranger who isn’t expecting the message. An audience of one.

Today, the internet lets us toss our message into a cyber ocean. As I write this, I have an idea of some of the people who will see it, but I also know that it has the potential to be picked up by some random person somewhere far away, opened up and read at random, without me ever knowing where my post, my message in a bottle, landed.

And this might happen today, or even a year or 5 years from now. As long as I pay for my domain and hosting, the message lives in this cyber ocean. Most of what I write will be ‘lost at sea’, just a small message in a bottle surrounded by millions of bottles. But every now and then one of my bottles of information will be picked up. An unknown audience, in an unknown location. Not an audience of one, but rather of one more…

Assuming the worst

It’s reactive rather than thoughtful. It amazes me how many issues today are immediately an 11 on a scale of 1-10. Let’s just bypass the normal scale and make the issue beyond the norm.

There is no room for ‘ooops’. There is no opportunity to reduce the conflict or issue, it’s just a direct inflation to anger and upset. Retribution trumps resolution. The disagreement itself is an offence and the only solution is complete surrender, full admittance of wrongdoing, no opportunity for negotiation or mutual understanding.

People don’t interact with other people perfectly. Communication is an imperfect art. But interactions get worse when the worst interpretations are assumed. When there is an immediate high voltage response to an issue, the conversation continues to stay charged longer than it needs to. Sparks fly, and no one comes out un-singed.

It’s reactive rather than thoughtful. It is a jump to the worst conclusions. And it leads to no one coming out unscathed, unhurt, or even feeling like the resolution was rewarding.

How much could this change if we believed everyone was doing the best they could? If we chose to assume the best? If we started from a place of compassion rather than getting ramped up? If this is where we started I think, I know, a lot of situations would escalate to a 3/10, and never get to an 11/10.

Wouldn’t that be a better place to start?

My miscommunication

I really try to live by the mantra, ‘The meaning of your communication is the response you get’. It puts the burden of my clear communication solely on me. When someone misunderstands or misinterprets my communication, it’s not their fault, it’s mine… I could have been more clear, more concise, more thoughtful.

I had a written conversation with a colleague recently that didn’t go as I had planned. When I saw the misunderstanding, I tried to explain. But I came from a defensive stance about what I really meant. I didn’t think about what their response really meant. I worried too much about clarifying and not enough about understanding.

“This is what I meant to say,” does not repair what was said and interpreted incorrectly. Not usually. In a way it’s doubling down, it’s saying, “You were wrong in your interpretation.” It’s not saying, “I messed up in my communication.”

It’s a minor shift, simple to see after the fact, but delicately difficult to communicate in a response to what was clearly my poor communication. I didn’t get the response I wanted, thus I didn’t communicate well. If that’s my premise, then what I need to do is listen to their response, and communicate about that, not what I meant to say.

It’s a subtle shift. Not an easy one, but an important one.

Buried in messages

I hate email. It’s a monster, and right now it’s a HUGE monster for me. I’m just surfacing from the longest leave I’ve ever taken from work. I was heavily medicated until late last week and choose to be ‘completely off’ rather than working from home. I’ve never done that before. I’ve always worked while away, and did my best to keep up. But the medication was enough that I lacked judgement and knew better than to try and communicate (or even drive). So, as I look to return to work this week, I see that I have 840 unread emails. That would have been larger if I hadn’t peeked at a few (hundred) along the way, but I never once tried very much Now it’s time.

I know that hundreds will be ones I can just delete. I know that some will be informational and I can read and delete, or file away. I know that some will be ‘ball drops’ where I should have read and followed up with days or even weeks ago, although I did have an auto-response to contact the office. And I know it will take longer than this week to get through them all.

What I hope happens is that most of them are just destined for the delete folder and I can see just how unimportant email is compared to everything else I need to do at work. My direct team that I work with communicate with me on Microsoft TEAMS and they have been very respectful of me being away… so there won’t be a lot there that is overly urgent, especially with a very competent leader assisting while I was away. So, I’ll pick away at it, starting tomorrow. Today I joined my team online for a Pro-D session and then after a short nap I joined my PAC meeting remotely as well. My eyes are blurry and it’s off to bed early tonight. Hopefully the email monster will be tamed by early next week.

Just a call away

Today I saw a sunset in Greece. It was hours ago, and although the sun hasn’t set here yet, my daughter is on a Greek island and she FaceTime’d me. The photo shared above is from a Snapchat she shared just before calling. She was on a balcony at her hostel, and we chatted for a few minutes while her friends got ready to go to dinner.

When my wife did a similar backpacking trip 30 years ago she spoke to her parents by collect call each time she was heading to or arrived in another country and that would be it for contact for days if not longer than a week. For this trip my wife is in contact with our kid almost daily, even if just by WhatsApp chat. She checks in with her dad a little less frequently, knowing I get the updates from my wife.

Time zones are the only challenge to communication. As I’m writing this at 7:30pm here, and it’s 5:30am in Greece. But beyond that, it’s pretty awesome that we can stay connected… for free with a simple wifi connection. This shouldn’t still amaze me but it does. It would take me 14.5 hours including a layover to get to her, but I can see her ‘live’ on my phone with the only challenge being what time we go to sleep.

Makes me think, who else is just a call away, but I haven’t made the effort?

Blind spots

I’m dealing with an issue between two students right now and the challenge is that both of their opposing views are valid. The challenge isn’t the points of view, it’s the current climate that makes one view insensitive to the other view. There was no intent to harm, but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t harm. Poor communication is another issue, and it might seem like therein lies the problem more so than the stances themselves. However this just amplified the problem.

I can get the students together to eliminate the communication issue, but first I needed to show one of them how their perspective could be perceived differently than intended… I had to show this student how their perspective came from a place of privilege. I shared how I was once blind to my privilege and I think the student understood. Was this student’s statements ‘wrong’? No. Was this student’s statement insensitive? Yes. Could the other student have approached the concern differently? Yes… but here’s the thing, I don’t think it would have been settled any better if the issue was addressed in-person rather than publicly online. When a concern is in your blind spot how are you expected to see it?

Privilege creates blind spots. Politics creates blind spots. Religion creates blind spots. Gender creates blind spots. Anger creates blind spots. Culture creates blind spots. Language creates blind spots. Wealth creates blind spots. Trauma creates blind spots. Power creates blind spots. Ignorance creates blind spots… and the list can go on and on.

We can’t know that we have blind spots until they are shown to us. We don’t see them unless we can be shown things from a different perspective. We need to be empathetic. We need to be open to alternate views. We need to understand that our blind spots don’t inherently make us bad people, but when we are exposed to our blind spots our egos, our sense of right and wrong, need to be tempered.

When we are faced with a perspective that was in our blind spot we need to be open to seeing things from a perspective that’s not our own… and here’s the hard part, not to be judgemental but to be compassionate, empathetic, and willing to see the bias we hold. This is a big ask. But it builds character and helps us grow.

In the student issue I’m dealing with the onus to make things better lies on the person who was blind to their privilege. If that student can’t see the other perspective, if the blind spot remains, well then we have a disagreement that won’t be settled well. But if that student can see the other perspective, then maybe we can come to a satisfactory conclusion. We can focus less on intent and blame, and more on making things better. We can have an honest conversation about how our statements could be seen as insensitive and biased, even though that wasn’t the intent. There was no intention of harm, but harm was done, and if that harm is recognized, well then we can move forward. It becomes a learning experience and not an issue of right versus wrong. That’s one less blind spot, and one more opportunity to help us all get along a little more compassionately.