“Ultimately, there is nothing to forgive
because there is no one to judge.”
Wayne W. Dyer
To be in society means making conscious choices regarding the people you surround yourself with. It is said that like-minded people attract one another but I have experienced situations when that wasn’t applicable so I found myself asking how true is that nowadays? Is it still available for every person and in every society? What about organizations, how do they function and if the people collaborating on that organization’s vision are like-minded and share the same or approximately the same system of values?
When in society is it possible for someone to make a display of a certain mindset through speech but have a different behavior, resulting in incongruence (or a fraud as I call it), perhaps as a result of confusion or just unattained self-reflectiveness/ awareness of own acts?
YES! And it happens not only among people but at organizations level as well, regardless of culture or age.
I see it as an absolute necessity for each person to be aware of their own behavior and other people’s behavior in order to develop healthy, respectful relationships based on win-win outcome regardless of the input or social relations – be it personal or professional. In my experience I have met situations where people were incongruent between their speech and behavior displaying huge differences between what they claimed to be and what they represented through their actions, in my private and professional life. Persons and organizations I have collaborated with disrespected the initial agreement and plan, putting at risk the lives of the people involved, therefore I have concluded that making conscious choices after a rigorous evaluation as an absolute necessity before starting any social relation/collaboration.
I have asked myself what could be the problem of such mismatch and how can one prevent a collaboration with someone who is unreliable in terms of not being aware of their own behavior and influencing in an undesirable way collaboration? I have concluded that one individual is a result of the overall social relations developed along with time including the childhood background which plays a large part in formatting an individual’s future character. I will come up with a few examples from my experience both personal and professional as a certified coach, from different cultures and of different age group, of how influential childhood background is and how it shapes future characters.
Let’s start with the case of a 45 years old English man. This man makes an agreement with a lady to support her through education (promises) as he states that education is important and women should be world examples (this is the speech). His behavior states differently. He withdraws and leaves the woman without support, probably preferring pornography and alcohol (incongruence). He refuses to accept the woman’s chosen method of contact and forces his own way of contact (aggressive behavior), violating the woman’s human right of free choice, intimacy and privacy in a display of forced male dominance. This is a classic case of a fraud, someone who says one thing but does another. But free choice is free for everyone. Can we blame the English man for choosing pornography and alcohol over supporting a woman’s education? Let’s see his background. Coming from a dysfunctional family where the father is an alcoholic living a passive life spent between pub and television where the mother is constantly overwhelmed with responsibilities and too busy to display affection towards children. The children will subconsciously follow the father model, sabotaging a woman’s role.
40 years old western woman coming from a dysfunctional environment where the mother has an extra relationship (adultery) and the father is an alcoholic, with a younger sibling who appears to be preferred by the father will develop a subconscious aversion towards the mother and the sibling, ignoring the alcohol problem of the father. She will understand that adultery is tolerated and women are untrustworthy, similarly developing a strong demonstrative behavior to state her own worth and necessity of being acknowledged as worthy of affection, recognized as capable of displaying love. In her adult years she will struggle to develop collaborations with people rated as important and be stimulated by competition for attention, in scenarios that will replay the initial conflictual theme (mother-father issue), supporting the male part and proving herself better than the female part involved in the conflictual theme. At professional level she will constantly compete with other female positions (even when unnecessary – it is a subconscious level), sabotaging the ones higher in hierarchy to prove her worthiness and display a mask of savior/victim in her romantic relationships, attracting men with similar father conflictual issues (vices). Such a person displays a message of reliable friend or partner, subconsciously competing to prove her importance, sabotaging collaborations.
A young woman coming from an environment where strong traditional motifs were present yet the mother was little present and the father was supportive will be encouraged to trust herself and life but will subconsciously associate women with unreliable presence. The influence will be displayed on how relations will be encouraged. Such a person will choose to trust persons who make themselves present even if having inadequate behavior (encouraging adultery or fraud) instead of evaluating consciously the quality of a collaboration regardless of time input. Professionally she will have inconstancy tendency. An Oedipus complex will be present if the mother-daughter relationship was dysfunctional, the woman being inclined to adultery herself (subconscious competition to prove her worth).
A child that has witnessed a mother’s way of problem solving situations (also financial tensions) developing into a period of sickness or illness will associate tensioned periods of life with illness and money as a reward or conflict solving option. As an adult, the person will “get sick” every time will be met situations that need to be consciously solved or will experience hardship. Money will be perceived as a type of “necessary evil” to solve a conflict or a reward for attention, a display of affection.
Behaviors are rarely taken into account and what is more valuable in our society is the spoken word or agreement even though verbal agreements are not respected in most cases, even at organization level.
An organization advertising children programs, especially children coming from broken families (dysfunctional background), will need to psychologically assess their personnel by an authorized and competent authority, distributing tasks to collaborators according to competences and attributes, after a rigorous evaluation. Tasks that are safely and efficiently designed to meet children’s needs.
Ignoring behavior means not paying attention when the organization will mix tasks and issue proposals for unauthorized collaborators, putting at risk children’s lives and breaking their human rights for safety. The question here is what is the actual aim of the organization?
There are many situations in which you can find yourself confused as the initial agreement has changed without notice. It is a necessity to observe and evaluate each person or possible collaborator for establishing a relation where every part involved has a gain and thus avoid misunderstandings.
I am available for writing pieces, coaching discussion (phone, skype, 1-on-1) and projects that are based on win-win solutions/outcome for all the parties involved. Contact me here for further details.