 ‘Listening is the gateway to understanding.’ (David Spangler) I met with leaders at a UK charity yesterday who were thinking through how to create a focused and appropriately-boundaried People & Culture strategy for their organisation as they move forward. I was wearing my organisation development (OD) consultancy hat for the day. The first think that struck me is that they had already being doing lots of People & Culture related things until now. The question was how to create something less reactive and more intentional. As we talked through some of their hopes, aspirations, concerns and challenges in free-flow conversation, a simple framework emerged into my awareness that I thought, perhaps, could provide the foundation for a People & Culture theory of change or strategy map. If rested on 3 main areas: talent, thrive and transform – a convenient alliteration that also reflected their own values and language. We tested this idea and found it worked well as a conceptual map. While the leaders were populating the map with key conditions that would support fulfilment in each area and provide a basis for their own prioritising and action-planning, I noticed how praying at the start of the workshop had helped me hold the day and our work more lightly than tightly, listening for spiritual discernment rather than hard over-thinking. The 3 x Ts felt like a revelation, a realisation, and that made such difference. Listening to God is a lesson in trust.
10 Comments
 ‘A repeat of last year’s summer riots is inevitable as government has failed to act.’ (ITV News) My parents used to say, ‘There’s none so deaf as those that won’t hear and none so blind as those that won't see.’ They were right. A new report came out last week, The State of Us – Community Strength and Cohesion in the UK, as the output of research in response to widespread protests and riots in the UK last year. With tensions at breaking point once again in places like Northern Ireland and Essex, it’s a timely reflection on what lays behind such boiling discontent and what radical solutions may be needed to address it. One could argue: far too little and far too late. Dame Sara Khan, the Government's own Independent Adviser for Social Cohesion and Resilience, had already commented astutely on last year’s unrest: ‘While the police were excellent in dealing with the summer riots under very difficult circumstances, we have to remember and appreciate that’s a downstream approach.’ In other words, addressing effects. Khan offers a sobering critique: ‘The lessons have not been learned (from last year). The signs (then) were flashing red.’ She goes on to question pertinently, ‘Where is the upstream approach to identify, prevent and respond to tensions when they are breaking out, or to address the grievances that people have? …There is no central government guidance or strategy to prevent such activity.’ Mark Fairhurst, Chair of the UK Prison Officer’s Association, echoed her deep frustration in a recent press release: ‘The Justice System lurches from crisis to crisis. The prison estate cannot cope with the existing prison population and now the Government has announced they can cope with unpredicted rises in the prison population without explaining where all the additional staff will come from.’ He was reacting to news that the Government is preparing emergency prison spaces in case of summer riots. ‘Maybe, just maybe a better option would be to address the fundamental issues that fuel unrest, in some cases that is poverty and a sense of hopelessness and alienation and in others it is the lack of police on the streets and a failure to crack down on political groups who stir up civil unrest.’ The Government’s response? To clamp down on free speech. God help us.  ‘Words have memories, a history of their own.’ (Vivek Shanbhag) I speak some German as well as my own native language, English. I noticed yesterday that, when recalling a vivid memory of an event in the German-Austrian alps, I found myself translating that account into English to explain it to an English friend. If you’ve ever had that or a similar experience, I’ll share some insights here as to why it happens: 1. Memory is context-dependent When we experience something in a foreign country and speak the local language, our brain stores that memory with the linguistic, emotional and sensory context of the moment, including the language we are speaking. So, when we recall that memory, our brain tries to reconstruct it as it was encoded, which includes the foreign language. 2. Language is part of the memory trace Language isn't just a tool for describing memories. It’s actually embedded in the memory itself. The words we used, heard or thought during the experience are part of the memory’s structure. So, when we retrieve the memory, our brain pulls it up with the original language attached, as if replaying a recording. 3. Reconstructing vs retranslating When we try to recount the story in our native language, we aren’t simply replaying. We’re actively translating because our brain is accessing the memory as it originally occurred. That means we first get the thought or sentence in the foreign language, then we convert it to our native language in real time. That’s why it feels like we’re translating. 4. Cognitive switching between linguistic systems If we’re bilingual or speak multiple languages, our brain keeps those linguistic systems semi-separate and switching between them takes effort. Recalling a memory stored in Language B while speaking in Language A triggers a language switch, which can feel like mental translation in the moment. 5. Emotional and cultural encoding Sometimes, the meaning of what we experienced is tied closely to the culture or emotional tone of the foreign language. Certain concepts, expressions or nuances don’t map perfectly onto our native language, making the translation feel less immediate or intuitive and further reinforcing our sense of translating. Have you had these or similar experiences? I’d love to hear from you!  ‘Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.’ (Harry S. Truman) In June 2025, the UK’s Commission for Countering Extremism (CCE) published a research report based on a Freedom of Expression survey it conducted via Ipsos during February and March 2025. The research aimed to identify nuances in how different demographics in England and Wales perceive the current state of freedom of expression in the UK and in relation to which specific topics. 'While the principle of free speech is generally valued, a notable segment of the population believes it is not adequately protected.' It’s a ramble, but worth a read. In July 2025, Routledge published a study by researcher Natalie Alkiviadou on Hate Speech and the European Court of Human Rights: Hate Speech, Its Effects and the Question of Regulation. It, too, explores a range of dimensions and nuances in the ‘freedom of expression vs freedom from harm’ debate and offers a thoughtful critique of how the oft-controversial ECHR handles such issues. It provides thought-provoking insights into the social-political implications of intervention and ‘militant democracy’. Reason.com provides a summary. Also in July 2025, the UK Free Speech Union released a thought-provoking interview in which Lord Young talks to Fiyaz Mughal, the founder of Tell MAMA (a national project that records and measures anti-Muslim incidents in the UK), about the UK government's determination to adopt an official definition of 'Islamophobia/Anti-Muslim Hatred' and the chilling effect it is likely to have on free speech. Mughal speaks with rare clarity on this theme and he is well worth listening to. Once you’ve heard what he has to say, you’ll want to write to your MP.  ‘Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.’ (The Bible) I was reflecting this weekend on the many different books I’ve read over the years and which, in retrospect, still stand out as special. One such book for me was C. Stephen Evans’ Philosophy of Religion. I read it in 1987 at a time in which, in the UK and elsewhere, Christian beliefs were often challenged and sometimes ridiculed. As a fairly new follower of Jesus, I had a keen interest in philosophy and psychology. I was astonished and impressed by Evan’s depth and clarity of thought in these fields and he helped me sharpen my own questions too. That said, I was taken aback some years later when a colleague at work commented, ‘Nick, I’m so glad God isn’t like you.’ Apart from the irony of a self-declared atheist speaking about God in this way, I wondered what had provoked it. We were both employed in a social sector organisation based explicitly on secular humanistic beliefs and values and, in such, my Christian beliefs were often treated with caution, scepticism or hostility. I didn’t find this intimidating. In fact, I relished the opportunity for open debate around issues that felt so very important to me. I did discover, however, that there’s far more to a relationship than winning an argument. My colleague explained that he couldn’t think as critically or as quickly as me, yet that wasn’t the same as being convinced by my ‘clever thinking’. In fact, it often had the opposite effect, leaving him feeling silenced or frustrated. A pastor cautioned me similarly in later life: ‘Nick, sometimes truth seems more important to you than love.’ That left me reeling too. It had taken an atheist to open my eyes and heart to my own spiritual blindness. God is truth...and God is love.  ‘Success depends on the real possibility of failure.’ (Clara Nobre) I heard someone complain recently that achieving their goal would take too much hard work. I replied that, if the goal were more easily achievable, it could risk decreasing any corresponding sense of success. I heard someone else say that the bar for achieving qualifications should be lowered so that more people are able to pass and less people will fail. Their argument was based on compassionate desire for inclusion. I do think it’s legitimate to ask if the bar is at the right level. However, to lower it for this reason alone would risk devaluing the qualification. A different approach might be to consider whether everyone has equitable access to, say, the life circumstances, resources and support that would enable them to succeed. If someone is disadvantaged by having no access to such things and no realistic prospect of accessing them, should we lower the bar for those people? Or should we, perhaps, do whatever is needed to ensure they are able to gain access and, thereby, to achieve the same standard as others? It’s something about where we locate responsibility for success; the individual or the system. So, it’s a complex issue. Success depends on the real possibility of failure. If I were to succeed in something without ever having had any real prospect of not-succeeding, where would the sense of merit or achievement be? Take, for instance, a scenario in which I pass a car driving test, irrespective of how well I am able to perform behind the wheel. What would any cause for celebration (say, for successfully overcoming the challenge) be based on afterwards? What would the consequences be for the quality of my driving and the safety of other road users?  ‘When all of our idols are taken away, all our securities and defence mechanisms, we find out who we really are. We’re so little, so poor, so empty and a shock to ourselves. Then we find out who we really are and who God is for us.’ (Aaron Lines) Have you noticed that, when under pressure or stress, some people project their anxieties or frustrations outwards – blaming others for what they’re experiencing – whereas others tend to introject instead – taking too much responsibility onto themselves for whatever is happening? These are examples of aggressive and passive responses. The former (‘I’m OK, you’re not OK’ – ‘It’s all about you’) is a common example of a psychological defence mechanism, a way by which someone may aim to protect themself if, perhaps, they are feeling insecure or under threat. As a behaviour, it could well be experienced by others as unfair, an avoidance of taking personal responsibility, or bullying. The latter (‘I’m not OK, you’re OK’ – ‘It’s all about me’) is often a learned behaviour from early childhood, a way of making sense of a world of experience that has resulted in cognitive distortions. It too can be a defence mechanism, an attempt to protect oneself from, say, a painful, traumatic belief that a 'caregiver' was or is neglectful or abusive. If these are habitual responses, it can take awareness, effort and practice to develop a different way of being in relationships. Awareness often entails an openness to reflect and invite honest feedback; effort, a determination to work on changing oneself; practice, trying more assertive behaviours. It’s hard on your own. A coach alongside can help. Curious to discover how I can help you? Get in touch.  ‘For the first time since records began, the United Kingdom is no longer classified as an ‘Open’ country in a leading global ranking of freedom of expression.’ (Freddie Attenborough) I couldn’t decide whether to laugh or cry. A good friend chastised me recently over my 'paranoia' about erosion of free speech in the UK. He’d never heard of e.g. UK police Non-Crime Hate Incident (NCHI) recording; the UK Government’s demands for access to Apple’s encrypted user data; the UK Government's secretive working group on defining Islamophobia; the number of UK academics removed from post, disciplined or no-platformed for expressing their views. This is, perhaps for me, one of the most insidious and scary dimensions to what’s happening here and now. It feels like we’re sleepwalking down a slippery slope into a darkly dystopian future. Most people I speak with are totally unaware of what’s happening or too preoccupied with trivia to pay it attention. It feels more comforting to put one’s fingers in one’s ears and sing ‘La, la, la.’ ‘All it takes for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.’ (Edmund Burke) We’re heading for a precipice, a dangerous tipping point. If you’re not convinced, look at e.g. the number and type of protest groups now classified by governments as 'terrorist'; diluting legal definitions and diverting our attention (and resources) away from actual terrorists who threaten our existence, culture and liberal-democratic values. Speak out while you still have a chance to speak. When we wake up and find ourselves silenced, we can’t say we weren’t warned. [Are you concerned about defending free speech? See: Free Speech Union; Alumni for Free Speech; English PEN; Christian Legal Centre; Amnesty International; Liberty] |
Nick WrightI'm a psychological coach, trainer and OD consultant. Curious to discover how can I help you? Get in touch! 
Like what you read? Simply enter your email address below to receive regular blog updates!
|
RSS Feed